Tom Cox AKA "Montalk"

[Ryan]

Cassies

You see, Ryan, I don't really care about the sites that disrespect "the information from the spirit". I also like getting a second opinion to validate the sources I use. The critics and "anti"-people are a useful bunch, if they are intelligent.

Only they are not "criticizing" the information, they are conducting wholesale character assassination based on LIES. Oh, and they're not particularly intelligent, either. It's not hard to make stuff up, but it is considerably harder to impartially and critically analyze a body of work.

So sites that defame Cassiopaea are ok for me at least. I can visit them, find out their point of view and not visit ever again.

At least as long as I am not under the fire, I do not approve of not sharing all of the transcripts in original form. Yet I do respect the effort put into this work and the personal decisions of who are associated with it.

How comforting for you that you are not the one under fire. This makes your approval worth... what?... exactly?

If you really do respect the efforts that Laura and Ark have made to provide all this research and writing for FREE, then you shouldn't have any problem with them keeping certain personal conversations out of it (especially when said conversations are twisted and used to attack them). Because regardless of the nature of the C's, what takes place with them is essentially that - a personal (if unorthodox) conversation. Laura and Ark are under no more obligation to share such conversations any more than you are obliged to post discussions you had with your family over the dinner table.

Do you see what I mean?

 

[Freedom]

Cassies

You said it there buddy, it's NOT you that will be under the fire. Really easy for you to make judgements that way...

How comforting for you that you are not the one under fire. This makes your approval worth... what?... exactly?
...
Do you see what I mean?

Yes, I see what you mean. And you are right.

 

[Ryan]

Cassies

Yes, I see what you mean. And you are right.

That being said, remember that "The Future is Open". You never know what might turn up on the SOTT page. :)

 

[Freedom]

Cassies

Expressing my intent was the most I could do.

 

[ark]

Cassies

It may also be useful to ponder on the following quote:

"Such is the nature of man,
that for your first gift - he prostrates himself;
for your second - kisses your hand;
for the third - fawns;
for the fourth - just nods his head once;
for the fifth - becomes too familiar;
for the sixth - insults you; and
for the seventh - sues you because be was not given enough.".

G.I.Gurdjieff, «Life is real only then, when ‘I am’»

 

[pstott]

Cassies

I hope that one of these days Laura will be able to publish the C's later material. It gives me one more thing to look forward to.

Phil

 

[Joe]

Cassies

Anything in later material that was relevant would have been shared. All of the answers lie in the published transcripts. At some stage, children have to stop being spoon-fed and learn to fend for themselves, otherwise they will never learn the responsibilities of being an adult.

Joe

 

[Nathan]

Cassies

The way I see it, the published Cassiopaean transcripts are the beginner's classroom. You start in the classroom to learn a myriad of "essentials" (e.g. basic discernment). Then you venture out into the playground and put your knowledge to practical use. Of course, you could continue in the classroom and just read about what happens in the playground. Or, you could "see" it for yourself. After all, you can learn a lot more in the playground from your own experience -- and if you're anything like me, your own mistakes too! :)

 

[henry]

Cassies

Nathan, I would say that no one should begin with the transcripts.

If you are interested in the transcripts, then read The Wave and see them in context. The transcripts are problematic in many ways because people try to make them into general statements that are applicable to everyone in every context whereas this work is about understanding that there is right and wrong and the context that determines which is which. The answers to questions in the transcripts are given in a specific time and place to specific people. They must be understood in that context. That is where The Wave comes in.

Also, the transcripts tend to attract people who are interested in weird stuff more than working on themselves. They read into them what they want to believe and then use them to justify really crazy ideas and behaviour. They will sometimes even pretend to understand them better than Laura and Ark by taking points out of context and twisting the meanings in ways that reflect the subjectivity of the twister more than the meaning of the written words.

The transcripts also discuss many topics that can not be verified in any way, things that happened long ago for which there are no accurate accounts. It is fascinating, to be sure, but all of this material must be treated as speculation, not truth.

The basic ideas of the work can be had from In Search of the Miraculous and Mouravieff's Gnosis. After understanding those, then one might go back and read the transcripts and see how the Cs were saying the same things.

 

[Mikey]

Cassies

Have you read Adventures with Cassiopaea, Nathan? Quoting from there:

Over the next six years, the Cassiopaeans gave clue after clue about many things, including Frank himself, that were delivered to us based on a secret signal system that was unknown to Frank, and is only now being revealed. And this, of course, leads to another reason why we did not choose to publish all the transcripts at once, unedited, and without commentary. Without this background, without the information about the code and the questions that were asked "in code" and answered "in code," there is no way that the casual reader can fully realize the truly amazing nature of the transmissions.

 

[Nathan]

Cassies

Ah yes, the Wave and the Adventure series are what I should have been referring to as part of "the classroom", not the transcripts by themselves.

Having read in the Baked Noodles section some of the connections people make between the transcripts and their own theories, it's not too hard to see what you mean, Henry, by people who use the transcripts to justify their ideas and behaviour. Rather than letting go of their beliefs, it appears they are instead absorbing select portions of the material into their beliefs.

 

[Bernhard]

Cassies

The basic ideas of the work can be had from In Search of the Miraculous and Mouravieff's Gnosis. After understanding those, then one might go back and read the transcripts and see how the Cs were saying the same things.

That is very true. I read "In Search of the Miraculous" and I'm in the middle of Moruravieff's Gnosis' trilogy. It makes me see the C's transmissions in a whole new light.

 

[thorbiorn]

Cassies

But, after "all that mess," we understood that it is better to convey the understanding/information via the persepctive of the Signs Page since that is the context of much of it. The parts of it that relate to our quest for higher understanding are also conveyed in articles and commentary. Now and then, if an issue comes up in our groups or in the forum that might be elucidated by some of this material in a more direct way, we might quote it. But again, after "all that mess," we learned that as long as psychopaths seek to steal and co-opt and twist, we have the right to preserve, protect and maintain.

This is understandable, though would it be acceptable to leave a note for example here, if a more recent quote or parallel material is used in some thread.

The following is an example:

Laura quoted the Cassiopaean transcripts on page one in the section of < Ultra-terrestrial activity > in the thread < The Return of the Puppet Masters >:
23 October 2004

Q: (H) When you referred to the manipulations with S****, what kind of manipulations were you referring to: internal or external?

A: Both but mostly external as in not directly perceivable in the environment.

Q: (L) Does that mean that if someone believes an illusion, that it leaves a hole in their defences?

A: More or less.

Q: (H) What is the major problem facing the group at the moment?

A: Stalling frequency waves.

Q: What can we do to help?

A: Requires will and knowledge. You share, they find will if it is there to find.

Q: (A) What kind of knowledge do we need to share?

A: That their lack of ability to see and do is due to deliberate stalling.

Q: (H) Can you elaborate?

A: They are in a frequency fence being stored for later food.

Q: (A) Are we also in a fence? Or is there a difference?

A: Quite.

Q: We are quite different?

A: Yes.

Q: What makes us different?

A: Seeing and doing.

Q: (L) Well, if we have a network, different people are doing different things. They are at different levels. Shouldn't we consider it in this light?

A: You were in as bad condition before leaving the USA, remember?

Q: (H) Can they overcome the stalling?

A: If they wish.

Requoting may be a bit much in general, but leaving a link would be alright???

 

[ark]

Cassies

Requoting may be a bit much in general, but leaving a link would be alright???

Leaving a link to WHAT?

 

[thorbiorn]

Cassies

Leaving a link to WHAT?

'WHAT' could be a link to the exact forum thread, so one lands on the right page, in case there are many pages in the thread. With this clarification, would the option be acceptable?