R U Educatable?

Are the educable - educatable? Since “knowing” is teachable - I ask then; are we all teachable? The source of targeting is not a mystery for everyone – some like me know that most come from the same sources! Regardless of our experiences - electronic, dew, gas lighting, physical – all of it.

First off, targeting is a real created thing and I along with a growing number of others are the proof. I’m only one story; almost completely centered philosophically, mentally, socially -  not left, right, in no way extreme. Sure for many - much of it’s made up or imagined, not people like me though - having lived it, I saw it every day. If people want to know why I don’t try to help others they’ve never read any of my books or articles. Writing from my experiences is my contribution by reading everything I could from others and filtering out the nonsense is how I learned. Like with anything else we all have that obligation to ourselves. Long-term logic disconnect can’t be explained away by temporary lapses of judgment because no one’s listening that’s coming to the rescue.

Anyway, is “educatable” a word? Looking it up it means – capable of being educated or taught. I’m not asking to sound condescending, but do you know what “uneducable” means? Are some of us TIs uneducable? I really believe that many of us are very smart and I’m not just saying that. You know I took a lot of different music related classes - like when I was really into recording I took “audio engineering.” I even set up and taught “Pro Tools 24” computer recording for the board of education in my town. That became a mandatory class for the music teachers so I guess I might have been an advanced nerd.

Now here we are again with our focus in general being real TIs and though we are a mixed lot I don’t differentiate. Many real along with many fakes including actors of all types; law enforcement and their informers even regular perps, all blended. I read a lot more than I write though when writing large magazine articles they require proof, citations and sources. Like me, you may be grilled if they’re interested in your piece. Especially because much of my writing are unprecedented original science, social science or deep thought. And the way this world works is that everything isn’t just believed without question. Without precedent many are ill-equipped disbelievers for things I write. With the editors I had to get them to understand my quantum hypotheses otherwise the articles just wouldn’t get printed. That often takes much effort because regular readers rely on their diligence.

Well, real or not all our experiences are different so we can only tell our stories and since I say I got results I can only share my experiences. It’s up to people to choose which stories are believable when all we really have are our thoughts speaking our truths. We can take action - “legal” like I did, but we can’t make anyone else. Now what I did do I wrote about here in a synopsis article link from my book “COS4”:

Description: Description: C:\Real-TimePublishing\articles\2023\images\p eye 3.jpg


I can only tell you what I did and my results; I’ve been through so much harassment coordinated from the shadows that I’m way too paranoid to try to help anyone other than as a writer. BTW, roughly or by percentage how many do you think will take action and do it right for themselves? I’ve gotten letters from many of you - some believe they tried so it can’t be done. Sometimes I wish I wasn’t so gun-shy but if the goal is to entrap you, then you have to be defensively offensive. Like not practicing law without a license for me translates as no one on one legal advice. Believe me I’ve used a lot a lawyers myself and they’re not all good so after questioning I usually just don’t hire them. That’s why I write my true stories from personal experiences. You know: all that freedom of speech and the press?

Yeah, so the other day someone posted asking for TI testimonials for a college research project. I read the first reply suggesting she look up schizophrenia as an explanation. Seemed perpy to me but it got 93 replies when I saw it. So much attention diverted using a gas-lighted misdirection word “schizophrenia.” And yet so many TIs felt the need to bite or “role-play along” with the distraction rather than actual discussion with legitimate comments. I’m sure as an amateur schiz-sleuth; many were infiltrators steering meaningful dialogue from the original poster.

I’ve spoken to so many of you guys and of course there’s a lot of schizophrenia in our midst along with much intellect. I learned to accept surface level characters – which is not the same as believing. Like because how does one explain someone like me with my claims or the many others from the very beginning of my research? Even in these scenes the answers I was looking for all had to make sense. If you know the script gas lighting doesn’t work because you don’t have to let on with answers – sometimes it’s better just to quietly play along. Easy broad brush strokes don’t explain me even though I’m easy to explain because I’m real. I didn’t look to anyone to help me. I took what I needed from reading people like you guys and the law and made decisions on how to handle things by rationally filing a criminal complaint.

---Written by the author Robert Torres (2024)








COS Series