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:

"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.

Global Misbehavior: Information Control

Of Head-Hunters, Attack Poodles, & Communicators

There are three interlocking groups of information controllers operating in the public arenas where exopolitical mediation is concerned. One is part of the journalistic genre, another involves individuals associated with three-letter-acronym agencies, and the other are strong-willed opinionated individuals with their own ideas of righteousness who band together with like individuals and members of the first two groups.

In exopolitical mediation we have referred to these groups and individuals as 'head-hunters'. Head-hunting is a human behavior in which non-believers or anti-disclosure advocates seek exploitable weakness of any kind and then use it to destroy the message of researchers, contactees or insiders, along with their ability to communicate further, their reputations, careers, and public/private lives. This term applies to the toxic behavior irregardless of the truth pertaining to the individual presenting their story or knowledge. The working concept being that two wrongs do not make a right.

"It is hard to contend with passion for whatever it desires to get, it buys at the cost of Soul." ~ Heraclitus, On Nature.

A passionate believer in some ideal, or need will be more inclined to cross illicit boundaries. This being true of those who do not want the manufacturing or manipulation effort ensconcing our true paradigm, publicized in its stark entirety. There is no communication nor disclosure effort which will not have to contend with these forces.

Catherine Austin Fitts describes this in the accompanying video. She refers to head-hunters quite appropriately as 'attack poodles'.

BrasscheckTV publisher puts it this way:

...the three most common ways that the "news" media makes information safe for Corporate America (the actual rulers of the country):

1. Ignore the story completely (a favorite)

2. Dillute daily TV news shows and newspapers with so much junk reporting there's no room for real stories (they've got to put something on the screen)

3. Allow blatant lies on the part of "officials" and bought and sold "experts" to stand without even rudimentary research and analysis (it cost too much, don't you know)

However, occasionaly a story gets away from them (think Gary Webb and his Dark Alliance reporting.)

Then somebody actually has to do some work - that work being the attempted destruction of the reputation and career of the news source (usually a lone reporter or a publisher that's not safely "in the loop.")

There's a revolving door between the "news" industry and the PR "professionals" who take on this kind of work.

The system is so literally innudated with organized corporate interests that any portion can and does get used to control information which attempts presentation to the public. Insiders and contactees routinely express attitudes of powerlessness. This is their feeling that no matter what they do it will have little or no effect on their situation or the direction human life is taking. This in turn reinforces the condition of powerlessness which is the inability to contol the events that shape their lives and the lives of others. Attitudes or perspectives of this form of powerlessness "become barriers to effective self-help, independence, and self-respect."1

Look at the situation many of these individuals reside in. For starters many are affluent in some way. They have careers, some have power, a respectable income, resources, and reputations. These are the exploitable weaknesses. Why? Because they can't imagine how to live without any of it or how to recover from their loss. Many contact participants on the inside in particular have never done without. This is a little described form of poverty. Kenneth B Clark, an social psychologist, describes the poverty of powerlessness happening when human beings who live apart from the rest of society, who do not share in society's affluence, and who are not respected or granted the ordinary dignities and courtesy accorded to others will eventually begin to doubt their own worth.

Head-Hunters or Attack Poodles take advantage of this inherent culture of powerlessness which has been created by the secrecy in order to control the information about it. This culture is passed from one generation of participants to the next as a self-perpetuating cycle. The rest of humanity picks up on this culture through the effectiveness of the information controllers and further perpetuates it by inserting further toxicity through negative derogatory comments, votes of unsubstantiated disbelief, admonitions to speak no further on the subject, exposure of confidential personal life details, and so on which are viewed by other paradigm experiencers. In this way it's passed on preventing any coherent multi-force effort to coelesce together, pushing back the effort to control, supplanting it with an understanding in the mind of the public onlookers.

If we want to understand why the public does not understand or believe in paradigm issues such as corporate controllers, shadow government, global governance, extraterrestrial contact, or alternative human history then we must more thoroughly examine the processes being used to control the current existing information. Those who operate as head-hunters or attack poodles must have every aspect of their operation thoroughly examined and traced; back-engineering, pardon the pun, all the way up the ladder behind them to identify the sources of the anti-reality sentiment. The same is said for being able to function in a mediation or facilitory situation. There should be an expectation of hostile encounters with anti-reality representatives and plans made to address those encounters prior to public efforts.

1 Dye & Harrison, Power and Society, 2005 Wadsworth

Social-Genetic Engineering an Advanced Society - By Ed Komarek

Social-Genetic Engineering an Advanced Society
By Ed Komarek
7/5/09
Copy and Distribute Freely
My blog: http://exopolitics.blogspot.com/

I believe some advanced ethical extraterrestrial human civilizations present a positive role model for earth humanities future. Only until there is full disclosure will the general populace be able to experience directly what I call a Type II civilization but until then some of us are able to speculate and prepare humanity based on indirect data derived from declassified or leaked government documents and contact witness testimony.

I call emerging global autocratic civilizations with a developing space faring capability such as ours a Type I civilization. I believe a civilization with macro-problems including overpopulation, inequality, autocracy, environmental and internal warfare can flourish only if it has room to expand. If its expansion is limited or contained and the people unable to deal with the above macro-problems then natural forces will force the civilization to collapse and reemerge from the ashes of its destruction like the proverbial phoenix legend. As the civilization reemerges from the prior collapse it sows the seeds of entrenched autocratic interests that later bring about collapse and reemergence again and again.

I think a Type I civilization is inherently unstable and relatively short lived in comparison to a Type II civilization. A Type I civilization is founded upon natural principles by which competitive forces soon overwhelm cooperative elements of society resulting in the primitive civilization cycling over and over up against a glass ceiling. In contrast a Type II civilization is organized cooperatively like the way individual cells are organized in our bodies giving great benefit to the individuals organized in such a society.

The problem is that individuals in a Type II society must sacrifice a considerable amount of freedom of choice and individual liberty to participate in this more complex society just as individual cells in the body are so limited in their movement and freedom of choice. But as one door closes to certain choices and liberties other doors open up for increased choices and freedoms brought about through the benefits of a more advanced civilization.

So what might be both the benefits and sacrifices of living in a Type II civilization? In a Type II civilization that fosters a lifespan of 800 years or more it is obvious that individuals must agree to severe restriction on reproduction. Obviously only a small percentage of people can be allowed to reproduce with such a long lifespan else overpopulation would force a collapse back down to a Type I society.

Even one child per couple would be way too many children for a sustained and stable growth of population unless the civilization was colonizing new frontiers. I suspect that things could be getting a bit crowded across a universe as old as ours. I can envision a situation where only a small segment of the population is involved in reproduction and childrearing and even then several children might be raised by an extended family of adults at different stages of their early lives.

I suspect that because of advances in genetic screening and engineering conception may begin in a test tube with embryo implantation into womb in an artificial manner. It might be considered to risky for the future well being of the child for reproduction to happen naturally. This might mean all citizens would be subject to a medical procedure to block natural reproduction before puberty.

We are not talking about the haphazard, indiscriminate creation of dysfunctional mutts anymore but of recreating ourselves into human thoroughbreds. This resurrects the uncomfortable notion of eugenics and the superman and woman in the minds of many. Were the Nazi’s on to something just that they perverted the concept? Are we ready to reengineer our bodies for maximum expression of our soul’s finer qualities? (I have suggested in other articles that we might be being mined as a primitive gene bank for just this kind of activity by other extraterrestrial races.)

Thus we can see that the benefits of a long healthy lifespan in a socially supportive environment would require individual reproduction sacrifices that many in a Type I society would consider severe restrictions on individual reproduction rights and liberties. Such restrictions on what we consider individual freedoms and liberties may not stop here.

I can envision a situation where we all are so telepathically connected that not only individual destructive actions have to be curtailed but even destructive thought processes as well. Even with our primitive Internet that has not yet become telepathic we can see problems developing that require restrictions of individual freedoms and liberty to say and do as we please without regard for others. I can envision a situation on a telepathic net where an individual is defaming another individual just by thinking bad thoughts about this other individual. Thought control and thought police will become a reality for such a civilization.

Still even with restriction on actions taken over the Internet most people would not be willing to give of the benefits of the Internet and so are willing to make the personal sacrifices. I think it would be the same for individuals in a Type II civilization. Once the benefits are seen and experienced of a Type II civilization it might feel like descending back into hell reentering a Type I civilization. In fact I believe contactees have experienced this by participating briefly in contact with ethical extraterrestrial races.

I am beginning to think that unless we have full disclosure soon where citizens can experience a Type II civilization directly and experience its benefits in mass we are headed for a population crash and societal collapse. Social engineers must try to steer humanity in the direction of the ethical extraterrestrial races and away from involvement with the less ethical races. An honest, truthful, full and open UFO/ET disclosure is a necessary radical step in the right direction. We must completely stop the lies and the deceptions now! We can’t build a healthy enduring civilization on a foundation of lies.

A Question for Dr. Henry Kissinger - By Ed Komarek

A Question for Dr. Henry Kissinger
By Ed Komarek
7/4/09
Copy and Distribute Freely
My blog: http://exopolitics.blogspot.com/

There have been indications from many sources over the years that Dr. Henry Kissinger is or was near the very top of the autocratic power structure that is responsible for the UFO/ET cover-up. It has been rumored that Henry is or was the most politically powerful person on the MJ 12 committee most likely beginning his tenure in the 1960s. His name would not be in the leaked MJ 12 documents because the documents released are dated prior to his tenure.
http://www.examiner.com/x-2383-Honolulu-Exopolitics-Examiner~y2009m3d23-Kissinger-influence-on-Obama-administration--UFO-policy

As far as I know there have been no leaked MJ 12 documents that include living individuals. For the reasons listed above Henry would be the one person I would like to have an open, honest and truthful discussion with regarding extraterrestrial reality so as to understand how best we can get human evolution on earth back on track. Of course mistakes have been made in the past by autocratic global leaders beginning with fear of the unknown and a lack of vision, and later by self serving entrenched special interest. http://www.majesticdocuments.com/

There are sure to be some that would ask why I should be reaching out to those who may have intentionally or unintentionally supported what Thomas Jefferson and other founding fathers would have called a tyranny over the mind of man. The reason I am reaching out is that we need to collectively realize that the UFO/ET cover-up has had severe unintended consequences that have retarded earth human evolution and we need to come together to end the cover-up once and for all.

Statements made by Ben Rich and Bill Uhouse indicate that MJ 12 influence over all UFO/ET affairs has diminished considerably after the Nixon purge, internationalization and privatization of extraterrestrial related information and technology. It would still seem that nationally MJ 12, while no longer and in overall control over collections and analysis of all related extraterrestrial knowledge globally still retains considerable influence in the United States and elsewhere.
www.stealthskater.com/Documents/Andrews_02.doc

It has been my supposition that human evolution was derailed beginning in the 1940s and early 1950s and the leaked MJ 12 historical documents seem to bear this out as counter-intelligence operations were ordered and authorized against not just the American public but around the world. I believe that the effect of this over time has been the empowerment of global autocratic leadership, disempowerment of the people and democratic and republican institutions, and a general suppression of global human evolution.

In order to bring human evolution back on track its going to be necessary for those in government that now have inherited this mess to come to a consensus to stop the lying, deceptions, propaganda, acclimation-propaganda programs and just start being straight up and honest with the national and global public. There seems to still be a lack of political courage amongst national and international leaders for radical honest change so we continue to muddle along continuing the current evolutionary disastrous middle road between non-disclosure and disclosure that includes a so called “public acclamation-propaganda program” that never ends.

I think part of the solution toward getting back on a positive evolutionary track is to understand just what has happened to get us into this mess so as to make a radical course correction and get ourselves back on track. In order to do this we must gain some perspective as to just what is the overall lay of the land, so to speak. Over many years I have tried to construct a model that I hope is at least close to the truth. This model involves a critical scenario that if true and understood could provide guidance toward getting back on track.

The scenario is this: Our rapid technological advancement in World War II combined with the first atomic explosions caught the rest of the cosmic neighborhood by surprise. This resulted in a hasty and rapid increase of surveillance especially in technologically sensitive areas that resulted in crashes of extraterrestrial craft with occupants. By at least 1952 or 1953 several very different extraterrestrial races began to contact the recognized leadership in the U.S. and perhaps other countries as well. These races had a variety of agendas, motivations and ethics.
http://galactic.no/rune/usa_et.html

What is not exactly clear is if it was it the ethical extraterrestrial humans, called Etherians at the time, who first contacted leaders like Eisenhower, or was it the less ethical races called EBEs or Ebans, now called Zetas or Reticulians. The contact between these two races seems to have been within a year or two of each other with the Etherians warning the Americans about involvement with the EBEs. It would seem by the end of the 1960s several different types of extraterrestrials had introduced themselves to American leaders in utmost secrecy.

From the scarce information at my disposal it appears as if the American government and MJ 12 felt they could not meet the conditions of contact offered by the ethical Etherians. These conditions of contact included an end to atomic testing and a serious attempt at global arms reduction and ending war as a means of settling international disputes. These conditions would of course force a radical change in earth human society to meet these challenges.

It is unclear to me that if these were the only conditions expressed by the Etherians at the time or if other conditions were expressed later including a serious effort toward population control, dealing with environmental problems, equitable distribution of resources, and an end to the UFO/ET cover-up. Clearly the Etherians were concerned about the evolutionary direction humanity was taking and that this track would lead to social and environmental catastrophe if not arrested. It would appear they were willing to help us solve these problems if their conditions were met.

Unfortunately the American leadership could not accept these conditions and felt that the people were not yet ready for full and open disclosure. Apparently the less ethical races including the Ebans or EBEs were not so hard to please and did not demand radical changes in earth human society. The politicians and generals also could see the likelihood of tangible technological assistance being offered by the less ethical races through contact even if there was a unsavory flavor to the contact. I think technology was something the Etherians were holding back on presumably because they felt our technological advancement was dangerously exceeding our ethical and moral advancement.

In my estimation this scenario set in motion a sequence of events that bedevils us to this day. Now with the environmental and social catastrophes envisioned by the Etherians right around the corner, radical disclosure and social change is necessary if we are to avert a simultaneous environmental and social collapse of the human population perhaps as much as 80%. So the question is will the autocrats finally relent in their disempowerment of humanity through UFO/ET non-disclosure for their own benefit as well as the people as a whole.

The question I would like to ask Henry Kissinger requires a simple yes or no answer. The question is, are my deductions essentially correct? Through my contacts with a source I have the email address of Ramsey Clark who I have heard knows Henry Kissinger. I intend to pass this on to Clark hoping he will pass it on to Henry for his consideration. Perhaps Clark himself may wish to make a comment or two. :-) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramsey_Clark

There are as always going to be those who would say that I am just wasting my time. I would point out that in the past I have communicated with some pretty high level people because I made the effort to reach out. Sometimes I succeed, sometimes I do not. I think others in the public domain should be doing the same in order to build the networks needed for a consensus to develop and end the UFO/ET cover-up rapidly.

If I am essentially correct in this assessment, then the only way out is to rapidly build a consensus in the intelligence community and with the military to take the radical step toward ending the cover-up once and for all. I suggested this in a previous article called Suggested Disclosure Speech for Obama. Of course Obama would not be doing this on his own but flanked by those representing different aspects of the intelligence community, military and congress.
http://exopolitics.blogspot.com/2009/06/disclosure-speech.html

My friends we can do this, our very survival as a species is at stake. At this late date I suggest a straightforward truthful radical disclosure policy of Shock and Awe that favors interaction with ethical extraterrestrial races and disfavors interactions with less ethical races and civilizations.

I don’t believe world populations will ever make the radical social-genetic engineering sacrifices needed to solve our extreme social, overpopulation and environmental problems unless there is outside assistance of an ethical extraterrestrial role model where the benefits of radical change become clearly evident. People have to see the benefits of radical change for themselves before they are willing to make the very rapid difficult social-genetic engineering sacrifices needed to bring about a better world and avoid social-environmental collapse of our present civilization. We can do this!

Testing and Attending to Group Coherency In Exopolitical Mediation

Testing and Attending to Group Coherency In Exopolitical Mediation
By Cyrellys Geibhendach
06/12/09
Copy & Distribute Freely
Compass Morainn
Compass Morainn Journal

The exopolitical mediator closely observes participant coherency or group coherency in mediation situations. The observations are used to manage the group communication perspective. A litmus test for evaluating the dialog compares and applies the most useful communication questions to the trends or events within each revolution of the discussion or communication event. This allows the mediator to recognize the development of new levels of stress associated with unfulfilled needs, and the subsequent trends transcending fair reason in participant expectations.

“Taking a communication perspective, the most useful questions are not "can you hear me?" or even "do you understand me?" They are "what are we making together?" or, referring to specific events or objects such as a person, an organization, or a culture, "how is it being made in the process of interaction?" or, "how can we make better social worlds?"” ~ W. Barnett Pearce (1)

W. Barnett Pearce discerns and illustrates the root intent of modern group communication. These questions being descriptive of the effort embodied in exopolitical communications regarding the contact paradigm can then be applied in the evaluation of the following exopolitical trend issue: would exopolitical researchers be reasonable in expecting or demanding that Insider disclosers of the Contact Paradigm violate national security in order to produce a proof of paradigm along with their communication event in order for the event to be seriously receivable by the exopolitical community? It has been suggested that due to past disinformation campaigns, information obscuring, the use of exit strategies, the preponderance of unverifiable stories, and the heaps of community conjecture thrown upon every event which researchers must wade through, that the future of insider communications is in severe jeopardy. Rather than engage in the formulation of an equitable solution such as an Amnesty for insiders or the contact control structure itself as has been requested repeatedly by insiders, some participants in the exopolitical community have agreed with the following in regards to unproven communications (communication events without verifiable proof of paradigm claimed), “If they are intending to obscure, then they have. For now, we are no further in knowing the truth. Perhaps we should put a sign out in the front: "Proof, or no entry".” (2)

The individuals who would consider this constriction are indeed asking, "what are we making together?" In their perception the Insiders communication events fail to fulfill (with 50 years of routine consistency) the expectation of working together; producing clear forward movement. However, asserting such restrictions upon the communication event, without first providing an avenue for them to legally produce and release that level of expected proof (without undue risk to personal self-injury), is certainly unreasonable. It is an example of failure to partake in a team effort or the outright withdrawal from group coherency. In promoting such restrictions they may be asking "what are we making together” but they are not allowing an equitable joint effort to occur. Therefore their response becomes self-defeating for their particular needs.

Of serious concern, when participants retreat from group coherency, they open themselves to follow with even greater emotional responses, exerting their personal power of self-assertion and aggression in order to cut through barriers, penetrating the consciousness of the other participants, such as considering more extreme requirements or actions which violate the sovereignty of other participants. An example in this manner of a further reach for proof and power can be found in the suggestion that abductees, contactees, and MILAB victims relinquish their sovereignty by allowing themselves to be chipped with a device like the RFID tag made by Verichip which can then be tracked via GPS. According to this suggestion, such a device would be formatted to output a minute by minute log of where the device has been and could even be networked into Google Maps to track its movements in real-time. Verichip’s human implant device has been almost wholly rejected by the major public whereas in contrast it has been toyed and experimented with on a small scale by elites and their high security facilities. It’s blatant violation of human rights and privacy has largely restricted its use despite international governments plans to implement it as a data gathering, security and control staple in human society. Allowance of this suggestion to manifest into real use could carry consequences which legally impact a population subgroup of unknown size around the globe and then traverse the scope of application to enact itself upon a determinedly unwilling global population which creates a spiral of conflict outside of the contact paradigm. Such a conflict would be a detriment to both the Disclosure process and the secrecy maintenance proponents.

In exopolitical mediation, the participants are struggling for their legitimate rights to power and affirmation. We tend to look on power in a negative way and associate it with abuse. Rollo May, however has a different take on it. Mr. May, a psychologist of distinguished career, “whose contributions to the humanistic movement are highly significant, contended that power is a fundamental aspect of the life process. Indeed, he believed that powerlessness corrupts the human personality by robbing the individual of a sense of meaning and significance…He argued that power occurs in an individuals life in five functional forms.” (4)

Those forms are the ‘power to be’, ‘power as self-affirmation’, ‘power as self-assertion’, ‘power as aggression’, and ‘power as violence’. A legitimate use of power can include actualizing one’s own self in a perceived hostile environment. Many in the public, and the exopolitical/ufology community view the secrecy paradigm as a hostile environment. Therefore a leap to the destructive use of power occurs when tolerance to powerlessness is exceeded. This can be seen when exopoliticians leave the group coherency in aggression to inflict injury, unjust restrictions, or the taking of power simply to increase the range of their control. In the personal experience of these exopoliticians the sense of meaning and significance they gain through the mediation event has been lost.

The application of the communication perspective questions, open the door to an extended depth of dialog regarding what limitations or extent should be applied to the pursuit of truth and participant expectations, in order to maintain human liberties and ethical conduct on all sides. In the evolution of the contact paradigm, wide ranging impacts and consequences to participant approaches, touch everyone on the planet. It has the potential to set disconcerting precedents that can be applied even beyond the management of the paradigm’s direct influence. It is therefore highly important for Exopolitical Mediators to be very conscious of the directions communications among participants take.

An exopolitical mediator may choose, upon perception of these trends, to intervene with a directional comment or open the floor to a discussion of the larger picture where the consequences of the limits or extents of the pursuit of truth are addressed. If the participants can discover for themselves through topic interaction, an understanding of how their expectations and efforts impact the other participant members or the wider global scope then a reformulation of group coherency may evolve with positive results.

“that which is utopian is not that which is unattainable; it is not idealism; it is a dialectic process of denouncing and announcing; denouncing the dehumanizing structure, and announcing the humanizing structure.” ~ Paulo Freire (3)



Notes:
___________

1. 
   Toward Communicative Virtuosity: A Meditation On Modernity And Other Forms Of Communication; page 3 © W. Barnett Pearce, 2005, School of Human and Organization Development Fielding Graduate University http://www.humiliationstudies.org/documents/PearceCommunicativeVirtuosity.pdf
2. Fore - Reply #1864, Re: UN / Source "A" - Discussion & Follow Up III; Open Minds Forum, http://lucianarchy.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=unitednations&action=display&thread=4806&page=125#186977
3. Communication for Social Change Anthology: Historical and Contemporary Readings, A Farewell to Aristotle “Horizontal Communication”, Lewis Ramiro Beltrain, © 1979, pg 157 http://books.google.com/books?id=85WbPmx9QlcC&pg=PA159&lpg=PA159&dq=percieving+communication,&source=bl&ots=6BGLQatRbP&sig=krL_ZSeeX344i9EmJSmtNLcl9QE&hl=en&ei=ATwUSunGBKCc8QTl-5CKBA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3#PPA158,M1
4. Power and Society, Thomas R Dye & Brigid C Harrison; © 2005 Wadsworth – A Division of Thomsan Learning Inc. page 159
   

Sacrificing 60 Years of Human Experience for Disclosure

Sacrificing 60 Years of Human Experience for Disclosure
By Cyrellys Geibhendach
05/23/09
Copy and Distribute Freely
My Website: Compass Morainn

An acquaintance recently suggested that humanity use the mainstream gift of legitimacy which lies upon Seth Shostak and SETI to initiate an opening to a human disclosure of extra-terrestrial intelligence existence by using them to present evidence that ETs are real. He said, “While it would be nice if governments disclosed what they know, i always thought SETI evidence would be the best way to confirm ET's are real, because all the evidence we present always gets rejected, if SETI catches a signal, everyone will then believe.” [1] In his frustration for achieving a disclosure he is willing to sacrifice the history of human contact up to that point in time.

But, such a means to disclosure would be a lie, and for all that is known out here beyond the realm of pride and fear, a furtherance of lies puts on additional layers of ill repute, distrust, and feelings of animosity demanding retribution....more lies compounds the problem of disclosure, not help it. It widens the rift and would be encouraging the contextual infrastructure which is built by lies and proscribed a freedom by lies to do as it pleases....that is because such an infrastructure creates a sort of personality complex buried within our collective human psyche which is then picked up and mirrored across the board exponentially as the wave of it ripples outward. No. No more lies....I advocate instead, for all participants to find the courage to be different....be truthful....any possible harshness and horrors of some truths is still not comparable to that which lies inherently generate within us.

By choosing Truths we promote the conceptual communications [2] which we would prefer to enact since promoting them causes the same mirroring effects. If we wish to live in a positive world then we must will the strength of steel into acting it out in every possible way....even if it means some initial discomfort.

When we ask ourselves, "What can we do just to make it through the day?" then we are exhibiting living under a seige mentality....when we ask ourselves, "What is my life about? How can I apply the purpose and principles that my life is about," then we have made a powerful intervention...because we get our security through our own integrity to our personal value system, rather than from outside reinforcement. " ~ paraphrased, Stephen Covey - Principle-Centered Leadership[3]

It occurred to me shortly after writing the above if my acquaintance really intended to advocate approval of lies to achieve a chip in the block of human disclosure? I don't believe he did. I think it was ego speaking.

Egos are interlopers in our states of being. They are personal constructs which each individual builds in life. How that construct is applied is up to the individual. Many people apply them subconsciously out of the construct's persistence of intense 'needs'. In a recent article regarding the Purpose and Reason in Conceptual Communications, I said the following: Our egos tend to be, "wrapped up in our social perception of societal expectations which are both extrinsic, concerning relationships of our social groups, and intrinsic, concerning our own behavior, opinions, issues, values, and goals as expected by ourselves or of us by our social groups. The ego is a construct of all these things and does not always adhere to what we really believe or value in ourselves or others."

When we become aware of ego's insertions within our personal experiences, we are empowered to more closely examine our contribution to the existential construct which we residing in. This lends opportunity to make adjustments or to reconsider positions for the additional influx of information.

In the reference to SETI which was made above, it illustrated an example of SETI as a potential Mediator of a human disclosure. In this type of mediation, information or data regarding a signal found would be used as evidence or to present evidence of extra-terrestrial intelligence clearly existing. This is (irregardless of its truthfulness) an example of a mediation because of the bridge between two realities they would be providing to at least two group participants identified as knowledgeable insiders and the public.

In regards to the ego involved in advocating a modification to truth, I believe we must tread very carefully in allowing it to dictate to us a course of action which we ourselves or our future posterity may well find paying for in unintended ways.

Michael A Melton, M.S. Psy D., just released (05/23/09), an examination of the function and positioning of ego in an exopolitical mediator, in his article: The Proper Mindset and Attitude for Successful Mediation . He concludes that the mediator's ego must remain neutral or be restrained in order for the mediator to be effective and that to be effective a mediator must be truthful. Now while he primarily refers to actual potential mediation events between humanity and ETs with a human mediator, I think the same importance of neutrality, restraint, and dogged adherence to truth is just as important when the mediation occurring is between knowledgeable insiders and the earth-bound, human public.

Mr. Melton said that mediators will be ‘counted on’, which I interpret to mean that in the face of so many initial unknowns, whoever takes position as mediator(s) in the blooming of contact awareness will hold 'interpersonal linkage-power'. In exopolitical mediation I hold this power to mean, "the mediators ability based on their perceived influence with people who control psychological or social resources within a participatory group. This power is necessary to developing a group culture among participants where a collective personality and point of view or understanding is negotiated by the members (participants) of the mediation group; in whatever way those participants are defined in the mediation process." [4]

Additionally Mr. Melton went on to suggest just how important is is and why we mediators should portray "what eminent psychologist Carl Rogers calls “Unconditional Positive Regard.” The brilliant Carl Rogers explains that unconditional positive regard is accepting the other person, or entity, in the current moment, regardless of status, crime, or temperament, or culture, beliefs, and attitude, as a good person, or entity, at face value, as long as the current moment lasts. Maintaining this attitude causes the mind of the caregiver, or in this case, the mediator, to remain neutral. If you embrace the other with unconditional positive regard, then any discriminating feelings, thoughts or behavior would, logically, be incompatible with that mindset. Maintaining that attitude will increase the chances of successful mediation, because you will treat all involved in the same way – equally fairly, and with positive intention." [5]

Now, if humanity initiates a mediation, deliberately using mediators in originating and enacting a disclosure oriented mediation, for the purpose of pure untruths or wholesale modifications of truths then what have we just done?

In doing such a thing, how have we further damaged humanity's ability to believe another or trust another or interact with others or co-exist with others? How would any ET reciprocate in the face of such behavior? How would we, when the lie was discovered? What have we done when we have corrupted the individuals or groups who should be instilled with the ability to be Truthful no matter the circumstances, that they might initiate Mutual Respect, and Mutual Civilized Behavioral Reaction in the face of Contact?

When a global sociological mirror is allowing duplication of dishonesty where do lies stop?

Notes:
---------------------------
[1] Open Minds Forum, Re: Disclosure by Governments, darkassasin post #99, May 22 2009,

[2] “Purpose and Reason in Conceptual Communications”, Cyrellys Geibhendach, Compass Morainn Journal 2009

[3] Principle-Centered Leadership, Stephen R. Covey, Simon & Schuster 1990.

[4] Creating Competent Communication, Second Edition; Yoder, Hugenberg, Wallace; Kendal/Hunt Publishing 1996, page 326.

[5] “The Proper Mindset and Attitude for Successful Mediation”, Michael Austin Melton M.S Psy D, Compass Morainn Journal 2009.

Purpose and Reason in Conceptual Communications

Communication examination on the subject of extraterrestrials and contact has been and still is a critical need in current human reality. When we pause to consider that in the last hundred years our population explosion, our use of electricity and mechanical devices, including nuclear technology, as well as our many forms of broadcast communications, we have literally ‘lit up’ our world. It is akin to setting up a digital billboard in your front yard advertising your presence. Therefore it can be theorized that the matter of Extra-terrestrial Contact is a subject which if we don’t go to the trouble of immersing ourselves in before-hand, it will come home to roost literally over our heads eventually, unexpected, into a population unsettled by its complete surprise to the event.

Beyond the obvious discussions engaged in the subject matter within Exopolitics, Ufology, and Science Fiction Literature, who else has made early efforts at broaching this topic? And what is its importance to Exopolitical Mediation? A recent article from a website in the exopolitical field specializing in exopsychology has examined the sparse address of the subject and notes the following:

“Theologians take the prize for being first off the mark, for having had lengthy discussions about the existence of extraterrestrials, and possible contact scenarios. Their work has been so extensive that it deserves a separate entry,” [1} – Michael Gintowt.

Mr. Gintowt, a notable psychologist delving into exopsychology, has published another remarkable article on his blog: Exopsychology In the article titled “Exoisms: foreshadowing of a New Age, or macro-egoism?” he examines the “trailblazers who have considered the implications of contact with an Intelligent Extraterrestrial Race (ET).” He explores his interest in the meaning and relevance of visionary extensions into an uncertain future and considers how the strength of our collective vanity as a race may hinder us in our conceptual explorations of contact scenarios. For all those interested in the mechanics involved in exopolitical mediation, I highly recommend this article for it gives due consideration to the baggage which all participants, including the Mediator, his or herself, can and will bring to the communications table.

Our examinations of contact scenarios are forms of conceptual communications or if you prefer, preparations for experiential communications in which the concepts or abstract notions and mental impressions of contact scenarios are played out in practice. These surface from our collective understanding of reality, incorporating endless ideas of what ET life might exist as, and then are experimented with for their logic and potentialities. Within these scenarios are enmeshed contact mythologies and sometimes even the asserted Contact Experience. Michael rightly explores our psychological reasonings, aspirations, and pursuit of “uncertain patterns”.

After relating a number of examples, he goes on to say, “that the evidence (for contact) is not crystal clear, unambiguous, and simple to behold. It is fuzzy, vague, incomplete, and a perfect backdrop for the projection of our mental contents.”

Now how do these explorations benefit exopolitical mediation? What does this understanding of evidence for contact as ambiguous or incomplete, bring to the communication table or the application of a mediator skills? Of what use is conceptual communications on the subject of Contact to exopolitical mediation? This is where I think we revitalize how we look at communication. ”Looking at communication, not just through it to see how it affects other things, gives us a way of thinking about the events and objects of the social world that differs substantially from the modernistic way of thinking. Our attention is drawn to wholes rather than parts; to dynamics rather than substances; to reflectivity rather than linear relations; and to interactions rather than single actions,” [2] W. Barnett Pearce, School of Human and Organization Development, Fielding Graduate University.

The conceptual communications within the dynamics of Exopolitics or those built during mediation or even others presented complete through the direct contact experiencer, gives us the ability to closely examine the root context within which the information originates for the purpose of deep understanding of the communications and participants involved. It will likely be a conglomeration of the participants and experiencer’s interpretations and the source intent of their experience. Context in exopolitical mediation includes but is not limited to, the experiencer’s and participants’ culture, their psychological state, their educational and life experience level, and their personal mythos of individual existence…so too will it also include the level of ability, type and style of communication, and intents on the part of the extra-terrestrial contacting party, as well as a whole series of contextual ranges on the part of the receiving public who is without doubt a theoretical if not actual participant in the mediation circle. An in-depth examination of context is very important to facilitating the mediator’s understanding of the participants involved in the mediation. This examination of context allows us to delineate the actual identity of participants in the mediation circle.

It is in my mind to suggest that it may be worthy for exopolitical mediators to look, within the context, at the instigator of both our own ‘mental contents’ and that of our participants various ‘mental contents’, the oh so infamous ego, as another participant to the mediation circle. The ego inserts its own purposes and needs and therefore may transcend or overtake the communication process, intent, or specific content. By placing the ego within its own category as a participant we give ourselves awareness of its presence and It, its own voice, so that we can therefore gain an opportunity to separate it from the originating source of individual communications.

What is ego? Is it a true representation of us? When we stop to consider ego in our lives, most of us would say no, that is not truly us, not deep down because we have separated what we tend to fall into existentially from what we think of ourselves as mentally, and what we expect or strive for ourselves to be. The pressure to conform to our human ego is very great. Our egos are wrapped up in our social perception of societal expectations which are both extrinsic, concerning relationships of our social groups, and intrinsic, concerning our own behavior, opinions, issues, values, and goals as expected by ourselves or of us by our social groups. The ego is a construct of all these things and does not always adhere to what we really believe or value in ourselves or others.

The exopolitical mediator can use the delineation and identification of ego in the scope of examining conceptual communications and their contexts to increase his or her ‘interpersonal linkage power [3]. This power is the mediators ability based on their perceived influence with people who control psychological or social resources within a participatory group. This power is necessary to developing a group culture among participants where a collective personality and point of view or understanding is negotiated by the members (participants) of the mediation group; in whatever way those participants are defined in the mediation process.

In closing I offer a reference to conceptual communications, in which Michael Gintowt refers to speculation about ETs, giving it a definition as, “about attempting to lead the way into the future, to break new ground, to innovate, to find meaning in work, and contribute by asking questions, as opposed to furnishing answers – which is a good thing, because excellent science is based on asking the right questions.”

Congratulations go to the theologians for taking the initiative to be among the trail-blazers, those who dove in first.


Notes:
-----------------------

[1] Exopsychology, “Exoisms: foreshadowing of a New Age, or macro-egoism?”, Michael Gintowt, 2009

[2] TOWARD COMMUNICATIVE VIRTUOSITY: A MEDITATION ON MODERNITY AND OTHER FORMS OF COMMUNICATION© W. Barnett Pearce, 2005, School of Human and Organization Development, Fielding Graduate University

[3] Creating Competent Communications, Yoder, Hugenberg, Wallace, Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company, 1996, page 326.