The Wave Chapter 41: The Realm of Archetypes

At this point I would like to divert back into the past again for a little bit in order to discuss some of the background issues that are important to this process of recapitulation and revealing the Matrix.

Over the course of the past few days we had a meeting of members of the group, past and present, in order to discuss Frank-as-Cypher-in-the-Matrix. One of the many subjects that was put on the table was the issue of Frank’s direct channeling, as well as several instances in which group members had strong, instinctive negative reactions to the material, none of which made sense until now. In a very real way, Frank has done all of us a favor by revealing his true agenda and orientation. This has made it quite easy to spot when Frank’s controllers or Franks emotions were in motion, skewing the material.

Of course, all of us were just smacking ourselves in the forehead that we didn’t think of it before. But Frank was very, very good at it. He’s probably a lot better than his present compadres realize. After all, he spent years embezzling from a guy who is said to have been one of the smoothest operators in the business.

As I mentioned before, when Frank channeled directly, there was a repellant air that emanated from him. We discussed this at length, those who had experienced it attempting to describe it in words for those who had not. A couple of members proposed the idea that the directly channeled sessions ought to be completely disregarded as being entirely corrupted. I pointed out that, in all fairness, even if the material was subject to being skewed by Frank’s emotional or programmed agendas, he was still able to be very accurate due to the well-pipe analogy. As long as he was in the physical presence of the individual asking the questions, he could tune into that person’s mind to some extent, most particularly when the questions were personal. In this way, under hypnosis, he was quite able to channel via a sort of telepathy, the same way he was able to accurately read palms. He simply connected to the individual asking the questions and sort of vacuumed the information out and verbalized it, as long as they were physically present. At the same time, it seems pretty obvious that even if Frank claimed that he channeled “all the time,” whatever he was channeling on his own, out of our presence, was very likely being beamed from a satellite at the very least, or downloaded from fourth density STS at most.

Another point we discussed was the fact that even things that may seem to be negative occurrences from one perspective, can be very positive from another. We have already noted the fact that STS-oriented individuals have a sort of semantic aphasia – likely a consequence of wishful thinking, and even when an obvious truth is right in front of their faces, they cannot see the range, depth, or associative properties of the principle. It was in this sense that Frank was quite able to participate in the delivery of material of a very STO orientation, because he simply could not understand what it really meant.

So it is that, in the present instance, Frank’s declared alignment with the forces whose origin and activities are under discussion, we now have a much better handle on understanding some of the formerly puzzling elements from certain sessions that were so completely out of character for the Cs. As we revisit the transcripts with Frank’s exposed agenda and assignment to download, steal, drain, and then destroy, we are better equipped to recognize that activity and to literally spot Frank in action when his STS agent mode was activated! Fortunately, as the Cs themselves denoted, it was only 30 percent corruption.

It wasn’t just the direct channeling that suffered from Frank’s manipulations, or from Frank being manipulated, whichever the case may be. Even with the presence of Terry, there were instances of the bleed-through of something – either from a higher density STS source or Frank’s psychological agenda. As we have already speculated, the latter is the tool of the former, so it’s difficult to separate the two.

I would like to discuss here several session excerpts. In the first one, Terry announced at the beginning of the session that he was low on energy, and we can now recognize that this might have tended to reduce the shielding effect. If Terry was low on energy, it would mean that Frank’s negative agenda would be more able to manifest, as was, indeed, the case. What made the session even more problematical was the presence of guests – this was the first session attended by Tom French.

I was pretty happy that Tom had decided to attend a session. I was absolutely certain that he would see that the group was far more interesting than I was. I hoped that the result would be that he would then want to interview the other members and that the focus might shift to the group and away from me, individually and specifically.

When he scheduled his attendance at this session, Tom had specifically asked that we should not do anything in any way different from any other session – he just wanted to be a fly on the wall, so to speak. I promised that would I try to make everything as “normal” as possible. I decided not to notify any of the group members in advance that Tom would be at the session. I wasn’t being discourteous by springing something on them that they might not find agreeable, because all of them had already said that they hoped he would attend a session soon. As I saw it, Tom’s attendance would be a surprise, but a nice one. At the same time, I was keeping my promise not to do anything different. Now, let’s look at a few specific remarks from that session:

June 3, 1995

Q: (L) Hello.

A: Hello.

Q: (T) I’m running on low energy. […] (L) We have guests this evening; this is Tom and Cherie.

A: Hello Tom and Cherie.

The session went along rather normally, with the standard kinds of questions we ordinarily asked, and nothing particularly different in any way. Anyone can read the sessions and determine that this is so, which is what made the remark so surprising.

A: This is more complex than your queries allow.

Q: (L) In other words, our questions are not complex enough to get the answer?

A: You are “rushing it” due to company present, now please relax and just behave as always.

Q: (J) She’s trying to show off! (L) I am not! (SV) That’s what they said! (L) That’s not what they said, and I am not the only one asking questions. (T) Let’s start over with something simple. We are talking about the aura or something similar. The planet’s aura.

A: Yes.

I was more than a little stung by such a remark, followed by Jan’s declaration that I was showing off. What was more, as I pointed out at the moment, I wasn’t the only one asking questions, nor was I in any way rushing anything. A bit later, the Cs made the comment: “You are drifting and there is much too much thought fragmentation tonight.”

We can now recognize that the suggestion that the subject was too complex for the board would have lead to the suggestion for Frank to channel directly. If anything would have turned Tom French off to the Cs, that would have done it. So, even though Jan’s teasing remark focused the attention in her direction, we can now see that it was a diversion away from Frank’s agenda. The remark that there was too much thought fragmentation was a warning from Cs that something was going on, and in retrospect we think that it was a sort of “battle of forces.” What happened toward the end of the session was also rather strange:

Q: (L) Let’s go onto something else that is more simple. The other night the children saw some lights in the sky. I went out to see what they were talking about and at that point there were no moving lights, but there was a single, pulsating, red light about ten degrees to the right of Jupiter. My initial reaction to it was that it was atmospheric twinkle of a large red star or the planet Mars. There was nothing there the following night. What was it the children saw?

A: Children saw planes and a helicopter.

Q: (L) Well, what was it I saw when I saw this red, pulsating light which did not move for quite some time?

A: Mars.

Q: (L) It was not Mars because it wasn’t there the next night.

A: Clouds.

Q: (T) Yeah, there were clouds on Mars that night. (J) Well, let’s move on. (L) Well, I thought it was Mars. (J) You were right.

A: You were right.

The only problem was, it could not have been Mars. And at that moment, I knew it couldn’t have been Mars. But rather than argue the point, I decided to let it drop. I was hugely disappointed that the session had not been like so many of the others, full of fun and lively exchange and accurate information. Of course, that may have been partly due to my own wish that the group would “shine” and demonstrate that it would be far more interesting for Tom to write about all of us, than just me. But there had been a distinctly unpleasant sensation in the air at the time, and I wanted to know why. Jan had drawn attention to herself by saying, “She’s just trying to show off,” and that was very hurtful, most especially when it wasn’t true. In fact, the opposite was true. I wanted to know what had happened, why the energy had been so unpleasant. So, Frank and I had a session a few days later to ask about this. In retrospect, this wasn’t a very good idea because it gave Frank the opportunity, as occurred on many other occasions, to divert attention and suspicion away from himself, and plant it on others.

June 6, 1995

Q: (L) Hello.

A: Stop.

Q: (L) What does that mean? (F) Don’t ask me! (L) Hello!

A: Hello. Azoref from Cassiopaea.

Q: (L) Who was it that said stop?

A: Static.

Q: (L) There was static?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) What was the source of the static?

A: Not important, static always present to some degree.

Q: (L) I want to ask some fairly quick questions.

A: Okay.

Q: (L) With whom were we communicating on Saturday night?

A: Cassiopaea.

Q: (L) Was there any corruption in Saturday night’s session?

A: Maybe.

Q: (L) Well, I am not looking for a maybe. I felt somewhat offended by the atmosphere that was generated. We had guests and it was important …

A: If corrupted, came from 3rd level.

Q: (L) Can you only identify the corruption that comes from your level?

A: No.

Q: (L) Was there an element of … I don’t want to lead here … my impression was that the group was in a state of tension, is this correct?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) Why?

A: Jan was unhappy because of guests.

Q: (L) Why?

A: Not notified ahead. […] If there is strong prejudice by any member or members of level three channel participants it may cause messages to be altered at the point of reception.

Q: (L) […] I spent a lot of time preparing questions and it seemed that whatever was making it through the “prejudiced channel” did not even want to deal with questions that were quite similar to many we have asked in the past – so it seems that the prejudice came through toward me in a specific way.

A: Yes.

Q: (L) Well, if people can be so easily subjected to prejudice and emotional thinking, would that not be considered psychic attack?

A: Result of. Careful not to make hasty moves based upon events which may be transitory in nature.

Q: (L) Well, I feel like we have all been under attack …

A: Attack does not emanate from Terry and Jan.

Q: (L) Well, the whole session seems ruined. Even the answer about the lights in the sky was verifiably wrong. You have said that the channel is grooved and cannot be corrupted, yet obviously wrong answers were given, and it seems that you are saying that the attack is “through” Terry and Jan and the garbled emotions they are experiencing, correct?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) Well, even the answer about the lights in the sky. Mars is 120 degrees away from Jupiter …

We can note a very strange thing in the above remarks: first, Jan is being blamed for the emotional prejudice that poisoned the atmosphere of the session, and at the same time, it is being said that the attack does not emanate “from” Terry and Jan, which suggests that it was “through” them rather than originating there.

And I missed the clue. It never would have occurred to me that Frank, himself, was the vector of attack, that he could possibly have been emanating the energies that affected Jan, as well as the rest of us in the room.

Nevertheless, after this incident, Frank renewed his campaign to do the direct channeling, and so the group discussed it and decided we would give it another try. I started off with my question about the session itself that had been described by me as “corrupted,” and that wrong answers had been given as a result of this corruption, to which the Cs had given assent that my analysis was correct.

June 10, 1995

Q: (L) The first question I have is concerning last Saturday night’s session, which nobody seems to have been happy with. We would like to understand why the information seemed to be so garbled and distorted and, quite frankly, incorrect.

A: What makes you feel it was incorrect?

Q: (L) Because one of the answers was that what I was seeing outside was the planet Mars. It could not have been the planet Mars because Mars was 120 degrees away from the planet Jupiter.

A: Perhaps the question was posed in such a way as to receive that response. Suggest you check the material more closely.

The reader can look at the question and response above and see quite clearly that the question was not posed in such a way as to “lead” the response. And, in fact, when I pointed out that the light could not have been Mars because it wasn’t there the next night, the answer was that I couldn’t see it because of clouds, which was also incorrect. I couldn’t see it the next night because it wasn’t there. There were no obscuring clouds.

Q: (L) It was also said that the children were seeing airplanes and helicopters. When I went out, what I saw was most definitely not a helicopter or an airplane and was only ten degrees away from the planet Jupiter, and was a red, pulsating light. Can you tell me what I saw?

A: Well, if you desire to believe that what you saw was something other than any response given, that’s perfectly acceptable. But, when inquiring upon such things as visual reference, one must be prepared for any and all answers.

Q: (L) That seems to be rather evasive.

A: Evasiveness may also indicate a desire to help one learn about oneself and one’s environment.

Q: (L) What I saw out there was not an airplane or a helicopter; it was also not the planet Mars. Whatever it was, it was not there the following night or any night subsequent to that. Therefore, it was some sort of object that wasn’t of a sort that we usually see, and it baffles me as to why it would be conducive to learning for me to …

A: May we ask a question?

Q: (L) Sure.

A: When seeking to identify visual reference, would it not be wise to be patient with the outcome of the analysis?

Q: (L) Well, sure.

A: You state that what you saw was not a plane or a helicopter. We are interested to know how you can be certain of that?

Q: (L) Because I stood and watched it for a considerable period of time and it never moved.

A: Does that indicate that it was not a helicopter?

Q: (L) Yes, because even helicopters, when they hover, there is some lateral or horizontal movement or motion, and they also have different kinds of lights on them. They don’t sit there and look like a single, large, reddish orange, glowing light that pulsates.

The subject was changed right after the above because none of us saw any point in pursuing it. All the while these words were coming out of Frank, we were all looking at each other and silently signaling each other that this was most definitely not the Cs talking. I was embarrassed for Frank. He had no idea how pompous and condescending he sounded or that he was being viewed as a poseur by the other members of the group. I continued to have faith that his “talent” could be developed, but I knew that he needed more exposure to the Cs by group channeling before we tried trance channeling again. What is more, I protected him. I didn’t want to undermine his confidence by telling him that everybody felt just plain yucky in his presence when he channeled on his own. After all, his claim to be able to channel was the only thing he had. How could I take it away from him?

Frank’s controllers’ efforts to subvert the channeling to direct channeling through him came up at sporadic intervals such as the following clip from November of ’95. At this point in time, I decided that, for Frank’s sake, I needed to gently approach the issue of the flavor of the trance channeling, in hopes that I could get the issue on the table without triggering Frank’s emotional responses based on his belief that he was the channel. I should have known that the very fact that direct channeling was being pushed indicated that the controllers were already skewing.

November 4, 1995

Q: (L) Is there anything about these bases and this subject matter that you wish to teach us further at this time?

A: Suggest direct channeling for this subject.

Q: (L) Well, you know how we feel about the direct channeling, that there is too much personal filtering involved. This way, none of us knows anything …

A: Faith must enter the picture somewhere, lest you fall behind. Some subjects are too complex to be properly discussed through this medium.

Q: (L) OK, we’ll save this discussion of the bases for a direct channeling session. The only thing is, in a direct channeling session it is … There are some things about it that are disturbing. It tends, after doing it several weeks in a row, to become, it begins to sound pompous. (SV) Let’s ask. (L) Why is it after doing it several times in a row, it begins to sound pompous, information begins to get skewed, why is that?

A: Perceptions are a fun challenge.

Q: (L) That’s easy for you to say, because, when the answer comes back that … (J) You’re not “perceptually challenged!”

A: It is easy for you to say many things.

Q: (L) Well, the thing is, when absolutely incorrect information comes out, I have a difficult time dealing with that.

A: How do you determine correctness?

Q: (L) Well in that particular instance, I was told that a certain thing that I saw in the sky was the planet Mars, and the planet Mars was so far away from that spot, that it was absolutely incorrect. I mean, the planet Mars was 120 degrees away from Jupiter. And yet, you said that they were 10 degrees apart; that what I saw that was 10 degrees away from Jupiter was Mars. Unless Mars traveled 110 degrees across the sky in one day, then that was incorrect information. There’s no two ways about it!

A: Wrong!!!

Q: (L) No, it’s not!

A: It is!!!

Q: (L) What is wrong? That Mars didn’t travel 110 degrees? Because that is exactly what you said, that it was Mars. I went back, I read over the session!

A: You were in a 4th density flap.

Q: (L) Well, fine and dandy! If I’m in a fourth density flap, that’s an easy answer for … any answer that seems to be at variance with what’s happening here. I mean, do you get my point here?

A: Yes. But you are still mistaken.

Q: (L) Why am I the one that’s mistaken? Why can’t you be mistaken?

A: We can, but not on this one! Remember, you felt strange during this experience. And besides, you asked us for the information, we must present it to you as it is.

Q: (L) You’re saying that I felt weird or strange or unusual at that occasion. I don’t remember saying that I felt strange or unusual. Are you trying to put words in my mouth?

A: Who said that? You said that.

Q: (L) OK, you didn’t say that I said that. You said that I said that I felt strange or unusual. I don’t remember that I said that. I don’t remember feeling strange or unusual.

A: OK.

The reader may want to look again at the clips from the sessions where the light in the sky was brought up to see that I most certainly did not say anything about feeling unusual during the experience, nor, more importantly, did I feel unusual during the experience. I simply saw something inexplicable. I watched it for a sufficient length of time to be certain that it was not an airplane or helicopter, and I just wanted to ask a simple question and get a simple answer. So why was this issue so touchy? Why was such a block being placed in front of it so that, under no circumstances, was I able to get a straight answer? It was pretty obvious that it had become an emotional issue for Frank, and the answer might be as simple as that.

The fact that we were not giving him acceptance and kudos as the channel seems to have begun to prey on Frank’s mind at some point. All attempts to move the channeling to that format were rejected, though we most certainly gave it a spin a few times. Our vigilance kept the material uncorrupted for the most part even when he was direct channeling. The only problem was the repellant nature of the personality that came through Frank. It was like Frank himself to an exponential power. There was such an attitude of superiority and even contempt for human understanding completely out of keeping with the kind and patient responses of the Cs that there was no comparison.

Another example of this that deals directly with Frank’s growing resentment that he was not being given top billing is the next excerpt. We had gotten into a discussion about it because he had started another of his “pity me” rants and I had just told him in a joking way that if he started on that again I was going to throw something at him. He became all upset that I had used a word describing a physical act of violence. I pointed out that the violence was only words spoken in defending myself against his words which were, effectively, doing violence to me because they were draining my energy. What was more, it was merely a metaphor, and he knew I really wasn’t going to throw anything at him. But he just wanted to argue, so I suggested that sometimes, one had to do or say something to make the point. What is interesting about this one is the fact that the following excerpt generally contradicts the information given in the session about Frank’s many rants as being his way of “fighting back.” Of course, as I have already mentioned, the truth was coming through then, though it was being skewed by Frank’s agenda. The same is true in the following:

June 1, 1996

Q: (L) Frank and I would like to have a comment on our dispute.

A: Ask.

Q: (F) I don’t know what to ask. (L) Well, Frank says that violence is never an appropriate response to words.

A: Okay.

Q: (L) I say that under some circumstances, it may be the only response.

A: Why do you say that?

Q: (L) Because there do exist situations where words are used repeatedly to harm another. One example is the Nazi propaganda machine. If someone had shot Goebbels, it might have saved a lot of people from dying.

A: No.

Q: (L) Well, of course. There would have been someone else. Still, the point is, words can be used to destroy, and words of power can be used to kill. Sometimes words can be a lot more hurtful to the soul than physical acts.

A: Not directly.

Q: (L) Well, directly, or indirectly, it still amounts to the same thing.

A: No.

Q: (L) Well, I know you are not going to agree with me.

A: This is a subject that demands further exploration, in order to bring about a definitive answer.

Q: (L) Go ahead. Explain it to me.

A: Words only have power if the receiver believes they do.

Q: (L) But, in many cases, that belief exists.

A: The power to control belief lies exclusively within the receiver.

Which, of course, begs the question of why it was okay for Frank to fight back with words, but it was not okay for me to do it! In another sense, however, if Frank was already marked as an STS individual, then the answers then and in this particular session were exactly correct, only I was seeing them from the idea that Frank was seeking to serve others.

Q: (L) Let me put it this way: Frank often says things that are not precisely soothing to the soul, to say the least. Most often, I ignore them. But, sometimes I am not in an ignoring mood, and my response is no more violent toward him than his toward me. I merely speak metaphorically. When I do, I am only saying, “Stop doing that!” in a figurative way. But, he finds this to be as irritating to him as what he says that irritates me …

A: And …

Q: (L) Well, that is about it. I have lately been verbally attacked by numerous individuals … so I am not in a mood to tolerate much in this line from those around me.

A: And if this irritates you, it is because you allow it to.

Q: (L) Fine and dandy. And it is true, and I know it. Which is why I am beginning to think that I ought to simply do nothing, because my feelings are too sensitive.

A: And do you really believe that that is an unalterable condition?

Q: (L) Well, why should I be the one who is obliged to become less sensitive, and other people are not obliged to become more thoughtful about what they say?

A: You cannot control others.

Q: (L) I don’t want to control anyone. I am just saying that the obvious thing is for me to simply withdraw into my own little world of reading and thinking and writing, and if nothing ever comes of any of it, it is utterly immaterial to me.

And here we see Frank’s powerful emotional reaction. There I was, suggesting that we give the entire project up, forget about the Cs, forget about making Frank a star, and just go back to doing what I enjoyed doing where I certainly didn’t have to put up with Frank or the various types of nastiness encountered on the Internet, from Frank, and elsewhere.

A: That is your choice, but not a wise one!!!

Q: (L) Well, you say that, but it is, as several people have pointed out to me, only since we have begun this channeling project that all these dreadful things have happened in my life. My life is a shambles!

A: “Dreadful is subjective.”

Q: (L) I would say that the physical things that have happened to me, the collapse of my marriage, the things that have happened to my children, are pretty damn dreadful, subjectively or otherwise!

A: Before these changes began to manifest, you were deeper into the “deadly illusion” than you are now. Emergence is, by its very nature, uncomfortable. But, it has and will, empower you, we promise!!!!!!!!

Q: (L) It is a very trying time now. I am having a difficult time just coping.

A: And there have been others, and will be others, but that does not mean that the rewards will be slight.

Q: (L) Well …

A: You are on a path of destiny, and there is no turning back now.

Q: (S) What happened in specific? (L) Well, I was trying to explain some of the material to several people, and the end result was that they decided that I was possessed and that the Cs were evil because they say that we have to figure things out ourselves in order to graduate to the next level. Including my husband.

A: Why does this bother you? It does not bother us. They can all decide that we are the “Queens of Satan,” if they wish. It is free will.

Q: (L) I don’t like the implied hardness … I am not a hard person.

A: It is not hardness. The “feelings” you describe are related to ego, and by relation, pride, two things that were deliberately implanted into the 3rd density human psyche by the 4th density STS 309,000 years ago, as you measure time. Refer to the transcripts with regard to DNA alteration and the occipital ridge. Believe it or not, you, Laura, will be rid of these, eventually. It is not what some individuals respond to you that matters. It is sharing the information that counts. Also, remember, these persons do not perceive your feelings and sensitivities as keenly as you do, nor do you perceive theirs, likewise.

That was all fine and good, and I certainly couldn’t argue with it in principle. However, I was having some difficulty understanding how feeling hurt after being attacked for sharing some of the Cs material was related to ego and pride. What is more, this didn’t seem like the Cs I was used to. Indeed, there comes a time when a person needs to toughen up, but considering the beating I had been taking for so long, these remarks were singularly cold.

Yes, they offered the carrot that “you are on a path of destiny,” and “rewards” that were not slight were indicated. But as a general rule, I am on guard against such lures, considering them to be ego hooks. I realize in retrospect that yes, it may be true that there is some destined activity, but the entire interaction with Frank was designed to divert that destiny to some other agenda, and to prevent the real destiny, if there is one, and whatever it may be. But it was the next segment that was so completely untrue that I was shocked. I thought that the Cs (even if skewed by Frank) were finished and I started to ask a question for someone else. I was about to find out that the Cs were not only being cold, they were being completely inaccurate and making assumptions that were untrue!

Q: (L) There is someone who wants to ask some questions …

A: We are not finished with this subject. Also, it is important to note that, in most cases in which you have suffered “attack” from those on the Internet, you were not directly conveying the information we have given to you. You were presenting thoughts that you claimed as your own, or knowledge that you have gathered strictly through your own efforts, thus, it was responded to in kind. This you must expect if you are going to plant the bulk of the credit upon yourself, then you open up yourself to direct criticism. This is not wise if you are not prepared for negative reactions. Third density beings will always perceive knowledge that is being given to them before they are ready to receive it as “preaching,” and they resent this because of the very same ego related issues we discussed earlier. So, suggestion: better to frame knowledge transference with a preamble such as, “this is what was given to me, it is up to you to decide for yourself whether or not you are comfortable with accepting it, or not.”

What was so shocking about the above remarks was that it was entirely and altogether untrue. In fact, it had always been as a direct result of presenting the raw material that I had suffered attack! I was most definitely directly conveying the information, and I was most definitely not presenting thoughts that I claimed as my own!!! And that’s a cold hard fact because I still have the emails and message board discussions from that period. There is no doubt whatsoever that this was Frank using the board to express what he believed to be true. He felt that he was not being sufficiently revered as the channel, and this led him to create wild theories in his mind that everyone was conspiring against him to “cut him out” of something, including credit for being the channel. What is more, for a very long time I presented all material as simply from the Group, with no names designated at all. I was so stunned by this attack from the C’s, that I knew it was not them at all and I terminated the session.

Q: (L) Well, that is not true, by any stretch of the imagination. I don’t want to talk about it anymore with you. You are being completely wrong! Talk about assumptions! [End of Session]

But again, let me point out to the perspicacious reader that, even though there was skewing, again, there were remarks that were made that were right on the money, most especially those comments about DNA alteration and our need to hone our skills as warriors by divesting ourselves of self-importance in the sense of being subject to offense. Indeed, when I am offended, it is an effect of self-importance. But in the above case, I was most definitely not guilty of the offenses for which I was being blamed.

By now the reader may be getting the idea that sometimes the transmissions were like trying to watch television while someone runs the vacuum cleaner (no pun intended!). The degree of interference can vary by the position of the vacuum relative to the television, as well as other factors including the strength of the broadcast signal. So, even though the picture might get very snowy or distorted, the real picture can still be seen and interpreted. The best pictures came when the vacuum was turned off, and Frank practically dozed at the board from boredom. For the most part, when I was off on my cosmic questions, my questions about history and the nature of reality, he practically went to sleep.

There is another consideration that would negate the assumption that, just because the material was delivered by Frank in trance, that we ought to just toss it out. As the Cs themselves once said when we asked a question about a similar situation:

March 18, 2000

Q: Whitley Strieber and Art Bell have published a book about a “global superstorm.” Is any of the information they have given in this book fairly accurate?

A: Derived from non-human sources known for stark accuracy, when convenient.

Q: What makes it convenient at the present time for them to be “starkly accurate?”

A: Fits into plans.

This now brings us to a particular session, one that was direct channeled via Frank when the entire group was present. This session was one that demonstrated the superior, condescending attitude so sharply that it is even obvious in the text. Many people have written to ask me if I was sure that we were talking to the Cs on this one. However, even though repellant obfuscation and avoidance of the issues by a lot of words that said little was apparent, there was so important a message conveyed in this session that it deserves attention. In this particular case, I don’t think it was the Cs, and I don’t think it was the STS controllers speaking; I think it was a simple matter of Frank tuning into me telepathically, or was acting as the well-pipe, and the information was being drawn directly from my unconscious mind. One thing I do know is that, in retrospect, the way I received the information, and the way I ultimately acted on it, was one of the keys to unlocking the destiny and changing my reality completely.

The therapy I was receiving for the injuries sustained in the accident some seven months earlier wasn’t helping me very much, to put it briefly. At some point, another X-ray was made by the chiropractor, and he noted a strange shadow that looked like a metal pin linking the 5th and sixth cervical vertebrae together. He referred me to a neurosurgeon who ordered a series of MRI’s.

On the night before I was scheduled to have these films made, I woke up suddenly, as though I had been thrown off a cliff, my heart pounding, choking and gagging on something thick in my throat. My entire mouth and throat, going deep inside, was in horrible pain. I felt as though my tongue had been torn out by the roots and I was strangling on it.

I ran to the bathroom and tried to spit out what was choking me, and it was a big clot of blood. The only explanation I could think of was that I must have bitten my tongue in my sleep. I examined my throat, and it was torn, red and swollen way in the back, beyond my teeth, slightly to one side of the back of my throat. The bleeding redness extended down into the recesses of my throat where I couldn’t see it all. There was no way I could have bitten myself there! When I tried to wake my husband up to help me, I was unable to rouse him, and he had always been a light sleeper. This disturbed me very much. My throat and the side of my face swelled up and stayed swollen for over a week and I had difficulty eating and talking, much less swallowing.

The bottom line was: whatever had been seen by the chiropractor on the X-rays was no longer there. But I did have a bulging disk that was pressing on the spinal cord and the neurologist felt that this was the source of most of the pain. He wanted me to see a surgeon. The films were sent over and I was given an appointment.

Surgery was not the best option because I have a congenitally narrow spinal canal. But the same thing that made surgery problematical, made it likely that I would suffer constant pain and occasional paralysis for the rest of my life. What was more, with the vagaries of spinal impingement, it was hard to tell where I was going to hurt or experience the paralysis from one day to the next.

Having suffered so much pain for so long, I was rather depressed by this news. I mean, what else can go wrong?

The attorneys for the fellow who hit me wanted my MRI’s to send out for a second opinion, but they had “disappeared.” All the efforts of two doctor’s staffs as well as the staff at the medical center where they were taken, were unable to produce them. It was a big mystery. The staff at the MRI unit were so upset that they undertook to do hand searches in relays to try and find them. They were under a lot of pressure to find them because, otherwise, they had to do them over again without charge, and it was a very expensive set of films. After almost two weeks of searching, the MRI staff finally admitted defeat. I was scheduled to come in to have another set made.

The night before the new pictures were to be made, I was worried about being able to go to sleep due to the strange events surrounding the loss of my films as well as other matters. After lying down, I was just trying to be still and calm down the pain, knowing I wasn’t going to be able to go to sleep. I was right in the middle of puzzling over those blasted MRI’s, when the next thing I knew there was a sort of momentary blank-spot and I came to myself, only to discover that I was being floated out of bed, feet first, by three or four spidery creatures who had me by the ankle and were “pulling” on me.

I was struggling and resisting and apparently had been doing so even while asleep because I found that my paralyzed arm was extended up over my head and was locked on the brass headboard in a death grip and the bed was shaking and bouncing with the efforts of my resistance. It was virtually a tug of war and I wasn’t going to let go!

I looked at them and the creepy little spider guys realized that I had awakened. One of them put its hand on my head and I felt a paralysis coming over me. I became very angry. I wanted to curse them. But it was impossible to resist this paralysis and that made me even madder! I was determined that, even if they had technology that could overcome all of my efforts of resistance, that at least I would give them a piece of my mind! I was going to have my say!

With enormous concentration, I was able to utter a strangled sound. It was not the defiant curse I was working on in my head, but anything was progress against the frozen sensation of my entire body. And, it had a startling effect! As soon as I uttered this incomprehensible, cave person-type sound, they dropped me like a hot potato and began sort of flitting and chattering like a nest of birds with a cat climbing the tree. They huddled together and sort of melted into a shimmery curtain thing alongside my bed. It was much like the mirage effect one sees on the road ahead when driving on a hot day.

My heart was pounding from real exertion. I can’t say that I was terrified because such a thing is beyond terror. And, I have always been a person who acts cleanly and efficiently in a crisis, so this was no different in that respect. What had been most useful was that I had the information from the Cassiopaeans because that certainly had a lot to do with not feeling terrified which is more often a reaction to the unknown. At least, to some extent, I had an idea of what I was dealing with, even if I preferred to believe that it had been a hypnagogic nightmare.

At one point, while I was fighting them, while the bed seemed to be bouncing and jerking, I was very conscious that it was not waking my husband up, and after the creatures had melted away, when I had turned to work at peeling my paralyzed hand away from the headboard, I was startled to see and feel three distinct, wave-like shudders pass through his body starting from the head and moving down. After the third one, he took a deep breath, and began to snore suddenly and loudly as though he started right in mid-snore.

What was troubling me was that he was not been moving at all, not even to breathe. It struck me with horror that he seemed to have been “turned off” in order to prevent his intervention. That he could be turned off scared me half to death! I had no protection at all! Not only that, when I tried to tell him what had happened, he thought I was imagining it. I can assure you, it was not Imagination, though it may indeed have occurred in a hyperdimensional reality, and had not been a material event as we understand them.

As I lay there, trying to figure out whether the event had really happened, or if it had just been in my own head, I realized that the evidence that something had happened was that my partially paralyzed left hand was holding the headboard. Heck, I couldn’t even lift that arm, much less hold anything with my left hand. And that I had been gripping and struggling for some time was pretty certain because of the way the hand refused to come open. I lay there trying to figure out what the heck had happened, while cradling my arm that was still screaming in pain and jerking spasmodically. What was more, I couldn’t understand how my ex-husband could have slept through all of that rather violent struggle! I was pretty sure that, even if nothing had been physically manifested in the room, at least I had been struggling.

I got out of the bed and sat up the rest of the night in a recliner, thinking and smoking. Early in the morning, the girl from the test center called, and in a shaking voice, told me that when she had come in that morning, my file with all films intact, was on the reception desk. No one admitted to finding it and placing it there, and she had been the last one to leave the office the night before and the first in the office that morning and had unlocked the doors herself. It was a mystery that has never been explained.

That gave me even more to think about, but I will leave the speculation to the reader. I can only recount what happened. Because of the exhausting, obfuscatory nature of the following session during which I wanted to ask a few simple questions about this event, I was never able to ask about the films, and never came back to the subject. Another important point: I had not discussed the event with the group before asking the questions. The reader will notice that I do not initially even describe or name the event in order to not lead the answers. Also, I have edited out the tedious rambling around of Frank and have retained only those questions and answers bearing on the event itself. The interested reader can go to the sessions page and read the entire session and see what I mean by “tedious.”

July 23, 1995

Q: (L) Toren, the first thing on my mind is an experience I had several nights ago. It seemed as though there was some sort of interaction between myself and something “other.” Could you tell me what this experience was?

A: Was eclipsing of the realities.

Q: (L) What is an eclipsing of the realities?

A: It is when energy centers conflict.

Q: (L) What energy centers are conflicting?

A: Thought energy centers. […] Therefore, energy centers conflicting involve thought patterns. You could refer to it as an intersecting of thought pattern energies. […]

Q: (L) Well, it seemed to me that something happened to me that blanked out a period of my experience, and you say this was an eclipsing of energies caused by an intersecting of thought centers. Now, this intersecting of thought centers, did this occur within my body or within my environment?

A: They are one and the same. […]

Q: (L) Alright. I was lying in bed worrying about being able to get to sleep. The next thing I knew, I came to myself feeling that I was being floated off my bed. Was I?

A: No. When you say “I” you are referring to your whole person. There is more than one factor involved with one’s being to any particular definition.

Q: (L) Was some part of my being being separated from another part of my being?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) Was this an attempt to extract my soul or astral body?

A: Attempt is not probably the proper term.

Q: (L) In other words …

A: It is more just an activity taking place. Attempt implies effort rather than the nature present in a conflicting of energies and thought centers.

Q: (L) I also seemed to be aware of several dark, spider-like figures lined up by the side of the bed. Was this an accurate impression.

A: Those could be described as specific thought center projections.

Q: (L) I seemed to be fighting and resisting this activity.

A: That was your choice.

Q: (L) Was I successful?

A: Now, we are back to leading again.

Q: (L) Alright, was this the ending of an abduction that had already taken place?

A: Not the proper terminology. It was the conclusion to an event, not necessarily what one would refer to as an abduction, but more what one would refer to as an interaction.

Q: (L) What was the nature of the interaction?

A: The conflicting of energies related to thought center impulses.

Q: (L) Where are these thought centers located?

A: Well, that is difficult to answer because that is assuming that thought centers are located. And, of course this is a concept area in which you are not fully familiar as of yet. So, an attempt to answer this in any way that would make sense to you would probably not be fruitful. We suggest slowing down and carefully formulating questions.

Q: (L) At what level of density do these thought centers have their primary focus?

A: Thought centers do not have primary focus in any level of density. This is precisely the point. You are not completely familiar with the reality of what thoughts are. We have spoken to you on many levels and have detailed many areas involving density level, but thoughts are quite a different thing because they pass through all density levels at once. Now, let us ask you this. Do you not now see how that would be possible?

Q: (L) Yes. But what I am trying to do is identify these conflicting thought centers. If two thought centers, or more, conflict, then my idea would be that they are in opposition.

A: Correct. […]

Q: (L) OK, you said I wasn’t abducted, that an event of some sort occurred. What was the event?

A: We have already described this, but the problem that you are having is that you are assuming that the description we are giving is more complicated than this. It is not. […]

Q: (L) OK, in the experience I felt a paralysis of my body, what caused this paralysis.

A: Yes. Separation of awareness. Which is defined as any point along the pathway where one’s awareness becomes so totally focused on one thought sector that all other levels of awareness are temporarily receded, thereby making it impossible to become aware of one’s physical reality along with one’s mental reality. This gives the impression of what is referred to as paralysis. Do you understand?

Q: (L) Yes. And what stimulates this total focus of awareness?

A: An event which sidetracks, temporarily, the mental processes.

Q: (L) And what event can sidetrack the mental processes to this extent?

A: Any number.

Q: (L) In this particular case, what was it?

A: It was an eclipsing of energies caused by conflicting thought centers.

Q: (L) What energies were being eclipsed?

A: Whenever two opposing units of reality intersect, this causes what can be referred to as friction, which, for an immeasurable amount of what you would refer to as time, which is, of course, nonexistent, creates a nonexistence, or a stopping of the movements of all functions. This is what we would know as conflict. In between, or through any intersecting, opposite entities, we always find zero time, zero movement, zero transference, zero exchange. Now think about this. Think about this carefully.

Q: (L) Does this mean that I was, essentially, in a condition of nonexistence?

A: Well, nonexistence is not really the proper term, but non-fluid existence would be more to the point. Do you understand?

Q: (L) Yes. Frozen, as it were?

A: Frozen, as it were.

Q: (L) Was there any benefit to me from this experience?

A: All experiences have potential for benefit.

Q: (L) Was there any detriment from this experience?

A: All experiences have potential for detriment. Now, do you see the parallels? We are talking about any opposing forces in nature, when they come together, the result can go all the way to the extreme of one side or all the way to the extreme of the other. Or, it can remain perfectly, symmetrically in balance in the middle, or partially in balance on one side or another. Therefore all potentials are realized at intersecting points in reality. […]

Q: (L) Was one of the thought centers me?

A: That is presupposing that you, what is defined as you, or how you define yourself as “me” is of and by itself a thought center.

Q: (L) Well, I am trying to find this out by asking these questions. I am not presupposing here, I am just trying to find out what is going on here!

A: Part of what is you is a thought center but not all of what is you is a thought center. So, therefore it is incorrect to say: “Was one of these conflicting energies or thought centers me?”

Q: (L) Was one of these conflicting thought centers or energies some part of me?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) And was it eclipsed by interacting with a thought center energy that was part of or all of something or someone else?

A: Or, was what happened a conflicting of one energy thought center that was a part of your thought process and another energy thought center that was another part of your thought process? We will ask you that question and allow you to contemplate.

Q: (L) Was it?

A: We will ask you that question and allow you to contemplate.

Q: (L) Does it ever happen that individuals who perceive or think they perceive themselves to have experienced an abduction, to actually be interacting with some part of themselves?

A: That would be a very good possibility. Now, before you ask another question, stop and contemplate for a moment: what possibilities does this open up? Is there any limit? And if there is, what is that? Is it not an area worth exploring?

Q: (L) OK, help me out here …

A: For example, just one example for you to digest. What if the abduction scenario could take place where your soul projection, in what you perceive as the future, can come back and abduct your soul projection in what you perceive as the present?

Q: (L) Oh, dear! Does this happen?

A: This is a question for you to ask yourself and contemplate.

Q: (L) Why would I do that to myself? (J) To gain knowledge of the future.

A: Are there not a great many possible answers?

Q: (L) Well, this seemed to be a very frightening and negative experience. If that is the case, then a: maybe that is just my perception, or b: then, in the future I am not a very nice person! (J) Or maybe the future isn’t very pleasant. And the knowledge that you gained of it is unpleasant.

A: Or is it one possible future, but not all possible futures? And is the pathway of free will not connected to all of this?

Q: (L) God! I hope so. […]

Q: (L) OK, when this experience occurred, am I to assume that some part of myself, a future self perhaps, of course they are all simultaneous but just for the sake of reference, came back and interacted with my present self for some purpose of exchange?

A: Well this is a question best left for your own exploration as you will gain more knowledge by contemplating it by yourself rather than seeking the answers here. But a suggestion is to be made that you do that as you will gain much, very much knowledge by contemplating these very questions on your own and networking with others as you do so. Be not frustrated for the answers to be gained through your own contemplation will be truly illuminating to you and the experience to follow will be worth a thousand lifetimes of pleasure and joy.

To say that I was puzzled and confused is putting it mildly. But there was still something else about the event that was bothering me: the fact that my husband had been “turned off.” For some reason, I had the idea that this was connected to another event that had occurred several days previously. So, trying to be discreet, I asked:

Q: (L) OK, just a few days prior to this experience, I experienced a couple of headaches brought on by marital interactions. I would like to know what was the source of this sudden, extreme pain.

A: Have you not answered that for yourself already?

Q: (L) Not satisfactorily.

A: No. It is that you perceive it as being not satisfactory.

Q: (L) Well, I have a couple of choices and I haven’t selected one as being the one.

A: Well, then select one.

Q: (L) What if I select the wrong one?

A: You won’t.

And this brings us to the crux of the matter at this point, the very thing we have been discussing: our relationships in terms of theological realities and conflicts between forces at higher levels.

If all of existence is consciousness, if alternate universes are different individual or mass consciousness trajectories, then it must be very much like a tree.

When we look at a tree we notice that some branches start to grow, but for some reason, they become stunted and die and fall off. Others will grow for a little way before doing so. Still others grow strong and get all the “juice” and develop, and more branches grow from them, and so on.

In terms of alternate dimensions, its all too easy to use it as an excuse for any lie to be accepted as truth, and this is why I sat back to think about this idea a little more carefully.

As soon as the Many Worlds theory of physics was dropped into public awareness, the New Age grabbed it and it became the new explanation for everything weird. If a source was caught in a lie, it was easy to explain that it “happened in another dimension.”

My guess is that the real world of third density/dimensions, is a collapsed wave function reality. It is like the branch of a tree. At certain nodal points, there are other branches that have the possibility of “getting all the juice” and becoming the dominant branch, and what determines which it is depends on many factors.

But, once one bud begins to dominate, the others become smaller and smaller and fall away eventually for lack of “juice.” There is only one “real” reality. The others are only ghost or potential realities. Like a tree, with gazillions of branches, each individual’s reality grows in this way. At certain points, there are alternate realities. But, depending upon choice, attention, and other factors, those realities that are undesirable can be “pruned” or deprived of sap so that they wither and fall away.

At the same time, each individual being their own “branch,” has a slightly different reality from every other individual, and some responsibility for the way their branch grows. But it is all from the same tree, and thus has a more or less single reality. If their choices are “diseased,” their branch will grow in a way that causes it to be pruned, or wither, or face some interference even from other branches, perhaps.

So, in a certain sense, at the nodal point, many possibilities may exist, just as several buds may put out on the end of a branch, but not all of them will continue the process of branching, and at such points, we have some freedom to choose, individually or collectively, depending on the nature of the branch.

It is my thought that, at this time of eclipsing of realities, a very interesting thing had occurred: the energies of awareness I had been acquiring for almost a year had brought me to a point where the nascent Thought Centers of STO and STS each had an equal possibility of becoming the dominant branch. If the Cassiopaeans were one Thought Center of a different reality, me in the future, so to speak, but a future that was not yet “firm,” it was only a budding branch on the tree, and the abducting critters originated from a different “me in the future,” of another branch. At this moment, the energies were equal, and something tremendous hinged upon my choice. And that choice had consequences relating to my marriage.

I began to understand that our reality is masked as a medium for growth. What we are growing is our Will which, when aligned with a given Thought Center, allows that Thought Center to manifest its Will in our reality to the extent we are in alignment and can be amplified! To be in alignment with the STO Thought Centers results in an increase of spiritual consciousness and a diminishment of the “sleeping” consciousness of matter. To align with the STS Thought Centers, as we are, results in an increase of the sleeping consciousness, or wishful thinking of matter, and a diminishment of spiritual consciousness.

Every situation or dynamic in which we find ourselves demands a response. To not respond is, of course, a choice to accede to the dynamic as it is. This means that the only true response we can give is to be more fully and strongly what we have chosen. Consciously. And only by doing this do we progress to the next level.

We come then to the problem of how to do this and I realized that it was a matter of growing stronger in terms of polarity/orientation. At the level of third density, the animal man is far stronger than the spiritual man. Third density is the point at which the process of division into those that will follow the unification into Oneness that leads to the “new” descent into primal matter, and those that will follow the unification into Oneness that will be the consciousness that will “play” with this clay, losing itself in it for the joy of creation and learning and experience.

It was at this point that I began to understand the principle and purpose of the petty tyrant. Even though I hadn’t read Castaneda at this point, I knew that there was a moment in which I had received a warning that my ex-husband was draining my energy to the point of death. And after the two experiences, where I realized that he might actually be the one whose energy was utilized to interact with me – that it was through him, as a portal, that such beings were enabled to enter my reality – it was a terrible thing to face. I was seeing the theological reality, the eclipsing of realities, that my real choices in real life, regarding real people, reflected some higher realm of existence. And all the niceness in the world wasn’t enough to make this one go back under the rug.

In dealing with my ex as a petty tyrant, I had achieved a certain level of modification that allowed me to hold my own in the face of the unknown. Combined with knowledge from research and information from the Cs, I hadn’t run screaming in terror; I hadn’t collapsed in horror; I hadn’t allowed myself to be a victim. Even though I had the idea that such beings might have more power than me, I refused my permission. If they were going to do it, if I couldn’t kick and scream, I would think the loudest yells at them imaginable. And they knew it somehow. Remember what don Juan said?

He explained that … if seers can hold their own in facing petty tyrants, they can certainly face the unknown with impunity, and then they can even stand the presence of the unknowable.

“The average man’s reaction is to think that the order of that statement should be reversed,” he went on. “A seer who can hold his own in the face of the unknown can certainly face petty tyrants. But that’s not so. What destroyed the superb seers of ancient times was that assumption. We know better now. We know that nothing can temper the spirit of a warrior as much as the challenge of dealing with impossible people in positions of power. Only under those conditions can warriors acquire the sobriety and serenity to stand the pressure of the unknowable.”

I vociferously disagreed with him. I told him that in my opinion tyrants can only render their victims helpless or make them as brutal as they themselves are. I pointed out that countless studies had been done on the effects of physical and psychological torture on such victims.

“The difference is in something you just said,” he retorted. “They are victims, not warriors.”

And that was the key. I began to grow a branch of the tree that went in a different direction, toward a different future; a future wherein I was no longer willing to be a victim.

The branch grew slowly, of course. It would be 8 months before there was enough growth to stand the pressure of the unknowable – and then, only to a certain extent. But everything hinged on recouping my energy, and I knew that I must concentrate everything on this task.

This idea, this principle, that close association with an individual who is on a path to a certain future, a person who is growing the branch of a certain Thought Center, being united with such a person as in a marital relationship, is a crucial element of the theological reality. They may be on the same branch for a long time, but when a new bud begins to grow, there is a choice. This fact is disguised from us in myriads of ways all engendered and supported by the theories of psychology promoted by the Matrix control system.

And the same is true for all our many relationships. Each and every encounter with a petty tyrant will ultimately bring us to a point of eclipsing of realities wherein we can make choices. There are any number of futures, but they are ghost futures; potential futures; you can build up your energy and choose which branch grows. But only at those points where you have done a certain amount of work that “seeds” the new branch. And when it is ready, it will let you know.

And based on those choices, the entire universe can be changed.