September 09, 2000
Ark, Laura, Frank, Barry
Q: Hello.
A: Hello.
Q: And who do we have with us this evening?
A: Larria.
Q: Where do you transmit through?
A: Cassiopaea.
Q: (A) Regarding my calculation of the coming of the comet cluster, taking into account all the data that were given, I came to the conclusion that there is no way to fit the data unless I assume that the period of the comet cluster is changing during these past 300,000 years. I had to assume that it is decreasing. Is this conclusion correct?
A: The period between visitations of the implicator is decreasing.
Q: (L) What is the implicator?
A: Visitor.
Q: (L) What is the visitor?
A: Maybe dialogue with Arkadiusz is good here.
Q: (L) Okay, I'll shut up. (A) Who is the implicator? Visitor?
A: Dark.
Q: (L) Oh, dark star. (A) Okay, let me ask again. I am not ready to discuss the dark star. My computations had to do with the comet cluster which is an independent visitor, as I understand it. What about the period of visitation of the comet cluster? Is it also decreasing?
A: In accordance.
Q: (A) In accordance with the period of the dark star?
A: Shrinking orbital plane.
Q: (A) In accordance with the shrinking orbital plane. Is shrinking of the orbital plane the same as the shrinking of the orbit?
A: Close.
Q: (A) Taking into account the decreasing of the period, I came to the conclusion from all the data, that the coming visit of the comet cluster will be, most probably in the middle of 2009, with possible plus or minus 6 months. So, it will come 2009. Are these calculations correct?
A: You are doing well.
Q: (A) Is the comet cluster going to come in 2009?
A: We refrain here...
Q: (A) I am done. (L) Now, I have this information that someone sent to me. It says that Palestinian rebels have 3 suitcase size, low yield, small capacity nuclear bombs. It further says that Palestinian leaders are being pressured to strike at Israel for blackmail purposes. The time factor which is critical is the third week of September. I guess they mean THIS September. It then says that, should this occur, Israel will strike back without compassion. Other Arab nations will gather to strike at Israel in the last week of October. Let me first ask if Palestinian rebels have nuclear bombs?
A: It is not Palestinians behind this effort.
Q: Who is behind this?
A: Complex, but consists of Persian influences.
Q: (L) Oh, the Iranians. Are they planning on using such a threat to blackmail Israel?
A: Will not work, if such effort is made.
Q: (L) If it doesn't work to try blackmail, will they use these bombs?
A: No. Think about it: bombs of nuclear capability in Israel cook Palestine too since they are essentially the same!
Q: (L) Not to mention Iran, Iraq, Syria, Saudi Arabia and the whole kit and kaboodle. One of the things said in this information is that America is supposed to be "distracted" BEFORE this strike, (so that would have to be pretty soon here), by using nuclear devices in OUR country. Are they planning on using nuclear bombs in the United States?
A: How is this accomplished?
Q: (L) Well, I guess the idea is that terrorists would smuggle them in somehow and plant them and Boom! There you have it!
A: You make it sound easy!
Q: (L) Well... Anyway, they say that there are seven of these nuclear bombs in the possession of Palestinian rebels or guerilla groups in the United States now, that were brought in across the Southern Border with Mexico. It further says that the cities with the highest probability of being hit are New York, San Francisco, and others. The whole thing is supposedly backed by the consortium of "regressive aliens," (whatever THAT is), composed of 19 races from the constellation of Orion along with the Draconians and Sirians. Well, it is sounding whackier by the minute, I gotta admit!
A: Good tale spinners!
Q: (L) Yeah. Where do they come up with this stuff? (A) But, you see, it seems that some kind of conspiracy has some bombs. Many kinds of conspirators may know about this fact, and somehow it has leaked out, so now they are discussing this and they are fighting over the best use of these bombs. The best use, as I would see it, is to use them for blackmail to get money. I would say that they may try to blackmail the government of the U.S. or Israel. But, blackmail will not work, and when it doesn't, then the first thing to do is use one so that the next attempt at blackmail WILL work. This might be the most likely scenario.
A: No. Who is going to pay? And for what and to whom? Your world does not operate like that.
Q: (L) Well, considering the incredible surveillance capabilities of the U.S. government, not to mention possible alien technology, it is hardly likely that any such group would get far in such a plan. Not only that, since there is already a One World Government, and ALL nations are already under the control of the human/alien Consortium, they certainly aren't going to go around blowing up what they already own. So, any information of this kind is purely and simply disinformation designed to confuse and disrupt and distract. Is that correct?
A: Close, and one can buy "low yield" weapons from disenfranchised Russians, but do they work?
Q: (L) Well, that's certainly a good question! Another remark was that these folks made a prediction that New York was going to be sacrificed by 1999 (which obviously did not happen!), via a terrorist act of nuclear detonation. Some of the same story here. But, anyway, this was supposedly prevented by the "good aliens" that are proposed to be in contact with this source. It is claimed that this terrible prediction did NOT come to pass because of the "intervention of the Andromedans." It says that San Francisco was targeted in order to set off the San Andreas fault, and that this disaster was designed to set off social and economic disorder which would result in more controls on a national level. Now, aside from the fact that it is really handy to make dire predictions and then, when they do not happen, to say that your "good guys" saved all our buns from the fire, it seems to be eluding these guys making the predictions that there is absolutely no need for anything like this to set up "national controls." In case they haven't noticed, we are already so completely controlled and monitored that there is simply no point in "fixing" what isn't broken! But, what is the likelihood that any of this kind of stuff is going on; that is, terrible things are being avoided by all these "interventions?"
A: Please Laura, enough with this fantasy dribble!
Q: (L) Well, okay. So much for that! That was my take on it too, but since inquiring minds have sent these questions, I did think I would present them! Now, this one ought to be quick. Another correspondent wants to ask some questions about his research in astrology. The question is: could you give a number, in percentages, representing the degree of influence or correspondence of astrological factors, relating to the whole system of possible influence over character, constitution, and destiny of an individual?
A: Varies according to the preconceived notions of the perceptor.
Q: (L) So, it could have a great deal of influence for someone who believes it does, or no influence over somebody who does not believe? Is it possible that, if you do not believe, it has no influence? Or...
A: No.
Q: (L) So, even if you believe it has no influence, it will still have some influence?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) For somebody who is completely skeptical, what would be the percentage of influence?
A: Not measurable in such terms.
Q: (L) Can you get me in a ball park here?
A: You are misconceiving.
Q: (B) Is the reason you can't give a percentage because, even under such circumstances, the percentages are variable?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) If it is variable, is there a percentage in a global or general sense of the term?
A: We have spoken of illusion before.
Q: (L) Is astrology in general a false assumption?
A: Astrology is a stepping stone to higher knowledge.
Q: (L) What is the most useful application of astrological concepts as known today?
A: Publishing works which other 3rd density types will gleefully purchase!
Q: (L) Well, that's pretty cynical! Now, this guy has developed something he calls the "Natural House System." He asks: Is the Natural House System a better approximation to the problem of houses in astrology related to other known systems? Is his idea better than what is out there?
A: If it if he can convince enough others.
Q: (L) Is there, in 4th density, an equivalent to 3rd density astrology?
A: Not needed there.
Q: (L) Okay, moving right along here. We have here a guy who has written a paper that says: "To make interstellar travel believable, NASA was created. The Apollo space program foisted the idea that man could travel to and walk upon the moon. Every Apollo mission was carefully rehearsed and then filmed in the large sound stages at the Atomic Energy Commission's Top Secret test site in the Nevada Desert and in the secured and guarded sound stage at the Walt Disney studios within which was a huge, full scale mock-up of the Moon." Is it true that the Apollo missions were films as described here?
A: No.
Q: (L) Did the Apollo missions actually go into space as we think they did?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) This guy further writes that "All names, missions, landing sites and events in the Apollo space program echo the occult metaphors, rituals and symbology of the Illuminati secret religion. The most transparent was the fakes explosion on the spacecraft Apollo 13 named 'Aquarius' at 1:13 on April 13, 1970, which was a metaphor for the initiation ceremony involving the death, placement of the coffin, communion with the spiritual world, and the imparting of esoteric knowledge to the candidate, rebirth of the initiate, and the raising up of Phoenix, the new age of Aquarius by the group of the Lion's Paw..." and so on and on. Was this occult significance applied to these events, either deliberately or accidentally?
A: Maybe coincidentally.
Q: (L) If there was any coincidence of application of these principles, did it bespeak an underlying synchronous or nonlocal reality of oneness?
A: These ideas being put forth this evening are entertaining if nothing else!
Q: (L) Well, I always said that you could derive occult significance from where the paper man tosses the paper on the lawn if you try hard enough! Nevertheless, this guy further writes that "The tremendous radiation encountered in the Van Allen belt, solar radiation, cosmic radiation, solar flares, temperature control and many other problems connected with space travel, prevent living organisms from leaving our atmosphere with our known level of technology. Any intelligent high school student with a basic physics book can prove NASA faked the Apollo moon landings. If you doubt this, please explain how the astronauts walked upon the moon surface enclosed in a space suit, in full sunlight, absorbing a minimum of 265 degrees of heat, surrounded by a vacuum. And that is not even taking into consideration any of the effects of the cosmic radiation, solar flares, micro-meteorites, etc." Comment please?
A: No comment!
Q: (A) On the list to which I am subscribed, there was news about a Brazilian physicist, D'Aquino is his name, who was doing experiments with anti-gravity. I was following his work, and it is true that he is a physicist, but what he was writing made no sense to me. Finally, he published a paper in which he described some effects he got, succeeding with his anti-gravity work, but when I read it, it seemed like cheating to me. The description was not of a TRUE anti-gravity effect. Nevertheless, NASA awarded this guy a 600 thousand dollar research grant to continue his research. The question is: did he really succeed in producing anti-gravity?
A: He succeeded in producing a red herring.
Q: (L) So, if we produce a red herring they'll give us money, too?
A: Payment is for distraction value only. Maybe you would get a grant, but you cannot use the funds to redecorate!
Q: (L) Now, we have a problem with our group. There was an issue some weeks ago where another member was in dire financial straits. He understood the rules that you have to ask for help. He was homeless, jobless, carless, and pretty much rejected by his own family. Of course, we know that such situations can exist either because of attack or simply because a person is a user and manipulator and their family and friends know the score. We know that people can leave themselves open for this kind of attack in many ways. Nevertheless, I made it clear that, if the guy was trying to expand his knowledge base, and if he asked for help, he would get it. He asked if we could help with the immediate financial thing. We basically took up a collection and sent it to him, he was able to renew his rent, got a job as a night watchman, and stabilized, or so it seems. But then, as moderator on the egroup, he began posting some writings that were certainly not a positive reflection on the Cassiopaea site, to say the least, though, in general, I have no argument with anybody thinking or writing anything they like. In this case, however, he had been warned that, as moderator, he was supposed to set an example. There was also some question as to whether his writings and musings about mass killings could be evidence of instability, which might then lead to backlash on the Cassiopaean site and US.
Knowing how such things, if left unattended, can certainly come back to hit you in the face, I made it clear to the group, the public, as it were, that this was not condoned nor was it reflective of our efforts. We removed him as moderator. The end result was that the small group started to talk about it and Linda decided that this was a BIG lesson for all of us, and if we didn't "get it" now, we were going to keep getting it over and over again. The big lesson, in her mind, was that we helped this guy and by helping him, we violated his free will because he didn't really "ask," and that opened the door for us to all be attacked.
Well, the list became quite divided on this one. There were those who were simply not expecting anything about the recipient to change, and who felt that giving was NOT a mistake. And then there was Linda and her circle, Carla and Alisa, who were all pretty much agreeing with her that we did a big boo-boo by giving ANYthing to this guy. Right at this point, problems erupted in the lives of a number of the group members. Linda got a big toothache and was attributing her toothache and energy problems to this "giving" episode. And, of course, it was notable that nobody had any problems until the idea that it WAS a problem was suggested.
However, in the midst of the toothache, Linda wrote about it again and, voila! Her tooth stopped hurting! She then wrote to me privately and listed the obvious attacks we were all getting: Sara had foot problems, Polly had bowel problems, my writing on the page that was produced right after this was stinky, I*** and A*** were depressed, and so on. The issue was, of course, even if the poor guy asked, did he REALLY ask?! The fact that saying it brought immediate relief to her tooth was, in her mind, validation. The fact is, however, that nobody had any problems UNTIL it was suggested, or insisted, that this was a big lesson and we all screwed up by giving! We should have made the guy crawl on his knees, or ask over and over or whatever. Now, this is the situation behind the questions. Before I even start, do you have a general comment on giving for the future?
A: Best to investigate carefully before giving.
Q: (L) Well, yes. We did investigate within the limitations of the medium. Perhaps not as thoroughly as would be liked, but considering the small sums of money involved, it wasn't worth a big deal here. But, again, as soon as the email was posted suggesting that we had a lesson going on because of Phillip's behavior on the list, the personal problems among the various members kicked in. My feeling was that if we gave with no strings, if we did not think it was going to "save" him, our intent was to demonstrate a principle. But, my question, straight out is: is Linda right that we should not have given anything at all?
A: When one gives, best to not expect ANY outcome.
Q: (L) I didn't. I wasn't even upset with the guy afterwards, except to just more or less calmly write the email that would establish disassociation and remove him as moderator. And, I did that simply as a preventive measure because of past experience. And, I don't think Polly or Sara or Barry or any of the others had any expectations either. But clearly, since she suggested that we made a mistake by trying to "save him," which was the last thing on my mind, that it was the FIRST thing on HER mind. She must have somehow felt that our act was going to save him, and she must have been attached to an outcome even if she said that she wasn't. She had a big string attached to her giving.
A: Yes.
Q: (L) Well, she writes to me about the physical manifestations that everybody was getting from Sara's feet to Polly's colon. She wrote that Polly "was pissed about the prospect that someone said she might be wrong" and that she was in denial and that this was the root of her colon problem, since P____s internet handle is Bucket Man, or BM, and now Polly had a "BM" problem. Linda read this as a clue, completely ignoring that this was a flare-up of an already existing condition and that IF the flare up related at all, it was more likely related to the conflict than P____ or helping him. Then, Sara's foot problem is related to the fact that she wrote to Linda that "she refuses to go there" as in getting into a conflict about Phillip, I guess. Of course, at this point, I became aware that Linda was more or less writing to the others on the list, trying to convince them that she was right since I was not confirming the "we made a mistake" idea. Actually, I thought the whole thing was a tempest in a teapot, but it was clearly a BIG deal to Linda. She had an outcome expectation, and nobody else did. She got this terrible toothache which lasted until she dumped on everybody how bad they were for giving to Phillip and how direful the consequences were going to be if we didn't "tighten up" and "get it."
A: Toothache is incidental but the heartache is not.
Q: (L) So, her heart was hurting and it manifested through the tooth?
A: Close.
Q: (L) Well, why did the toothache end after she "had her say," so to speak?
A: She was "dumping" negative energy. This always resolves issues for the "dumper," but not necessarily for the "dumpees."
Q: (L) I see. Well, the thing is, my feeling is that, from my own experience, when you see an issue like this outside of you, it reflects something in your personal life. You are in the process of giving and doing in a personal way, and you are asking for love, but not getting it. Is this a reflection of her lesson?
A: Reflectivity can be present but the lessons for individuals are for the individuals.
Q: (L) In a general sense, did we violate P_____'s free will by sending him cash?
A: No.
Q: (L) Did we interrupt his lessons? Or did we become part of an enriched lesson?
A: Closer to the latter.
Q: (L) Well, why did Polly have this flare up? Was that a result of Linda's dumping?
A: No.
Q: (L) Well, since she already asked me to ask, what IS the deal with the bowel problem?
A: Polly has lessons yet to be learned regarding internalization of anger, and the physical circumstances which match.
Q: (L) How can she follow up investigating this?
A: Past experiences fester.
Q: (L) What would be the best approach for her to deal with this?
A: Forgiveness helps, especially when concerned parties are now in 5th density.
Q: (L) Can you speak to her with something that will be a clue?
A: Tough, but not impossible.
Q: (L) Speaking of negative energy, where did negative energy come from that Linda is holding? Did she connect to P____ by giving?
A: P____ is not germane to her issues.
Q: (L) So, you are suggesting that there are just simply big issues going on with Linda and this incident was just a likely thing to blame it on? Did this negative energy come from her misperceptions? Does it come from outside her, as in someone projecting it onto her? Is it amplified emotions inside her? Is it her expectations or illusions?
A: Some of the above and more.
Q: Getting back to Polly, point her in a direction for relief while working on the issues.
A: Colonics.
Q: (L) Well, I would like to have some direction to be able to weather such storms. It is certainly too good a group for such an exaggeration of emotion to be allowed to destroy it!
A: Knowledge protects.
Q: (L) Am I making any mistakes in managing the problem? Am I supposed to manage it?
A: Of course!! If you were not making mistakes, now that would be a problem!
Q: (L) I don't know what that means. As long as I am making mistakes, I'm okay?
A: Unless you would like to transit quickly to a higher density unilaterally!
Q: (L) What does that mean? I guess, if you don't make mistakes, you have stopped learning...
A: Because you have finished your lessons... "Time to move on."
Q: (L) Is there any thing that would help Linda at all with this? What does she need to see, if anything?
A: She will not see it until she stops struggling.
Q: (L) And, knowing her, she is so stubborn she won't do that until she is laid flat on her back, literally or figuratively. Okay, let's move on. This Toltec book says that, on June 13, 1994, there was a very significant full moon. Supposedly, on that day, the earth entered a new era... etc. Was this full moon as significant as this guy, Theun Mares suggests?
A: No.
Q: (L) Is it time for people to clearly make a stand for which side they are going to fall on? STS or STO? Is this the big thing going on at this time?
A: No.
Q: (L) What IS the most important thing for human beings to be focusing on in terms of the opportunity of transitioning to 4th density?
A: There is no such thing!
Q: (L) I don't understand. (A) There is no such thing as the MOST important. Whatever is important to the individual is important, and it is different with each.
A: Yes, thank you Ark!!!
Q: (B) I've always had sounds in my ears and when driving through Louisiana, I was hearing a distinct "tinking" sound. Is there any significance to this?
A: You may hear many things, as you have increased psychic sensitivity in that way.
Q: (L) You should ask about this heart and lung business you were talking about earlier. (B) I don't know what to ask.
A: Let Barry ask what he desires to ask, please.
Q: (B) I just didn't want to clutter up the session with personal issues. Is there something specific that I should be doing, other than the normal routine things, to promote a healthier lung and circulatory system?
A: Diet. Vegetables increase.
Q: (B) That sums it up. Is there any benefit to chelation or peroxide via IV?
A: Chelation is preferable to bypass surgery. Peroxide: topical only, not internal.
Q: (L) I guess you could put it in a spray bottle and spritz it all over after a bath. (B) Is there any special direction or attention we should be aware of in regard to the investment club or in an overall sense?
A: On track.
Q: (L) Now, we had some guests today who were Scientologists, as I found out. Were they here to spy on us?
A: Maybe in a personal sense.
Q: (L) Is L. Ron Hubbard's Scientology set up going in the right direction in helping people to become free of the Control System on the planet?
A: Exchange, to a limited extent.
Q: (L) So, it is just an exchange of control system from one to another?
A: Something like that.
Q: (L) Well, the gentleman pointed out that, at least when Scientology gets done with a person, they are off drugs, off alcohol, they stop beating their wife and kids, and become productive people. That DOES seem to be true! They get free of attachments and improve themselves in many ways. Couldn't that be considered positive?
A: Sure.
Q: (L) What is the downside of such a positive thing?
A: Decreasing individual discovery.
Q: (L) Now, according to Scientology, an alien group landed in a volcano 70 million years ago, and it exploded and that started the human race, or something like that. Is any part of that accurate? This is the "initial event" that has to be ultimately audited. Could this be symbolic of the descent of man into matter?
A: Up to the individual perceiver.
Q: (L) Why is Scientology so secretive? That is something I don't care for, though I can mostly understand it.
A: Why is Masonic temple so secretive?
Q: (L) Is Scientology really as aggressively destructive toward people who say things against them as is reported?
A: No.
Q: (L) Did L. Ron Hubbard derive his information by plagiarizing other people's work?
A: Too general.
Q: (L) Did L. Ron Hubbard participate in sex magic rituals with Jack Parsons and Aliester Crowley?
A: Maybe.
Q: (L) Did he derive some of his information or teachings from these magical sex rites?
A: Maybe.
Q: (L) Was L. Ron Hubbard Greenbaumed?
A: Maybe.
Q: (L) Can sex magic rituals be a source for valid insight?
A: Can be, but so can all others. Insight is open to the individual's preferences.
Q: (L) What were the conditions surrounding L. Ron Hubbard when he died? Had he really gone mad or was he addicted to drugs?
A: Laura, this is so incredibly unimportant!
Q: (L) Is there any insight in a general sense that a person can gain by studying Scientology and the auditing process? Would it be a useful path to follow?
A: What did we just say?!?
Q: (L) Okay, I get it. Is there anything else we ought to cover that we haven't though about? Is there anything around the bend that we need to be aware of? Any concerns that we need to pay attention? If so, please indicate.
A: Well, specificity is not in vogue here tonight.
Q: (L) I had all these things backed up to ask for other people. I am just pressing forward on the website, so I didn't really have a set of questions prepared for the clarification issues.
A: You need not ask about that which you already know. i.e., please no more about the Andromedans!
Q: (L) I know. That stuff is so pathetic. But people get so worked up about those things!
A: So?!? It is not your lesson, so why consult us? They will believe what they wish to believe.
Q: (L) So, are any aliens gonna land this year? Are we gonna have any major UFO flaps? Is there gonna be a big solar flare to fry the planet?
A: Laura, you know better!
Q: (L) I was just joking...
A: Answer: yes, no, yes, yes, no, yes.
Q: (L) Now you are joking! You gave six answers for 3 questions!
A: Good night!
End of Session
Ark, Laura, Frank, Barry
Q: Hello.
A: Hello.
Q: And who do we have with us this evening?
A: Larria.
Q: Where do you transmit through?
A: Cassiopaea.
Q: (A) Regarding my calculation of the coming of the comet cluster, taking into account all the data that were given, I came to the conclusion that there is no way to fit the data unless I assume that the period of the comet cluster is changing during these past 300,000 years. I had to assume that it is decreasing. Is this conclusion correct?
A: The period between visitations of the implicator is decreasing.
Q: (L) What is the implicator?
A: Visitor.
Q: (L) What is the visitor?
A: Maybe dialogue with Arkadiusz is good here.
Q: (L) Okay, I'll shut up. (A) Who is the implicator? Visitor?
A: Dark.
Q: (L) Oh, dark star. (A) Okay, let me ask again. I am not ready to discuss the dark star. My computations had to do with the comet cluster which is an independent visitor, as I understand it. What about the period of visitation of the comet cluster? Is it also decreasing?
A: In accordance.
Q: (A) In accordance with the period of the dark star?
A: Shrinking orbital plane.
Q: (A) In accordance with the shrinking orbital plane. Is shrinking of the orbital plane the same as the shrinking of the orbit?
A: Close.
Q: (A) Taking into account the decreasing of the period, I came to the conclusion from all the data, that the coming visit of the comet cluster will be, most probably in the middle of 2009, with possible plus or minus 6 months. So, it will come 2009. Are these calculations correct?
A: You are doing well.
Q: (A) Is the comet cluster going to come in 2009?
A: We refrain here...
Q: (A) I am done. (L) Now, I have this information that someone sent to me. It says that Palestinian rebels have 3 suitcase size, low yield, small capacity nuclear bombs. It further says that Palestinian leaders are being pressured to strike at Israel for blackmail purposes. The time factor which is critical is the third week of September. I guess they mean THIS September. It then says that, should this occur, Israel will strike back without compassion. Other Arab nations will gather to strike at Israel in the last week of October. Let me first ask if Palestinian rebels have nuclear bombs?
A: It is not Palestinians behind this effort.
Q: Who is behind this?
A: Complex, but consists of Persian influences.
Q: (L) Oh, the Iranians. Are they planning on using such a threat to blackmail Israel?
A: Will not work, if such effort is made.
Q: (L) If it doesn't work to try blackmail, will they use these bombs?
A: No. Think about it: bombs of nuclear capability in Israel cook Palestine too since they are essentially the same!
Q: (L) Not to mention Iran, Iraq, Syria, Saudi Arabia and the whole kit and kaboodle. One of the things said in this information is that America is supposed to be "distracted" BEFORE this strike, (so that would have to be pretty soon here), by using nuclear devices in OUR country. Are they planning on using nuclear bombs in the United States?
A: How is this accomplished?
Q: (L) Well, I guess the idea is that terrorists would smuggle them in somehow and plant them and Boom! There you have it!
A: You make it sound easy!
Q: (L) Well... Anyway, they say that there are seven of these nuclear bombs in the possession of Palestinian rebels or guerilla groups in the United States now, that were brought in across the Southern Border with Mexico. It further says that the cities with the highest probability of being hit are New York, San Francisco, and others. The whole thing is supposedly backed by the consortium of "regressive aliens," (whatever THAT is), composed of 19 races from the constellation of Orion along with the Draconians and Sirians. Well, it is sounding whackier by the minute, I gotta admit!
A: Good tale spinners!
Q: (L) Yeah. Where do they come up with this stuff? (A) But, you see, it seems that some kind of conspiracy has some bombs. Many kinds of conspirators may know about this fact, and somehow it has leaked out, so now they are discussing this and they are fighting over the best use of these bombs. The best use, as I would see it, is to use them for blackmail to get money. I would say that they may try to blackmail the government of the U.S. or Israel. But, blackmail will not work, and when it doesn't, then the first thing to do is use one so that the next attempt at blackmail WILL work. This might be the most likely scenario.
A: No. Who is going to pay? And for what and to whom? Your world does not operate like that.
Q: (L) Well, considering the incredible surveillance capabilities of the U.S. government, not to mention possible alien technology, it is hardly likely that any such group would get far in such a plan. Not only that, since there is already a One World Government, and ALL nations are already under the control of the human/alien Consortium, they certainly aren't going to go around blowing up what they already own. So, any information of this kind is purely and simply disinformation designed to confuse and disrupt and distract. Is that correct?
A: Close, and one can buy "low yield" weapons from disenfranchised Russians, but do they work?
Q: (L) Well, that's certainly a good question! Another remark was that these folks made a prediction that New York was going to be sacrificed by 1999 (which obviously did not happen!), via a terrorist act of nuclear detonation. Some of the same story here. But, anyway, this was supposedly prevented by the "good aliens" that are proposed to be in contact with this source. It is claimed that this terrible prediction did NOT come to pass because of the "intervention of the Andromedans." It says that San Francisco was targeted in order to set off the San Andreas fault, and that this disaster was designed to set off social and economic disorder which would result in more controls on a national level. Now, aside from the fact that it is really handy to make dire predictions and then, when they do not happen, to say that your "good guys" saved all our buns from the fire, it seems to be eluding these guys making the predictions that there is absolutely no need for anything like this to set up "national controls." In case they haven't noticed, we are already so completely controlled and monitored that there is simply no point in "fixing" what isn't broken! But, what is the likelihood that any of this kind of stuff is going on; that is, terrible things are being avoided by all these "interventions?"
A: Please Laura, enough with this fantasy dribble!
Q: (L) Well, okay. So much for that! That was my take on it too, but since inquiring minds have sent these questions, I did think I would present them! Now, this one ought to be quick. Another correspondent wants to ask some questions about his research in astrology. The question is: could you give a number, in percentages, representing the degree of influence or correspondence of astrological factors, relating to the whole system of possible influence over character, constitution, and destiny of an individual?
A: Varies according to the preconceived notions of the perceptor.
Q: (L) So, it could have a great deal of influence for someone who believes it does, or no influence over somebody who does not believe? Is it possible that, if you do not believe, it has no influence? Or...
A: No.
Q: (L) So, even if you believe it has no influence, it will still have some influence?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) For somebody who is completely skeptical, what would be the percentage of influence?
A: Not measurable in such terms.
Q: (L) Can you get me in a ball park here?
A: You are misconceiving.
Q: (B) Is the reason you can't give a percentage because, even under such circumstances, the percentages are variable?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) If it is variable, is there a percentage in a global or general sense of the term?
A: We have spoken of illusion before.
Q: (L) Is astrology in general a false assumption?
A: Astrology is a stepping stone to higher knowledge.
Q: (L) What is the most useful application of astrological concepts as known today?
A: Publishing works which other 3rd density types will gleefully purchase!
Q: (L) Well, that's pretty cynical! Now, this guy has developed something he calls the "Natural House System." He asks: Is the Natural House System a better approximation to the problem of houses in astrology related to other known systems? Is his idea better than what is out there?
A: If it if he can convince enough others.
Q: (L) Is there, in 4th density, an equivalent to 3rd density astrology?
A: Not needed there.
Q: (L) Okay, moving right along here. We have here a guy who has written a paper that says: "To make interstellar travel believable, NASA was created. The Apollo space program foisted the idea that man could travel to and walk upon the moon. Every Apollo mission was carefully rehearsed and then filmed in the large sound stages at the Atomic Energy Commission's Top Secret test site in the Nevada Desert and in the secured and guarded sound stage at the Walt Disney studios within which was a huge, full scale mock-up of the Moon." Is it true that the Apollo missions were films as described here?
A: No.
Q: (L) Did the Apollo missions actually go into space as we think they did?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) This guy further writes that "All names, missions, landing sites and events in the Apollo space program echo the occult metaphors, rituals and symbology of the Illuminati secret religion. The most transparent was the fakes explosion on the spacecraft Apollo 13 named 'Aquarius' at 1:13 on April 13, 1970, which was a metaphor for the initiation ceremony involving the death, placement of the coffin, communion with the spiritual world, and the imparting of esoteric knowledge to the candidate, rebirth of the initiate, and the raising up of Phoenix, the new age of Aquarius by the group of the Lion's Paw..." and so on and on. Was this occult significance applied to these events, either deliberately or accidentally?
A: Maybe coincidentally.
Q: (L) If there was any coincidence of application of these principles, did it bespeak an underlying synchronous or nonlocal reality of oneness?
A: These ideas being put forth this evening are entertaining if nothing else!
Q: (L) Well, I always said that you could derive occult significance from where the paper man tosses the paper on the lawn if you try hard enough! Nevertheless, this guy further writes that "The tremendous radiation encountered in the Van Allen belt, solar radiation, cosmic radiation, solar flares, temperature control and many other problems connected with space travel, prevent living organisms from leaving our atmosphere with our known level of technology. Any intelligent high school student with a basic physics book can prove NASA faked the Apollo moon landings. If you doubt this, please explain how the astronauts walked upon the moon surface enclosed in a space suit, in full sunlight, absorbing a minimum of 265 degrees of heat, surrounded by a vacuum. And that is not even taking into consideration any of the effects of the cosmic radiation, solar flares, micro-meteorites, etc." Comment please?
A: No comment!
Q: (A) On the list to which I am subscribed, there was news about a Brazilian physicist, D'Aquino is his name, who was doing experiments with anti-gravity. I was following his work, and it is true that he is a physicist, but what he was writing made no sense to me. Finally, he published a paper in which he described some effects he got, succeeding with his anti-gravity work, but when I read it, it seemed like cheating to me. The description was not of a TRUE anti-gravity effect. Nevertheless, NASA awarded this guy a 600 thousand dollar research grant to continue his research. The question is: did he really succeed in producing anti-gravity?
A: He succeeded in producing a red herring.
Q: (L) So, if we produce a red herring they'll give us money, too?
A: Payment is for distraction value only. Maybe you would get a grant, but you cannot use the funds to redecorate!
Q: (L) Now, we have a problem with our group. There was an issue some weeks ago where another member was in dire financial straits. He understood the rules that you have to ask for help. He was homeless, jobless, carless, and pretty much rejected by his own family. Of course, we know that such situations can exist either because of attack or simply because a person is a user and manipulator and their family and friends know the score. We know that people can leave themselves open for this kind of attack in many ways. Nevertheless, I made it clear that, if the guy was trying to expand his knowledge base, and if he asked for help, he would get it. He asked if we could help with the immediate financial thing. We basically took up a collection and sent it to him, he was able to renew his rent, got a job as a night watchman, and stabilized, or so it seems. But then, as moderator on the egroup, he began posting some writings that were certainly not a positive reflection on the Cassiopaea site, to say the least, though, in general, I have no argument with anybody thinking or writing anything they like. In this case, however, he had been warned that, as moderator, he was supposed to set an example. There was also some question as to whether his writings and musings about mass killings could be evidence of instability, which might then lead to backlash on the Cassiopaean site and US.
Knowing how such things, if left unattended, can certainly come back to hit you in the face, I made it clear to the group, the public, as it were, that this was not condoned nor was it reflective of our efforts. We removed him as moderator. The end result was that the small group started to talk about it and Linda decided that this was a BIG lesson for all of us, and if we didn't "get it" now, we were going to keep getting it over and over again. The big lesson, in her mind, was that we helped this guy and by helping him, we violated his free will because he didn't really "ask," and that opened the door for us to all be attacked.
Well, the list became quite divided on this one. There were those who were simply not expecting anything about the recipient to change, and who felt that giving was NOT a mistake. And then there was Linda and her circle, Carla and Alisa, who were all pretty much agreeing with her that we did a big boo-boo by giving ANYthing to this guy. Right at this point, problems erupted in the lives of a number of the group members. Linda got a big toothache and was attributing her toothache and energy problems to this "giving" episode. And, of course, it was notable that nobody had any problems until the idea that it WAS a problem was suggested.
However, in the midst of the toothache, Linda wrote about it again and, voila! Her tooth stopped hurting! She then wrote to me privately and listed the obvious attacks we were all getting: Sara had foot problems, Polly had bowel problems, my writing on the page that was produced right after this was stinky, I*** and A*** were depressed, and so on. The issue was, of course, even if the poor guy asked, did he REALLY ask?! The fact that saying it brought immediate relief to her tooth was, in her mind, validation. The fact is, however, that nobody had any problems UNTIL it was suggested, or insisted, that this was a big lesson and we all screwed up by giving! We should have made the guy crawl on his knees, or ask over and over or whatever. Now, this is the situation behind the questions. Before I even start, do you have a general comment on giving for the future?
A: Best to investigate carefully before giving.
Q: (L) Well, yes. We did investigate within the limitations of the medium. Perhaps not as thoroughly as would be liked, but considering the small sums of money involved, it wasn't worth a big deal here. But, again, as soon as the email was posted suggesting that we had a lesson going on because of Phillip's behavior on the list, the personal problems among the various members kicked in. My feeling was that if we gave with no strings, if we did not think it was going to "save" him, our intent was to demonstrate a principle. But, my question, straight out is: is Linda right that we should not have given anything at all?
A: When one gives, best to not expect ANY outcome.
Q: (L) I didn't. I wasn't even upset with the guy afterwards, except to just more or less calmly write the email that would establish disassociation and remove him as moderator. And, I did that simply as a preventive measure because of past experience. And, I don't think Polly or Sara or Barry or any of the others had any expectations either. But clearly, since she suggested that we made a mistake by trying to "save him," which was the last thing on my mind, that it was the FIRST thing on HER mind. She must have somehow felt that our act was going to save him, and she must have been attached to an outcome even if she said that she wasn't. She had a big string attached to her giving.
A: Yes.
Q: (L) Well, she writes to me about the physical manifestations that everybody was getting from Sara's feet to Polly's colon. She wrote that Polly "was pissed about the prospect that someone said she might be wrong" and that she was in denial and that this was the root of her colon problem, since P____s internet handle is Bucket Man, or BM, and now Polly had a "BM" problem. Linda read this as a clue, completely ignoring that this was a flare-up of an already existing condition and that IF the flare up related at all, it was more likely related to the conflict than P____ or helping him. Then, Sara's foot problem is related to the fact that she wrote to Linda that "she refuses to go there" as in getting into a conflict about Phillip, I guess. Of course, at this point, I became aware that Linda was more or less writing to the others on the list, trying to convince them that she was right since I was not confirming the "we made a mistake" idea. Actually, I thought the whole thing was a tempest in a teapot, but it was clearly a BIG deal to Linda. She had an outcome expectation, and nobody else did. She got this terrible toothache which lasted until she dumped on everybody how bad they were for giving to Phillip and how direful the consequences were going to be if we didn't "tighten up" and "get it."
A: Toothache is incidental but the heartache is not.
Q: (L) So, her heart was hurting and it manifested through the tooth?
A: Close.
Q: (L) Well, why did the toothache end after she "had her say," so to speak?
A: She was "dumping" negative energy. This always resolves issues for the "dumper," but not necessarily for the "dumpees."
Q: (L) I see. Well, the thing is, my feeling is that, from my own experience, when you see an issue like this outside of you, it reflects something in your personal life. You are in the process of giving and doing in a personal way, and you are asking for love, but not getting it. Is this a reflection of her lesson?
A: Reflectivity can be present but the lessons for individuals are for the individuals.
Q: (L) In a general sense, did we violate P_____'s free will by sending him cash?
A: No.
Q: (L) Did we interrupt his lessons? Or did we become part of an enriched lesson?
A: Closer to the latter.
Q: (L) Well, why did Polly have this flare up? Was that a result of Linda's dumping?
A: No.
Q: (L) Well, since she already asked me to ask, what IS the deal with the bowel problem?
A: Polly has lessons yet to be learned regarding internalization of anger, and the physical circumstances which match.
Q: (L) How can she follow up investigating this?
A: Past experiences fester.
Q: (L) What would be the best approach for her to deal with this?
A: Forgiveness helps, especially when concerned parties are now in 5th density.
Q: (L) Can you speak to her with something that will be a clue?
A: Tough, but not impossible.
Q: (L) Speaking of negative energy, where did negative energy come from that Linda is holding? Did she connect to P____ by giving?
A: P____ is not germane to her issues.
Q: (L) So, you are suggesting that there are just simply big issues going on with Linda and this incident was just a likely thing to blame it on? Did this negative energy come from her misperceptions? Does it come from outside her, as in someone projecting it onto her? Is it amplified emotions inside her? Is it her expectations or illusions?
A: Some of the above and more.
Q: Getting back to Polly, point her in a direction for relief while working on the issues.
A: Colonics.
Q: (L) Well, I would like to have some direction to be able to weather such storms. It is certainly too good a group for such an exaggeration of emotion to be allowed to destroy it!
A: Knowledge protects.
Q: (L) Am I making any mistakes in managing the problem? Am I supposed to manage it?
A: Of course!! If you were not making mistakes, now that would be a problem!
Q: (L) I don't know what that means. As long as I am making mistakes, I'm okay?
A: Unless you would like to transit quickly to a higher density unilaterally!
Q: (L) What does that mean? I guess, if you don't make mistakes, you have stopped learning...
A: Because you have finished your lessons... "Time to move on."
Q: (L) Is there any thing that would help Linda at all with this? What does she need to see, if anything?
A: She will not see it until she stops struggling.
Q: (L) And, knowing her, she is so stubborn she won't do that until she is laid flat on her back, literally or figuratively. Okay, let's move on. This Toltec book says that, on June 13, 1994, there was a very significant full moon. Supposedly, on that day, the earth entered a new era... etc. Was this full moon as significant as this guy, Theun Mares suggests?
A: No.
Q: (L) Is it time for people to clearly make a stand for which side they are going to fall on? STS or STO? Is this the big thing going on at this time?
A: No.
Q: (L) What IS the most important thing for human beings to be focusing on in terms of the opportunity of transitioning to 4th density?
A: There is no such thing!
Q: (L) I don't understand. (A) There is no such thing as the MOST important. Whatever is important to the individual is important, and it is different with each.
A: Yes, thank you Ark!!!
Q: (B) I've always had sounds in my ears and when driving through Louisiana, I was hearing a distinct "tinking" sound. Is there any significance to this?
A: You may hear many things, as you have increased psychic sensitivity in that way.
Q: (L) You should ask about this heart and lung business you were talking about earlier. (B) I don't know what to ask.
A: Let Barry ask what he desires to ask, please.
Q: (B) I just didn't want to clutter up the session with personal issues. Is there something specific that I should be doing, other than the normal routine things, to promote a healthier lung and circulatory system?
A: Diet. Vegetables increase.
Q: (B) That sums it up. Is there any benefit to chelation or peroxide via IV?
A: Chelation is preferable to bypass surgery. Peroxide: topical only, not internal.
Q: (L) I guess you could put it in a spray bottle and spritz it all over after a bath. (B) Is there any special direction or attention we should be aware of in regard to the investment club or in an overall sense?
A: On track.
Q: (L) Now, we had some guests today who were Scientologists, as I found out. Were they here to spy on us?
A: Maybe in a personal sense.
Q: (L) Is L. Ron Hubbard's Scientology set up going in the right direction in helping people to become free of the Control System on the planet?
A: Exchange, to a limited extent.
Q: (L) So, it is just an exchange of control system from one to another?
A: Something like that.
Q: (L) Well, the gentleman pointed out that, at least when Scientology gets done with a person, they are off drugs, off alcohol, they stop beating their wife and kids, and become productive people. That DOES seem to be true! They get free of attachments and improve themselves in many ways. Couldn't that be considered positive?
A: Sure.
Q: (L) What is the downside of such a positive thing?
A: Decreasing individual discovery.
Q: (L) Now, according to Scientology, an alien group landed in a volcano 70 million years ago, and it exploded and that started the human race, or something like that. Is any part of that accurate? This is the "initial event" that has to be ultimately audited. Could this be symbolic of the descent of man into matter?
A: Up to the individual perceiver.
Q: (L) Why is Scientology so secretive? That is something I don't care for, though I can mostly understand it.
A: Why is Masonic temple so secretive?
Q: (L) Is Scientology really as aggressively destructive toward people who say things against them as is reported?
A: No.
Q: (L) Did L. Ron Hubbard derive his information by plagiarizing other people's work?
A: Too general.
Q: (L) Did L. Ron Hubbard participate in sex magic rituals with Jack Parsons and Aliester Crowley?
A: Maybe.
Q: (L) Did he derive some of his information or teachings from these magical sex rites?
A: Maybe.
Q: (L) Was L. Ron Hubbard Greenbaumed?
A: Maybe.
Q: (L) Can sex magic rituals be a source for valid insight?
A: Can be, but so can all others. Insight is open to the individual's preferences.
Q: (L) What were the conditions surrounding L. Ron Hubbard when he died? Had he really gone mad or was he addicted to drugs?
A: Laura, this is so incredibly unimportant!
Q: (L) Is there any insight in a general sense that a person can gain by studying Scientology and the auditing process? Would it be a useful path to follow?
A: What did we just say?!?
Q: (L) Okay, I get it. Is there anything else we ought to cover that we haven't though about? Is there anything around the bend that we need to be aware of? Any concerns that we need to pay attention? If so, please indicate.
A: Well, specificity is not in vogue here tonight.
Q: (L) I had all these things backed up to ask for other people. I am just pressing forward on the website, so I didn't really have a set of questions prepared for the clarification issues.
A: You need not ask about that which you already know. i.e., please no more about the Andromedans!
Q: (L) I know. That stuff is so pathetic. But people get so worked up about those things!
A: So?!? It is not your lesson, so why consult us? They will believe what they wish to believe.
Q: (L) So, are any aliens gonna land this year? Are we gonna have any major UFO flaps? Is there gonna be a big solar flare to fry the planet?
A: Laura, you know better!
Q: (L) I was just joking...
A: Answer: yes, no, yes, yes, no, yes.
Q: (L) Now you are joking! You gave six answers for 3 questions!
A: Good night!
End of Session
