Discombobulation

 

I look around the world and see a fair amount of discontent. This appears to be increasing rather than diminishing.

I look around my personal local world and see a fair amount of discontent. This appears to be increasing rather than decreasing.

There is an important point I wish to emphasise, the local and global are interconnected. Global discontent is just an accumulation of local discontent.

My next point is crucial, the local discontent is added to by my discontent.

As an Engineer I am motivated to identify problems and their root cause. There is a lot of discontent and I have identified the root cause, which I aim to develop and share in this blog post.

Large numbers of people feel weak and this motivates them to gain employment and promotion to places of perceived power. Many of these people like to exercise their power whenever they feel weak which is perhaps whenever they aren’t exercising their power.

I am going to have to stop writing these blogs. The above paragraph is a key ‘ingredient’ of the Nazi rise to power. Give those who perceive themselves to be weak some power over ‘normal’ people and they will become increasingly motivated to exercise that power with ever greater frequency and ferocity.

Normal people, when subject to such injustices will either push back or ‘appear’ to comply. To be fair there will be an ever changing spectrum of responses from ‘normal’ people. A few will go for self preservation and rise quickly up the ranks. These are the truly dangerous.

In the above ‘discussion’ I am suggesting that Hitler was weak and thoroughly enjoyed the ‘power’ he felt when giving his little speeches. Events allowed him to make speeches to larger and larger audiences. Anyway, I suggest this as a framework with which to view just one dynamic of power.

In our current world we have large numbers of weak people with positions of perceived power. It should be noted that this is all relative. A ‘normal’ person could suddenly find themselves with a great deal of power and find it terribly exciting and be unwilling to give it up.

Hopefully, that is enough of an explanation of that. When someone in ‘authority’ announces a new rule or initiative, the ‘weak with a little power’ will be very irritated by anyone who questions this new rule. This irritation is half of the discontent we see around us. The other half is the reaction of ‘normal’ people to a new rule that they perceive as unfair.

This brings us to the title of the piece. There is always some tension between ‘normal’ people and the ‘weak with a little power’. I must also point out that there is a spectrum of ‘normal’ and ‘weak’ people and that nothing is static.

I haven’t even mentioned psychopaths, who in this context can be perceived as spoons who stir the mixture / agitate the ‘ingredients’. (Just to see what happens and to exercise their ‘power’ too.) Psychopaths can get quite bored without a constant source of ‘confrontation’ to create, develop and enjoy.

I haven’t mentioned the narcissists either. A great many of these fit into the ‘weak but seek power’ group.

What about the sociopaths? These really struggle with the concept of a weak person thinking a job title makes them anything other than what they were.

For clarity, let us imagine three characters – someone weak with a little power who we will call the boss. Let us imagine a psychopath and a normal person all ‘working’ together. I suggest the normal person gets a job elsewhere but what generally happens is the psychopath quickly determines the weaknesses of the Boss and the normal person and deliberately preys on both of them for her amusement, creating discontent where there was none.

A less extreme example is where we have a ‘weak with a little power’ Boss and a ‘normal’ person. A ‘normal’ person will question anything the Boss says which appears to be stupid or perhaps unfair. The ‘weak with a little power’ Boss will hate this as all they really have is the ‘power’ and won’t be comfortable with that ‘power’ being questioned.

You might wonder why we have all these ‘weak with a little power’ bosses everywhere? They are easily controlled by anyone above them. They will not question the slightly more powerful than them as that would destroy their own power base too.

As this is a Critical Thought Blog, you ought be imagining this all into existence. This is just another lens for viewing the world. Just another viewpoint and nothing more. When you become aware of an interesting interaction between a few or many people, you can use this viewpoint and see if it helps with your understanding or not. What you should not be doing is deciding if this is true because it is only true from a single viewpoint. Many viewpoints are needed for the full truth and so a single viewpoint will never lead to a deeper understanding or greater awareness.

Should I continue? Have I written enough for you to develop this further?

Let us imagine that our Prime Minister / President announces an emergency measure that ‘normal’ people have a wide range of responses to. Very wide. The ‘weak with a little power’ will be deeply disturbed by those who do not display compliance or question the emergency measure. ‘Normal’ people find injustices troubling, which also adds to the general level of discontent.

Do you feel that the general level of discontent is rising, falling or more or less static?

1) in yourself

2) in your family

3) at work

4) in the UK

5) in Europe

6) in the US

7) China

8) Middle East

9) Russia

What do you think? Please give it some critical thought.

What do I think? Thanks for asking. Imagine a society with a dozen or so very powerful families who deliberately seek to give a little power to the weak. Who create, develop and nurture any idea that gives the weak power. Who fund any organisation that seeks to give the weak a little power over normal people. Who fund any organisation that can and does create fear in the population.

That is exactly what I think we do have and it is called society, also known as the real world.

Now, giving the weak power may seem like the right thing to do and may be it is. It is what we do.

Could we consider helping ‘weak’ people transform into ‘normal’ people please?

At this point do we even know the difference between weak and normal?

How many weak people, especially those with a little power, are aware that they are weak?

So, awareness of self is perhaps important.

May be awareness of others is of interest

Perhaps becoming free from fear and having some awareness might be beneficial?

Or am I simply trying to sell some books that I have published with Amazon?

None of your business

Is it legal?

I have mentioned before that whatever government says is legal is legal.

However, I believe that the Judicial system could challenge anything at any time.

Unless, the government declares a national emergency and then there are severe restrictions on what the Judicial system can do and what the mainstream media can say.

Any of this sound familiar?

The logic is flawless, governments can do anything they wish but the media and courts would soon stop anything too outlandish. Unless, the government first declare a national emergency.

As I write this on December 1st for publication on December 19th, I am currently living in an ongoing government declared emergency. Thus all government rules, guidelies and suggestions are fully lawful and we can be fined and other such things for any non-compliance.

My Government is led by Boris and opposed by Kier. Unfortunately, Kier opposes nothing. I could blame Boris and I could equally blame Kier. However, I will assume that they are both behaving in accordance with their conscience and in the best interests of society in their opinion. There is no real blame for either of these men. I disagree with both of them as my opinion differs considerably.

Is it legal?

Let us start with ourselves. If an elderly relative or friend wishes us to stay away from them, physically, at Christmas then I would say we ought to allow them to make that decision and honour it. No laws are necessary. No force external to ourselves is necessary. We needn't ask Boris or Kier for their opinion. Our own internal mechanisms of common sense, courtesy and respect would have us maintaining whatever distance our elderly relatives and friends request. We would quite naturally extend the same courtesy to strangers, should we have an idea of what those wishes are.

Each of us is capable, in a moment of peace, to determine our own course of action. Each of us can decide what our personal comfort levels are and communicate them clearly to others. Others can include friends, relatives, police, strangers, Boris and Kier.

Is it legal?

At the end of World War II there was a choice to be made. The winning side could choose to line up all the Nazi people and shoot them. Many favoured this approach. When I say many, I refer to governments. However, we know that we put them on trial instead. The governments stood aside and let the courts decide.

This is extremely important. Government rarely give up any power. In this instance they did. Many of the Nazi people said that they were only following orders. Much like the police of today. Much like other officials who find themselves with a little power over other members of society. Many Nazi people said they were following government guidelines, rules and laws and so were acting legally. The government had a legal right to behave as it did and so what was the problem?

Excellent logic but we are not computers. The Nazi men and women who were on trial were saying that what they did was legal and all we could do was line them up against a wall and shoot them or choose not to. This firing squad method of dealing with the Nazi people was legal too.

A different path was chosen. Now I fully accept that Boris, Kier and others won't be happy about my mention of the Nazi people. Let us be in no doubt, I am clearly stating that I now live in a Nazi flavoured country. We all now live in a Nazi flavoured world.

Is it legal?

There are instances when a government saying something is legal and police enforcing what the government are saying is not actually legal. So, is that what is happening now?

The first answer should be the only one that matters. Does it feel legal to you? If you think yes, then so be it. If you think no, then so be it.

Standing up against the many is always going to be difficult. If this is not for you then don't do it. Simply state that you are not happy, perhaps you are fearful and so I recommend that you simply comply. At some point you may reach your own hard limit and react accordingly. There is no rush or pressure to get to that point.

Is it legal?

In my opinion, whether or not this is legally illegal or legally legal is not my concern. I have clearly stated that I don't FEEL that it is legal and so it isn't. You may feel that it is legal. Fine. I might be wrong or you might be wrong.

The Nuremberg trials determined that the Nazi government acted legally but against the intrinsic laws of humanity. Basically, WWII led to a change in rules that no longer allowed Governments to do as they wished and those who enforced government nonsense were no longer allowed the defence of ‘we were only following the governments guidelines’. Now, is the current thing legally legal or not?

The Nuremberg trials allowed the intentions of the United Nations Charter to be written into law above that of government law. Regardless of emergency measures you always have four rights. Everybody has these four rights. Not just because law above government law says so but because they are inherent human rights. I have them regardless of what anyone or everyone on this planet says or believes, as do you.

The four laws above all government laws are:-

1) freedom from want

I don't understand this one. However, I can interpret it in any manner I choose and argue my case in a court of law if necessary. I shall give you an example of my interpretation. Should my government choose to create a law saying that I must take a vaccine in order to be part of society then I can refuse on the grounds that the law is not legally lawful. I might be wrong but I don't care. I will argue my case to the death.

2) freedom to worship. My interpretation of this one is that I have a right above that of my government to believe whatever I want. For example, should I choose to believe that this national emergency is unnecessary then it is unnecessary. Any laws, rules or guidelines based upon this national emergency can be ignored. I must respect the rights of others to believe that the national emergency is necessary. I do. We all have the freedom to be wrong. We all have the right to be wrong. Again, I am able and happy to fully explain my position to any court of law. That is the purpose of courts of law. (This might not be how they are currently being utilised by our governments.) The courts have a duty to act above and beyond that of government. As determined at the Nuremberg Trials.

3) freedom from fear

I don't understand the first two rules. I have interpreted them in accordance with my core beliefs. You are free to interpret them however you wish. (You may find yourself in a Court of Law explaining your position.)

However, freedom from fear is fully within my area of expertise. My government is behaving in ways to promote their opinions / beliefs / agenda by error of omission or by deliberate intent creating and sustaining fear. I can provide innumerable examples. Only one example is required to provide a legal basis for questioning the legality of any of the governments rules, laws or guidelines. Is it legal? I don't believe that it is and will act accordingly. No government rule, guideline or law will be followed by me whatsoever. I will be happy to discuss my reasons in court and I am happy to be proved wrong, to be declared wrong or to actually be wrong. I will OBVIOUSLY not impose my will over others. Masks and social distancing will be observed by me when in the company of people who wish to comply. That is just obvious.

4) freedom of speech

When the government declared a national emergency, then rules for opposing government came into force. Rules for mainstream media came into force. Rules for twitter, Facebook, Instagram and the rest came into force. ALL THESE LAWS ARE LEGAL BUT OPPOSE FREEDOM OF SPEECH. Thus all the laws, rules and guidelines are not legally legal.

Is it legal?

No, how can it be? We could simply wait for the Judicial System to acknowledge this basic fact or act in accordance and harmony with our own human natures. Remembering that the Nuremberg Trials have given everyone on the planet four human rights written into law above and beyond any and all government laws.

Our government has legally announced and is legally enforcing a national emergency and they have done this ILLEGALLY, is my honest interpretation of the rules created after WWII.

Many people will be fearful on my behalf and wonder if ‘they’ will they come after me.

Who is this ‘they’? Google? Police? Government? Courts?

All these things are just ideas. The police force is not a person. The government is not a person. The court is not a person. Society is not a person. I am not a member of society. I am a human being and my four intrinsic rights have been recognised as being above government law before I was born.

You may not be aware of the forces discussed in this post and their magnitude. I will say this, those who go against their own human nature will, eventually, be lawfully destroyed by forces beyond their comprehension. This same rule applies to collections and groups of people. Slowly at first and then abruptly.

Will this blog or post be taken down. I don't know. I might get a computer generated letter, again, which I will comply with, again.

Will a member of society argue with me and physically impose their will upon me? I don't know but it seems unlikely.

The real question is, who, when in my presence will choose to unlawfully (and against their own human nature) attempt to impose government folly upon me when they become aware that I am not fearful of either them or their punishments?

Anyone intentionally using fear to control you is breaking law above that of any government. They are breaking both ‘legal law’ and the natural law of human beings

I wrote this for me to read on the 19th of December. You can read it if you wish.

Proceed, or not, entirely at your own risk.

So, what are these risks and how serious are they?

We have a Government which is violating our human rights without any real push back. This emboldens Boris to continue down this path. We can certainly expect more and more human right violations. Where England leads, the world follows. Thus we can expect more and more human right violations the world over. This is just how it is. Each government success in violating our human rights encourages other governments to go just as far if not further.

Our four basic human rights have been listed above and each violation is not just against our human nature but against the law. Our governments are behaving criminally. Boris Johnson may not feel like a criminal. He may feel that he is protecting the vulnerable and weak and God may agree with him. The tier system is a human rights violation and as such is illegal. Needing a vaccine to use what was a publicly available service will be a human rights violation. Deciding how many households I can visit at Christmas is a human rights violation. All human right violations are illegal.

So, how many human rights violations am I able to tolerate? What about you?

I am beyond my limit. My hard limit on human right violations has been exceeded. My government has shown itself to be criminal in nature. Mainstream media is not allowed to discuss this as their / our freedom of speech has been restricted by government. This is also a human rights violation.

Governments do not like to be held accountable for their actions. Boris will feel as though he is a powerful and important man and as such his decisions ought to be final. Well, provided that he does not breach our human rights and his party supports him and the courts do not disagree and he has the consent of the great British public, then he is correct.

Human rights cannot be violated for any reason. Our governments are ignoring human rights for the greater good. Our governments have violated our human rights, are currently violating our human rights and will continue to violate our human rights with ever greater disregard for our human rights.

This is nothing new but governments are not above the law of human rights. Currently, human rights are being ignored. The government are behaving as criminals and encouraging others to endorse and enforce the very same criminal behaviour.

Many will say that when this crisis is over, things will return to normal. This is the message that the governments comms specialists are spending vast sums of our wealth to infuse into the general public. Removing the concept of basic human rights from our minds means that government gets more power over us. Government will see this as a good thing. Having the power over us to get us to behave 'better'. Again, many will say that this is a good thing because of 'reasons'.

This is a very unfortunate state of affairs. Boris may have the very best of intentions but the road to hell is paved with such people. We are very firmly on that road.

Our human rights were paid for with the blood of all those who suffered and died in WWI. After WWI nothing changed and we very quickly found ourselves in WWII. Our human rights were paid for with the blood of all those who suffered and died in WWII. Things changed and we got our human rights written into law above that of any government. Until March 23rd 2020, when we were unlawfully asked / requested / told / ordered into lock-down.

Perhaps our government is being very careful with its use of language. Perhaps in the court of human rights, they can provide official documents proving that each lock-down and tier was only a suggestion or guideline. That the police force had documents suggesting what they could and could not do and any and all human right violations were not authorised by our government. At some point in time, if we do not push back, they will abandon any such notion and the police will be asked and eventually be ordered, to 'go in hard'.

Bit by bit and little by little we are being conditioned to accept that which goes against our human natures. As we continue down this path we will get to match the atrocities of the Nazi people and then easily exceed them.

Now, most people will feel that this is an exaggeration that will 'never happen'. Even if people will accept that human rights violations have taken place and are happening they will happily state that they are justified for the greater good. As ever more human rights violations are forced upon us they will repeat the mantra of hands, face and space or whatever the current government approved chant is. Is this a real problem?

Well, that is the point. It all boils down to what you believe. Critically thinking is all well and good but ultimately all you get for your effort is an opinion. Albeit a very well considered opinion.

My opinion is that it is never acceptable for a government to violate human rights.

Others may feel that we live in exceptional times and that these violations are temporarily acceptable.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion under human law and that is not a problem.

What could be a problem is when an individual in my physical presence attempts to violate any of my human rights. Human beings respect other human beings innate rights. These rights have been granted legal status above that of government law and for good reason.

If you fear a virus then you have either been conditioned into that state of mind, which is a human rights violation. Or you have decided to fear it, which is a human right.

What you cannot do is violate my human right to decide to not to fear you, the virus, the government, the police or some other set of deluded beings who think that human rights are optional. You may believe that your human rights are optional but I have decided that my human rights are not optional and there is nothing you or anyone else can legally do about that.

Please give your own human rights some critical thought.

Consider sharing your thoughts with those you love.

Society does have laws but these are of no significance relative to our human rights.

My personal favourite human right is that one about freedom from fear. I have had bosses who relied heavily on inducing fear in their staff. Now that I understand that this is illegal I look forward to someone in authority attempting the same thing. My response being, 'that this (situation) is a human rights violation'. They will respond automatically and without (critical) thought, something about their job title or government law and I will simply state that, 'human rights are above that of your job title / government laws'. Then I will remain silent and watch their actions intently. I can be very intense with very little effort.

 Previously, I suggested using the phrase, 'none of your business' and seeing how that felt. Those who are comfortable to progress might consider using the following phrase with officials, 'Please explain to me how what you have said / suggested is not a human rights violation.'

That's it. This blog is nearly finished, as is the human race.

By your deeds and actions, feel free to prove me wrong.

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

This is none of your business but I sent the following email to my government via my local member of parliament on December 2nd 2020

Hello Mr Sheerman 

I am very concerned with a great many things that the government believes it must do for the greater good, in relation to the covid 19 virus.

Could you explain to me how my human rights have not been violated? 

The lock-downs are a human rights violation.

The tier systems are a human rights violation.

Fear mongering is a human rights violation.

Manipulation of data to create fear is a human rights violation

Only one such violation renders the entire government response to covid19 as illegal.

Perhaps you are not aware that we all have four basic human rights that have been written into law above that of any government? 

I expect that you will soon be supplied with a very carefully crafted document and this cleverness will not sway me in my understanding that the government is behaving in a criminal manner and as such I will not adhere to any rules, laws or guidelines that I believe violate my human rights. Fines will not be paid and my day in court will be a waste of limited resources. 

I ask that you consider human rights before you take or don’t take any official action ever.

A decent human being would not need to instructed in this manner. Why are there so few decent human beings in government, the police or the media? Or perhaps the real question is, why are they all being so quiet? 

No need to answer as I already know.

You take care and please feel free to spend your Christmas however you wish. 

David Watkinson

 

Resonant frequency for members of society

If I am about right with my resonant frequency hypothesis then how do I explain how society has conditioned almost all of us to be, most of the time, acting against our own natural frequency?

I don't need to. It means almost nothing to me. It is, literally, in my own best interest to have you believing in banks being wealthy and government being powerful.

So, why am I writing this then? Simply to 'balance' my previous post.

A Government must always keep us off balance. Never allowing us to get used to the feeling of our natural / resonant frequency. Except for a few rare moments of bliss when we are on holiday, for example. Something that we must work hard for all year. Not something that we can sustain for more than a few weeks a year. I have noticed how distressing I find the whole traveling to the holiday destination. I particularly dislike being treated as cattle in airports and on aeroplanes. Regaining your resonant frequency after all that is likely to be difficult in just a few weeks.

So how does the government manage to maintain us all at an unnatural frequency?

You need to have a think but my example is suitably complicated and convoluted. Event 201 was an exercise in pandemic control. Event 201 involves lots of think tanks and other nefarious institutions who are guided by the CIA into all believing the same thing. The CIA also ensures that funds are funnelled to the very people doing the very things that increase the chances of these global events occuring.

So far, so very conspiracy theory. Remove the word 'nefarious' from the above paragraph and research it yourself. Very quickly you will see that it is accurate and potentially correct. All the worlds experts then agree on how things should be handled and then the CIA has created a single powerful frequency. This keeps all society unbalanced. maintaining the staus quo of us all being at an unnatural frequency.

Not really something I wish to either prove or disprove. It is just an example of how we could be kept off balance. It is only 'correct' if my hypothesis on resonant frequencies is correct. I don't much care to be right or wrong. It is just a thought experiment for you to ponder at your leisure. An odd view of the world with which to exercise critical thought.

My actual opinion is none of your business. What I actually believe is none of your business. Why I really wrote this is none of your business.

I mentioned the CIA. I realise that I wrote a post or two about intelligence networks. You may remember that I said that the CIA was not an intelligence organisation. The CIA is an unbalancing organisation. It exists to maintain a powerful single frequency to unbalance us all. One of the CIA's assets is traditional media. The CIA like to keep a large menagerie of friendly journalists looked after. Imagine a single upsetting tone or noise. The CIA like to get their pet journalists to repeat the same tone over and over. Have I gone all conspiracy theorist again? Do some research yourself. The CIA have admitted what they do over and over and over again. You have to listen to them and not be deafened or overwhelmed by the single powerful frequency that keeps you off-balance.

Am I rambling again? Am I simply providing additional clarity?

Are the CIA concerned with my blog? Am I CIA?

It doesn't matter. I doubt there is a single person at the CIA who understands the actual role of the CIA that they are an integral part of. In other words, what they believe that they know prevents them from understanding exactly what it is that I do.

The thing that I do is amuse myself with my bemusement of society and the so-called 'real world'. What my impact is upon you is unkown to me at this time. All I can really do is apologise. Sorry. You don't have to read this. Still, sorry.

There you go. I have no idea where I am going with this or what I will waffle on about next week.

Be seeing you

I have just remembered where I was going with this. Find your natural frequency and notice when those around you attempt to dislodge you from it. Truthsaying is a part of this natural skill that rarely anyone knows exists.

Your natural frequency is where you spend most of your time being a happy bunny. Regardless of emotional triggers, injustices against you and others. It is where you get to say to God, 'thanks that was amazing'. Rather than the usual, 'what was that all about?'

I am currently considering taking a 12 year holiday. Well, I am going to have a 12 year holiday. The real question is, when will I start it? The answer is obvious to me and none of your business. At this point, you only need to consider if you wish to have an extended break from work. Then decide how you are going to make it happen. I advise thinking about this when in happy bunny / resonant natural frequency mode for human beings and not when wearing the chains of your social conditioning.

If you have never considered having a multi year holiday, why not? Is having a decade, or more, off beyond your ability to comprehend? Do you believe that I believe that I can? Basically it is down to belief. What do you believe? What you believe is none of my business but it is telegraphed loudly and clearly in the CIA talking points that are repeated without (critical) thought by the pet journalists and the consumers of that deluge of nonsense that is part of the 'real world'.

This is nonsense but it is my nonsense. Anyway back to the 12 year holiday. Considering my age, I will take my 12 year holiday, 12 years before my state sanctioned retirement age.

People, when learing of this will have a dozen 'yes but...' responses all crafted with great care by the CIA's handlers. think on that younglings.

I really ought to stop writing now and have a bath or cut my hair and then a bath. Perhaps I will have an espresso first? These are real world questions. My real world will be different from yours, probably.

Take care

Resonant frequency for human beings

I have written most of these blogs from a certain perspective. This 'style' is not especially pleasant. I do it because I a m basically projecting back to me, not you, from the future. Obviously, I am not actually going into the future, simply imagining that I am.

Well, that may explain my 'style' to you or simply be ever more confusing.

Resonant frequency is an engineering term and  I am an engineer. When I use human being, I refer to a state of being where you are 'free'. So, not at work or dealing with some bureaucrat or other.

Combining resonant frequency with human being I am trying to merge two concepts. I am attempting to create a bridge in your mind to shine a torch into an area you aren't encouraged to contemplate.

Perhaps you aren't an Engineer and you would like me, at the cost of my own time to explain it to you for free. Why are you expecting this? This is a critical thought blog so, if you don't know what it is, research it. Or don't research it. Stop reading this. Or continue reading this. I am writing it to clarify my own thoughts and record them for review, by me, in the actual future. Anyway...

Imagine or remember when you were on holiday, somewhere warm and pleasant perhaps, when you felt fully recharged both physically, spiritually and emotionally. I suggest that you were at your resonant frequency and were in your natural human being state. Use other words if you wish. I am using these combinations of letters to convey a very complex state of being. I am asking you to attempt to, temporarily, resonate with this blog post. Don't stress about trying to understand this post. The focus should always be on yourself first, loved ones second and strangers last. I am most likely a stranger to you. What I actually think and who I actually am is insignificant. What this post states is unimportant. What you ponder during or after it is the only thing that is relevent or significant. The same applies to me, the author or perhaps I plageurised it from somewhere. Again, none of this is significant.

So let us contrast the happy bunny on the beach with getting a tongue lashing from whoever for something you hadn't actually done. Just remember a time when an injustice was being acted upon you and a time when you were actually content. I suggest the happy bunny scenario is yourself when resonating at your resonant frequency. The tongue lashing scenario is when you are exposed to a powerful frequency which clashes with and obliterates your resonant frequency.

The punch line is simply this. Society operates at a very powerful frequency which we then find ourselves resonating with. I suggest that this is not our natural frequency. Otherwise we would be happy bunnies most of the time and not just when we experience a perfect moment on the perfect beach.

Now for the money shot. For the last week, I have been a happy bunny at work, at home and commuting inbetween. So, did everything go my way? Did everything go perfectly? No. There were a great many potential triggers and all failed to illicite much of a reaction from me. I actioned none of them. My natural resonant frequency was never overcome by any scenario in over 200 hours of actual life. Whatever the societal frequency is, however powerful it may be, my natural frequency was more powerful.

Feel free to change the words out for ones you feel more comfortable with. Feel free to change the concepts out to ones you feel more comfortable with. Ponder this for yourself. Consider this post to be a seed of an idea. Modify this seed of an idea as you wish and tend to it in whatever way you like.

Let us see if I can remain a happy bunny for another week or so.

Financially, I lost £1500 this last week (assets) and earned less than a third of that. The week before that I was on furlough at 80% of my wage. Happy bunny or idiot? Your call. I am aware of this loss but it has failed to trigger any sense of loss. I am untroubled with thoughts of losing over £1,000 in a week. I do recall losing £500 on just one day. I may lose more next week. I might gain some back. At the moment, the numerical valuation of my assets is unimportant. My happy bunny is unaffected by societies valuation of my financial assets. My happy bunny is pleased to have financial assets. They will be exchanged at a time of my choosing for something that I value more than the financial assets.

Am I rambling? Perhaps I am re-inforcing my initial point or simply confused it?

Whatever, no editing and no spell checking. If errors bother you that much, you are not a happy bunny.

My happy bunny does not see the need to 'polish' this post. An exchange of my time for a 'better' written article is not valued by my happy bunny at this time. Your opinion of me or my happy bunny self is none of my concern. Your opinion on anything is none of my business. Believe what you will. Choose to react however you wish, assuming you have developed that ability.

Be seeing you