PDA

View Full Version : Alternative Media You Say? What's So Alternative About It?



Fred Steeves
13th March 2014, 16:32
I originally intended this post to be an addition to Herbert's thread with the latest George Kavassilas interview,
http://jandeane81.com/threads/2300-George-Kavassilas-Organic-Reality-Creating-Life-Through-Agreements
but the more I thought about it, the more it became a whole new subject worthy of it's own thread.


One thing that consistently bothers me about the alternative media (and I know some of you may be getting tired of me lamenting on this LOL), is that for all the time and energy we put into listening to the alt media movers and shakers, and how seriously we take what they say, there is virtually NO vetting process what so ever. The only vetting I see going on, is that all of these movers and shakers go around vouching for each other's immense genius and credibility, and that's about what the vetting process is, unfortunately. They basically get to vet themselves, not a tough thing to do.


Of course this is basically the same way big time politicians are coddled by main stream media, so it's really making me start to wonder what's so darned alternative about alternative media? Obviously the material content is radically different between the two, but what about the media part of alternative media? We all know that *true* main stream journalism is already 6 feet under, and I am now going to posit that alternative media is right there with it as well.


Back to Kavassilas. He was one of the last people I hung onto before not caring to pay particular attention to *any* of them any more, but even now I saw a lot I liked about what he was saying in this interview. Thing is, as Sandy pointed out in that thread, It wasn't that long ago when ole George was preaching ascension. Wasn't the Earth supposed to turn into a star or something soon? Before that he was channeling the Galactic Federation of Light ffs.


Now I was always willing to give him a pass on the GFL thing because he freely admitted to being duped, and we've all been duped six ways to Sunday along the way right? Meanwhile though, the new truth was ascension. OK, but now ascension is apparently not the truth any more either. But now this, now *this* is the *real truth*, it's right here in my new book! (LOL) Really???


A good journalist should politely ask him something like this at some point: "George, forgive me for being blunt here, but as you know this is my job. I have to ask how you are so certain that the way you see things now is the truth to end all truth, when before it was ascension, and before that it was the GLF? Can you please do your best to explain how this has come to be for our viewers?"


See this is getting to the crux of my point here. In these interviews we all watch, the guest is never challenged, and never asked tough or probing questions. It's almost like the old "we'll just perch here around your feet and listen to how wise and wonderful you, your spirituality, and deep wisdom is".


It's Texas Pick 'Em with most of the rest of AM interviews as well, not just picking on this one. What ever happened to doing some preparation and research for someone you're going to interview? That's what a journalist is supposed to do for us, the viewer or reader seeking new information, right? Read or scan through various books and such the guest has authored, note what they said then, say now, and said in between as well. Do they have a history of making predictions that never come to pass, like Ed Dames' "Kill Shot" for example? (Ed, where the heck IS that kill shot brother?) If you findthey are privately funded, then who funds them? Why do I not see this, ever? Is it now seen as rude or attacking, to ask public people, people who are putting themselves out there (or are being put out there) on a soap box, tough and probing questions?


A couple of other examples:


1) Crop circles are a big deal in the AM, and say you have the opportunity to interview, let's just pick Colin Andrews. I've got nothing against Colin Andrews, he's probably a nice guy, and hell I'm not really even into the crop circle thing. But, it's no big secret that his research is funded by the Rockefeller Foundation.
http://www.colinandrews.net/CropCirclesAssessment.html


Maybe it's just me, but that's a bit of a sticking point. How much does this Rockefeller moula influence his research? What are the Rockefellers getting out of this? Are they simply interested in crop circles like everyone else, and want to help investigate?


Would that not be a fair question to ask of Mr. Andrews? I'm just sayin...


2) Disclosure disclosure disclosure, everywhere we turn we see that disclosure *must happen*, and it *must happen now*!!! Well, besides my old question asking why demand that kind of information from the very ones who constantly lie through their teeth, and apply deep mind control on their populations, there is this funding thing again. The Rockefeller Foundation is again *very* deeply involved in this, they are actually the ones who started the official disclosure movement in the first place back in '93 I believe it was.
http://www.paradigmresearchgroup.org/main.html


So if you have the chance to interview say a Bruce Maccabee, a Steven Greer or a Richard Boylin, (even Colin Andrews again LOL), shouldn't this also be up for discussion? It never is though is it? Are the Rockefellers simply just trying to lend us the old helping hand here yet again? Sure would be nice to at least hear the matter thoroughly discussed in an open and public setting, but me no thinky that's to be permitted...


I could go on and on here, but that's enough of stepping on toes for now. Let me just finish with this: When someone who has something important to hide is approached by a true journalist, it should strike fear in their hearts. When someone who has *nothing* to hide is approached by a true journalist, it should be a welcome occasion.


As an addendum, just because someone has said one thing here and another thing there over time, doesn't at all (necessarily) dictate that malfeasance is in the offing. You know what? I'll be the guinee pig for this one. If for whatever oddball reason a true journalist wanted to interview me, it wouldn't take them a New York minute to find my many extreme contradictions in web forum posts. Heck, just go back 1 year to what I was saying over at PA/ULTRA, and it is blatant that I was saying one thing then, and something radically different now.


But see I have nothing to hide though, so I would welcome any and all questions if my credibility were in doubt because of that. Vet away dear reporter, and I'll answer them all to the best of my ability. Here is one thing the reporter should ask at some point, if they were worth their salt at their craft: "So Fred, why do your posts from even a year ago suggest they may as well be from a whole different person. I find that interesting, and also rather shocking. I think our viewers may be scratching their heads wondering about that as well. Would you please explain what's going on here?" Simple and straight forward answer, I *was* a different person 1 year ago. Things have changed, and I'll be more than happy to lay it out for you how, why, and where the turning point was. How simple is that?


Now if I were getting let's say, some shady funding, trying to become another run of the mill internet guru, spreading disinformation, or trying to start a cult for just a few examples, I would not give this interview, not with a *true* journalist anyway. They would nail my hide to the wall in no time flat, as they well should. But see herein lays the rest of the problem (as I see it). I wouldn't have to sweat that, because I don't see any, or at least many true journalists out there in AM to be concerned about. Like taking candy from a baby.



Cheers

norman
13th March 2014, 17:24
It's all about how the beautiful people don't like 'negative'.

"It's negative to question a person's integrity"...... hohoho....

The One
13th March 2014, 17:31
Its all an illusion

Have you been deprogrammed lol click here http://www.pacinlaw.us/images/banner/wht_rab_on.gif (http://www.deprogram.us/enter/)

Highland1
13th March 2014, 17:52
Simple and straight forward answer, I *was* a different person 1 year ago.

I wouldn't be surprised Fred if that applied to all of us here.

I have often perused through things I have said and written here on the forum previously and thought, "did I actually say or think like that then?"

Makes one wonder how ones mind set will be a year ahead in the future.

Russ

Eelco
13th March 2014, 18:50
So in the interest of searchers for truth out there.. I agree with you Fred the truth as voiced by the alternative media is ever changing. it doesn't seem to satisfy and it is certainly not me. Now where have I seen those 3 characteristics before...lol

That said having been knee deep into an ascension cult. And took the advice of george to getvrid of my chacra's only to have them reinstalled by a godesses truth. therebis a pattern emerging. Somehow all that has shaped , changed and influenced me to where I am now. And I have to conclude I like where i'm at.

With love
eelco

Frances
13th March 2014, 19:25
You made me laugh Eelco, I remember your chakras being gone and then them being them put back. I'm still having a chuckle to myself now. Funny.
Frances.

ronin
13th March 2014, 19:31
when we start down the rabbit holes .
we set of with interest and a open mind.
we are seekers of truth and that truth is not just about the world out there but the world within.
there are levels that we start at and as the rabbit hole gets deeper,the more disturbing,surreal our reality becomes.

try to introduce a newcomer to the alternative media or the level of awareness you are at ,if your lucky some may get it and many will run thinking you crazy.

so we start of thinking UFO,s and ET are cool.
then we may think hey they eat us,
then we are harvested as a food source.

we see the cabel all around us .
the materialism,the false lies.
we learn of the political bull****,the vatican and bloodlines.

but we also start to learn of the gnostics,alchemy and personal spirituality.
we learn to raise our awareness and be more vigilant.

for everything negative that we learn there is always a positive.

the choice is ours to take.

modwiz
13th March 2014, 19:33
I am not into the alternative 'scene'. I work at one of the worlds biggest Holistic Institutes. I have to hold my nose more often than I would like but, the people it attracts are often fine people looking to enlighten themselves and like everyone, they have to try a few ideas on to see what works and 'feels' right for them. The personal quest that seekers undertake is motivated by noble reasons, IMO.

I have observed the growth of members in the different forums over the years. I see my own growth almost daily. As much as some utterings of my past cause me to have facepalm moments, it is all part of the growth of understanding. Especially of the self. Knowing thyself is a constant process, there is no final destination. It is really great stuff, IMO.

I use alternative media to get nuggets of info. Interest and utility of information factor in for my consideration. Biases and agendas are noted for what they are and parsed out from the actual info, if any exists. There is always the psychology of things to observe as well. Reading comments to ideas is the real barometer.

Without the alt media we would be asked to swallow the fecal matter being served on MSM. Alternate real time reporting is useful to me. The new age silliness that rides with the material is just part of serving 'the market'. Add in clueless, feckless and self absorbed interviewers and the picture gets crappy quickly. I do see a general dissatisfaction with the silliness developing. A good sign.

Good post, Fred.

Chickadee
13th March 2014, 19:40
Not that I ever had read the bible, perhaps one day- but im doubting it..
My Gramma told at 9 years old: " don't ever follow false prophets, and fight to your death if "they" ever want to put a chip in you".

Those words have stuck with me. :)

ronin
13th March 2014, 19:41
Its all an illusion

Have you been deprogrammed lol click here http://www.pacinlaw.us/images/banner/wht_rab_on.gif (http://www.deprogram.us/enter/)

fact is as we try to deprogrammed and be our true selves,we still have to live in a controlled society that does not have our interest at heart.
it is a double edged sword.

ronin
13th March 2014, 19:49
Not that I ever had read the bible, perhaps one day- but im doubting it..
My Gramma told at 9 years old: " don't ever follow false prophets, and fight to your death if "they" ever want to put a chip in you".

Those words have stuck with me. :)
there maybe some truth in this.......

http://gnosis.org/naghamm/gosthom.html

PurpleLama
13th March 2014, 19:59
fact is as we try to deprogrammed and be our true selves,we still have to live in a controlled society that does not have our interest at heart.
it is a double edged sword.

You have to deprogram the deprogramming.

sandy
13th March 2014, 21:36
Great post Fred, and hey what's up with changing?! Isn't life a process and one of evolving? Well that's my story and I'm sticking to it!!! hahaha Love Yah Bro'

BabaRa
14th March 2014, 03:24
One thing that consistently bothers me about the alternative media (and I know some of you may be getting tired of me lamenting on this LOL), is that for all the time and energy we put into listening to the alt media movers and shakers, and how seriously we take what they say, there is virtually NO vetting process what so ever. The only vetting I see going on, is that all of these movers and shakers go around vouching for each other's immense genius and credibility, and that's about what the vetting process is, unfortunately. They basically get to vet themselves, not a tough thing to do.

Cheers

I understand where you are coming from Fred, but I really believe you're preaching to the choir. I think most of us here don't believe what we're spoon fed on the alternative media or from New Age gurus.

Just because we post these articles and videos, doesn't necessarily mean we believe them completely or even a smidgen. But there is some truth in most of them -

We are being our own investigative reporters by posting and analyzing these items - talking and sharing our views on them. This is how we learn and broaden our perspectives as well as get a deeper understanding of ourselves.

Seikou-Kishi
14th March 2014, 03:37
I understand where you are coming from Fred, but I really believe you're preaching to the choir. I think most of us here don't believe what we're spoon fed on the alternative media or from New Age gurus.

Just because we post these articles and videos, doesn't necessarily mean we believe them completely or even a smidgen. But there is some truth in most of them -

We are being our own investigative reporters by posting and analyzing these items - talking and sharing our views on them. This is how we learn and broaden our perspectives as well as get a deeper understanding of ourselves.

I agree BabaRa! I expect often when somebody posts something, they are not saying "look at what I have found and put my confidence in", but rather something like "I'm making you aware of something that is being said in case it is something you'd like to hear about".


Not that I ever had read the bible, perhaps one day- but im doubting it..
My Gramma told at 9 years old: " don't ever follow false prophets, and fight to your death if "they" ever want to put a chip in you".

Those words have stuck with me. :)

My god I love your grandmother :P

Seikou-Kishi
14th March 2014, 03:43
Great post Fred, and hey what's up with changing?! Isn't life a process and one of evolving? Well that's my story and I'm sticking to it!!! hahaha Love Yah Bro'

I absolutely agree! There is the awful attitude all over the place that people aren't allowed to change their minds. It's as though they have to choose an opinion and stick with it, no matter what. They're not allowed to change their mind because they feel different, or even in the face of fresh evidence. They are shouted down as doing a u-turn and not having the courage of their convictions.

I'm far too whimsical and inconsistent for that lol

Fred Steeves
14th March 2014, 14:51
I understand where you are coming from Fred, but I really believe you're preaching to the choir. I think most of us here don't believe what we're spoon fed on the alternative media or from New Age gurus.

Roger that Barbara, point taken. This serves actually as an opportunity to clarify some different mindsets behind my postings, the same likely holds true for many others as well. Sometimes I'm talking directly to other TOT members, sometimes it's meant more for non members who may (and do) follow this forum, and sometimes it's just a need to assemble my thoughts and feelings about something in writing, much like the writer part of John Boy on "The Waltons". This thread was all three.

I know this is a savvy bunch here, I wouldn't hang around if that were not the case. In some ways my post yesterday was a bit of a controlled release of rant that builds up from time to time, and it just feels good to gather it all together and let it fly away when that happens doesn't it? Now honestly, I don't rightly know how many here do actual research into these public figures and their various projects or not. For the ones who don't, I try to show that the information gleaned from doing so can prove of value when making a decision about something, or someone.

I also wanted what I wrote "out there" for the newbies sucking up all this alt media stuff like a vacuum cleaner on steroids, just like I was 3 or so years ago. That little heads up to be careful may save a person or two just starting out from diving down too many unnecessary rabbit holes. I used to be an avid Glenn Beck fan, until one day I heard Alex Jones pointing some things out about him that really got me re-thinking things. I had just been unable to see it, but once I was shown things from a different perspective I could take it from there.

Staying with non members, but in a different way, when I say something like this---

Do they have a history of making predictions that never come to pass, like Ed Dames' "Kill Shot" for example? (Ed, where the heck IS that kill shot brother?)
I'm actually talking directly TO that person. In this case the ex army major.

Same thing here:

So if you have the chance to interview say a Bruce Maccabee, a Steven Greer or a Richard Boylin, (even Colin Andrews again LOL), shouldn't this also be up for discussion?

What I'm basically doing is calling them out a bit. A lot of these guys know each other to varying degrees, and these forums are of great interest to a lot of them as well, so I like to think (wrongly or rightly) that word tends to maybe get around. Maybe something like this: "Hey Ed, have you seen the guy on that little TOT forum that's been calling you out lately?" Ed may not give a chit, probably doesn't, but he knows at least one person is out there watching things with a magnifying glass. Then again though, maybe one of the people I randomly mentioned would actually like to sign up here, and give their side of the story. I would welcome that, as I'm sure we all would.

So anyway, I hope this little offing gives a clearer insight into how I post things and why. Sure I enjoy preaching to the choir every now and then as well, it's fun to hear an "Amen brother!" every now and then (LOL).


Cheers

Calabash
16th March 2014, 01:31
Whether you're reading information from the alternative media or msm, it's perhaps commonsense to take a "fence-sitting" approach and not lob yourselves hook line and sinker in any direction. Gradually, a pattern emerges. ime 40% of what we read is a mixture of truth and half truth, 5% or less is the truth and the rest is complete crap or wishful thinking.