Today's conditions brought to you by the Bush Junta - marionettes of their hyperdimensional puppet masters - Produced and Directed by the CIA, based on an original script by Henry Kissinger, with a cast of billions.... The "Greatest Shew on Earth," no doubt, and if you don't have a good sense of humor, don't read this page! It is designed to reveal the "unseen."
If you can't stand the heat of Objective Reality, get out of the kitchen!

June 20, 2003

Reader Response to
Is Signs of the Times in Synch With Cassiopaea

Yesterday we responded to two emails that suggested the material we publish on Signs of the Times was at odds with the rest of the material on the Cassiopaea site. Today we will look at the responses generated by our comments.

To: signs_at_cassiopaea
Date sent: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 20:26:26 -0500
Subject: Is 'Signs of the Times' "In Synch" With Cassiopaea?

I have been an enthusiastic visitor of your site for a while now you have opened my eyes and I definitely agree with your reader JM whom you quoted on your 6/19 Signs page.

But, I have to say that GZ has a point. To oppose these morons in the White House with such verve as you do seems to me a bit of a liberal trap it implies that, in your rather severe criticisms, you are taking sides, taking some higher ground - nobler, better ground.

We are glad the site has been helpful. We also thank you for taking the time to put your ideas together. We appreciate getting well-thought responses to our writing. You raise some important issues. We will do our best to expand on our point of view.

A correct understanding of the question of "taking sides" is important. Yes, it appears we are "taking sides". In fact, we are "taking sides", although not in the sense you appear to understand. With each choice we make in our lives, we are taking sides, either choosing to align ourselves with Service to Others or Service to Self. This is the bottom line. This is the "default" situation for all of us. And in an STS world, the default choice is always STS. Therefore, if we do not come to the realisation that we are always taking sides in this sense, then it is very likely that our choices will be for the STS option.

Similarly, it is a bit of a trap to assign the Lizzies /Consortium/Matrix to the bad side, and you or the C s to the good side. This bias occasionally shows up in the transcripts (in the form/tone of questions asked) and in some of the other writings on the site. There is this sometimes subtle, sometimes-not-so-subtle, current of us vs. them. While it is worthwhile to explore political/ulterior motives, there is at least a tinge of judgment (or, if you prefer, moral outrage ) when discussing these motives, and this I believe was GZ s point. The issue for some of us readers is, it is not what signs we see, but how we interpret them, how we parse them in spiritual/moral terms - and is the Signs commentary appropriate in this light?

We believe that there exist two fundamental forces at work in the universe, an expansive, creative force, that we call STO, and a contractile, destructive force that we call STS. In our realm, these forces can be sometimes interpreted as "good" and "evil". By reading the "Signs", we work to understand the play of these forces in our world.

Within this schema, we would most certainly classify the Consortium and the Matrix Control System as elements of the STS path. This world is STS. It works to keep those within it subjugated to an STS hierarchy that reaches outside of 3rd density and into 4th density. The puppet masters of this world are in 4th density, with 3rd density allies and partners. The Cassiopaeans, if they are who they claim, represent the STO path. So there is, on this level, a fundamental difference, beings who have made choices to align with different aspects of creation.

But both sides, STS and STO, are part of Creation, are needed in order for the whole of creation to work: creation and desctruction, expansion and contraction. In this sense, there is no "opposition", no "us against them". But this is from the point of view of God, of the Ultimate Consciousness, or whatever label you wish to assign to the unnameable. From within our world, our survival, in the sense of the survival of our SOULS, depends upon understanding the differences, making the distinction, and then choosing with which side you wish to align yourself. The surest way to sin against your soul is to place yourself in the position of God, to place yourself outside of your realm, where all of us now belong, and refuse to choose or worse, to deny the difference. Ignoring the distinctions between STS and STO is to play God.

We are still STS beings, but we are waking up to the true nature of this world and are working to better understand it so that our choices can lead us out and towards an STO future, one choice at a time.

As you have pointed out elsewhere on the site, the struggle we re in is not a black-and-white battle between good and evil forces, or human and alien forces; rather, there are karmic and God-knows-what other complications that have positive/educational value at all levels, including levels of the much-despised US government. It is the awareness/knowledge that is key, not picking sides and/or taking cheap shots (such as Bush tripping last week; he isn t the only one who has tripped and fell!).

Again we must understand which level we are speaking from. There is a battle between two "sides", however, the manifestations of this battle are often subtle, intricate, and best portrayed in tones of grey. Yes, STS provides a terrain for us to learn lessons, and in this way they "serve others", however, it does not follow that they are any less than "black" as a force. When we "pick sides", we are picking sides with the truth. We seek to align ourselves with the truth, that is, on Signs of the Times, we pull together reports of events, look at the literal truth or not of the stories (such as Bush's lies about WMD in Iraq). But more importantly, we are trying to understand the underlying TRUTH OF OUR WORLD. This is "picking sides".

This polarization of good vs. evil, aware (good) vs. asleep (bad) is implicit in many of the Signs comments; and this DOES contradict writings elsewhere in the site, which acknowledge that evil is a blend and assignments of good and bad are meaningless and counterproductive, however strong our tendency to dichotomize. The truth, or at least our attempts to explore it, does lie in a grey area. To reduce the US government discussions to Bush Reich = Bad is naïve; even if it is not your intent, this is easily be the message received by many readers of some comments on the Signs page I question your move to dismiss these readers as misguided or in denial. This gray area is worth acknowledging and questioning, and to simplify it in moral terms in Signs commentary makes some of us readers suspicious.

The polarisation between STO and STS is happening on this planet, right here, right now. Manifestations of STO and STS may have the appearence of "grey" in our daily lives, and especially within each of us as indivudals, because this battle is being fought out inside of each of us. What appears as grey are our own attempts to understand the distinctions between STS and STO.

Imagine a photo screened for printing in a magazine or newspaper. Each individual point is either black or white, but the interplay between the two can form a wide variety of tones of grey when looked at from a distance.

At first, from a distance, we can see large patches of white, the snow fields, and the large patches of black, the night sky. But we can not yet recognise the individual dots of black and white that make them up. The trees off in the distance, where the field meets the sky, may have a wide range of greys. We might think, ah, this is where white meets black, this is where the two realms intermix, a realm of greys.

Yes, individual trees may be made up of both white and black dots. In the same way, each of us have both within us. That does not mean we are "grey"; it means we are a battleground between the two forces, and our "being" in this world is determined by the mix of the two within us.

To accept that we are grey is to accept the mix. But if we accept this mix, we will not change. To replace the black dots by white dots requires work and effort. It doesn't happen automatically. As we understand the work, the goal is to approach this reality, growing closer and closer, so that you can make ever finer distcinctions between black and white, resolving the "grey" into the play of opposites. Only then can you pick out those opposites and make a choice based upon knowledge.

One does, of course, have the choice to remain in this "grey" state. However, because this is a black world, if we do not move towards the "white", we will slip back into the black. Furthermore, if all we see is grey, we will never see the black, either in the world, or in ourselves. If we can not identify the black, how can we avoid it, how can we learn to distinguish it so that we can then recognise the white.

As for our "reduction" of the US Government to the Bush Reich, unfortunately, it is hard to sense from your message the alternative you are proposing. We do not believe that every American politician or bureaucrat is a fascist. We imagine that there are people within the government doing "good work". We imagine that our readers are able to make these distinctions themselves. But we do not get caught up in more detailed commentary on the US government because that would lower our perspective to partisan politics. We are mostly looking at the Bush Reich/US Government as the vehicle that is being used to set up a harvesting of energy for our 4D STS controllers. This is the level that concerns us, and in this, we most definitely "take sides".

On this level, every American who does not stand up and call a lie a lie, who does not take a stand against the US Government in its activites to impose the preparations for the harvest, is complicit in its crimes. You will live the consequences of this choice in your soul.

Confusion of information from the media or wherever is acutely frustrating when trying to decipher just what lies behind that curtain, but confusion also provides the traction to learn, to progress, because it provides the context to practice that powerful art of discernment, as your own evolving story with the C s has shown. But we are not all at the same skill level, although many of us spiritual un-sophistocates still want to be watching and listening and discerning. Who is your target audience? People who think/respond to world events in the same way as you do, at your level? Your defensiveness and lack of respect in responding to GZ made me think this may be the case, and prompted me to send this email. Is this ultimately the most valuable approach?

Yes, the confusion in the media provides friction. As you say, it gives us the opportunity to practise discernment. The purpose of these pages is to put out the truth as we see it, as part of our own need to align ourselves with truth against lies. The Signs page is a doorway into the Cassiopaea material, as well as an example of its practical application. The results of Laura and Ark's interactions with the C's and the work at the QFS have shown us that to "wake up" means waking up to the types of manipulations depicted on the Signs page: not the fact that Bush fell off a Segway, or that the US and some of the European countries have different policies on Iraq, but to the forces at work beneath the surface, the manouvering to set up a specific situation, and the steps towards its realisation.

We hope we are not only preaching to the converted, to those who already share to some extent our point of view. Our audience is anyone who wants the truth. This does not mean that we have the truth; it means we are on a quest for the truth. Our audience is anyone who is also on this path, moving in this direction.

Having reread our reply to GZ, we are having trouble seeing where we were defensive or showed a lack of respect.

In general, as you usually do, I d suggest letting the headlines speak for themselves. Occasionally, it is totally appropriate to put news bytes in the context of C s transcripts or provide links to other work that you ve already detailed (such as your valuable work on the psychopath or C s talk about the brown star, e.g.).

Give the readers of your site the credit to discern the meanings for themselves in the spirit of good journalism, leave the polarizing commentary in the editorial room. I did not think that GZ was implying that he was for Bush or that he misunderstood your message; he was simply taking issue with the harsh words you have for many of the recent events in our world. I agree, they ARE shocking, they ARE appalling. But let the deeds speak for themselves most of the time, you guys don t need to add a thing.

Keep up the great work,


We certainly expect that our readers are able to discerns things for themselves, and yet, as your message shows, there are also readers who think they are understanding the C's material, but who have not in fact understood it in the same way as we have. This is evident in your position on "taking sides". Your understanding of this is different than ours. That is fine. However, from our point of view, this shows that our readers are not understanding the real message of the Cassiopaean material.

Leaving everything to "speak for themselves" would bring Signs back "in synch" with a misinterpretation of Cassiopaea by eliminating those points of contention, by allowing readers to not "take sides".

Sounds like going back to sleep to us.

It is therefore clear to us that we do need to add our commentary, draw certain links, explain certain relationships, and be clearer in showing how the Signs page is the practical application of the Cassiopaea material.

H, who had written us about Wellestone, replied to our comments and had this to say:

To: signs_at_cassiopaea
Subject: My note on Clarke & Wellstone

[...]Regarding your lead item of today, about making nice to the Bushies while keeping up the lovely spiritual work, you have my complete support. Truth is not the same thing as global bullies: you really *are* either for it or against it. As you know so well, you can't serve two masters, and when one is the Antichrist, you're in big trouble.

To: <signs_at_cassiopaea>
Subject: GZ and Signs "In Synch?"
Date sent: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 15:46:07 -0700

Dear Signs Team,

As a long-time admirer of the content available on your website, I'd like to write in support of your reader GZ's comments about Signs not quite being in synch with the rest of the site. While your rebuttal brought about many good points in support of the purpose and structure of Signs, I think the main thrust of what GZ was saying may have been missed.

I think that, rather than objecting to the purpose and content of Signs, GZ was finding some fault in the homogeneity of the current team's Comments in response to many of the articles posted. Rather than dissecting the content of an article and shedding specific light on it from the vantage point of the C's material, many of the Comments seem to rehash the same hardline response again and again, oftentimes reducing many valid viewpoints within an article into one summed-up conclusion and/or rebuttal. It's somewhat akin to how liberals and conservatives often debunk an opposing point of view simply by dumping it into one lump category that they can easily dismiss, as opposed to individually confronting the facts and dissecting them accordingly.

I used to scan through the old Signs section (back when Laura personally handled the whole thing) and I would find myself repeatedly skipping directly to the Comments, as I found them to be refreshing and intellectually appealing. Nowadays, unfortunately, I find myself doing just the opposite: scanning a sentence or two of a Comment and realizing it's the same "well, what do you expect from the Bush-Reich? these people are evil, etc., etc.".

Fair enough, but I'm not looking for a categorical dismissal of the articles you present. Often it seems that the comments are unnecessary and add nothing but an ad hominem statement that has been repeated time and time again. Not that I necessarily disagree with the viewpoint; it's just that I'm well aware of it and tire of hearing the same reply to story after story. To me, there may as well be no Comment at all.

(One question comes to mind: Why no more transcript quotes as they apply to the news you post? This was perhaps the most appealing facet of Signs and it seems to be no more). :(

Regardless of what effect this letter has, please know that I understand that, once others are brought on in order to help with a website, the original author's personality may no longer seem to pervade certain portions of that site. One must be careful to guide the staff so that the message stays tried and true to the purpose of the site. My hope is that this series of letters from your readers will not result in the removal of any of the staff that put in so much effort toward Signs, but rather in a renewed zeal for recapturing the personality and message that the section stands for.

Kudos to Laura, Ark, Sam, Scott, Joe, Henry and all others who have donated their time to I have every confidence that the Comments will once again become my favorite part of Signs. :)

Best regards,


Good points, R. The Signs Team recognises the justness of your comments about our comments. We feel this, too, at times. If we have misunderstood GZ's point, we are pleased you can clarify it for us.

We agree that we can at times end up repeating the same ole, same ole about President Bush and the hard-working team he has around him. Some of it may be explained by a need to vent. (You should see the comments that get cut.) And we do admit to a certain amount of frustration day in and day out as the lies of Bush and his men who very clearly believe in what they are doing and who bring great passion to their work become ever more apparent, and the American people roll over and snore.

We would love to be able to do more dissection. Being able to do large amounts of dissection takes time, and we are still working to get the site back up in the new format, create a new Quantum Future School site, as well as the numerous odd things that pop up from day to day. We enjoy being able to do the dissection, too. Hopefully, as the new team gets grooved, we'll be able to do more.

But we should be clear that even if there are new voices on the Signs page, the "editorial policy" is shared by Laura. Now that we are setting up a permanent home for the QFS, and that some of us are seeing each other on a daily basis, we have many discussions about the days events, email, and how to respond.

As we said above, the world itself is changing. These changes give us a basis to better understand the messages from the Cassiopaeans. Laura will be expanding on this topic shortly in an article on shocks and the work.

Your suggestion that we add more of the C's transcripts is a good one. In one of those moments of synchronicity, we had already prepared a selection of excerpts on anticipation in response to another message. You'll find them below.

One last thought, perhaps new found skills at reading the signs yourself are also contributing to your ability to skip over our comments. Maybe you have something to say yourself. We are always open to receiving comments from readers.

To: <signs_at_cassiopaea>
Subject: Bravo! Sign of the Times
Date sent: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 10:20:16 -0400

You were right on regarding your comments to GZ and M-L K. They think if they turn a blind-eye to the terrible things our politicians do they absolve themselves.

I'm so tired of these sheeple..."Love and Light, Love and Light"
Go back to sleep the bus leaves for "kumbuyaa land in ten minutes".


"If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen." Samuel Adams

Thanks, JK. We liked the quote from Sam Adams so much, we have added it to the sidebar. No wonder the guy brews such good beer. (That is a joke. We know that he has been dead for a loooong time. Please, no letters correcting us...)

As we have said, it is the shocks produced by seeing the world as it is that help us to fuse the 'I's of the Personality into the Real 'I' of our Higher Centres. People who refuse to see this will see their dreams fulfilled and will end up in "kumbuyaa land". Unfortunately, having anticipated this land, they will be in for a shock when they see what it actually is.

The C's have stressed the importance of looking at the future as open, to not close off possibilities through anticipation:

Q: (L) OK, we've been talking earlier this evening about intent, and of
course, our own experiences with intent have really been pretty
phenomenal. We've come to some kind of an idea that intent, when
confirmed repeatedly, actually builds force. Is this a correct concept,
and is there anything that you can add to it?
A: Only until anticipation muddies the picture... tricky one, huh?
Q: (L) Is anticipation the act of assuming you know how something is
going to happen?
A: Follows realization, generally, and unfortunately for you, on 3rd
Q: (L) Is this a correct assessment of this process?
A: Both examples given are correct. You see, once anticipation enters
the picture, the intent can no longer be STO.
Q: (L) Anticipation is desire for something for self. Is that it?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) OK, so it's OK to intend something, or to think in an intentional
way, or to hope in an intentional way, for something that is to serve
another, but anticipation defines it as a more personal thing.
A: And that brings realization.
Q: (L) So, desire to serve others, and to do something because it will
help others, brings realization...
A: But, realization creates anticipation.
Q: (L) Well, how do we navigate this razor? I mean, this is like walking
on a razor's edge. To control your mind to not anticipate, and yet, deal
with realization, and yet, still maintain hope... (J) They said it was
tricky... (L) This is, this is, um...
A: Mental exercises of denial, balanced with pure faith of a
nonprejudicial kind.
Q: (L) OK, so, in other words, to just accept what is at the moment,
appreciate it as it is at the moment, and have faith that the universe
and things will happen the way they are supposed to happen, without
placing any expectation on how that will be?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) This is, and I'm not asking about Ark, this is something that he
has talked about in terms of shaping the future. He talks about shaping
the future as an intentional act of shaping something good, but without
defining the moment of measurement. In other words, adding energy to it
by intent, but not deciding where, when or how the moment of
measurement occurs. When the quantum jump occurs, it occurs on it's
own, and in it's own way. Is this the concept he's dealing with here?
A: Anticipation.
Q: (L) In other words, is what he's talking about anticipation?
A: No.
Q: (L) Well, what do you mean, anticipation in response to what I said?
A: That is the key to shaping the future... Avoiding it.
Q: (T) OK, because we’re not anticipating in what we're doing...
A: Yes.
Q: (T) What we're doing is not anticipatory, it's just happening. We
were talking about it on the way up, that with interactions with others,
we are facilitating, we are creating reality. This is what they all say
about reality.
A: When it hits you, it stops.
Q: (L) When what hits you? (J) The realization. (T) The fact that it's
A: Yes unless you cancel out all anticipation.

Q: (J) You told Laura to get on the internet, and that worked to find Ark. What would result in an equivalent outcome in my case? (L) Well done!!!
A: You must be kidding!
Q: (L) No he's not! He's serious! But then, I didn't get on the internet because I was interested in anything but my research. It was part of my mission. So, I guess that was the focus that opened the right doors for me. I had no idea, no expectation, no anticipation - NOTHING. Maybe if you are even looking, you will BLOCK what you need to have in your life? Maybe forever.
A: Yup!
Q: (L) Well, 'J' thought 'I' was the one!
A: He was anticipating. By now we should know that this is a wee bit disappointing.

Q: (L) ...For the record, I was thinking that we are all part of the same soul unit here.
A: To an extent, but you may not yet understand what exactly a "soul unit" is in that sense. And of course, there is more than one sense for this as well. The "trick" that 3rd density STS life forms will learn, either prior to transition to 4th density, or at the exact juncture, is to think in absolutely limitless terms. The first and most solid step in this process is to not anticipate at all. This is most difficult for you. We understand this, but this as also why we keep reiterating this point. For example, imagine if one of your past lives is also a future life?
Q: (I) There we have quantum tunnelling!
A: Yes.
Q: (I) This has to do with past lives and future lives.
A: Yes.
Q: (I) But somehow I can't put it together yet. I can't connect it.
A: You will. "All in due time, my pretty, all in due time."

The C's have returned to this idea of anticipation over and over again. Many New Age gurus encourage you to visualise in very conrete terms how your future will materialise. This visualisation is a form of anticipation. You then no longer live in an open universe where your intent is free to manifest in ANY WAY POSSIBLE, ways you are incapable of imagining. You define it, and kill any possibility of its realisation in the process.

Subject: SOT out of synch...
Date sent: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 07:47:59 -0700


Thanks for getting real on our global evolution. Buddha went through hell before hitting his jackpot.

Denial and avoidance saturate the 'New Age Movement', likely an extension of our parents' generational demand for security and prosperity.

Most Boomer worlds are shrinking due to global manifestations contrary to our 1970's projections.

Oh, well. Too bad.

Carry on.


Thanks, T, for your observations. Indeed the Boomer world is about to go kaboom splat! And as much as their worlds are shrinking, they will remain large enough to be targets, both of our analysis and any incoming objects from the Oort cloud.

However, not all Boomers have morphed into neocons and chickenhawks...just most of them...but we can't lay all the blame on their (our) doorstep because the processes coming to fruition in our day were set into motion long before the Boomers were least in this lifetime. Laura's book The Secret History of The World goes into great detail about the writing of the Bible and its role in establishing the cult of the One God: the cult of the Chosen People and its progeny, the cult of the Dead Man on a Stick. A study of history, when properly carried out, is like compiling the Signs of the Times of the Ages. You see the same type of machinations, seeing the pieces being put into place from eopch to epoch to prepare today's events. There is such consistency over so long a period of time that one can only conclude that there is a force directing events behind the scenes, a transmillennial "conspiracy" to bring our planet to a peak of despair and suffering in time for a "harvest".

Of course, as with the the stolen election of 2000, the events of 9/11, the invasion of Iraq, and the other manifestations of this invisible hand today, there is never a smoking gun pointing clearly to the culprit. Confronting the reality of a transmillennial "conspiracy" is on the same order as an American accepting the reality that highly placed persons within the US government were behind the "attack" on the Pentagon and the WTC. It remains ambiguous. It always will. Right up until that last moment when the horror of it all will dawn on the "sheeple".

The most logical explanation appears to be one that defies "logic" all together: that there are hyperdimensional masters of our realm who can travel in time, putting the pieces carefully into place. Of course, this is an outrageous explanation. Until you begin investigating it from a scientific perspective and you realise that this is POSSIBLE according to our current understanding of physics. The new introduction to the Cassiopaea site discusses this question.

To: signs_at_cassiopaea
Subject: Proper pronunciation of "Nooclear"
Date sent: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 08:04:46 -0400

I realize that youse guys is prob'ly mostly Limeys or Frogs or some kind of yoo-ROPE-eans (no offense [offence?], please!) but if you're going to mimic the Shrub, you've got to get it right. The correct pronunciation (à la Shrub) of the word you'll find in the dictionary under "nuclear" is "NOOK-yoo-lur", which you might spell "noocular"; it is derived from a reference to the atomic nooculus (or "nucleus", as some would have it). I hope I've made myself cular (clear).

Now this is what we really like: constructive criticism we can put into practice right away! Your explanation was very "cular". Glad we have that pronunciation down. "NOOK-yoo-lur".

But as for your supposition that we are all either English or French, sorry to disappoint you. We are all native English speakers, including some Uh-mahricunz. (Did we say that right?) But no one from England, although some of our ancestors were brutally suppressed by the blighters...

To: signs_at_cassiopaea
Subject: Have you ever listened to Ray Taliaferro??
Date sent: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 05:00:11 -0500


I hope this email finds you well.

I am a regular visitor to your website, especially Sign of the Times.

Thank you SO for your work and I will out help as soon as I can.

I cannot express - in the words on this screen - how much I appreciate you and what you have done for me. Or should I say, 'the opportunity I have been given through your existence'?

I want to say it that way but I hope it doesn't make you too uncomfortable.

FYI: when I write 'you' and 'your' I do mean both you and Ark - most times.

The reason I am writing you is:

Have you ever listened to Ray Taliaferro? You may already know of him.

He broadcasts from KGO radio (810 am) in San Francisco from 1:00 am to 5:00 am.

He is also available on the web here:

And he has a link to PNAC on his homepage:

I wonder how much longer he will be allowed to be on the air...

Thanks again and kudos for escaping the Beast in one piece - somehow I thought that at if you got out - the C's got out, too.

Je sais, je sais - tres 3-d, no? :-)

San Jose, CA


I REALLY appreciated your response to the 2 emails you posted on Sign of the Times (6/19). I was TERRIFIED that you were going to "back down" for some reason (embarrassing but true).

I guess I thought that way because that was how I was starting to react, reading their comments.

I have a lot of work to do...

And finally...

To: <signs_at_cassiopaea>
Subject: signs of the times in synch with cassiopaeian views
Date sent: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 18:56:29 -0400

Hello Laura or whoever answers these messages:

Seems like you have heard this before somewhere, NO?

I am tiring of your left-wing slant and it is grating on my nerves.

Now that you have left the US for France, how does that make you an American critical of America?

Anyways, my attacking would not prove anything.

What matters is that others are seeing the truth of the matter here.

I do understand what the Cassiopaeans are saying: we are not political!

So why are you?

Can you stop destiny?

Can you stop the will of the creator?

Why do you mock Christ, even when the C's hold him in reverence?

Your organization has been overtaken by academic socialists and they will divert you from you objective.

Who is really behind that, ask yourselves?



Check out the Signs of the Times Archives

Send your comments and article suggestions to us.

You are visitor number .