What are your needs?

What are your needs?

Hakann trough A. S.

Posted on July 20 , 2024

 

My dearest brothers and sisters,

This is Hakann speaking. I greet you in peace and love.

What us galactics want to achieve is to help you get to this love-based society that so many of you are hoping for.

What we see as the primary, but also temporary obstacle to that is a lack of consciousness in the Earth collective. And you are all connected, and almost no one on Earth has reached full enlightenment yet, so anyone can contribute to Earth's liberation process by raising their consciousness some more.

Therefore, many of our messages lately have been focused on giving you tools that you can use to raise your level of consciousness. Today's article is in that same vein.

Specifically, today we are inviting you to ask: what are your needs?

Now, on one hand, we want to tell you that it's okay to have needs, including needs that society frowns upon, including needs that are supposedly unspiritual, so long as you're not hurting anyone. In fact, suppressing your needs doesn't work, because then your needs continue to fester in your subconscious.

On the other hand, it is possible that you genuinely don't have a need that many people have, or that society tells you you should have. For example: for many people living in a healthy and loving community is a psychological need, but certainly that's not a need for everybody.

As a third consideration: sometimes people's actual needs aren't at the forefront of their mind, because they unconsciously feel that they can't meet their actual needs directly. Instead at the forefront of their mind people have something through which they can sort of indirectly meet their actual need.

For example, someone's actual need might be to feel loved and to feel a sense of belonging, or to have a loving partner and healthy children. However, perhaps they unconsciously feel that they can't achieve that directly. And so what might be at the actual forefront of a person's mind is that they want to become richer or more successful, because then they unconsciously feel that they will receive love and approval from the outside world, and perhaps then they unconsciously feel that they can find a partner.

Or someone's actual need might be to be part of a healthy and loving community, but they're living alone in a city and they have no idea how they could achieve that. So instead, they're sort of satisfying that need by repeating political talking points among their group and getting a measure of approval and belonging for doing that. On Earth that's often called virtue signalling, but you could also think of it as "I-want-to-be-part-of-the-tribe, please-love-me" signalling.

They may have substituted their political party for their community. And they may feel that their community is relatively safe when their party has political power and their leader seems competent, and their community doesn't feel safe when their party might lose the upcoming election or when their leader seems incapable. Hence, for a long time, "Biden is senile" was just a right-wing conspiracy theory.

After all, the primary purpose of a person's mind is to ensure their own physical and psychological well-being. Understanding the world, or observing reality as it really is, or being logically consistent, are only secondary purposes of a person's mind. Hence, the importance of meeting your needs.

In general, if someone seems completely unwilling to face reality, it may be the case that their emotional well-being depends on them clinging on to a certain viewpoint, and their mind doesn't fulfil its secondary purpose (understanding the world, observing reality) so long as its primary purpose (the person's psychological well-being) isn't secured.

This is a hard problem to solve. Just telling them that they're wrong, even if that's true, may actually make them feel more unsafe and therefore dig in their heels even more. One solution is when reality finally becomes so glaringly obvious (such as Biden's senility during the debate with Trump) that denying it becomes more psychologically painful than facing reality. 

Another solution is if people eventually start feeling psychologically safe enough to be able to face reality -- and if you want, you can contribute to this by showing love and kindness to others. 

Or alternatively, you can just focus on taking care of yourself and improving your own life and doing your own inner work, because that indirectly helps them too.

So, when you are considering what your own needs are, we would like to invite you to try and look beyond secondary needs (such as "my political party must win the election") and look at what your actual, primary, underlying needs are (such as "I want to be part of a loving and safe community").

Keep in mind that you are a physical human. So there may not necessarily be any deeper and truer need lurking behind a desire to have sex or to eat tasty food, for example. And sure, technically sex isn't a need in the sense that you can survive without it, however for many people occasionally having good sex is a prerequisite for optimal mental health. If Tunia stopped having sex, yes she would survive, but she wouldn't have optimal mental health. I wish you could see Tunia's sad-looking face right now at the thought of her never having sex again, because it is so clearly illustrating that she wouldn't be living her best life without sex. Therefore, having good sex is one of Tunia's needs, and perhaps one of your needs too. Don't worry Tunia, it's only a thought experiment.

Also, part of being a physical human means that you may have hardwired social needs. Now, people are wired differently, but for many people, it is a fundamental need to have people around you who love you. For many of you, it would only hold you back if you were isolated and you tried telling yourself that you should just love yourself and that should be enough. Now, perhaps at a certain level of consciousness you genuinely don't need love from others anymore, but if you're not at that level yet, then it won't help you in the present to suppress your social needs. After all, if you suppress needs, they will continue to fester in your subconscious and they will hold you back.

So: I am inviting you to consider what your needs are, and to what extent each one of your needs is currently getting met.

If you want, you can share this in the comment section, or perhaps share the results with your partner.

I hope this was helpful.

I love you very much.

Your star brother,

Hakann

A. S.

 

For Era of Light

 

These channelings are exclusively submitted to EraofLight.com by the channeler. If you wish to share them elsewhere, please include a link back to this original post.

If you are interested in local meetings with other people also seeking first contact with benevolent ETs, then please see https://eraoflight.com/2024/06/19/hakann-local-meetings-for-those-seeking-first-contact-with-benevolent-ets/ . If you search with control-F for @, then you can quickly find email addresses of those who are organizing local groups. It's also not too late to post a new (secondary) email address yourself to start a new local group, because we plan to keep linking to that post for the foreseeable future. 

 

9/11 After 22 years

9/11 After 22 years

By Paul Craig Roberts

LewRockwell

Posted on September 11, 2023

Today is the 22nd Anniversary of the attack on the World Trade Center and Pentagon known as 9/11. A generation of 22-year olds has grown up after 9/11, and the event probably means nothing to them.  They learn that it was an attack on America like the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, and 9/11 disappears into history.  It is unlikely that anyone under 40 is much concerned with 9/11.  A 40-year old today would have been 18 in 2001 and would likely dismiss 9/11 concerns as conspiracy theory.  Today’s youth are more likely to be marching in support of sexual perversion than wondering about the source and purpose of the 9/11 attack.

Over the years I have reported the mounting evidence provided by scientists and by architect Richard Gage’s Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth until the organization he created removed him at the request of the government, effectively destroying the organization.  But for me the proof that 9/11 was an inside job has always been that no one in government and security agencies was ever held accountable for the worst humiliation ever inflicted on an alleged “superpower.”  Instead, it took a year before the White House even agreed to an official coverup with the 9/11 Commission, another in the long line of commissions like the Warren Commission that validates the official story.

....+ below

September 11th, 2023

Why We Need To Understand What Happened at Pearl Harbor

Lew Rockwell

9/11 After 22 years

Paul Craig Roberts

Argentina, Milei, and the International ‘New Right’

Edgar Beltrán

How Do We Reach the Brainwashed?

VN Alexander

Criminally Insane… America’s Top Diplomat Calls Depleted Uranium Munitions to Ukraine a ‘Housewarming Gift’

Strategic Culture Foundation

Reinventing Democracy

Charles Hugh Smith

Mexico’s Two Presidential Candidates – Soros Installed

Helena Glass

Pay Attention to the Everyday Horrors

Caitlin Johnstone

Welcome to the Real Estate Industry Apocalypse

Michael Snyder

To Your Health

Taki Theodoracopulos

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. — The Health and Freedom Candidate

Dr. Joseph Mercola

Burn Back Better; It’s Not Climate Change, It’s Psychopathy

Elizabeth Nickson

Population Collapse “Good for the Planet”, WEF Adviser Prof Sarah Harper Explains

Population Collapse “Good for the Planet”, WEF Adviser Prof Sarah Harper Explains

By Igor Chudov

Posted on August 21, 2023

 

Remember how depopulation was called a right-wing conspiracy theory? Things have changed, and ‘population collapse’, which can no longer be denied, is now good for us!

The Telegraph picked the perfect messenger to communicate the new way we should think about population declines. A high-level WEF adviser tells us:

Oxford Professor Sarah Harper is a very important person. The Telegraph article listing her credentials forgot to mention that she serves on the Global Agenda Council on Ageing Societies of the World Economic Forum.

Prof Harper is thrilled about recent declines in fertility:

Prof Harper told the Telegraph: “I think it’s a good thing that the high-income, high-consuming countries of the world are reducing the number of children that they’re having. I’m quite positive about that.”

The academic said declining fertility in rich countries would help to address the “general overconsumption that we have at the moment”, which has a negative impact on the planet.

Most importantly, declines in births will bring about reductions in CO2 emissions from wealthy nations, Prof Harper points out:

Research has found that wealthy nations tend to have much larger carbon footprints than poorer countries, as rich people can afford to buy more goods, travel more and do other activities that generate emissions.

Carbon emissions from high-income countries were 29 times larger than low-income countries on a per capita basis in 2020, World Bank figures show.

Population Declines or Population Replacement?

Here’s the strange part: If the leadership of the World Economic Forum wanted to reduce emissions from wealthy countries, I could understand how they would hope that population reductions would lead to a decline in economic output. Aside from moral implications, it is simple math that fewer people means fewer cars on the road, less food consumed and so on.

However, something entirely different is going on! While the population of local-born natives is no longer reproducing at the levels needed to maintain the population, new immigration picks up. It accounts for a larger and larger share of births!

While the number of births in Britain is declining, the share of children born to parents who immigrated from outside Britain has hit a record high.

Almost one in three children born last year were delivered by mothers born outside of the U.K. The number of births by women born outside the U.K. rose 3,600 year-on-year to account for 30.3% of all births. The previous peak was 29.3% in 2020.

When including the father, more than one in three children born last year had at least one foreign-born parent. In London, the figure was two thirds.

This development is inconsistent with wanting to reduce the populations of high-consumption countries. It seems self-defeating to celebrate birth reductions while simultaneously amping up the arrivals of new immigrants who work hard to live well, consume a lot, have many children and realise the ‘British dream’.

Please do not interpret me pointing out the above inconsistency as my hostility towards immigrants: I immigrated to the United States, worked hard to have a good life and am blessed with a beautiful family and two grown children. I am immensely thankful for the opportunity to live in this wonderful land of the free – and I am sure that most other immigrants want to live well and work hard, just as I did.

However, even though I am equally sympathetic towards immigrants, just as I am towards the natives, I cannot shake the feeling that Prof Harper and the WEF have an inconsistency between stated goals and actions that I cannot explain easily.

This inconsistency is not something I can quite understand: New immigrants want to consume just as much as native residents. Why encourage immigration from poor countries to rich countries if the goal is a reduction of carbon and other emissions that would occur due to declines in the population of rich countries?

• Source

MSM Attacks ‘Sound of Freedom’ Film As ‘Q-Anon Conspiracy Theory’

MSM Attacks ‘Sound of Freedom’ Film As ‘Q-Anon Conspiracy Theory’

By Jamie White

Posted on 07/10/2023

-

Numerous mainstream media outlets disparaged the anti-child trafficking thriller Sound of Freedom as being based on nothing but a “conspiracy theory” linked to “Q Anon.”

Rolling Stone, the Washington Post, CNN and The Guardian all condemned the box office hit, which is based on true events, as a baseless conspiracy born out of the Q Anon movement.

Rolling Stone claimed the film was “designed to appeal to the conscience of a conspiracy-addled boomer.”

WaPo accused the “low-budget” film’s star, Jim Caveizel, who plays former DHS agent and child rescuer Tim Ballard, of “embracing Q Anon,” while the Guardian called it a “paranoid Q-adjacent thriller.”

CNN claimed the drama injected “Q Anon concepts” like child trafficking to induce a “moral panic.”

Why left is appearing to seethe so badly over the true story laid out in Sound of Freedom that exposes the multi-billion child trafficking trade?

Many on social media called out these news networks’ bad-faith reporting in response, with some noting how they took on the opposite tone for the questionable Netflix movie “Cuties” in 2020, which is about a pre-teen girl who starts a “twerking dance squad” in defiance of her parents.

Sound of Freedom producer Eduardo Verástegui warned on Fox News that the establishment is “trying to take this movie away from theaters” because it aims to expose the $150-billion-a-year child trafficking industry.

“I’m just so grateful that people are showing up in theaters. I mean, we have, we have a goal of 2 million people in theaters for 2 million children that will be traffic this year. And we’re very close to, to get to that goal,” he said.

“And this is amazing. And it’s important because if we succeed in the in theaters, then the media is going to talk about this problem. People will not know about this, because there’s a lot of people they don’t know that this is real. They think that this is too far from them. It’s happening next door behind your house. And the more people if more people know about this problem.”

Sound of Freedom greatly outperformed box office expectations, hitting over $14 million on its July 4th opening alone.

Caveizel expressed gratitude to audiences for watching the important film after news emerged it was beating out Disney’s Indiana Jones and The Dial of Destiny in theaters.

Notably, Disney had purchased the rights to Sound of Freedom in 2018 but shelved the release, leading some to speculate that decision was not coincidental.

Be sure to catch Sound of Freedom in a theater near you!

Jamie White

Source