C's Transcript After 28th Sept 02

Q: (L) We are a little bit curious about the strange weather. Is this the beginning of the ice age?

A: It is a precursor.

Click to expand...

Q: (L) What is driving Bush to have his war with Iraq?
A: Orders. Bush knows little in any respect as to what or why he does anything.
Q: Is the war drama merely a play being put on to keep us all distracted and in a state of fear?
A: More or less.
Q: Yet, you said the United States would be bombed, and on another occasion you said there would not be a nuclear war.
A: "Bombs" are not all "nuclear." And, there are "natural bombs."
Q: (A) I want to ask about the collapse of the World Trade Center. There is evidence of seismicity and unusual pulses that seem to have simply disintegrated matter.
A: Very good observation, but that does not mean human sabotage either. There were certainly "pulses." They were of a "natural" source that was "sculpted" or "shaped" and directed.
Q: What do you mean by a 'natural source?'
A: Energies of the planet artificially collected and disbursed. An artificial earthquake sort of.
Q: But we are still talking about technology. Where is the operational center for this type of thing?
A: 4th density technology.
Q: This we know. But there are human brain involved. What brains are behind this?
A: Did you ever wonder why the pentagon is a pentagon? Hint!
Q: Is that why they specifically included the Pentagon as one of the buildings to be hit in the 9-11 attack; to allay suspicions?
A: Yup!
Q: Are there 4th density sections to the Pentagon?
A: Absolutely. It is a "deep cover" kind of place.
Q: (A) There is this Pentagon, then there is another superpower - Russia - and still another - China...
A: There is only one. The U.S. just happens to be the center.
Q: (A) Well. (L) Maybe the heads of these other countries are all like George Bush. They don't know why they do what they do. It's all been scripted from somewhere else. (A) Question is: there is Europe - how can France or Russia or whoever, win against this kind of technology? Apparently, since there is only one center, and this center of technology is the U.S, it seems pretty hopeless.
A: Remember Perseus and David and Goliath. Besides, help is drawing near.
Q: (A) Help. (L) Sometimes I have the feeling that when they say "help is drawing near," it really means that that our "future" is getting closer and we are going to be the ones doing the helping! [Laughter.]
A: Close, but not all.
Q: (A) That means there are surprises waiting for us. (L) I think that people concentrating on the anti-war thing is a waste of time. I think they ought to be concentrating on the "impeach Bush" issue. But then, what good would it do to impeach Bush. Same thing would have happened with Gore. Until people wake up to the reality of 4th density manipulation, we are all in deep doo doo.
A: True.
Q: (L) I guess they are all gonna gather together there on the battlefield and when they are all there, something is gonna happen to scare the bayjeezus out of them...
A: Maybe...
Q: (A) The point is, that people have no choice. They are backed into a corner. The only thing they can do now is just impeach Bush. If they don't do that, there is nothing else they can do. Because if they don't do anything, they will bear the blame for doing nothing - the same way Germany did after Hitler. All the signs are here now: it is exactly like it was in 1939 in Europe.

(L) Well, anything we do, we cannot anticipate the outcome. We can't even know if it will be helpful. We just have to do what is right from one moment to the next based on what we know using our best efforts. For all we know, if we keep pushing the "impeach Bush" issue, we may end up in jail as "enemy combatants."

(A) What did we learn? That there is this help on the way. We know that we cannot quit working. We are helping the help, so to say.

(L) Well, I wrote to some people pointing out that the anti-war stance is only more divisiveness. There are people who are for the war to support Bush, and there are people who are against the war who don't support Bush. It is a question of supporting Bush. Everybody agrees that Saddam is a stinker, but they can't agree on whether how Bush is handling the matter is appropriate or not. They forget that what is happening here is that they are all being put into an oppositional stance against each other, and Bush, himself, is coming out on top clean. If they would concentrate on the REAL issues: that Bush is a liar, that he is not even our legal president, that he stole the election by nefarious means, that he is a criminal from a criminal family, making it clear and plain with facts and massive media coverage about who and what Bush really is, then the whole issue would be focused where it belongs: on Bush and the Consortium that has put him in power to serve its agenda. But, instead of concentrating on the problem - of which Bush is only the representative, the real issue being the Consortium - people are not seeing that the whole situation is being manipulated for the benefit of the Industrial-Military Complex just as Eisenhower foresaw. Bush is only the puppet for this Consortium. If that could be seen as the real danger that it is, if they could impeach Bush - who is their creature - and get somebody into the presidency who was uncorruptible, who could kick butt and take names like Kennedy tried to do.

Well, we have learned. Kennedy didn't take the danger as seriously as he should have. If he had, maybe he could have carried through what he wanted to do: disband the CIA, tie the hands of the military, make things more equitable for the common people, enhance civil rights and civil liberties. If we could get somebody in the White House who was smart enough to not get assassinated, and who was clean and not tied up with the consortium, things really COULD change.

(A) The problem is only in America. If America would just stand down, Saddam would be dealt with appropriately. Nobody likes the guy. He doesn't have anything. He is no danger to anybody. But Bush is a danger to the whole planet. He has created this crisis and the whole world has gone to hell in just a few months. (L) And the reason he is able to do what he is doing - which is basically that he is going to destroy the whole damn planet - is because of the media. The media is controlled by the Jews who have only one agenda: to own all of Palestine and revenge. And so, they dangle carrots for Bush to follow without even knowing that they are signing their own death warrant. They are following the script of the Consortium which wants, above all other things, to see all Semitic peoples destroyed, and their hubris won't even allow them to see it. For that reason, the Jews have helped George Bush plunge the entire world into chaos. And they will wonder why, at the last moment, everyone hates them just as Americans will wonder why they are the most hated nation on Earth. Blind hubris.

(Ark) Well, there is this Game Theory, and they are employing it to the max. They are playing a game. They know where the buttons need to be pushed, to steer the delicate equilibrium where they want it.

(L) No one in the world of politics is clean. No one. They are all dirty, and if you know all the dirt, you can do what you want. As much as it seems to be a horrible thing to lay at the door of the Jews, that's where it ends up of its own. You can't help it. You follow the threads, and that's where they take you: the Zionists.

(A) So, if something comes along that destroys their game theory...the whole operation will collapse. Game theory is based on data.

(L) It's like Vincent Bridges. His whole game was based on pushing our buttons, trying to blackmail us, saying things like "I'll tell the whole sordid story." Well, guess what? I'll tell it first! I'm not perfect and I have certainly made mistakes. But nobody is going to use it to control me. If other people could do that, if they could get over their fear of being judged for making mistakes, there would be nothing that anyone could hold over their head anymore.

(A) Okay, there is Bush and his Skull and Bones. And then, there is the Illuminati. And they are looking for something. So, probably somebody behind Bush is also looking for something. So, the only way for us to help, is to work on this project. And then, hopefully, these people will halt this mass destruction hoping they will get what they are after: grail or whatever. Because if they destroy the world, they will get nothing.

(L) And then meanwhile, there is the North Korean guy - the mirror image of George Bush; everything he says and does is modeled from George Bush. It is actually comical to watch them. "I'm going to blow up the world!" "No you're not, I'm going to blow it up first! I'm going to turn America into a sea of fire." And Bush is saying "I'm going to bomb Iraq back to the stone age." "No you're not! We're going to bomb YOU back to before the Stone Age!" They are like two identical characters! Crazy! We are in a hell of a mess. Any comments?
A: The situation looks bleak indeed. But remember the Achilles heel of STS: Wishful Thinking.
Q: In this case, how is wishful thinking going to help?
A: There will be a big miscalculation made. It will reveal the "Man behind the curtain."

Click to expand...

[...]
Q: ... One of the questions we would like to clear up is the issue of the Holy Grail and the Ark. Is the Ark of the covenant - the ark thing given to the early pre-Mosaic Jews that you have described previously - the same as the Holy Grail?
A: No.
Q: (L) So there are two completely different technologies?
A: If you wish to term it such.
Q: (L) Why did they answer the question that way? What is the distinguishing thing between them?
(A) Maybe 'as such' refers to the fact that you termed it 'technology.' Maybe this is not quite the correct term. Technology can be part of it, but maybe not the most important part.
(H) Is one an STS tool and the other an STO tool?
A: Yes and no.
Q: (H) Thanks guys! That's real clear!
A: This is an issue that will clarify itself soon enough.
Q: (L) Is my idea correct that we can identify the presence of these more-or-less technologies by the architecture or art or megalithic structures of the different groups on the planet?
A: To some extent, yes. But do not let that be the only clue. You might consider "lifestyle" as well as the presence and uses of metals; particularly gold vs. iron.
Q: (L) So, we have a whole different set of clues to look at here. Alrighty then! Was what we are calling the Ark of the Covenant at Baalbek?
A: No. But there were certainly those who had advanced knowledge.
Q: (L) I hate it when they do that: blow my theory to bits. Was there a "grail faction" and an "ark faction?"
A: Pretty much.
Q: (L) Was Baalbek built by the Ark Faction or the Grail Faction?
A: It was Ark Faction.
Q: (H) Well, we got that part right. (L) Once before we discussed Nefertiti and Sarah being one and the same person. We have now been discussing the idea, based on some significant clues in ancient documents, that this individual was also Helen of Troy. Is this, in fact, a useful idea to follow? Is it a correct assessment of the clues?
A: Indeed!
Q: (L) That would mean that, according to the story, that Paris/Alexander would be the same individual as Abraham and that Herodotus' story of Paris and Helen sojourning in Egypt was true?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) We have the brother issue to deal with. We have Abraham and his nephew, Lot. Then we have Moses and Aaron, Jacob and Esau, Isaac and Ishmael. Were all of these sets of brothers just different aspects or views on the same stories, a set of singular individuals, whether brothers or not?
A: Pretty much though with added elements from other stories blended in.
Q: (L) Was it a brother/brother relationship as in actual brothers?
A: No. The "brother" relationship was created to legitimize a "false" line of transmission.
Q: (L) So there wasn't a brother, or Aaronic relationship present, assuming any part of that story was true. Is that it?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) One aspect of the variation on the story was that Jacob gave his brother, Esau, the 'blessing' and some 'gift.' Does this reflect an accurate part of the story that Moses, in his form as Jacob, passed something on to someone else - something that was important?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) Was it Moses/Abraham who was doing this?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) Who did he pass it on to?
A: It was finally understood by "Moses" that the danger of the object was greater than the ability of descendants to resist corruption. He handed it over to those who had created it.
Q: (H) Was it STS or STO forces that created it?
A: STS.
Q: (H) So, the Ark was an object created by STS. Did this amount to some sort of realization on Moses' part? Did he start to wake up?
A: Yes. The story of the "contending with the angel" was the significant turning point as well as the moment of return.
Q: (L) What was the blessing he gave to "Esau", if giving the object to the "angel" was the event of returning the ark? What was the story there?
A: Two separate events.
Q: (L) So, he returned the ark to the so-called angel. And then, he gave something to someone else. Previously, when I asked about this, you said that what he gave to Esau was "trampled leaves of wrath, the blue apples incarnate," and remarked that I should inquire into the "core meaning."
A: And who was "Kore?"
Q: (L) Was this Abraham's daughter?
A: It was the last living member of the Perseid family.
Q: (L) Was it a male or female?
A: Female.
Q: (L) And how did Abraham come to be in possession of this female?
A: Search the text and you will see.
Q: (H) If this person was the last member of the Perseid family, does that mean that Paris/Abraham was a member of this family?
A: No.
Q: (L) Was this person someone who was part of Abraham's group because he kidnapped her?
A: That is going in the right direction, though not quite that simple.
Q: (H) They are saying that this was a female who was kidnapped? Could it be Helen?
A: No!
Q: (L) Previously we were told that Helen was a genetically tweaked Hittite. Were her parents anybody who would be familiar to us outside of mythology?
A: No.
Q: (L) So her parentage was strictly mythical. Was she a member of any esteemed family or royal family along that line as has been claimed?
A: Here also you will make a discovery.
Q: (L) Going back to this person - the last living member of the Perseid family - who was handed over by Abraham in his Jacob persona to someone else, who was this person handed over to and why?
A: For protection from the fury of "Helen."
Q: (L) So, there is a reflection of that in the story of Hagar the Egyptian. Who was she handed over to?
A: The "Dragon Slayers."
Q: (L) You mentioned before that Helen/Nefertiti/Sarah was locked up by Akhenaten. Why, specifically, was she locked up?
A: He became unable to function and the action was taken by others.
Q: (L) Did Akhenaten go mad as I have surmised?
A: Pretty much.
Q: (L) Did he fall in the Nile and get eaten by a crocodile as the story about one pharaoh suggests?
A: No Crocodile.
Q: So, he just fell in and drowned?
A: More like he was "helped."
Q: (L) Sounds to me like this poor guy was just a patsy all around.
A: Yup.
Q: The story about the plague that is told in Manetho, was this a plague as in leprosy, a disease, or something else?
A: It was multiple elements including leprosy.
Q: (L) What were these different elements?
A: Consider the writings about cometary showers.
Q: (L) Was any of this radiation sickness from being around the ark as we have surmised?
A: Not so much since it was kept contained.
Q: (L) Did Helen/Nefertit/Sarah get some sort of sickness that contributed to the necessity of locking her up?
A: No, in fact it was the fact that she did not get sick that made her the object of suspicion.
Q: (L) So, she didn't get leprosy. That means that Miriam was not part of the Helen/Nefertiti/Sarah element, is that it?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) Was Helen from Argo?
A: No.
Q: (L) Was someone from Argo?
A: Yes.
Q: [Laughter.] (L) Well, I mean involved in this particular story.
A: Oh, indeed, and that may be an important clue!
Q: (L) In reading the texts, we read about the Libyans and Ethiopians and it seems that anybody who didn't live in the Delta was called either a Libyan or an Ethiopian. Who were these so-called Libyan/Ethiopians, who lived in Egypt and other areas of North Africa, and where did they come from?
A: Various identities at various times.
Q: (L) So, these were names applied to different peoples at different times and we would have to ask specific questions about specific groups at specific times to narrow it down. Who were the so-called "Libyans" of the Exodus of 2676 BC, recorded as a Libyan rebellion by Manetho?
A: Sumerian and Aryan mix.
Q: Did this group end up in Crete?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) You said on previous occasions that the pyramids in Egypt - that is, the Great Pyramid at Giza and its companions - were built by Atlantean descendants. We would like to know which precise group of Atlantean descendants built these specific pyramids?
A: Leave this one until you have connected more dots.
Q: (L) Is it going to surprise us?
A: No doubt!
Q: (H) Is the importance of Argos related to the myth of Jason and the Argonauts?
A: Yup.
Q: (H) Does it have something to do with the individuals who flew away on the Ram?
A: Mmmmm .... And did she really drown?
Q: (H) Is it a significant fact that this girl's name was similar to Helen of Troy?
A: Could be a clue. All those stories of escape from confinement and flying and cataclysm...? Who was imprisoned? Why? Good night.
Q: (H) Stories of escape - there's the story of Daedalus and Icarus... We have Colchis, Jason, the argonauts. We have the last living member of the Perseid family... all mixed up with Abraham and Sarah otherwise known as Paris and Helen who was also Nefertiti. (L) And Abraham wanted to save this individual from the fury of Helen. (S) And why was Helen furious? What happened when Helen got furious? (H) A thousand ships got launched... (L) And a lot of people died and have been dying ever since from this whole monotheistic rant. And it looks like Helen/Nefertiti/Sarah is the main source of the whole deal. A Hittite hybrid with a big skull like those heads of the Ica in Peru. And the C's have said that there were hybrids in Peru that were supposed to have been attempts to create a 3rd density body for direct STS incarnation. And it looks like Sarah/Helen/Nefertiti was one of them. No wonder women have been given a bad name. We have our work cut out for us.

Click to expand...

Q: (J) Can we expect an ice age any time soon?

A: wait a couple of years and check the thermometer!!!

[group laughter]

Q: (L) Is a couple of years a clue here?

A: Is it? Hmm...

[more laughter]

Q: (L) I suppose we can take that as a yes. (H) We recently pulled together some info on the Maunder Minimum. Are we correct in the direction we are taking on that?

A: We wondered how long it would take you to figure that one out.

Click to expand...

Q: (L) I don't think that was one of your options.

(A) well, someone on the physics newsgroups was discussing this, so maybe it is a confirmation.
(L) Look! It's raining. (After months of extraordinary heat and many deaths, rain was significant.)
Q: (A) So we can ask then about this weather breakthrough yesterday, is it a sign of a break through in our own situation?

A: One day there will be sheets of rain.

Click to expand...

Q: (A) I still want to know who or what is setting or popping these programs [this question was at the end of a discussion of various "agents" that were obviously sent in to destroy our lives and work, one of which was active at that moment, putting us in grave danger.]

A: Remember Carissas' story? It points to the source. Aided by 4D influences of course. [This story was about so-called "abductions" and programming going on in a military context though disguised as "alien."]

Q: (L) Wow, that rhymes! (S) So is Mossad part of that?

A: Mossad is near the apex of the 3D consortium. The lines blur at that level.

Q: (JH) What's the relationship between the Mossad and the Rothschilds?

A: Mossad is a "brainchild."

(Laughter at the joke)

[Discussion as to whether the Rothchilds are part of the apex or if they are just useful idiots that are going to be double-crossed also. C's break in as Laura is saying she doesn't understand.]

A: The lines blur. Rothchilds are similar in a smaller way to Sargon. Deep level punctuator.

Q: (L) What is a deep level punctuator?

A: One who emerges from seeming obscurity to "make a mark" on history. Don't you wonder where they come from? Think "deep."

Q: As in underground bases?

A: Well, what a concept!

Click to expand...

[...]

Q: (L) So what was ****'s agenda?

A: You figured that one out.

Q: (J) Yeah he wanted to "cultify" us.

A: All of these many activities stem from the same "urge." Think about Waco and guns. Put that together with Tom and his guns and you and the charge of "cult."

Q: (L) He could get us killed!

A: Stop and think about the possibility that your work was known in advance and all the preparations were made in advance to make the charge of cult mean what it does today.

Q: (L) Was it done via time travel?

A: Not necessary. "Mass dreams of the future" anyone?

Q: (L) That's a book where people get progressed into the future and see the future. It's kind of like time travel in your head. (JH) Is that sort of like remote viewing?

A: Oh indeed!
Q: (L) So they can see the future, which has something to do with the Montauk project. And they obviously sought to do something about the future by adjusting the present, in a way. (JH) Do the guys in the Aviary have anything to do with it?

A: You would not believe how many are involved. Many innocently of course.

Click to expand...

Q: (H) When you referred to the manipulations with S****, what kind of manipulations were you referring to: internal or external?

A: Both but mostly external as in not directly perceivable in the environment.

Q: (L) Does that mean that if someone believes an illusion, that it leaves a hole in their defences?

A: More or less.

Q: (H) What is the major problem facing the group at the moment?

A: Stalling frequency waves.

Q: What can we do to help?

A: Requires will and knowledge. You share, they find will if it is there to find.

Q: (A) What kind of knowledge do we need to share?

A: That their lack of ability to see and do is due to deliberate stalling.

Q: (H) Can you elaborate?

A: They are in a frequency fence being stored for later food.

Q: (A) Are we also in a fence? Or is there a difference?

A: Quite.

Q: We are quite different?

A: Yes.

Q: What makes us different?

A: Seeing and doing.

Q: (L) Well, if we have a network, different people are doing different things. They are at different levels. Shouldn't we consider it in this light?

A: You were in as bad condition before leaving the USA, remember?

Q: (H) Can they overcome the stalling?

A: If they wish.

Click to expand...

Q: (J) You mentioned before about a scandal at the Denver Airport. Is this still on or have things changed?

A: Yet to come. Just keep flapping.

Q: (H) Will this have to do with 911?

A: Yes. Oh, yes!

Q: (J) Does it have to do with the flight simulators?

A: No.

Q: (L) Is it that they landed Flight 77 at Denver?

A: Very possible.

Click to expand...

Q: Were there passengers and crew on both planes that hit the WTC?

A: Yes

Q: Where any of the alleged hijackers on the planes?

A: No

Q: If there were passengers and crew on the planes, were they conscious up until the time of impact?

A: No

Q: Were the planes that struck the WTC being controlled by helicopters or other planes nearby?

A: Not even necessary. The onboard computer does it all.

Q: So how did the passengers and crew lose consciousness?

A: You have already speculated about gas released via onboard ventilation system

Q: Is Barbara Olsen alive?

A: Now that is a very interesting question! Let us just say that she is busy making the bunker "homey" for the housewarming.

Q: Was there a second emergency landing at Cleveland after Delta 1989 landed?

A: No, that was just to confuse the issue.

Q: So it was just more of the intelligence agencies sowing disinformation in real time. Which would suggest that Flight 93 did crash in Pennsylvania?

A: Crash?

Q: Well, crashed after it was shot down. So, was it shot down?

A: Absolutely. You had it from the "horse's" mouth.

Q: If so, was it shot down because the passengers were getting ready to take control and that would have brought something to light that they didn't want to happen?

A: Yup.

Q: So why weren't these people gassed like the ones on the WTC flights?

A: Mechanical glitch. Wishful thinking will get you every time.

Q: So where was Flight 93 meant to be going?

A: White House. The fire was started in anticipation and had to be extinguished and covered up.

Q: At the time there were reports of fire at the Pentagon before the plane hit, was this the same thing as at the White House?

A: Yes.

Q: Did Flight 77 land at Reagan Airport in Washington DC as Dick Eastman suggests?

A: Try Wright Patterson.

Q: Did it go on anywhere else after WP?

A: Only piecemeal.

Q: But wasn't it said in a previous session that Flight 77 landed at Denver and that this might well be the source of the Denver airport scandal? [Discussion of what "piecemeal" means. Conclusion is that plane and passengers were "taken apart" and plane pieces were moved somewhere else - possibly Denver]

A: So, see?

Q: Where there any other plane crashes that day that the public was not told about?

A: You can research this and find conflicting info. But, no.

Q: Was the strike on the Pentagon for the purpose of taking out the people involved in legitimate training exercises who would have known the truth of the events of that day?

A: Now, another interesting question! What is up with the Navy?

Q: What is up with the navy?

A: Maybe they know things they don't tell. Maybe what they know gives them a certain respect for "nature" and a hesitancy to meddle.

Q: Can you clarify?

A: Let's just say that the navy wouldn't play with the bullies because they know about bigger bullies. The navy learned a lot from the Philadelphia experiment. George Bush senior tried to get all the data about the things he heard and saw, but failed.

Q: What is the navy doing now?

A: Flying under the radar and waiting.

Q: Was there some sort of double-cross involved in the 9/11 attacks where one party of the plans attempted to blackmail another?

A: Not really, though there were glitches.

Q: So if the Denver airport scandal is going to expose the government; is the government going to be deliberately exposed by some other party?

A: We have already said that airports are used by both STS and STO.

Q: Is there in-fighting among those in high levels over how to proceed?

A: At various levels, yes. But you know the old saying about incompetency seeking its own level like water.

Q: What does this mean?

A: Those at the top are there because of an agenda that each is concealing. They are waiting for the opportunity to act to influence. However they are learning that Bush is becoming more difficult to manage.

Click to expand...

Q: (L) Regarding the recent earthquake and tsunami, there is a huge buzz on the net that this was not a natural phenomenon. Some say it could have been a meteor; others say it was a US nuke; others say it was India and Israel playing around in deep sea trenches. Then there is the speculation on an EM weapon of some description. The New agers are saying it was the start of the final 'Earth Changes". So what really caused this earthquake that happened one year minus one hour after the earthquake in Iran?

A: Pressure in earth. Not any of the proferred suggestions. But remember that the human cycle mirrors the cycle of catastrophe and human mass consciousness plays a part.

Q: In what way does mass consciousness play a part?

A: When those with higher centers are blocked from full manifestation of creative energy, that energy must go somewhere. If you cannot create "without" you create "within".

Q: (L) In other words the acts of the STS consortium in trying to suppress steal and control the creative energy from those with higher centers may be the cause of their own destruction because that energy is uncontrollable. (A) Yes but they bring it on everyone's head also. (J) Maybe that is their plan, after all they want to destroy the planet. (L) Yes but I don't think that people like Bush and his cronies want to destroy the planet, but then they don't know much about what goes on anyway. So, anything else on that? (A) Well we have this idea that the US, UK, Russia and France all knew about the coming tsunami and failed to tell anyone. Well, we know from some concrete evidence that the US and UK knew, but what about France and Russia who also have these capabilities with satellites etc to detect such things?

A: Indeed it was known and suppressed and do not underestimate France and Russia.

Q: Is that related to technology or evil intentions?

A: Tech, though some "evil" as well. There is still some balance in France. In this case the "evildoers" happened to be in the know.

Click to expand...

Q: (L) What's the deal with this K***** in the group?

A: Some people are born to serve, others are born to be served...

Click to expand...

Q: (J) How many troops have actually been killed since the beginning of the Iraq war?

A: 7,500

Q: (H) What percentage of the US population actually supports Bush?

A: 36%

Q: (H) What percentage of the US population thinks there was complicity on the part of the US government in 9/11?

A: 47%

Q: (H) What percentage of the US population actually thinks at all?

A: 12% if you define it rigidly.

Q: (group amazement at this figure)

A: What do you expect with HAARP turning brains to tapioca

Q: (J) So it's a Zombie nation then?

A: You took the words right out of 6th density.

Q: (J) so does HAARP only affect the US population?

A: Mostly.

Q: (J) In terms of our group members, the only solution would be to get out of the US then? Is that true?

A: Or be aware and network.

Q: (Scott) I have to ask; how many have seen the Pentagon Flash now?

A: Going on 500 million

Q: (J) Who carried out the Madrid train bombing?

A: Our favourite false flag gang

Q: (H) And were they also behind the London train bombings?

A: MI5 involvement there. Lack of professionalism shows. [...]

Q: (J) Are the world's oil resources dangerously depleted?

A: Not even close.

Q: (H) So, as we suspected, the whole peak oil thing is a political manipulation to get people behind the Reich?

A: Distract and conquer.

Q: (Jon) Is Tony Blair acting on his beliefs or is he being blackmailed?

A: He has been promised a place on the "rapture special."

Q: (Ing) Why are the French putting so much energy into the Int. Thermo-Nuclear Experimental Reactor? Supposedly because we are going to be short of oil...

A: It keeps people busy and it keeps the Bush gang happy. You don't think France "buys" all that nonsense do you? It has to buy time and space to maneuver.

Q: (J) So they are playing dumb in terms of the "end of the world"?

A: Dumb like a fox!

Q: (Ing) So are there two groups, one in France and one in the US and they are not allies?

A: Not at present. But everyone has to consider that fun gang of stooges for Yahweh. They don't play nice.

Q: (J) Is there any update on the possibility of some form of germ disbursement and is something like that imminent?

A: Expect a good round this fall

Q: (J) Is there anything we should be doing to prepare?

A: Stay healthy

Q: (Jon) Is this germ warfare going to be strictly in the US?

A: It's already starting

Q: (J) Is it going to be worldwide?

A: Spottily

Q: (J) Are we talking about a deadly form of flu?

A: It will be eventually.

Q: (J) What was the cause of crash 587?

A: Covered up. Can you spell MOSSAD? Just call it a "reminder."

Q: (J) They seem to have monopolised the market on false flag terror attacks.

A: That is their speciality.

Q: (Ing) What was the influence behind the French "No" vote?

A: Mostly free thinking.

Q: (H) So what percentage of people in France can really think?

A: 59%

Q: (Ing) Is Sarkozy associated with any occult group?

A: Absolutely.

Q: (Ing) Can you specify?

A: Let's just say that he is very much influenced by Kabballah.

Q: (J) Did anyone else other than Barbara Olsen survive Flight 77?

A: 2

Q: Was one of them the ex- IDF guy who had made a website for Rummy's department in the Pentagon?

A: Good possibility.

Q: (H) There have been rumors on various web sites that the special prosecutor (Fitzgerald) is going to bring down charges against the Bush gang. Is this just more disinfo?

A: Lots of negotiation going on at present. Most likely that Bush will prevail.

Q: (J) Were there really explosions at the WTC as reported by firefighters on the 24th Floor and in the basement by civilians?

A: Yes, but not necessary to plant charges. Only necessary to plant "conductors" for "shaped" EMP.

(Discussion about what these might be and of previous session where they mention that towers were felled by natural wave that was "contoured.").

Click to expand...

Q: (R) I am interested in how the 94% of the population being used as containers or parts for a new race relates to the comment that “all of this will fail”. How can those two things happen at the same time or are they mutually exclusive?
A: Just because 94 percent may “die” does not necessarily mean success for STS forces. The energy of “containers” can be utilized positively or negatively. Also, notice that the plans were revealed prior to the efforts of the present company. Remember the flapping butterfly wings.
Q: (J) So there you go. Nothing is certain. It depends upon what you do, R****! (R) Thank you for that. (L) Flap your wings. (J) Get some wings and flap them. Did the drone craft that hit the Pentagon fire a missile prior to hitting the building? Just before hitting the building?
A: Yes.
Q: (J) Excellent. I want to know if a drone was scheduled as part of the plan to hit the White House?
A: Yes, but sans shaped charge. Also, a quite different appearing craft.
Q: (J) What did it look like? What kind of craft? (Laughing) A UFO? (Everyone laughs)
A: More like the “Osama special.”
Q: (J) The point is that Flight 93 was not supposed to hit the White House.
A: Probably not, but the “neocons” were not in on the whole “plan.”
Q: (L) Talk about a dirty, double-cross huh? (J) It was said there was a glitch in the gas release on Flight 93 and that is why it was shot down. The gas didn’t release. Was that the only glitch or did they lose control of the plane and that’s why they had to shoot it down, or were there other glitches?
A: They had to shoot it down because it was no longer under control from many angles. No one could be allowed to survive.
Q: (H) Were the many phone calls that were reported from Flight 93 real phone calls or were they fake?
A: Some were real.
Q: (J) Were the real calls reported in the media?
A: Yes, but with “enhancements.”
Q: (J) Let’s get some of that real-time voice morphing technology! (H) Did Barbara Olson really phone?
A: Oh yes!
Q: (H) If she was in on it, why would she phone?
A: She was “in on it” but it was not supposed to include Flt 77.
Q: (H) That means there was a double-cross! (J) Hang on, let’s not jump to conclusions! Is Laura correct in her hypothesis that she was in some way kidnapped or being used as insurance… is that the case?
A: Close.
Q: What would make it closer?
A: Insurance, blackmail, and the “bearer of bad tidings.”
Q: (H) So it seems she was phoning to let her husband know that things were not going as planned. (L) Boy, talk about being hoisted on your own petard, huh? (J) The entire operation was not meant to include Flight 77.
A: Correct.
Q: (J) So let me get this straight in my head. So why did it include Flight 77? (L) A double-cross. (H) The Israelis did it to take a hostage and to turn the tables on the US. (J) So that suggests there were two groups involved in it.

(L) Think about it, if the US and at some level, the Israeli agents with these neocons and whoever, the neocons said, “Oh yeah, that’s a great idea” because they’re thinking in their mind “Oh yeah, we’ll let Israel do that. It’ll get us into the Middle East, and then we can stomp on the Israelis, too. We can take everything. We can turn the tables on them and get the whole thing.” And then the Israelis are thinking, “We know what you’re thinking. You think you’re going to help us and then you think you can blame us after it’s all over. Well, guess what? We’re going to fix you.” There’s going to be some little thing going on here. So they planned to have the “Osama special” hit the Pentagon. It was supposed to be a precision strike, yes, but it was supposed to be painted up to look like something quite different. Meanwhile the Israelis are painting something up to look like an American Airlines plane and they have the plan to take another plane. And then they make sure for whatever reasons, by appointments, dates, that Barbara Olson gets on this plane that’s set-up. Then they have Barbara Olson. She’s chosen because she’s young, attractive, a TV person, and then they hit the Pentagon with a plane that is literally a US military plane that’s painted up to look slightly like an American Airlines plane.

(J) That’s the thing. They couldn’t explain how Osama got a US military plane. In the original plan, it was going to be hit with an “Osama special”. Which is what? (L) It’s something that’s probably smaller, lighter, and less lethal… (J) Like a little Cessna or something with some bombs in it. (L) It was supposed to actually look like something that came from Osama.

(J) Like some kind of a plane that he had access to, right? And they tell them this. This is part of the plan. We’re going to hit the Pentagon with a plane loaded with explosives. But while the Israelis are saying that to the neocons, that’s fake. They have another plan that includes Flight 77 and the drone craft. So the entire operation is split between two groups. (H) I wonder about the WTC. Was that part of the original plan, or was it part of the double-cross?
A: The WTC was the original main “plan.” Its symbolic value was needed.
Q: (L) So in other words, what then happened was they say that we’re going to do this….but we’re going to keep you… Just imagine what Mossad is saying to these neocons. “OK, you’re going to stand down, but somehow we’re going to have to cover you. Here’s what we’re going to do. We’re going to make it look like you’re being attacked, too, and then nobody will ever suspect that you’re involved. (J) And we’re going to put it on TV and then people will see that it was Osama. (H) Was Flight 93 in the original plan?
A: Yes, but with a different target. How about the Washington Monument and lots of innocent civilians?
Q: (J) So they were planning to use another type of “Osama special” on the White House and they didn’t. Why?
A: Left Bush with his drawers down didn’t it?
Q: (Laughter) (J) They had Bush and the neocons jumping through hoops. They told them a plan that was radically different… (L) And then they did the old switcheroo (J) And they’re running around going “What the hell happened!”. (W) That explains why the cover-up on the Pentagon has been poor and why it’s so obvious. (L) If it had been planned, they would have had something better planned. (A) Were there some unusual weapons used on the WTC?
A: It was a fairly simple “hit,” with a specially prepared building.
Q: (J) What did they use then to make the steel beams collapse in the way they did, so completely? Did you have a question about that? (A) Well, specially prepared is essentially explosives that would cut the beams. But there are many. (H) But we’ve asked about explosives in the building, and they’ve said it was more something to shape the… (S) Yes, EMP (J) Conductors with shaped EMP. (H) That means that using shaped EMP waves is “fairly simple”. (Laughter) (J) If they could take down the Columbia… (H) Was it the same technology as with the shuttle Columbia?
A: Yup.
Q: (H) Did it come from the same source? (J) Space-based satellite?
A: Now you are getting into warm water.
Q: (H) I guess we don’t want to get into hot water… (Laughter) (A) It’s not our business. (H) Curiosity killed the cat.
A: Let us just remind you that it scared even George.
Q: (J) Was Robin Cook murdered?
A: What do you think, Laura got a herniated disc. How about a herniated heart?
Q: (J) But the interesting question is then, if that was deliberate, obviously, where was the concentration of negative energy coming from?
A: There must be a “local conduit.”
Q: (J) And that then may lead to a question about Italy. What was the cause of the spontaneous fires in Cannetto over the past two years on a couple of occasions?
A: Shall we say “practicing” and refining tech. Imagine, metal pipes that burn; steel beams that “dissolve.” Connection?
Q: (J) You know these pipes that were bursting into flames? (A) Yes. (L) Metal was bursting into flames. (J) Metal pipes. Electrical appliances. (H) And then steel beams in the WTC. (J) A couple of years ago. (R) We were looking at the videos from the WTC and we were wondering where the beams came from. (A) Still, I want to know what kind of physics is behind this because I can’t imagine any.
A: The nanotech you read about is going in the right direction.
Q: (J) You were reading about nanotech? (A) I was. Then I am in warm water. (L) Uh hmmm. (Laughter) (A) OK. What is the next question? (Laughter) (J) You’re in hot water! (Laughter) (R) I have a question about Anna Lindt, the Swedish Foreign Minister. (J) That was Mossad. (L) That’s easy to figure out. (J) She was anti-American, anti-Iraq war. (R) So how did they make the killer do it? (J) Sirhan Sirhan. Oswald. (L) That’s all out there. Manchurian Candidate. Did you ever see it? (R) Yes. (J) Is there any significance to that fact that we met those Americans at Ax les Thermes? They just fit the bill. (L) Art students?
A: They’re everywhere!
Q: (L) I would say there is no specific significance. With them everywhere, the odds are good that you’re going to bump into them once in awhile. Did you feel you were being specifically targeted? (J) Yeah… (L) Well, it’s a possibility. Now that we have some kind of tradition of stopping there at the pool to soak our feet on the way home, they could probably know that and have somebody there…. (H) What about the guy I met at the airport in Paris? Was that just a “coincidence”?
A: No coincidence there.
Q: (J) He was there to try and lure you away, Henry. (L) (In a sinister voice) He was reading you. He was taking a profile. (J) I want to know about these strange formations on the radar image of Hurricane Rita.
A: 4th density “battle.” Also includes some “practice.”
Q: (L) They’re practicing with new weapons.
(J) Some people said Katrina was the product of HAARP heating up the waters in the Gulf.
A: We’ve already dealt with HAARP and weather. Read transcripts.
Q: (W) (Quoting transcripts) “HAARP has nothing to do with the weather or EM associated with same.” (H) Which suggests that there is EM associated with the weather. There could be some EM stuff associated with the weather that isn’t part of HAARP. (L) 4th density. (J) Were any of the storms manufactured from 3rd density or was it a natural storm?
A: Mfg in 3D? No. As we have said… 4D battles represent as weather. But the “veil” is thinning.
Q: (R) So if there is more weather it is due to more battles, and it being thinner. (J) Possibly. The thinning of the veil creates more natural… (L) Or unnatural, depending upon how you look at it.

(S) So, I have a few questions. In the last session the C’s had said that 47% of Americans think that the government was complicit in 911. They also said that 12% of Americans can actually think. So, assuming that the 12% that can think are part of the 47% who think the American government was complicit in 911, that would give 35% would think the government is complicit not because they think but because they have been programmed to think it. If that is the case, then why are these people being programmed to be suspicious or against the Bush government?
A: They are not being programmed to be suspicious of Bush et al, the contrary.
Q: (L) In other words, it is the ones who think that Bush is not complicit that are being programmed. The ones who don’t think it, even if they’re part of that 35%, they’ve simply never been programmed. (R) Those who are programmed are programmed to not be suspicious. (A) You can be suspicious, but that doesn’t necessarily mean you can think. (L) The ones who are not suspicious are the ones being programmed, but it doesn’t mean… Ops can just be Ops. They don’t have to be bad or evil, they’re just the ones who, nobody’s gotten to them, there’s been no opportunity…maybe they’re just people who don’t want to watch television so much. Or they are contrary in a certain way. They see that there is a group of people who are suspicious and they follow along with them rather than following along with the ones who are not suspicious. (S) They said that Bush “will try” to become a fuehrer, that he’ll continue on as president until he dies. Does that mean that someone will… Bush will be tossed out and someone else will move in and become fuehrer?
A: Warm water. It would not serve your best interests to know this.

Click to expand...

Q: (H) In reading through the transcripts in the 9/11 book, I was confused about the genetic tweak that was made 130,000 years ago. Was that a tweak that was done to all the Semites, so it wasn't only the Jews?

A: Question is what is a Semite?

Q: (H) You make a remark that this thing with Hitler goes off planet. So was this something that was going on on Kantek before it exploded?

A: Yes.

Q: (H) Did the Semites have a significant role in the collapse of Atlantis?

A: Indeed!

Q: (H) So, when we're looking at a replay, we're REALLY looking at a replay!

A: Yup.

Q: (Discussion of who are the Semites) (H) So the real Semites are the Aryans?

A:You got it!

Q: (L) So that means that the rank and file of Jews that have carried the tradition, the Arabic types, just took on the tradition and carried it and set it back to these Aryan types. They were just intermediaries. (J) Semites is like Middle Eastern, isn't it?

A: Is it? Was it?

Q: (H) Then the genetic tweak, was it made in the Aryan Semites or was it made in the Jews that we know as Jews today?

A: Aryan. Reason for destruction of Jews of the "Abrahamic" line.

Click to expand...

Q: (Guest) Is there a time by which I should definitely __________?

A: April drop dead date.

Q: (Henry) "Drop dead date". God! (Joe) That´s a loaded answer. (Henry)
Does "drop dead" apply to [Guest] or is this more general?

A: General.

Q: (Scott) Oh, great! (I***) What does it mean "Drop dead date"? (Joe)
What does it sound like? A date that somebody or something drops dead.

A: Wait and see.

Q: (A***) They love saying that! (Joe) That´s their favorite answer.
[Laughter]

Click to expand...

6 September 2006

Q: (H) Did you enjoy our celebrations on Saturday night (September 2, 2006 lunar standstill)?

A: Yes

Q: (J) What was the light over J***'s head in one photo from that night?

A: EM bursts.

Q: (S) Which means... Was it evil EM bursts? (Laughter) (J) What about the smoke? What was the smoke?

A: Laura manifests many things. She was just a bit disorganized at that moment.

Q: (Laughter) (A***) What about the little orbs all the pictures?

A: Little things from 4D.

Q: (S) So they were 4D flies or something. 4D fireflies! (Laughter) (J) Friendly little things, or evil little things?

A: Friendly mostly but generally neutral. They are "magnetized."

Q: (L) Does that mean that they are attracted to... like iron filings attracted to a magnet. (A***) Were they attracted to us or the energy around us?

A: Yes

Click to expand...

[...]
Q: (Joe)What was the boom that shook the shutters on the afternoon of the
25th of January this year? There was a boom when we were sitting in the
office...(Scott) Oh yeah, that crazy boom! (Joe) It was a clear....a pretty
clear day and there was nothing outside and there was a boom....

A: Overhead explosion, meteorite.

Q: (Scott) Sweeet! We almost got wiped out! (A***) Excellent! *laughter*
(Ark) What did they say? What was it? (Joe) An overhead explosion.
(A****) A meteorite. (Joe): Happens all the time...*more laughter*)

A: It was quite small.

Q: (Laura) That just tells you how much power they can have.....(Joe) It
was a little pebble...it went pooft! (Laura) Kinda like e=mc sqared, huh?
(Henry) There are more and more reports now in the press of these things.
What percentage of the actual meteorite impacts or arrivals are actually
getting reported?

A: 11 percent.

Q: (Scott) Well, I guess that´s raindrops then.... (J****) Is one of these
meteorites gonna hit Bush? (*laughter*)

A: Funny you ask...(*more laughter*)

Q: (A****) It´ll hit everybody. (Joe) No, one with his name on it...just a
little one....to knock him out, you know? Is the April drop dead date still
on the cards?

A: Oh yes.

Q: (Joe) Is this a combination of things that are scheduled to happen in
April or just one initial event?

A: That would be telling. No dice.

Click to expand...

Laura, Ark, and 7 other people present

A: Welcome!

Q: (L) And who do we have with us this evening?

A: 5 near of Cassiopaea.

Q: (L) Why five?

A: It's a special occasion!

[Personal remarks deleted]

Q: (L) I have the idea that we should make a video to show people how to safely and effectively use a board-type instrument to work through their issues, to find out what's lurking in their own subconscious mind, possibly to do spirit release therapy on themselves (one of the few ways it can be done), and just in general to bring some light to the topic of using a board-type instrument as a means for self-development. What do you think about this idea?

A: 5 of us think it is stupendous!!!

Q: (L) Are there any particular dangers to this plan? If people who are ignorant or spiritually weak would attempt to use a board-type instrument, obviously they would have problems. Is that not correct?

A: Of course, but that is just the sort of person who would try trance channeling with absolutely no warning system in operation.

Q: (L) What do you mean by a warning system?

A: No conscious feedback.

Q: (L) What about people who talk about having played with a Ouija board or spirit board and they had some sort of bad experience and they felt like there was something evil there and they got scared away or creeped out? What about those kinds of stories?

A: Some of them are true, but most of them are just made up.

Q: (L) What about the ones that are true?

A: That is what we mean about a "warning system."

Q: (L) What do you mean that's what you mean by a warning system?

A: Those kinds of entities are around a lot of people, they just don't know it unless they interact in a way that removes the veil and exposes the fact.

Q: (L) So you're saying that when they use a board, it shows them what's there, and otherwise it's there and they don't know it. Is that what you're saying?

A: Yes

Q: (L) And does that also mean that if such people were to try some other form of channeling, that they would be interacting with something that their conscious mind would not perceive as yucky or unpleasant?

A: Yes

Q: (L) And why is that?

A: When an invitation to "come in" is given, the entity can produce pleasant sensations that override the conscious warning system. When a board type device is used, it gives a distance and a layer of protection. You then can choose if you wish to continue the contact or not. You don't have that choice when the entity has already been invited "in".

Q: (L) So it's kind of like the vampire movie! The vampire says, "Enter freely and of your own free will!" And if you do, you're screwed. And if you say, "Come in and talk to me, you're my higher self!" you're screwed! Very interesting. So in other words, when people are using the board and they have an unpleasant experience, it's actually a good thing because it's warning them to not proceed and to have no further contact with that entity. They can choose to send that entity on down the road. Is that basically it?

A: Yes

Q: (L) Will that entity go away if they tell them to go?

A: Yes, normally: and they also have their full body sensorium to warn in the event that the entity does not. But having said that, it is also important to remember that most entities that are encountered this way are already "in residence." A person who has a direct personal encounter with a repellant entity is usually only meeting the "neighbors".

Q: (L) So you're saying that what people most often encounter in these exercises will be attached entities that they don't even know are in residence in their space? Is that it?

A: Yes

Q: (L) So, anybody who encounters something really yucky and wants to throw the board away has just thrown away probably one of the best methods for finding out about this entity and helping to get rid of it. Is that it?

A: Yes

Q: (L) Because just because they have thrown the board away, that doesn't mean the entity they've encountered has gone away. He has just been enticed to speak, and once the board is gone, he goes back to lurking. Is that it?

A: Yes

Q: (L) Most unpleasant. (J) Is there ever a case where using a board could attract an entity that wasn't there beforehand? That seems to be the key question...

A: Yes, if the individual is knowledgable and the entity needs help. Also it must be made plain that young people, because of their natural tendency to dissociate, ought not to be around such activity.

Q: (Ark) Well, we still have the question about what happens to passive participants. (L) Passive participants in what respect? (Ark) I mean because we were talking about people who do the session, and they are so to say "active" at the board, but there are usually observers and a lot of entities attached to them...

A: That can present problems in some cases. Ideally all participants and attendees ought to be "clean."

Q: (L) Alright. So we'll deal with that some other time.
...
End of session

Click to expand...

Vulcan59 said:

23 Oct 04 - Link

Q: (H) When you referred to the manipulations with S****, what kind of manipulations were you referring to: internal or external?

A: Both but mostly external as in not directly perceivable in the environment.

Q: (L) Does that mean that if someone believes an illusion, that it leaves a hole in their defences?

A: More or less.

Q: (H) What is the major problem facing the group at the moment?

A: Stalling frequency waves.

Q: What can we do to help?

A: Requires will and knowledge. You share, they find will if it is there to find.

Q: (A) What kind of knowledge do we need to share?

A: That their lack of ability to see and do is due to deliberate stalling.

Q: (H) Can you elaborate?

A: They are in a frequency fence being stored for later food.

Q: (A) Are we also in a fence? Or is there a difference?

A: Quite.

Q: We are quite different?

A: Yes.

Q: What makes us different?

A: Seeing and doing.

Q: (L) Well, if we have a network, different people are doing different things. They are at different levels. Shouldn't we consider it in this light?

A: You were in as bad condition before leaving the USA, remember?

Q: (H) Can they overcome the stalling?

A: If they wish.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Franco said:

Thanks for posting this.

Where can i find more of the updated C's sessions?

Click to expand...

02.02.2003 Ark, Laura SF and HS

Q: Hello.
A: Hello group from Cassiopaea.
Q: One of the first questions we want to ask tonight is about the event of the Space Shuttle that was lost. First, was it an explosion, or was it just disintegration, or breaking up?
A: It was a "direct hit."
Q: A direct hit by what?
A: EM pulse.
Q: (S) What was the source of the EM pulse?
A: 3/4th density Consortium.
Q: Well, I thought Bush was a puppet of the Consortium? (A) Well, we know that the military are scrambling planes to go after UFOs...there are even reports of firing on them and there have been reports of military jets being disintegrated by UFOs. The UFOs are, somehow, in cahoots with the consortium. It seems that Bush and the gang are not in control of the Consortium and maybe they needed to be "reminded?"
A: It is not so much that he needs to be reminded, as he needs to be stimulated to react.
Q: (L) You once before said that Bush knows very little anyway - or that the "White House" level is pretty much in the dark about the plans of the Consortium - even if they are carrying them out. So, you are suggesting that they are being driven by forces of which they are unaware and do not understand?
A: Exactly. Bush is a "reaction machine."
Q: (L) I would like to know about this supposed “body guard” of Saddam recently presented by MOSSAD? Was he one of Saddam’s former bodyguards?
A: To an extent, yes. But certainly not in the way presented. Just remember
this: if pilots can be conditioned to commandeer airliners that will fly into
certain death, how hard is it to “Produce” a “bodyguard?”
Q: (L) Piece of cake to produce a bodyguard, I guess. (A) He is saying exactly what the Israelis want him to say. He is not revealing any particular data that counts. It is just general things. Anybody could say such things and be called a “bodyguard.” (L) Exactly. Okay, you say that an EM pulse brought down the Shuttle. (A) Where did the EM pulse come from?
A: From space based satellite.
Q: (A) Does NASA know about the cause?
A: There are some who suspect.
Q: (L) Which explains why they are so anxious to convince everyone that it was NOT sabotage. Like Wellstone's death, there was "no question" about it being a terrorist attack. The likelihood is that the Bush Junta was behind Wellstone's death. In both cases they "know" the cause and want to divert the attention away from it. But, in the case of the shuttle, they aren't "dirty," but they most definitely do NOT want anyone to realize that they also are not "in charge." It makes me think of the remark the C's made a few years ago about the reason for the Military Industrial Complex build-up and manipulations. C's said that the REAL enemy is "out there" and that war was just a "cover" to prevent the masses from realizing what they were really doing. Maybe Bush and the gang are really convinced, in their own minds, that they are acting to "protect" humanity from this threat. Meanwhile, they are simply being drivent to fulfill the agenda of the Consortium. And it is so interesting that the shuttle broke up over Palestine, Texas... as though it was saying to Bush: this is what is going to happen to you: Palestine is going to be your destruction. But, of course, Bush would be incapable of perceiving it in that context. Is it so that a message was intended in this event?
A: As always, confusion is the mask.
Q: (L) In other words, everyone's reaction to the event will depend on their own context. There is the view that it was a "message to Bush." Bush and gang will, of course, see it only as a stimulus to faster and more "decisive" military action. So, it will really work on them the way it is wanted. (A) And of course, we wonder how they will make use of this event.
A: The primary effect among the masses will be shock, thus making them less resistant to Bush's policies. Still other groups will see the clear threat to Bush and Co. from their activities. Bush and Co. will, of course, seek to capitalize on the event even while remaining in the dark as to its meaning. But there most certainly is awareness among them that there is a "Maverick" element at loose. Bush has even "felt" a bit of primal fear in respect of this event.

Click to expand...

Laura said:

Saman, the "illusions" you ask about had to do with romantic relations of a particular individual. Specifically, when an individual believes a lie about another individual because they so much want to have a relationship with them, it leaves them wide open for manipulation of ALL sorts. They become, basically, food. And the same is true when an individual believes lies about themselves.

Click to expand...

Franco said:

scanned for keywords in the .exe version

Click to expand...