French blog about Laura's work (blog en français sur les travaux de Laura)

[Sentenza]

J'aime bien les travaux de Sand et Jenael, et vraiment je ne vois pas de différences significatives avec ceux des Cassiopéens. Ils disent d'ailleurs être inspirés par les Cassiopéens, qui se seraient actuellement déplacés dans la constellation du Lion.
Ils ont même récemment parlé du protocole de l'iode !

La seule différence importante semble être le rôle accordé à la Russie et Poutine, qui pour Sand et Jenaël semble être juste une branche différente des Illuminatis.

Peut-être serait-il intéressant, lors d'une prochaine session, de poser ces questions aux Cassiopéens. A savoir : Se sont-ils déplacés dans la Constellation du Lion ?
Valident-ils les thèses développées par Sand et Jenael ?


I like the work of Sand and Jenael, and really I do not see significant differences with those Cassiopaeans. They also say they are inspired by the C's, which are currently displaced in the constellation Leo.
They even recently talked about the protocol of iodine!

The only major difference seems to be the role given to Russia and Putin; for Sand and Jenaël, it seems to be just a different branch of the Illuminati.

Perhaps it would be interesting, at a forthcoming session, to ask these questions to the C's. Have they moved in the constellation Leo?
They validate the theories developed by Sand and Jenael?

 

[Chu]

I like the work of Sand and Jenael, and really I do not see significant differences with those Cassiopaeans. They also say they are inspired by the C's, which are currently displaced in the constellation Leo.
They even recently talked about the protocol of iodine!

I confess not having read their material in depth, but the above in and of itself, to me says that it's a bit of a "copy and paste" work. Is there anything really original in their work? Anything that can be proved? And what are the results of their work? I don't know.

The only major difference seems to be the role given to Russia and Putin; for Sand and Jenaël, it seems to be just a different branch of the Illuminati.

Again, any proof? The "Illuminati" have been used as a vague idea to convey "secrecy and power", but there is little (or NOTHING) to indicate that Putin and Russia would be part of that. All speculations.

Perhaps it would be interesting, at a forthcoming session, to ask these questions to the C's. Have they moved in the constellation Leo?

How could that be proved? They mentioned it themselves already, but it's one of those questions that would not add much to S. and J's credibility, as it would prove nothing.

They validate the theories developed by Sand and Jenael?

Maybe, but I think that we can probably figure it out by studying their material. Personally, I'm not too inclined to do it. Because I don't see any real networking on their part. Many people can take ideas, and then "repeat" them in their own way. Maybe they have good intentions, but what are their results? That's what counts. If there is nothing really original about it, or nothing that can be proven, then it's a bit "weak", IMO.

 

[Elohir]

I agree with Chu.

I won't repeat what I answered you in the 27 february session http://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic,41076.msg673376.html#msg673376.
I thank you for bringing here some new work and questions but I think that maybe you should be more careful with their website.

Some of their informations look strange to me and appears to be a new-age material. Like Chu noticed, we have a mix between various sources but not always serious or accurate according to me.

Of course, Im nobody and I don't pretend to have the truth but it's my own feeling about that.

 

[Sentenza]

Chu and Elohir,
Thanks for sharing your thoughts about that. I agree with what you say.
Don't worry, I stay vigilant about what I read on their website (and all websites, anyway). There are some speculations, yes...

Their approach is respectable however.
But I wonder why, indeed, if they are such defenders of Laura's work, why they are not networking on this forum... (an issue with english language ?)

As I said on another thread, I far prefer the approach of this forum, with the networking, rational approach and now the connection with the crystal project. ;)

 

[Chu]

Don't worry, I stay vigilant about what I read on their website (and all websites, anyway). There are some speculations, yes...

Good to know that you stay vigilant. :)

Their approach is respectable however.

Could you explain this a bit further, since you know their work better? What I get from reading this:
_http://bienvenussurlanouvelleterre.jimdo.com/

is that he has "dialogues" with this "Angel" (higher consciousness), and she helps them interpret them. So, no actual tool is used, such as the Ouija board or anything that can allow for full alertness. That's the first red flag for me. He hears the "angel", transcribes these dialogues, and that's it? After reading the forum for a while, he goes have a "talk" with this "angel", and all those answers come to him? Weird... I wouldn't consider that a very respectable approach, FWIW.

But I wonder why, indeed, if they are such defenders of Laura's work, why they are not networking on this forum... (an issue with english language ?)

My guess is that their English must be good enough, since they obviously read so much of what is posted on the forum, the sessions, etc.

I managed to read this:
_http://bienvenussurlanouvelleterre.jimdo.com/dialogues-2016-1/dialogue-n-42/

To me it sounds like A LOT of copying from Laura's work, with some "new" ideas that tend towards nonsense. They mention Jesus' myth, the ketogenic diet, you name it! It's nice that they cite their sources, but at the end, I'm left out thinking... what did they actually say that is new? And the answer is "Nothing". Granted, we are familiar with these concepts and this research, while the average reader of their blog might not. But when they do supposedly quote directly from the words of that "angel", it is such a word salad that it's nonsense. Gravity, anti-gravity, quantum this, quantum that. The only time when it's interesting is when they quote from Gurdjieff, or when they stick to facts. But there is very little of that. They say they are not "New Agey", but there's a lot of that in the way they write (it doesn't have to be about "love and light" to be New Age).

In fact, reading just that (and giving them the benefit of the doubt) makes me think that they are being taken in by whatever that "angel" is, to say a lot of truths combined with lies and nonsense. That would be dangerous for some new readers, and for us, a waste of time. What do you think? (Note: I read it fast, so I may have missed details.)

 

[Sentenza]

Chu,

I have taken note of what you said, and I'll try to answer soon. I would have to take the time to proofread their work.
Now, I will read their work keeping in mind what you said, and I will try to exercise more critical than curious eye.

I think I will ask you your opinion on some concepts that they have developed and see what you think about it.

 

[Eol]

I have to agree with what was write above. I read this dialogues since nearly 2 years. At the begining, and as a "newbie" on spiritual, esoteric knowledge and an easily handleable person , I was completely fascinated with what they were writing, with the participation of this "angel". But the more I read and started to do some laterals researchs, the more I began to realise that the majority of what they were writing was just some assimilation of other's work, re-interpreted in some way or not, with some ideas here or there (essentially their idea of retro-causality and the greys being the degenerated humans in the future).
But also a lot of nonsense and unprovable things. For example, they talk about specific alien races (Amasutum, Urmah, Gina'abul etc...) with which they stated that are for certain, part of their "galactic origins". The source of this races is Anton Parks. Concerning this author, here is what i said to a member about him :

"I would like to warn you against Anton Parks's papers (especially Les Chroniques du Girkù). I read the 4 volumes of the present serie. Although his linguistic work can be interesting (I cannot verify and I suspect that he turns certain meaning of words in its advantage to stick to his own narrative though), if we look at it quite objectively, its history rests only on personal re-interpretations of vestiges and Mesopotamian legends in functions of the visions that he tells to have had since he was a child. The history which he tells us is very fascinating, but when we look at it, we cannot say nothing more than that."

And I am now asking what was the real ratio of objectivity in the life experience who they shared in their dialogues.

After reading the forum for a while, he goes have a "talk" with this "angel", and all those answers come to him? Weird... I wouldn't consider that a very respectable approach, FWIW.

For what i understood, they ask a question and the response they receive is supposedly comming through their intuition, their higher self. It's what they call "the angel". (I was very desapointed when i learned that )

I will continue to read them, but the recent dialogues gave me a bad impression.

 

[Bastian]

(...)But the more I read and started to do some laterals researchs, the more I began to realise that the majority of what they were writing was just some assimilation of other's work, re-interpreted in some way or not, with some ideas here or there (essentially their idea of retro-causality and the greys being the degenerated humans in the future).

Hum, I wouldn't be surprised if these two last ideas were taken from other authors as well (2 French physicists) :

* Philippe Guillemant talks/writes a lot about "retro-causality" (the way the future affects the present) :
_http://www.doublecause.net/
_http://guillemant.net/
A thread about him :
http://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic,39770.msg612219.html#msg612219

* Jean-Pierre Garnier-Malet wrote about 4 times (God's one, the slowest ; Angels' one, slower than ours, in our past ; ours, the present ; demons' one, quicker than ours, in the future), with "demons" trying to attract us/the present to theirs, a dark future...
_http://www.dedoublement.com/fr
_http://www.garnier-malet.com/
A thread about him :
http://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic,29881.msg384702.html#msg384702

But also a lot of nonsense and unprovable things. For example, they talk about specific alien races (Amasutum, Urmah, Gina'abul etc...) with which they stated that are for certain, part of their "galactic origins". The source of this races is Anton Parks.

A thread about Anton Parks :
http://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic,27876.0.html

My two euro-cents.