Zen Gardner Exposed & Spotlight on Alt Media

[Callista]

Dear Citizen No2, you bring up a very good point that many are pondering.

When you are made aware of a situation, it is sometimes required of you to take action. This is imperative if you are to bring truth to light. Brave people are standing up and exposing situations that need to come to the light in order to be cleared.

The problem comes in when we start to judge the people in the situation, and thereby putting the whole thing into a duality perspective. Then it becomes a 'he said, she said' tug of war which gets nowhere.

Also, remember Cosmic Awareness spoke of not making judgement against a person, but did not say do not take action if you know of a situation. Again this is an area that we will investigate deeper in our next discussion.

The video really only scratched the surface. There is a lot more to be discussed, and we are looking to do just that very soon. Posts like your's help us to know what direction to take in the next discussion and are very much appreciated.


much love

Callista

[boutreality]

Callista-
Is that Channeled information in their defense?
The brain operates in a specific range of frequencies, similar frequencies can be broadcast to obstruct its function and even make a person believe they are being spoken to.
-That episode of Conspiracy Theory with Jesse Ventura on HAARP gives a basic example how this works. Or,
-Check Omnisense's work (on PA) on reasons to doubt channeled information- he has shown a number of documentaries about covert electromagnetic manipulation and 'channeling' is but one example. (That's how I feel about all channeled info.)

"Cast the first stone" is a "muddy the waters" stance because Simon has positioned himself (been positioned) as a person to trust as a "guide" for people experiencing trouble in their lives/people that want to have a closer connection to an inside source of truth.
He has endeavored to make a living doing so.

I'm not looking for a witch hunt.
I agree with the one (apart from ZG specifically) salient point of this thread's beginning:
"What is the nature of the people bringing us these messages?" -"Why, once their information/past relations are exposed and they themselves are found implicit in fraudulent behaviors, are they still being listened to?"
These people, the ones expecting to make a living doing this, should be held to account for the validity of what they have to say and the effects it has on others.

Bill-
CW states, I believe in his Simon Parkes "Galactic Connection" video, regarding PA, he was "waiting for 'conversations to happen before he 'dealt' with PA"
Did you inquire as to what he meant by that?

[Citizen No2]

Here is the beginning of a post by Majorin, the first reply to the thread started by Bill re; The Anglo Saxon Mission, waaaaay back in 2010.

But, may I ask that you consider the following nothing more than a personal opinion on my part, and take it no more than that -- its a personal opinion, in which I'll also pose a few questions on my mind, and you may or may not have the time or even the inclination to answer, but I'd hope you do find time to read it, at least. So here goes.

Many people have always wondered about the "vetting" process for "whistleblowers" as part of the platform(s) that is Camelot/Avalon, and how, essentially, you and/or Kerry (I'm not asking you both, just yourself really) how you establish that the people relaying such information as this; on a wide variety of topics at that, are actually telling the truth? - it seems a silly question because the answer is somewhat obvious, in fact, and if I were in your place being asked this question, I'd probably say: "nobody can be 100% absolute about the validity of anyone's testimony, especially in a field known to be riddled with disinformants and disinformation, we listen to what people have to say, and then we can all come to our own conclusions based on our own intuition and independent investigative efforts, if even some of the information is valid, then its important to get it out in every way possible".

I guess , that in six years, we are still asking the same questions.

The silence is deafening.


R

[Bill Ryan]

Posted by Citizen No2 (here)
Here is the beginning of a post by Majorin, the first reply to the thread started by Bill re; The Anglo Saxon Mission, waaaaay back in 2010.

But, may I ask that you consider the following nothing more than a personal opinion on my part, and take it no more than that -- its a personal opinion, in which I'll also pose a few questions on my mind, and you may or may not have the time or even the inclination to answer, but I'd hope you do find time to read it, at least. So here goes.

Many people have always wondered about the "vetting" process for "whistleblowers" as part of the platform(s) that is Camelot/Avalon, and how, essentially, you and/or Kerry (I'm not asking you both, just yourself really) how you establish that the people relaying such information as this; on a wide variety of topics at that, are actually telling the truth? - it seems a silly question because the answer is somewhat obvious, in fact, and if I were in your place being asked this question, I'd probably say: "nobody can be 100% absolute about the validity of anyone's testimony, especially in a field known to be riddled with disinformants and disinformation, we listen to what people have to say, and then we can all come to our own conclusions based on our own intuition and independent investigative efforts, if even some of the information is valid, then its important to get it out in every way possible".

I guess , that in six years, we are still asking the same questions.

The silence is deafening.


R

The answer is one I'd expect everyone here to understand -- especially after six years.

We all (by and large, with some clear exceptions) simply do the best we can. Everyone does, who has integrity.

We're not the NSA, we don't have mail- and phone-tapping facilities, and we don't have Private Investigators on call. So we have to use our best judgment when someone comes to us and says: "Hey, I have a story." (That's a little glib. The messages we get of that nature are very often way more complex than that. Personally, I reject maybe 95% of them, and they never see the light of day in any form.)

It's always a judgment call, and different personalities make different judgments, for different reasons. Most people reading this will be well aware that Kerry Cassidy and I did not always agree on the credibility of witnesses, by any means. It was to a large degree disagreements about witness credibility that split Camelot, in the end.

It's hard (and rather unfair) to talk about this in general terms. Sometimes, we never met the person claiming to have had important experiences or information, at all, and everything was done remotely. (Maybe, even, a published interview, as in the case of Peter Levenda. I've never met him personally, at all.) On other occasions, we got to know a witness really, really well, over long periods of time, for literally many hundreds of hours, on and off-record, in person, as in the case of Henry Deacon.

If you'd like to ask more specific questions about specific witnesses -- what I knew, what I felt I knew, and the judgments I personally made, and why -- then please do. But your post here sounded like a generalized, unsubstantiated criticism of a lot of well-intentioned (and sometimes dangerous) work, and I'd suggest it was of very limited value.

In fact, it was actually a kind of subtle smear. You know this, and it was neither kind, nor appreciated. I'd have rather more respect if you came out with your own real name, your own real photo, and your own real e-mail address. Maybe, even, the real name of your own real dog.

And, of course, if you did some real interviews with (maybe) real witnesses. Then, as they say, walk a mile (or even a few hundred feet) in the shoes of people who are trying to do real work for the benefit of others.

We take the bullets... not you.

[boutreality]

Bill-

I recognize the lack of resources needed to appropriately check these sources. I appreciate the unneeded though levity providing "We're not the NSA..." part of your post.

If anything you've started outlining the need for people like CW in the Alt media scene.
Maybe Alt Media doesn't need him specifically, but it could use with some checks and balances, and some measure taken when allegations like these arise.
-Measures ranging from investigations to the adoption of a "Nevermind that guy anymore" outlook.

And I'll repat the question, asking it to anyone as I'm sure Bill is abusy man.

Does anyone know what CW meant when he said, I believe in the "Simon Parkes Galactic connection vid" he was "Waiting for conversation to be had before he "addressed" PA?

"Blame it on the web but the spider's your problem now." "-Blame it on the Tetons" by Modest Mouse

[Citizen No2]

Not a smear Bill......... More goading, and sad that I had to resort to that.

I asked a couple of questions in a post on the previous page, which had, I believed, a couple of valid points in relation to your statement about C W Chanter, points that I feel, if answered, have value in the wider issue of due diligence, and surely that must benefit everyone.......... What I am seeing is a mode of behaviour that mirrors the behaviour that criticisms are being levelled at. I am not looking for a fight or confrontation, just explanations and possible answers.

You know my real name, you have my real e-mail. I doubt a picture of my dog would be of interest...... I could be wrong.

Whether you respect me or not is a moot point. If I where to 'come out' with my name, picture, email and dog, would you answer my legitimate questions?

If you feel my post above was a smear, then I apologise for that was not my intention...... More frustration I suppose.

We take the bullets... not you.

Sorry Bill but I have to disagree with you on that one. Have you been held, as a direct result, of something spoken about in private on here, for 7 days and 8 nights under 24hr guard in a hospital (not a mental hospital)? Have you received an Osman warning from MI5? Have you been violated, the best way I can describe it, during a medical procedure, poking around inside me looking for something, during my being held? I well know about taking bullets thank you. Over this last ten years I now have a pretty good idea of what you can talk about without repercussions, and what you can't..... ergo, I don't feel the need to carry-out interviews.

I, as I'm sure like all here, value the work you did in bringing to light the information that you did with your work with Camelot, to me, some of it, holds great value. I am in no way belittling that, and again, apologise if you feel that I am somehow smearing you. As I stated, that was not my intent. I am however, asking if you could explain further your comment regarding C W Chanter and him being, in your opinion, knowingly dis-informing. That is all.

boutreality:

Does anyone know what CW meant when he said, I believe in the "Simon Parkes Galactic connection vid" he was "Waiting for conversation to be had before he "addressed" PA?

"Blame it on the web but the spider's your problem now." "-Blame it on the Tetons" by Modest Mouse

I haven't seen all of that vid so can't offer any insights on that one.

R

[betoobig]

i trust we can start focusing in forgiveness and compassion, this(meaning Zen´s issue) is not even the tip of the iceberg for us to shallow, and you know it.
Much love

[Agape]

In risk of coming out as little light headed here .. sometimes, speaking the truth does not benefit others a lot but the person himself . At least so it seems to me , in this case .. something he needed to get off his chest .

Obviously ..again.. and quote your impeccable determination to find the truth , vis above , guess what ?
Does anyone have any means to figure out right now, as we talk , if this person called Don Fergusson exists ( ok, he does ) and spent 27 years in the COG and what did he do there , exactly ?

Hypothetical question , I presume but sometimes, it may be relevant . What if he was somewhere else , working for the NSA ? Would you believe him this time or the other time ?
Who cares , right ?

So lets presume he's some kind of honest person and held this information within for a decade and had to let it out because someone or something prompted him to share or had to , who benefits .
The trick we all may be stumbling upon so often with these types of 'revelations' is that we're trying to learn something , and benefit at all costs but it does not work .
It's only betraying your self .

COG and many other dangerous sects were around for long time . It may be very important topic to discuss but in fact, the topic itself is so sensitive and no ones favourite so I'm certainly rather avoiding it .

His past is his past and he will have to deal with it , whatever it means.

I don't know much about Zen Gardner and what type of followers and students he gathered but if they believed him before and left now they are hardly good friends and 'people of integrity' either .
It more looks like one of those staged internet shows to me .

As with many others I've seen around , talking a lot .. to everything, world politics to philosophy to science to religions , there are people who consider themselves 'all knowing' and experts in everything and that's a sign of total lack of integrity for me ..because , guess what , these days , every subject in itself is so vast that to learn and know something for real you have to go deep and be who you are and stop caring if people can benefit immediately or not instead being 'everything at the same time' , a witness, a researcher, a teacher , a victim , founder of new religion and much more ..


Enough , right But maybe he wants to prompt an investigation to that cult really and that would be a worthy cause , in my opinion .

[Cidersomerset]

I had a scan of of google and there was only this article calling out
everyone to comment on the situation

August 22, 2016
https://aplanetruth.info/2016/08/22/...r-zen-gardner/

What is the rush ? We all know it now we can look at Zen's future work
with this insight . I suggest calm down and pick this up as more info
comes out. As far as I'm aware he has not committed a crime , poor
judgement with thousands of others back then. People have and still
are attracted to cults over the world. If he is directly or indirectly
responsible for abuse he has to live with it . If he is not then the witch
hunt maybe premature . We can only wait and see how it develops,
falling out with each other is not going to help the situation....

[Atlas]

Posted by boutreality (here)
"Blame it on the web but the spider's your problem now." "-Blame it on the Tetons" by Modest Mouse

Alright, try this one: [warning harsh content] http://psychohistory.com/books/the-o...ids-in-tribes/ and let me know what can we do to put Zen Gardner in jail.

[Bill Ryan]

Posted by Citizen No2 (here)

I am however, asking if you could explain further your comment regarding C W Chanter and him being, in your opinion, knowingly dis-informing. That is all.

Okay, you did ask for it (twice). But the pettiness, irrelevance and unintelligence is staggering. Be warned!

Here, on full record, is an e-mail reply I sent to CW Chanter about an hour ago. Nothing's been changed.

Then, ... please.

CW:

1) I'll reply to you in more depth when you provide full details about the lie (and it was a lie, meaning a statement that was knowingly and maliciously invented) that I "had stolen something from Christine when she was in the shower".

(OMG. Insert facepalm here. The NWO is destroying the human race and all our freedoms, and you pick that to talk about. What does that say about your focus and interest?)

Listen very, very carefully. That never happened. Nothing LIKE that ever happened. I never stole anything from Christine, ever. I never would, never could, and it doesn't even make any sense. (What did I steal? Her lipstick? Her clothes? Her cookies?)

Be intelligent. You're being used, here.

2) Re Corey: I have on full, detailed, written record the correspondence I had with him at the time re the publication of his interview, before it was released. He was excited and enthusiastic -- and was consulted fully. Of course he was. I'd never release an interview without the full okay of the person concerned.

Whoever told you the opposite is lying. Christine was there the whole time, and knows exactly what happened.

Again, to repeat: I have this in writing, from Corey. I'll forward that to you if you like, and you can in turn publish it or forward it to anyone you choose. It's on another computer which I will be able to access in a few days' time. Do you think I'd be saying this if it wasn't true? This e-mail here is on record. Send it to anyone, as long as it's unedited and in full.

Here's a very, very strong recommendation: always check your facts before making statements that do, or can, cause damage to others.

I do, absolutely, want a clear reply from you regarding the very, very silly 'shower' thing. I want you to tell me who else you told (because you hardly kept it to yourself!), and, importantly, who told it to you. If it was a 'confidence', you should never have shared that kind of silly gossip with anyone. At least, check things with me first that are clearly attempted smears. You can check ANYTHING with me. I'm pretty easy to find.

You're not doing very much to earn the respect of anyone out there. In fact, consciously or otherwise, you're really doing quite a lot of harm.

You're a disinformationist because what you say and write is part truth, part falsehood. That's what disinformation is. And you're 'knowing', because you are absolutely well-aware that you do not check your facts.

You may, somewhere in there, mean well. But if so, you're totally being used by others for agendas of their own. Please wake up and fully realize that. One doesn't have to be Sherlock Holmes to figure it out. And you're probably a lot brighter than you present yourself as being.

Re Zen Gardner, you're probably right, and re Simon Parkes, I know you are. Re David Icke, you should be ashamed. His hands are crippled with arthritis, and he can hardly hold a pen -- let alone shake hands normally.

Get back to me, and please answer my questions in full. Thanks. And finally, please cut the 'Mr Ryan' crap. You have to realize you come over as insincere and fawning. -- Bill

Once more... . This thread is about far more important things. Really.

[Cidersomerset]

Still looking.......



Biggi’s Perspective

By Zen Gardner -
22/08/2016

There has been a ****storm of note akin to the witch hunt of the middle ages raging on the
Zen Gardner issue. I have seen a lot of people comment on it with comments ranging from
just plain disbelieve to outright name calling online. People have erased Zen’s archives from
their sites without even speaking to him. I have seen it all come past. And I know for a fact
that 99.9% of these people a) Don’t know Zen personally and are only copying the rest of
public opinion like a herd of sheep watching the latest episode of big brother and b) haven’t
contacted Zen to get his side of the story.

Read more....

http://www.zengardner.com/biggis-perspective/

[music]

My wife read me a very long blog post on the whole Zen Gardener-gate affair by someone who had had a few articles posted on ZGs site, and had skyped with him twice yet was portraying himself as a true friend concerned for ZGs soul. What I got from the extended ramblings of a person who obviously very much likes the sound of his own voice was that this person is so obviously not ‘clear’. So, a lengthy criticism of one person by another person showing all the same psychological flaws he is accusing the first person of. An undercurrent of ‘fan’ poaching (hence unenlightened agenda) was plainly there for all to see, a jockeying for guru status, traffic generated to websites, we all know the sort of thing – the very antithesis of enlightened function.

The fact that Zen Gardener calls himself that is not because he is hiding, but because like many people, when he sought to reinvent himself, a name change was logical. The concept of the Zen Garden may be unknown to a few here; he chose the name based on that is my assumption.

I have no idea whether Zen Gardener knowingly participated in child abuse. I have no idea what he knew or suspected. I have no idea about his departure from the cult, the thought processes that led to it, the soul searching (or otherwise), the emotional or psychological spurs and effects.

I have no idea, and neither does anyone else here.

Zen Gardener is not communicating? So what, this is not a sign of guilt, merely of a character that needs refinement. As do the characters of us all. By all means seek the truth, but mobilising the shadow and taking a group dynamic down to the lowest common denominator is never, ever productive. And let’s not mince words, when we write in vitriol, when we accuse and abuse, what we are doing is hiding from our own repressed shadow elements. We should try to resist the witch hunt, rather see our desire for one as indication that we have internal work to do.

Judge not lest ye be judged.

Try to give the guy time to overcome his fear, shock, and disorientation, gather his thoughts, search his soul, and respond. We are all human, so we are all fallible; we have all sinned in some shape or form; we would all like to think that after periods of growth and clarity that leave us more enlightened, and inch us closer to our true nature of loving perfection, that others will understand, and forgive us any transgressions over which we are honestly repentant, and for which we have made some kind of amends.

[boutreality]

Atlas, I'm not sure ZG qualifies for charges.
The crime was a fixture of the closed culture that was the Children of God, later called The Family.
Those facts have yet to be sorted, the line of complicity yet to be drawn.

I'm not sure what more useful comments can be made regarding that.
I know I won't traffic his site (not that I ever did) - I believe I posted there once or twice long ago.

I'm still here because of the concept of harmful fraudulent personalities in the Alt Media.

In the Simon Parkes' case- he acted in a way that throttles the line between "unlicensed therapist" and (apparently, in some case) unethical behavior with clients- not the least of which is sex under false pretense, if CW can back those claims.
He started a somewhat cult-like following; he collects (has collected ) money for giving people what he claims they 'need' - counseling; "soul-readings" etc.
That is disturbing and it should be addressed.

[Flash]

I think pedophilia has to be denounced and stopped and those who have been aware of it and did not stop it shall be questioned, no doubts about that.

However, I must say that CW Chander gives me the creep as well. His eyes are not forthright, his movements do not fit with the words, something is off with him.

Also, he has sanpaku eyes, all along the video, very noticeable (I rarely have seen people in which it was so noticeable as with him). Which gives me the creep further.

In non verbal langiuage, Sanpaku eyes are very significant. Usually, only one eye is sanpaku, and will show heavy mental/physical tiredness if it is the right eye of the person, or emotional imbalance if it is the left eye. However, when it is both eyes as in CW Chander, it is quite surprising because not frequent. It shows psychic imbalance usually.

I am happy he found out about some potential pedophilia cases, but I would not trust him either.

Some known people who had sanpaku eye (one or two):

John F. Kennedy[5]
Abraham Lincoln
Adolf Hitler
Sal Mineo[6]
Marilyn Monroe[5]
Robert Pattinson[5]
Sylvester Stallone[6]
Natalie Wood[6]
Osama bin Laden
Yitzhak Rabin
Jill Dando
Adi Da
Salvador Dalí
Roy Cohn
Ted Bundy
Omar Mateen

Omar Mateen pic

Here is an extract of the Chinese knowing about Sanpaku eyes, which are similar to those found in non verbal language studies:

Sanpaku gan (三白眼?) or Sanpaku (三白?) is a Japanese term meaning “three whites,” which originated from a Chinese term[citation needed]. It is generally referred to in English as "sanpaku eyes" and refers to eyes in which the white space above or below the iris is visible.

According to Chinese medical face reading, when the white part of the eye, known as the sclera, is visible beneath the iris, it represents physical imbalance in the body and is claimed to be present in alcoholics, drug addicts and people who over-consume sugar or grain. Conversely, when the upper sclera is visible it is said to be an indication of mental imbalance in people such as psychotics, murderers, and anyone rageful. Stress and fatigue may also be a cause.[1] In either condition, it is believed that these people attract accidents and violence.

In August 1963, macrobiotic-diet leader George Ohsawa predicted that President John F. Kennedy would experience great danger because of his sanpaku condition.[2][3]

In 1965 Ohsawa, assisted by William Dufty, wrote You Are All Sanpaku which gave this perspective on the condition:
For thousands of years, people of the Far East have been looking into each other's eyes for signs of this dreaded condition. Any sign of sanpaku meant that a man's entire system — physical, physiological and spiritual — was out of balance. He had committed sins against the order of the universe and he was therefore sick, unhappy, insane, what the West has come to call "accident prone". The condition of sanpaku is a warning, a sign from nature, that one's life is threatened by an early and tragic end.[4]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanpaku

Posted by Citizen No2 (here)
I held off for a few days to see if anyone else would pick-up on this, evidently not. This is an issue that has troubled me for sometime, troubled me enough to take some time-out, leave my home, visit some countries and places and meet some very interesting people. I found great comfort that there is a ground-swell taking place of like-minded individuals, individuals that have had enough of being lied to, of being deceived and being presented with ever more fanciful stories that are served-up without so much as basic due diligence.

I shall start this off with an introduction........C W Chanter. You can watch his channel here:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCzE...fi0Vqrg/videos

I do not agree with C W Chanter's stance on a lot of what he has to say, but then again, if I did that would be pretty weird.

What I do like about C W is that he will not take things that are reported in Alt Media at face value without checking facts and proper due diligence. I assume his work as an attorney-at-law stands him in good steed in this respect.

My second introduction is this gentleman, Mr. Phil Stone. He runs this blog, readable here:
http://www.philosophers-stone.co.uk

Again, a man that likes to dig a little deeper, who likes to verify and fact-check and who has posted some very disturbing findings regarding.............. Zen Gardner.


Zen Gardner has been exposed as a long-time leader in the child-abusing cult, The Children of God, formerly The Family. The details are disgusting, as one would expect. You can read about the how's and why's here:

http://www.philosophers-stone.co.uk/?p=13437

And watch this expose by C W Chanter here:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=aPv3vOoFem0

In the expose above, another 'whistleblower' exposed is Bill Wood, real name William Brockbrader and a convicted paedophile and fantasist (http://wtkr.com/2012/05/31/newschann...hic-abilities/), a Project Camelot favourite. I must state here that in the expose, C W Chanter links to David Icke, Kerry Cassidy and Bill Ryan, Mel C and the CCN. I personally find that a bit harsh as in these internet days, guilty-by-association can be only a click away, so on that point I do not totally agree with C W Chanter.......... BUT, it does raise a very important question about due diligence.

If you are presenting to the World a whistleblower with an outrageously fantastical story, stories so mind-blowing that they have the potential to shift peoples paradigms, then does the responsibility to check, check and check again not fall into your lap? It is an interesting question.

I have it on very good authority that this is only the start, that the spotlight of truth is about to shine bright upon some of those that have sought to elevate themselves as Truth Warriors. I also believe that a couple of Project Camelot's big hitter whistleblower's have been trying to hide damaging information regarding their past involvement with some sick s**t........... And also a man that has appeared on more than a few threads here recently. Watch this space, as they say.

This has the potential to be the single most damaging episode in the Alt Media scene. When we look back to see who to blame for the discrediting of Alt Media, we need only to look in the mirror. In our thirst for ever more fanciful information, nobody stopped to check the source of the water. I am of the opinion that this is what is needed, it is an essential cleansing of the polluted information sphere, but this phase will be more damaging in the interim than any Government psy-op.

This is about to get very messy and there will be some ugly, and disturbing, fallout.



R

[boutreality]

Citzen No 2-
Re: What CW says about "addressing" PA is in the linked video. I believe I set it to start about 10-20 seconds before the statement. He cusses a decent amount -over the course of the whole video- I find his demeanor entertaining but I am certain it is not for all.

https://youtu.be/ghXDKW-Yxu0?t=36m15s

Flash-
That is an interesting find! I never knew there was a term for that or a condition associated with it. I wouldn't be surprised to find out he's a regular pot smoker (in the least); that his diet is high in grain and sugar- and from the Chinese source you cite, that may be the cause. He is an admitted past member of Cults -Hare Krisna; Adi Da; and Scientology -this may account for psychic imbalances.
Whatever it is, the notion of checking into people who are positioned as "leaders" in the Alt Community is valuable, - he's one person doing that.
Are there any others?

[Atlas]

Posted by Flash (here)
[...] Marilyn Monroe [...]

Marilyn Monroe (Can't take my eyes off you)
www.youtube.com/watch? v=wdBi9JWlkrY [dead link]

[Flash]

In this video, Marilyn's sanpaku eyes are not quite obvious. Here in this pic below, they are more obvious. To observe Sanpaku eye, the person has to look straight at you or straight in the camera lens, otherwise just looking up or down will show your sclera at the bottom or top of your eye, which is normal.



another article on this here http://www.listal.com/list/sanpaku-eyes



When in both eyes, it is usually related to heavy psychological/emotional/psychic trauma in the past and shows remaining imbalances. Monroe having had a schizophrenic mother and having had to care for herself very early would explain this.

What were the trauma in Chander's past and how is his actual balance? This is truly my question. Now, I may be wrong, who knows, but knowing what I know, I would question gently with compassion anyone with sanpaku eyes.

Posted by Atlas (here)

Posted by Flash (here)
[...] Marilyn Monroe [...]

Marilyn Monroe (Can't take my eyes off you)

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=wdBi9JWlkrY

[Cristian]

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)

I'll reply to you in more depth when you provide full details about the lie (and it was a lie, meaning a statement that was knowingly and maliciously invented) that I [I]"had stolen something from Christine when she was in the shower".

Funny

Asked Christine - while she is baking a pie - what was stolen from her when she was in the shower.

She was like laughing her ass off.

Nothing was stolen from her .

She is a known cookie monster . And if Bill ate one of her cookies while she was in the shower ...he's damned for eternity

[Citizen No2]

Phhhheewww........... That was painful, to get to that point.

1) I'll reply to you in more depth when you provide full details about the lie (and it was a lie, meaning a statement that was knowingly and maliciously invented) that I "had stolen something from Christine when she was in the shower".
(OMG. Insert facepalm here. The NWO is destroying the human race and all our freedoms, and you pick that to talk about. What does that say about your focus and interest?)
Listen very, very carefully. That never happened. Nothing LIKE that ever happened. I never stole anything from Christine, ever. I never would, never could, and it doesn't even make any sense. (What did I steal? Her lipstick? Her clothes? Her cookies?)

Be intelligent. You're being used, here.

2) Re Corey: I have on full, detailed, written record the correspondence I had with him at the time re the publication of his interview, before it was released. He was excited and enthusiastic -- and was consulted fully. Of course he was. I'd never release an interview without the full okay of the person concerned.

Whoever told you the opposite is lying. Christine was there the whole time, and knows exactly what happened.

Again, to repeat: I have this in writing, from Corey. I'll forward that to you if you like, and you can in turn publish it or forward it to anyone you choose. It's on another computer which I will be able to access in a few days' time. Do you think I'd be saying this if it wasn't true? This e-mail here is on record. Send it to anyone, as long as it's unedited and in full.

Here's a very, very strong recommendation: always check your facts before making statements that do, or can, cause damage to others.

I do, absolutely, want a clear reply from you regarding the very, very silly 'shower' thing. I want you to tell me who else you told (because you hardly kept it to yourself!), and, importantly, who told it to you. If it was a 'confidence', you should never have shared that kind of silly gossip with anyone. At least, check things with me first that are clearly attempted smears. You can check ANYTHING with me. I'm pretty easy to find.

You're not doing very much to earn the respect of anyone out there. In fact, consciously or otherwise, you're really doing quite a lot of harm.

You're a disinformationist because what you say and write is part truth, part falsehood. That's what disinformation is. And you're 'knowing', because you are absolutely well-aware that you do not check your facts.

You may, somewhere in there, mean well. But if so, you're totally being used by others for agendas of their own. Please wake up and fully realize that. One doesn't have to be Sherlock Holmes to figure it out. And you're probably a lot brighter than you present yourself as being.

Re Zen Gardner, you're probably right, and re Simon Parkes, I know you are. Re David Icke, you should be ashamed. His hands are crippled with arthritis, and he can hardly hold a pen -- let alone shake hands normally.

Get back to me, and please answer my questions in full. Thanks. And finally, please cut the 'Mr Ryan' crap. You have to realize you come over as insincere and fawning. -- Bill

OK, thank-you for that insight Bill. I guess, by the look of your email to him, that you are talking about lies and tittle-tattle gossip.......... Can't be any fun to descend to such a level.

As far as keeping this thread on-topic, the title is: Zen Gardner Exposed & Spotlight on Alt Media, so I think this discussion is still within the premise of the thread. You may think it a distraction but I think that this is a very important dialogue to have.............. tIt may also warrant consideration that a Sticky thread be started, for the benefit of all, that names and explains those putting themselves 'out-there' as something other than what they would have people believe? Maybe with Mod approval before posts are publicised to a wider audience? It may hold some value for people new and old in the community, and it may help in people making a more informed choice in who they decide to listen to and help in avoiding that horrible feeling when you come to the realisation that you have been lied to.


R