April 8, 2000
Laura, Ark, Frank
Q: Hello.
A: Hello.
Q: And who do we have with us this evening?
A: Rinirrah.
Q: And where do you transmit through?
A: Cassiopaea.
Q: We have some questions from readers; I have some questions from my reading; and we have some questions about some ideas that have been tossed around in the last few days. Which would it be better to start with?
A: Start where you wish.
Q: One of the first things is that we had our INS interview and it was a rather unpleasant experience, to say the least. And, there is going to be, I understand, some effort made to get some assistance in waiving the permanent residency requirements and go directly to the citizenship stage. Just thought I would throw that in because, of course, it is necessary for Ark to be a citizen to have a security clearance, and that is necessary in order for him to progress in his work. In regards to this work, George and Ark have talked about going for a contract, a military contract, on their own, and leaving Constellation.
A: Risky.
Q: Is George leading Ark astray in any way in his different comments about the company and his interactions with the company himself?
A: George is enigmatic.
Q: Why is George enigmatic?
A: Mental energies focus eccentricities.
Q: (A) Sometime ago we were asking about the situation at Constellation, and the answer was that it was stable. According to what George states, it will be stable only until December, and after that there is no money for the particular projects we are working on now. So, it doesn't look too stable. The question is: what kind of measures should we take so that we...
A: Constellation is growing, not contracting.
Q: Yet, according to what George says, there is a fight between George and the president, and because of this fight and animosity, as far as I understand, there will be no money for the programming work that I am doing under George. Of course, there is the possibility that Constellation will hire me for some other work, but it is not clear whether it will happen. So, the future is open and we are worrying.
A: George is the bug in this system. Not wise to align yourself too closely there.
Q: To whom should I talk?
A: Not to whom, concentrate talents.
Q: What does that mean?
A: You are the commodity, others may be the oddity.
Q: Is the president aware of the work that Ark is doing, and is he aware of his value?
A: To some extent, but also clouded to some extent by those who may wish to manipulate partly by filtration.
Q: Are you suggesting that George is manipulating by "filtration?"
A: Be on lookout.
Q: What would be the best advice you could give Ark at the moment, aside from concentrate talents? Be more specific.
A: Be own spokesperson, rely not upon others for this task.
Q: Are you suggesting that Ark should sit down and talk to the president, or have lunch with the president, or chit chat with him, or...
A: The point is to not rely upon others for communication.
Q: (A) Should I recommend to George that he should advise the military guys to allot money to Constellation for the extra project so that I would be working with Constellation for this money rather than with George?
A: Why do you feel you must operate via George?
Q: But, if anything is said to the president, George might hear about it and cause problems.
A: Does George have your best interests in mind... or his?
Q: Well, he has certainly created the idea that he has our best interests at heart. He has been very good to us.
A: But where does this lead?
Q: This can lead to a big downfall. If you encounter somebody who appears to have your best interests at heart, and you trust them and act according to their advice, sometimes you can fall into a pit. But, on the other hand, sometimes they DO have your interests at heart. Yes, they have their own interests at heart, but they may see your interests and their interests as being coincidentally the same.
A: Coincidental, or dependent?
Q: In other words, what you are implying, is that George was in a rough spot; he got Ark and his work to beef up his image; George gets the credit for Ark's work, and still isn't getting ahead or being perceived as he thinks he ought to be even with Ark backing him up and working day and night; and George is getting ready to jump ship, and he wants to drag Ark with him because he thinks Ark is going to help him make money that he can't do on his own.
A: If you say this, we have only revealed for you that which you already sensed, even i f reluctantly.
Q: (A) At one point there was this opening, and perhaps there is still this opening, to hire somebody, and I can apply, but I understood from George that it is better NOT to have a job where I would have to go to Constellation daily; that it was better to work on contract. That was George's advice.
A: Remember, Constellation wishes to keep those whom it perceives have value!
Q: So, maybe Ark needs to talk to this president about this position? Is it possible to have a contract AND a position? A contracted position. Why is it that George says they can't fire him? If it was as easy to fire somebody as he suggests, why haven't they fired him with all this animosity going on? (A) Probably he was somehow nominated by the military when Constellation came into being. (L) I don't think that is a good excuse. Is that what he told you? (A) No, but I believe so. How else would he get this position as a vice president? He must have been nominated by somebody.
A: Manipulators manipulate... that is their trade.
Q: (A) Now, it sounds like if I work FOR Constellation, and if I am hired, then it is sure that I will NEVER have time for anything else. (L) Maybe you should talk those concerns over with the guy and use that as the reason you have been reluctant to apply for the position...
A: Those who have true value can "name their price."
Q: I think you should talk to the guy. You don't have to say that anybody advised you, but you can say that if you are a "full-time employee," you won't have time for your own research, that you are interested in furthering that and still being able to meet your financial goals, and that you are still considering it because, as you understand it, there is only going to be money until December, and you would like to find out what the status would be, if a position were offered to you, and if you did take it? What would be your status and what would be your prospects in terms of time and obligations to be IN the building and so forth. Don't sell yourself short. I really DO think that George is capitalizing on YOUR work for his own benefit.
A: It is "the American way."
Q: I don't think you should tell George in advance that you are going to talk to the president about taking a position. (A) Why? (F) Because then he will manipulate... he'll pull something out of the hat.... (A) No... (L) Don't tell him in advance what you are gonna do. Am I right?
A: Yes.
Q: Just, next time you go, ask George to see if the guy is there, and just walk down the hall and talk to him then and there, giving George no time to do anything in advance. Don't make the arrangements through George in advance. Am I right?
A: Yes.
Q: Now, we promised George that we would give him some advice about what to do about this military contract. What advice would you give to George? The major problem is that if he was going to ask for a military contract, he would have to do it right away in order for it to be budgeted for next year.
A: It is risky, as there are so many hurdles, so many "fingers in the pie."
Q: Once you tell George this answer, that even HE needs to stay with Constellation for the present, it gives you a platform from which to make it clear that you wish to go for the position.
A: We will give one more reinforcing example: where oh where does the budgeting come from?
Q: (A) Probably because there is some congressman in charge of this particular aspect. (L) And who is the congressman a friend of? George or the president of the company? (A) Probably the president, yes. (L) So, there it is. George would lose if he tried to go against that.
I want to throw something on the table here since it is kind of freaky. This guy writes "I've read the article written about you in the St. Pete Times, and have read much of the material posted on your webpage. Like you, I live in the Tampa Bay area. I was wondering if you could possibly do me a favor by asking a question of the C's. I am Wiccan. One night I was astral traveling while in a circle. While I was in the depths of space, I saw a craft with a large window where the bridge would be located. Through this window I saw beings of non-terrestrial origin. They had whitish and yellowish splotchy skin, elongated eyes, and a ridge that projected from their foreheads giving them a Neanderthal appearance. It also appeared that these beings were looking directly at me as though they could see me in my astral form. The question that I hope that you will ask for me is: were these beings that I saw members of the groups utilizing the Wave to travel toward the Earth? And were they able to see my astral form because they were higher density beings? I would appreciate greatly if you could ask this question in one of your upcoming channelling sessions. If you would like to contact me, please reply to this email. I hesitate to give out any further information due to the fact that we have never met." Well, I think it is pretty rich that I am supposed to give out information to someone I don't even know! Here he wants to take up MY time, but he hesitates to tell me anything about himself. I hesitate to exert my time on behalf of him here because I don't know him! Maybe I am being overly sensitive. But, yeah, we've never met, but he has read all about me in the newspaper.
A: Our suggestion: best to not watch too much "Star Trek" before astral traveling!
Q: Now, we have this very unique one-liner here: "Are you nuts? What level of existence are you on, anyway?" That's from Emily Gotchnaur.
A: Do you feel this requires a response?
Q: Ark already took care of it. But I AM curious about anyone who would write such a thing and what kind of level of existence is THAT person on? What kind of person would ask that kind of question?
A: Someone who likes to knock down, not build up.
Q: This is a good one. Brad has written a couple of times. He was reading the Flight 19 session and he said: "This indicates to me that perception can manifest into a reality given proper conditions." Is his assumption going in the right direction? Can perception manifest into reality given the proper conditions?
A: Essentially, but it is more complex, as it involves manifestations from other realities, where the conditions do not parallel yours.
Q: Now he says: "If true, then an individual could manifest their reality if enough energy or focus or will could be focused to produce a result." You just said that it involves energies from other realities than our own. But, he goes on to say: "What I think is implied here is that the dominant belief will be the most often produced result. However, if ten people believe they see a UFO, but three others don't believe they see a UFO, then what is the result in this case? Do the three non-believers end up seeing UFOs because their perception that UFO's do not exist is overridden by the ten people who DO believe?"
A: Trying to impose conditional conceptualizations re: 3rd density awareness.
Q: Well, the question still is, if ten people think they see a UFO, and three don't, DO the three non-believers see a UFO?
A: Not valid due to rigidity of concept.
Q: Well, let me go on: "The prevailing or popular belief seems to override the less popular belief if I read the text of your essay correctly. That would certainly explain why disinformation and propaganda used by religious groups is so effective. I am not sure about the proper way this works according to your essay. It seems to me that, in order for an individual to buck the trend of a commonly held belief or thought, and for that person to manifest their own reality, or produce a desired result, they would have to be very strong willed, or have the ability to focus their will and intention so as to magnify its power and produce a reality which differs from that which is the common perception. It's all rather confusing. If ten people believe that Napoleon never died, but is still alive, and two people believe he is dead, the dominant belief prevailing would have Napoleon still alive. Perhaps you could go into some detail on this at a later time. If all is illusion, as so many New Age teachings suggest, then there are no constraints as to what reality can be."
A: No constraints? Then why the attempt to impose constraints?
Q: I think the one thing he missed in that session was the point that we were talking specifically about the Flight 19 incident where you had already said that the EM field generated by the aberrant activities of the Atlantean crystal, created an opening into what you called the Thought Plane, and as long as it remained open, this condition prevailed. But, under most circumstances, this is not the condition under which we live.
A: And even the EM crystal itself is transitory; in the space/time continuum it is of the "Philadelphia Experiment" mode.
Q: The example of the Flight 19 situation was a description of an aberrant situation, even though these aberrations can and do occur naturally or artificially, sometimes planned and sometimes random. Is that correct?
A: Sort of.
Q: But, in talking about our consensual reality. Are the conditions, say, for example, on our planet, a result of the consensus reality?
A: Ditto last response.
Q: Okay. Sort of. You say that we have these programs, and that there is this undulating matrix force field around the planet that holds these effects, and the programs in place, so to speak, but that some people CAN get out of the control and see what is real, but most people cannot.
A: Yes, or do not.
Q: So, if a critical mass of people began to SEE things, or to escape from the programming, would that effect a change for others in terms of the way they experience the reality, or would the reality that they had been choosing to experience...
A: Such a "critical mass" does not occur until the consensus "chooses."
Q: So, the reality under which we live is essentially, even if held in place by manipulations from higher densities, and some sort of matrix control system, is CHOSEN?
A: Close.
Q: To get back to this idea about changing the reality: can an individual or group of individuals change their personal reality so that they no longer have to or are required to participate in the consensus reality?
A: It is possible.
Q: Is it, as our correspondent has said, because such people are very strong willed, or have the ability to focus their will and intentions so as to magnify the power of the will, to change the reality...
A: Constraints constrain.
Q: Yes. The Matrix page on the website discusses this. So, it amounts to the fact that if a person is in THIS reality, for some reason they have CHOSEN it until they learn how to UN-choose it. (A) The question is: how often can people do it? Yes, it is possible, but can we know more?
A: Some truly rare types possess this talent flukishly, as it does not represent normal 3rd density domain.
Q: You once remarked to Ark "He who has the will of a Lion does not have the fate of a mouse." And then you added "to paraphrase, 'I am become One, creator of Worlds.'" I would like to understand the implication of these remarks?
A: The understanding of that comes from exploration, not explanation.
Q: I kind of figured you were going to say that! Now, I have this book entitled "Arktos." He says something here that echoes a remark you once made. He says: "It is a very remarkable thing that enlightenment seems to have come from the North against the common prejudice that the Earth was enlightened as it was populated from South to North. The Scythians are one of the most ancient nations; the Chinese descend from them. The Atlanteans themselves, more ancient than the Egyptians, descend from them." You said that the civilizing influence came from the North to the South. Of course, all the standard texts claim that civilization came from South to North, starting in Mesopotamia. Now, getting...
A: Okay, just a minute here. Thinking Mesopotamia is the beginning is like thinking that the beginning starts at the 12th chapter.
Q: I know that! The problem is: finding artifacts. I've been searching and digging, and I find a little bit here and there, but my God! Either nothing survived...
A: Artifacts have a limited shelf life!
Q: Exactly! The problem is that they've got specimens of humanoid types from 100 to 200 thousand years ago, and even further, but no specimens of modern man that are that old. Why is this so? Are they just looking in the wrong places?
A: Specimens survive by sheer luck.
Q: So, they are lucky that they have any specimens at all. Who knows, when they find a very ancient specimen of a modern type human, they won't believe it - it will be called an "anomaly!" There ARE artifacts that are EXTREMELY ancient, which give evidence of the presence of modern type man, and they just simply argue themselves to death over them.
A: Yes.
Q: They ignore them. But, during the time Neanderthal man was on the Earth, did he live alongside Modern man?
A: Yes. Except modern type man was different then.
Q: In what ways?
A: DNA and psycho/electrical frequencies.
Q: Does this mean that their physical appearance was different from what we consider to be modern man?
A: Radiance.
Q: What do you mean "radiance?"
A: You find out!
Q: Oh, that's interesting. Well, there are legends that the Northern people had "light" in their veins. Very ancient belief. Is this what you are referring to?
A: Maybe.
Q: Was this light related to the hemoglobin level, the iron level in the blood?
A: Maybe.
Q: Did they have a much higher iron level in their blood?
A: Possibly....
Q: Okay, part of the ancient legend of Arktos was that, in very ancient times the Earth was different because it had a vertical axial orientation. This contributed to the golden age or the Edenic condition. Is this, in fact, one of the conditions that existed in the Golden Age? A; Well, yes, but still some puzzle pieces needed.
Q: I noticed also that there are several ball-park type figures given for the precessional cycles. Apparently there is not a whole lot of agreement as to how long this cycle is, exactly. I notice that, if you divide 309,882 years by 12, you come out right in the ball park of 12 precessional cycles. Is this the reason that the zodiac was set up with twelve signs or houses?
A: Related, yes.
Q: Now, since all the recent conjecture about the precessional cycle has really gone all over the place, it is my thought that the real reason for the ancient clues about this cycle are to inform us that the length of 12 of these cycles is a GRAND Cycle, and that THIS is the big clue.
A: Needs some study by you.
Q: One of the interesting things about this Northern civilizational factor is that one of the hallmarks of the Aryan attitude is the Male dominated religion. When did the masculine religion "take over?" Was this always the tendency or leaning of the Aryan group?
A: Involves more than religion. Religion is the facilitator.
Q: Facilitator of what?
A: Customary psycho/social habitue.
Q: Customary to whom?
A: Those whom you refer to as Aryans.
Q: Where did they acquire the "habit" of a masculine oriented religion? Everybody else was worshipping the goddess in one form or another. But this male dominated theology was the distinguishing characteristic of the Northern peoples. Where did they come up with this.
A: Originated on home planet.
Q: Kantek?
A: For all intents and purposes.
Q: Was it this male dominated religion that contributed to the destruction of Kantek?
A: No.
Q: Okay, when they were on their home planet, why did they develop a masculine religion as opposed to a feminine one, considering the fact that women are the source of life, in certain terms?
A: In your density, masculinism/feminish is essentially a roll of "the dice." Remember, at higher levels gender is nonexistent.
Q: Well, the problem I am having here is this: the masculine religion is monotheistic, essentially.
A: In your references.
Q: Was the older masculine religion polytheistic?
A: Going off the track.
Q: The Aryans always thought they were better than everybody else...
A: They were more advanced than the company they found themselves amongst.
Q: But then, as far as I can tell, the Hebrew monotheism is also derived from the Aryan, monotheistic, male dominated religion. It then "fathered" Christianity, and that has been the whole patriarchal, kill-em-all and let God sort-em-out war mongering thing under which we have lived for over 2000 years. This is the Western, European mind... it came from the Aryans, from the North; it was the so-called "civilizing" influence in nearly every respect that you can track. The cohesiveness and dominance of this type of thinking was able to civilize, but then civilization involves dominance, killing, war, territory, the Hitler scene, the whole nine yards. All of this is antithetical to all that you promote as far as being desirable. Yet, you have said that you were in contact with the Northern Peoples for millennia. Yes, Cassiopeia is a Northern Constellation, and probably figured in the early myths of these peoples in ways we cannot know, but the whole thing is that they represent all that is STS.
A: But so do you, so then why did we contact you?
Q: Well. I don't buy into that whole monotheistic, dominator, war-mongering, make everybody conform to one way of thinking head trip!
A: So, you think all individuals conformed then, or is it the soul that counts in the final analysis?
Q: Okay, obviously all individuals are different, and some did not conform then, either.
A: And neither do you.
Q: Point taken. I am just having a hard time with this. I wish you would just tell me! Who interacted with these Aryans to give them this male-dominated, monotheistic idea that they then sought to impose on every other human being on the planet - and are STILL trying!
A: Interactions were transdensity.
Q: Let me ask one final question. I am reading this book about Jack the Ripper. The author claims that the real Jack was a "mad surgeon," which is what you suggested at one other time. This book also says that the murders were inspired by political considerations. Supposedly, the murders were designed to cover up the murder of one, specific person. It is even said that the Masons were involved, and the actual murders were symbolic Masonic statements. Is there any truth to this theory?
A: Maybe a little.
Q: The killer, as suggested by this author, was Dr. William Gull, physician to Queen Victoria. Now, this theory is so close to what you suggested, that I was sort of amazed to read this book. The refutation comes from people who say that, around the time of the Ripper murders, Dr. Gull had a stroke and was, therefore, unable to physically perform the murders, so must have had an assistant. Right after the murders ended, he retired from the practice of medicine, saying he didn't "feel like himself." Supposedly, he died but there are some who say he was really locked up in an asylum and a fake funeral was held. Well, the guy writing the book really did find some evidence of a cover-up, though whether or not it was THIS being covered up, I can't tell. It IS a compelling story. When this Dr. Gull had this stroke, and the supposed epileptic seizures that followed, was he, in fact, possessed? Is he even the one? Was Dr. William Gull the Ripper?
A: The theory is close, but the details are incorrect.
Q: Can you satisfy my curiosity?
A: Not really, not tonight.
Q: But I want to KNOW! Was Dr. Gull the Ripper?
A: Such "gall." Good Night!
End of Session
Laura, Ark, Frank
Q: Hello.
A: Hello.
Q: And who do we have with us this evening?
A: Rinirrah.
Q: And where do you transmit through?
A: Cassiopaea.
Q: We have some questions from readers; I have some questions from my reading; and we have some questions about some ideas that have been tossed around in the last few days. Which would it be better to start with?
A: Start where you wish.
Q: One of the first things is that we had our INS interview and it was a rather unpleasant experience, to say the least. And, there is going to be, I understand, some effort made to get some assistance in waiving the permanent residency requirements and go directly to the citizenship stage. Just thought I would throw that in because, of course, it is necessary for Ark to be a citizen to have a security clearance, and that is necessary in order for him to progress in his work. In regards to this work, George and Ark have talked about going for a contract, a military contract, on their own, and leaving Constellation.
A: Risky.
Q: Is George leading Ark astray in any way in his different comments about the company and his interactions with the company himself?
A: George is enigmatic.
Q: Why is George enigmatic?
A: Mental energies focus eccentricities.
Q: (A) Sometime ago we were asking about the situation at Constellation, and the answer was that it was stable. According to what George states, it will be stable only until December, and after that there is no money for the particular projects we are working on now. So, it doesn't look too stable. The question is: what kind of measures should we take so that we...
A: Constellation is growing, not contracting.
Q: Yet, according to what George says, there is a fight between George and the president, and because of this fight and animosity, as far as I understand, there will be no money for the programming work that I am doing under George. Of course, there is the possibility that Constellation will hire me for some other work, but it is not clear whether it will happen. So, the future is open and we are worrying.
A: George is the bug in this system. Not wise to align yourself too closely there.
Q: To whom should I talk?
A: Not to whom, concentrate talents.
Q: What does that mean?
A: You are the commodity, others may be the oddity.
Q: Is the president aware of the work that Ark is doing, and is he aware of his value?
A: To some extent, but also clouded to some extent by those who may wish to manipulate partly by filtration.
Q: Are you suggesting that George is manipulating by "filtration?"
A: Be on lookout.
Q: What would be the best advice you could give Ark at the moment, aside from concentrate talents? Be more specific.
A: Be own spokesperson, rely not upon others for this task.
Q: Are you suggesting that Ark should sit down and talk to the president, or have lunch with the president, or chit chat with him, or...
A: The point is to not rely upon others for communication.
Q: (A) Should I recommend to George that he should advise the military guys to allot money to Constellation for the extra project so that I would be working with Constellation for this money rather than with George?
A: Why do you feel you must operate via George?
Q: But, if anything is said to the president, George might hear about it and cause problems.
A: Does George have your best interests in mind... or his?
Q: Well, he has certainly created the idea that he has our best interests at heart. He has been very good to us.
A: But where does this lead?
Q: This can lead to a big downfall. If you encounter somebody who appears to have your best interests at heart, and you trust them and act according to their advice, sometimes you can fall into a pit. But, on the other hand, sometimes they DO have your interests at heart. Yes, they have their own interests at heart, but they may see your interests and their interests as being coincidentally the same.
A: Coincidental, or dependent?
Q: In other words, what you are implying, is that George was in a rough spot; he got Ark and his work to beef up his image; George gets the credit for Ark's work, and still isn't getting ahead or being perceived as he thinks he ought to be even with Ark backing him up and working day and night; and George is getting ready to jump ship, and he wants to drag Ark with him because he thinks Ark is going to help him make money that he can't do on his own.
A: If you say this, we have only revealed for you that which you already sensed, even i f reluctantly.
Q: (A) At one point there was this opening, and perhaps there is still this opening, to hire somebody, and I can apply, but I understood from George that it is better NOT to have a job where I would have to go to Constellation daily; that it was better to work on contract. That was George's advice.
A: Remember, Constellation wishes to keep those whom it perceives have value!
Q: So, maybe Ark needs to talk to this president about this position? Is it possible to have a contract AND a position? A contracted position. Why is it that George says they can't fire him? If it was as easy to fire somebody as he suggests, why haven't they fired him with all this animosity going on? (A) Probably he was somehow nominated by the military when Constellation came into being. (L) I don't think that is a good excuse. Is that what he told you? (A) No, but I believe so. How else would he get this position as a vice president? He must have been nominated by somebody.
A: Manipulators manipulate... that is their trade.
Q: (A) Now, it sounds like if I work FOR Constellation, and if I am hired, then it is sure that I will NEVER have time for anything else. (L) Maybe you should talk those concerns over with the guy and use that as the reason you have been reluctant to apply for the position...
A: Those who have true value can "name their price."
Q: I think you should talk to the guy. You don't have to say that anybody advised you, but you can say that if you are a "full-time employee," you won't have time for your own research, that you are interested in furthering that and still being able to meet your financial goals, and that you are still considering it because, as you understand it, there is only going to be money until December, and you would like to find out what the status would be, if a position were offered to you, and if you did take it? What would be your status and what would be your prospects in terms of time and obligations to be IN the building and so forth. Don't sell yourself short. I really DO think that George is capitalizing on YOUR work for his own benefit.
A: It is "the American way."
Q: I don't think you should tell George in advance that you are going to talk to the president about taking a position. (A) Why? (F) Because then he will manipulate... he'll pull something out of the hat.... (A) No... (L) Don't tell him in advance what you are gonna do. Am I right?
A: Yes.
Q: Just, next time you go, ask George to see if the guy is there, and just walk down the hall and talk to him then and there, giving George no time to do anything in advance. Don't make the arrangements through George in advance. Am I right?
A: Yes.
Q: Now, we promised George that we would give him some advice about what to do about this military contract. What advice would you give to George? The major problem is that if he was going to ask for a military contract, he would have to do it right away in order for it to be budgeted for next year.
A: It is risky, as there are so many hurdles, so many "fingers in the pie."
Q: Once you tell George this answer, that even HE needs to stay with Constellation for the present, it gives you a platform from which to make it clear that you wish to go for the position.
A: We will give one more reinforcing example: where oh where does the budgeting come from?
Q: (A) Probably because there is some congressman in charge of this particular aspect. (L) And who is the congressman a friend of? George or the president of the company? (A) Probably the president, yes. (L) So, there it is. George would lose if he tried to go against that.
I want to throw something on the table here since it is kind of freaky. This guy writes "I've read the article written about you in the St. Pete Times, and have read much of the material posted on your webpage. Like you, I live in the Tampa Bay area. I was wondering if you could possibly do me a favor by asking a question of the C's. I am Wiccan. One night I was astral traveling while in a circle. While I was in the depths of space, I saw a craft with a large window where the bridge would be located. Through this window I saw beings of non-terrestrial origin. They had whitish and yellowish splotchy skin, elongated eyes, and a ridge that projected from their foreheads giving them a Neanderthal appearance. It also appeared that these beings were looking directly at me as though they could see me in my astral form. The question that I hope that you will ask for me is: were these beings that I saw members of the groups utilizing the Wave to travel toward the Earth? And were they able to see my astral form because they were higher density beings? I would appreciate greatly if you could ask this question in one of your upcoming channelling sessions. If you would like to contact me, please reply to this email. I hesitate to give out any further information due to the fact that we have never met." Well, I think it is pretty rich that I am supposed to give out information to someone I don't even know! Here he wants to take up MY time, but he hesitates to tell me anything about himself. I hesitate to exert my time on behalf of him here because I don't know him! Maybe I am being overly sensitive. But, yeah, we've never met, but he has read all about me in the newspaper.
A: Our suggestion: best to not watch too much "Star Trek" before astral traveling!
Q: Now, we have this very unique one-liner here: "Are you nuts? What level of existence are you on, anyway?" That's from Emily Gotchnaur.
A: Do you feel this requires a response?
Q: Ark already took care of it. But I AM curious about anyone who would write such a thing and what kind of level of existence is THAT person on? What kind of person would ask that kind of question?
A: Someone who likes to knock down, not build up.
Q: This is a good one. Brad has written a couple of times. He was reading the Flight 19 session and he said: "This indicates to me that perception can manifest into a reality given proper conditions." Is his assumption going in the right direction? Can perception manifest into reality given the proper conditions?
A: Essentially, but it is more complex, as it involves manifestations from other realities, where the conditions do not parallel yours.
Q: Now he says: "If true, then an individual could manifest their reality if enough energy or focus or will could be focused to produce a result." You just said that it involves energies from other realities than our own. But, he goes on to say: "What I think is implied here is that the dominant belief will be the most often produced result. However, if ten people believe they see a UFO, but three others don't believe they see a UFO, then what is the result in this case? Do the three non-believers end up seeing UFOs because their perception that UFO's do not exist is overridden by the ten people who DO believe?"
A: Trying to impose conditional conceptualizations re: 3rd density awareness.
Q: Well, the question still is, if ten people think they see a UFO, and three don't, DO the three non-believers see a UFO?
A: Not valid due to rigidity of concept.
Q: Well, let me go on: "The prevailing or popular belief seems to override the less popular belief if I read the text of your essay correctly. That would certainly explain why disinformation and propaganda used by religious groups is so effective. I am not sure about the proper way this works according to your essay. It seems to me that, in order for an individual to buck the trend of a commonly held belief or thought, and for that person to manifest their own reality, or produce a desired result, they would have to be very strong willed, or have the ability to focus their will and intention so as to magnify its power and produce a reality which differs from that which is the common perception. It's all rather confusing. If ten people believe that Napoleon never died, but is still alive, and two people believe he is dead, the dominant belief prevailing would have Napoleon still alive. Perhaps you could go into some detail on this at a later time. If all is illusion, as so many New Age teachings suggest, then there are no constraints as to what reality can be."
A: No constraints? Then why the attempt to impose constraints?
Q: I think the one thing he missed in that session was the point that we were talking specifically about the Flight 19 incident where you had already said that the EM field generated by the aberrant activities of the Atlantean crystal, created an opening into what you called the Thought Plane, and as long as it remained open, this condition prevailed. But, under most circumstances, this is not the condition under which we live.
A: And even the EM crystal itself is transitory; in the space/time continuum it is of the "Philadelphia Experiment" mode.
Q: The example of the Flight 19 situation was a description of an aberrant situation, even though these aberrations can and do occur naturally or artificially, sometimes planned and sometimes random. Is that correct?
A: Sort of.
Q: But, in talking about our consensual reality. Are the conditions, say, for example, on our planet, a result of the consensus reality?
A: Ditto last response.
Q: Okay. Sort of. You say that we have these programs, and that there is this undulating matrix force field around the planet that holds these effects, and the programs in place, so to speak, but that some people CAN get out of the control and see what is real, but most people cannot.
A: Yes, or do not.
Q: So, if a critical mass of people began to SEE things, or to escape from the programming, would that effect a change for others in terms of the way they experience the reality, or would the reality that they had been choosing to experience...
A: Such a "critical mass" does not occur until the consensus "chooses."
Q: So, the reality under which we live is essentially, even if held in place by manipulations from higher densities, and some sort of matrix control system, is CHOSEN?
A: Close.
Q: To get back to this idea about changing the reality: can an individual or group of individuals change their personal reality so that they no longer have to or are required to participate in the consensus reality?
A: It is possible.
Q: Is it, as our correspondent has said, because such people are very strong willed, or have the ability to focus their will and intentions so as to magnify the power of the will, to change the reality...
A: Constraints constrain.
Q: Yes. The Matrix page on the website discusses this. So, it amounts to the fact that if a person is in THIS reality, for some reason they have CHOSEN it until they learn how to UN-choose it. (A) The question is: how often can people do it? Yes, it is possible, but can we know more?
A: Some truly rare types possess this talent flukishly, as it does not represent normal 3rd density domain.
Q: You once remarked to Ark "He who has the will of a Lion does not have the fate of a mouse." And then you added "to paraphrase, 'I am become One, creator of Worlds.'" I would like to understand the implication of these remarks?
A: The understanding of that comes from exploration, not explanation.
Q: I kind of figured you were going to say that! Now, I have this book entitled "Arktos." He says something here that echoes a remark you once made. He says: "It is a very remarkable thing that enlightenment seems to have come from the North against the common prejudice that the Earth was enlightened as it was populated from South to North. The Scythians are one of the most ancient nations; the Chinese descend from them. The Atlanteans themselves, more ancient than the Egyptians, descend from them." You said that the civilizing influence came from the North to the South. Of course, all the standard texts claim that civilization came from South to North, starting in Mesopotamia. Now, getting...
A: Okay, just a minute here. Thinking Mesopotamia is the beginning is like thinking that the beginning starts at the 12th chapter.
Q: I know that! The problem is: finding artifacts. I've been searching and digging, and I find a little bit here and there, but my God! Either nothing survived...
A: Artifacts have a limited shelf life!
Q: Exactly! The problem is that they've got specimens of humanoid types from 100 to 200 thousand years ago, and even further, but no specimens of modern man that are that old. Why is this so? Are they just looking in the wrong places?
A: Specimens survive by sheer luck.
Q: So, they are lucky that they have any specimens at all. Who knows, when they find a very ancient specimen of a modern type human, they won't believe it - it will be called an "anomaly!" There ARE artifacts that are EXTREMELY ancient, which give evidence of the presence of modern type man, and they just simply argue themselves to death over them.
A: Yes.
Q: They ignore them. But, during the time Neanderthal man was on the Earth, did he live alongside Modern man?
A: Yes. Except modern type man was different then.
Q: In what ways?
A: DNA and psycho/electrical frequencies.
Q: Does this mean that their physical appearance was different from what we consider to be modern man?
A: Radiance.
Q: What do you mean "radiance?"
A: You find out!
Q: Oh, that's interesting. Well, there are legends that the Northern people had "light" in their veins. Very ancient belief. Is this what you are referring to?
A: Maybe.
Q: Was this light related to the hemoglobin level, the iron level in the blood?
A: Maybe.
Q: Did they have a much higher iron level in their blood?
A: Possibly....
Q: Okay, part of the ancient legend of Arktos was that, in very ancient times the Earth was different because it had a vertical axial orientation. This contributed to the golden age or the Edenic condition. Is this, in fact, one of the conditions that existed in the Golden Age? A; Well, yes, but still some puzzle pieces needed.
Q: I noticed also that there are several ball-park type figures given for the precessional cycles. Apparently there is not a whole lot of agreement as to how long this cycle is, exactly. I notice that, if you divide 309,882 years by 12, you come out right in the ball park of 12 precessional cycles. Is this the reason that the zodiac was set up with twelve signs or houses?
A: Related, yes.
Q: Now, since all the recent conjecture about the precessional cycle has really gone all over the place, it is my thought that the real reason for the ancient clues about this cycle are to inform us that the length of 12 of these cycles is a GRAND Cycle, and that THIS is the big clue.
A: Needs some study by you.
Q: One of the interesting things about this Northern civilizational factor is that one of the hallmarks of the Aryan attitude is the Male dominated religion. When did the masculine religion "take over?" Was this always the tendency or leaning of the Aryan group?
A: Involves more than religion. Religion is the facilitator.
Q: Facilitator of what?
A: Customary psycho/social habitue.
Q: Customary to whom?
A: Those whom you refer to as Aryans.
Q: Where did they acquire the "habit" of a masculine oriented religion? Everybody else was worshipping the goddess in one form or another. But this male dominated theology was the distinguishing characteristic of the Northern peoples. Where did they come up with this.
A: Originated on home planet.
Q: Kantek?
A: For all intents and purposes.
Q: Was it this male dominated religion that contributed to the destruction of Kantek?
A: No.
Q: Okay, when they were on their home planet, why did they develop a masculine religion as opposed to a feminine one, considering the fact that women are the source of life, in certain terms?
A: In your density, masculinism/feminish is essentially a roll of "the dice." Remember, at higher levels gender is nonexistent.
Q: Well, the problem I am having here is this: the masculine religion is monotheistic, essentially.
A: In your references.
Q: Was the older masculine religion polytheistic?
A: Going off the track.
Q: The Aryans always thought they were better than everybody else...
A: They were more advanced than the company they found themselves amongst.
Q: But then, as far as I can tell, the Hebrew monotheism is also derived from the Aryan, monotheistic, male dominated religion. It then "fathered" Christianity, and that has been the whole patriarchal, kill-em-all and let God sort-em-out war mongering thing under which we have lived for over 2000 years. This is the Western, European mind... it came from the Aryans, from the North; it was the so-called "civilizing" influence in nearly every respect that you can track. The cohesiveness and dominance of this type of thinking was able to civilize, but then civilization involves dominance, killing, war, territory, the Hitler scene, the whole nine yards. All of this is antithetical to all that you promote as far as being desirable. Yet, you have said that you were in contact with the Northern Peoples for millennia. Yes, Cassiopeia is a Northern Constellation, and probably figured in the early myths of these peoples in ways we cannot know, but the whole thing is that they represent all that is STS.
A: But so do you, so then why did we contact you?
Q: Well. I don't buy into that whole monotheistic, dominator, war-mongering, make everybody conform to one way of thinking head trip!
A: So, you think all individuals conformed then, or is it the soul that counts in the final analysis?
Q: Okay, obviously all individuals are different, and some did not conform then, either.
A: And neither do you.
Q: Point taken. I am just having a hard time with this. I wish you would just tell me! Who interacted with these Aryans to give them this male-dominated, monotheistic idea that they then sought to impose on every other human being on the planet - and are STILL trying!
A: Interactions were transdensity.
Q: Let me ask one final question. I am reading this book about Jack the Ripper. The author claims that the real Jack was a "mad surgeon," which is what you suggested at one other time. This book also says that the murders were inspired by political considerations. Supposedly, the murders were designed to cover up the murder of one, specific person. It is even said that the Masons were involved, and the actual murders were symbolic Masonic statements. Is there any truth to this theory?
A: Maybe a little.
Q: The killer, as suggested by this author, was Dr. William Gull, physician to Queen Victoria. Now, this theory is so close to what you suggested, that I was sort of amazed to read this book. The refutation comes from people who say that, around the time of the Ripper murders, Dr. Gull had a stroke and was, therefore, unable to physically perform the murders, so must have had an assistant. Right after the murders ended, he retired from the practice of medicine, saying he didn't "feel like himself." Supposedly, he died but there are some who say he was really locked up in an asylum and a fake funeral was held. Well, the guy writing the book really did find some evidence of a cover-up, though whether or not it was THIS being covered up, I can't tell. It IS a compelling story. When this Dr. Gull had this stroke, and the supposed epileptic seizures that followed, was he, in fact, possessed? Is he even the one? Was Dr. William Gull the Ripper?
A: The theory is close, but the details are incorrect.
Q: Can you satisfy my curiosity?
A: Not really, not tonight.
Q: But I want to KNOW! Was Dr. Gull the Ripper?
A: Such "gall." Good Night!
End of Session
