Additional
comments to "Reductio ad absurdum" by Laura added July 2005
It
has recently been brought to my attention that there is an "ex-Cass
Group" member who is posting rather libelous remarks about us on
Internet Discussion boards. A reader sent these comments to me, and
there is really only one remark that has any significant bearing on
our work, and which I would like to address, the rest is just simply
opinion (libelously written, at that) which seems to have developed
from the singular problem of perception. Here is what was said:
From:
OPie: I was also one of those who transcribed the original sessions.
And, yes, when they were published on the website they had been changed.
One was changed considerably. She had been charged with this by others
before, and until I saw it happen first-hand, I didn’t believe it
was true. I figured she changed punctuation or corrected things, but
that’s not what happened with the sessions I transcribed. [...]
Now
the problem with this is that if she changed the two that I transcribed,
how many more of the sessions were tampered with? If you find one
piece of work that’s bogus, how can you trust the rest? [...]
Allow
me to give some background context in which to address this accusation.
As
Ark has written above,
...the
Cassiopaean channeling has characteristics of a scientific experiment.
Think of scientists in their lab, working on the great laws of the
universe. They perform an important series of experiments. They are
trained professionals, they know their stuff, they know their laboratory
equipment and its quirks. But they are human beings. Once in a while
someone will make some dirty joke, once in a while they will have
to discard a series of data, because mice have messed up their equipment
during the night. Now, think, what advantage it would be if they would
write in their paper the dirty joke, include the mice data, the ink
blobs etc. etc.
That
is not the way of science. And the Cassiopaean experiment will proceed
as a scientific one. With scientific standards in mind. The Cassiopaean
channeling is Critical Channeling. It is in this respect that it is
DIFFERENT from other channeling. And it will stay so.
In
the first few years of the experiment, I fell way behind in transcribing
because I had so many things on my plate that I could barely keep up.
A group member who regularly attended sessions offered to help me with
transcribing, so I sent her home with a few tapes. When she emailed
the transcripts back to me, and told me it was so "fast and easy" and
she didn't understand why it was so time consuming for me to do it,
I just figured that she must be a faster typist than I was and I didn't
think too much about it.
BUT,
when I read them, I found that what she had transcribed did NOT mesh
with my memory of the session.
Okay,
that's a problem. Maybe I remembered wrong, but I didn't think so. I
got the tape out and sat down to listen to it while going over the written
words in front of me. Sure enough, my friend had skipped entire words
- even phrases - that she apparently deemed immaterial to the context,
but which were crucial to the meaning of the C's answer. In other places,
she had written "not" when it was not there, or had omitted a "not"
that was actually there. This was really disturbing because it completely
reversed the meaning of what the person was asking, and thus, reversed
the answer the C's gave!
Just
to make sure that it wasn't ME who was unable to hear what was being
said, I asked a couple other people to listen with me while going over
the transcript. Seems that I wasn't in a state of delusion: the errors
were really there.
What
was obvious was that this member - who was otherwise very talented -
was unable to transform spoken speech into written speech accurately.
Not only was there a problem with missing words or words put in that
were not there, the text was full of dangling participles and either
devoid of punctuation, or had the wrong punctuation. This often had
the result of changing the sense of what the person was saying. Here,
I need to make it clear that I am talking about the discussion of the
attendees, as well as their questions, and not the C's answers which
are a different matter. There was also a repeating problem of the wrong
person being designated as having said something when it was actually
someone else who had said it. All of these problems changed the meaning
of many things and I was very dismayed to realize that I couldn't just
go in and fix a couple of things, I had to actually just do the whole
thing over again.
I theorized that part of the problem must be because she had just gone
through it so fast. I asked her how she had gone about the process.
She told me that she had just typed up the written notes, and then had
fast forwarded over those parts, actually listening only to the questions,
and typed them in rapidly. I
then explained what had happened and she became very upset. I had to
replay some parts of the tape to her, stopping it and starting it so
she could really hear what kinds of errors she had made, and she was
in a state of shock that her mind had done this. Well, she excused it
as being "in a hurry" or being "stressed" and so
on. I agreed that this was a reasonable explanation, and just made up
my mind that she ought to stick to what she did best and leave the transcribing
to me even if it took me awhile to get around to it.
I pondered this event for some time after, wondering if it really was
just lack of patience and stress. Sure, we know that this can profoundly
affect what a person hears or sees, but was it that simple? I had also
noticed that this person seemed to be able to "hear" some people at
the sessions better than others because what they said was more accurately
transcribed than what someone else said. I was also aware of the person's
feelings toward the individuals whose words were inaccurately reported,
and there was a definite corelation. It seemed that there was a sort
of "hearing bias" based in emotional bias and it was a very strange
thing to observe indeed.
Now,
let me say that I KNEW, without a doubt, that this individual was sincere
and not deliberately messing up the transcripts. I knew she wasn't consciously
trying to slant the text to make one person look good, and another look
stupid. And yet, there were "reading errors" in her "machine,"
so to say.
Now,
in transcribing the C's sessions, there is a significant problem: The
notes are often "messy" because a person will start writing letters,
then assume that they know what the C's are going to say, and will rush
ahead to complete a word, while the C's are actually spelling out something
quite different. Then, if the person realizes that they have anticipated
and written the wrong word, they then may try to make the correction,
which makes them fall behind, and it is impossible to catch up. They
skip words, drop words, and even invent words. So, relying on the notes
is not possible either. We generally try to have several people taking
notes at once (if possible), hoping that what one person may miss, will
be caught by another person. This is actually an interesting exercise.
During a session, we frequently stop and have each person read back
what they have written, and the differences are quite startling!
22
July 00
Q: (I) [Attempts to read back remark with some difficulty.]
A: Suggestion: try to inscribe letters without trying to break into
words while writing. Otherwise, you will lose step!
Q: (I) That's right! I'm trying to anticipate what they are going
to say. (L) And the interesting thing about this exercise is, it conditions
your mind to NOT anticipate!
A: Which is good, indeed.
(I
should mention that this excerpt came from a session attended by a group
of women members of the Cass group who had traveled from all over the
country to meet each other. Even though a couple of them later dropped
out of the group, none of them has ever suggested that the session was
presented inaccurately at all even though it was slightly edited for
clarity. I should also mention that dozens of people have attended sessions
and helped with note taking, and none of them have ever said that the
transcripts were inaccurate or "altered.")
The
problem comes down to this, you simply can NOT transcribe fast, and
you MUST compare notes, and even then, it can have errors that require
correcting. There is NO short cut. You have to listen to every word,
every letter, and type it exactly as it is heard. THEN, you have to
go back over it and try to get the exact sense of what the person is
trying to say, and convert it into a decent sentence for the sake of
the reader. Believe me, that is not easy. Nobody talks in complete,
grammatical sentences. And if I typed it exactly the way the person
talked, nobody would understand a thing with all the dangling participles,
interrupted with "Uh" or changes of direction and subject. In some cases,
this sort of thing had to be retained because the person speaking changed
direction several times, bringing in several threads, and the Cs would
respond to ONE of these, and not the rest... and then the other people
present would respond to something else the person had said that the
C's did not respond to, which then led off in a different direction,
so in order for it to make sense, I have often had to type it exactly
as it was said, no matter how confusing. I think many readers who have
read the transcrips have seen a few such examples.
Well,
there I was, looking at the fact that this friend and group member,
who was so willing to be helpful, and whose sincerity could not be doubted
in ANY sense whatsoever, obviously was not able to transcribe the tapes
accurately because of a) a hearing problem; b) a patience problem; and
c) an obvious internal bias problem. The the end result was that it
took me longer to correct the transcript than it would have taken me
to transcribe the tape in the first place. I decided that it was better
if I just do it myself.
So,
a few years later, again, I fell behind in transcribing. By this time,
we had the Cass group and there were three people who volunteered to
transcribe. So, copies were made of six sessions (I didn't want to send
out the original tapes), and each of these three people got two sessions
to transcribe each. You could say it was a sort of "test."
Well, one of them was unable to do hers at all because the tapes were
messed up. Rather than recopy them, since I was anxious to get them
done, I just did them myself. The second person did hers and sent them
back, and there wasn't any problem. I just did a check, reorganized
the punctuation of the questions, made sure that the proper attributions
were made as to who was speaking (she hadn't been present and could
not know whose voice was whose), and there was no issue at all.
HOWEVER,
the two sessions that went to the Third Person came back with problems
that were acknowledged by the individual, some of which seem to be of
the same sort as the ones described above when the member who actually
was physically present at the sessions was unable to transcribe accurately!
For some bizarre reason that I still can't quite understand, this individual
was incapable of actually HEARING what was being said on the tape. And
here, I don't mean that it was "un-hearable," but that what was being
said somehow got twisted when it went in her ears and connected with
her brain. Damndest thing I ever saw. The individual wrote to me about
her transcribing problems as follows:
From:
"Linda D***"
Subject: Re: Mailing tapes
Date sent: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 12:38:37 -0800
[...]
A
couple of things.
First,
the background noise on the tapes was REALLY loud, and seemed to get
louder when something important was being discussed (interesting,
isn't it?). There are a couple of places where I couldn't understand
Ark. It wasn't his accent; it was a combination of him talking very
quietly and the background noise being so loud. On the second tape
(August 10), I got smart and put ** where I couldn't hear what was
being said.
The
first tape (August 7) had a spot in it where there was nothing recorded
for a while. Then it picked back up right about the time I'd decided
it was finished. Then when it ended, it simply ended. No goodbye or
anything (actually, so did the 2nd tape). But the first one had a
very strange ending. You were basically concluding the session and
asking if there was anything you needed to know, should have asked,
and so forth. The answer was "Hold on to me", then there was a sound
like a heart beating, which became very loud, and the tape ended.
On the answer, I've put the spaces in. It chould have been "Hold on,
tom. M..." or "Hold on to m...". I don't know since it ended. [...]
The
second tape was a little better quality than the first, though there
were still a couple of areas where I couldn't decipher what was being
said -- one in particular where Ark apparently asked a question, but
I couldn't hear it (I say "apparently", because all of a sudden there
was an answer).
Before
I send the tapes back, I'll try to listen to them straight-through
(as opposed to stopping and starting) with the transcripts in front
of me and make sure I didn't miss anything. In the meantime, I thought
I'd get them back to you right away; maybe between the two of you
(or your notes from the sessions, if you have any), you can fill in
any missing spots. If I find anything I've missed after listening
to the tapes, I'll correct the transcripts and E-mail the corrected
copies to you.
When
I went over the transcripts she had sent, there were many problems that
made her effort almost useless. Naturally, I had the original tape and
not a copy to work from, but that is exactly the point. With all the
problems noted by the individual herself, how can she even say, with
such libelous certainty:
From:
OPie: I was also one of those who transcribed the original sessions.
And, yes, when they were published on the website they had been changed.
One was changed considerably. She had been charged with this by others
before, and until I saw it happen first-hand, I didn’t believe it
was true. I figured she changed punctuation or corrected things, but
that’s not what happened with the sessions I transcribed. [...]
Now
the problem with this is that if she changed the two that I transcribed,
how many more of the sessions were tampered with? If you find one
piece of work that’s bogus, how can you trust the rest? [...]
Notice
how the first sentence above even implies that she has done more than
two sessions... and how she does not even acknowledge the many problems
she had with the tapes and with hearing, and so on.
Well,
just to make the point, I am going to put her original transcripts side
by side with the corrected ones here, and will have further comments
to make after the reader has had a chance to judge for themselves: (Note
that I will remove names of the "innocent" in BOTH transcripts
below)
File
as transcribed by Linda D
8/7/2001
Laura, Ark
Q:
Hello, hello, hello. Is anyone there?
A:
Hello.
Q:
You're supposed to watch, just to see what it does. (A) I will.
Do you have a name? Tell us your name.
A:
Daohha.
Q:
Did you ever have a body of your own?
A: No.
Q:
Are you here to … what are you here for?
A:
Cassiopaea.
Q:
Are you the 6th density beings who transmit through Cassiopaea?
A:
Yes.
Q:
I would like to point out that six days have gone by and no money
came and, in fact, our world is a disaster. Well, actually our
world is not a disaster. It's a lot cleaner than it was, but we
still are confronted with some real issues as to which way to
go and what to do next.
A:
Money will come.
Q:
All right. What was behind … what forces were behind Vincent's
action? Were they simply 4th density manipulation, plus was there
any Satanic cult activity behind his activities?
A:
No.
Q:
Was there any … was he, in fact, loaded with attachments, as I
saw him in the viewing?
A:
Yes.
Q:
What was the source of these attachments?
A:
Rituals.
Q:
All right. What is the motivating factor behind his pushing for
me to discover where the "grail" is buried? Was it simply his
own desire to discover it?
A:
Yes.
Q:
Was he programmed to ask this question or to seek this?
A:
Yes.
Q:
What would have been the consequences if he had been able to squeeze
the answer out of me?
A:
Death to you.
Q:
Sh … was he even remotely aware of that possibility?
A:
Yes.
Q:
Apparently he wasn't sufficiently aware of it to really believe
it, I would think. He thinks it's still a game.
A:
Yes.
Q:
He doesn't really understand how serious it is, that if you really
get close to the secret, you die.
A:
Yes. Nor have you.
Q:
So that's why you guys don't answer a lot of questions.
A:
Yes.
Q:
Well, that's a good enough reason, I reckon - to keep us alive.
A:
Offee talking (check tape)
Q:
What? (A) Who gave the orders … (L) Who gave the orders to Vincent?
(A) Who is behind … OK, we know he was programmed.
A:
4th density.
Q:
Let me ask this, since he was programmed, and that with the information
he wanted to obtain, is it in fact true that 4th density STS either
doesn't know or cannot access this secret?
A:
Yes. L:
And they are as anxious for it to be discovered … in fact, they
are the MOST anxious …
A:
Yes.
Q:
Hmm. Well, let's get back to the money situation. I know you say
money will come. It needs to come fairly soon.
A:
Each question says the same thing.
Q:
(A) It doesn't make any sense. (L) Each question says the same
thing. In other words, money will come. Is that it?
A:
Yes.
Q:
Are we supposed to continue trying to seek ways and means? I mean,
that seems to be a natural and proper thing to do.
A:
Yes.
Q:
I mean, putting energy out seems to be like … we've got to do
it. I mean, if you just sit there and think, "Oh, I don't have
to do anything and money will come; that's not a good way to be.
A:
Yes.
Q:
Do you have any hints or specific areas that we could put our
effort out?
A:
Basic research lot field.
Q:
Doesn't make a lot of sense. Basic research lot field. (A) Basic
research
A:
Others propose
Q:
Others propose, I guess, right? Propose it to others .. Propose
it to others?
A:
Yes.
Q:
(A) Who? (L) Well …Let me ask while I've got you here this silly
question B** has got going on. Don't you laugh, honey. What he
is saying is … B*** is reading some material that suggests that
this planet is a breeding ground for aliens, and the life cycle
of the aliens, as in the Reptilians or whatever, may mimic something,
such as a preying mantis. It also alludes to the suggestion that
the underground of the earth is kind of a dormant stage for the
female, and it is the male that is returning or that does return
at the end of each epoch, and that the focus of this appears to
be the great pyramid, and that if we move to STO - it doesn't
say those words but it's the same - much terror can be avoided
as the return of the male dragon will die for love for the female.
Okay. Is the earth a breeding round for some kind of aliens as
suggested in this passage?
A:
No.
Q:
Hmm. So this stuff that this guy has made up about this is like
right out of his darkest nightmares. I mean the worst possible
spin that could be put on what he has come up with. It's already
bad enough. So Bruce really ought to forget this and just get
some sleep at night, huh?
A:
Yes.
Q:
What is the source of this type of material? I mean, what kind
of energy is behind it?
A:
STS mind control signal.
Q:
What is it designed to do?
A:
Reach those that are programmed to receive.
Q:
Let me ask you this - If some of these STS programming signals
that are going out … I mean, I'm assuming that some of them come
from 3rd density. Is that correct?
A:
Yes.
Q:
Do they actually have, like, some place on the planet where these
guys read science fiction books and get these really crazy theories
and stories that they put together with sort of fiendish glee,
and then convert them via computer into the programming code that
gets beamed out into people's heads, while they sit there and
fall down on the floor laughing at what they have just done?
A:
Yes.
Q:
(Chuckling) That's sick. (A): Why? Wouldn't you do it if you had
the … (L) If I had the facility and abilities and I was sick like
that … if I was sick like that, sure. I mean, just take a whole
HP Lovecraft novel, convert it into the programming signal and
beam it out - and people are saying, "My God, the aliens told
me … it's just like HP Lovecraft said. Oh, my God!" Can you imagine?
(A) And it works. (L) Sure does, doesn't it? (A) And we see what
this guy _____ said to us about this _____ (igloo?) What he is
saying, I think is true … they have these capabilities … (L) Yeh.
(A) Inducing these states, you know, and it's coming, and there
will be massive programming. (L) Yup. (A) And it's coming pretty
soon. (L) What are Ophanic intelligences, as Vincent understands
them?
A:
4D STS.
Q:
Hmm. Well. We recently had a major attack from a bunch of Jews
who were claiming that we were anti-Semitic because we didn't
believe their religion, but we did believe they were special,
which was king of a weird twist to that whole thing. Ummm … is
this something that we should just back … I mean, you don't normally
advise, but you know, I've been having thoughts about just simply
pulling the material down off the site completely and just leaving
the subject behind. This is what I've been thinking, and I would
like to know if the future looks brighter with respect to ourselves
if I do that.
A:
Yes.
Q:
I mean, I know it's courageous and all that, but it's not necessary.
I mean, what's said is said on the site. (A) I had another idea,
which I was checking, and we can put one or two pages out and
put it on a different website that we have, which is not linked
… not associated with Cassiopaea in any way, and we can just …
instead of being on Cassiopaea, these pages will be on the _______
website, and you can always read the pages by clicking, go in
there, then come back, and it would give us a kind of legal advantage,
so that in case someone decides to attack, it would be not on
Cassiopaea pages. (L) Yeah, well, I think that discretion at this
point is probably the better part of valor. (A) What do you mean
"discretion"? (L) In other words, not telling everything you know.
(A) Right. (L), But,
A:
Good idea. L:
Well, the thing was, I put it up …
A:
Jews will be destroyed anyway. L:
Well, that's not friendly. So, it is better to pull it all down
and leave them alone, let them fry in their own juices and do
their own stupid things, and let them destroy themselves; because
there's nothing anybody can do anyway? (A) Right. (L) I mean,
there's no point in trying to … (A) No gain. (L) There's no gain
for us, no gain for them, and …
A:
Yes.
Q:
Well, anyway. Well, that's pretty depressing. Have you got any
questions about what you're working on that you were going to
ask? I mean, we need to ask questions to groove or something.
(A) Um-m. (L) I mean, just … (A) Um hm. (L) I don't really have
any. We need to keep the … need to work this. (A) The thinking
… (L) Yeah. (A) Okay, we what you do … okay, I don't have today
questions. I didn't do my homework. We were so busy with this
_________ and so on. So, okay, we should continue ________. So
we will be coming back. (L) Yeah, I need to work.
A:
Yes. Root is strong because of prior grooving.
Q:
Okay. And we answered Bruce's question, and I can't think of any
particular thing, and I think I'll just go in and take that page
down … do it tonight. The whole Jewish thing.
A:
Yes.
Q:
All right then. Thank you very much. And, unless you have something
that you know we need to know, or any questions that should have
been asked that we haven't asked … (A) Right. (L) That's important
now, please tell us.
A:
Hold on to me … (no further recording, though it is not the end
of the tape)
|
Transcript
as corrected by Laura
8/7/2001
Laura, Ark
Q:
Hello, hello, hello. Is anyone there?
A:
Hello.
Q:
You're supposed to watch, just to see what it does. (A) I will.
Do you have a name? Tell us your name.
A:
Daohha.
Q:
Did you ever have a body of your own?
A: No.
Q:
What are you here for?
A:
Cassiopaea.
Q:
Are you the 6th density beings who transmit through Cassiopaea?
A:
Yes.
Q:
I would like to point out that six days have gone by and no money
came and, in fact, our world is a disaster. Well, actually our
world is not a disaster. It's a lot cleaner than it was, but we
still are confronted with some real issues as to which way to
go and what to do next.
A:
Money will come.
Q:
All right. What was behind ... what forces were behind Vincent's
[Bridges] action? Were they simply 4th density manipulation?
A:
Close.
Q:
Was there any Satanic cult activity behind his activities?
A:
No.
Q:
Was there any ... was he, in fact, loaded with attachments, as
I saw him in the viewing?
A:
Yes.
Q:
What was the source of these attachments?
A:
Rituals.
Q:
All right. What is the motivating factor behind his pushing for
me to discover where the "grail" is buried? Was it simply his
own desire to discover it?
A:
Yes.
Q:
Was he programmed to ask this question or to seek this?
A:
Yes.
Q:
What would have been the consequences if he had been able to squeeze
the answer out of me?
A:
Death to you.
Q:
Sh ... was he even remotely aware of that possibility?
A:
Yes.
Q:
Apparently he wasn't sufficiently aware of it to really believe
it, I would think. He thinks it's still a game.
A:
Yes.
Q:
He doesn't really understand how serious it is, that if you really
get close to the secret, you die.
A:
Yes. Nor have you.
Q:
So that's why you guys don't answer a lot of questions?
A:
Yes.
Q:
Well, that's a good enough reason, I reckon - to keep us alive.
(A to L) Who gave the orders ... (L) Who gave the orders to Vincent?
(A) Who is behind ... We know he was programmed. 4th density?
(L) Let me ask this, since he was programmed, and that was the
information he wanted to obtain, is it in fact true that 4th density
STS either doesn't know or cannot access this secret?
A:
Yes.
Q:
(L) And they are as anxious for it to be discovered ... in fact,
they are the MOST anxious?
A:
Yes.
Q:
Hmm. Well, let's get back to the money situation. I know you say
money will come. Um. It needs to come fairly soon.
A:
Each question says the same thing.
Q:
(A) That doesn't make any sense. (L) "Each question says the same
thing." In other words, money will come. Is that it?
A:
Yes.
Q:
So, we're just supposed to keep doing what we think is right and
not worry? That's crazy.
A:
Yes.
Q:
Are we supposed to continue trying to seek ways and means? I mean,
that seems to be a natural and proper thing to do.
A:
Yes.
Q:
I mean, putting energy out seems to be like ... we've got to do
it. I mean, if you just sit there and think, "Oh, I don't have
to do anything and money will come; that's not a good way to be.
A:
Yes.
Q: Do you have any hints or specific areas that we could put our
effort out?
A:
Basic research lot field.
Q:
Doesn't make a lot of sense. (A) Basic research?
A: Yes. Others propose
Q:
I guess propose it to others?
A:
Yes.
Q:
(L) Well. (A) We can put an announcement on the web that we are
looking for a foundation.
A:
Yes.
Q:
(L)Let me ask while I've got you here, some questions from a member
of our group. He is reading some material that suggests that this
planet is a breeding ground for aliens, and the life cycle of
the aliens, as in the Reptilians or whatever, may mimic something,
such as a preying mantis. It also alludes to the suggestion that
the underground of the earth is kind of a dormant stage for the
female, and it is the male that is returning or that does return
at the end of each epoch, and that the focus of this appears to
be the great pyramid, and that if we move to STO - it doesn't
say those words but it's the same - much terror can be avoided,
as the return of the male dragon will die for love for the female
nymph. Okay. Is the earth a breeding round for some kind of aliens
as suggested in this passage?
A:
No.
Q:
Hmm. So this stuff that this guy has made up about this is like
right out of his darkest nightmares? I mean the worst possible
spin that could be put on this? It's already bad enough. So we
really ought to forget this and just get some sleep at night,
huh?
A:
Yes.
Q:
What is the source of this type of material? I mean, what kind
of energy is behind it?
A:
STS mind control signal.
Q:
What is it designed to do?
A:
Reach those that are programmed to receive.
Q:
(L) Let me ask you this - If some of these STS programming signals
that are going out ... I mean, I'm assuming that some of them
come from 3rd density. Is that correct?
A:
Yes.
Q:
(L) Do they actually have, like, some place on the planet where
these guys read science fiction books and get these really crazy
theories and stories that they put together with sort of fiendish
glee, and then convert them via computer into the programming
code that gets beamed out into people's heads, while they sit
there and just - you know - fall down on the floor laughing at
what they have just done? I mean, is this possibly something that
is going on [meaning in secret mind control experiments]?
A:
Yes.
Q:
(L) That's sick! (A): Why? Wouldn't you do it if you had the opportunity?
(L) If I had the facility and abilities and I was sick like that?
IF I was sick like that, sure. I mean, just take a whole HP Lovecraft
novel, convert it into the programming signal and beam it out
- and people are saying, "My God, the aliens told me ... it's
just like HP Lovecraft said. Oh, my God!" Can you imagine? (A)
And it works. (L) Sure does, doesn't it? (A) And we see what this
guy RC is telling us about this egroup, and it is... What he is
telling us, I think is true ... they have these capabilities ...
[Referring to mind control signals being utilized in rock music,
rock concerts, etc] (L) Yeah. (A) Inducing these states, and it's
coming, and there will be massive programming! (L) Yup. (A) And
it's coming pretty soon. (L) What are Ophanic intelligences, as
Vincent [Bridges] understands them? The ones he calls upon with
his 30 calls to the aethyrs?
A:
4D STS.
Q:
Hmm. Well. We recently had a major attack from a bunch of Jews
who were claiming that we were anti-Semitic because we didn't
believe their religion, but we did believe they were special,
which was kind of a weird twist to that whole thing. Ummm ...
is this something that we should just back - I mean, you don't
normally advise, but you know, I've been having thoughts about
just simply pulling the material down off the site completely
and just leaving the subject matter alone. This is what I've been
thinking, and I would like to know if the future looks brighter
with respect to ourselves if I do that.
A:
Yes.
Q:
I mean, I know it's courageous and all that, but it's not necessary.
I mean, what's said is said on the site. (A) I had another idea,
which I was checking, and we can put one or two pages out and
put it on a different website that we have, which is not linked
- not associated with Cassiopaea in any way - and we can just
- instead of being on Cassiopaea, these pages will be on a different
website. And you can always read the pages by clicking, going
there, then come back, and it would give us a kind of legal advantage,
so that in case someone decides to attack, it would be not on
Cassiopaea pages. (L) Yeah, well, I think that discretion at this
point is probably the better part of valor. (A) What do you mean
"discretion"? (L) In other words, not telling everything you know.
(A) Right.
A:
Good idea.
Q:
(L) Well, the thing was, I put it up ... [unfinished remark was
"to help" because of my deep sympathy for the Jews... but
the C's cut in before I finished]
A:
Jews will be destroyed anyway.
Q:
(L) Well, that's NOT friendly! So, it is better to pull it all
down and leave them alone, let them fry in their own juices and
do their own stupid things, and let them destroy themselves; because
there's nothing anybody can do anyway? (A) Right. (L) I mean,
there's no point in trying to ... (A) No gain. (L) There's no
gain for us, no gain for them, and nothing we can do.
A:
Yes.
Q:
Well, anyway... That's pretty depressing. (to Ark) Have you got
any questions about what you're working on that you were going
to ask? I mean, we need to ask questions to groove or something.
(A) Um-m. (L) I mean, just ... (A) Um hm. (L) I don't really have
any. We need to keep the ... need to work this. (A) The thinking
... (L) Yeah. (A) Okay, we what we will do ... I don't have today
questions. I didn't do my homework. We were so busy with these
other matters and so on. So, okay, we should continue another
night. So we will be coming back. (L) Yeah, I need to work.
A:
Yes. Root is strong because of prior grooving.
Q:
Okay. And we answered B's question, and I can't think of any particular
thing. And I think I'll just go in and take that page down ...
do it tonight. The whole Jewish thing.
A:
Yes.
Q:
All right then. Thank you very much. And, unless you have something
that you know we need to know, or any questions that should have
been asked that we haven't asked ... (A) Right. (L) That's important
now, please tell us.
A:
Hold on to me.
End
of Session
|
File
as Transcribed by Linda D
August
10, 2001 Ark, Laura
Q:
Hello?
A:
Hello.
Q:
And who do we have with us this evening?
A:
Viaggmoi.
Q:
And where do you transmit through?
A:
Cassiopaea.
Q:
I would like to ask if we can ask some questions about Vincent
Bridges and Jay Weidner.
A:
Yes.
Q:
What are their intentions toward us?
A:
Bad.
Q:
What are their plans?
A:
Sipprormt (A) What? What? It doesn't make sense. (L) It wasn't
a word? What are their plans? Q: Sippoutgag. (A) What? What do
you … (L) Sip? Pout? Gag? (A) What is sip? (L) Sip means to take
a drink of something - sip something. Sip? Out? Gag? What are
they going to sip?
A:
Knowledge.
Q:
Oh, they took a sip of knowledge - or they're going to take a
sip of knowledge?
A: Yes.
Q:
And this sip of knowledge is going to make them pout and gag?
(A) What is pout? (L) To just … (shows physically). Who are they
going to get this sip of knowledge from that is going to make
them pout and gag?
A:
Lawyer.
Q:
In other words, they're going to find they do not have a leg to
stand on?
A:
Yes.
Q:
Well, are Vincent and Jay … or is one … is Vincent … I think I
asked this already, didn't I? Is he really connected to these
Satanic people?
A:
Yes.
Q:
Was he connected to them close to the inner circle?
A:
No.
Q:
Is he really an initiated Sufi?
A:
No. Karma is coming.
Q:
Do we have anything to be concerned about where they are concerned?
A:
No.
Q:
Do we need to take any further actions like putting more information
on the website, any other things than what we are currently doing
or have already done?
A:
Yes.
Q:
What?
A:
Some more web info. (A) What? Some more what? (L) Web info. (A)
Oh. (L) Should I put on the Perseus site what we have discovered
about Vincent? A report on his claim to fame?
A:
No.
Q:
What, in specific, on the web?
A:
Files make him (L) Files make him what? A: Sick. Move to gag.
Q:
In other words, I should put something else that would drive him
to go to an attorney? Make him madder?
A:
Yes.
Q:
Should I post Jay Weidner's letter from this morning?
A:
Yes.
Q:
(A) What's the point? (L) To make him go to an attorney? I don't
know. What's the point - I don't get it? (A) What's the point
of making him go to an attorney? (L) Well, an attorney may tell
them that they are crossing dangerously into the lines of being
subject to a lawsuit themselves.
A:
Yes.
Q:
And I could also post Vincent's article or the letter he wrote
himself about slander and libel.
A:
Yes.
Q:
Well, I don't like the idea of doing any of those things. They
make me feel yucky. So why are you telling me to do them?
A:
How do you think Vincent will feel?
Q:
Well, he'll obviously feel more yucky that I will. ** Nothing's
bad, seeing as I feel he lied. See if they send any more blasts
in the morning. Hmmm…. (A) I don't think they said … if they decided
to organize a conference, OK, they are somehow … will be in touch
with these other people. And that takes ** to organize. (L) They're
not organizing anything. Did you notice them organizing anything
at all so far? They have no idea what they're doing. All they're
doing is running a con job. They're taking people's money. That's
all they're doing. (A) Well, for me, it's hard to believe …. (L)
That's all they're doing. Is all this just a con job to put themselves
in a position to take people's money?
A:
In part.
Q:
Well, I just can't imagine what was going through that man's mind
when he wrote that E-mail. I mean, that man is like … I mean,
I simply can't conceive of the type of consciousness that could
occupy a physical body that could write that type of an E-mail.
You know, it passeth my understanding.
A:
STS love.
Q:
Service to Self love. Well, boy, he must be exploding on himself,
or imploding or whatever. OK. Is Infinity Publishing a … I don't
know how to ask this question. We found this place called Infinity
Publishing, where it's like print-on-demand, you know, have total
control of the product, blah, blah, blah, and we think this is
a pretty good way to go. Should we be focusing on this book deal
right now, since we can do it this way, since we've been working
on it. Should we continue to push on this or should we just push
away and do something else?
A:
Do it now!!!!
Q:
Are we going to get any decent sales for our books?
A:
Yes!!!!
Q:
Are we going to be able to survive this flame war and attack from
Vincent and Jay Weidner?
A:
No.
Q:
Why not?
A:
They will open the door to fame.
Q:
What? How can that be possible? Huh? (A) From slandering us?
A:
No, but have contacts who will be interested.
Q:
(A) They have … who? (L) They have contacts that will be interested.
That's weird. Well, what do you want to ask them? Anything in
particular? Is B*** an STS agent?
A:
No.
Q:
Do we have an STS nasty agent on our list?
A:
Yes.
Q:
How many?
A:
Two.
Q:
Have they been there a long time or are they recent?
A:
One each.
Q:
(A) One what? (L) One each. One has been there a long time and
one recent. Is anyone on the list forwarding the list mail to
Vincent?
A:
No.
Q:
I didn't think so. They're all pretty **. (A) There are two different
agents? (L) Yeah. Is J** R** involved in Satanism?
A:
No.
Q:
Who killed Jon Benet Ramsey? (Long wait, then laughter) (L) They
won't answer that … thought I'd slip that one in real quick. Well,
was J** R** involved with that, as Vincent suggests?
A:
Close.
Q:
Do you mean he was close to it or involved with it?
A:
Close to it.
Q:
Was he involved with it in the sense of something that brought
it about?
A:
No.
Q:
Hmmm. Let me see here. Let me think. Any questions you want to
ask? There was something I was thinking about earlier today that
I wanted to ask. Oh, so many questions I want to ask. I think
about them, then when I sit in here, my mind goes completely blank.
Well, do you have any messages for us tonight? Is there anything
that we should be asking that we haven't asked? Something around
the corner that we don't see that we ought to see, because we're
both so tired - we've been working so hard all day. Cut us some
slack here. Consider it asked (long pause). Is B** an agent?
A:
No.
Q:
(Laughing) Who would I think of next? (A) ** check tape or notes.
Couldn't hear tape. (L) Oh, is M** an agent?
A:
Yes.
Q:
Is T** an agent?
A:
No.
Q:
Hmmm. (A) I think that it is good to have an agent, because if
you have an agent, you are kind of … you know … (L) Yes. And they
don't **, and if the one we've got isn't sending stuff out to
Vincent, we'll just keep him. (A) Right. Because ** agent ** we
don't know who that agent .. OK? (L) What happened to P**, by
the way? God, she went off the deep end. (A) She .. the second
time, right? (L) Yeah.
A:
Racial obsession!
Q:
(A) What? What? (L) Racial obsession. (A) What does that mean?
(L) Well, she's obsessed with this Nordic business. (A) Oh. (L)
You know, she's blonde and blue-eyed and she's special - she's
chosen. (A) Oh. (L) She's the one. (A) OK. And if she's the one,
and she's not appreciated as the one … (L) She's going to trash
anyone who doesn't appreciate her. Yes, that's pretty much what
S** was saying. P** has this mission and … (A) Um-hmm. (L) And
she's got to figure out what this mission is, and it's to save
our buns, I guess. Are we supposed to build some sort of technological
device to take us into 4th density?
A:
Possibly.
Q:
Is the building of them that will do it or the devices themselves?
I have a feeling it's the building and the knowledge that's going
to do it.
A:
Yes.
Q:
Acquiring the knowledge to be able to do it puts you there. Awareness
binds you to the reality. And I was reading this story by Plato
about the cave today, and this whole thing is just so amazing.
(A) What cave? (L) Plato's Cave, you know, you know … the shadows
on the wall and everything, and he really said some interesting
things there - a completely analogy of 4th density, all right
there … (A) Well, in fact, when the C;'s mention Rodin **, whatever
they are. (L) Yeah .. (A) And ** (check tape). (L) Well, I saw
this thing in the mirror, this gadget that shot out this beam
or whatever, was that the true, you know, image of some kind of
a time machine or time-transiting device, or was that something
that Vincent was projecting into my mind?
A:
Good catch.
Q:
Yeah, when I saw that picture on his webpage, I knew he'd been
projecting that. He was sitting there focusing on it so I would
see it. I told you, I showed it to you, didn't I? That was what
I saw, that twisted up figure 8 thing. I couldn't figure it out,
what in the world it was. Is there an object buried in France
I'm supposed to find?
A:
Yes.
Q:
Are we doing to find it?
A:
Yes.
Q:
Can you tell us what year we'll be finding it.
A:
Two (tape ended and was blank for some time) Then picked back
up:
A:
Holy grail.
Q:
What is the holy grail? (Tape noise gets very, very loud here;
can't hear any voices)
Q:
Huh. I don't know if they were drawing something or just playing.
Guess they're not going to answer that one. Hmmm. Well, anything
you want to ask? (A) Yes. It's pretty fun to be talking, so we're
talking … it's fun. So my question is, first, I want to know,
should I continue friendship with this R** guy?
A:
Yes.
Q:
(A) Is it a good idea to write papers with him?
A:
Yes.
Q:
(A) All right.
A:
He is knowledgeable in diverse ways. He will help you.
Q:
(L) He doesn't seem so knowledgeable right now, does he? (A) Well,
he does more practical things. He has some things that I don't
know, but is able to control ** his mathematics. (L) OK. (A) And
this is what I can do. Okay? (** Ark apparently asks question,
but the background noise drowns it out).
A:
Yes.
Q:
(A) In other words, is that a kind of **? Oh, but I want to know
why, because I have no idea why ** (L) Why the I Ching was so
dead set against Motorola, boy …
A:
Give it time and you will see.
Q:
(L) Give it time and you will see. So … well, do we have any big
explosions coming up in Israel? Do we have any volcanoes going
off or any earthquakes or anything of real significance going
on on the planet here?
A:
The solar activity is slowing down.
Q:
So I guess that kind of means no. Are we doing to get hit by a
comet or an asteroid? (A) When? (L) When what? When are we going
to get hit by a comet or an asteroid? They won't tell us that.
(A) Why not?
A:
Knowledge does protect.
Q:
(A) What? (L) Knowledge does protect. Well, is Vincent doing any
of his workings to try to harm us? I mean, is he out there with
his robes on, and drawing his pentagrams, and chanting, and calling
to the Ophanic intelligences to slam lightning and thunder down
upon our heads?
A:
Close.
Q:
Is he getting frustrated that it isn't working?
A:
Yes.
Q:
(A) I want to know what is the effect of his relation to Lady
Sekhmet? (L) What do you mean? (A) His wife. (L) Oh, you're wondering
how he's getting along with her right now after he did are this
stuff? Is she beginning to see through him in any way?
A:
Yes.
Q:
Is she furious with him for being a jerk (laughter)?
A:
Yes.
Q:
Was he deliberately trying to put the love bite on T**?
A:
Yes.
Q:
What were his motives?
A:
Control.
Q:
Well, I just … how many people are they going to have attend their
conference?
A:
26.
Q:
26? (Laughter). All right. So .. yes, we're sleepy
Tape
stopped recording - nothing on Side 2, though it was indicated
on the tape.
|
Transcript
as Corrected by Laura
August
10, 2001 Ark, Laura
Q:
Hello?
A:
Hello.
Q:
And who do we have with us this evening?
A:
Viaggmor.
Q:
And where do you transmit through?
A:
Cassiopaea.
Q:
I would like to ask if we can ask some questions about Vincent
Bridges and Jay Weidner.
A:
Yes.
Q:
What are their intentions toward us?
A:
Bad.
Q:
What are their plans?
A:
Sip prormt
Q:
(A) What? What? It doesn't make sense. (L) That wasn't a word.
What are their plans?
A:
Sip pout gag.
Q:
(A) What? What do you ... (L) Sip? Pout? Gag? (A) What is sip?
(L) Sip means to take a drink of something - sip something. Sip?
Out? Gag? What are they going to sip?
A:
Knowledge.
Q:
Oh, they took a sip of knowledge - or they're going to take a
sip of knowledge?
A:
Yes.
Q:
And this sip of knowledge is going to make them pout and gag?
(A) What is pout? (L) To just ... (demonstrates). Who are they
going to get this sip of knowledge from that is going to make
them pout and gag?
A:
Lawyer.
Q:
In other words, they're going to find they do not have a leg to
stand on?
A:
Yes.
Q:
Well, is Vincent really connected to these Satanic people?
A:
Yes.
Q:
Is he connected to them close to the inner circle?
A:
No.
Q:
Is he really an initiated Sufi?
A:
No. Karma is coming.
Q:
Do we have anything to be concerned about where they are concerned?
A:
No.
Q:
Do we need to take any further actions like putting more information
on the website, any other things than what we are currently doing
or have already done?
A:
Yes.
Q:
What?
A:
Some more web info.
Q:
(L) Should I put on the Perseus site what we have discovered about
Vincent? A report on his claim to fame?
A:
No.
Q:
What, in specific, on the web?
A:
Files make him sick move to gag.
Q:
(L) In other words, I should put something else that would drive
him to go to an attorney? Make him madder?
A:
Yes.
Q:
Should I post Jay Weidner's letter from this morning?
A:
Yes.
Q:
(A) What's the point? (L) To make him go to an attorney? I don't
know. What's the point - I don't get it? (A) What's the point
of making them go to an attorney? (L) Well, an attorney may tell
them that they are crossing dangerously close over the lines of
being subject to a lawsuit themselves.
A:
Yes.
Q:
And I could also post Vincent's article or the letter he wrote
himself about slander and libel.
A:
Yes.
Q: Well, I don't like the idea of doing any of those things. They
make me feel yucky. So why are you telling me to do them?
A:
How do you think Vincent will feel?
Q:
Well, he'll obviously feel more yucky that I will. I'll think
about it and see how I feel in the morning. See if they send any
more blasts in the morning. (A) I think they said they will. If
they decided to organize a conference, they will be in touch with
these other people. And it takes their energy to organize. (L)
They're not organizing anything. Did you ever notice them organizing
anything at all so far? They have no idea what they're doing.
All they're doing is running a con-job. They're taking people's
money. That's all they're doing. (A) Well, for me, it's hard to
believe. (L) That's all they're doing. Is all this just a con
job to put themselves in a position to take people's money?
A:
In part.
Q:
Well, I just can't imagine what was going through that man's mind
when he wrote that E-mail. I mean, that man is like ... I mean,
I simply can't conceive of the type of consciousness that could
occupy a physical body that could write that type of an E-mail.
You know, it passes my understanding.
A:
STS love.
Q:
Service to Self love. Well, boy, he must be exploding on himself,
or imploding or whatever. OK. Is Infinity Publishing a ... I don't
know how to ask this question. We found this place called Infinity
Publishing, where it's like print-on-demand. We'll have total
control of the product, and we think this is a pretty good way
to go. Should we be focusing on this book deal right now, since
we can do it this way, since we've been working on it. Should
we continue to push on this or should we just back away and do
something else?
A:
Do it now!!!!
Q:
Are we going to get any decent sales for our books?
A:
Yes!!!!
Q:
Are we going to be able to survive this flame war and attack from
Vincent and Jay Weidner?
A:
No.
Q:
Why not?
A:
They will open the door to fame.
Q:
What?! HOW can that be possible? Huh? (A) From slandering us?!
A:
No, but have contacts who will be interested.
Q:
(A) They have ... who? (L) They have contacts that will be interested.
That's weird. Well, what do you want to ask them? Anything in
particular? Is B** an STS agent [as suggested by T** B** and Vincent
Bridges]?
A:
No.
Q:
Do we have an STS nasty agent on our list?
A:
Yes.
Q:
How many?
A:
Two.
Q:
Have they been there a long time or are they recent?
A:
One each.
Q:
(A) One what? (L) One each. One has been there a long time and
one recent. Is anyone on the list forwarding the list mail to
Vincent?
A:
No.
Q:
I didn't think so. They're all pretty good. (A) There are two
different agents? (L) Yeah. Is J** R** involved in Satanism [as
claimed by Vincent Bridges]?
A:
No.
Q:
Who killed Jon Benet Ramsey? (Long wait, then laughter) (L) They
won't answer that ... thought I'd slip that one in real quick.
Well, was J** R** involved with that, as Vincent suggests?
A:
Close.
Q:
Do you mean he was close to it or involved with it?
A:
Close to it.
Q:
Was he involved with it in the sense of something that brought
it about?
A:
No.
Q:
(L to A)Any questions you want to ask? There was something I was
thinking about earlier today that I wanted to ask. Oh, so many
questions I want to ask. I think about them, then when I sit in
here, my mind goes completely blank. Well, do you have any messages
for us tonight? Is there anything that we should be asking that
we haven't asked? Something around the corner that we don't see
that we ought to see? Because we're both so tired - we've been
working so hard all day. Cut us some slack here. Consider it asked
(long pause). Is B** an agent?
A:
No. Q: (L) Oh, is M** an agent?
A:
Yes.
Q:
Is T** an agent?
A:
No.
Q:
A) I think that it is good to have an agent. Because if you have
an agent, you kind of know. (L) And they don't send another one
in. And if the one we've got isn't sending stuff out to Vincent,
we'll just keep him. (A) Right. Because you see, an agent will
know who's an agent. (L) What happened to P**, by the way? God,
she went off the deep end! (A) She did it the second time, right?
(L) Yeah.
A:
Racial obsession!
Q:
(A) What? What? (L) Racial obsession. (A) What does that mean?
(L) Well, she's obsessed with this Nordic business. (A) Oh. (L)
You know, she's blonde and blue-eyed and she's special - she's
chosen! (A) Oh. (L) She's the one! (A) OK. And if she's the one,
and if she's not appreciated as the one ... (L) She's going to
trash anybody who doesn't appreciate her. Yes, that's pretty much
what S** was saying. P** has this mission and she's got to figure
out what this mission is, and it's to save our buns, I guess.
Are we supposed to build some sort of technological device to
take us into 4th density?
A:
Possibly.
Q:
Is it going to be the building of them that will do it, or the
devices themselves? I have a feeling it's the building and the
knowledge that's going to do it.
A:
Yes.
Q:
Acquiring the knowledge to be able to do it puts you there. Awareness
binds you to the reality. And I was reading this story by Plato
about the cave today, and this whole thing is just so amazing.
(A) What cave? (L) Plato's Cave, you know. You know,the shadows
on the wall and everything. And he really said some interesting
things there - a completely analogy of 4th density. All right
then ... (A) Well, in fact, when Tony Smith mentions Rodin coils
- whatever they are - and toroidal structures - they will probaly
be important at some point. (L) Yeah .. (L) When, I saw this thing
in the mirror, this gadget that shot out this beam or whatever,
was that the true image of some kind of a time machine or time-transiting
device, or was that something that Vincent was projecting into
my mind?
A:
Good catch.
Q:
Yeah, when I saw that picture on his webpage, I knew he'd been
projecting that. He was sitting there focusing on it so I would
see it. I told you, I showed it to you, didn't I? That was what
I saw, that twisted up figure 8 thing. [laughter] I couldn't figure
it out, what in the world it was. Is there an object buried in
France I'm supposed to find?
A:
Yes.
Q:
Are we going to find it?
A:
Yes.
Q:
Can you tell us what year we'll be finding it.
A:
Two (tape ended and was blank for some time then picked back up
with a segment of what sounded like a heartbeat)
Q:
What is the object?
A:
Holy grail.
Q:
What is the holy grail?
[Tape
noise gets very, very loud here. Planchette was spinning around
and drawing figures.]
Q:
Huh. I don't know if they were drawing something or just playing.
Guess they're not going to answer that one. Well, anything you
want to ask? (A) Yes. It's pretty fun to be talking, so we're
talking ... it's fun. So my question is, first, I want to know,
should I continue friendship with this R*** guy?
A:
Yes.
Q:
(A) Is it a good idea to write papers with him?
A:
Yes.
Q:
(A) All right.
A:
He is knowledgeable in diverse ways. He will help you.
Q:
(L) He doesn't seem so knowledgeable right now, does he? (A) Well,
in these more practical things, he has some things that I don't
know. But he is not able to control his mathematics. And this
is what I can do. But he is doing things that are practical.
A:
Yes.
Q:
(A) In other words, they are kind of important? Oh, but I want
to know why, because I have no idea why [our question about] contacting
Motorola was bad? (L) Why the I Ching was so dead set against
Motorola, boy ... [laughter]
A:
Give it time and you will see.
Q:
(L) Give it time and you will see. So ... well, do we have any
big explosions coming up in Israel? Do we have any volcanoes going
off or any earthquakes or anything of real significance going
on on the planet here?
A:
The solar activity is slowing down.
Q:
So I guess that kind of means no. Are we doing to get hit by a
comet or an asteroid? (A) When? (L) When what? When are we going
to get hit by a comet or an asteroid? (L to A) They won't tell
us that! (A) Why not?
A:
Soon!
Q:
Yeah, well soon to you guys could be in the next millennium! [laughter]
(A) Soon! "Money will come soon!" (L) Yeah! What exactly do you
guys mean by "soon?" (A) Eight days? Six days? They are having
problems with time! [Laughter.]
A:
Money will come very soon!!
Q:
Do we need to play the lottery for that? [Laughter.] (A) We know
what to do. We are not sure about putting these things on the
web. Probably we can put something. (L) Yeah. I think we ought
to just drive him over the edge. Let's push him harder, just for
the fun of it. [Laughter.] Knowledge protects, so we will put
the knowledge out there.
A:
Knowledge does protect.
Q:
(L) Well, is Vincent doing any of his "workings" to try to harm
us? I mean, is he out there with his robes on, and drawing his
pentagrams, and chanting, and calling to the Ophanic intelligences
to slam lightning and thunder down upon our heads? A: Close. Q:
Is he getting frustrated that it isn't working?
A:
Yes.
Q:
(A) I want to know what is the effect of his history on his relation
to Lady Sekhmet? (L) What do you mean? (A) His wife. (L) Oh, you're
wondering how he's getting along with her right now after he did
all of this stuff? Is she beginning to see through him in any
way?
A:
Yes.
Q:
Is she furious with him for being a jerk [laughter]?
A:
Yes.
Q:
Was he deliberately trying to put the love bite on T**?
A:
Yes.
Q:
What were his motives?
A:
Control.
Q:
Well, I just ... how many people are they going to have attend
their conference?
A:
26.
Q:
26? [Laughter]. All right. So...
A:
Goodbye.
Q:
Yes, we're sleepy
End
of Session
|
Aside
from blocks of text that she simply did not hear, or which may have
been unclear on the copied tape, the reader may notice that Linda failed
on a couple of occasions to make breaks between the words of the C's
and the words of the individuals present, and also, on a couple of occasions,
attributed words of those present to the C s or vice versa. She also
included "false starts" which we always exclude. These occur for a number
of reasons. The C's may start out to say one thing and then indicate
that it is "cancelled" or *I* may call out the wrong letters and then
correct myself on tape saying something like "nope, wrong letter,"
or something. This person had actually transcribed those remarks as
part of the transcript! Now, it is also true that, in some cases, the
C's will actually correct me, and I have never seen any reason to include
all the correcting that goes on in the transcripts. Those people who
have actually attended sessions have a very good idea of the problem
because they are put on the spot to take notes, to keep up with the
C's, and it is funny and sometimes embarassing to people to realize
how poor their listening skills really are. My objective in presenting
the transcripts is to make it as easy to read what was conveyed, after
determining the accuracy, than to burden the reader with all the "spilled
coffee" and mouse droppings, as Ark puts it. It is not, after all, "Holy
Writ."
In
any event, again, I had to fix and edit the sessions to make it readable.
This is normal in one respect or another. Indeed, in some cases, the
questions are clear and well-formed which results in answers that don't
take 20 questions to get to, and no editing at all is required. What
was also telling was that even after reading hundreds of sessions, she
was unable to reproduce the exact Q: and A: format which was developed
for very specific reasons, including ease of global formatting and text
searching. Until you have spent years transcribing and working
with this material, you have no idea of the difficulties it presents.
Now,
no doubt this individual kept copies of what she had transcribed and
is perfectly convinced that what she typed was exactly what was on the
tape despite the fact that she had explained that she was unable to
complete the transcribing (and I WAS able to complete it from the original
tape). It was, and at the same time it wasn't for the reasons given
above. It had not been cleaned up, formatted, false starts removed for
clarity, and so on. These things are normal parts of the experiment,
justified by very good reasons and experience, and great care is always
taken to retain the MEANING of the material while, at the same time,
making it easy for the audience to follow. Not everyone is experienced
in dealing with raw data. Bottom line is, the text is clean, and the
MEANING is fully conserved and I have the tape and can prove it. But
it was then (and still is) very hard for me to tell someone who has
volunteered to do something to help me, that their help is no help at
all, that in fact, they have messed up and what they have produced is
not only incorrectly formatted (one wonders why THAT was a problem?)
but normal rules of transcription were not even utilized. Anyone who
has ever done medical transcription (I have) knows what those rules
are. But, I didn't want to upset her the way the other person who had
this problem had been upset, so, I just politely thanked her for her
efforts, and didn't ask her to do any more transcribing. That is my
fault. I probably should have told her at the time that she did not
transcribe either accurately or correctly. But she had so many issues
going on in her life that I didn't want to burden her with any criticism
at all since, in spite of the burdens she was carrying, she had been
willing to help out.
Now,
I would also like to add that, in more recent times, I have been going
back over both the original tapes and notes, comparing them, making
sure of accuracy of transcription on MY part, and annotating them so
as to get rid of as many errors as possible. In some cases, I am adding
footnotes that include the "false starts" and corrections,
but this text will be for specialists and not the general reader. This
is an overwhelming task, to say the least, because of the many hundreds
of pages of text, and will take some time. And yes, I HAVE found errors
of transcription on my part. There aren't many, but they do exist, as
do typos.
In
some cases, we have had to ask the C's questions about previous sessions
to clarify places where both tape and notes are lacking. We aren't perfect,
and sometimes somebody fails to turn the tape recorder back on after
a break and entire segments of discussion with the C's are lost. Usually,
we have notes to reconstruct the session, but not always.
There
are also cases when the C's tell me something and instruct me NOT to
publish it, that it is for my own information. They also will occasionally
make suggestions about how to present certain material that does not
include the exact question and answer sequence that was gone through
in order for me to learn it.
I have also had to consider the evident fact that, in many cases, the
C's have said things "in code" in earlier stages, that I later,
with additional information and training, had to then decode!
Now,
having read all of the above, let us look again at what "OPie"
has written:
From:
OPie: I was also one of those who transcribed the original sessions.
And, yes, when they were published on the website they had been
changed. One was changed considerably. She had been charged with
this by others before, and until I saw it happen first-hand, I didn’t
believe it was true. I figured she changed punctuation or corrected
things, but that’s not what happened with the sessions I transcribed.
[...]
Now
the problem with this is that if she changed the two that I transcribed,
how many more of the sessions were tampered with? If you find one
piece of work that’s bogus, how can you trust the rest? [...]
Aside
from the fact that this individual misses a major point that I, as
"Myself in the Future," am perfectly within the protocol
of translator when I format the transcripts according to a set criteria,
or insert explanatory words. Indeed, the raw data does exist, but
it is just that: raw data. What's more, it is my work, my experiment
and, if you like, my higher consciousness. If this individual feels
that I am "cheating" when I correct or edit for ease of
reading, then she never understood the C's or the experiment at all.
What
seems to be true is that this individual has a sort of flatland view
of the C's experiment and it is very difficult to add depth to it.
Certainly, if one is dealing with deliberate falsification of FACTS,
there could be an accusation of "bogus." But let us remember
what we are dealing with here: years of work and experimentation,
and further refining, research and feedback. We are NOT dealing with
Holy Writ. We are dealing with translation of ideas and developing
understanding.
The
individual in question made a choice, somewhere along the way, that
she wanted "Holy Writ" and then goes through some intellectual
exertion to justify this a priori "like" or decision. The terminus
a quo of this individual is, apparently, a desire to "believe
in" something. She wants God to speak, and speak clearly and
correctly from the beginning, and if he/she doesn't, then all is garbage.
There is no consideration of the need for expanding the receptacle
to accommodate the mysteries, or the necessity for a translator to
improve skills and pass that added improvement on to the audience.
The
chief problem is that this former member always took her present self
as a competent judge of how the universe should be. She does not seem
to comprehend that, in an experiment, we are seeking to expand knowledge
and it requires work and self-development and networking and input
of data from others. Indeed, we have to consider ourselves somewhat
competent at something in the beginning, that is, provisionally competent,
but then, we must never consider ourselves unconditionally competent
for all things. This
relates to something that Richard Muller has written about Science:
Scientific
training doesn't keep your senses from fooling you, but a good scientist
doesn't accept the impressions his senses deliver. He uses them as
a starting point, and then he checks, and double checks. He looks
for additional evidence, and for consistency among his measurements.
A scientist differs from other people in that he knows how easily
he is fooled, and he goes through procedures to compensate.
This
error of taking herself as unconditionally competent to judge actually
seems to be the root of her transcribing (and other) issues. She had
a priori beliefs and assumptions, and certainly this influenced what
she was hearing. It is also interesting that this is the very same
factor that has been at the root of those few individuals who have
left the cass group, now QFS.
Members
of QFS have witnessed this battle between subjectivity and objectivity
several times, but, it can be said that, until the individual engages
it themselves, they cannot know the "life or death" taste of it. When
the emotional reading errors "win" and the individual believe
the lie about their unconditional competence, the downhill slide then
is rather rapid. Gurdjieff described this phenomenon quite accurately:
"It
often happens that, having stopped before some barrier, usually
the smallest and the most simple, people turn against the work,
against the teacher, and against other members of the group, and
accuse them of the very thing that is becoming revealed to them
in themselves.
"Sometimes
they repent later and blame themselves, then they again blame others,
then they repent once more, and so on. But there is nothing that
shows up a man better than his attitude towards the work and the
teacher after he has left it. Sometimes such tests are arranged
intentionally. A man is placed in such a position that he is obliged
to leave and he is fully justified in having a grievance either
against the teacher or against some other person. And then he is
watched to see how he will behave. A decent man will behave decently
even if he thinks that he has been treated unjustly or wrongly.
But many people in such circumstances show a side of their nature
which otherwise they would never show. And at times it is a necessary
means for exposing a man's nature. So long as you are good to a
man he is good to you. But what will he be like if you scratch him
a little?
What
we have seen, again and again, is the barrier of taking oneself too
seriously, and the firm belief that one can acutally think with a
flawed or damaged reading instrument. What is astonishing is the fact
that people, with lifetime track records of failures and unhappiness
continue to think that they can actually think and make accurate assessments
about the world. They never stop to consider the fact that the wide
variance between their dreams of what they COULD have accomplished
in their lives, and what they actually have done, could relate in
some way to "reading errors," that they do not read their
environment, their reality, accurately. And the only way to fix reading
errors is in a group with frequent shocks to the "reading instrument."
Each
person's circumstances will be specific to them, but the progress
up the staircase is always one step at a time, and the first step
is this initial struggle to overcome the incredible control of one's
emotional subjectivity so as to be able to see your mechanical self
through the eyes of others on the same path in order to get an objective
view. This is crucial and is, as Gurdjieff described it: the first
initiation. To be able to assess the reading errors of one's own physical
being, is the thing that enables a person to measure themselves, without
which ability, they can never measure anything else. The degree of
struggle probably has a lot to do with the level of distortion of
the centers which depends on many factors, including the person's
fundamental make-up put together with influences from family, society,
and so on.
In
this sense, the role of what we call "The Mirror," group
input, which is adapted from the work of Boris Mouravieff, is absolutely
crucial.
This
brings me to Robbie Burns wonderful little poem: "To A Louse On seeing
one on a Lady's bonnet at Church."
When
we read this little masterpiece, we can almost see the louse crawling
in the unconscious lady's bonnet, a lady we are brought to understand
gives herself some airs and her illusions of grandeur are crawling
with lice.
Burns
inserts a bit of social satire in the piece with the exaggerated indignation
he uses to describe the contrast between the vulgarity of the louse
and the social pretensions of the lady. Burns outrage is actually
mockery of the lady herself which we learn when he suddenly drops
his pose of disturbed onlooker and names the lady, a simple country
girl: Jenny. At this point, his remarks become somewhat pitying because
he is telling us something very deep about that part of her that could
be real and not pretentious and self-righteous, but how difficult
it is to awaken it:
O
wad some Pow'r the giftie gie us
To see oursels as others see us
It wad frae monie a blunder free us
An' foolish notion
What airs in dress an' gait wad lea'e us
An' ev'n Devotion.
For
those of you who might have trouble translating this dialect, it is
simply saying that the gift of being able to see ourselves as others
see us would save us from many errors and foolish thoughts and ridiculous
or hurtful behavior and we would most certainly cease being devoted
to those things that shore up and support our illusions about ourselves.
In
recent times, I have pondered this issue of how people react to what
they perceive as "criticism" and how some people can "get
it" and some people simply cannot. This latter type, as soon as they
face the pooled observations of the group which point out to them
their "blunders" and "foolish notions" and "airs in dress an' gait
and Devotion," withdraw immediately into the "right man syndrome."
They
are "right," everyone else is wrong, their case is special and unique,
and that is that.
They
will argue and nitpick and so on. And we know what this comes from:
the energy of the emotional center has been aroused and usurped by
the intellect to fuel its frenzied and frantic need to "self-calm"
They MUST stop this "bad feeling" at all costs, and if the only way
they can stop it is to make everything and everyone out there "wrong"
about them. As Mouravieff wrote:
"When
it comes to the other centres, the misuse of the negative parts takes
much more insidious forms, which entail more serious consequences
for our minds as well as our bodies. That is how the negative part
of the intellectual centre nourishes jealousy, afterthoughts, hypocrisy,
suspicion, treachery, etc. The negative part of the emotional centre
receives all the disagreeable impressions and serves as a vehicle
for negative emotions, for which the keyboard is very large, ranging
from melancholy to hate. We shall have occasion to go deeper into
the problem of negative emotions. [Such emotion] represents one of
the major obstacles to esoteric evolution."
What
seems to be so is that it is generally individuals who have been "disenfranchised"
or who feel helpless and at the mercy of the forces of life - whether
they manifest through other people or random events - are those who
are most likely to erect such barriers against negative emotions.
They feel acutely their own inability to have an effect in the world,
and they turn their creativity inward to create and maintain their
illusions, their "blunders" and "foolish notions" and "airs in dress
an' gait and Devotion."
Self-calming
illusions thrive on certain mechanical characteristics of human beings.
The first characteristic is "absolute certainty." In this sense, it
is a sort of terminal consciousness in which development is stopped
because real growth and development includes, of necessity, uncertainty
and risk.
The
gift of being able to see ourselves as others see us would save us
from many errors and foolish thoughts and ridiculous behavior , and
we would most certainly cease being devoted to those things that shore
up and support our illusions about ourselves.
Gurdjieff discussed the problem with some specificity in Ouspensky's
"In Search of The Miraculous":
Only
two people dropped off who, exactly as though through some kind
of magic as it seemed to us, suddenly ceased to understand anything
and saw in everything that G. said misunderstanding on his part,
and, on the part of the rest, a lack of, sympathy and feeling. This
attitude, at first mistrustful and suspicious and then openly hostile
to almost all of us, coming from nobody knew where and full of strange
and quite unexpected accusations, astonished us very much.
"We
made everything a secret"; we failed to tell them what G. had spoken
of in their absence. We told tales about them to G., trying to make
him distrust them. We recounted to him all talks with them, leading
him constantly into error by distorting all the facts and striving
to present everything in a false light. We had given G. wrong impressions
about them, making him see everything far from as it was.
At
the same time G. himself had "completely changed," had become altogether
different from what he used to be before, had become harsh, requiring,
had lost all feeling and all interest for individual people, had
ceased to demand the truth from people; that he preferred to have
round him people such as were afraid to tell him the truth, who
were hypocrites, who threw flowers at one another and at the same
time spied on the others.
We
were amazed at all these and similar talks. They brought with them
immediately a kind of entirely new atmosphere which up to this time
we had not had. And it was particularly strange because precisely
at this time most of us were in a very emotional state and were
particularly well disposed towards these two protesting members
of our group.
We
tried many times to talk to G. about them. He laughed very much
when we told him that in their opinion we always gave him "wrong
impressions" of them.
"How
they value the work," he said, "and what a miserable idiot I am
from their point of view; how easily I am deceived! You see that
they have ceased to understand the most important thing. In the
work the teacher of the work cannot be deceived. This is a law which
proceeds from what has been said about knowledge and being. I may
deceive you if I want to. But you cannot deceive me. If it were
otherwise you would not learn from me and I would have to learn
from you."
"How must we speak to them and how can we help them to come back
to the group?" some of us asked G.
"Not
only can you do nothing," G. said to them, "but you ought not to
try because by such attempts you will destroy the last chance they
have of understanding and seeing themselves. It is always very difficult
to come back. And it must be an absolutely voluntary decision without
any sort of persuasion or constraint. You should understand that
everything you have heard about me and yourselves are attempts at
self-justification, endeavors to blame others in order to feel that
they are in the right. It means more and more lying. It must be
destroyed and it can only be destroyed through suffering. If it
was difficult for them to see themselves before, it will be ten
times more difficult now."
"How
could this have happened?" others asked him. "Why did their attitude
towards all of us and towards you change so abruptly and unexpectedly?"
"It
is the first case for you," said G., "and therefore it appears strange
to you, but later on you will see that it happens very often and
you will see that it always takes place in the same way. The principal
reason for it is that it is impossible to sit between two stools.
And people usually think that they can sit between two stools, that
is, that they can acquire the new and preserve the old; they do
not think this consciously of course but it comes to the same thing.
"And
what is it that they most of all desire to preserve? First the right
to have their own valuation of ideas and of people, that is, that
which is more harmful for them than anything else. They are fools
and they already know it, that is to say, they realized it at one
time. For this reason they came to learn. But they forget all about
this the next moment; they are already bringing into the work their
own paltry and subjective attitude; they begin to pass judgment
on me and on everyone else as though they were able to pass judgment
on anything. And this is immediately reflected in their attitude
towards the ideas and towards what I say. Already 'they accept one
thing' and 'they do not accept another thing'; with one thing they
agree, with another they disagree; they trust me in one thing, in
another thing they do not trust me.
"And
the most amusing part is that they imagine they are able 'to work'
under such conditions, that is, without trusting me in everything
and without accepting everything. In actual fact this is absolutely
impossible. By not accepting something or mistrusting something
they immediately invent something of their own in its place. 'Gagging'
begins - new theories and new explanations which have nothing in
common either with the work or with what I have said. Then they
begin to find faults and inaccuracies in everything that I say or
do and in everything that others say or do. From this moment I now
begin to speak of things about which I have no knowledge and even
of things of which I have no conception, but which they know and
understand much better than I do; all the other members of the group
are fools, idiots. And so on, and so on, like a barrel organ. When
a man says something on these lines I already know all he will say
later on. And you also will know by the consequences. And it is
amusing that people can see this in relation to others. But when
they themselves do crazy things they at once cease to see it in
relation to themselves. This is a law. It is difficult to climb
the hill but very easy to slide down it. They even feel no embarrassment
in talking in such a manner either with me or with other people.
And chiefly they think that this can be combined with some kind
of 'work.' They do not even want to understand that when a man reaches
this notch his little song has been sung. [...]
"A
man may think for a long time and quite sincerely that he wants
to work and even make great efforts, and then he may throw up everything
and even definitely go against the work; justify himself, invent
various fabrications, deliberately ascribe a wrong meaning to what
he has heard, and so on."
"What
happens to them for this?" asked one of the audience.
"Nothing-what
could happen to them?" said G. "They are their own punishment. And
what punishment could be worse?
I
have had to work very hard, to study, to develop, to expand my knowledge
base of the "language" I am attempting to translate. I'm
not perfect - no one is - but I give it my best, and I submit myself
to the network to catch errors. When some new data comes in and suggests
that changes are necessary, I am willing to make those changes. I
don't feel that I have to be "right" all the time, and I
certainly do not insist that "just because the C's said it, it
must be so." In fact, as I have often said, if the C's say it,
it needs to be checked.
Translators
must be trained; they must not only know the other language, they
must know how to regulate the degree of fidelity with the source text,
how to tell what degree and type of fidelity is appropriate in specific
use contexts, how to receive and deliver translations, how to find
help with terminology, and so on. All of this suggests a long period
of training and preparation. A Translator channel is someone who has
studied these things, who knows these things, and who, most importantly,
governs their channeling-translating behavior in terms of this knowledge.
This knowledge is ideological. It is controlled by Cosmic ideological
norms.
To
know, via reason, what those Cosmic norms prescribe and act upon them
is to submit to the original intent. To become a translator-channel
of truly Higher Cosmic Consciousness is to be hailed as a translator
by the "invisible hand" of the Universe.
If
you want to become a translator-channel, you must submit to the translator's
role of learning the language in an expert way; you must submit to
being directed by what the Cosmic ideological norms inform you is
the true spirit of the source author, and to convey that spirit unchanged
to the target language.
I
have certainly had to deal with the fact that, in the early days of
the C's experiment, I, too, had assumptions that had to be laid aside,
and most definitely, in my particular case, this very well may have
influenced the "translation." I have endeavored to correct
these errors, to restore the true spirit of the source author. That
is my job as the translator of the material, as the presenter of the
information to the "target audience." And I will continue
to do it as I see fit, as I am directed to do by the "invisible
hand" of the Universe.
You are visitor number .
|