| Visitors Now: | |
| Total Visits: | |
| Total Stories: |
| Story Views | |
| Now: | |
| Last Hour: | |
| Last 24 Hours: | |
| Total: | |
Commentary on Commentary – Part 1
There are many people who are not interested in “politics” and I’d suggest they simply pass on this article and go onto the next. If your attention is fully focused on Ascension, there’s no need to read this one.
Well, that was a very long interview between David Wilcock and Ben Fulford. And I don’t want to follow it with a very long article analyzing it.
However we have very few sources on what’s happening behind the scenes globally and Ben and David are among the best. We can see how difficult the job is and how possibly prone to errors people are who attempt the task.
This is not a precise art. It seems like commentators must construe sometimes from about as much evidence as an archaeologist has.
Before proceeding, perhaps we can discuss this role of commentator a bit. In 3D or duality, some commentators (I’m not referring to Ben and David) approach the task by trying to create in the reader the impression that “they know.” They have “insiders” that inform them. They’ve been at it a long time. They are “experts” in what they do, an impression that talk-show hosts contribute to in their introductions, partly to increase the stature of their show, I would imagine, and partly to ingratiate themselves to the commentators so they’ll return.
Commentators have a number of games they play around informing their publics and the whole process of managing one’s image is one of them. Once they’ve said “I know” often enough, the public settles down and buys what they say, until they’re proven wrong. (Then they suffer a quick and painful “death.”)
Well, I don’t know. I’m just giving you my impressions. I’m not an expert and I have no desire to be. I do what I do because I feel impelled to do it. Recently I’ve had it confirmed that this is my mission, but I seek no reward from it, no ratings, no status. And I don’t claim that following my own lines of enquiry is going to help you know the truth, what’s so, the lowdown or anything of the sort.
It just offers you another opinion to add to the mix and to assist you to form your own opinion, which may be in direct contrast to mine – and which often is, as you tell me by email.
My sources are equally available to you. You want to speak to Archangel Michael? He’s a phone call away. You read SaLuSa; I read SaLuSa. The same with all the others.
I have no use for an image and therefore no need to manage one. In fact an image is the booby prize in life. I want the brass ring, which is available to those who shed their image. I don’t charge anything for I write so that I won’t be beholden to anyone.
So you’re not hearing from an expert, not gleaning secret information from insiders, etc. Discernment is more valuable than secret channels, as far as I’m concerned. And your discernment is as precious as mine. So please don’t set me up on a pedestal, and you’d be best inclined not to do so with Ben or David or Alfred or Alex or anyone else either. Where we’re going, we won’t do that anymore so we might as well start now to validate our own sense of what’s so.
I think I’m going to need to do this in instalments, I can see. Let’s start in on what David and Ben have told us about the White Knights or Earth allies.
Ben sheds some light on who they are:
“’We’ is a group of us who are involved in the fight to overthrow this cabal.
“It includes members of the CIA, the Pentagon, the [intelligence] agencies, and various [other groups], including Asian secret societies.
“We use the name White Dragon. There is another group that calls themselves the White Hats.
“We all have the same goal, which is to get this insane group of people out of power.”
In terms of the military turning its hat around, Ben is quite helpful. The Pentagon were represented at the Monaco Meeting; the cabal was not:
DW: “What is the context of the Pentagon in light of this meeting of 57 different countries?
“Wouldn’t everybody in the Pentagon be part of the Bilderberg / Trilateral Commission thing?”
BF: “No. The Pentagon was represented there. The Bilderberg / Trilateral Commission was not.”
David asked him for details on who in the military was wearing a white hat and who a black.
DW: “What percentage of the Pentagon is on the side of this [Monaco] alliance?”
BF: “I’ve heard that the only generals who are not on board are [guys] like Petraeus.
“From what I’ve heard, most of the Joint Chiefs are now with this group.”
We heard from Archangel Michael that the Navy wore white hats and the Navy, I think, controls the Joint Chiefs. He comments on the lower ranks and here we’d have to use our own discernment.
DW: “What about lower levels of the hierarchy? Like the soldiers.”
BF: “The lower levels are completely pissed off. They support Ron Paul – and they know that there’s something totally wrong.”
David’s comment is also potentially instructive.
“[DW: My own insiders have told me there is a massive struggle going on within the military between those who would arrest, detain and kill American citizens and those who would not.
“The majority are rejecting the plans, roughly 80-90 percent, from what I heard. You can't win a battle against those odds.]”
So these comments should give us a certain measure of comfort. We can hear that the military are quickly joining the side of the Light and that the lower ranks would be most unlikely to fire on citizens.
Ben confirms for us the reality of the threat of assassination and therefore the need for secrecy.
“We’re dealing with some very dangerous people. That’s why there is a need for secrecy.”
“They use assassination like most of us use tissue papers.”
He makes a comment about President Obama that Matthew has made on occasion: “The president is the intended fall-guy to draw attention away from the cabal conspirators behind the scenes. His true power is limited.” Matthew has said that the President will not be able to show his true colors and commitments until after the cabal is dislodged.
His comment about J. Edgar Hoover, that “when a conspiracy is so big, people’s mind boggles and they go into denial,” is quite suggestive. And it surely helps understand why so many people are unwilling to face the truth about 9/11.
OK, I’m going to stop there for today and just take it in bits and bites. And don’t feel you have to read these comments. I’ve subjected you to enough reading (35 pages) just with David’s column!
I may have to abandon my intention if things heat up too much. I’ll try to do the very most important topics first, which would be the economic collapse and the comments on the ETs, just in case I can only squeeze in a little.
UFO/ET Disclosure, First Contact, NESARA, Accountability, Terraforming, Ascension, and the Golden Age.
Read more at The 2012 Scenario
Source:
