Breaking silence on Corey Goode and asking for your honest assessments

[Phil]

Hey PC (and others), I'm trying to do my part by examine the 'meta-data' you refer to...and also tried my hand in creating some...would you kindly take a look and provide feedback if/when you are so inclined:

[youtube]https://youtu.be/BNQM_KxuOu8[/youtube]

Ness has been telling me of her anamolous experiences before I ever discovered the "alt-community", but when this lead me to research...which lead me to Project Camelot which lead me to PA....I started getting new stories.

She is a example of who I'd think would come to the alt community looking for answers and buy into the bullshit**...however she is the quickest to point out others bullshitting...yet I have no reason to believe anything she says, and in fact have tons of reasons to assume it is bullshit.

I dunno....I keep deleting everything I type...so I am going to leave it at this, hoping for feedback--I just don't get why she'd make it up, or why Ben* (or me, or anyone) would believe any of it.

*I asked him first to do this, as I made friends with him and he is pretty much like me...really really skeptical and often not afraid to ask tough questions. ANd he's not afraid to admit he wants attention...a bit of a narrisistic streak, but tries to feed it with "truth" rather than outrageousness.

**Maybe this is for a different thread, and please move if you agree Christine...but I feel like the comparisons are relevant somehow. We haven't seen too many people not well-versed in the community come out and tell their own stories. I don't talk to ness about any of the personalities, she doesn't know CW Chanter from David Icke. I think there might be something to contrasting these two "nobodies" trying to do what the slick polsihed production discussed in the thread is supposedly trying to do: adding their experience to the meta-data

[Pluto's Child]

I would split this into it's own thread too !

It's too long a vid for me & the sound made it impossible to watch more than several minutes ( hypersensitive lol)

But I got a lot from your posts on yt, which I'll take the liberty of posting here;

33 minutes in she's trying to describe the house...it was a McMansion on about a half acre or more in the exurbs fancy neighborhood which used to be farmland...the main "anamoly" other people would see is a shadow figure where they definitely made out a "farmer" vibe, har and suspenders.

He was pissed...and I also believe was charged up by our presence. Maybe she gets into it but there was also a "regular" ghost family there she'd describe, a father and two kids, that were pretty much benign. There was some sort of "spiritual trap" hotspot next to our house where she'd hear children in distress, and more than once be sort of sleeping out toward, one time I had to physically pull her out (it was a bushy grove) and it was HUGE resistance.

My experience is she sees benign "dead people" pretty much anywhere they left an energy signature or were stuck, and the real issue is more "demonic". WHich is one of the huge issues that's a big reason for me pushing the idea of doing this. Listening to her say "it's just evil" when he askes if we named it (about 55 mins in) is killing me, as maybe that is what we thought at the time...but currently I recognize the "shadow dude" is a manifestation of the childhood trauma she's been clinging to her whole life, which was amplified by the bad energy (and possibly other, seperate independent local demons) of the place.

And me. I am some sort of battery, and magnet for crazy shit (and people). Our time in the house was just after the "honeymoon" phase peaked and the relationship got real. And "real" to her was the fear of losing it (I've come to suspect), as we got to know each better we had our problems as any relationship will go through...and the ramping of the paranormal definitely had an "as above, so below" aspect.So it is really interesting to me hear her localize "the entity/monster" to that place.

A big part of this exercize for me is to help her see it from a more honest perspective, as she has been showing me in real life recently...openly acknowledging it is "hers", has been ever-present as long as she can remember. She's learned and grown a lot since that period in her life, when I recognized our relationship was feeding/strengthening our life-long bad habit of codependency...we've both come a long way since then...

HA!! The story she chose (to entertain the crowd at 1:30 when Ben is kissing wife goodnight) was the "bushy grove" I mentioned above...and of course is different than how I remember it.She was putting her face in a little bit and did NOT disappear (though she apparently went to some other dimension) but WAS being physically pulled into it and I needed to use a lot of strength to pull her out and prevent her scratching herself all up while ficking up the bush.SHE didn't disappear...our reality disappeared for her. And the difference she'll tell you is "the way she talks"...which as you can imagine drives me nuts.

This is quite a typical case, and she's not nuts, lots of people have experienced these types of phenomena, myself included.

The childhood trauma is a classic catalyst or cause of these experiences;- paranormal, talking to & seeing the dead, precog stuff, the theory that makes the most sense IMO about this is that there is a tear or "deformity" in one of the energy bodies that lets things through that shouldn't get through, in childhood these barriers are not fully formed, and so are vulnerable, and it also explains childhood "invisible friends" that disappear as the child grows.

Like in primitive cultures it's the sick kid who somehow reaches adulthood who becomes the village medicine man.

The "bush incident" is interesting, it's like grays using a wardrobe as a portal into someone's bedroom, it's an ontological trick, there is the inside of a bush and there is the outside of a bush, there is a separation, and that's all is needed, they are two worlds & the edge of the bush is "the veil".

What you saw outside the bush & what she saw inside the bush belong to two equally valid realities.

It also appears to be a form of attempted abduction, these phenomena are also common amongst abductees, Whitley Striebers site has now almost become a spiritualist site he has that much material on communications with "people in spirit".

Which reminds me I had a bizarre experience a month ago talking to dead people in the astral in the local cemetery, the same night the Mayors father died, it was very freaky, French paysan ghosts, not a pleasant experience

[Christine]

Hi, I agree that it is important to listen to voices from outside the alt media mayhem mechanism ... as well as those who are participants. Where would you suggest I move this and under what heading? Happy to comply.

[Phil]

Ha...the "bush" incident is exactly the thing I thought would bring a compare/contrast point into the narrative creation conversation, which I thought would be relevant.

Ben never stops her when she says "I disappeared", which is something I get her on all the time about, she used to say "that's the way I talk".

Well "the way she talks" paints a different picture than the reality we share. The real experiencers may often do this in recounting their experiences, which is why it is important to have it come at (not just "attacked" as a "lie") from all different angles.

She didn't "disappear", reality disappeared for her...she went in, and into some different dimension, she described as nothing but gray and cold...with one other "presence" in there with her. The "real world effects" were her pulling herself face first into brush, and I swore it took more strength to pull her backwards than she had to push herself in that direction.

The whole anamolous experience is probably worthy of it's own thread...I remember at the time I created on PA about "soul traps", can't remember how good it ended up or not.

But as to relevancy to this thread...my whole sort of purpose was to present a reference to contrast the calculated details of an experience as recounted by any celeb (and particularly off-world meetings with galactic political bodies) versus actual stuff that happens to people.

Not to discount the possibility that there's a conglomarate of various alien factions that behave and interact EXACTLY like humans do, meeting and voting and legislating and whatnot...but I guess I am presenting an alternative for those (like PC) that might paint a more useful picture.

Any commonalities seem to end at some point after the individual myth-maker decides to publicly share their experience...and the discernment at that point maybe should be directed at WHY they are telling the story rather than giving ANY credence to the WHAT of the data...how much energy is wasted debunking stuff that someone else will believe or not based on their own context/experience anyway?

So maybe I'll start a thread identical this one...I guess pull my post from here and start one (NOT PRIVATE) "real experiences?" Or something more clever...in hopes of recieving feedback specific to that:

http://openuptoday.freeforums.net/threa ... rollTo=295" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

...but thanks for what you gave PC and I do think that an important component of the CG situation is what differentiates this dude...conversing with Christine in a similar way, gets bumped in popularity by Bill Ryan..though creeping behind the scenes is an established, popular, accomplished "alt community" rock star....that hitched his horses (and credibility) to THAT story.

What Corey was posting before (details of space ships and such?) may be relevant? DW's relationship with BR....particularly interviewing Pete Peterson with him, especially in light of mention of that in the OP...may hold a clue?

...And especially HOW they both tell stories, versus how someone versed it the lore of the "alt-community", versus some schmuck on the street who tells her boyfriend and the weirdos among their friends....

[Christine]

Thanks again, Phil. I think leaving these posts here AND starting another thread is valuable, as you pose the questions that we: humanity could well benefit from answering. In my own nutshell version, reality is much simpler than the complex web of the mind, though the Mind is of itself a worthwhile exploration.

I know that sounds like double talk, feeling pulled to finding time to write something a bit more logically coherent, perhaps the time lords (LOL) will give me the grace of expansive time.

[Phil]

Ha...coherency, why does that seem so difficult for the group so focused on looking for truth and knowing thyself

[Christine]

Ha...coherency, why does that seem so difficult for the group so focused on looking for truth and knowing thyself

Good day and good questions to launch from. Seems that the word coherency should be defined in some manner before trying to find words that could leave some breadcrumbs to the inevitable answers we are looking for.

Looking up word definitions has become the norm for me, it seems there are many reckless uses of words and implied meanings and we use them without full awareness.

[n] coherency: logical and orderly and consistent relation of parts
[n] coherency: the state of cohering or sticking together

Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary

Coherency: A sticking or cleaving together; union of parts of the same body; cohesion.

Coherency Connection: or dependence, proceeding from the subordination of the parts of a thing to one principle or purpose, as in the parts of a discourse, or of a system of philosophy; a logical and orderly and consistent relation of parts; consecutiveness.

"Coherence of discourse, and a direct tendency of all the parts of it to the argument in hand, are most eminently to be found in him."

Coherency the state of cohering.

Etymology
Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary
L. cohaerentia,: cf. F. cohérence,

There are deep concepts within the word 'coherent' and here is the nub for me; due to the nature of polarities there is always a give and take, a pull and release, a stronger magnetic field if you will; a formidable personage, or mass of thought we have consciously or subconsciously agreed upon, ideas that pull us toward something other than Self. So frankly without Gnosis of Thyself, without the ability to Self source, the state of Being we can call Love (the real glue or force that coheres or sticks all to all) we are in a sea of variables and prone to be drawn to the largest (or noisiest) body closest to us.

I am writing on the Corey Goode thread for a reason, Blue Sphere Beings, and the co-opting of a natural phenomena for profit and fame. Yesterday brought forth lots of inner questions about speaking out publicly, wishing to thread the eye of the needle with a truth without putting down another persons sovereign choices.

I listened to both DW and CG on Jimmy Church Radio (Fade to Black) the night before and one before that, easily searchable videos on YouTube. I have been resistant to listening to either of them as something inside of me becomes quite irate, deciding that was the best reason TO listen I did. The irateness was still there but so was the observer, so I listened. To say I didn't have any prejudice would be hypocrisy, though I did do my best to listen fully. Here follows a brief analysis:

David Wilcock at his best is a brilliant collector of data, but oh my! he loves to quip that he has collected a large amount of PHD papers as references, he fills the space of his words with self aggrandizing comments. Even that I can dig, because what he was speaking on was coherent to my view of how the Universe conforms itself, the dynamic laws of creation if you will. But, oh shit, the name of his new book is: The Ascension Mysteries, which has this in the descriptor; "The Ascension Mysteries explores the towering personal obstacles David overcame to unlock the great secrets of our universe and looks ahead to what this battle means for each of us personally. By unifying ancient texts from a variety of religions with scientific data and insider testimony, David presents a stunning conclusion—that Earth is on the verge of a massive cosmic event that will transform matter, energy, consciousness, and biological life as we now know it and will utterly defeat the great villains of our time."

What is my issue with the above? DW has personified himself as the One who has unlocked the secrets of our universe. His ego shows itself, as well as the hype and marketing of his works. He isn't the only one and while he clearly is intelligent enough to tap these mysteries there are many, many brilliant ones on the planet, both those before him and those present here and now.

From his speaking about how science has proven that DNA absorbs protons to create the energy for life, something that is knowable from the inside view of the embodied-self (light in matter), he goes on to actually state that the blue sphere beings have come here (from where he doesn't say) and are giving humans synchronicity. Okay, here I almost choked, so full stop. Observer-me asks the host why he doesn't stop and question this statement, he just lets it stand as a fact. See where my irateness comes in? (I tend to laugh a lot when irate.) I could go on but feel that these examples are the reasons I question WTF is going on.

Now the next night Corey is on with Jimmy, the camaraderie and obvious way Jimmy props Corey up leaves me floored. Corey's narrative doesn't have coherency, he skips around when asked questions and I don't hear anything that inspires me or leaves me wanting to know more. These are the words they used in talking about Corey's new website, realdisclosure.org, the discussion revolved around how Corey was going to market the website, it revolved around who (no names) was financing it, who would be presented, insiders and government whistleblowers, ahem ... minions? Don't quote me but I am rattling my memory here, Steve Greer is mentioned too.

Is this correct? Are we seeing the co-opting of Real Disclosure in full view, a full roll out of manipulative programming, cattle shooting (thanks to Randy Maugans for that term) human consciousness into the narrative the controllers want out there? This is my inner intuitive antenna screaming yes. This is why I am speaking now, this is why I share in heart connected coherency with others information we are compiling. It sucks though, it really does suck to talk publicly about someone else that you know and love.

Then there is honor, there is the vital truth. There is loving enough to take a risk, shoot your arrows into the air and see where they fall.

Criminy, if we the people haven't had enough of the entertainment aspect of the media, if we are so bored, captured and convoluted in our selves that we can't see this same old roll out mechanism covered in disclosure, ufology, new age clothing then WE have abdicated our response abilities all over again.

Yes, something in me is irate.

[Phil]

I understand the irate-ness, it is frustrating to think that there is not only an audience, but "interviewers" in this realm are supposedly here because they want to be somewhere different than the mainstream, where their role is bobble-head assisting in letting the "interviewed" unroll whatever "information" they want to present.

It's beyond irritating seeing the views these douches get letting people tell wild stories without any of the questions/qualifications/details to the story that would making it more easily discernible.

Now Wilcock is replaying his own 2012 story, while the super secret whistleblower is going to roll out some super secret whistleblowers....it's like an insult to our collective intelligence. Yet GiamTV or whatever exists. These guys apparently have an audience...is that real? Is there actual human beings anticipating anything either of these guys are setting the stage for?

[Spiritwind]

I'm kind of short on words these days, but just had to log in and tell you all how much you're just laying it out there is appreciated. It is time for candid observation, with as much honesty and detachment as we can muster up. To me, briefly, it is the energy behind the players, that keeps co-opting the narrative and actually continuing the legacy of deceit, whilst claiming to know the truth, that has my attention. It seems to happen every time, this counterfeit enigmatic takeover energy. And I do wonder that what seems so obvious to us, is completely not seen by many/most. I shake my head in wonderment when people actually look you in the eye, and basically admit they just don't want to know. Maybe it's just that hope/savior programming that is still so strong in people. And a deeply ingrained desire to want to be rescued from the suffering of the world, without admitting we still give our energy away daily, and are all co-responsible for where we are now.

[Phil]

Well, it's like Bill Maher once said (when asked why the homophobic RNC would have a gay man at its head): "because hating yourself is the Greatest Love of All"

Seems to me that anyone it is "not obvious to" is so in love with lying to themselves that they work toward becoming indifferent. I don't have the quote perfect, but something I heard yesterday was to the effect that "hate is rough, but it is nothing compared to 'indifference'".

I get that, remembering the times in my life I believe I truly "felt hate". I don't think you can "hate" anything you didn't actually love.

But what do I know? I hate that about the way we arrange our lives within our culture, where most of us can hardly afford to think about too much that doesn't directly effect us, what choice do we have but to build up an indifference to them...especially those things seemingly out of our control?