Thanks Diane Awesome link 
I wonder if he had access to a kolbrin, there are a lot of parts that resonate, very inspiring to listen to.
Hi Diane. Am finally back online - my computer started to play up towards the end of last year and then eventually ‘bit the bullet’ so many times then eventually ‘gave up the ghost’ and totally died on me. But new computer (and a new year) so I can now take part once again…
Is that what you were trying to tell me?
Not really, although that is part of the picture. What is being referred to in the discourse is control via manipulation of emotional states of being in order to facilitate a particular outcome, and has nothing to do with Truth. Those ‘globalists’ who think they are in control adhere to the addage, “the end justifies the means”, and use that mentality at all times - and that has nothing to do with how the common people view morality or even Truth; it is all about CONTROL.
The above author makes morality sound like it's a bad quality, an infectious one, one that would prevent people seeing the truth.I don't agree. For myself, I see the author as emphasising an aspect of morality from his or her own point of view on the subject that is more aligned with manipulation and control. What I can see here is more an emotive use of the word morality to effectively emphasise his or her point of view concerning [i]conspiracies[/i]. Having said this, though, I agree with what he/she has written, for in this context it is indeed one of the weapons used.
Allen’s definition of morality is pertinent to all sides of the conspiracy debate inasmuch as each participant believes they stand on the only moral ground, and, in many ways, this is true. From the individuals moral perspectives they each believe they are on the right path.
So would it be far off to say that if the moral character of a person is based on disinformation, brainwashing and lies it could lead to very misdirected actions and events?From an outside observers perspective (ie someone who is not at all involved with Earth life) I would definitely agree if their own view of reality and cause and effect concur with your own. But from the participants, this couldn't be further from the truth, for they believe they are doing the right thing. To them, what may be seen from afar as brainwashing, disinformation, etc., would be viewed as absolute truth and if the majority of people agree with this so-called truth then that is what will be. Examples of this can be seen in religion, sectarian and non-sectarian violence happening around the world today, corporatocracy, government, and even in the likes of the UN.
But if the moral character of the person was to be based on truth, (the non-emotional, extremely fact base type, subject to change given new facts and truth), the actions of the person would not be as misdirected?One of the interesting things here on Earth (and within our 3-dimensional universe) is that Truth is something that can't even be glimpsed because of this universe's position on the evolutionary ladder. As mentioned above, this misdirection refers to that perceived by the observer, not the participant. I think the old saying, '[i]can't see the forest for the trees[/i]', is quite apt here. To my understanding, none of us has the ability at present to see Truth as it really is, all we can do is to interpret that which we are a part of (our reality) with the knowledge and experience we already possess. We may call that perception Truth if we want, and, in some ways, it is. But to my understanding, it is merely a pale reflection of what Truth is.
I don’t know if I would agree that the moral character of a person could even possibly be based on Truth as you have written simply because we need to attribute an emotional tie to this concept in order to make it a reality in our world. I would agree that Truth simply is, but in order for us to understand its varying facets, we have to attribute an emotional response to that understanding and/or belief.
Lance-I’m content with trying to interpret, find and defend the truth within our reality. For a simple person like myself to try to interpret the greatest truth would be foolish. I can always guess and wonder about it though, and I do. The things I’ve come up with on that subject even make me giggle a bit. I can let my imagination run wild when I let it.
Ra-I think he had access to a lot of writings, and maybe a bit more than just writings. Good hearing from you!
Some James Allen for today…
By earnest self-examination strive to realize, and not merely hold as a theory, that evil is a passing phase, a self-created shadow; that all your pains, sorrows, and misfortunes have come to you by a process of undeviating and absolutely perfect law; have come to you because you deserve and require them, and that by first enduring, and then understanding them, you may be made stronger, wiser, nobler. When you have fully entered into this realization, you will be in a position to mould your own circumstances, to transmute all evil into good, and to weave, with a master hand, the fabric of your destiny.
Can be a tough one to swallow some days. But so very true. Wish more people in my life could relate to that paragraph. I tire of hearing it’s always someone else fault or something else’s fault. I always rejoice when I hear someone taking responsibility for whatever it was that happened that caused them to have a painful experience.
Happened just yesterday. I listened to someone work out their problem verbally and they came to the conclusion that it was their own actions that caused the whole thing. I smiled a big smile, but probably shouldn’t have at that very moment. The hug they received was much more appropriate.
I totally agree with you Diane. I believe it is more in the striving towards that counts. And synchronicities abound should we choose to see and experience them.