Perceval said:silos said:Psalehesost said:It sounds like the idea is that it happened naturally, but the "advisors" took credit for it and issued threats.
Thanks, Psalehesost. If you have more thoughts about it, please share.
Q: (L) You mean they had plans to be more aggressive and “in-their-faces”, and they... (Perceval) Why would the disappearance of the plane make them scared or make them back down? Was it "comedown", was that what was said? Like a retreat. So, basically the PTB backed down on Crimea and Russia and that whole situation because the plane disappeared and they were worried about...? (Pierre) So, if you lie too much, if you create too much chaos, like unjustified war, you might increase such a bleedthrough?
A: They have "advisors" and "interpretors" of such things.
So, if you might increase such a bleedthrough with an ongoing lying and manipulation, something else could "fall in" in such a bleedthrough and that could be a bigger problem in sense of resolving such a problem for media for an average Joe?
The way we were thinking about it was that the "bleedthrough" was a natural result of the flagrant infringing of free will that the US was perhaps planning in response to Russian actions in Crimea. That perhaps there is some mechanism where if the overt PTB push their psychopathic agenda too far that it destabilizes our reality and leads to such bleedthroughs. The overt ptb have "advisors' that are aware of a 'higher power' to some extent and what they can do and are afraid of it. The plane event was interpreted by the advisors as being a signal that their plans were too aggressive and that they better back off or they could lose control of things. It's not that they knew exactly what it meant or if it was done on purpose, but that as a general rule, when something like that happens, its a good idea to err on the side of caution.
Approaching Infinity said:Corvinus said:Also makes me wonder: if Putin is simply the best on the market, is it even possible for someone better to be in a similar set of circumstances (i.e., some kind of world leader)? Or is he also the best option possible, given the current state of the world and possible conditions hindering another Caesar getting things done?
If assuming there is even someone better and would not we already know about him?
Hard to say. Dag Hammarkjold, whom I consider to be one of the the finest statesmen (and human beings) ever, was a relative 'nobody' until he was picked for SG of the UN. The major powers thought they were choosing a pushover bureaucrat, but he surprised everybody by becoming a force to be reckoned with, remarkably intelligent, politically savvy, and morally rock solid. Of course, that was in the '50s, and times have changed. (Needless to say, DH died in a 'mysterious plane accident'.)
Laura said:A: He's not perfect but he's the best your planet has in such a position at this time.
Things are unfolding as they should; you are all doing well and soon others will join your reality.
Laura said:It is often surprising - and interesting - to see the various elements of a session that a given individual focuses on and/or gets tied up in knots about. It seems to me that most of this session was pretty straightforward for those who have the context, i.e. if you have read The Wave, watched the videos we made last Fall, and keep up with the Forum.
I know that the forum is big and active, but you can figure out easily what is most concerning to members by clicking the "view most recent posts" option and observing what threads are on the top over a period of days and thus have an idea of what to scan. And if you spend 15 minutes to half an hour scanning the active topics daily, you stay abreast of what is going on. Over the past weeks, the discussions about Ukraine and the Malaysian flight have been VERY active. Topics about Caesar have been very active, and our history database project has been on the "recent posts" page practically every day. Diet and smoking issues are always popular. And finally, if you read SOTT every day - even if just scanning the headlines and only opening a few articles - you'll be much better oriented for comprehending the sessions.
I notice a few Noobs in this thread who have asked some questions indicating a lack of orientation as described above so perhaps some of you who have been following developments along several lines and who are more familiar with past sessions can provide synopsized guidance.
Shijing said:Thanks for the session, everyone. I'm glad that you asked about Putin, and it's encouraging to see the response that was given about him. Lots of interesting stuff :)
A: You are tired, but tricky. Things are unfolding as they should; you are all doing well and soon others will join your reality. Goodbye.
Laura said:Session Date: March 22nd 2014
Laura, Ark, Pierre, Perceval, Andromeda, PoB, Kniall, Chu, Data, Alana, Timotheos, Mr. Scott
Q: (L) Oh, this should be the equinox, shouldn't it? March 21st, 22nd? (Andromeda) Wasn't it yesterday? (L) Yeah. So this is Saturday, March 22nd, 2014. It's been grey and windy and rainy outside, and we've got a fire going on in here. Alright... Hello.
A: Everyone looks so healthy! Oh my goodness! The attacks are not working on you! How do they expect to harm those who do not obey their rules?
Q: (L) Who do we have with us this evening?
A: Komessias
Q: (L) And where do you transmit through or from?
A: Cassiopaea
Q: (L) So, what does the point of this little introduction about health, other than what was just said... Did they say harm? So, there are directed attacks going on against us at the present time like with some kind of EM or electronic devices or something that's supposed to harm our health?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) Is that what's getting a little play in the swelling in my leg?
A: Yes. But you stopped it "cold".
Q: (L) Ha ha ha! [laughter because Laura was induced to start a program of saunas followed by ice-cold hip baths] Alright then. So I guess that we can pretty well answer the question in advance that other little glitches that people are having all over are part of the same thing. It just manifests in each person according to their particular vulnerability?
A: Yes.