Jeff Rense EXPOSED!!

[j0da]

What Rense.com is not talking about

Well, I guess I expected something like..

"I've spotted such goals of mine as:

-to appear knowledgable
-to appear smart
-to feel important
-to show what I know
-to argue
-to prove myself
-to outwit another
-to prove others wrong by making myself right
-to reinforce my self-image
-to feel good
-to receive admiration
-to agree/disagree with someone
-to feel the thrill of danger/mystery/revelation
-to show how helpful I am
-to clean my karma
"
etc, etc

Despite the uncomfortable sensation emerging from such insights and the difficulty of communicating such statements to another it is what really advances us on our way to freedom. Without such willingness to look inside oneself honestly, there will be no REAL Knowledge or Awareness to be found here or anywhere else.
Questions differ from group to group, from one school of thought to another, but the question is repeated until one gives the right answer.
But, of course, one has to be willing to answer... If one is not.. well, anyone can pretend to seek enlightment for as long as he wants to, but to expect that pretense will go unnoticed is completely unreasonable if not plain stupid.

Honesty goes a long way.

 

[Fifth Way]

What Rense.com is not talking about

I think you guys may have erronously assumed that Ruth will, against all odds, give you an honest answer, instead of an obvious textbook one. And when she failed to provide an answer that is consistent with YOUR observations of her true intentions (please note that she still disagrees with them), you guys were a bit surprised (by now you shouldn't be), and so tried to restate the question and emphasize parts of the question to get a real answer, again, with absolutely no result.

a.) You keep referring to "you guys". That seems to be counterproductive to the effort of learning discernment. I can only answer for myself with:
b.) No, I don't think you understood this right. You quoted only a fraction of what I said. The important part I "repeated" as I tried to communicate this already a few post back, was:

I just don't buy anything you say anymore.

I thought that was pretty straight forward but maybe not.

Then you seemed to remember that asking a predator if he's a predator is a total waste of time, so you decided to leave it at that.

Anyway, this is the impression I got from what just transpired, and it did give me a chuckle when you guys were kinda shocked/surprised with Ruth's answer and tried to sort of ask it again right before you realised what you were doing

Again, speaking only for myself : No, for me there was no shock/surprise involved whatsoever. Only regret that I spend the time to begin with. Restating jOda's question in regards to Ruth's expected accomplishment, was meant to be a rhetorical question - to make a point. As it turns out that too was too subtle. The point I tried to make is this: Ruth DOES NOT answer the question. Has not and will not.
Finally, me answering her question was meant to be even less subtle, but apparently still unsuccessfull. The translation for

NO, I do not see you achieving any of it.

... is: I think you ar full of s#$@!

Isn't that what just happened? That's what it looked like.

Does it still? I very much hope I was clearer now.

 

[Fifth Way]

What Rense.com is not talking about

...anyone can pretend to seek enlightment for as long as he wants to, but to expect that pretense will go unnoticed is completely unreasonable if not plain stupid

Especially on this forum. And this is exactly how I understood you, jOda. No shock/surprise here either.

Thanks anyway, SAO, I'm sure you meant well.

 

[ScioAgapeOmnis]

What Rense.com is not talking about

Sorry, I didn't read between the lines there, and thought the questions were in all seriousness. I wanted to point out the humor in the situation, but I totally misread the situation, so the joke is kinda on me now lol. Will be more careful in the future, thanks for clarifying.

And you're right I should not have used "you guys", but been more specific. Weird that I did that, seems I probably got too carried away in trying to point out the humor that I neglected objectivity, and sort of went into a mechanical state, which was sort of like "tunnel vision". Besides, now that I think about it, it does seem odd that you (fifth way) and j0da would suddenly become so naive as my previous observation of the situation suggested. I know better than that. Not to say that you cannot make mistakes, even naive mistakes (we all do sometimes), but just looking back at the posts it was pretty clear that it was not the case, but again, due to my temporary state of tunnel vision, I totally failed to see it. Another question I'd have is, why would I even jump at a chance to make a joke that seemed to make you naive in it, considering you clearly weren't? So upon reflection, I think my own predator just took the wheel for a while there, and it went right over my head until you brought it up.

A good reminder to myself that, despite Ruth's obvious twisting/deception of things being said, I'm just as vulnerable to doing this if I let my ego/predator/programs talk for me. And although I did "mean well", I think there may have been more than one "i", and thus, more than one intention behind all that was said. So then, you could say that Ruth also means well, but she seems to be oblivious to the part of her that is in control that in fact does not mean well at all. And yeah, it is uncomfortable when someone points it out, sometimes to the point of sort of "burning" you, but what is being burned is not YOU but the part that has been discovered that is currently in control of you - be it the ego, the predator, etc. But since it's part of you, you feel the burn, and if you don't realise that it's not necessarily *YOU*, it's easy to take offense and think you're being attacked. So I think maybe this is what Ruth's issue is - she identifies with all her programming, ego, etc, and so cannot separate herself from it.

A saying comes to mind, "Good intentions pave the way to hell".

 

[j0da]

What Rense.com is not talking about

Your parable was in itself very funny, SAO :) I asked my questions in order to feel and sample that peculiar evasive reaction, so I could remember it better. Reading other's interactions is beneficial, but by doing it myself, by testing the energy of this phenomena I might have learned the lesson a bit better. So, you weren't completely mistaken SAO, at least in my case - I asked the question quite seriously and the response provided feedback for my own observations. With proper discernment we find that tricksters come in handy :)

And, apart from what is written above by asking Ruth a question I might just have wanted to ask "an important question" or to be seen as "serious intelocutor". It amazes me how much of this freakin stuff we have inside ourselves! And it is so laughable after all, lol.

 

[Magus]

What Rense.com is not talking about

To assert, as Ruth does, that someone else has the ability to change one's own state of mind, in any slightest regard, seems rather indicative of a "magical" belief system in which both one's own powers over others and others' powers over one's self are grossly exaggerated. Without our making a personal Choice to alter any specific aspect of ourselves, whether it be choices in our attire or our Choices in our modes of credence, thought and behaviour, no change will take place. We must first permit the change, Choose it, and thereafter foster it from within, or it won't happen, ever.

Rare individuals, such as David Hicks, demonstrate that there is simply no means by which any other Being can force any action or thoughts upon us without our cooperation. No kind or amount of torture, pain or fear will work against those who simply refuse to Choose to cooperate with tormentors of all kinds. The historical records of the most unholy Inquisition tell of numerous accused, tried and tortured "witches" who did not ever confess to the "crimes" of which they were accused, and who did indeed go to the stake, those who survived their tortures long enough to get there, actively cursing the church, the pope and the inquisitors one and all, for the injustices and suffering they were inflicting upon the innocent. Although such individuals were not common, they were certainly not unheard of either. Such is the power of Choice.

Ruth demonstrates a characteristic of consistently Choosing to limit her perceptions or concepts of herself, her responses to events, her words and her interactions with others, to only those that are comfortable and customary to her. She seems to project upon others the responsibility for Choices she has made as to which things she will regard as true, or factual, and which she will disbelieve, which of the advised methods for personal growth and Awakening she might try to live by and which she will utterly disregard. It is not a liberating or empowering behaviour. But it does enable certain kinds of irresponsibility, at both the innermost psychological levels and at the externally interactive levels: From the old "X made me do it", or think it, or "made me" whatever else excuse, to the "I'll change X's mind, behaviour, beliefs, etc.," about whatever, it inflates the sense of personal power and value and decreases the personal ownership of and responsibilities for one's own wrongs and wrongdoings.

It keeps open the "doors", psycho-emotionally, to "justifying" a number of less than optimum habits of thought, belief and action, inaction and reaction. Internally and especially at the level of Seeking, as the term is Known and used in this Forum, this denial of the essential nature of personal Choice determining what will be or become the contents of one's own mind, the same as it does in all else, might be one key to Ruth's seeming cluelessness in some areas, and much more so in her seeming inability to either perceive or change those problem areas for and especially within herself.

She may simply Choose not to See those problems and not to make those changes within herself. She may in fact, in a rather "backwards" way, be fending off the need to do so by accusing others of trying to force them upon her, while secretly, the awareness of it hidden even from herself, being angry with those same others that they have not already done so, so that she too could "grok" the full measures of what is being discussed by others in the Forum.

She seems to attempt, by this constant subterfuge, to "grok" it without having to do the hard and painful internal Work of objective self-examination, objective self-evaluation, and brutally honest admission to self and others of her errors, and without making her own Choices, errors included, as to what and how she needs to change. The current method also avoids any need to pay heed to the objective criticisms or observations made by others if they aren't flattering or comfortable to her, the need for both self and others monitoring her thinking and behaviour is avoided, and so on; many forms of avoidance are available this way. As those of us who have done it, and who live by it now do know, it is a very humbling and literally never-ending Work, always in progress and never completed. (But so very worth every bit of that and more for the Seeing and all else that it brings to us in time.) It may be that a sufficient desire to Choose a way of life embracing this difficult Path is not present for and in Ruth.

There is literally Cosmic Power in our Free Will Choice when we make right use of it from the depths of our Informed Beings. The first aspect of our Beings about which we must become Informed, however, is the honest and fullest list of those many ways, both subtle and obvious, in which the Lies surrounding us and within us, especially those Lies we tell about ourselves, and worst of all to ourselves, have taken us down a far and wrongful path away from living in an objective Reality and perceiving what is True, rather than what we wish, or believe, or have been taught to view as the truth.

That essential process of getting honest with yourself about your own self-deceptions, and about all of the other inevitably present deceiving ways of living and being you have within you, is exactly what many others in this Forum are trying to Model for you and Teach to you, Ruth, not least among them Laura herself. They are your loving Friends, in the truest sense of those words, and not your competitors, malicious detractors, opponents or enemies. There are no points being earned here. All there is are lessons being learned, then more lessons, then more lessons, and the cycle never ends. If the members of this Forum who take so much time to Reason with you again and again actually Loved you any less, they would not keep trying so hard and for so long to get this and other concepts of essential Knowledge across to you. Were it not for their selfless desires to see you make it to objective self-evaluation, painful though it can be at first, and from there to your beginning to Walk the Walk, in Aware self-honesty and humility, as your Way of Life, they would not bother to continue confronting you. They would instead just ignore you and write "around" you.

Except they do recognise the note of sincerity that comes into your Asking from time to time, the sincere confusions, and they are dedicated to the Work, and through the Work to you. So, time and again, they keep coming back to try to open your mind a bit more. If that is not acting with Objective Love, then one is hard put to think what is.

Please, mes amis et amies, accept my profound gratitude this day for the many Good Examples you have displayed herein, including your patience and gentleness.

M

 

[Ruth]

What Rense.com is not talking about

Ok, I wasn't precise, for what I'm sorry. I'd like to correct myself.

I meant: what is your REAL PURPOSE of being here? What do you REALLY WANT to achieve by interacting with members of this forum?

As far as I know, the reasons I stated are the 'bottom line' on why I am here. I'm not sure how I should feel about other members thinking that there is more to it than that. I cant see it myself, so maybe more information will 'pop up' for me later. Or maybe for others, who knows? Strange times are these...

Those questions if contemplated upon in a sincere manner would provide great insights. In our complex nature we can find purposes behind purposes, motives layered one over another in dozens. You are right, STATED (real or false or somewhere between) purposes of many people who call themselves "truthseekers" are common, but what lies beneath? You could write volumes about it and never run out of original cases.

But sometimes a cigar is just a cigar as Freud would say. Sometimes things are just that simple. Why do we make them complicated? I have no idea why.

Don't get me wrong, I in no way want to indicate, that you were insincere in your answer, I just think you have answered my question only partially. Behind the obvious there is much to discover. In the atmosphere of likemindedness one can find real help or merely a pool of energy which satisfies one's not so holy needs and urges. In our confusion we very often seek both and I'm not an exception for that matter. For a long long time I've been seeking occasions to argue or debate for the sake of debating. Not mentioning such funny things like an idea that picking chicks with a smart conspiracy/spiritual talk is way more cool than showing them my stamp collection.

Thruthseeking is a tricky business :D

Indeed it is, that's what makes this website so facinating. So too are everybody's unique idiosyncrasies. And conspiracies of course. They're pretty cool as well.

Good luck with the picking up chicks part. I hope you have time for all the other stuff a person has to do as well. :D. I wish that my life was that straight forward.

 

[Ruth]

What Rense.com is not talking about

Rare individuals, such as David Hicks, demonstrate that there is simply no means by which any other Being can force any action or thoughts upon us without our cooperation. No kind or amount of torture, pain or fear will work against those who simply refuse to Choose to cooperate with tormentors of all kinds. The historical records of the most unholy Inquisition tell of numerous accused, tried and tortured "witches" who did not ever confess to the "crimes" of which they were accused, and who did indeed go to the stake, those who survived their tortures long enough to get there, actively cursing the church, the pope and the inquisitors one and all, for the injustices and suffering they were inflicting upon the innocent. Although such individuals were not common, they were certainly not unheard of either. Such is the power of Choice.

David Hicks, huh? Not the 'sharpest tool in the shed' and definately not in the right place at the right time, but hardly remarkable. A bit silly perhaps. Poor man, but you know what they say, only the dumb ones get caught. I don't care how much of a 'dill' this man is or was, its still no excuse for his treatment. I have a lot of sympathy for him. But its often the dumb ones that suffer the most.

I believe the PTB tried to 'use' him whilst incarcertated in that illegal place where they put all the people who were 'sold' to them in Afganistan. I don't think he has been much help to them. Perhaps that's why he's not getting released now. That and the fact that there isn't enough international condemnation coming from his home country. More like "What every you say, GWB my Texan friend"....lol. But a quick Google look on the internet reveals news stories claiming that Hicks is "damaged" or "not fit and well". So, maybe they ARE planning to release him soon. They just have to plant certain ideas in the minds of the public, just in case he should say something damaging to PTB.

I find it absolutely facinating that you bring this man up. But not as a martyr, just a poor silly soul (or not) who got caught in the wrong place at the wrong time doing the wrong thing. Quite inconvenient really. But definately not smart. I hope he gets released soon.

 

[j0da]

What Rense.com is not talking about

I must admit - energizer bunny has nothing on you, Ruth. But, hey - thanks for participation. While I'm leaving you to your own devices I'm sure there will be always someone ready to push your buttons and give you a jolt of much desired excitation.

 

[Guest]

What Rense.com is not talking about

Perhaps it's time to reassess the situation in terms of the bigger picture. We notice resistance in some people. What is it that makes them react? In Ruth it seems to be anything that can lead to identifying people who sabotage learning. This make me wonder it Ruth is trying to hamper learnings that would invariably reveal her own "portal", that which rides her psychological constructs.

We need to consider if Ruth is a conduit, just as others are conduits of the same entropic vector that strikes again and again in this forum, from within members and through conscious disinformants. Taking this into consideration, we can look into Ruth's psychology through her behavior, and see if there are links that make her a likely "portal" candidate.

So let me take a broader view of the attack patterns. These, as I said, come from different directions, seemingly unrelated, but all end up intending the same kind of damage. I think we are beyond the land of coincidences here. Ruth for example goes on and on as if she were against the Matrix. Her behaviour consistently shows, however, that it is the Matrix itself which affirms her sense of existential meaning. Otherwise she would not feel threatened by every little thing that can teach us to counter its hypnotic effects.

The damage disinformation has done through the ages, and the very role of the Matrix on human psychology is extensive, and needs to be corrected, most importantly regarding inner development. This group/network is growing into the right attitude to understand the corrections needed. When the time comes, people gaining from the dynamics of this group can apply those understandings when and where they will be called to apply them.

In private communications, but not so much here on the forum, I have expressed strong misgivings regarding the concept of "school". The misgivings are for the word (not the true spirit of it), and all the associations we may have about it, because we cannot deny that our formative years have been passed in "schools" of the Matrix. We cannot deny that those schools have done a good job to condition our very understanding of learning.

The devil is in the details, and we need to examine our ideas regarding the details of "school", "learning" and "teacher" because we cannot just ignore the effect of years of sitting in Matrix classrooms. How we approach learning can be seriously affected by our biases about it.

The point is that this network expresses the true dynamic of learning, and that dynamic has its own distinct character, far different than anything the Matrix can project in imitation of it. I think it is important to look, without neglecting the details, at the larger patterns of how we are experiencing learning.

True learning is characterized by phases of acceleration and assimilation. True learning may, and should involve stress. Attacks come to distort the beneficial effects of stress, and convert it into suffering. Inevitably, one of the first things we need to learn is to separate the stress of true learning, from the distorting effects of attacks that lead to suffering which can over-stress, and cause harm instead of integration.

We need to know that we have the power to back off when the going gets tough, to say no, to read the signs, to know when it is constructive to confront, and when it is not. That in itself is a major learning. This learning gives the confidence and strength to confront stresses of a magnitude we could never before confront, because now we know we do not have to submit to them in body or soul. There are solutions. Even when we don't know them, we can be confident that they exist and we can find them when we know how to confront stress/challenge. We do not have to suffer, as the Matrix keeps telling us we do.

Acceleration phases are where stresses are applied to those who learn. These are tempering forces, and have the face of adversity in one way or another, intended or circumstantial. The stress, however, is only half of the story. The other half is the intensity of life energy, mind energy, soul energy or however you want to identify this, which we can also feel as stress, as sensitivity, as mood changes, but also as inspiration, increased awareness, sense of being alive, deepening vision ect.

The prime characteristic of acceleration phases, in the context of networking in particular, is the feeling of being overwhelmed by something that transcends one's former ideas of it. When challenging issues of internal resistence in the forum pop up (as conflicts of sorts) it is noteworthy to observe that reflections go both ways. One member, for example plays the role of parabolic focus, the dramatic actor of the issue. The rest play the role of parabolic reflector.

The resistance comes from all participants. It only consciously and directly manifests in the focus. In the others it is there in a subconscious or lesser degree, but if energies accelerate without confronting the issue they may also be triggered as foci. This is good to know in case members get it into their heads that they would be far better off if a bothersome influence was removed off the bat.

Removal can and should happen when the lesson is fully understood. It is true that the focus is responsible, but also that the focus reflects what others might be shoving under the rug or trying to suppress. In this context I place attention on one form of resisting acceleration, resulting from feeling overwhelmed and out of control.

These psychological patterns form the waves that forces of the Matrix can ride to greatly "assist" the overwhelmed individual in stomping out the "threat", while allowing them to maintain a sense that they are justified in doing so.

I want to, therefore, note that psychological factors are in no way incompatible with a person being a conduit for grander forces of the Matrix to work through them. In fact, it is these psychological variables that form the condiut of attack in a quite literal fashion. They are the waves that carry the true attack. Trauma is perpetuated among individuals to structure/condition more conduit-compatible psychological patterns.

They open the person to call on the forces of the Matrix, (whose acknowledgement requires one to think outside the "box" our schools have formed around us), in the name of reducing dissonance. The more they call, the easier it is for the Matrix to answer, until a day can arrive when the conduit is fully open, and calling is not required anymore. In all of this, there is no need for the forces of the Matrix to be consciously acknowledged as such. The individual can easily see them as the "voice of their own reason".

Take Ruth, for example. She activates her conduit at key points in the discussion. Always the same points it seems. The ones that reveal knowledge that negates her facade. And she represents just one case of resisting acceleration. This is caused by a feeling of losing control, and interpreting that feeling as an existential threat.

Everyone is afraid of losing control, of experiencing "too much too fast". Yet this feeling is unavoidable, in the first stages in particular because a lot of barriers have to be removed at the onset, and the sincere asking to do so is usually so fervent initially that it calls in a lot of energy. Turbulence will therefore happen, and it is never comfortable.

One thing about a group, however, is that it allows an equalization, and distribution of growth promoting forces that might otherwise pressure an individual into acute crisis, in the same manner that a group can absorb attacks better than an individual alone, (force of numbers). If people understand this, and use discernment to know when to safely trust, the group can learn to navigate the waves of quickening in a more fluid manner.

Ruth represents the voice of mistrust in this process, and behind Ruth are the forces that are gung ho to shut it down. Ruth mistrusts to the extent that even discernment is not enough for her. Nothing short of shutting down the acceleration is enough for her, (hence the agreement with the adverse forces, which need not be conscious).

Whether she is a genetic OP or not, she chooses to be a functional OP, and considers the very concept of networking as an affront to her sense of being in control. She may very well be of individuation potential, but I think her credo is "better to be in control among OP's than serve among individuals" (to paraphrase Milton).

She cannot, however, stop the increase in vibration as others learn to stabilize the energies in themselves, and learn a mature attitude with respect to the quickening impulse. In time, she will probably gravitate to more mundane areas of discussion where things feel more "normal".

Or the forces behind her will increase their pressure. Her paradox is that although she wants to be in control, she doesn't like the idea of being alone, nor the idea that there are things going on that threaten her sense of control by their very existence. Hence, it is not easy for her to "give up". This also serves the forces riding the waves of her psychological patterns.

I think it is constructive to consider all of these things I have expressed when addressing the case of Ruth, and take them into account if we think responding to her is needed. As long as we are part of the reflection dynamics, however, there will always be the impulse to respond. This does not mean we share in her issue. Just that we have not completely learned the lesson it offers yet.

 

[Ruth]

What Rense.com is not talking about

Ruth represents the voice of mistrust in this process, and behind Ruth are the forces that are gung ho to shut it down. Ruth mistrusts to the extent that even discernment is not enough for her. Nothing short of shutting down the acceleration is enough for her, (hence the agreement with the adverse forces, which need not be conscious).

This just gets more and more bizare, almost like some ideas of reality are completely fantastic or come from some other place. Calling me a psychopath or an OP or telling me I am this, that, or the next thing (and all of it bad) is just a misplaced expression of fear or projection of problems designed to make a person feel more comfortable. Which, when you think of it, may be a very significant problem. Saying that I have nothing to offer and shouldn't be interacted with, is a self defence mechanism designed to shut off any form of communication and potential self analysis. Like the ostrich stuffing its head in the sand, all the while telling itself that this is the best place for its head to be! Yep, its called entropy. And its good because it can be used time and time again.

She cannot, however, stop the increase in vibration as others learn to stabilize the energies in themselves, and learn a mature attitude with respect to the quickening impulse. In time, she will probably gravitate to more mundane areas of discussion where things feel more "normal".

I don't think you have to be an intellectual snob here. It should be perfectly within posibility that people can increase their 'vibrations' anywhere and probably even doing "normal" things and also when feeling "normal" . Their aint no recipe to it, inspite of what some people may think. The trick is to recognise when you 'think' you are doing it as apposed to when you actually are doing it, and this isn't very often.

One question EsoQuest - have you actually learned anything about yourself when interacting with others, or is it all about getting them to 'do the work'?

I am pretty disgusted. I know some people have learned something from conversing with others and me, despite what others say. But, it seems many are more comfortable in their isolated 'precious' and self important states, than actually interacting with (normal?) people whom they consider to be lesser beings. You won't learn anything by doing that. You'll just look ridiculous.

 

[Beau]

What Rense.com is not talking about

It should be perfectly within posibility that people can increase their 'vibrations' anywhere and probably even doing "normal" things and also when feeling "normal" . Their aint no recipe to it, inspite of what some people may think.

This is just completely at odds with objective reality. The fact is, our "normal" way of doing things has not proven to "increase vibrations", or to put it more technically, ascend up the esoteric ladder to 4D STO. My own opinion is that keeping the status quo in that respect will only guarantee a continual slide into an entropic future. Your idea is a nice altruistic idea, but it sounds as though you view the difficult road to be too much of a task. Your use of the word 'recipe' is telling, implying that their is a lot of Work to, and possibly too much Work to your liking.

Your quote above sounds as though it is the polar opposite of one of the C's much used phrases: There are no free lunches.

It would be far too easy to think we can make it out our physical prison while still in our machine state. The 'recipes' that we have been given should be viewed as a gift, not as a tedious task that you rationalize in order to avoid.

 

[Beau]

What Rense.com is not talking about

I know some people have learned something from conversing with others and me, despite what others say. But, it seems many are more comfortable in their isolated 'precious' and self important states, than actually interacting with (normal?) people whom they consider to be lesser beings. You won't learn anything by doing that. You'll just look ridiculous.

Just cuz people disagree with you does not mean they aren't learning anything. In fact, that's when the most learning occurs, when there are disagreements. But the above just sounds like you are whining about these disagreements. Perhaps you are the one who hasn't learned anything from the interactions. That's actually what is starting to look ridiculous.

I mean, you think people are responding just to demean you and that's it. What a self important state to be in. And quite blind to the real purpose behind these interactions. I'm saying this not to make you feel bad or to make me feel better. But the only way to wake up is through shocks. Typically they are not very enjoyable. And if you're here on this forum you can expect to receive them from time to time.

 

[Approaching Infinity]

What Rense.com is not talking about

Ruth for example goes on and on as if she were against the Matrix. Her behaviour consistently shows, however, that it is the Matrix itself which affirms her sense of existential meaning. Otherwise she would not feel threatened by every little thing that can teach us to counter its hypnotic effects.

Let me raise the possibility that Ruth does not feel threatened at all. The impression I get reading her posts is that what is perceived as "being threatened," "being angry," or "being frustrated" is actually experienced by Ruth in the following manner: she responds to critical posts with a loud laugh ("LOL"), whilst thinking, "these guys just don't get it!" I do not think "Ruth" has the capability to be truly threatened (i.e. to have some sense of self-doubt). Being threatened impies the possibility that 'something' can lose its grip on Ruth. What if this 'something' has nothing to fear in regards to Ruth? What it fears is Ruth's condition being exposed for others to see?

Keep in mind that Ruth has no shame. Even when group members here openly speak about her being stubborn, annoying, dense, she just comes back for more. She does not feel embarassed. A person possessing the capability to have their predator threatened (and thus the possibility to see this predator) would feel some sense of shame. They might feel unwelcome after receiving the kind of feedback Ruth has received here. Picture the following scenario: imagine the forums here as a house. Imagine being in a house and having the owners and fellow occupants telling you, "You are annoying, you don't get it, and you should confine yourself to rooms 3 and 5 (out of 30, let's say) from now on. Let the rest of us do what we do, just don't bother us." What kind of person would continue to stay in the house??

An externally considerate person would leave. They would consider that they, themselves, can be used as a portal of attack and Work to eliminate this possibility. Does Ruth care? I don't think she's even considered it.

Take Ruth, for example. She activates her conduit at key points in the discussion. Always the same points it seems. The ones that reveal knowledge that negates her facade. And she represents just one case of resisting acceleration. This is caused by a feeling of losing control, and interpreting that feeling as an existential threat.

This is interesting. Would a genetic OP feel any existential threat? I'd guess no. It seems to me that certain people cannot grasp certain concepts. I think OPs would not be able to grasp their own masks (are they anything more than a mask?). I think this needs more thought and discussion, but I think that an OP would need the capability for objectivity in order to to feel this. But they are entirely subjective. I think one's ability to see their own condition would be indicative of non-OP genetics. What do you think?

[addition]While editing this post, I see Ruth has also replied. Notice her first sentence: "This just gets more and more bizare, almost like some ideas of reality are completely fantastic or come from some other place."

Also, "One question EsoQuest - have you actually learned anything about yourself when interacting with others, or is it all about getting them to 'do the work'?"

Has Ruth asked herself this question?

 

[ScioAgapeOmnis]

What Rense.com is not talking about

Ok I just want to make a few comments, but I wish to be clear that they're not designed to address Ruth with any hope that she'll take them seriously or really reflect and consider what is being said. I think that continuing interaction with Ruth is fascinating in and of itself, the more she talks, the more analysis can be made of what is going on, and the more learning for all involved. Also, the more Ruth talks, the more data we have to understand where she's coming from, and so it makes it much easier to SEE the same dynamic in ourselves and others in the future, if we're ever to encounter it.

This just gets more and more bizare, almost like some ideas of reality are completely fantastic or come from some other place.

Ok so it is clear that Ruth does not agree with the comments made to her. But more than that, to her, those comments seem like they're coming from an entirely different reality than the one she experiences. It does appear as if Ruth keeps running the same program over and over in a loop, each time she posts. Curiously, she has a habit of going into truisms that really have little or nothing to do with anything that was just said, and seem to only exist there to make an appearance of coherent thinking and true analysis. But it seems very robotic, like she is running a pre-programmed script that involves using a lot of esoteric terminology with no "substance" in it or any context or meaning other than the general meaning of the esoteric concepts she brings up. But more than that, as hkoehli noted, she seems to be utterly unphased by any comments made to her, she just shrugs and goes back to running the program like nothing ever happened.

She seems to make no attempts to reflect, but also does not seem to be angry or upset or embarrased or even really manipulative. If she was manipulative then she wouldn't last very long at all with this group. She does not seem to exhibit too many signs of fighting to keep her programming intact with denial or strong opposition, etc. To some degree yes, but it seems more like a casual "hmm this is weird, I think you're projecting and avoiding facing your own issues" repeat of the same few programs. So yes, fighting and denial definitely exist, but it seems all very devoid of the "oomph" that people usually put into defending their programs, though I'm not too sure about that one.

So I keep getting the impression that she really means no harm, and she really does have good intentions, but it's like she has an "off switch". She seems very reasonable and makes great posts on certain topics, and then on others, almost inexplicably, she makes absolutely no sense, loses logic, sees what is not there, etc. And she's been on this forum for a long time now (considering casschat too), so it makes no sense that after all this time and countless posts on esoteric, spiritual, and Work-related topics, that she's so incapable of even attempting to do the most basic thing in the Work - self-reflection. How can this be?

Calling me a psychopath or an OP or telling me I am this, that, or the next thing (and all of it bad) is just a misplaced expression of fear or projection of problems designed to make a person feel more comfortable.

This statement is an example of what I think is nothing but a program, an auto-response not unlike an answering machine.

Saying that I have nothing to offer and shouldn't be interacted with, is a self defence mechanism designed to shut off any form of communication and potential self analysis.

Again, I get the distinct impression that this is the same program, albeit with some details changed. Again, a pre-scripted response.

In both cases I think the assumption is made that anything negative said about Ruth must be a projection or based on fear etc, and cannot possibly be true.

Like the ostrich stuffing its head in the sand, all the while telling itself that this is the best place for its head to be! Yep, its called entropy. And its good because it can be used time and time again.

Interesting how she keeps projecting though, since she just described herself to a T. I wonder why she keeps projecting? What does projecting signify, if anything? I mean, in general, why does someone project anyway? Where does projection come from and what is its purpose (conscious and/or unconscious)? And is this purpose the same for Ruth as it is for others who project? Is there any indication that it may not be the same?

For example, psychopaths often project. They would attribute to others what they themselves are guilty of. I'm not insinuating that Ruth is a psychopath, again, I'm just using them as an example to help myself understand projection. So my question would be, why do psychopaths project? Projection is assigning your own qualities, thoughts, actions, or intentions to someone else. But why, what is the reason/purpose for this?

But, it seems many are more comfortable in their isolated 'precious' and self important states, than actually interacting with (normal?) people whom they consider to be lesser beings.

Ok this is a general statement but, it seems you're talking about yourself as the "normal people" and certain members of the forum that you think consider you a "lesser being"? Just the impression I got. Anyway, what is "normal"? And I think there ARE "lesser beings" in some sense, it just depends on what you mean by "lesser". If you assign an objective meaning to it then it can be true - like some people may have a lower intellectual capacity than others. Some people may be OP's or psychopaths, and so fundementally different than others. Some people may be simply further along their 3rd density lessons, and so may be closer to fusing magnetic center and thus SEE more than those who are still only beginning (if even that) esoteric work.

So there are many objective ways to interpret "lesser", although I got the impression that you are speaking of a totally subjective meaning with some subjectively negative connotation, as in "worse" or "less worthy" etc. I'd disagree with you, but I just don't see the point to doing that anymore. So I guess I have no choice but to agree and say - yup, we all hate you. Ruth, our hate for you is nothing but a reflection of our own hate for ourselves and our fear to face it, so we all project it onto you. More than that, our inability to realise this is causing all of us to constantly insult you and put you down and make you the target of our hate because you are someone who can see right through us! You caught us Ruth, you win!

But what if I'm actually projecting about projecting, so really it is you Ruth that is projecting, and I'm just projecting my projectionable thoughts onto you. Ruth, you and I could be like 2 mirrors facing each other directly with one flashlight between them, with the beam of light projecting infinitely creating a really neat corridor that you can kinda see if you just sorta move your head a little to the side so your eye is like a little bit to the side of your own face so you can see beyond your head down the infinite corridor of the 2 mirrors. The effect is so awesome I can stare at it for hours on end contemplating just how far that corridor goes, and if somebody is at the other end looking back at me wondering the same thing?

Man, I'm deep. o_O

After this thread, I'm taking up smoking, that's it.