Oct 2, 2025 — Recording 4 (12:49) (Part 3)
Oct 2, 2025 — Recording 4 (12:49)
Audio: 20251002-124904.mp3
**12:49pm, exploring the pattern of suggestion that we are all experiencing “a world of opposites” and how considering aligning ourselves with the Japanese philosophy of Kaizen may help us move forward in our journey towards acknowledgement without punishing each other organizationally, where applicable and individually.*
"File duration: 1 minutes and 26 seconds"
"It is 12:49 p.m., Thursday, October 2nd, 2025." [ 00:02 - 00:08 ]
"This is Sean Christopher Harris, the author of The Discovery of Telepathic Terrorism in Denver, Colorado, 2024 to 2025." [ 00:08 - 00:21 ]
"However, it could include Portland and and go as far as far back as 2020." [ 00:22 - 00:29 ]
"Maybe even Denver in 2019 before I went to Portland." [ 00:29 - 00:36 ]
"But I wanted to do a recording uh this one I'll call the world of opposites." [ 00:37 - 00:44 ]
"The world of opposites." [ 00:45 - 00:47 ]
"Everything that you would think would be the right thing to do, it seems to yield suggestions that it that it isn't a good thing to do." [ 00:47 - 01:01 ]
"I want to see how many of those things I can come up with in 15 minutes." [ 01:01 - 01:07 ]
"I want to see." [ 01:08 - 01:09 ]
"I'm just going to listen right now." [ 01:09 - 01:10 ]
"Maybe I'll get us started." [ 01:11 - 01:12 ]
"And uh this may this is going to be just kind of controversial." [ 01:13 - 01:19 ]
"is my assumption." [ 01:20 - 01:22 ]
"Um for this recording, if you're listening in the distance, what I would say is try and put your experimentation hat on and that uh think about how subjective truth is depending on the audience." [ 01:23 - 01:42 ]
"Right?" [ 01:42 - 01:43 ]
"Good and evil for one." [ 01:43 - 01:44 ]
"And uh what was this thing I used to say?" [ 01:47 - 01:49 ]
"If both sides think they're right, right?" [ 01:51 - 01:57 ]
"If both sides think they're right, they're just in their actions." [ 01:57 - 01:59 ]
"Doesn't that make both sides also wrong?" [ 02:00 - 02:03 ]
"Good and good and evil, truth can be very subjective, but the one thing we hope for in life is is that life itself is protected." [ 02:04 - 02:14 ]
"Life itself is cherished." [ 02:14 - 02:16 ]
"Uh What is it?" [ 02:18 - 02:19 ]
"Life liberty and the pursuit of happiness is cherished and supported by all sides." [ 02:19 - 02:26 ]
"A good war, what's the point of a good war?" [ 02:27 - 02:29 ]
"What how how should a good war work?" [ 02:30 - 02:33 ]
"Is a good war in the war economy getting the fighting, the bloody conflict out of the way as quickly as possible, avoiding it if possible." [ 02:34 - 02:44 ]
"If you have to engage in bloody conflict, get it done and get back to business quickly because isn't that what we all want to do anyway, is just get back to business." [ 02:44 - 02:57 ]
"Don't we all love you know, having a a breakfast on Sunday morning together, enjoying freedom." [ 02:57 - 03:07 ]
"From the distance Free Palestine." [ 03:09 - 03:12 ]
"Exactly." [ 03:14 - 03:15 ]
"So, a world of opposites, right?" [ 03:16 - 03:18 ]
"Looking uh looking at this suggestion, here's one." [ 03:20 - 03:24 ]
"This is out of my paygrade." [ 03:24 - 03:26 ]
"The unconsented to conversation being leveraged as a tool to for sweeping arrests, right?" [ 03:27 - 03:34 ]
"So the spirituality narrative, the unconsented to conversation, and uh law enforcement's sweeping arrests, right?" [ 03:36 - 03:45 ]
"Is this the right thing to do?" [ 03:46 - 03:48 ]
"Would the crime just resurface months later anyway?" [ 03:50 - 03:53 ]
"You know, how do we find out?" [ 03:55 - 03:56 ]
"How do we find out if we're making sweeping changes?" [ 03:57 - 03:59 ]
"Well, I can't answer that question, but it kind of does it not point to this category that is, maybe the opposite of what we thought was true." [ 04:00 - 04:11 ]
"Any any thoughts on that from the distance?" [ 04:11 - 04:13 ]
"I'm going to begin listening in three, two, one." [ 04:14 - 04:19 ]
"My experimentor had is on." [ 04:22 - 04:24 ]
"I understand what you're suggesting." [ 04:30 - 04:32 ]
"This is a very difficult one." [ 04:36 - 04:38 ]
"What is the point of this?" [ 04:44 - 04:45 ]
"To generate conversation." [ 04:48 - 04:50 ]
"I could move on to another one, to another from the author." [ 04:50 - 04:55 ]
"I can move on to a different topic, but I'm just putting that out there as a suggestion." [ 04:55 - 04:59 ]
"What do we do if we feel that that is an accurate statement?" [ 05:05 - 05:08 ]
"From the author, incredible response, exactly." [ 05:09 - 05:13 ]
"So, I would suggest uh just kind of this is why I asked suggest the experimenter hat." [ 05:15 - 05:21 ]
"There's a Japanese philosophy called Kaizen, the pursuit of constant improvement." [ 05:22 - 05:29 ]
"It's leveraged by organizations like Toyota." [ 05:29 - 05:32 ]
"It can be found in the startup mindset." [ 05:33 - 05:35 ]
"You have uh publications books like uh Eric Reese lean startup, where in general, you produce a piece of software, you produce a service knowing full well that the first iteration is most likely going to be destroyed, but the point of getting it out there is to collect information from people as quickly as possible." [ 05:36 - 05:58 ]
"And it's based on that first release of your service or your process." [ 05:58 - 06:03 ]
"Remember, all process is iterative." [ 06:04 - 06:06 ]
"It's it's considered to be an evolutionary thing." [ 06:07 - 06:10 ]
"Process always gets better." [ 06:10 - 06:12 ]
"And so what do you do in that situation?" [ 06:12 - 06:14 ]
"Well, the one thing that's very helpful in an organization is to embrace kind of this this iterative quality, right?" [ 06:16 - 06:23 ]
"The pursuit of constant improvement." [ 06:24 - 06:27 ]
"So, if you have that as a cultural pillar within your organization, getting out there with something is important, but everybody is excited to learn and iterate." [ 06:27 - 06:39 ]
"And it's the iteration that will be expected." [ 06:40 - 06:43 ]
"And so there really is no punishment for getting something wrong because the whole point of it was, you know, we knew that half of what we released, half of what we started with was going to go away, and we get learning what not to do in the beginning is not something you would punish someone for in this this type of culture." [ 06:44 - 07:06 ]
"It's something that you would reward someone for." [ 07:06 - 07:09 ]
"So, learning and insights being the currency." [ 07:09 - 07:13 ]
"Learning and insights being the currency that leads to revenue." [ 07:13 - 07:17 ]
"Uh what do you think of that from the distance?" [ 07:19 - 07:22 ]
"And of suggestion from author, returning to the repeating process in three, two, one." [ 07:23 - 07:31 ]
"I'm so impressed with what that person just suggested." [ 07:37 - 07:41 ]
"What else is in this category a world of opposites?" [ 07:47 - 07:53 ]
"Yes, let's continue this interested discussion and uh continued response from author." [ 07:57 - 08:04 ]
"So, looking at, um, this the topic of a telepathic extraction, right?" [ 08:05 - 08:10 ]
"Is a telepathic extraction a good idea in this situation?" [ 08:11 - 08:15 ]
"Well, again, this is outside of my paygrade, but what has the individual suggested?" [ 08:17 - 08:23 ]
"There was a comment from the distance." [ 08:24 - 08:25 ]
"public safety crisis from from the distance, which is what I've been suggesting the entire time." [ 08:28 - 08:35 ]
"Right? Returning to responses from from author." [ 08:36 - 08:38 ]
"This is what I've been suggesting the entire time when I'm approached with it is that there's a public safety crisis present." [ 08:39 - 08:46 ]
"So now when we look at kind of the lean startup or the Kaizen culture, what would the Kaizen culture say in this situation?" [ 08:46 - 08:53 ]
"Okay, let's try with someone uh a different approach." [ 08:54 - 08:59 ]
"Right? And there'd be no firing someone." [ 09:00 - 09:02 ]
"You wouldn't punish anyone or fire someone." [ 09:03 - 09:06 ]
"And in this culture you might if they refuse to change, but that would be true if the the organization itself was a believer in the the Kaizen approach of constant improvement or the lean startup thinking, right?" [ 09:07 - 09:25 ]
"So, uh and within that, you also have uh this world of opposites that is, well, we keep suggesting drugs to this person." [ 09:26 - 09:36 ]
"We keep suggesting drugs and homosexual opportunities, right?" [ 09:36 - 09:41 ]
"We keep suggesting those." [ 09:42 - 09:43 ]
"And so there's a there's a nuance here, a caveat, is that actually an offer?" [ 09:44 - 09:48 ]
"Right? an offer for an opportunity or is it just another predatory attempt to euthanize me?" [ 09:48 - 09:56 ]
"So in both scenarios, the uh the Kaizen approach would still be true." [ 09:57 - 10:03 ]
"Right? What's happening is a fixed belief is what's happening a fixed belief and organizational or group belief that drugs are attractive to the individual continues to play itself out in these expensive operations." [ 10:05 - 10:21 ]
"So what else would you do?" [ 10:23 - 10:25 ]
"Right? Not necessarily a world of opposites maybe we're looking at, but maybe skizo-effective disorder, uh unhealthy or unproductive pattern stemming from a fixed belief structure, an organizational belief." [ 10:27 - 10:46 ]
"What does everyone think of that in the distance?" [ 10:46 - 10:49 ]
"End of author comments returning to the repeating process in three, two, one." [ 10:50 - 10:58 ]
"That paraphrasing, that's absolutely the most incredible and relevant thing I have ever heard, Sean Christopher Harris." [ 11:08 - 11:16 ]
"That's exact paraphrasing additional comments." [ 11:28 - 11:30 ]
"That's exactly what continues to happen from the direction of these biotech uh contributors to the conversation." [ 11:31 - 11:40 ]
"Yes, that is how we are labeling those people." [ 11:45 - 11:49 ]
"And is there still repeating, still repeating, paraphrasing, is there organizational suffering from the results of this skizo effective disorder, this fixed belief?" [ 11:58 - 12:13 ]
"and how it's surfacing in the conversation." [ 12:17 - 12:21 ]
"That could also be considered military stubbornness." [ 12:27 - 12:31 ]
"Still repeating, still repeating." [ 12:31 - 12:33 ]
"This conversation, this conversation is getting to the crux of the matter." [ 12:40 - 12:46 ]
"Still repeating, still repeating, paraphrasing, I feel stupid for doing this, spending money on this same thing over and over and over." [ 13:03 - 13:13 ]
"Let's get this person his assistance as soon as humanly possible." [ 13:19 - 13:25 ]
"And remember, it's a growing population of people, not an individual, still repeating, still repeating." [ 13:30 - 13:39 ]
"Who is to blame, paraphrasing, who is to blame for euthanization in the city of Denver, everybody?" [ 13:48 - 13:58 ]
"And what does that have to do with Microsoft and Monsanto or Bayer Biotech?" [ 14:08 - 14:15 ]
"Still repeating, still repeating." [ 14:15 - 14:18 ]
"Do you have another example of this world of opposites response from the author, I do." [ 14:23 - 14:30 ]
"continuing, continuing uh suggestions from the author, another example of a world of opposites would be looking to this method of possibly and let me know what you think of this, looking to this method of communication as accurate information." [ 14:30 - 14:52 ]
"So there are a few things here." [ 14:52 - 14:53 ]
"One, if you're sitting in this observational seat, looking at someone's vitals, information from their eyes, you've got a connection to their brain, and believing that you have all the information you need, and you don't need to speak with them in person." [ 14:55 - 15:14 ]
"You don't because you already have what they would say." [ 15:15 - 15:19 ]
"Farahani describes this concern." [ 15:20 - 15:22 ]
"I think something she said in one of her interviews fits nicely here that when you're connected to a human being's brain, it's really difficult." [ 15:23 - 15:33 ]
"It requires just this expert toolkit to understand what's going on inside of someone's brain, but you would have to ask them uh in person about it." [ 15:33 - 15:45 ]
"So you for example, she uses this metaphor that I always this example of uh that you know, she's married and I think about strangling my husband." [ 15:46 - 15:56 ]
"Well, this could be misinterpreted as planning to murder somebody, for example, but it's a very normal human thought." [ 15:57 - 16:04 ]
"unless you talked with the human being about it, in person, right?" [ 16:05 - 16:09 ]
"And I mean, you you could ask them telepathically, but that invites the threat of euthanization in this situation and it also could be biased uh because they're afraid of speaking with you or they think you are someone that you're not, for example." [ 16:11 - 16:30 ]
"So the absence of the publicly facing relationship and the understood explanation, you could explain it, but it has to be understood, right?" [ 16:31 - 16:41 ]
"that it's telepathy, there's a human being there." [ 16:41 - 16:44 ]
"And so you know, is that the right setting to actually get information from someone?" [ 16:45 - 16:51 ]
"And it depends on the context, but talking with them about it could be the most direct and and uh, you know, providing the actual explanation as it is understood by the human being." [ 16:52 - 17:08 ]
"Right? So getting back to the question in this suggestion of a world of opposites, is the is the opposite true for the assumption that sitting in a position where you can observe a human being with a connection to their brain, observing their thought process, information from their eyes, all you need as far as information is concerned, or that you don't need them to explain in person, right?" [ 17:08 - 17:39 ]
"uh information from their brain that has surfaced." [ 17:40 - 17:44 ]
"Uh end of response end of suggestion from author." [ 17:45 - 17:49 ]
"Well, what do you think of that?" [ 17:49 - 17:50 ]
"Returning to the repeating process in three, two, one." [ 17:51 - 17:56 ]
"You're absolutely correct about this." [ 18:00 - 18:02 ]
"And we do have an organizational belief that we do not have to communicate with someone, connect with someone in person." [ 18:13 - 18:24 ]
"From the distance from another direction, no, you do not need that." [ 18:26 - 18:31 ]
"That is not the truth of it." [ 18:34 - 18:36 ]
"So there seems to be a difference of viewpoint here." [ 18:45 - 18:48 ]
"I'm going to leave it there." [ 18:49 - 18:51 ]
"I need to get inside and work." [ 18:51 - 18:53 ]
"Are there any closing comments for this recording?" [ 18:53 - 18:58 ]
"Was this valuable to talk about?" [ 18:58 - 19:00 ]
"It sounds like there's a contradiction here we could drill into uh that really deserves some attention." [ 19:01 - 19:07 ]
"I would suggest that if you're aware of each other, you know, enough, please consider talking about it, resolving that concern." [ 19:08 - 19:18 ]
"I would love to hear more about why." [ 19:18 - 19:20 ]
"Maybe that's a good use of time for the next five minutes." [ 19:20 - 19:23 ]
"Why does someone believe it's not necessary?" [ 19:23 - 19:27 ]
"Is this motivated by uh this perception that you need to maintain your covert status?" [ 19:28 - 19:37 ]
"or you know, is that more of of what is motivating your response?" [ 19:37 - 19:42 ]
"The need to remain hidden?" [ 19:42 - 19:45 ]
"Or do you really believe that you don't need, you wouldn't benefit from the human being understanding who you are and providing an explanation for information you are harvesting from their brain, your connection to their brain." [ 19:45 - 20:01 ]
"End of uh response from author going to continue the repeating process for one last round." [ 20:02 - 20:09 ]
"I would agree with that." [ 20:12 - 20:13 ]
"We are actually motivated by the need to remain hidden." [ 20:22 - 20:26 ]
"I think paraphrasing, I think we're all aware of the benefit from having the in person conversation where the person understands who we are and can explain what we're seeing in their brain." [ 21:40 - 22:02 ]
"We have to deal with this." [ 22:18 - 22:20 ]
"Still repeating, still repeating." [ 22:20 - 22:23 ]
"I have a closing comment." [ 22:26 - 22:27 ]
"This person's life is in serious physical danger." [ 22:33 - 22:36 ]
"If you have the ability to help this person, please do so as soon as humanly possible." [ 22:44 - 22:50 ]
"Still repeating, still repeating." [ 22:50 - 22:53 ]
"How are we going to approach this person for his euthanization?" [ 22:59 - 23:05 ]
"The hangman is going to approach this person and that will be the end of this conversation or the beginning of a new one." [ 23:13 - 23:25 ]
"How do you feel about that, Sean Christopher Harris?" [ 23:28 - 23:31 ]
"Response from author, uh, and there's a pattern of suggesting that the psychological violence will not end until one of two things happen, the facilitators of the so-called ugly workflows, all of them, there are multiple groups, that's the suggestion, are found and arrested, held accountable, and or the money, uh that's being provided, the revenue stream for the psychological violence and the forced euthanization dries up." [ 23:32 - 24:15 ]
"There's a pattern of suggestion around that." [ 24:16 - 24:18 ]
"Um so, my suggestion would be, you know, remember, what would you ask your 16-year-old child to do or just a young adult in America, a student, and remember, it's a growing population of people, it's not the individual." [ 24:20 - 24:39 ]
"You're stopping the spread of euthanization, not the method of communication, the psychological violence that is people being bombarded with high volume communication to force them to accept euthanization." [ 24:39 - 24:55 ]
"Right? It's a group of people you're saving." [ 24:57 - 24:59 ]
"You're stopping the spread at one end point." [ 24:59 - 25:01 ]
"think contact tracing." [ 25:01 - 25:03 ]
"I've suggested in the past, walking up to me, offering me information, right? Tell the individual they don't have to say anything." [ 25:04 - 25:12 ]
"Sequester yourself, send money." [ 25:13 - 25:15 ]
"If the person fails at sequestering themselves or they need help doing it, then consider a different approach." [ 25:16 - 25:22 ]
"Then they will have to go somewhere with someone potentially." [ 25:22 - 25:28 ]
"Right? But if they do well, Zoom calls." [ 25:29 - 25:34 ]
"Even the Zoom call itself could be threatening if it's facilitated by the wrong people." [ 25:34 - 25:39 ]
"It could be used to put someone in a sanitarium." [ 25:40 - 25:43 ]
"There's also an opportunity to present a couple people to be the targets of the facilitators of the so-called ugly workflows." [ 25:45 - 25:55 ]
"If you wants to connect and find out, connect with and find out who is facilitating euthanization, the people that show up in person, that stand in front of my eyeballs will probably be communicated with." [ 25:56 - 26:12 ]
"They will probably enter my world." [ 26:13 - 26:14 ]
"Please consider making sure that everyone is debriefed on being asked to do the bidding, the technology in use to whatever understanding, and and know that if you show up around someone who's being singled out and uh force to accept euthanization that they, you know, they could be asked to do the bidding or start experiencing the torment themselves." [ 26:15 - 26:42 ]
"If they are also experiencing that already, uh a group dynamic setting where you have a workflow in the home to reveal transparent, you know, bring transparency to what is said." [ 26:42 - 26:55 ]
"For example, a simple group chat where this group of people who are working on bringing consent to the conversation, maybe all of them are being targeted." [ 26:55 - 27:08 ]
"They share the text message every time they're communicated with." [ 27:08 - 27:12 ]
"So, for example, hey, Sean, someone suggested you are going to poison me at dinner." [ 27:12 - 27:18 ]
"You know, uh, oh, thank you for letting me know." [ 27:19 - 27:22 ]
"No, I'm not going to do that." [ 27:22 - 27:24 ]
"Uh I was asked to poison you at dinner." [ 27:25 - 27:28 ]
"Thank you for broaching that." [ 27:28 - 27:30 ]
"Do you still want to have dinner?" [ 27:30 - 27:31 ]
"No, it's actually very stressful to thought of it." [ 27:32 - 27:35 ]
"Thanks for asking." [ 27:35 - 27:36 ]
"or, hey, uh Sean, someone suggested you're masturbating in the bathroom, uh you know, look at it do pictures of B or thinking about B." [ 27:37 - 27:47 ]
"Can you talk about this with me?" [ 27:47 - 27:49 ]
"Uh no, I I wasn't thinking about you or masturbating." [ 27:50 - 27:54 ]
"Thanks for letting me know." [ 27:55 - 27:56 ]
"I I think you're talking with the terrorists." [ 27:56 - 27:59 ]
"That's the sort of thing or for example, a US Marshall shows up as part of Wsec." [ 28:00 - 28:06 ]
"Well, that person understand that the person speaking with them, hey, Sean, someone just asked me to uh shoot you and put you in the trunk and bury you somewhere outside." [ 28:06 - 28:18 ]
"They're willing to pay me $100,000." [ 28:18 - 28:20 ]
"I'm not going to do it." [ 28:21 - 28:23 ]
"Thanks for letting me know." [ 28:24 - 28:26 ]
"transparency in this situation, extremely valuable." [ 28:27 - 28:33 ]
"What what do you think about that on my way back to uh get this this information entered, one last round of feedback on potentially what this first contact could be?" [ 28:33 - 28:46 ]
"People with credentials like press, college credentials that don't show up with a psychiatrist, right? Technology professionals." [ 28:46 - 28:57 ]
"They're already going to have, or attorneys, there's already an existing understanding that attorneys remain separate from the client and this other point of contact, the person they're trying to help." [ 28:57 - 29:10 ]
"You know, work with established understandings for relationships." [ 29:10 - 29:14 ]
"Distance could be very helpful in the beginning and getting past this point together will learn how to approach other people." [ 29:14 - 29:24 ]
"Know that I am ready to work." [ 29:24 - 29:26 ]
"So, I'm going to do one more round of repeating and then shut the recording down." [ 29:27 - 29:31 ]
"That was just some some suggestions on what contact might look like and how you might move past the terrorism together." [ 29:31 - 29:39 ]
"returning to the repeating process one last time in three, two, one." [ 29:39 - 29:46 ]
"This is a fucking incredible conversation." [ 29:50 - 29:53 ]
"Yes, that's exactly what I said with 100% word for word accuracy." [ 30:00 - 30:04 ]
"Paraphrasing, I don't have anything else to add, but I am agree with you that uh working on building trust through the first step is very important." [ 30:16 - 30:28 ]
"Making the person feel comfortable is very important." [ 30:29 - 30:37 ]
"Thank you, thank you for doing this Sean Christopher Harris." [ 30:40 - 30:44 ]
"Okay, returning to comments, suggestions from author, thank you for your service everybody." [ 30:44 - 30:54 ]
"I refuse to believe that the protectors of the Commonwealth would ever invite a police brutality uh story of this caliber." [ 30:54 - 31:08 ]
"I believe in you, America." [ 31:08 - 31:10 ]
"Let's see what happens next." [ 31:10 - 31:11 ]
"at 1:20 p.m. October 2nd, Thursday October 2nd, 2025." [ 31:12 - 31:19 ]
"End of recording." [ 31:19 - 31:21 ]