World's Largest English Language News Service with Over 500 Articles Updated Daily
"The News You Need Today…For The World You’ll Live In Tomorrow."
Note: This is a private letter intended for the sole and exclusive use of the patron/donors to the Sisters of Sorcha Faal.
Western World Ponders Sorcha Faal “Trance-State” Writings—While Failing To Remember Stephen Hawking Warned It Would Wipe Out Universe
31 August 2018
One of the many duties I perform for the Sisters on a daily basis is monitoring Western alternative news feeds—one of which is Rumor Mill News where one can frequently find breaking news stories that are being ignored by the mainstream media—that is one of the oldest American alternative news sites and is run by the remarkable Rayelan Allan Russbacher whose CIA agent husband, Gunther Russbacher, sacrificed his own life so that she could live.
In my viewing the breaking news feeds emanating from Rumor Mill News a few hours ago, though, one headline jumped out at me-- About Sorcha's Peculiar Writing Style—whose anonymous author moniker “hobie” wrote:
For what it may be worth, Sorcha's writing style is peculiar.
Each paragraph consists of just one complex or compound sentence with multiple clauses.
It's possible that it's simply an archaic style, a syntax deliberately taught by someone, somewhere, that was perhaps in vogue decades ago.
(I seem to recall that journalist and commentator Eric Sevareid (1912-1992) wrote and spoke in wonderfully complex sentences. But Sevareid's sentences always delivered their meaning with great clarity. Sorcha's, not so much. :)
Sorcha's sentences _delay_ resolution for longer than what we're used to these days. And the multiple clauses create detours along the way.
Those characteristics, taken together, tend to bore and disorient the mind - which can lead to the threshold of a 'trance state'.
Are readers being offered hypnotic suggestions by Sorcha? Not that I can see.
I'm wondering, though, if the peculiar structure of Sorcha's writing accomplishes some other purpose we wouldn't likely be aware of.
After relaying this article to the Sisters, and my never expecting they’d reply to it—as it’s impossible for them to respond to the thousands of such things they review each week—I was actually gobsmacked when the Sorcha Faal herself sent me an astonishing series of messages requesting that I compile and use to reply to “hobie” directly answer their question “I'm wondering, though, if the peculiar structure of Sorcha's writing accomplishes some other purpose we wouldn't likely be aware of?”—and that Sister Gobnait has granted permission for others to read, too.
Now anyone being familiar with the Goidelic Manx language the Sisters prefer to write and talk in among themselves, as it’s nearly indecipherable to understand, will immediately know the Sorcha Faal’s answer to the question “hobie” posed—with the main point to understand being that the Sisters reports can only be compared to a “thesis”, not a news article the majority of Western peoples are familiar with—and that Harvard University does a rather good job of describing:
An effective thesis cannot be answered with a simple “yes" or "no.” A thesis is not a topic; nor is it a fact; nor is it an opinion.
An effective thesis has a definable, arguable claim.
Think of yourself as a member of a jury, listening to a lawyer who is presenting an opening argument.
You'll want to know very soon whether the lawyer believes the accused to be guilty or not guilty, and how the lawyer plans to convince you.
Readers of academic essays are like jury members: before they have read too far, they want to know what the essay argues as well as how the writer plans to make the argument.
After reading your thesis statement, the reader should think, “This essay is going to try to convince me of something. I'm not convinced yet, but I'm interested to see how I might be.”
The opening of a thesis is refered to as the “lede”—an opening sentence or paragraph summarizing the most important aspects of what is being written about (in purely scientific articles it is called the “abstract”)—but in Western news articles sees the most important elements of a story being tucked down into the details, obscured by less important, distracting information (called propaganda)—and is a deceitful practice known as “burying the lede”.
As an example of this I present to you the headlines and ledes from the Sisters last report, and that of a New York Times article running today:
A new Security Council (SC) report circulating in the Kremlin today, dealing with the significance of no messages having come from the United States that might indicate their wish to mend relations or avoid the introduction of new anti-Russian sanctions, reveals an interesting discussion that took place between Chairwoman of the Council of Federation Valentina Matviyenko and State Duma Speaker Vyacheslav Volodin over why the “Deep State” apparatus had begun targeting former President Barack Obama as being a bigoted racist, and if this meant they were trying to incite a race war—and involved these US shadow government apparatchiks (officials in a large political organizations), yesterday, attacking US Congressman Ron DeSantis for telling his socialist black opponent Andrew Gillum, regarding their election contest to be the next Governor of Florida, that he shouldn’t “monkey this up”—that was immediately pounced upon for its being a racist and bigoted statement, but was, in fact, an idiom (a group of words established by usage as having a meaning not deducible from those of the individual words) long used by American politicians, most particularly Obama who, during his 2008 campaign, said: “It’s not as if it’s just Republicans who have monkeyed around with elections in the past. Sometimes Democrats have, too”.
“White men,” an obscure Australian academic named Charles Henry Pearson predicted in his 1893 book “National Life and Character: A Forecast,” would be “elbowed and hustled, and perhaps even thrust aside” by people they had long regarded as their inferiors — “black and yellow races.” China, in particular, would be a major threat. Pearson, prone to terrors of racial extinction while living in a settler colony in an Asian neighborhood, thought it was imperative to defend “the last part of the world, in which the higher races can live and increase freely, for the higher civilization.”
I don’t even have to point out to you which is the Sorcha Faal report and which one was written by the New York Times because it’s plainly evident which one conforms to having a proper lede, and which one doesn’t—but that, admittedly, also shows why readers such as “hobie” say about the Sisters reports that they “tend to bore and disorient the mind - which can lead to the threshold of a trance state”—and are words echoed on university campuses throughout the world on a daily basis by academics who have to read a never-ending number of thesis reports written by their students.
Admittedly, too, a thesis, by its very nature, can be “boring” when compared to sensationalized Western media propaganda, and a thesis, also, being able to “disorient the mind” due to its presenting a new and/or novel argument that conflicts with what the reader believes to be true—and is a psychological “trance-state” known as “cognitive dissonance” that occurs when a person simultaneously holds two or more contradictory beliefs, ideas, or values.
Remember though, and as even Harvard University points you towards, when reading a Sorcha Faal thesis, think of yourself as a member of a jury, listening to a lawyer who is presenting an opening argument—and asking yourself, based on the evidence being presented, has an effective, definable and arguable claim been made?
If so, then you are able to replace an outmoded belief and/or mindset with a new one—or reject it and keep your original beliefs and mindsets in place—either one of which will keep you from entering the “trance-state” of “cognitive dissonance”.
Most important for you to understand about every thesis you read written by the Sisters are that they are meant not only to inform, but to educate you, too—and that they have clearly described their methods of accomplishing this for nearly two-decades on their Main Information Page—wherein they direct you towards the linguistic methods and techniques developed and discovered by Ferdinand de Saussure and Pjotr Garjajev.
Ferdinand de Saussure is one of the founding fathers of semiotics (which he called semiology) that is the study of meaning-making, the study of sign process (semiosis) and meaningful communication—and whose true origins stretch back in time nearly 2,000 years ago to the early Christian theologian and philosopher Saint Augustine of Hippo whose most important works (The City of God, On Christian Doctrine and Confessions) formed the basis of Western civilization—with Pjotr Garjajev being the Russian biologist who discovered that what Western scientists called “junk DNA” could be changed by both the written and spoken word, and exhibits “hyper-communication” abilities where information is passed inter-dimensionally as though the DNA acts as a “Stargate” between this dimension and others—and that Western scientists have long theorized about in their modeling of what are called tachyons that are not constrained by either space or time, and has led to the statement being made that “theoretical physics is a weird place and is not too far off from philosophy”—but that all Christian peoples have long known as “prayer”.
To more fully comprehend all of this we must first go back to the beginning, the very beginning, where in the Old Testament Book of Genesis, Chapter 1, Verse 1, it begins saying: “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth…And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters… And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.”—and whose assertion of this truth was supported in the New Testament Book of John, Chapter 1, Verse 1, that says: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”
In 1964, the first modern day scientific equivalent of “The Spirit of God” that created our universe by the “Word” was theorized, and was called the Higgs Field—a field of mysterious and unknowable energy that theoretical physicists calculated existed in every region of the universe—and whose properties of could only be described in religious and/or science fiction terms—but to be proved to really exist needed someone to discover the main substance it was made of, called a Higgs Boson—otherwise known as the “God Particle”—and that, in 2012, was discovered to exist, with further confirmation of its existence stunningly being released this past week, too.
Upon the existence of the “God Particle” being confirmed as being real, the entire global theoretical physics community was upended because no one was able to confirm that matter or reality even existed—and whose “best and brightest” minds concluded that we are all living in a computer simulation they call “The Matrix”—and that (I’m NOT making this up!) some of the world’s richest and most powerful people are convinced is true and they’re trying to do something about it by breaking out.
Our generation’s most esteemed theoretical physicist, Stephen Hawking, though, who aside from losing a $100 bet that the “God Particle” would never be discovered, knew immediately the full implications of what its discovery meant and warned that it could one day be responsible for the destruction of the known universe—but that Christian peoples have known for a long time because it’s exactly what God said would happen!
At this point folks, I’ll freely admit to you that I’m not, nor have I ever been, fully understanding of what the Sisters are actually doing with their “thesis” reports—is it possible that they’ve tapped into the “Spirit of God” (or “Higgs Field” if you prefer) to use “Words” as a means to change the lives of people for the good?
I don’t know—but what I can tell you the truth about is that for years, thousands of their readers have written about how their lives have been changed after they’ve started reading the Sisters—the vast majority for the good, who nearly unanimously thank the Sisters for “leading” them back to God and the Bible—and a very few who write the most vile words about the Sisters I’ve ever had the displeasure of reading.
Likewise, I don’t know which of these two sides the anonymous “hobie” falls upon, but whom the Sorcha Faal, at least, believes is sincere in their motives, otherwise she wouldn’t have responded at all.
I’ll end this letter by THANKING those of you who have generously supported us this past month—and encourage those of you who haven’t to click HERE, scroll to the bottom, or read my last letter if you haven’t already, and support the Sisters in their mission for goodness and truth as much as they have helped you to know and understand the world you’re living in today—and, as always, please feel free to write me at email@example.com with any comments/questions/suggestions, remembering to put ATTN: BRIAN in the subject line.
All the best folks,