Monday, January 11, 2016
Thursday, September 26, 2013
News for Exopolitical Mediators 09-26-2013
For those interested in Exopolitical Mediation this tidbit is of interest:
There are no national standards to measure a mediator's competency, but Maryland's Council for Dispute Resolution “performance-based certification” may serve as a model for other states.
Source: LinkedIn's group ADR Conflict Resolution and Mediation Exchange Group Members
cc. https://www.facebook.com/groups/Openmindsforum/
There are no national standards to measure a mediator's competency, but Maryland's Council for Dispute Resolution “performance-based certification” may serve as a model for other states.
Source: LinkedIn's group ADR Conflict Resolution and Mediation Exchange Group Members
cc. https://www.facebook.com/groups/Openmindsforum/
Wednesday, June 26, 2013
Cogs in the Wheel of Contact Preparations
Has any reader here considered what it would take to be ready for a world where Contact is a reality? What might you need? What would be your greatest fear? Who would you employ? What boundaries would be erased? How would you define an expert? And to what extent of effort might you be willing to go?
When you are intellectually beyond the un-informed squabbles over truths and deceptions, how might you view what you see in the situational landscape? How would your concerns and values adjust? Where would you invest your life and perspectives?
When you are intellectually beyond the un-informed squabbles over truths and deceptions, how might you view what you see in the situational landscape? How would your concerns and values adjust? Where would you invest your life and perspectives?
Friday, January 11, 2013
2013 Audio Interview of Cyrellys Geibhendach by TJMorrisET Radio
First ever audio interview with Cyrellys by TJ Morris of TJMorrisET Radio Show at BlogtalkRadio. Cyrellys discusses issues currently facing the public, governance, and the exopolitical/ufology community. The interview is 2.5 hours long with many subjects covered.
Listen to internet radio with TJMorrisETradio on Blog Talk Radio
Thursday, December 13, 2012
THE EVOLUTION OF PARADIGM AS CONFIRMATION EMERGES
THE EVOLUTION OF PARADIGM AS CONFIRMATION EMERGES
December 2012
Mankind at the dawn of extraterrestrial contact is akin to pre-Socratic thinkers which were termed natural philosophers. Like them, our entire attention has been focused on our immediate world and its vicinity. It is a limited view of reality that has consisted only of ourselves relative to the known living species in this world. And we have sought to understand the origins of our world and the meaning of our lives in this limited context. Our explorations have largely consisted of science, philosophy, and the spiritual constructions of religion. So far we have rejected the seemingly naive imaginings of science fiction and fantastic tales of experiences involving highly sentient and developed beings not of our own kind. We have looked for understanding not in the broader universe with its tangible construct of reality, but rather in our own anthropological view of reality where all concerns, needs, and conclusions revolve around our own. Like Heraclitus of ancient Greece, we have "sought for myself!" Yet while we have reached beyond the limits of these crafted paradigms we still cling to these manufactured perspectives, religion, and myth. More work yet lays ahead of us to establish a more holistic independence of reason and perspectives upon which sciences, doctrines, and everyday living might ponder and build.
We move today with a similar detached curiosity to identify previously unknown elements in our primordial adventure. But that detached curiosity is not sufficient and far from satisfying. We fail to reach agreement among our various investigators who are becoming increasingly segregated as they champion primary material toward isolated event patterns and their causes. We also face a secondary problem arising naturally out of these preoccupations with the material substances; the problem of change. As so long ago in ancient Greece, some of our number deny the emerging reality of change, while others hide from the reality of Being -- existing -- expressing our selves as a singular people within a wider context which is not closed from the greater community. This controversy leads to a further problem: the problem of knowledge! How can something be knowable if it changes from moment to moment? How can something be knowable when our established bureaucracies have become so introverted that they support an aversion to truth, knowingly or unknowingly, for the sake of their own survival rather than the greater good? Once again as in ancient Greece the methods of finding Truth has been called into question. We move from evidence of the senses, to an appeal to reason, and then followed by a "great emphasis" upon deductive logic as a technique for disclosing and and proving this new evolution in mankind's fringe awareness as a means to embrace the change on the more holistic scale. But these proofs are NOT satisfying! The cumulative effects of over 60 years of experiencing, seeking, speculating, deducing, and attempting to communicate in such a way as to illicit an affirmative response from our societal hierarchies, exercising control over the masses and its governing systems, has only resulted in a growing conviction that neither experience nor human reason can establish Truths which should be universally accepted.
Pondering ancient Greece, "individualism and skepticism in thought coincided with the economic and political crisis that produced the Peloponnesian War, and the interaction of these various factors brought Greek thought to the dead end represented by the teachings" of their day, likewise in our time does collectivism and skepticism in thought coincide with the economic and political crisis which produces endless terminal wars in the seemingly more penurious areas of our world. Among our masses rise various groups of highly critical thinkers largely tuned to man and society and who shun what they believe are fruitless speculations about the broader paradigm beyond age old human perspectives. We observe with horror, all religious, ethical, and political values fall before the onslaughts of their attacks -- attacks utilized as forms of social engineering to create a niche within human perception more harmonious to their various purposes. In their intent 'grounded being' is a controllable certainty, "a clever devise" of sociological statesmen as a means of preventing thought deviance, maintaining stability, and providing for the masses whose unconcern facilitates malleable intellectual regression. Among these trans-paradigmic statesmen "justice is simply the interest of the stronger." We are experiencing a peculiar synchronicity with the pre-Socratic thinkers of ancient Greece who agreed in interpreting the famous dictum of Protagoras, "man is the measure of all things," to mean that truth and morality were relative and individual matters. And many go on to accept the extreme skepticism regarding Truth formulated by Gorgias: "Nothing exists; if anything did exist, it could not be known; if a man should chance to apprehend it, it would still be a secret: he would be unable to communicate it to his fellows." This is the situation we find ourselves in today regarding extraterrestrial contact as unambiguous contact looms.
My fellow man, into this "intellectual and spirited vacuum" each of you must step. Your place in history lies in great jeopardy. It is your immediate destiny to reverse the destructive trend in our planetary human thinking and construct a viable foundation upon which our children may build a world fit for open participation in the greater community. Your first task is to build an ethical, moral, and philosophical system for the masses to abide, in the face of unambiguous contact discovered, confirmed, and acclimated to, rather than disclosed prior to experience. The investigating is done! Like the Sophists, it is your lot to refuse to spend time without introspection. Socrates explained this step in the following manner, "I have no leisure for such inquiries; shall I tell you why? I must first know myself, as the inscription at Delphi says; it would be absurd to be curious about what is no business of mine, while I don't know my own self." In other words, because man has reasoned all Truth and traditional values out of existence the resulting void of meaning demands your attention. It is therefore the world within you; your behavior before the enigma, through the enigma, and in conjunction with the enigma experienced which must concern you and consume you in this time. You must attend to the care of the soul and bear yourself anew as a broadened paradigm emerges and establishes itself. Only you can prevent implosion. In this it matters not how you identify the soul or the mind of man. You can only know it is the seat of reason and capable of finding ethical truths, behavioral responsibility, and intrinsic excellence which can and will restore the meaning and value of life. Like Socrates you must not doubt such things can be found and that they will be universally accepted as good. Socrates believed if people would place themselves under the rule of reason, they would recognize and desire what is good and true, for the nature of goodness and truth is such that all who recognize it will want it; all evil and error are the products of ignorance. This is the meaning of his well-known statements that "virtue is knowledge" and "nobody errs willingly".
I ask you, are you satisfied with the beliefs of being a singular presence in this universe? Are you satisfied with the absences of Others contradictory to experiential evidence by so many of your peers? It is said in sociology that it requires only 3% of a population to tip the scales of understanding. Far greater than that percentage has encountered the enigma in varying degrees. How much for you is enough to accept and live by this new scope of awareness, rather than by dialectical inconsistencies in what you have been taught systemically -- a false truth of your reality? When will you exhort what you have come to understand? Why do you cling to skepticism, whether by belief or by shield, when you accept and express so many other myths with less proof in hand?
The ground has been prepared. Those who have experienced the enigma both within the system of governance and outside the system of governance have a great seed planted in common. That seed is to grow into fruition a tree of life; a tree of change from subversive secrecy, fear, and self-servancy to a paradigm of optimism, commonality, exhortation, and an embrasure of an eternal truth both about reality and ourselves. This achievement is yours to attain and bequeath to your children and associates. The solution to the problem is you; knowing your time; knowing to speak and express an excellence of being, come what may.
Cyrellys Geibhendach
Compass Morainn
An Association of Exopolitical Mediators and Facilitators
Montana, USA December 2012
**Three reasons for speaking come what may: for instruction against ignorance, council against strife, and Truth against harmful Falsehood.
***Three words of counsel from an old teacher: know thy power, know thy wisdom, and know thy time.
Three followers of wisdom: imagination, purpose, and endeavor. -- Irish Triad
FiOs ~ "Vision, Memory, Dream" Berla Feini (old Irish), "Knowledge" Modern Irish.
In singing, in exploring our connection to our Spirit and the Creative Source, then turning to examine our Reality, what we thought was only Imagination or only a Dream is revealed to be the most powerful Truth of all...
Friday, April 27, 2012
Return of Open Minds Forum
Hi Everyone!
In case you had not already heard, OMF is now back online in a new location. She is better organized and ready to rock. A copy of the original Archive is linked up and ready for access.
You can find the new OMF at the following:
Lucianarchy's Original Open Minds Forum - Alpha Site
http://originalopenmindsforum.webs.com/
Lucianarchy's Original Open Minds Community Forum
http://openmindsforum.forumotion.com/forum
One note about the Archive: We found a glitch in access to the Encounters section. It is being looked at for a remedy. It's on the To Do List to get fixed.
If anyone finds any other glitches across the system just give a yell and we'll get to it as quickly as possible.
We look forward to seeing everyone there. Spread the word.
Cyrellys
In case you had not already heard, OMF is now back online in a new location. She is better organized and ready to rock. A copy of the original Archive is linked up and ready for access.
You can find the new OMF at the following:
Lucianarchy's Original Open Minds Forum - Alpha Site
http://originalopenmindsforum.webs.com/
Lucianarchy's Original Open Minds Community Forum
http://openmindsforum.forumotion.com/forum
One note about the Archive: We found a glitch in access to the Encounters section. It is being looked at for a remedy. It's on the To Do List to get fixed.
If anyone finds any other glitches across the system just give a yell and we'll get to it as quickly as possible.
We look forward to seeing everyone there. Spread the word.
Cyrellys
Thursday, January 26, 2012
A Warning Statement About the Forum Wars
,Compass Morainn has stepped into the public arena on the recent forum wars to make a statement about the use of hosting companies against their own as a weapon to censure public knowledge caches.
Recently there has been an internet wide protest of great effect on the issue of censure-ship and how systemic processes and management tools are created and then applied under the guise of protective responses to unpalatable truths or malicious self-serving acts that may or may not fall under any heading termed terrorism. That protest was over the recent attempts to install an open patent on what is happening anyway under the table. SOPA and PIPA in the US Congress fell under world-wide condemnation across the net and was forced to withdraw their propositions for tyrannical controls and proposed eradication measures.
This is like I said only the public face of what goes on under the table across the board on issues of Constitutionality, corruption, and even the Contact Paradigm. The Contact Paradigm, due to the derision it is subjected to by the controlled media is held in trust for the public by a broad community of public individuals who operate in association with not just idle entertainment but even professional bodies and in some cases aspects of governence. These people are the only thing that stands between the world and complete utter inexcusable ignorance. And they are under habitual attack by anti-disclosure factions who come by way of proxies in every form imaginable.
That conflict paradigm has recently taken on a whole new level of dementia and violence in the way of Forum Wars which has resulted in a 6000 plus member forum of distinction and renown being virtually nuked into oblivion by its own hosting company who obliged complaints of Libel by disgruntled and self-serving parties.
This has raised serious questions about the extent of actions that the anti-disclosure factions out there in both their public and non-public forms will go to achieve societal control, thought insemination, and paradigm censor-ship and social engineering. This has caused us to carefully consider whether we will tolerate this level of activity and unethical conduct. Therefore Compass Morainn has deemed these actions as a CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER and so produced a public statement on the matter. Here is a copy of that statement:
Recently there has been an internet wide protest of great effect on the issue of censure-ship and how systemic processes and management tools are created and then applied under the guise of protective responses to unpalatable truths or malicious self-serving acts that may or may not fall under any heading termed terrorism. That protest was over the recent attempts to install an open patent on what is happening anyway under the table. SOPA and PIPA in the US Congress fell under world-wide condemnation across the net and was forced to withdraw their propositions for tyrannical controls and proposed eradication measures.
This is like I said only the public face of what goes on under the table across the board on issues of Constitutionality, corruption, and even the Contact Paradigm. The Contact Paradigm, due to the derision it is subjected to by the controlled media is held in trust for the public by a broad community of public individuals who operate in association with not just idle entertainment but even professional bodies and in some cases aspects of governence. These people are the only thing that stands between the world and complete utter inexcusable ignorance. And they are under habitual attack by anti-disclosure factions who come by way of proxies in every form imaginable.
That conflict paradigm has recently taken on a whole new level of dementia and violence in the way of Forum Wars which has resulted in a 6000 plus member forum of distinction and renown being virtually nuked into oblivion by its own hosting company who obliged complaints of Libel by disgruntled and self-serving parties.
This has raised serious questions about the extent of actions that the anti-disclosure factions out there in both their public and non-public forms will go to achieve societal control, thought insemination, and paradigm censor-ship and social engineering. This has caused us to carefully consider whether we will tolerate this level of activity and unethical conduct. Therefore Compass Morainn has deemed these actions as a CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER and so produced a public statement on the matter. Here is a copy of that statement:
Re: Memos to Members
« Reply #8 Today at 9:16am »
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi All!
I have an announcement to make: Due to the recent Forum Wars that is resulting in hosting companies being used as weapons of mass destruction to take out whole forums containing the People’s Knowledge Cache’s on the histories, interactions, and events of ufology and exopolitics (such as this and this and this), I am activating Emergency Action Plan No.1, in the event that these wars should roll around and attempt the same here at Compass Morainn.
In the event of catastrophic attack, Members are to go to either my Facebook page at: http://facebook.com/cyrellys or visit my hubpages.com account of published articles under http://cyrellys.hubpages.com/ to review instructions that will be posted in short order article form, for where to go as a Reconvene point for the community, participants, and observers.
You should know that unlike other forums which have fallen victim in this under the table virtual knife war, that Compass Morainn will not remain idle were it to be so engaged. An offensive plan and a defensive plan stands ready to be applied and there would be no mercy in its actions across the Internet on the perps and their affiliates.Source of Statement: Here
Rest assured that CM’s material content is subjected to a regular backup and any matter affecting its presence on the internet will only cause it to be rapidly reborn exponentially elsewhere. Someone who closely considers this in terms of effects and ramifications would rapidly come to the conclusion that this would theoretically result in a weird form of intergroup-communication and public notification of that communication, in such a way that would ultimately drag the Conflict Paradigm of the human reaction to Contact wide out into the open. That is true…it would be one wild way to disclose to the public about the proverbial pink elephant in the room, but it would be more to the point -- effective to paint the picture of the ethos and immaturity of some of the parties in the mix.
The whole point of this is precisely what a friend recently remarked: There is no half measures when it comes to Disclosure. If engaged the paradigm will roll over you like a tidal wave in full bore and it is not something once initiated that could possibly be held back. And with it will rise all the dirty inequities of mankind…the socks in it’s closet, so to speak, will be the vehicle and the sudden stop at the bottom of the long fall from grace. Pardon the pun.
FiOs.
Cyrellys Geibhendach
Compass Morainn
I will go to war if I must…and I will call the wildcards of the world into a new playground where dreams and fears and unconcern have by right of un-acknowledgement, great weight. WWIII may have to take a backseat to this one. And someone had the unbelievable nerve to tell an Apprentice to Synchronicity: sit down and shut up. ~ Elemental Thoughts on Paradigm Commonalities, Patterning, and A Hidden Conflict
All Mankind of Earth bends knee and pays a homage in one form or another to the Creative Source...and you will be reminded of that.
cc Hubpages, Twitter, Facebook,
Tuesday, January 17, 2012
A Message From Compass Morainn Regarding January 18 2012
ANNOUNCEMENT TO ALL MEMBERS, GUESTS & OBSERVERS:
From: Cyrellys Geibhendach, Compass Morainn Admin
Subject: Compass Morainn joins OathKeepers.org in the Fight Against SOPA - Blackout of Oathkeepers.org Jan. 18
On January 18, 2012 from 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Eastern Time, Compass Morainn's main website will be going dark to protest the looming SOPA (House) and PIPA (Senate) Bills. We are joining with many other websites across the internet who are also going dark in protest.
These bills directly affect every living and communicating soul on the planet in an adverse way. Compass Morainn invites everyone to review OathKeepers.org's notice about this event and leaves with each reader an open invitation to join in this fight for liberty in defense of the tools of humane opportunity and mankind's capacity to learn, share, communicate, and solve through mutual participation the problems of our world via the freedom we currently have across the internet domain.
The black-out will only affect the main website of Compass Morainn at http://compassmorainn.webs.com/
The Members Forum, the Journal and news site at yahoo groups will remain open for use to members & visitors to continue their work and discuss the event if they so wish.
Cyrellys Geibhendach
Compass Morainn
cc. Compass Morainn Journal & List
Enclosed for your review:
Elias Alias eliasalias@------ to bcc: me
show details 4:14 PM (2 hours ago)
See also:
http://sopastrike.com/
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Oath Keepers
Date: Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 3:21 PM
Subject: Oath Keepers Joins the Fight Against SOPA - Blackout of Oathkeepers.org Jan. 18
To: eliasalias@------
Oath Keepers Joins the Fight Against SOPA - Blackout of Oathkeepers.org Jan. 18
On January 18th, 2012, from 8am to 8pm Eastern, the Oath Keepers website will go dark to protest the looming SOPA (House) and PIPA (Senate) Bills. We are joining with many other websites across the internet who are also going dark in protest.
On Jan 24th, Congress will vote to pass internet censorship in the Senate, even though the vast majority of Americans are opposed. We need to kill the bill - PIPA in the Senate and SOPA in the House - to protect our rights to free speech, privacy, and prosperity.
Our First Amendment protected right of free speech is now directly under assault by a berserk U.S. Congress and White House. Our voluntary black-out is being done in conjunction with countless other websites to help the public understand the serious dangers in SOPA and related bills awaiting passage in Congress right now.
SOPA and PIPA are to the First Amendment what the NDAA military detention and trial provisions are to the Fourth, Fifth, And Sixth Amendments - allowing for the "black bagging" and "disappearing" of websites on a mere accusation alone. If such laws are enacted, the following may as well be posted by the government when they shut sites down:
That is the kind of Orwellian world the internet will have become, under SOPA/PIPA or other such nonsense.
The First Amendment is first for a reason.
Without it, peaceful redress, correction, and removal of oath breaking officials becomes impossible, leaving you with only the Second Amendment to secure your rights. The internet is our most powerful weapon of free speech, which is exactly why the powers that be want to shut it down. With a free internet, they no longer have a monopoly on the exchange of ideas and the spreading of information, and that scares the hell out of them. So, we can expect them to do all they can to find a way to shut the internet down or to tightly control it.
Thus, the same "bi-partisan" pack of traitors and useful idiots who passed the NDAA now want to kill the internet. We must defend it with as much dedication as we would defend our right to bear arms.
Over the weekend, the Obama administration issued a statement on the blacklist bills, saying it would oppose PIPA and SOPA as written, and said that it "will not support" any bill "that reduces freedom of expression, increases cybersecurity risk, or undermines the dynamic, innovative global Internet" (whatever that means - surely the people pushing this will not admit it does those things). But remember, Obama said he would veto the NDAA, and then turned around and signed it. By dong so, he joined in on the treason of Congress. Obviously, if he cannot be trusted to keep his oath when it comes to the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments (or the Article Three, Section 3 Treason Clause), he should not be trusted to protect the First Amendment either. Do not rely on such promises from Obama or from any of your congress-critters. And even if they "table" these bills for now, you can bet they will try to cram them through under some other name, or buried within some other bill (like the NDAA). Keep the heat on them all and get the word out.
This will be an ongoing fight, until all of these oath breakers are removed from office. Read more about this issue at EFF.ORG
And spread the word! We must defend all of the Bill of Rights, for all Americans. Period.
Stewart Rhodes
Founder of Oath Keepers
PS - our members forum will still be online during this blackout, and you can discuss SOPA/PIPA there.
END ENCLOSED.
From: Cyrellys Geibhendach, Compass Morainn Admin
Subject: Compass Morainn joins OathKeepers.org in the Fight Against SOPA - Blackout of Oathkeepers.org Jan. 18
On January 18, 2012 from 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Eastern Time, Compass Morainn's main website will be going dark to protest the looming SOPA (House) and PIPA (Senate) Bills. We are joining with many other websites across the internet who are also going dark in protest.
These bills directly affect every living and communicating soul on the planet in an adverse way. Compass Morainn invites everyone to review OathKeepers.org's notice about this event and leaves with each reader an open invitation to join in this fight for liberty in defense of the tools of humane opportunity and mankind's capacity to learn, share, communicate, and solve through mutual participation the problems of our world via the freedom we currently have across the internet domain.
The black-out will only affect the main website of Compass Morainn at http://compassmorainn.webs.com/
The Members Forum, the Journal and news site at yahoo groups will remain open for use to members & visitors to continue their work and discuss the event if they so wish.
Cyrellys Geibhendach
Compass Morainn
cc. Compass Morainn Journal & List
Enclosed for your review:
Elias Alias eliasalias@------ to bcc: me
show details 4:14 PM (2 hours ago)
See also:
http://sopastrike.com/
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Oath Keepers
Date: Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 3:21 PM
Subject: Oath Keepers Joins the Fight Against SOPA - Blackout of Oathkeepers.org Jan. 18
To: eliasalias@------
Oath Keepers Joins the Fight Against SOPA - Blackout of Oathkeepers.org Jan. 18
On January 18th, 2012, from 8am to 8pm Eastern, the Oath Keepers website will go dark to protest the looming SOPA (House) and PIPA (Senate) Bills. We are joining with many other websites across the internet who are also going dark in protest.
On Jan 24th, Congress will vote to pass internet censorship in the Senate, even though the vast majority of Americans are opposed. We need to kill the bill - PIPA in the Senate and SOPA in the House - to protect our rights to free speech, privacy, and prosperity.
Our First Amendment protected right of free speech is now directly under assault by a berserk U.S. Congress and White House. Our voluntary black-out is being done in conjunction with countless other websites to help the public understand the serious dangers in SOPA and related bills awaiting passage in Congress right now.
SOPA and PIPA are to the First Amendment what the NDAA military detention and trial provisions are to the Fourth, Fifth, And Sixth Amendments - allowing for the "black bagging" and "disappearing" of websites on a mere accusation alone. If such laws are enacted, the following may as well be posted by the government when they shut sites down:
"NOTICE: THIS SITE HAS BEEN DECLARED AN UNLAWFUL BELLIGERENT SITE BY THE U.S. GOVERNMENT OR ONE OF ITS CORPORATE PARTNERS. THIS SITE HAS BEEN BLACK BAGGED AND DISAPPEARED IN THE NAME OF NATIONAL SECURITY, AND IS NOW INTERNED IN GITMO.
Your attempting to access and associate with this site has been noted, your IP address has been recorded, and you too are now being evaluated as a possible candidate for unlawful belligerent designation. Have a nice day."
That is the kind of Orwellian world the internet will have become, under SOPA/PIPA or other such nonsense.
The First Amendment is first for a reason.
Without it, peaceful redress, correction, and removal of oath breaking officials becomes impossible, leaving you with only the Second Amendment to secure your rights. The internet is our most powerful weapon of free speech, which is exactly why the powers that be want to shut it down. With a free internet, they no longer have a monopoly on the exchange of ideas and the spreading of information, and that scares the hell out of them. So, we can expect them to do all they can to find a way to shut the internet down or to tightly control it.
Thus, the same "bi-partisan" pack of traitors and useful idiots who passed the NDAA now want to kill the internet. We must defend it with as much dedication as we would defend our right to bear arms.
Over the weekend, the Obama administration issued a statement on the blacklist bills, saying it would oppose PIPA and SOPA as written, and said that it "will not support" any bill "that reduces freedom of expression, increases cybersecurity risk, or undermines the dynamic, innovative global Internet" (whatever that means - surely the people pushing this will not admit it does those things). But remember, Obama said he would veto the NDAA, and then turned around and signed it. By dong so, he joined in on the treason of Congress. Obviously, if he cannot be trusted to keep his oath when it comes to the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments (or the Article Three, Section 3 Treason Clause), he should not be trusted to protect the First Amendment either. Do not rely on such promises from Obama or from any of your congress-critters. And even if they "table" these bills for now, you can bet they will try to cram them through under some other name, or buried within some other bill (like the NDAA). Keep the heat on them all and get the word out.
This will be an ongoing fight, until all of these oath breakers are removed from office. Read more about this issue at EFF.ORG
And spread the word! We must defend all of the Bill of Rights, for all Americans. Period.
Stewart Rhodes
Founder of Oath Keepers
PS - our members forum will still be online during this blackout, and you can discuss SOPA/PIPA there.
END ENCLOSED.
Tuesday, July 26, 2011
Why? The question of Compass Morainn
IMAGES OF CHANGE...I could have left it as it was originally published...but change is as simple as re-writing ones future....going from paradigm of conflict and confinement to a different tack:
The question was why we come together in support of exopolitical mediation, when the places we emerge from are diverse and sometimes controversial? Why is this desireable by those who've experienced aspects of the extraterrestrial contact paradigm?
Because we have forsaken ignorance, deceit, corruption, and the harming of those least in position to effectively defend their undeniable liberties and living truths!
It is possible for the philosophies of the individual and the collective to function in unison; two cogs making it possible for the wheel to spin in true efficiency; engaging potential in ways neither could do alone.
Because we're fools to make war on
our brothers in arms.
-- Dire Straits, Brothers In Arms.
Impossible is just a big word thrown around
by small men who find it easier to live in the
world they've been given then to explore
the power they have to change it
Impossible is not a fact. It's an opinion.
Impossible is not a declaration. It's a dare.
Impossible is potential.
-- Unknown.
Some things in this Universe unite All of Us.
Common Ground
The proverbial Third Option.
Dire Straits - Brothers In Arms
Album: Brothers In Arms
Year: 1985
Lyrics:
These mist covered mountains
Are a home now for me
But my home is the lowlands
And always will be
Some day youll return to
Your valleys and your farms
And youll no longer burn
To be brothers in arms
Through these fields of destruction
Baptisms of fire
Ive witnessed all your suffering
As the battles raged higher
And though they did hurt me so bad
In the fear and alarm
You did not desert me
My brothers in arms
Theres so many different worlds
So many different suns
And we have just one world
But we live in different ones
Now the suns gone to hell
And the moons riding high
Let me bid you farewell
Every man has to die
But its written in the starlight
And every line on your palm
Were fools to make war
On our brothers in arms
Lyrics reprinted for expression of concept.
Thursday, July 14, 2011
Facilitating Drawing Water
Facilitating Drawing Water
By Cyrellys Geibhendach
July 14, 2011
Permission granted to copy & distribute intact without changes.
What do all of the following have in common? Social policy, living conditions conducive, intellectual exchange, research, facilitation, cultural policy, ecopsychology, dialogues, impact, competitiveness, development, secret history, extreme prejudice, global paradigm shift, beyond myth, interactive, balanced outcomes, ancient mysteries, quarantined planet, foresight effect, self-centered policy makers, discipline parallel, watching veneer, negative vs positive thinking, exercize unique collection, back-channeling, university ufology, extraterrestrial hypothesis, exopolitics definition, positive psychology, exopsychology, exopolitics and bioethics, and ET contact all have in common? Exopolitical Mediation.
Now that I have your attention...
I spend entirely too much time wondering why people do what they do. I wonder how much time they invest in their choices. I see only one crooked hitch with extraterrestrial contact cold-turkey method...the cat is out of the bag that some global leaders and various groups of insiders know all about it and have a long running history in Contact AND that the history of Contact runs the full extent of human existance on this planet.
Presenting a case for peace:
Too many people can't and won't be lied to any longer. That is becoming a growing phenomenon around the entire planet. It's not Contact that is the problem...it's the lies that have the leaders and managers and other peripheral personnel in hot water with the public sentiment; its the failure to maintain an open line of communication or lack of meaningful and truthful communication. And it is fueling other sentiments about all the secrecy, lack-of transparancy, behavior that is seen as over stepping authority or even illegal at times, and the lack-of acknowledgement and responsibility taken for the mind-games of the past etc. I'm not specifically pointing fingers here. I'm trying to make a point and suggest some solutions. I consider myself a third party observer in this conflict-paradigm that has formed between them and the aware public. If you need an example (small scale) just check out Larry W. Bryant, a journalist of renown in ufological research, who recently experienced a direct snubbing by NASA who is trying to foist $100 plus dollar fees upon him for information to which he is legally entitled as a journalist. NASA is intelligent enough to send aerospace contraptions beyond the atmosphere, so one would expect that they're intelligent enough to do a simple google search and discover his credentials. Of course they know who Mr. Bryant is but that is part of the silly, destructive game. Both the aware public and aware PTBs are mutually responsible for the creation of this conflict-paradigm through seemingly miniscule, incremental behaviors which is then mimic'd across the social spectrum of the planet. I haven't perceived this as a one-way street. There are social factions among the public which are equally responsible for perpetuating this situation and the problems it creates. In my opinion, it will take both broadly described groups to fix it.
Members of the public are currently having a grand time chasing after ET's COVERT CONTACT and swapping tales over it. It is interesting to listen to all the conversations among these people about the PTB (powers that be). According to them the PTB are either proverbial imbeciles or brain dead to not notice what the public observers have; to not hear their stories; to not take all the evidence seriously or at the very least with a little interest and non-comedic respect, etc. This too fuels the conflict-paradigm and continues the construction of moments subjected to rises of resentment, open hostility, aggression, malice, and the professed need for recompense. Exopolitical mediators experience first-hand this conflict-paradigm behavior when trying to make connections between the public and aware intermediaries with the contact control structure and the PTBs.
This symptomatic behavior oozing from this conflict-paradigm sometimes results in negative feeding-frenzies with communicators ending up as the victims. This is an example of an Old Irish concept of 'dire-price' or 'honor-price'. When a perceived crime was committed against a person or against personal or tribal property, a fine or consequence, sometime social and sometimes monetary or tangible, was exacted or assessed against the criminal and his tuath (clan/family and extended relatives or adopted members and associates). The dire price is often given a greater subconscious priority than communication or communicative interaction which is defined as dialogues without proof involved.
Those individuals or groups acting upon exacting the dire price see an opportunity to do so and victims often cannot not pay their way free of it with any form of proof having a discernable value high enough for the opportunists to cease their attack. What is even more interesting is that those bystanders who either know or suspect a communicator to be genuine will follow the collective and stand silent when they could stop this social punishment. They do so because of the history. Those PTB and their associates who know, are seen by the collective as having breached the social codes of conduct of the collective (aware public).
In Celtic tradition a person's honor had a specific monetary value (dire/honor-price). If one's honor was damaged, the person who had done the damage could be made to pay a price; dire-price or honor-price. One's honor was a kind of strength which was highly valued. If an enemy tried to harm a person, the enemy would likely lose body parts for the trouble. But on the opposing position the enemy's relatives were liable for his crimes and legally responsible to pay the 'honor-price'. For committing some crimes a person's honor-price was revoked, which meant that others could kill or wound them with impunity, and the victims family could not ask or require compensation.
There is a saying, "Without Trust between Individuals, there can be no Tribe." There can be no coherent collective public or quasi-public without it. A conflict-paradigm is the antithesis to a coherent and cooperative effort as a collective based on trust. Trust ALWAYS begins with communication and finishes with a relationship based on mutual positive experience. There is nothing positive in social conflict or personal greed for recompense or social status ill-applied. When initial attempts fail at connecting paradigm groups into cohesive collectives it is persistance and perseverance that salvages the situtation. These things may be generally deplored but without them fears, concerns, and objections become irrelevant and the cause of the objection is often lost in the ensuing muck-throwing contest. I'm not defending the rotten behavior of either party...just observing it and shaking my head because this situation should not be left as is...it's too destructive to both groups involved.
I have to ask, can this conflict-paradigm be surpassed? Can we as a specie escape this vicious circle, this rift, that has been created? Has there ever been a time when personal and often individualistic greed for recompense and personal social status, been relinquished in favor of choices which hold greater benefit and nurture for both individuals and the collective?
I suggest that the answer to these questions is yes. It can be done and has been done. I proffer to you an example out of ancient history: "Loyalty in the tuath was also important, for without this trust and cohesiveness it would be all too easy for any individual to perish, alone and without aid. The tuath depended upon mutual assistance and collective labor, for the survival tasks of herding, farming, and gathering were beyond the means of any one "nuclear" family. Truth was of utmost importance to the Celts, and the discernment of truth is a theme that is touched upon in many of the traditional tales. In "Cormac's Cup" for instance, the object of the tale was a cup which would shatter when three lies were told and mend again when three truths were uttered. This implies that some actions are not and can not be "relative", but instead are considered absolute and have value as being true. One either has or has not put water in the bucket. It cannot be both full and empty at the same time, at least within ordinary, mundane reality. The state of the bucket is a truth. Truth is one basis of proper judgment, and offering false judgment was believed to be one of the things that destroyed a tuath," Erinn Rowan Laurie. It is not the differences or the power that bind groups together into collectives, but rather the truths; those matters which groups hold in common relationships. It is their similarities on a social and spiritual level which bind the ties and support cohesion.
There was a time when we Old Irish seemed new to this world and generally practiced this aversion to greed; when the individual and the collective functioned for the most part, as a team....two well oiled interlinked cogs in the same wheel. I don't think it is that it didn't exist, or that it was always successful, or that myth paints pretty pictures for our time. Rather, I think compatibility and social cohesion existed in the collective of that time because there were clearly defined behavioral and ethical guidelines....boundaries of acceptable behavior, codes of conduct, that everyone understood clearly and agreed upon...making it possible for minor and major breaches of those codes to be pointed out and create a starting point for dealing with situations of breaching or transgression when they inevitably arose.
We don't seem to have any of that in this day and age. In mundane terms, we live in a socio-political free-for-all; laws are unclear, or hidden to all but a highly educated few because there are so many meaningless laws that law, itself, is a maze no one even cares to understand anymore unless greed is involved; philosophy is not taught as a required subject in schools; control of youth behavior by the family, for another example, is under severe attack to the point that many parents fear to do any firm disciplining without officials getting involved resulting in tribal-like social constructions among youth and general chaos in many communities. And two groups on Extraterrestrial Contact who have far more in common than they have in difference can't manage open and civilized communication events without alot of haggling over what constitutes a lie, or whether or not proof is actually proof or even necessary in the first place, and whether or not any act is ever legally or ethically actionable or of value. I think it is true that trust develops more easily and a community becomes more than a fractured group of people who claim they believe similar things when communication, honor, and truth are involved; when the parties concerned are at the very least willing to attempt it.
I do think is that individual and group greed is most often opportunistic behavior ill-applied. Sometimes that behavior is self-centered with altruistic results...and sometimes it is self-centered with destructive, disruptive, and incapacitating results. Like so many things on this world, I see it as a mixed bag of negatives and positives depending upon peoples choices. We don't teach about greed or how to manage or control it in this day and age. We don't respect inequities anymore so we pay for it day after day like gluttons for self-punishment, failing to understand how we got here and sometimes even missing where we are in the scheme of things.
I think we can figure this out. Basically, I don't so much think as I BELIEVE we can figure this out. No conflict-paradigm is healthy to leave intact. We have all the tools lying scattered across the ground around us. In order to use them effectively to solve our mutual problems and achieve mutually beneficial goals between paradigm groups, we need to learn to work together as a team once again...and that means going after the Unknown Country together -- including the PTBs, their people, and the full history of Contact too -- uniting a fractured and fearful world through our commonalities.
By Cyrellys Geibhendach
July 14, 2011
Permission granted to copy & distribute intact without changes.
What do all of the following have in common? Social policy, living conditions conducive, intellectual exchange, research, facilitation, cultural policy, ecopsychology, dialogues, impact, competitiveness, development, secret history, extreme prejudice, global paradigm shift, beyond myth, interactive, balanced outcomes, ancient mysteries, quarantined planet, foresight effect, self-centered policy makers, discipline parallel, watching veneer, negative vs positive thinking, exercize unique collection, back-channeling, university ufology, extraterrestrial hypothesis, exopolitics definition, positive psychology, exopsychology, exopolitics and bioethics, and ET contact all have in common? Exopolitical Mediation.
Now that I have your attention...
I spend entirely too much time wondering why people do what they do. I wonder how much time they invest in their choices. I see only one crooked hitch with extraterrestrial contact cold-turkey method...the cat is out of the bag that some global leaders and various groups of insiders know all about it and have a long running history in Contact AND that the history of Contact runs the full extent of human existance on this planet.
Presenting a case for peace:
Too many people can't and won't be lied to any longer. That is becoming a growing phenomenon around the entire planet. It's not Contact that is the problem...it's the lies that have the leaders and managers and other peripheral personnel in hot water with the public sentiment; its the failure to maintain an open line of communication or lack of meaningful and truthful communication. And it is fueling other sentiments about all the secrecy, lack-of transparancy, behavior that is seen as over stepping authority or even illegal at times, and the lack-of acknowledgement and responsibility taken for the mind-games of the past etc. I'm not specifically pointing fingers here. I'm trying to make a point and suggest some solutions. I consider myself a third party observer in this conflict-paradigm that has formed between them and the aware public. If you need an example (small scale) just check out Larry W. Bryant, a journalist of renown in ufological research, who recently experienced a direct snubbing by NASA who is trying to foist $100 plus dollar fees upon him for information to which he is legally entitled as a journalist. NASA is intelligent enough to send aerospace contraptions beyond the atmosphere, so one would expect that they're intelligent enough to do a simple google search and discover his credentials. Of course they know who Mr. Bryant is but that is part of the silly, destructive game. Both the aware public and aware PTBs are mutually responsible for the creation of this conflict-paradigm through seemingly miniscule, incremental behaviors which is then mimic'd across the social spectrum of the planet. I haven't perceived this as a one-way street. There are social factions among the public which are equally responsible for perpetuating this situation and the problems it creates. In my opinion, it will take both broadly described groups to fix it.
Members of the public are currently having a grand time chasing after ET's COVERT CONTACT and swapping tales over it. It is interesting to listen to all the conversations among these people about the PTB (powers that be). According to them the PTB are either proverbial imbeciles or brain dead to not notice what the public observers have; to not hear their stories; to not take all the evidence seriously or at the very least with a little interest and non-comedic respect, etc. This too fuels the conflict-paradigm and continues the construction of moments subjected to rises of resentment, open hostility, aggression, malice, and the professed need for recompense. Exopolitical mediators experience first-hand this conflict-paradigm behavior when trying to make connections between the public and aware intermediaries with the contact control structure and the PTBs.
This symptomatic behavior oozing from this conflict-paradigm sometimes results in negative feeding-frenzies with communicators ending up as the victims. This is an example of an Old Irish concept of 'dire-price' or 'honor-price'. When a perceived crime was committed against a person or against personal or tribal property, a fine or consequence, sometime social and sometimes monetary or tangible, was exacted or assessed against the criminal and his tuath (clan/family and extended relatives or adopted members and associates). The dire price is often given a greater subconscious priority than communication or communicative interaction which is defined as dialogues without proof involved.
Those individuals or groups acting upon exacting the dire price see an opportunity to do so and victims often cannot not pay their way free of it with any form of proof having a discernable value high enough for the opportunists to cease their attack. What is even more interesting is that those bystanders who either know or suspect a communicator to be genuine will follow the collective and stand silent when they could stop this social punishment. They do so because of the history. Those PTB and their associates who know, are seen by the collective as having breached the social codes of conduct of the collective (aware public).
In Celtic tradition a person's honor had a specific monetary value (dire/honor-price). If one's honor was damaged, the person who had done the damage could be made to pay a price; dire-price or honor-price. One's honor was a kind of strength which was highly valued. If an enemy tried to harm a person, the enemy would likely lose body parts for the trouble. But on the opposing position the enemy's relatives were liable for his crimes and legally responsible to pay the 'honor-price'. For committing some crimes a person's honor-price was revoked, which meant that others could kill or wound them with impunity, and the victims family could not ask or require compensation.
There is a saying, "Without Trust between Individuals, there can be no Tribe." There can be no coherent collective public or quasi-public without it. A conflict-paradigm is the antithesis to a coherent and cooperative effort as a collective based on trust. Trust ALWAYS begins with communication and finishes with a relationship based on mutual positive experience. There is nothing positive in social conflict or personal greed for recompense or social status ill-applied. When initial attempts fail at connecting paradigm groups into cohesive collectives it is persistance and perseverance that salvages the situtation. These things may be generally deplored but without them fears, concerns, and objections become irrelevant and the cause of the objection is often lost in the ensuing muck-throwing contest. I'm not defending the rotten behavior of either party...just observing it and shaking my head because this situation should not be left as is...it's too destructive to both groups involved.
I have to ask, can this conflict-paradigm be surpassed? Can we as a specie escape this vicious circle, this rift, that has been created? Has there ever been a time when personal and often individualistic greed for recompense and personal social status, been relinquished in favor of choices which hold greater benefit and nurture for both individuals and the collective?
I suggest that the answer to these questions is yes. It can be done and has been done. I proffer to you an example out of ancient history: "Loyalty in the tuath was also important, for without this trust and cohesiveness it would be all too easy for any individual to perish, alone and without aid. The tuath depended upon mutual assistance and collective labor, for the survival tasks of herding, farming, and gathering were beyond the means of any one "nuclear" family. Truth was of utmost importance to the Celts, and the discernment of truth is a theme that is touched upon in many of the traditional tales. In "Cormac's Cup" for instance, the object of the tale was a cup which would shatter when three lies were told and mend again when three truths were uttered. This implies that some actions are not and can not be "relative", but instead are considered absolute and have value as being true. One either has or has not put water in the bucket. It cannot be both full and empty at the same time, at least within ordinary, mundane reality. The state of the bucket is a truth. Truth is one basis of proper judgment, and offering false judgment was believed to be one of the things that destroyed a tuath," Erinn Rowan Laurie. It is not the differences or the power that bind groups together into collectives, but rather the truths; those matters which groups hold in common relationships. It is their similarities on a social and spiritual level which bind the ties and support cohesion.
There was a time when we Old Irish seemed new to this world and generally practiced this aversion to greed; when the individual and the collective functioned for the most part, as a team....two well oiled interlinked cogs in the same wheel. I don't think it is that it didn't exist, or that it was always successful, or that myth paints pretty pictures for our time. Rather, I think compatibility and social cohesion existed in the collective of that time because there were clearly defined behavioral and ethical guidelines....boundaries of acceptable behavior, codes of conduct, that everyone understood clearly and agreed upon...making it possible for minor and major breaches of those codes to be pointed out and create a starting point for dealing with situations of breaching or transgression when they inevitably arose.
We don't seem to have any of that in this day and age. In mundane terms, we live in a socio-political free-for-all; laws are unclear, or hidden to all but a highly educated few because there are so many meaningless laws that law, itself, is a maze no one even cares to understand anymore unless greed is involved; philosophy is not taught as a required subject in schools; control of youth behavior by the family, for another example, is under severe attack to the point that many parents fear to do any firm disciplining without officials getting involved resulting in tribal-like social constructions among youth and general chaos in many communities. And two groups on Extraterrestrial Contact who have far more in common than they have in difference can't manage open and civilized communication events without alot of haggling over what constitutes a lie, or whether or not proof is actually proof or even necessary in the first place, and whether or not any act is ever legally or ethically actionable or of value. I think it is true that trust develops more easily and a community becomes more than a fractured group of people who claim they believe similar things when communication, honor, and truth are involved; when the parties concerned are at the very least willing to attempt it.
I do think is that individual and group greed is most often opportunistic behavior ill-applied. Sometimes that behavior is self-centered with altruistic results...and sometimes it is self-centered with destructive, disruptive, and incapacitating results. Like so many things on this world, I see it as a mixed bag of negatives and positives depending upon peoples choices. We don't teach about greed or how to manage or control it in this day and age. We don't respect inequities anymore so we pay for it day after day like gluttons for self-punishment, failing to understand how we got here and sometimes even missing where we are in the scheme of things.
I think we can figure this out. Basically, I don't so much think as I BELIEVE we can figure this out. No conflict-paradigm is healthy to leave intact. We have all the tools lying scattered across the ground around us. In order to use them effectively to solve our mutual problems and achieve mutually beneficial goals between paradigm groups, we need to learn to work together as a team once again...and that means going after the Unknown Country together -- including the PTBs, their people, and the full history of Contact too -- uniting a fractured and fearful world through our commonalities.
Friday, July 8, 2011
Mickey Komtra Facebook Discussion Taking It To Congress
Mickey Komtra a member of facebook has opened a discussion in the Disclosure Project UFO group seeking peer opinion on, "a way we the people could help take the disclosure project to congress? legit ideas not defeatest conspiracy crap. 400 members of all former areas of intelligence, military, and government step forward and admit what we all discuss daily, lay the paving stones, and 10 years later, the D.P. on youtube has a million hits, and justin bieber has 500,000,000. It hasnt even been featured on something like fox news.....GO!!!!"
It was an opportunity to open up the discussion further to reach the heart of why the national security state maintains its hold over the secrecy and elected officials. He is genuinely looking for a real and actionable course that concerned individuals could do singularly or as a group. He rightly pointed out the increasing numbers of the public who could be theoretically brought to bear through grass roots movement.
I suggested that it is a good idea to get involved but that a strategy would be necessary. One that produced positive benefits for more than just the public.
It was an opportunity to open up the discussion further to reach the heart of why the national security state maintains its hold over the secrecy and elected officials. He is genuinely looking for a real and actionable course that concerned individuals could do singularly or as a group. He rightly pointed out the increasing numbers of the public who could be theoretically brought to bear through grass roots movement.
I suggested that it is a good idea to get involved but that a strategy would be necessary. One that produced positive benefits for more than just the public.
Hi Mickey, realistically you would have to grow a movement with more influence than the money which funds re-election campaigns. Power only respects power. Influence only respects a greater Influence. You have to have something on the table that is greater than oh well "they're here". Solve the 'why' they personally need to acknowledge it and you may find yourself on the right road. Better than a million man march...a million man sales pitch they can't refuse. Just remember some quarters of 'they' already know and anything that changes their safe & secure little hidden world scares the crap out of them. So your sales pitch needs to be sensitive to those people too or they will fight to the death for their own survival. They've often requested Amnesty for the decades of secrecy and national/international security state acts to maintain what they believe was peace and civilization. Why don't you take such an effort and solve both problems? Creating win - win situations are more likely to produce a result you would be happy with than one that continues a 'conflict-paradigm' between those who desire Disclosure and those who are terrified of the consequences.
Saturday, July 2, 2011
Online Event - The Future of Justice
The following event is one of interest to active mediators and communication facilitators. The transitioning of communication and conflict paradigm resolution to the online forums makes programs such as this one of great interest to the exopolitical mediator who, while working with participants, is also mindful of points involving social & legal agendas and parameters or requirements which are part of the confidentiality agreements and subsequent activities. It is useful to a mediator's profession to perceive modifications and trends in the landscape of the private & public resource environments as they surface. CY
The Future of Justice
Tuesday, July 26, 2011 from 10:00 AM - 11:30 AM (ET)
Early Registration tickets $10.00
Event Details:
BE A PART OF THE GLOBAL COMMUNITY SHAPING NEW BUSINESS MODELS FOR TECHNOLOGY-MEDIATED DISPUTE RESOLUTION
A technology-mediated justice system is taking shape around us. What began as e-filing and online docketing has transitioned into the use of technology to enable the average citizen in creating complex legal documents, crowdsourcing legal information, and allowing lawyers and clients to interact on a virtual platform. These developments have merely touched the surface of technology’s influence on dispute resolution, the practice of law, and the justice system as a whole.
The Future of Justice program addresses this exciting future and offers insights from leading industry professionals on the critical issues facing technology and the justice system and what this future will look like. By addressing one of the main focal points of all justice systems, dispute resolution, the program looks at the history, past, and future of the industry that has come to be known as online dispute resolution.
Program participants will gain greater understanding of the past, present and future of online justice systems, how international organizations, NGOs, and the private sector are positioning themselves to shape the system, and how your business will be impacted as a result.
Speakers:
Ethan Katsh, Director of National Center for Technology & Dispute Resolution
Vikki Rogers, Director of Institute of International Commercial Law at Pace Law School
Chittu Nagarajan, founder of ODRIndia and Director of Ebay India & Ebay's Community Courts in India
Timothy Sze, Founder of China ODR Forum; General Mediator and Administrated Panelist at Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre (HKIAC)
Moderated by: Vince Polley, President of KnowConnect PLLC
Who Should Attend:
Lawyers and Mediators: Learn about new directions for the legal industry and how to optimize your practice using technology to prevent, negotiate, and settle disputes in real-time and in a collaborative and time-sensitive manner.
Government officials: Learn to more effectively use resources to build efficiencies into your current systems, increase public participation, and build consensus.
Social Justice Practitioners: Learn how the quickly growing field of online dispute resolution can help to bridge the justice and technology divide, facilitate micro-commerce, and grow markets.
Program Sponsored By:
SMU Center for Dispute Resolution and Conflict Management and
The Center for Public Policy Dispute Resolution at University of Texas School of Law
Hosted By:
Hosted by InternetBar Org Institute; Sponsored by SMU Center for Dispute Resolution and Conflict Management and The Center for Public Policy Dispute Resolution at University of Texas School of Law
Internet Bar Organization is a non-profit organization that seeks to promote and shape the emerging online justice community through educational programs, providing businesses and individuals around the world with learning resources and by running Rule of Law & Technology programs in the developing world to empower individuals at the bottom of the economic pyramid with new tools to make a living.
Source: http://future-justice-eorgf.eventbrite.com/
The Future of Justice
Tuesday, July 26, 2011 from 10:00 AM - 11:30 AM (ET)
Early Registration tickets $10.00
Event Details:
BE A PART OF THE GLOBAL COMMUNITY SHAPING NEW BUSINESS MODELS FOR TECHNOLOGY-MEDIATED DISPUTE RESOLUTION
A technology-mediated justice system is taking shape around us. What began as e-filing and online docketing has transitioned into the use of technology to enable the average citizen in creating complex legal documents, crowdsourcing legal information, and allowing lawyers and clients to interact on a virtual platform. These developments have merely touched the surface of technology’s influence on dispute resolution, the practice of law, and the justice system as a whole.
The Future of Justice program addresses this exciting future and offers insights from leading industry professionals on the critical issues facing technology and the justice system and what this future will look like. By addressing one of the main focal points of all justice systems, dispute resolution, the program looks at the history, past, and future of the industry that has come to be known as online dispute resolution.
Program participants will gain greater understanding of the past, present and future of online justice systems, how international organizations, NGOs, and the private sector are positioning themselves to shape the system, and how your business will be impacted as a result.
Speakers:
Ethan Katsh, Director of National Center for Technology & Dispute Resolution
Vikki Rogers, Director of Institute of International Commercial Law at Pace Law School
Chittu Nagarajan, founder of ODRIndia and Director of Ebay India & Ebay's Community Courts in India
Timothy Sze, Founder of China ODR Forum; General Mediator and Administrated Panelist at Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre (HKIAC)
Moderated by: Vince Polley, President of KnowConnect PLLC
Who Should Attend:
Lawyers and Mediators: Learn about new directions for the legal industry and how to optimize your practice using technology to prevent, negotiate, and settle disputes in real-time and in a collaborative and time-sensitive manner.
Government officials: Learn to more effectively use resources to build efficiencies into your current systems, increase public participation, and build consensus.
Social Justice Practitioners: Learn how the quickly growing field of online dispute resolution can help to bridge the justice and technology divide, facilitate micro-commerce, and grow markets.
Program Sponsored By:
SMU Center for Dispute Resolution and Conflict Management and
The Center for Public Policy Dispute Resolution at University of Texas School of Law
Hosted By:
Hosted by InternetBar Org Institute; Sponsored by SMU Center for Dispute Resolution and Conflict Management and The Center for Public Policy Dispute Resolution at University of Texas School of Law
Internet Bar Organization is a non-profit organization that seeks to promote and shape the emerging online justice community through educational programs, providing businesses and individuals around the world with learning resources and by running Rule of Law & Technology programs in the developing world to empower individuals at the bottom of the economic pyramid with new tools to make a living.
Source: http://future-justice-eorgf.eventbrite.com/
Wednesday, June 22, 2011
Free Physics Resource - Richard Feynman Lectures
From the Desk of Cyrellys: I just ran across a free resource courtesy of Microsoft Research's Project Tuva. It is a series of Richard Feynman Lectures. For those of you who don't know who this guy is, he is not only one of physics greatest minds but also renowned for being able to put physics ideas in terms which anyone can understand. His lectures are said to be very interesting and entertaining not just educational. You will need Microsoft Silverlight to see the videos. Here is the link to them: Feynman Lectures It is the featured video series at this time. Anyone interested in exploring the Contact Paradigm, exotic technologies, and associated conspiracy theory could use a familiarity with Feynman's work.
Tuesday, June 21, 2011
Sociological Perspective in Exopolitical Mediation
Sociological Perspective in Exopolitical Mediation
By Cyrellys Geibhendach
06/21/11
Copy and Distribute Freely
The following article operates within an understanding that Contact, and an infrastructure to contain the knowledge of it, is a fact of our reality even while not supported yet by openly available empirical evidence.
The social perspective comprises the foundation of the sociological approach to understanding the human condition. It incorporates two ways of viewing people: “seeing the general in the particular” and “seeing the strange in the familiar.” It also seeks to discern social contexts, marginalities, crisis points, benefits, and applications. The field of sociology is the systematic study of human society from these distinctive points of view.
The conditions involving open humanity and the residents of the contact paradigm are subject to the same foundational principles of social ecology as other branches of human society. This condition is comprised of contexts, marginalities, crisis points, detriments and benefits, and lives that struggle with the reality that the world they live in is uninformed.
The general categories to which we belong in life shape our particular life experiences. It is through the power of society that these experiences influence our actions, thoughts, and feelings. These general categories or patterns offer advantages or opportunities to us based on factors such as social class, age, and gender. In exopolitical mediation, we add to this by observing that knowledge itself can define and shape lives and thereby actions, thoughts, and feelings. Knowledge patterns or degrees of understanding also offers advantages and opportunities, but the secrecy more often limits access to the commonly valued aspects of human needs; things which we associate as agents of socialization, such as stable family, traditional schooling, credentials, and clear access to peer groups across social spectrums.
The sociological perspective in most social circumstances “sees the strange in the familiar” because human behavior is largely “a matter of what people decide to do in favor of the idea that society shapes our thoughts.” What others think of us, matter to us. Deciding or choosing. which in American society is a hallmark of individuality, can then be influenced by the various opinions of others around us. Our notion of individuality is therefore commiserate to our relationships rather than other functions such as logic or physical well being. One peculiar example of this is the intense secrecy about Contact and the activities associated among the inhabitants of the paradigm. The control structure has many decades of experience in defying conventional human behavior to the detriment of those in-the-know. Their definition of individuality is based on their relationship to experience and needs based on unconventional knowledge unavailable to broader society. This removes much of broader society’s ability to influence. Individuality in this context is an activity of or self-contained state (autonomy) of a societal group operating outside of social norms and expectations.
Emile Durkheim explored the context of individuality through examination of profound “personal choice” exhibited in the social forces at work in the “isolated act of self-destruction.” Durkheim discovered that categories of people experienced differences associated to social integration that influenced suicide rates. He found that people with strong social ties had low suicide rates and more individualistic people had high suicide rates. His conclusion was that regardless of the “advantages of autonomy, it contributed to social isolation and a higher suicide rate.” The degree of secrecy involved in the context of the contact paradigm seemingly prevents in some cases the buffering effect that strong social ties can provide. The autonomy of the compartmentalized groups paired with the requirements of national security and secrecy causes these individuals to experience traumatic differences and an absence of perceived social integration within broader social systems. Unsavory control behavior within the paradigm is observed as not the only cause of death. Suicides, which we know by reports occur, may be linkable to the limited or absent social integration and may be as prevalent as any security measures to contain the knowledge.
Sociological perspectives run from individual and provincial experiences up through national and then beyond to global perspectives. There is potentially no real limit to what points of view could be taken. The global perspective is an important means of understanding the larger world and our society’s place in it whether that society is on the individual scale, provincial scale, national scale or higher. This logical extension of perspectives is based on the basic premise that our place in society profoundly affects our life experiences. The individual perspective provides us with the most personal examination of the paradigm while the compartmentalized groups could be more closely likened to a provincial perspective due to its limited contact with open society except where efforts have been specifically made to take a broader one. The interlinking and interaction with experiential groups and those of high social status residing in the contact paradigm allows us to come engage in a unique exploration of the idea of socialization which inevitably involves inconsistencies from different sources. Experts describe socialization “as not a simple learning process but a complex balancing act in which we weigh all the ideas we encounter, form our own distinctive personalities, and create new world views.”
Societies of the world are increasingly interconnected by electronic technology and the conscious awareness that the technology allows. The transmitting of pictures, sounds, and written documents brings each of the sociological perspectives to life within seconds and in ways that were largely unavailable in the past. The consequence of this is that a secrecy paradigm becomes less sustainable as many people all around the world now share “many tastes in things like music, clothing, food…,” and a thirst for knowledge and understanding in our relationships. Even as we share and project our way of life into the world, the larger world has an impact on us, and we are just as quick to adopt or experiment with many of the things we find in it. The money-siphon we know as the deep black infrastructure created to manage Contact and all the peripheral aspects of its consequences and human responses has become a sprawling structure that grew up like a break-away civilization virtually no one noticed. It tickles the curiosity and imagination of individuals and groups when they encounter portions of it. It causes us to think in terms beyond nationality and provincial perspectives. Stories wriggle their way into surface society and take on our understanding of life; challenging both accepted truths and entrenched mythologies. This sharing, experiencing, utilizing and experimenting “greatly enhances the cultural diversity of this country.” Exploring this new way of thinking about humankind and our world is a good way to learn about ourselves.
This increasingly interconnected world with its secrets emerging from the wood-work, through the interchange of fear-based secrecy, principle based searches for truth, and the interplay of individuals and groups opens an opportunity to “understand ourselves only to the extent that we comprehend others.” The sociological perspective gives us tools with which to explore our world in this new context and gain this comprehension.
Bibliography
Quote from: Sociology, Seventh Edition by John J. Macionis; Prentice Hall 1999; pg2
Quote from: Sociology, Seventh Edition by John J. Macionis; Prentice Hall 1999; pg3
Quote from: Sociology, Seventh Edition by John J. Macionis; Prentice Hall 1999; pg 3
Quote from: Sociology, Seventh Edition by John J. Macionis; Prentice Hall 1999; pg 4
Quote from: Sociology, Seventh Edition by John J. Macionis; Prentice Hall 1999; pg 4
Quote from: Sociology, Seventh Edition by John J. Macionis; Prentice Hall 1999; pg 5
Quote from: Sociology, Seventh Edition by John J. Macionis; Prentice Hall 1999; pg 137
Quote from: Sociology, Seventh Edition by John J. Macionis; Prentice Hall 1999; pg 8
Quote from: Sociology, Seventh Edition by John J. Macionis; Prentice Hall 1999; pg 8
Quote from: Sociology, Seventh Edition by John J. Macionis; Prentice Hall 1999; pg 8
Quote from: Sociology, Seventh Edition by John J. Macionis; Prentice Hall 1999; pg 9
By Cyrellys Geibhendach
06/21/11
Copy and Distribute Freely
The following article operates within an understanding that Contact, and an infrastructure to contain the knowledge of it, is a fact of our reality even while not supported yet by openly available empirical evidence.
The social perspective comprises the foundation of the sociological approach to understanding the human condition. It incorporates two ways of viewing people: “seeing the general in the particular” and “seeing the strange in the familiar.” It also seeks to discern social contexts, marginalities, crisis points, benefits, and applications. The field of sociology is the systematic study of human society from these distinctive points of view.
The conditions involving open humanity and the residents of the contact paradigm are subject to the same foundational principles of social ecology as other branches of human society. This condition is comprised of contexts, marginalities, crisis points, detriments and benefits, and lives that struggle with the reality that the world they live in is uninformed.
The general categories to which we belong in life shape our particular life experiences. It is through the power of society that these experiences influence our actions, thoughts, and feelings. These general categories or patterns offer advantages or opportunities to us based on factors such as social class, age, and gender. In exopolitical mediation, we add to this by observing that knowledge itself can define and shape lives and thereby actions, thoughts, and feelings. Knowledge patterns or degrees of understanding also offers advantages and opportunities, but the secrecy more often limits access to the commonly valued aspects of human needs; things which we associate as agents of socialization, such as stable family, traditional schooling, credentials, and clear access to peer groups across social spectrums.
The sociological perspective in most social circumstances “sees the strange in the familiar” because human behavior is largely “a matter of what people decide to do in favor of the idea that society shapes our thoughts.” What others think of us, matter to us. Deciding or choosing. which in American society is a hallmark of individuality, can then be influenced by the various opinions of others around us. Our notion of individuality is therefore commiserate to our relationships rather than other functions such as logic or physical well being. One peculiar example of this is the intense secrecy about Contact and the activities associated among the inhabitants of the paradigm. The control structure has many decades of experience in defying conventional human behavior to the detriment of those in-the-know. Their definition of individuality is based on their relationship to experience and needs based on unconventional knowledge unavailable to broader society. This removes much of broader society’s ability to influence. Individuality in this context is an activity of or self-contained state (autonomy) of a societal group operating outside of social norms and expectations.
Emile Durkheim explored the context of individuality through examination of profound “personal choice” exhibited in the social forces at work in the “isolated act of self-destruction.” Durkheim discovered that categories of people experienced differences associated to social integration that influenced suicide rates. He found that people with strong social ties had low suicide rates and more individualistic people had high suicide rates. His conclusion was that regardless of the “advantages of autonomy, it contributed to social isolation and a higher suicide rate.” The degree of secrecy involved in the context of the contact paradigm seemingly prevents in some cases the buffering effect that strong social ties can provide. The autonomy of the compartmentalized groups paired with the requirements of national security and secrecy causes these individuals to experience traumatic differences and an absence of perceived social integration within broader social systems. Unsavory control behavior within the paradigm is observed as not the only cause of death. Suicides, which we know by reports occur, may be linkable to the limited or absent social integration and may be as prevalent as any security measures to contain the knowledge.
Sociological perspectives run from individual and provincial experiences up through national and then beyond to global perspectives. There is potentially no real limit to what points of view could be taken. The global perspective is an important means of understanding the larger world and our society’s place in it whether that society is on the individual scale, provincial scale, national scale or higher. This logical extension of perspectives is based on the basic premise that our place in society profoundly affects our life experiences. The individual perspective provides us with the most personal examination of the paradigm while the compartmentalized groups could be more closely likened to a provincial perspective due to its limited contact with open society except where efforts have been specifically made to take a broader one. The interlinking and interaction with experiential groups and those of high social status residing in the contact paradigm allows us to come engage in a unique exploration of the idea of socialization which inevitably involves inconsistencies from different sources. Experts describe socialization “as not a simple learning process but a complex balancing act in which we weigh all the ideas we encounter, form our own distinctive personalities, and create new world views.”
Societies of the world are increasingly interconnected by electronic technology and the conscious awareness that the technology allows. The transmitting of pictures, sounds, and written documents brings each of the sociological perspectives to life within seconds and in ways that were largely unavailable in the past. The consequence of this is that a secrecy paradigm becomes less sustainable as many people all around the world now share “many tastes in things like music, clothing, food…,” and a thirst for knowledge and understanding in our relationships. Even as we share and project our way of life into the world, the larger world has an impact on us, and we are just as quick to adopt or experiment with many of the things we find in it. The money-siphon we know as the deep black infrastructure created to manage Contact and all the peripheral aspects of its consequences and human responses has become a sprawling structure that grew up like a break-away civilization virtually no one noticed. It tickles the curiosity and imagination of individuals and groups when they encounter portions of it. It causes us to think in terms beyond nationality and provincial perspectives. Stories wriggle their way into surface society and take on our understanding of life; challenging both accepted truths and entrenched mythologies. This sharing, experiencing, utilizing and experimenting “greatly enhances the cultural diversity of this country.” Exploring this new way of thinking about humankind and our world is a good way to learn about ourselves.
This increasingly interconnected world with its secrets emerging from the wood-work, through the interchange of fear-based secrecy, principle based searches for truth, and the interplay of individuals and groups opens an opportunity to “understand ourselves only to the extent that we comprehend others.” The sociological perspective gives us tools with which to explore our world in this new context and gain this comprehension.
Bibliography
Quote from: Sociology, Seventh Edition by John J. Macionis; Prentice Hall 1999; pg2
Quote from: Sociology, Seventh Edition by John J. Macionis; Prentice Hall 1999; pg3
Quote from: Sociology, Seventh Edition by John J. Macionis; Prentice Hall 1999; pg 3
Quote from: Sociology, Seventh Edition by John J. Macionis; Prentice Hall 1999; pg 4
Quote from: Sociology, Seventh Edition by John J. Macionis; Prentice Hall 1999; pg 4
Quote from: Sociology, Seventh Edition by John J. Macionis; Prentice Hall 1999; pg 5
Quote from: Sociology, Seventh Edition by John J. Macionis; Prentice Hall 1999; pg 137
Quote from: Sociology, Seventh Edition by John J. Macionis; Prentice Hall 1999; pg 8
Quote from: Sociology, Seventh Edition by John J. Macionis; Prentice Hall 1999; pg 8
Quote from: Sociology, Seventh Edition by John J. Macionis; Prentice Hall 1999; pg 8
Quote from: Sociology, Seventh Edition by John J. Macionis; Prentice Hall 1999; pg 9
Tuesday, June 14, 2011
Larry Bryant seeking records prohibiting all GSC personnel from publically discussing UFO-ET encounters
Larry Bryant, well known journalist, researcher, and member of Compass Morainn in the affairs of exopolitical facilitation is hard at work seeking records prohibiting all GSC personnel from publicly discussing UFO-E.T. encounters. These records are very important to the public understanding of the restrictions under which our military first responders to extraterrestrial contact are forced to function.
It also allows researchers, mediators, communication facilitators, and disclosure activists to understand how the secrecy works and what means of control are currently in operation.
This is work that builds the fundamental image of our first responders not only as bounded-beings, but as individuals beyond skin and space. It evolves our understanding of the current infrastructure; what drives its actions, what motivates it. Aristotle once said, "the same causes and the same means that produce any excellence or virtue can also destroy it, and this is true of every art....the same holds true of the virtues: in our transactions with other men it is by action that some become just and others unjust, and it is by acting in the face of danger and by developing the habit of feeling fear or confidence that some become brave men and others cowards...In a word, characteristics develop from corresponding activities. For that reason, we must see to it that our activities are of a certain kind, since any variations in them will be reflected in our characteristics." As a philosopher he said that our habits are no small matter; that it makes not only a considerable difference but all the difference.
In order to grapple with these boundaries, we must first understand them. The majority of the public trusts to the extent that we take them for granted. Even many of the insiders live with them rather than challenge them. This has produced a system which rules humanity rather than humanity ruling the system. Research, illumination, and understanding returns control of our systems to those who would benefit or be managed by them. It allows us to look at the true liabilities by which we suffer. What are the results for our lives together? What is invited and what is denied? Kenneth Gergen, author of Relational Being - Beyond Self and Community, noted that there are enormous costs involved in our complacency over bounded-being and that this bounding emerges as a threat to the world.
FiOs.
Cyrellys
FROM EMAIL:
fromLARRY W BRYANT overtci@cavtel.net
to ufohastings
to ufohastings
bcc cyrellys
hide details 10:34 PM (11 hours ago)
== The USAF's Broken FOIA Record ("No records, no records, no records, no ...") ==
[LWB Note (as posted in the comments section of my blog's Item 2.96): The "authorities" here once again illustrate the public's need for emergence of whistleblowers bold enough to provide us with solid evidence that hard-core UFOtruth remains hostage of forces inimical to the public interest.] - http://ufoview.posterous.com
TO: Larry W. Bryant
FROM: HQ AFGSC/A6
414 Curtiss Rd. Bldg 4714, Ste 208
Barksdale AFB, LA 71110
DATE: April 12, 2011
Dear Mr. Bryant,
This is in response to your 11 February 2010 [sic] Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request #2011-02498-F, for a photocopy of all GSC generated and GSC received records prohibiting all GSC personnel from publicly discussing their own UFO-E.T. encounters and the UFO-E.T.-related reports of others, pertaining to Minot Air Force Base, Malmstrom Air Force Base, and F. E. Warren Air Force Base.
Upon your request, AFGSC FOIA office conducted a search to include Minot Air Force Base, Malmstrom Air Force Base, F. E. Warren Air Force Base, and Air Force Global Strike Command. An appropriately detailed search of the relevant system of records was unable to locate any responsive records for your FOIA request.
Should you decide that an appeal of this decision is necessary, you must write to the Secretary of the Air Force at the address below in sufficient time so that the appeal reaches us no later than 60 calendar days after the date of this letter. Include in the appeal your reasons for requesting reconsideration, and attach a copy of this letter. Mail to: Secretary of the Air Force; Thru: HQ AFGSC/A60K (FOIA); 414 Curtiss Rd., Bldg. 4717, Ste 208; Barksdale AFB, 71110; Or e-mail to: afgscfoiaworkflow@barksdale.af.mil .
Department of Defense Regulations 5400.7 indicates fees be assessed for processing FOIA requests; however, there were no chargeable fees assessed for this request.
Sincerely,
ROBERT S. JACK II, SES, USAF
Director of Communications [Headquarters, Air Force Global Strike Command]
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
http://tinyletter.com/ufoview-updates
--
Three followers of wisdom: imagination, purpose, and endeavor. -- Irish Triad
FiOs ~ "Vision, Memory, Dream" Berla Feini (old Irish), "Knowledge" Modern Irish.
In singing, in exploring our connection to our Spirit and the Creative Source, then turning to examine our Reality, what we thought was only Imagination or only a Dream is revealed to be the most powerful Truth of all...
Alan Sharland on bullying and conflict-coaching
Alan Sharland offered some advice to a fellow colleague workplace ADR Consultant/Coach. He recommened conflict-coaching as a method of dealing with the aggressive behavior we describe as bullying. Alan said, "Tamara, my view is that often the focus is on the person considered to be doing the bullying rather than support the person who feels bullied in finding different ways of supporting themselves in the situation. When the focus is on 'proving' there is bullying taking place this proves very difficult as it is not always clear what 'bullying' means. What is a bully? Meanwhile the person who feels bullied is left having to continue in their situation without support for them (an ongoing investigation into a boss/colleague for bullying is not the most comforting or effective form of support someone can have). This is one of the many reasons that conflict coaching has emerged. At CAOS we provide workplace conflict coaching as a confidential 1-to-1 support for both those considered to be 'bullies' and those who feel they are being bullied. I don't use the terms directly of 'bully' and 'victim' as often this is subjective, which is why it is very difficult to 'prove' it has taken place and thus the existence of the concept perpetuates, meaning the actual experiences of the person who feels bullied go unchanged and they go unsupported." Alan Sharland works out of the UK on Mediation, Conflict Coaching, Conflict Management Training + Consultancy, mainly in universities.
Friday, June 10, 2011
A Behavioral Modeling Text
The following is a book that was created for "the Human Effectiveness Division of the U.S. Air Force Research Laboratory, with additional funding from the Air Force Office of Scientific Research" and so compiled by Greg L. Zacharias, Jean MacMillan, and Susan B. Van Hemel, Editors, Committee on Organizational Modeling: From Individuals to Societies, National Research Council.
Book: Behavioral Modeling and Simulation: From Individuals to Societies
Free PDF: http://download.nap.edu/cart/download.cgi?&record_id=12169&free=1
It is useful for mediators and facilitators to have an understanding of perceptional methodologies in common use by participants, particularly in highly structured social stratum such as the military. The editors point out that,
These ideas about behavioral modeling represent the latest in institutional expertise and may be of use within the exopolitical mediation field. This book is submitted here for professional review.
Book: Behavioral Modeling and Simulation: From Individuals to Societies
Free PDF: http://download.nap.edu/cart/download.cgi?&record_id=12169&free=1
It is useful for mediators and facilitators to have an understanding of perceptional methodologies in common use by participants, particularly in highly structured social stratum such as the military. The editors point out that,
"the Air Force and the other military services are increasingly interested in using models of the behavior of humans, as individuals and in groups of various kinds and sizes to support the development of doctrine, strategies, and tactics for dealing with state and nonstate adversaries, in support of military planning and operations, acquisition programs, and as training and simulation tools. In this report, we are calling them individual, organizational, and societal (IOS) models."
These ideas about behavioral modeling represent the latest in institutional expertise and may be of use within the exopolitical mediation field. This book is submitted here for professional review.
News Flash - New Patriot Act has Senators Alarmed
News Flash for Exopolitical Mediators and Researchers:
This just in from our friends at Brasscheck,
The way the improved Patriot Act is being applied is new and disturbing.
Quote:
There's no longer any pretence that it's
for investigation of terrorists. Now anyone
is fair game.
It's gotten so extreme that even Sentators
on the Intelligence Committee are alarmed.
Video:
http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/4035.html
- Brasscheck
P.S. Please share Brasscheck TV e-mails and
videos with friends and colleagues.
That's how we grow. Thanks.
================================
Brasscheck TV
2380 California St.
San Francisco, CA 94115
This just in from our friends at Brasscheck,
The way the improved Patriot Act is being applied is new and disturbing.
Quote:
There's no longer any pretence that it's
for investigation of terrorists. Now anyone
is fair game.
It's gotten so extreme that even Sentators
on the Intelligence Committee are alarmed.
Video:
http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/4035.html
- Brasscheck
P.S. Please share Brasscheck TV e-mails and
videos with friends and colleagues.
That's how we grow. Thanks.
================================
Brasscheck TV
2380 California St.
San Francisco, CA 94115
Recommended Reading June 9 2011
Here's a list of readings worth checking out:
Martin Dominik andJohn C. Zarnecki
The detection of extra-terrestrial life and the consequences for science and society
Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A February 13, 2011 369 (1936) 499-507; doi:10.1098/rsta.2010.0236
View Text
Baruch S. Blumberg
Astrobiology, space and the future age of discovery
Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A February 13, 2011 369 (1936) 508-515; doi:10.1098/rsta.2010.0239
View Text
Malcolm Fridlund
Extra-terrestrial life in the European Space Agency’s Cosmic Vision plan and beyond
Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A February 13, 2011 369 (1936) 582-593; doi:10.1098/rsta.2010.0233
View Text
Martin Dominik andJohn C. Zarnecki
The detection of extra-terrestrial life and the consequences for science and society
Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A February 13, 2011 369 (1936) 499-507; doi:10.1098/rsta.2010.0236
View Text
Baruch S. Blumberg
Astrobiology, space and the future age of discovery
Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A February 13, 2011 369 (1936) 508-515; doi:10.1098/rsta.2010.0239
View Text
Malcolm Fridlund
Extra-terrestrial life in the European Space Agency’s Cosmic Vision plan and beyond
Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A February 13, 2011 369 (1936) 582-593; doi:10.1098/rsta.2010.0233
View Text
Wednesday, June 8, 2011
Deviance study notes as relative to exopolitical discourse on the subject of social-conflict paradigm
Deviance study notes as relative to exopolitical discourse on the subject of social-conflict paradigm.
By Cyrellys Geibhendach
June 8, 2001
Permission granted to copy & distribute intact without change.
Collective notes and direct excerpts from the text Sociology, seventh edition by John J. Mcionis, combined with personal commentary on the subject of Deviance as relative to Exopolitical discourse.
The existing division between the public and the national security state infrastructure on Contact which I have referred to numerous times as a contact control structure has evolved from a simple matter of those who know nothing and those who know something into a social-conflict paradigm which muddies the water as to what is known and who knows what, as well as contributes to a hostile public environment in which communicators are placed at heightened risk for social injury and destructive outcomes in communcative efforts. These notes are an opportunity for both the public and insiders to consider how culture, natural behavioral tendencies, and previous behavioral choices has complicated an already difficult communication environment.
Deviance is the recognized violation of cultural norms. Norms guide virtually all human activities, so the concept of deviance covers a correspondingly broad spectrum. Not all deviance involves action or even choice. The simple existence of some categories of individuals can be troublesome to others.
The long-standing policies withholding a publicly perceived non-terrestrial interaction effort has given rise to a deviance behavior that resulted in creation of a sprawling community comprised of people from around the world who's cultural norms now include the concept of Contact or the possibility of Contact. The social-conflict paradigm involved is defined as a struggle over the power to define conformity and nonconformity, freedom of human choice, moral boundaries, how society defines social deviance, and who's definition of deviance will be the long-standing one. This conflict is specified as occuring between the public and the vaguely defined Contact Control Structure (CCS).
Most examples of nonconformity that come readily to mind are negative instances of rule breaking, but we also define especially righteous people, students who speak up too much in class, or people who are overly enthusiastic about new technologies as deviant, even if we accord them a measure of respect. What deviant actions or attitudes have in common is some element of difference that causes us to regard another person as an “outsider”.
There is dispute between factions of the aware community within the public, defined as ufology & exopolitics, and the insiders of the CCS as to who is defined as an "outsider", and as to who is an example of nonconformity.
Members of society try to influence each other’s behavior through various kinds of social control. Much of the time this process is informal. Deviance is much more than a matter of individual choice or personal failing. How a society defines deviance, whom individuals brand as deviant, and what people decide to do about nonconformity are all issues of social organization.
Surface society's attempts at influencing the behavior of those within the CCS through nominative social control methods has historically had severely destructive consequences prior to either side really gleaning understanding of each other or even of what each side is knowledgeable about or what each is capable of knowing.
Although we tend to view deviance in terms of the free choice or personal failings of individuals, all behavior – deviance or conformity – is shaped by society. Three social foundations of deviance are identified:
1. Deviance varies according to cultural norms. No thought or action is inherently deviant; it becomes deviant only in relation to particular norms.
2. People become deviant as others define them that way. Everyone violates social norms regularly, occasionally to the extent of breaking the law. Whether such activities are sufficient to define us as mentally ill or criminal depends on how others perceive, define, and respond to our behavior.
3. Both rule making and rule breaking involve social power. The law, claimed Karl Marx, amounts to little more than the means by which powerful people protect their interests. In short norms and how we apply them are linked to social inequality.
The structural-functional paradigm focuses on how deviance contributes to the operation society.
In his pioneering study of deviance, Emile Durkheim made the astonishing statement that there is nothing abnormal about deviance; in fact, it contributes to the operation of society in four ways:
1. Deviance affirms cultural values and norms. Living demands that we make moral choices. To prevent our culture from dissolving into chaos people must show preference for some attitudes and behaviors over others. But any conception of virtue rests upon an opposing notion of vice. And just as there can be no good without evil, there can be no justice without crime. Deviance in short, is indispensible to creating and sustaining morality.
2. Responding to deviance clarifies moral boundaries. By defining some individuals as deviant, people draw a social boundary between right and wrong.
3. Responding to deviance promotes social unity. People typically react to serous deviance with collective outrage. This Durkheim explained, reaffirms the moral ties that bind them.
4. Deviance encourages social change. Deviant people Durkheim claimed, push a society’s moral boundaries, pointing out alternatives to the status quo and encouraging change. Moreover he declared, today’s deviance can become tomorrow’s morality.
Durkheim wrote:
Imagine a society of saints, a perfect cloister of exemplary individuals. Crimes, properly so called, will there be unknown; but faults which appear [insignificant] to the layman will create there the same scandal that the ordinary offense does in ordinary consciousness…For the same reason, the perfect and upright man judges his smallest failings with a severity that the majority reserve for acts more truly in the nature of an offense. (1964)
Deviance then is not a matter of having a few “bad apples” around; it is a necessary condition of “good” social living. If deviance is universal, the kind of deviance people generate depends on the moral issues they seek to clarify. It answers questions about how much dissent to allow and what goals should be by celebrating some of their members while condemning others as deviant. Social scientist, Erikson discovered that even though the offenses change (over time), the proportion of deviant (people) remained steady over time. This stability, concludes Erikson, confirms Durkheim’s contention that deviants serve as ethical markers, outlining a society’s changing moral boundaries.
A failure on both sides of the proverbial fence (public & CCS) to understand how and why they have habitually made certain choices, results in further division and solidification of sentiments involving resentment and open hostility. This lack of mutual understanding withdraws freedom of choice in how to proceed for both groups. Inserting understanding allows introspection and the opportunity for reconcideration of potentially destructive future choices and behaviors.
Some deviance may be necessary for a society to function, but Robert Merton argues that excessive violations arise from particular social arrangements. Specifically the scope and character of deviance depends on how well a society provides the institutionalized means to achieve cultural goals.
Conformity, Merton begins, lies in pursuing conventional goals through approved means. Some people use unconventional means – deviance innovation – to achieve a culturally approved goal. According to Merton, the “strain” between our culture’s emphasis on [wealth and] limited opportunity, gives rise to unconventional behavior, illegal or destructive behavior, and street hustling. Minorities who find the doors to “legitimate” success [goals] all but closed, blaze their own trail to the top.
The inability to become successful by normative means may also lead to another type of deviance that Merton calls ritualism. Ritualists resolve the strain of limited success by abandoning cultural goals in favor of almost compulsive efforts to live “respectably”. In essence, they espouse the rules to the point that they lose sight of their larger goals. Low-level bureaucrats, for example, often succumb to ritualism as a way of gaining respectability.
A third response to the inability to succeed is retreatism – the rejection of both cultural goals and means, so that one, in effect, “drops out.” Retreatists include some alcoholics, and drug addicts, and some of the street people found in U.S. cities. The deviance of retreatists lies in unconventional living and, perhaps more seriously, in choosing to live that way.
The fourth response to failure is rebellion. Like retreatists, rebels reject both the cultural definition of success and the normative means of achieving it. Rebels however, go one step further by advocating radical alternatives to the existing social order.
The very existence of the street hustling, ufology & exopolitics community denotes a human choice toward placing greater value on Truth and movement toward integration of Earth within a greater community than the prior preferences of human safety and security still promoted by the leadership infrastructure. It should be noted that the amount of pressure from this human social faction routinely elicits the response defined above as retreatism, due to malicious misunderstanding and ignorance with regards to the umbrella power structure and its ability to control information and individuals. Actions have very real social consequences and a conflict exists when one or both groups routinely exceed percieved moral behavioral boundaries which may differ between groups.
The central contribution of symbolic-interaction analysis is labeling theory, the assertion that deviance and conformity result, not only from what people do, but from how others respond to those actions. Labeling theory stresses the relativity of deviance, arguing that all reality is socially constructed so that the same behavior may be defined in any number of ways. Howard S. Becker claims that deviance is therefore nothing more than “behavior that people so label”. Given that “reality” is relative to time and place, it is no surprise that one society’s conventions may be another’s deviance.
The response to initial deviance can set in motion secondary deviance, by which an individual repeatedly violates a norm and begins to take on a deviant identity. The development of secondary deviance is another example of the Thomas theorem which states that “Situations we define as real become real in their consequences.”
Secondary deviance also marks the emergence of what Erving Goffman calls a deviant career: As individuals develop a stronger commitment to deviant behavior, they typically acquire a stigma, a powerful negative social label that radically changes a person’s self-concept and social identity.
Stigma operates as a master status overpowering other aspects of social identity so that an individual is diminished in the minds of others and consequently, becomes socially isolated. Sometimes an entire community formally stigmatizes an individual through what Harold Garfinkel calls a degradation ceremony. A criminal prosecution is one example of this, operating much like a college award ceremony except that people statd before the community to be labeled in a negative rather than a positive way.
Once people stigmatize an individual they may engage in retrospective labeling. This is the interpretation of someone’s past consistent with present deviance. Retrospective labeling distorts a person’s biography by being selective and prejudicial, guided more by the present stigma than by any attempt to be fair. It also helps to deepen the person’s deviant identity.
Similarly, people may engage in projective labeling of a stigmatized person. That is, others keep an individuals deviant identity in mind when assessing any future action. The result, of course is that people find evidence of deviance in almost anything a stigmatized individual does.
All the various symbolic-interaction theories see deviance as a process. Labeling theory links deviance not to action but to the reaction of others. Thus some people come to be defined as deviant while others who think or behave in the same way are not.
The public and the CCS can be defined as independent social groups with extremely limited contact. Each have their own rules and boundaries which cannot or will not be crossed. It would be useful for the purposes of successful bridging if there were incorporated intervention between the two groups by those well versed in cultural anthropology as part of the mediation process. But as yet the classical intellectual community does not yet extend its boundaries toward or into the frontiers of observation, awareness, and social infrastructure without the confining biases and intellectual habits which instigated both the secrecy and the secondary deviance. The hostile atmosphere stemming from inequalities by and between both groups remains problematic.
The social-conflict paradigm demonstrates how deviance reflects social inequality. This approach holds that who or what is labeled “deviant” depends on which categories of people hold power in society.
Social-conflict theory links deviance to power in three ways.
1. First the norms – especially laws – of any society generally reflect the interests of the rich and powerful.
2. even if their behavior is called into question the powerful have the resources to resist deviant labels.
3. Third, the widespread belief that norms and laws are natural and good masks their political character. For this reason we may condemn the unequal application of the law but give little thought to whether the laws themselves are inherently fair.
What is considered deviant in society has much to do with the relative power and privilege of different categories of people. Historical limitations of portions of our society applies stringent normative controls. Groups within society have been socialized to define success and power in specific terms. And because society [class structure] puts certain individuals [classes] in positions of power over others these powered classes often escape direct responsibility for actions that victimize the non-powered classes.
FiOs.
By Cyrellys Geibhendach
June 8, 2001
Permission granted to copy & distribute intact without change.
Collective notes and direct excerpts from the text Sociology, seventh edition by John J. Mcionis, combined with personal commentary on the subject of Deviance as relative to Exopolitical discourse.
The existing division between the public and the national security state infrastructure on Contact which I have referred to numerous times as a contact control structure has evolved from a simple matter of those who know nothing and those who know something into a social-conflict paradigm which muddies the water as to what is known and who knows what, as well as contributes to a hostile public environment in which communicators are placed at heightened risk for social injury and destructive outcomes in communcative efforts. These notes are an opportunity for both the public and insiders to consider how culture, natural behavioral tendencies, and previous behavioral choices has complicated an already difficult communication environment.
Deviance is the recognized violation of cultural norms. Norms guide virtually all human activities, so the concept of deviance covers a correspondingly broad spectrum. Not all deviance involves action or even choice. The simple existence of some categories of individuals can be troublesome to others.
The long-standing policies withholding a publicly perceived non-terrestrial interaction effort has given rise to a deviance behavior that resulted in creation of a sprawling community comprised of people from around the world who's cultural norms now include the concept of Contact or the possibility of Contact. The social-conflict paradigm involved is defined as a struggle over the power to define conformity and nonconformity, freedom of human choice, moral boundaries, how society defines social deviance, and who's definition of deviance will be the long-standing one. This conflict is specified as occuring between the public and the vaguely defined Contact Control Structure (CCS).
Most examples of nonconformity that come readily to mind are negative instances of rule breaking, but we also define especially righteous people, students who speak up too much in class, or people who are overly enthusiastic about new technologies as deviant, even if we accord them a measure of respect. What deviant actions or attitudes have in common is some element of difference that causes us to regard another person as an “outsider”.
There is dispute between factions of the aware community within the public, defined as ufology & exopolitics, and the insiders of the CCS as to who is defined as an "outsider", and as to who is an example of nonconformity.
Members of society try to influence each other’s behavior through various kinds of social control. Much of the time this process is informal. Deviance is much more than a matter of individual choice or personal failing. How a society defines deviance, whom individuals brand as deviant, and what people decide to do about nonconformity are all issues of social organization.
Surface society's attempts at influencing the behavior of those within the CCS through nominative social control methods has historically had severely destructive consequences prior to either side really gleaning understanding of each other or even of what each side is knowledgeable about or what each is capable of knowing.
Although we tend to view deviance in terms of the free choice or personal failings of individuals, all behavior – deviance or conformity – is shaped by society. Three social foundations of deviance are identified:
1. Deviance varies according to cultural norms. No thought or action is inherently deviant; it becomes deviant only in relation to particular norms.
2. People become deviant as others define them that way. Everyone violates social norms regularly, occasionally to the extent of breaking the law. Whether such activities are sufficient to define us as mentally ill or criminal depends on how others perceive, define, and respond to our behavior.
3. Both rule making and rule breaking involve social power. The law, claimed Karl Marx, amounts to little more than the means by which powerful people protect their interests. In short norms and how we apply them are linked to social inequality.
The structural-functional paradigm focuses on how deviance contributes to the operation society.
In his pioneering study of deviance, Emile Durkheim made the astonishing statement that there is nothing abnormal about deviance; in fact, it contributes to the operation of society in four ways:
1. Deviance affirms cultural values and norms. Living demands that we make moral choices. To prevent our culture from dissolving into chaos people must show preference for some attitudes and behaviors over others. But any conception of virtue rests upon an opposing notion of vice. And just as there can be no good without evil, there can be no justice without crime. Deviance in short, is indispensible to creating and sustaining morality.
2. Responding to deviance clarifies moral boundaries. By defining some individuals as deviant, people draw a social boundary between right and wrong.
3. Responding to deviance promotes social unity. People typically react to serous deviance with collective outrage. This Durkheim explained, reaffirms the moral ties that bind them.
4. Deviance encourages social change. Deviant people Durkheim claimed, push a society’s moral boundaries, pointing out alternatives to the status quo and encouraging change. Moreover he declared, today’s deviance can become tomorrow’s morality.
Durkheim wrote:
Imagine a society of saints, a perfect cloister of exemplary individuals. Crimes, properly so called, will there be unknown; but faults which appear [insignificant] to the layman will create there the same scandal that the ordinary offense does in ordinary consciousness…For the same reason, the perfect and upright man judges his smallest failings with a severity that the majority reserve for acts more truly in the nature of an offense. (1964)
Deviance then is not a matter of having a few “bad apples” around; it is a necessary condition of “good” social living. If deviance is universal, the kind of deviance people generate depends on the moral issues they seek to clarify. It answers questions about how much dissent to allow and what goals should be by celebrating some of their members while condemning others as deviant. Social scientist, Erikson discovered that even though the offenses change (over time), the proportion of deviant (people) remained steady over time. This stability, concludes Erikson, confirms Durkheim’s contention that deviants serve as ethical markers, outlining a society’s changing moral boundaries.
A failure on both sides of the proverbial fence (public & CCS) to understand how and why they have habitually made certain choices, results in further division and solidification of sentiments involving resentment and open hostility. This lack of mutual understanding withdraws freedom of choice in how to proceed for both groups. Inserting understanding allows introspection and the opportunity for reconcideration of potentially destructive future choices and behaviors.
Some deviance may be necessary for a society to function, but Robert Merton argues that excessive violations arise from particular social arrangements. Specifically the scope and character of deviance depends on how well a society provides the institutionalized means to achieve cultural goals.
Conformity, Merton begins, lies in pursuing conventional goals through approved means. Some people use unconventional means – deviance innovation – to achieve a culturally approved goal. According to Merton, the “strain” between our culture’s emphasis on [wealth and] limited opportunity, gives rise to unconventional behavior, illegal or destructive behavior, and street hustling. Minorities who find the doors to “legitimate” success [goals] all but closed, blaze their own trail to the top.
The inability to become successful by normative means may also lead to another type of deviance that Merton calls ritualism. Ritualists resolve the strain of limited success by abandoning cultural goals in favor of almost compulsive efforts to live “respectably”. In essence, they espouse the rules to the point that they lose sight of their larger goals. Low-level bureaucrats, for example, often succumb to ritualism as a way of gaining respectability.
A third response to the inability to succeed is retreatism – the rejection of both cultural goals and means, so that one, in effect, “drops out.” Retreatists include some alcoholics, and drug addicts, and some of the street people found in U.S. cities. The deviance of retreatists lies in unconventional living and, perhaps more seriously, in choosing to live that way.
The fourth response to failure is rebellion. Like retreatists, rebels reject both the cultural definition of success and the normative means of achieving it. Rebels however, go one step further by advocating radical alternatives to the existing social order.
The very existence of the street hustling, ufology & exopolitics community denotes a human choice toward placing greater value on Truth and movement toward integration of Earth within a greater community than the prior preferences of human safety and security still promoted by the leadership infrastructure. It should be noted that the amount of pressure from this human social faction routinely elicits the response defined above as retreatism, due to malicious misunderstanding and ignorance with regards to the umbrella power structure and its ability to control information and individuals. Actions have very real social consequences and a conflict exists when one or both groups routinely exceed percieved moral behavioral boundaries which may differ between groups.
The central contribution of symbolic-interaction analysis is labeling theory, the assertion that deviance and conformity result, not only from what people do, but from how others respond to those actions. Labeling theory stresses the relativity of deviance, arguing that all reality is socially constructed so that the same behavior may be defined in any number of ways. Howard S. Becker claims that deviance is therefore nothing more than “behavior that people so label”. Given that “reality” is relative to time and place, it is no surprise that one society’s conventions may be another’s deviance.
The response to initial deviance can set in motion secondary deviance, by which an individual repeatedly violates a norm and begins to take on a deviant identity. The development of secondary deviance is another example of the Thomas theorem which states that “Situations we define as real become real in their consequences.”
Secondary deviance also marks the emergence of what Erving Goffman calls a deviant career: As individuals develop a stronger commitment to deviant behavior, they typically acquire a stigma, a powerful negative social label that radically changes a person’s self-concept and social identity.
Stigma operates as a master status overpowering other aspects of social identity so that an individual is diminished in the minds of others and consequently, becomes socially isolated. Sometimes an entire community formally stigmatizes an individual through what Harold Garfinkel calls a degradation ceremony. A criminal prosecution is one example of this, operating much like a college award ceremony except that people statd before the community to be labeled in a negative rather than a positive way.
Once people stigmatize an individual they may engage in retrospective labeling. This is the interpretation of someone’s past consistent with present deviance. Retrospective labeling distorts a person’s biography by being selective and prejudicial, guided more by the present stigma than by any attempt to be fair. It also helps to deepen the person’s deviant identity.
Similarly, people may engage in projective labeling of a stigmatized person. That is, others keep an individuals deviant identity in mind when assessing any future action. The result, of course is that people find evidence of deviance in almost anything a stigmatized individual does.
All the various symbolic-interaction theories see deviance as a process. Labeling theory links deviance not to action but to the reaction of others. Thus some people come to be defined as deviant while others who think or behave in the same way are not.
The public and the CCS can be defined as independent social groups with extremely limited contact. Each have their own rules and boundaries which cannot or will not be crossed. It would be useful for the purposes of successful bridging if there were incorporated intervention between the two groups by those well versed in cultural anthropology as part of the mediation process. But as yet the classical intellectual community does not yet extend its boundaries toward or into the frontiers of observation, awareness, and social infrastructure without the confining biases and intellectual habits which instigated both the secrecy and the secondary deviance. The hostile atmosphere stemming from inequalities by and between both groups remains problematic.
The social-conflict paradigm demonstrates how deviance reflects social inequality. This approach holds that who or what is labeled “deviant” depends on which categories of people hold power in society.
Social-conflict theory links deviance to power in three ways.
1. First the norms – especially laws – of any society generally reflect the interests of the rich and powerful.
2. even if their behavior is called into question the powerful have the resources to resist deviant labels.
3. Third, the widespread belief that norms and laws are natural and good masks their political character. For this reason we may condemn the unequal application of the law but give little thought to whether the laws themselves are inherently fair.
What is considered deviant in society has much to do with the relative power and privilege of different categories of people. Historical limitations of portions of our society applies stringent normative controls. Groups within society have been socialized to define success and power in specific terms. And because society [class structure] puts certain individuals [classes] in positions of power over others these powered classes often escape direct responsibility for actions that victimize the non-powered classes.
FiOs.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
