A Boot to Dan's Butt - Part 11

Cy's Response to Dan's Quote Below:
Re: New (temporary) Rule - DS section
« Reply #40 Today at 12:03pm »

Today at 11:29am, dan wrote:

Cy,

Quote Cy:
As any interpretation you have a right
to present and to be heard, to be acknowledged, to engage in debate, and to
defend, etc....you do not however have a right to exceed the bounds of common
decency in the process of doing or achieving such ends. Nor does anyone in this
in either the forefront or behind the scenes. The days of that being the status
quo and/or acceptability are at an end.


I cannot answer for CK’s ethics and objectives. I

only know that he has aided and abetted my eschatological stance. He
may have chosen to conceal his nefarious agenda behind this faux-eschaton.

But I do know that CK is the only known key player in this Endgame. I can
nail him to the wall of a Congressional Inquiry, but I will not participate in
that inquest unless all other participants are fully aware of the possible
eschatological consequences. .

That is where I differ in opinion. He is not the only key player in this Game...(endgame is an inappropriate lable based on my knowledge). Perhaps you meant the only 'known' key player? I would agree in that he is prominent in that his name is very public in this sector but this is not the only sector functioning. And his spotlight will always be shared irregardless of whether the names are initially known or not.

Nailing him to the wall with a Congressional Inquiry may or may not be necessary. I would judge that according to the level of negative influence he or his particular arena chooses to make on the ongoing effort toward preparing and effecting an honest & honorable Human Disclosure prior to unambiguous Contact.

Apparantly there are leaders already active in sorting the situation out equitably who are including the prior history of Contact which involves the Greys Group & Reppies....Since he is not in his prior post (location) I would assume he his either:

1. otherwise engaged or busy elsewhere in support or opposition

2. or is involved as is appropriate for his history and existential ability to influence

3. or has been maneuvered out of the loop to allow for a more productive adjustment of the paradigm as reflected by the activity noted by AF below.

i.e.

Yesterday at 4:02pm, af wrote:

Okay lets bash out the detail.

This new Treaty will be with another faction of ETs that are different
to the Greys and the Reptiods. What this new faction will want from us seems to
me more sociological and environmental.

Children interacting with ETs started with the Greys Whitney Strieber
being a good example. What we have now are Hybrids that are being developed to
work with ETs and Humanity.

I should point out that the Greys have a very good understanding what a
Treaties is, which like all Treaties in our own history are like. They get
breached and tested by the other side to see the reaction. eg US/UK said yes you
can abduct some of our people. The Greys abducted thousands.

SO here is the current problem US/UK don't like the Greys and the
Treaty they have with them but currently they both need each other. Abductions
seem to have been reduced of late but it still happens.

Now here is the interesting part the UK and US do not agree with each
other about how to open this can of worms. But there are people above my contact
and Source A that seem to be working closely together on this.

Currently it feels like we are just waiting for something to
happen.

AF

A Boot to Dan's Butt - Part 10

Cy's Response to Dan's Post Below:
Re: New (temporary) Rule - DS section
« Reply #36 Today at 11:15am »

Today at 9:50am, dan wrote:

Cy,

Quote Cy:
That is very funny Dan, your humor is
coy, considering the prior Management of the Paradigm, also entrenched within
the 3 Letter Acronym Agencies among other places, is responsible for the Dumbing
Effect upon Surface Politicians. And a heavy number of behaviors had the CIA
label on them.

If your campfire must reside in a cast iron pot then it is pointless to
use the magnesium to start it there until the water has been removed or at least
pointed out to the Chef.


You persistent vehemence against the BPWH seems to suggest that you take
these DS section proceedings to be something more than INCONSEQUENTIAL. I can
only commend you for that smidgen of (political/spiritual) insight. But are you
suggesting the CK is BHO’s Rasputin???

That is a more serious allegation, but one that is permissible to discuss
here, remaining within the bounds of only one brick-thrower at a time….!! And,
please, allow me to note, that within the space of one or two posts, you are
vacillating between the under-consequential view of R&D to the
over-consequential view.

A very significant part of my mission is to find the fine line between
over-reaction and under-reaction.

Quote Cy:
just because you have a get out of jail
free card coming doesn't mean you get to continue business as usual
unabated.

Cy, feel free to elaborate on this last observation……..

Exactly what ‘business’ do you not wish me to continue? The disclosure
business or the eschaton business?

Yes, CK is very clever in insulating himself behind the Eschaton. In order
to get to CK, you will have to acknowledge the Eschaton contingency of
Disclosure.

And how many politicians or pundits are willing to do that?? PRECIOUS
FEW!!! Yes, CK is playing fast and loose with the US Constitution. BUT, the only
way to get to CK is by going though Chicken Little who has been his publicist
for these many years. The only way to enlist CL in nailing CK is by taking
seriously the Eschaton contingency. It is that simple! (cont.)

Ok, now to address your comments.

I am not at all persistently vehement against your BPWH. While I do disagree with it in many regards I do treat it with respect as one of many interpretations to this Paradigm as an option to how humanity might choose to interpret and react in regards to the Contact Paradigm and Human Potential. I have made it quite clear in the past that I did not agree with readiness for an existential leap on the scale of the one you propose. Or that an eschaton type sitation will net the results you expect. Life tramas leave horrible marks and baggage upon the human spirit, an eschaton type event is very destructive/damaging to spiritual evolution for this reason. But I don't exclude this interpretation from the cadre of ones existing because that would be interfereing with honorable free will.

I do however take/have tremendous vehemence in opposition with a continuance of unethical, immoral, and illegal behavior regarding this paradigm. It is unnecessary and your manipulations of humanity in those manners paint you, your brethren, and many less informed participants and collateral parties as horrendously evil whether deserved or not! It begs the question of how many times will a human mash their fingers with the same hammer before they choose some other method of driving a nail?

Your stacking of the conversational/observational deck is what initiated this response from me today for it illustrates in prime example an inherent dishonorability this and previous behaviors originating from this faction.

As any interepretation you have a right to present and to be heard, to be acknowledged, to engage in debate, and to defend, etc....you do not however have a right to exceed the bounds of common decency in the process of doing or achieving such ends. Nor does anyone in this in either the forefront or behind the scenes. The days of that being the status quo and/or acceptability are at an end.

Cyrellys

« Last Edit: Today at 11:28am by Cyrellys »

A Boot to Dan's Butt - Part 9

Cy's Reply to Dan's Post Below:
Re: New (temporary) Rule - DS section
« Reply #27 Today at 9:42am »
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Today at 9:18am, dan wrote:
Cy,

Quote Cy: Because, my dear Dan, you and CKs intent to
be the singular moving force in briefing our initially highly controlled and
improperly influenced President Obama and intent to be the singular
interpretation of Contact, the History of Contact, and the Primary Course of
Human Potential Presented is warped, and humanly unconstructive, potentially
destructive, and generally annoying in its distinct lack of Ethical Behavior
ACROSS THE BOARD.

I've sat back and observed for a good year, now I speak to be heard on
the matter.

End quote Cy.


I can only deal with one black-baller at a time. No one else will be
permitted to interrupt the following discourse between Cy and Dan, until you
have been granted EXPLICIT permission by me.

Yes, it is true, my dear Cy, that CK knows how to throw his weight around,
inside the Beltway. Yes, and those can be extremely mean and terminating
streets.

He does this only so that you and I may discuss openly and freely the
CONSQUENCES of disclosure/eschatology. That is my claim.

If you don’t like the R&D show, I/we invite you to complain to your
Congressperson. That is very easy to do, and you are invited to begin a
campaign, right here, to Congress to complain about how R&D violates the
Separation Clause of the First Amendment. (cont.) End Quote Dan.

That is very funny Dan, your humor is coy, considering the prior Management of the Paradigm, also entrenched within the 3 Letter Acronym Agencies among other places, is responsible for the Dumbing Effect upon Surface Politicians. And a heavy number of unethical and illegal behaviors had the CIA lable on them.

If your campfire must reside in a cast iron pot then it is pointless to use the magnesium to start it there until the water has been removed or at least pointed out to the Chef.

I suppose for your quarter's sake you will at least sort of win either way if the UN is successful in its work on an Amnesty....that being a worthwhile endeavor to correct this mess that has been made of Contact....but that still leaves how Disclosure will be processed or is being processed....

just because you have a get out of jail free card coming doesn't mean you get to continue business as usual unabated.

Cy


« Last Edit: Today at 9:54am by Cyrellys »

A Boot to Dan's Butt - Part 8

Reply from Cy to Dan Quote Below:
Re: New (temporary) Rule - DS section
« Reply #22 Today at 9:05am »

Today at 8:53am, dan wrote:

Cy,

Quote Cy:
Hense your ethical problem is apparent.
A one sided stacked conversation is no conversation or debate at all....it is
only Dictatorial....a shadow of Tyranny.If your perspective holds Truth then
Truth shall stand in Strength with no need for Dictatorial Conditions. This an
argument against your presentation....the presenter or the manner of
presentation is falleable.

YOU are NOT SYNCHRONICITY. Nor am I a GRANDMOTHER....therefore your
Dictatorial Conditions can only illustrate the Universal Creative Source
Synchronistic hand of admonition when you use POWER in a negative fashion. An
admonition for all to consider.

You are distasteful in thanking me for an Compliance you seek, which I
have not given.
End Quote.

As you can readily ascertain, I am deeply engaged here in dialogue mode
with myself.

I am as practiced in this mode as much as anyone in the world. And you are
rudely interrupting. Why can’t you just mind your own INCONSEQUENTIAL
business??? .

Because, my dear Dan, you and CKs intent to be the singular moving force in briefing our initially highly controlled and improperly influenced President Obama and intent to be the singular interpretation of Contact, the History of Contact, and the Primary Course of Human Potential Presented is warped, and humanly unconstructive, potentially destructive, and generally annoying in its distinct lack of Ethical Behavior ACROSS THE BOARD.

I've sat back and observed for a good year, now I speak to be heard on the matter.

Cyrellys

A Boot to Dan's Butt - Part 7

Reply from Cy:
Re: New (temporary) Rule - DS section
« Reply #19 Today at 8:43am »
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Today at 8:23am, dan wrote:

Cy,

Quote Cy:
In truth Dan
neither of us are of any
consequence. Disclosure and Contact and Human
Social Construction of Reality in
reaction will break down the group-think
of the past, opening the foward course
to a more flexible and creative
series of opportunities benefiting Human
Potential. Even the Ptb will be
surprised from their entrenchments.

In truth, Cy,

I will have to revoke your ‘grandmother’ privilege if you refuse
to take
seriously the CONSEQUENCES of what we may choose to discuss
concerning the
Disc/Eschaton contingency. This is your final
warning
………………..

You may discuss INCONSEQUENTIALLY, to your
heart’s desire, everywhere else
on OM and on the WWW.

Thank
you for your compliance.

Hense your ethical problem is apparent.

A one sided stacked conversation is no conversation or debate at all....it is only Dictatorial....a shadow of Tyranny.If your perspective holds Truth then Truth shall stand in Strength with no need for Dictatorial Conditions. This an argument against your presentation....the presenter or the manner of presentation is falleable.

YOU are NOT SYNCHRONICITY. Nor am I a GRANDMOTHER....therefore your Dictatorial Conditions can only illustrate the Universal Creative Source Synchronistic hand of admonition when you use POWER in a negative fashion. An admonition for all to consider.

You are distasteful in thanking me for a Compliance you seek, which I have not given.

Cyrellys

« Last Edit: Today at 8:47am by Cyrellys »

A Boot to Dan's Butt - Part 6

From Cy:
Re: New (temporary) Rule - DS section
« Reply #15 Today at 8:13am »

Today at 7:46am, dan wrote:
Cy,

(Quote Cy:
A little slow there Dan. That was obvious once it sunk
in to CK that he had competition. In other-words you and him are not the only
party testing Disclosure....see UN Meetings & ET Treaty & Amnesty
threads. The interesting part is the distinct differences in the flavor between
the two versions....yours eschatalogical, death cult oriented, theirs diverse
life & positive human potential oriented. )

I will only admit to hypothetical
or speculative competition. As for boots on the ground with a PtB D/E, there is
no actual competition, at this point in time, especially since CK has sent
Source ‘A’ to the showers….--------------

Quote Cy:
(And that - theirs - despite an overshadow of a ptb
interested in world domination of a negative nature....it would seem that the
Elite death cults aren't as all powerful as would appear...there is hope to move
all of this out of Tyranny.)

Yes, and, hold your breath, you and I are that hope, are we not?? (cont.)

End Dan Quote.

In truth Dan neither of us are of any consequence. Disclosure and Contact and Human Social Construction of Reality in reaction will break down the group-think of the past, opening the foward course to a more flexible and creative series of opportunities benefiting Human Potential. Even the Ptb will be surprised from their entrenchments.

Cy


Edit to Add: Of course you will only admit to hypothetical or speculative competition. You are tasked with maintaining the CIA's foot in the door to effect an extreme and highly controlling Disclosure. Fear creates predictable behavior which is malleable.


« Last Edit: Today at 8:19am by Cyrellys »

A Boot to Dan's Butt - Part 5

Dan's Reply:
[b]Re: New (temporary) Rule - DS section[/b]
« Reply #10 Today at 7:28am »
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cy,

It seems that your blogspot is, for now, streaming this thread…..
-------------

Now back to Wolf and the Pope, et al…………

Sure, that may still be the plan.
And so CK is using us at OM to test market their D/E message.
Doesn’t that make sense?

[And, Cy, feel free to continue chiming in, as your grandmotherly heart desires……]

[But, please, just one Interlocutor at a time.......]

So fine, can we all agree, for the sake of this discussion, i.e. those who wish to participate in the DS section, that we are test marketing the Disc./Eschaton message of the Spiritual PtB?
And as soon as Cy has to run to the lambing shed, she can designate her substitute….
(cont.)

« Last Edit: Today at 7:42am by dan » Link to Post - Back to Top Logged


*********************************

From Cy:
[b]Re: New (temporary) Rule - DS section[/b]
« Reply #11 Today at 7:39am »
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Today at 7:28am, dan wrote:

Cy,
It seems that your blogspot is, for now, streaming this
thread…..-------------
Now back to Wolf and the Pope, et al…………
Sure,
that may still be the plan.
And so CK is using us at OM to test market their
D/E message.
Doesn’t that make sense?
(cont.)

A little slow there Dan. That was obvious once it sunk in to CK that he had competition. In other-words you and him are not the only party testing Disclosure....see UN Meetings & ET Treaty & Amnesty threads. The interesting part is the distinct differences in the flavor between the two versions....

yours eschatalogical, death cult oriented,

theirs diverse life & positive human potential oriented.

(And that - theirs - despite an overshadow of a ptb interested in world domination of a negative nature....it would seem that the Elite death cults aren't as all powerful as would appear...there is hope to move all of this out of Tyranny.)

Cy

« Last Edit: Today at 7:42am by Cyrellys »

A Boot to Dan's Butt - Part 4 (Note from the Noosphere)

As we speak Dan is busy editing his responses to reflect additional thoughts on this little drama. Anyone with continued interest in this is recommended to visit the thread in question to see them.

Cy

A Boot to Dan's Butt - Part 4, the Adventure Continues

Dan Smith Reply:
Re: New (temporary) Rule - DS section
« Reply #8 Today at 6:58am »

Cy,

Quote:

You and CK should be thanking me. In commenting here I've created a blurb which
pulls the Conspiracy Theorists in to see Your Version of the Paradigm and the UN
Meetings version of the Paradigm.And as I recall, the Contact Paradigm is one of
the best vantage points to get a good healthy view of the various ptb's vying to
drive the bus.

Ok, the DS Rules committee has just conducted an emergency, plenary session. The unanimous decision was that Cyrellys should be included here under the ‘grandmother’ clause. Hallelujah!

There will be a laying on of hands ceremony, shortly!

------------------

And, yes, you make a good point about the Contact Paradigm…..

This also answers a question, previously posed in the BB thread, I believe, as to why, given the spiritual nature of the message, why it should not be delivered by one or more recognized spiritual leaders. (cont.)

« Last Edit: Today at 7:15am by dan »


****************************************


From Cy in Response:
Re: New (temporary) Rule - DS section
« Reply #9 Today at 7:16am »

http://exopoliticsparadigm.blogspot.com/

"you can't touch this!"

Isn't there a song by that name..he he he

Cy

A Boot To Dan's Butt - part 3

Quote from Dan Smith:
Re: New (temporary) Rule - DS section« Reply #6 Today at 6:28am »

Cy,

Quote:
your interpretation of the paradigm is so
beautifully warped that commenting on your lack of ethics is
irresistible....continue throwing fuel on the fire illustrating the color of
your version of reality.

I’ll be glad for you to do that, somewhere else, please. Or should there be a ‘grandmother’ clause in the above rule?

http://lucianarchy.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=dansmithsom&action=display&thread=5515&page=1#176115


*************************

Re: New (temporary) Rule - DS section« Reply #7 Today at 6:45am »


You and CK should be thanking me. In commenting here I've created a blurb which pulls the Conspiracy Theorists in to see Your Version of the Paradigm and the UN Meetings version of the Paradigm.

Cy

Edit to Add: And as I recall, the Contact Paradigm is one of the best vantage points to get a good healthy view of the various ptb's vie-ing to drive the bus.

« Last Edit: Today at 6:49am by Cyrellys »

A Boot to Dan's Butt Continued

Re: New (temporary) Rule - DS section« Reply #1 Today at 5:19am »

Quote:
That is one hell of an example you are setting for the Obama administration to follow, Dan. With so many of the financial CIA front companies going belly up or shutting down for the summer, I am surprised that this faction would be considered qualified to brief anyone....

How about you go back and brief the perverse dweeb who is instructing the 'paid' US military brass to issue orders to confiscate privately owned firearms and report their serial numbers of all in possession from military personnel that his time is numbered before he is found and PUBLICISED?!! Why? Because the instructions have gone out that anyone participating in such unconstitutional orders is going to be publicly flaunted as well...birds under spotlights tend to sing quite well.

Then you can say you have done something useful....useful to making the path to Disclosure and Contact ETHICAL.

Cyrellys

Edit by DS: Sorry, Cy, but this is an example of a post that will not be acceptable in the DS section, for the next 3 months. All the rest of OM is open to your venting! If you feel this strongly, I would urge that you create another section for that specific purpose.]


My Dear Dan,

your interpretation of the paradigm is so beautifully warped that commenting on your lack of ethics is irresistable....continue throwing fuel on the fire illustrating the color of your version of reality.

Cy

« Last Edit: Today at 6:03am by Cyrellys »

A Boot to Dan's Butt

Re: Cyrellys: Letting the Days Go By« Reply #55 Today at 5:24am »
Posted by DAN:New (temporary) Rule - DS section« Thread Started Today at 4:58am »
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------With the kind forbearance of the Admins, this New Rule will apply in this DS section for the next three (3) months OR until CK is no longer able to maintain the façade that something serious is afoot with BHO/R&D, whichever comes sooner.
Participation in the DS section of OM will be strongly discouraged unless you can abide by the following two conditions:
1.) You agree to seriously entertain the possibility of the BPWH.
2.) You agree to seriously entertain the possibility that the Pres and/or the VP are, or soon will be, receiving weekly updates on any developments in the DS/OM section.
Exceptions:
You are already grandfathered into DS/OM to provide 'background music’ OR you are a designated replacement for such a one.
All others are encouraged to use the Disc./Core-story section for venting, or obtain permission to start another section for that specific purpose.
Thank you for your compliance, and thank the Admins for their temporary forbearance.

.
« Last Edit: Today at 5:03am by dan »
*******************************
Posted By Cy:Re: New (temporary) Rule - DS section« Reply #1 Today at 5:19am »
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------That is one hell of an example you are setting for the Obama administration to follow, Dan. With so many of the financial CIA front companies going belly up or shutting down for the summer, I am surprised that this faction would be considered qualified to brief anyone....

How about you go back and brief the perverse dweeb who is instructing the 'paid' US military brass to issue orders to confiscate privately owned firearms and report their serial numbers of all in possession from military personnel that his time is numbered before he is found and PUBLICISED?!! Why? Because the instructions have gone out that anyone participating in such unconstitutional orders is going to be publicly flaunted as well...birds under spotlights tend to sing quite well.

Then you can say you have done something useful....useful to making the path to Disclosure and Contact ETHICAL.

Cyrellys

http://lucianarchy.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=blogs&action=display&thread=4734&page=4#176103