(Stillness in the Storm Editor) I cannot confirm if the reports offered below are accurate. Discernment is advisable. And if anyone does have any data to confirm or deny this information, please send it to me.
REGARDING KENT DUNN — BE ADVISED: I have received a swath of feedback about Kent Dunn’s claims and information. Some people say he is a total fraud or shill but offer no evidence to support their claim. Others believe what he says without question, citing how well it resonates with their own beliefs.
In my personal view, in some cases, Dunn speaks about real issues that can be verified with some research. In other cases—especially regarding certain events—Dunn’s claims cannot be verified. For example, he recently alleged that mass arrests were taking place in various locations around the globe, which cannot be verified using normal means—as the mainstream media will not report on these things even if they were happening. Some seem to think that because an assertion is either unbelievable or unverifiable it is untrue, but this is not a valid basis to refute a claim’s validity.
As a result of the difficulty in validating Dunn’s information, it provides an excellent venue to test and improve our holistic discernment skills. This is one of the reasons why I am sharing his information—not because I believe it blindly.
As a result of the sensational aspect of some of Dunn’s claims, some people dismissed them entirely. I suspect that such dismissal is based on, what I call, incredulity bias—the idea that something can’t be true because it is too unbelievable. But incredulity is not a valid reason to dispute a claim.
As an example, for centuries, in Europe, it was believed unquestionably that the Earth was flat. Anyone claiming otherwise was regarded as insane. In other words, it was incredulous to most people that the Earth was anything else but flat. Of course, the shape of the planet did not change to match people’s beliefs. More to the point, incredulity alone is not enough to refute a claim’s validity. Whether you are capable of acknowledging reality or not, reality itself remains unchanged—the Truth is not democratic. An incredulity fallacy is an incorrect belief that something is not true (or is true) based on how well it resonates with our belief system.
Why am I sharing this information?
1. listening to the claims thoroughly,
2. fact-checking each point against as many data sets as possible,
3. objectively assessing each resulting comparison to determine if it is true or not. In this way, one can move beyond the intuitive, gut, or credibility level of discernment and gain skill in assessing a claims plausibility based on what is said instead of who is saying it—facts and evidence available.
All too often, people reject information because “it doesn’t resonate” or they blindly accept it because it does. But in order to know precisely whether or not a claim is true, we must look past the messenger and focus on the message. Thus, whether you think Dunn is credible or not, what he says can be analyzed and discerned. Dismissing his claims without investigation is not discernment, it is prejudice and close-mindedness.
For now, some of the data remains unverified and unproven, and the catalyzing effects of awakening consciousness via holistic discernment is still possible. The opportunity to polish up your discernment skills is there.
In the following videos, Dunn discusses increased chemical spraying in some areas of the U.S., and a “chemtrail law” that allows this spraying on the public.
Yes, there is a legal framework in place to legally do all sorts of horrific things to people. In order to understand this, one needs to research legal policy, language, and law—especially contracts or Equity law.
In summary, the people of the world, including citizens of the USA, inc. are considered enemies of the State. This was legally defined through a tapestry of policies, such as the Act of 1871, the War Powers Act of 1913, and the amendments made in 1933, the Trading with the Enemy act, and—as Kent stated, PUBLIC LAW 105—85. I have provided a link to that document and another post that I strongly encourage everyone to become familiar with. Ignorance or dismissal of these policies WILL NOT protect us. We need to gain key knowledge and understanding and then act as a group of free thinking individuals to rebut each of the fallacious legal presumptions defined in the tapestry of statutory codes within the USA and any other incorporated body on the planet.
These “laws” are effective because we, the people, do not exercise our sovereign powers to rebut them. IN law, the most coherent and organized organization, acting with honor and precision, rules the day—which we can become if we do our homework and face reality.
WE are the “Enemies of the State” — Documented Evidence — And How to Change The Status Quo
Stillness in the Storm Editor’s note: Did you find a spelling error or grammar mistake? Do you think this article needs a correction or update? Or do you just have some feedback? Send us an email at [email protected]. Thank you for reading.