"Thrive" is amazing must watch!

[Namaste]

There is a fine line between indifference and compassion.

Wanting to help someone for the 'better' is part of third density; opening the heart. It's how you balance.

Questioner: I am going to make a statement and ask you to comment on its degree of accuracy. I am assuming that the balanced entity would not be swayed either towards positive or negative emotions by any situation which he might confront. By remaining unemotional in any situation, the balanced entity may clearly discern the appropriate and necessary responses in harmony with the Law of One for each situation. Is this correct?

Ra: I am Ra. This is an incorrect application of the balancing which we have discussed. The exercise of first experiencing feelings and then consciously discovering their antitheses within the being has as its objective not the smooth flow of feelings both positive and negative while remaining unswayed but rather the objective of becoming unswayed. This is a simpler result and takes much practice, shall we say.

The catalyst of experience works in order for the learn/teachings of this density to occur. However, if there is seen in the being a response, even if it is simply observed, the entity is still using the catalyst for learn/teaching. The end result is that the catalyst is no longer needed. Thus this density is no longer needed. This is not indifference or objectivity but a finely tuned compassion and love which sees all things as love. This seeing elicits no response due to catalytic reactions. Thus the entity is now able to become co-Creator of experiential occurrences. This is the truer balance.

To choose indifference (and yet be intolerant to many people and their actions), and to tell one's self it's love/wisdom, is self delusion. One has to engage in these emotions in which to become truly balanced. Identifying with what one would deem 'better' for all is the keystone for service to others. From there one can truly balance, as Ra states above. Avoiding that choice by not wanting to 'label' is an incarnation wasted.

In my opinion, of course :¬)

[zenmaster]

Identifying with what one would deem 'better' for all is the keystone for service to others.

Identifying like Hitler did?

Identification or belief in some idea or way itself does not necessarily have a basis in 'living from the heart'. Most often, it's in the form of an idea attachment which obviously promotes separation. I wonder how you would say such separation is a 'service to others'. As we know, sincerely believing that one is promoting their identifications in a positive manner, one that is 'service to others', may easily be as a road to hell paved with good intentions. Don't you think there's an important distinction between some belief seeming to be 'service to others' and something actually promoting that 'polarity'.

"The peoples of Maldek had a civilization somewhat similar to that of the societal complex known to you as Atlantis in that it gained much technological information and used it without care for the preservation of their sphere following to a majority extent the complex of thought, ideas, and actions which you may associate with your so-called negative polarity or the service to self. This was, however, for the most part, couched in a sincere belief/thought structure which seemed to the perception of the mind/body complexes of this sphere to be positive and of service to others."

[Diana]

There is a fine line between indifference and compassion.

Wanting to help someone for the 'better' is part of third density; opening the heart. It's how you balance.

Namaste, thank you so much for the excellent Ra quote.

[Namaste]

Identifying with what one would deem 'better' for all is the keystone for service to others.

Identifying like Hitler did?

Identification or belief in some idea or way itself does not necessarily have a basis in 'living from the heart'. Most often, it's in the form of an idea attachment which obviously promotes separation. I wonder how you would say such separation is a 'service to others'. As we know, sincerely believing that one is promoting their identifications in a positive manner, one that is 'service to others', may easily be as a road to hell paved with good intentions. Don't you think there's an important distinction between some belief seeming to be 'service to others' and something actually promoting that 'polarity'.

"The peoples of Maldek had a civilization somewhat similar to that of the societal complex known to you as Atlantis in that it gained much technological information and used it without care for the preservation of their sphere following to a majority extent the complex of thought, ideas, and actions which you may associate with your so-called negative polarity or the service to self. This was, however, for the most part, couched in a sincere belief/thought structure which seemed to the perception of the mind/body complexes of this sphere to be positive and of service to others."

Or Ghandi, Jesus, Mother Teresa, Tesla etc.

You seem to forget that third density is not the density of understanding, it's for experience.

Those who are naturally compassionate will offer their help to others, in the way they think is fit. Those who are naturally selfish will do the same, but for the own benefit.

Thats the point of this density.

You're well within your rights to choose to do nothing in a place of indifference. Others are well within their rights to act in ways they think helps others, and do help others. Others are free to act selfishly for their own good. It's all catalyst, it's all experience.

Take away the experience, or action, and this density would lose it's value.

---

There is a fine line between indifference and compassion.

Namaste, thank you so much for the excellent Ra quote.

You're welcome. It's very profound indeed :¬)

[zenmaster]

Identifying with what one would deem 'better' for all is the keystone for service to others.

Identifying like Hitler did?

Identification or belief in some idea or way itself does not necessarily have a basis in 'living from the heart'. Most often, it's in the form of an idea attachment which obviously promotes separation. I wonder how you would say such separation is a 'service to others'. As we know, sincerely believing that one is promoting their identifications in a positive manner, one that is 'service to others', may easily be as a road to hell paved with good intentions. Don't you think there's an important distinction between some belief seeming to be 'service to others' and something actually promoting that 'polarity'.

"The peoples of Maldek had a civilization somewhat similar to that of the societal complex known to you as Atlantis in that it gained much technological information and used it without care for the preservation of their sphere following to a majority extent the complex of thought, ideas, and actions which you may associate with your so-called negative polarity or the service to self. This was, however, for the most part, couched in a sincere belief/thought structure which seemed to the perception of the mind/body complexes of this sphere to be positive and of service to others."

Or Ghandi, Jesus, Mother Teresa, Tesla etc.

You seem to forget that third density is not the density of understanding, it's for experience.

Why do I seem to forget that? The idea of 3D not being a place for understanding is related to identification with some notion of knowing something as it is. Ra repeatedly suggests that one's mind and body be 'understood' in order to arrive at health and balance.

Our patterns of behavior are reinforced, opportunity for harmony and learning is provided by an 'understanding' - cultural, personal, etc. And there are certainly 'misunderstandings' which when eventually understood and accepted, remove 'blockages'.

The zealotry and exaggeration, applied to whatever cause, are often completely accepted as evidence of a 'positive' understanding, when in fact it's an indication of confused imbalance. Such a position is an example of lack of honesty and overextension of actual experience which is, of course, damaging. It should be obvious that conspiracy theories are spawned by compelling ideas of possibility (freedom, health, etc) which have been 'taken away' by some headless group. Social balance starts with individual balance, not with such ungrounded detachments.

Take away the experience, or action, and this density would lose it's value.

---

This density? there would then be no densities to evaluate.

[βαθμιαίος]

The zealotry and exaggeration, applied to whatever cause, are often completely accepted as evidence of a 'positive' understanding, when in fact it's an indication of confused imbalance. Such a position is an example of lack of honesty and overextension of actual experience which is, of course, damaging. It should be obvious that conspiracy theories are spawned by compelling ideas of possibility (freedom, health, etc) which have been 'taken away' by some headless group. Social balance starts with individual balance, not with such ungrounded detachments.

I basically agree with your first, second, and fourth sentences above. However, wouldn't it be fair to say that Ra believes in conspiracies?

11.19 Questioner: Can you name any names that may be known on the planet that are recipients of the crusaders’ efforts?

Ra: I am Ra. I am desirous of being in nonviolation of the free will distortion. To name those involved in the future of your space/time is to infringe; thus, we withhold this information. We request your contemplation of the fruits of the actions of those entities whom you may observe enjoying the distortion towards power. In this way you may discern for yourself this information. We shall not interfere with the, shall we say, planetary game. It is not central to the harvest.

8.11 Questioner: Would this type of craft come close to solving many of the energy problems as far as transport goes?

Ra: I am Ra. The technology your peoples possess at this time is capable of resolving each and every limitation which plagues your social memory complex at this present nexus of experience. However, the concerns of some of your beings with distortions towards what you would call powerful energy cause these solutions to be withheld until the solutions are so needed that those with the distortion can then become further distorted in the direction of power.

I don't think there can be any question that there are many conspiracies designed to increase the power of the few at the expense of the many. That is a basic aspect of service-to-self work at this time. The question is what the most appropriate response to that reality is, and there I agree that meditation, balancing, and working with catalyst are essential and fundamental. For me, Ra's casual acknowledgment that a technological breakthrough is possible (indeed, has already been achieved) increased my awareness of our potential. Focusing on who is denying us that potential is not necessarily helpful, but awareness of the potential may be, especially if it encourages inventors, engineers, scientists, and theorists to push beyond the limits of the current conventional wisdom.

[zenmaster]

However, wouldn't it be fair to say that Ra believes in conspiracies?

Yes.

I don't think there can be any question that there are many conspiracies designed to increase the power of the few at the expense of the many. That is a basic aspect of service-to-self work at this time.

Of course.

The question is what the most appropriate response to that reality is, and there I agree that meditation, balancing, and working with catalyst are essential and fundamental. For me, Ra's casual acknowledgment that a technological breakthrough is possible (indeed, has already been achieved) increased my awareness of our potential. Focusing on who is denying us that potential is not necessarily helpful, but awareness of the potential may be, especially if it encourages inventors, engineers, scientists, and theorists to push beyond the limits of the current conventional wisdom.

My position with respect to conspiracies has never been that they don't exist, or that they somehow should not be investigated. It's when one takes a particular conspiracy idea which is merely seen to be plausible, a possibility, and claim it to be true (historically, currently) and, from such a premise, divisive action to 'correct' the fabricated imbalance is taken - by promoting or acting upon such a fundamental dishonesty.

What is morally wrong is the perception that the ends are seen to justify the means in order to fulfill an agenda. The ends are getting people to 'wake up' to some 'now-exposed' reality 'X' using the utterly dishonest vehicle of a guessed or imagined idea. Which of course is made compelling by free-association with and appeal to internal symbols of mystery, power, and transcendence. The needlessly confused premise can not be excused, because there are always real alternatives coming from and bridging to something from actual, less 'tainted', disciplined experience, substantiated, more accepting, balanced and viable.

[Namaste]

I echo B's thoughts. B, you basically typed out what I was thinking. Cheers ;¬)

[βαθμιαίος]

My position with respect to conspiracies has never been that they don't exist, or that they somehow should not be investigated. It's when one takes a particular conspiracy idea which is merely seen to be plausible, a possibility, and claim it to be true (historically, currently) and, from such a premise, divisive action to 'correct' the fabricated imbalance is taken - by promoting or acting upon such a fundamental dishonesty.

What is morally wrong is the perception that the ends are seen to justify the means in order to fulfill an agenda. The ends are getting people to 'wake up' to some 'now-exposed' reality 'X' using the utterly dishonest vehicle of a guessed or imagined idea. Which of course is made compelling by free-association with and appeal to internal symbols of mystery, power, and transcendence. The needlessly confused premise can not be excused, because there are always real alternatives coming from and bridging to something from actual, less 'tainted', disciplined experience, substantiated, more accepting, balanced and viable.

I don't disagree.

I'm curious -- this particular form of hypocrisy seems to bother you more than others. At least, I've noticed you post about it a number times. You don't need to answer this, of course, but why choose this specific windmill to tilt at, given all the other examples of dishonesty in service of agendas that are out there?

[Tenet Nosce]

My position with respect to conspiracies has never been that they don't exist, or that they somehow should not be investigated.

Somewhere I got the distinct impression that was your position.

It's when one takes a particular conspiracy idea which is merely seen to be plausible, a possibility, and claim it to be true (historically, currently) and, from such a premise, divisive action to 'correct' the fabricated imbalance is taken - by promoting or acting upon such a fundamental dishonesty.

There are two kinds of divisive acts. The first is an action against the other (Let's take out the oppressors!) the other is an action for the self (Let's move in a different direction). I actually didn't see any admonition in this particular movie toward the first kind.

2. Jesus said, "Those who seek should not stop seeking until they find. When they find, they will be disturbed. When they are disturbed, they will marvel, and will reign over all. [And after they have reigned they will rest.]"

What is morally wrong is the perception that the ends are seen to justify the means in order to fulfill an agenda. The ends are getting people to 'wake up' to some 'now-exposed' reality 'X' using the utterly dishonest vehicle of a guessed or imagined idea.

What, exactly, do you suppose is being imagined here in this specific case? Please describe the "guessed or imagined idea" employed in this video.

there are always real alternatives coming from and bridging to something from actual, less 'tainted', disciplined experience, substantiated, more accepting, balanced and viable.

Such as?

[zenmaster]

I'm curious -- this particular form of hypocrisy seems to bother you more than others. At least, I've noticed you post about it a number times. You don't need to answer this, of course, but why choose this specific windmill to tilt at, given all the other examples of dishonesty in service of agendas that are out there?

I don't look at it as 'hypocrisy' per se, but more fundamentally, as a theme of dishonesty which, after a long examination could possibly be the single most contributing cause of social disharmony or imbalance here. And, in every case, entirely preventable by each and every person engaging in that behavior, on their own. There are different forms of the dishonesty, one of the more rampant one's is:

I see that lying and manipulation is possible and have seen examples of such in action

My particular agenda wants to see the idea of X spread. But there also tends to be some frustration, impatience and a generally shortcoming of knowledge of what X is and how it can be beneficial. As I only have a vague apprehension of what X is and how it may be the 'answer'.

I suspect that X can not be spread or is being actively suppressed due to lying and manipulation (which could be the case), or merely lack of common interests.

But the suspicion is then not enough, a fabricated dynamic - a story, a rumor, is then created to paint a picture or 'frame' the separate, actual situation in such a way that my agenda gains more sympathy. This idea is that, through such promotion tactics, people start thinking along the lines of my view of what is and what could be (based on hearsay and tenuous and vague notions), and and corrective action is taken.

That framing tactic alone is morally lacking, and enough to promote confusion, waste of time and energy, and actual solutions from being applied, but it doesn't stop there. The finger is conveniently pointed at some (quite innocent) individual, group, idea, or institution which usually gets the blame whether or not there is sufficient evidence.

If the so-called wanderers are doing this, then how again is that raising the planetary vibrations?

[Tenet Nosce]

But the suspicion is then not enough, a fabricated dynamic - a story, a rumor, is then created to paint a picture or 'frame' the separate, actual situation in such a way that my agenda gains more sympathy.

I'm curious to know if you would consider this following story a "fabricated dynamic". Particularly since you previously recommended for me to read it. Would you consider this all BS? Or?

Also I find it quite curious as this story that is being told here is of a high congruence with what I previously thought to be the case, having already arrived at similar conclusions via various disparate sources before I had even ever read this. I wonder how that could be? What do you think? Just confirmation bias? Or?

http://lucianarchy.proboards.com/index.c...z1AUIn5mvy

Firstly, she had me understand that part of the conspiracy theories were true (how cliche). She said there was a group of people who had power and we not elected who decided a long time ago that a crisis was coming that they could not control (im paraphrasing her words for simplicity). She said that they made plans long ago to build installations underground because there was a percieved threat to them and that they were building "just to be safe".

She said it started out back in the 1860->1862 that the two people who started a group to establish research for ufo's and aliens. She said back then these few men did not have any authority over anything but were a small project started to study the phenomena. She said around the 1900's they gained importance and were granted a budget and became a small department and were in charge of budgets (small time) to organize the "structures" (i have no clue what she meant but thats what she said) to more easily collect information about aliens. She said from here on they grew rapidly and already had a good wealth of information but very little technology. She said in the early 1920's different groups like hers made contact but were rejected and that the different aliens started revealing informations about themselves. She said this made the now established but mildly influencial department/group/affair department VERY paranoid (I have no clue how to put that idea into a word that would fit).

She didn't explain why but she said they became very concerned that they were not going to survive and they began building in excess underground installations. She said they were very paranoid about aliens. She said that some of the groups revealed to them the future and this was why. She said by the time the so called famous 1947 roswell incident happened. They were already well established and had overiding control over the branches of military. She said several things about the controlling group changed and they became desperate to gather technology and make deals to advance both the public and the non-public sciences. She said they for example couldn't land anywhere on the earth without being detected almost immediately and that there was very few places they could arrive without the phasing technology that kept them protected, She said there should be stories about the armed forces intercepting arrivals very quickly (yeah i looked and there was.)

She said that by the 1940's the non-public science was already more advanced in ideas than the public was in the 1960's onward. She said as time passed the Groups like hers and "the others" began to spy on them in the underground sessions they had and kept pace with the knowledge that was being retrieved. She said the only reason she revealed technologies to me was because it was already knowledge that was known on the earth and in the non-public sciences. She said there was nothing to lose by showing me what was already known. She said the cabal (she changes the title at this point.) would meet underground and in the 80's were planning what was known as artificial terror. She said they wanted to play "the game of the gods" (why she called it that I dont know).

She described this "game" as a game that many races including hers and her faction had played with humanity. She said in the old days on earth they would even fight openly (yeah right!) between them and "the others". She said "the others" (greys/pleiadeans/whatever) would implant and manipulate thoughts and start religions and create wars over them to decimate mankind so that they would not evolve beyond a certain point. She said her groups way of thinking was to introduce a counter movement to spread knowledge and stabalize the religions or impart knowledge to dismantle "the others" plans. She said there was a lot of instability with these fights and the people on the earth became very "fractured" from the constant introduction of ideas and counter ideas.

She said eventually "the others" and Thier groups were stopped by a third group of aliens. (she does not describe them in detail or otherwise.) She said the third group did not care for either side but wanted them to stop interfering. She said this group was very powerful and that even if the two sides went against the third group they would not win. She made it sound like they didn't have a hope in hell united, let alone apart. She said they both agreed to an uneasy peace that they would not interfere. She said this stopped the interference to a large part.

"The others" still kept starting movements in very small ways to keep people at war. Then her people's side would go to the third group and the third group would allow interference from their side and they would start a counter movement. She said this slowed down the idealogy war but did not stop it. She said the earth was already very divided in many ideals and fronts but both generally obeyed.

She said the bible was one example of being edited and re-edited (i dont believe her on this but i used to.). She said that around the time she was telling me this the amnesty bewteen both factions was ending. I asked her why amnesty if I thought that was used only for immigrants. She insisted on the word amnesty (I looked it up in the dictionary since i didn't know what it mean't hrug. She said that once the amnesty was lifted that "the others" would immediately go back to trying to control mankind. She said they were worried about what might happen if "The Others" came first to humanity. She said they were pretty sure that they would. They were preparing themselves and alot of them were leaving because she said a war between them was likely to happen.

She said in the future many things would happen. Which I will post in another post rather than this one so I dont break the long a$$ "truth" she left me with.

First, She said "the others" would go back out into space and make an entrance, as if they were not here already. She said this would allow them a clean entrance and blame the rest of the past on aliens from her faction. She said they would probably go and pick the people amoung them who were human-like. She said this is what abductions and grey experimentation was trying to bring about for a long time (thousand of years into the past when a couple of races handed us as a project down or abandoned us.). She said the human-like beings were either slaves who would talk very little or geniune people of hers and others who look like humans who had an agenda to control humanity and stop it's progress.

She said the others were itching to stop our progress because at a certain point we would be acknowledge-able as indpendent beings. She said on her world about 60% of her kind thought of human kind as an experiment to be observed but generally do not care one way or the other. Roughly, 30% constitute "the others" mentality. While she said, the minority consititute her point of view 14%).

She said when "the others" arrived they would do what would look like miracles to mankind (of this she kept talking about) and they expected the people on earth to quickly believe "the others". She said "the others" were likely going to present themselves as being Gods. She said this would lead to human beings accepting them as the leaders. She said that because "the others" would very likely choose human-like front men with their powers intact. The genetic manipulations both factions had commited to, a long time ago, would cause human beings to give in very quickly. She said a long time ago when other races had lost interest in humanity they picked up and modified humanity to be planet squaters (my word interpretation but pretty accurate.).

She said the reason that human beings become very easy to manipulate when they see a pretty person is because they are pre-programmed genetically to have this behavior. She said this was an easy trick back when people were very primitive and they wanted workers and slaves. She said that before those projects were ended that the aliens modified the human beings more to create a very xenophobic response to other aliens. And that human beings were given the cultural push to breed at will. She said this way both factions past founders could prevent other aliens from occupying the earth in the open; nor the human beings from helping them. She said that some of that has degraded over time but it was still a dominant trait. That was the reason some aliens use greys as front men because it is less problamatic and they are humaniod enough to be accepted when they continue the experiments on mankind.

The next interesting bit she said was that "the others" needed contactees for the future. She said some of the grey experiments are about how human beings react to certain situations and that the greys were looking for weaknesses and lessening the possiblity that the human beings they choose will have conflict against them when they bring about their "arrival". She said some of those human beings would be "go-betweens" in the contacts with those who follow "the others". She said "the others" needed a close enough....spokesman...to represent thier interest and that the association with these beings would elevate these human beings to a higher status. She said that is why alot of "the others" choose human beings who will readily accept a title or illusions of granduer and are usually told they are "the one".

She said that both sides could be accused of this since they both engage in a little bit of everything. Hers supposed alot less (yeah right!). She said "the others" would institue a government where there would be three tiers of contactee's; the local, regional, and the special few. She said the locals would be in charge of their smaller communities while the regional would have limited contact with the aliens directly and the special few are supposed to be less than 25 (fuzzy) who would have to represent thier slab of the world. She said "the others" would divide the world up into sections and each "special contactee" would be in charge of it. She said "the special contactees" would also have very high abilities endowed to them (pet slaves anyone?)

She said the first thing "the others" would do is stop progressing technology. She said they would introduce their own technology to produce energy but that it would be off limits to human beings and that they would fix alot of the earths problems as long as they could coerce power from the former leaders of the governments. She said the few skeptical human beings would probably by that time be thinking they are "gods" because they would take the time to display their powers which she said is common knowledge to everyone except human beings who don't see those things.

She goes on to explain to me how miracles (or seemingly miracles) are performed and that this will impress many. This is where she warned me about not listening to "what they say" but "seeing what they do" if I have doubts as to which side they represent. She said any alien could say anything. She said actions though would easily reveal their true intent. She said "the others" would quickly order the executions of millions of people world wide who would not obey them because of religion. She said since these people on earth who would believe them would think they are "doing the right thing" and have the backing of "the Gods" they would turn in their neighbors to be executed. She said that if people knew the future they would not want any part of it. She explained that the reason why "the others" will win over so many is because they will give people what they want and create a new super religion. She said the religion will unite pieces of old religions and that they will lie and say they are the Gods of the old religions and that they will create a new one and even spin lies that they created mankind.

She said people won't notice it but they will be tricked into alot of manipulative situations. And she said if people accept them then there is nothing they can do except watch. Im sure I left out some things.

She said this is why (at the time they were racing to "prepare") to present themselves anyway. She said because her people were the minority that they would not have much of a chance in changing the minds of people but she said they would try. She said at the time that there was a big debate as to whether her faction should come in first or second, because they did not know which would yield the best results. She said when her faction did come that they would show up shortly after the others most likely, and they would present to the world their side of the case. She said they would show mankind what they could of how the miracles were happening and how they came to be and even perform for them to see. That they were not miracles, but common understandings and knowledge shared by both sides.

She said her faction would also reveal information and the truth to people at this time but the general consensus was that the human beings of the future would be unlikely to believe them. I asked her why "the others" would let them make their case? She said because of the third group they would have to allow it or the third group would probably come in quickly and put them in their place or worse. (Squish)

She said that they had a growing fear, that if the people of the earth did side with her faction. That then "the others" in spite, would burn the earth while leaving. She said this was a likely possibility.

[zenmaster]

But the suspicion is then not enough, a fabricated dynamic - a story, a rumor, is then created to paint a picture or 'frame' the separate, actual situation in such a way that my agenda gains more sympathy.

I'm curious to know if you would consider this following story a "fabricated dynamic". Particularly since you previously recommended for me to read it. Would you consider this all BS? Or?

An example of 'negative' influence. BS? To the extent that no backing info was provided. Fore knows this, of course.

[_X7]

Wow.... I'm surprised that the film of this thread is judged on a basis of a deep life-changer for the public. If it was analysed by this standard, then a person "under any film spell" might latch on to TV or upon nearly any whim. I thought of it merely as a potential ice breaker or after burner. To contrast systems as they are with systems purportedly made a little more free.... There are plenty of energy conserving systems ignored and pushed away from markets. Yes the film is too much work for the lazy. There are many repressed systems which could improve life, but instead are unpleasantly destroyed or lazily ignored. Or perhaps real effort is plain shunned. I favor exposures of competing paradigms-of-possibilities which compare alternatives to the currently failing paradigm. In this case it somewhat challenges the failing promises of golden parachutes or false laurels promised for old age. It's just a little heads up, to take a walk around the block. To see what can been seen.

[Tenet Nosce]

But the suspicion is then not enough, a fabricated dynamic - a story, a rumor, is then created to paint a picture or 'frame' the separate, actual situation in such a way that my agenda gains more sympathy.

I'm curious to know if you would consider this following story a "fabricated dynamic". Particularly since you previously recommended for me to read it. Would you consider this all BS? Or?

An example of 'negative' influence. BS? To the extent that no backing info was provided. Fore knows this, of course.

I see. I must have not got to that part but... does Fore explain why this woman would take great pains to deceive him repeatedly over the course of 20-30 years. It just seems a little egocentric for him to think a being of her intelligence level would bother with him to such a degree.

You also didn't respond to the second part of my reply. No comment on how somebody like me might arrive at the same ideas this Pleiadian woman was offering. Perhaps they are abducting me and feeding me these same lies? What would be the purpose in that?

And what about the things that Fore was able to independently verify? Doesn't that give the woman any credibility on the rest? Or shouldn't people speak of anything unless they are carrying physical proof with them to back up their claims?

Maybe there is something later on which will change my perspective... but so far Fore seems to me like your garden-variety ego who thinks they are being "clever" by being dubious and mistrustful of others. Particularly those who are actually looking out for, and caring for him. Interesting psychology there.

I really don't understand what your perspective is on this. It would probably improve communication if you came out with it all at once rather than in bits and pieces. As you well know- offering your view in bits and pieces is going to result in the tendency of others to fill in the blanks with their own projections. That probably isn't a good thing for communication.

---

Wow.... I'm surprised that the film of this thread is judged on a basis of a deep life-changer for the public. If it was analysed by this standard, then a person "under any film spell" might latch on to TV or upon nearly any whim. I thought of it merely as a potential ice breaker or after burner. To contrast systems as they are with systems purportedly made a little more free.... There are plenty of energy conserving systems ignored and pushed away from markets. Yes the film is too much work for the lazy. There are many repressed systems which could improve life, but instead are unpleasantly destroyed or lazily ignored. Or perhaps real effort is plain shunned. I favor exposures of competing paradigms-of-possibilities which compare alternatives to the currently failing paradigm. In this case it somewhat challenges the failing promises of golden parachutes or false laurels promised for old age. It's just a little heads up, to take a walk around the block. To see what can been seen.

Yes, I was surprised as well. I didn't see anybody in this thread claiming that the "Thrive Movement" was going to change the world. Yet some seem to be arguing against it that way.

Interestingly, I have seen zenmaster forward arguments that movies like this are basically ineffectual, then later claims that they are actually harmful to society and slow the process of true spiritual growth. It seems to me like it would be one or the other, but not both.

At any rate... considering how many Americans will spend the most of today watching large men in colored tights chase a pig skin around a large field of grass while surrounded by tens of thousands of screaming idiots... I have a really hard time seeing how movies like "Thrive!" are the REAL problem as far as society goes.

[zenmaster]

But the suspicion is then not enough, a fabricated dynamic - a story, a rumor, is then created to paint a picture or 'frame' the separate, actual situation in such a way that my agenda gains more sympathy.

I'm curious to know if you would consider this following story a "fabricated dynamic". Particularly since you previously recommended for me to read it. Would you consider this all BS? Or?

An example of 'negative' influence. BS? To the extent that no backing info was provided. Fore knows this, of course.

I see. I must have not got to that part but... does Fore explain why this woman would take great pains to deceive him repeatedly over the course of 20-30 years. It just seems a little egocentric for him to think a being of her intelligence level would bother with him to such a degree.

Yes he does, you'd indeed have your answers addressed in his own words. My take on the matter is that it's a complicated situation. I've read the entire thread (you can see my comments therein), we've had IM discussions. '4D' thinking is so far beyond what we are used to that it's not possible to see an actual 'agenda' (as if our 3D notion of 'agenda' is even applicable?) and we are almost always 'wrong' in interpreting motive - hence the disinfo which I keep bringing up at this time. We do not 'strategize' like they do. There is the surface story and there are deeper elements at work. The overall intent, positive or negative however, is influence (as Ra said).

In short, no, I do not consider his narration of his experiences fabricated at all. He does have some 'ability', but not sure to what extent. What he is relating, however is a subjective experience and what he says he's been told is, of course, open to interpretation. And he repeatedly says as much, questioning his own thoughts. I believe he's being fairly objective in telling his story - but hey, as he relates, he's been educated or 'trained', almost like an experiment. How could such a special situation be allowed when it seems like a free-will abridgment?

---

Interestingly, I have seen zenmaster forward arguments that movies like this are basically ineffectual, then later claims that they are actually harmful to society and slow the process of true spiritual growth. It seems to me like it would be one or the other, but not both.

For crying out loud, ineffectual towards the ends which are being claimed. Overall it's entertainment. As I said, the goal is obviously to paint a picture, to stir emotions and anchor transcendent concepts to them. Where they do suggest 'free energy', they have stooped to bringing on outspoken conspiracy people who incorporate a consequentialist (immoral) agenda - that's 'negative'.

As far as I can tell, Greer's organization will promote disinfo if it serves their ends. As you can plainly see, they did a 180 on the alleged, secret, insider-info United Nations UFO meeting attended by basically all nations. First denied by him as BS, then fully embraced (once it was determined to be completely unfalsifiable no doubt). If you followed that particular story a few years ago, you'd see how it evolved in response to probing, in order to create something seemingly plausible. Vallée also saw right through it.

As you may know, Greer believes ET contact has been and is of a positive nature - that's not as in 'looking on the bright side', he doesn't believe negative exists at that level.

[Tenet Nosce]

Yes he does, you'd indeed have your answers addressed in his own words.

Well, so far it is kind of a needle in a haystack. It has taken me several hours to get through three pages. And I am an exceedingly fast reader. Can you tell me where, specifically, he addresses this?

'4D' thinking is so far beyond what we are used to that it's not possible to see an actual 'agenda' (as if our 3D notion of 'agenda' is even applicable?) and we are almost always 'wrong' in interpreting motive - hence the disinfo which I keep bringing up at this time. We do not 'strategize' like they do. There is the surface story and there are deeper elements at work. The overall intent, positive or negative however, is influence (as Ra said).

Well, certainly! There are conspiracies nested within conspiracies nested within conspiracies. I assume at the "highest" level of it all, it turns out that the negative entities were being put to good use all along. Hence the rapid switch from negative to positive in early 6D.

But getting back to Thrive... basically it says that the governments of the world answer to transnational corporations, who answer to energy companies, who answer to central banks. I don't see what is so dubious about these claims.

As for the "why" or the motive... it doesn't really suggest anything one way or another. According to my understanding, the motive is based on the idea that if humanity had free energy, we would continue to breed out of control and destroy the planet. Also, governments are scared (perhaps rightly so) that some whack-job with a tabletop free energy device would use it for destructive purposes.

As for "why" the Logos and Crew "allow" the suppression of technology by the negative elite, it is precisely because their fears are correct. At least until humanity reaches a certain level of spiritual awareness. It would appear we are nearly approaching- or even have now crossed- that threshold.

How could such a special situation be allowed when it seems like a free-will abridgment?

Sounds like typical Wanderer stuff to me. I've got a whole book of similar stories here called The Three Waves of Volunteers and the New Earth by Dolores Cannon. It is chock-full of similar stories acquired through hypnosis... especially about how physical life is viewed from the "other side".

There are many pieces in that book that also corroborate what this Pleiadian woman was relating to Fore. Not just Pleiadians though... all manner of different types of beings are basically telling the same story.

If they are all wrong, and trying to trick us, I mean WOW that has got to be the biggest conspiracy of all eternity. The whole galaxy is in on it!

[zenmaster]

At any rate... considering how many Americans will spend the most of today watching large men in colored tights chase a pig skin around a large field of grass while surrounded by tens of thousands of screaming idiots... I have a really hard time seeing how movies like "Thrive!" are the REAL problem as far as society goes.

Yeah, sports fans being entertained vs somewhat polarized, or 'poised-to-be awakened' 'seekers' being given a prejudicial map filled with conspiracy lies and pre-rational, magical thinking.

---

Yes he does, you'd indeed have your answers addressed in his own words.

Well, so far it is kind of a needle in a haystack. It has taken me several hours to get through three pages. And I am an exceedingly fast reader. Can you tell me where, specifically, he addresses this?

Just take the time to read the thread. He talks about a past relationship, and pre-incarnative decisions.

But getting back to Thrive... basically it says that the governments of the world answer to transnational corporations, who answer to energy companies, who answer to central banks. I don't see what is so dubious about these claims.

That's pointing out the obvious, no one would disagree. Who said anything about dubious?

As for the "why" or the motive... it doesn't really suggest anything one way or another. According to my understanding, the motive is based on the idea that if humanity had free energy, we would continue to breed out of control and destroy the planet. Also, governments are scared (perhaps rightly so) that some whack-job with a tabletop free energy device would use it for destructive purposes.

If humanity had free energy, there would be an excess heat problem on a scale beyond imagination. Our devices and machines, which use electricity, are not superconductors. There would be a huge security problem, since most of the limiting factors for weapons delivery have to do with cost and engineering of the power source. And of course, the possible weapons themselves. It may just be a 'good idea' that such tech is withheld at this time when we could die rather quickly as a direct consequence of its dissemination.

As for "why" the Logos and Crew "allow" the suppression of technology by the negative elite, it is precisely because their fears are correct. At least until humanity reaches a certain level of spiritual awareness. It would appear we are nearly approaching- or even have now crossed- that threshold.

We haven't.

How could such a special situation be allowed when it seems like a free-will abridgment?

Sounds like typical Wanderer stuff to me. I've got a whole book of similar stories here called The Three Waves of Volunteers and the New Earth by Dolores Cannon. It is chock-full of similar stories acquired through hypnosis... especially about how physical life is viewed from the "other side".

There are many pieces in that book that also corroborate what this Pleiadian woman was relating to Fore. Not just Pleiadians though... all manner of different types of beings are basically telling the same story.

If they are all wrong, and trying to trick us, I mean WOW that has got to be the biggest conspiracy of all eternity. The whole galaxy is in on it!

Yes, it's typical wanderer stuff. There are many 'contactees'. However, certainly not many with quite that level of detail and involvement.

[Tenet Nosce]

For crying out loud, ineffectual towards the ends which are being claimed.

What ends are being claimed? And by whom? Maybe I missed it, but I didn't see anybody claiming this movie was going to "save the world".

Where they do suggest 'free energy', they have stooped to bringing on outspoken conspiracy people who incorporate a consequentialist (immoral) agenda - that's 'negative'.

Oh you mean, like Icke and Greer?

What about Duane Elgin, Nassim Haramein, Jack Kasher, Daniel Sheehan, Adam Trombly, Brian O'Leary, Vandana Shiva, John Gatto, John Robbins, Deepak Chopra, Catherine Austin Fitts, G. Edward Griffin, Bill Still, John Perkins, Paul Hawken, Aqeela Sherrills, Evon Peter, Angel Kyodo Williams, Elisabet Sahtouris, Amy Goodman, and Barbara Marx Hubbard?

Would you say all of these individuals incorporate a negative consequentialist agenda?

As far as I can tell, Greer's organization will promote disinfo if it serves their ends. As you can plainly see, they did a 180 on the alleged, secret, insider-info United Nations UFO meeting attended by basically all nations. First denied by him as BS, then fully embraced (once it was determined to be completely unfalsifiable no doubt). If you followed that particular story a few years ago, you'd see how it evolved in response to probing, in order to create something seemingly plausible. Vallée also saw right through it.

Actually, I don't follow Greer, or find him all that credible. He lost me several years ago. Last time I really checked into the ET scene was the 27 Sep 10 press conference where:

Six former U.S. Air Force officers and one former enlisted man will break their silence about these events [shutdown of nuclear weapons by ETs] at the National Press Club and urge the government to publicly confirm their reality.

That was all I really needed to know on the subject. Of course, this didn't get much attention in the media. They didn't deem this as important as sports scores and celebrity gossip.

As you may know, Greer believes ET contact has been and is of a positive nature - that's not as in 'looking on the bright side', he doesn't believe negative exists at that level.

According to DC (whose view I most align with at this moment) there are all manner of various ET factions with different takes on the matter. They all think they are doing the "right thing". Some of them just have less regard for the free will of humans.

This is because we have detonated nuclear weapons, and some are planning to do it again. Otherwise, they would leave us be to mind our own business. So it is actually HUMANITY that has infringed on the free will of other civilizations by our ignorant use of nuclear weaponry. These are the ones who act toward humans in what we would perceive as "negative" ways.

The vast majority of ETs present have responded to "The Call". Except upon arrival, they found that the earth had been quarantined by even "higher" entities who ascribe to a philosophy of strict noninterference. I can only assume Ra is part of this group.

Faced with this situation, many of the ETs decided to incarnate physically, in order to make changes from the inside without further eroding free will on the planet. These are what Ra refers to as Wanderers.

So what we have is actually a panoply of ET entities at every imaginable level of development. So yes, there are the "4D positive" who are attempting to recruit humans into their "spiritual war".

The fourth density is the only density besides your own which, lacking the wisdom to refrain from battle, sees the necessity of the battle.

But the whole point... the point behind the point... is for people to choose. There is nothing "wrong" with making a choice one way or another. The problem is that here on earth we have acquired so much spiritual entropy that very few are choosing at all. Whether positive, negative, neutral, or otherwise.

Based on this, I don't agree with your argument that videos like Thrive are "negative" because they are "divisive". That is the point. To get people to choose which reality they want to be a part of.

I'm not a Bible thumper... but in light of the greater context of events offered here, I think this enigmatic quote from Jesus makes a lot of sense:

Think not that I am come to send peace on earth. I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to `set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law.' And `a man's foes shall be they of his own household.'

A similar view is offered in the Gnostic Gospel of Thomas:

Jesus said, "Perhaps people think that I have come to cast peace upon the world. They do not know that I have come to cast conflicts upon the earth: fire, sword, war.

For there will be five in a house: there'll be three against two and two against three, father against son and son against father, and they will stand alone."

[Diana]

I disliked the movie "The Secret," and felt that the messages were too sensationalized and simplistic; and could have caused harm to undiscerning people who came away from it thinking that they could just wish for something and it would fall from heaven. But on the other hand, it did put out into the mainstream the concept that there was more to life than being a victim.

In the case of Thrive, however one might disagree with the way it was put together--melodramatic music to engage the emotions for example, which may be thought of as manipulative--it still served to give a vision of a gentler, more productive, and equal way to live (not to say that it was the pinnacle of anything). And I agree with TN that the main points of the controlling elite, corporations and the rest of the hierarchy, are arguably valid.

[Tenet Nosce]

Yeah, sports fans being entertained vs somewhat polarized, or 'poised-to-be awakened' 'seekers' being given a prejudicial map filled with conspiracy lies and pre-rational, magical thinking.

Yes, like how organized sports reinforce the notion that humans are inherently violent and competitive. Remember about how the false Yahweh genetically manipulated humans so as to become more bellicose?? It supports expression of that.

Also how it reinforces the paradigm that there is really nothing more to our existence here... so let's just whoop it up, drink tons of beer, and slap our bellies together when "our team" beats "their team", and pound even more beers if we lose! Yup... that is what life is all about... "winning". Who cares if a few little boys get raped in the process? Bottom line is... if "my team" wins, that makes me a "winner", too.

How is that for pre-rational, magical thinking?

But whatever you do, don't watch that Thrive video! It might corrupt your mind and cause you to subscribe to a false paradigm of reality.

That's pointing out the obvious, no one would disagree. Who said anything about dubious?

Well... the movie doesn't take the "conspiracy" talk any further than the pyramid ponzi scheme operating behind the scenes. Would it have been better to put an upside down pyramid at the top- inhabited by all the orders of highly evolved beings, with the Logos at the highest level transforming even the most heinous of acts into a positive? Maybe so...

But you seem to be saying that this movie makes unfounded claims with respect to the controlling elite of the world. You do realize, of course, that the majority of Americans still think the "government" is in charge, right?

But besides this, the answer to "Who said anything about dubious?" is you.

'seekers' being given a prejudicial map filled with conspiracy lies

du·bi·ous/ˈd(y)o͞obēəs/
Adjective:

Hesitating or doubting.
Not to be relied upon; suspect.

Synonyms:
doubtful - uncertain - questionable - shady - equivocal

So what, exactly, are the "conspiracy lies" in this movie? I'm not sure how many times I will need to ask this question before you respond to it. But it isn't going to go away. I will keep asking this question as many times as you ignore it.

If humanity had free energy, there would be an excess heat problem on a scale beyond imagination. Our devices and machines, which use electricity, are not superconductors. There would be a huge security problem, since most of the limiting factors for weapons delivery have to do with cost and engineering of the power source. And of course, the possible weapons themselves.

Actually, we have already taken some steps to address this. For example, there is already technology in development that would allow for small devices to scavenge electromagnetic energy from the air, and even the human body.

Student Innovation Transmits Data and Power Wirelessly Through Submarine Hulls
Novel Artificial Material Could Facilitate Wireless Power
First Self-Powered Device With Wireless Data Transmission
Human Gait Could Soon Power Portable Electronics
Electricity from the Nose: Engineers Make Power from Human Respiration

As for storage and even distribution of the energy... we have made substantial progress on that as well.

Nanoparticle Electrode for Batteries Could Make Grid-Scale Power Storage Feasible

ScienceDaily (Nov. 23, 2011) — Stanford researchers have used nanoparticles of a copper compound to develop a high-power battery electrode that is so inexpensive to make, so efficient and so durable that it could be used to build batteries big enough for economical large-scale energy storage on the electrical grid -- something researchers have sought for years.

It may just be a 'good idea' that such tech is withheld at this time when we could die rather quickly as a direct consequence of its dissemination.

Maybe it would be for the best if we just ended the experiment? I don't believe this... but there are those groups out there who do.

We haven't.

OK. Then, how long shall we wait? It seems to me that, left to their own devices, humans would spend most of their time slaving away for transnational corporations during the week in order to buy trinkets and fancy gadgets, and would be content to spend their weekends drinking beer and watching "the game" on their flatscreen, which they worked a whole month (or more) to be able to afford to purchase with the little green papers that pass for "money" which are left over after the government takes their "fair share".

Meanwhile, 3.5 billion people live on less than $2.50 a day, and 1 billion of those could quite possibly starve before the end of the year.

Meanwhile, a small, but powerful, group of individuals proceeds with their depopulation agendas, and seeking to herd humanity into accepting a system of complete control by a world government with these selfsame individuals at the helm. This is not "conspiracy theory". There are members of the CFR, IMF, BIS, and others who are on public record promoting these agendas.

How long shall the rest of the galaxy wait for humanity to pull their heads out of their rears? Forever? According to my understanding, there are hundreds of other civilizations out there that would like to get on with their lives, but instead are caught up in events here on earth due to humanity's exceedingly persistent state of ignorance.

For that matter, what about the rest of us who no longer wish to live in this backwater state of affairs? What about our free will? We are humans, too. Shall we be held in perpetual bondage to those caught in the "sinkhole of indifference"?

But probably the most relevant question is: What do you suppose will actually result in a positive outcome here? If you take such great issue with these "tactics", what would you propose as an alternative? How can humanity get to that place where it is safe to release free energy technology?

Yes, it's typical wanderer stuff. There are many 'contactees'. However, certainly not many with quite that level of detail and involvement.

Right. And look what happened with Fore. He even talks about his preincarnative experience where his guardian/teacher/whateveryoucallit thought his life plan was a poor idea. And now here he is... ironically still being mistrustful of those who would watch over his experience here on earth when it didn't turn out so well... as these wiser and more intelligent beings suggested. Yet still... he styles himself as the "clever" one who saw through all their lies and deceit using the power of his skeptical mind. Nevermind that he admits these other beings are both wiser and more intelligent than he... they've got it all wrong.

Actually, the more I read of this the more I start to suspect that he is using skepticism as a literary technique, in order to preserve plausible deniability.

[_X7]

Gosh zenmaster, you're opening big cans of worms and over fishing miniature ponds, but all over the place... Yet you are offering much lively energy, perhaps enough enjoyment for folks to actually discuss "free energy".

Apparently you assume that many inventors want to energize heat machines with free energy . Yes indeed, that would be a ridiculous outcome, to over heat the planet. However, you miss the goal of many inventors and theorists who rather envision a heat-free energy-system, much akin to the evolution of the light bulb.

You also overlook many heat conserving inventions which are smashed or hidden way. A couple examples here are Mr. Mentor's hydraulic drive car and more readily proven by home builders is the "self heating house". Which actually has multiple terms and multiple interesting implimentations. A self heating house is in fact free energy derived by annualizing heat levels. A degree of global heating is absolutely reduced by each such house, instead of using oil sucked through gun barrels or worse.

[Tenet Nosce]

I disliked the movie "The Secret," and felt that the messages were too sensationalized and simplistic; and could have caused harm to undiscerning people who came away from it thinking that they could just wish for something and it would fall from heaven. But on the other hand, it did put out into the mainstream the concept that there was more to life than being a victim.

Exactly. It is a step in the right direction, but not the "end-all-be-all" truth.

In the case of Thrive, however one might disagree with the way it was put together--melodramatic music to engage the emotions for example, which may be thought of as manipulative--it still served to give a vision of a gentler, more productive, and equal way to live (not to say that it was the pinnacle of anything).

Exactly. It is a step in the right direction, but not the "end-all-be-all" truth.

And I agree with TN that the main points of the controlling elite, corporations and the rest of the hierarchy, are arguably valid.

I don't think it is too arguable... well at least beyond the point where certain people like to argue for argument's sake. Or to those who are stuck in a 50's mentality where we the people are supposed to blindly trust the government, and societal institutions.

I actually didn't notice anything in this video which was a mischaracterization of the elite agenda. I thought it rather mild. Just enough to get people thinking, and well-buffered by his wife- who I can only assume was previously the type who "didn't believe in conspiracies".

[zenmaster]

Apparently you assume that many inventors want to energize heat machines with free energy . Yes indeed, that would be a ridiculous outcome, to over heat the planet. However, you miss the goal of many inventors and theorists who rather envision a heat-free energy-system, much akin to the evolution of the light bulb.

Regardless of what the futurists speculate about, there is no solution. (There is no problem either yet). The (very real) potential problem is (intelligently) discussed at 48m30s into this older show: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vghjGwvmrqE&t=48m30s

[Tenet Nosce]

Yes he does, you'd indeed have your answers addressed in his own words.

Sorry, I got through about 5 pages. I'm not going to sift through another 193 in order to find the point.

As for a sound logical reason for Fore to believe that this ET woman would sit there and feed him elaborate lies for however many years, I don't see the purpose. STS doesn't operate that way- there is nothing to be gained. At this point, I think Fore is being more than a bit absurd with his droning on about how skeptical he is of this woman.

If you ask me, the two of them together seem like a perfect match. I can see why she was assigned to him, and why neither of them likes it. Sounds like they both need to get over themselves to me.

I've read the entire thread (you can see my comments therein), we've had IM discussions.

Are you also "zenmaster" in this thread? Otherwise I would have no idea which person was you, even if I did decide to scroll through all 198 pages.

How could such a special situation be allowed when it seems like a free-will abridgment?

Why do you say that it seems like a free-will abridgement?

[zenmaster]

How could such a special situation be allowed when it seems like a free-will abridgment?

Why do you say that it seems like a free-will abridgement?

It appears that much of his learning was not self-determined, or seeded from this 'experiential nexus'. For example, the 'advisor' would change things in his mind, as he slept, apparently. The stories, the training. But then again, as Ra said, they commonly 'get away' with programming people for their use, so there would seem to be some kind of mutual exchange involved. He may very well be part of the 'new breed' and therefore have different balancing concerns.

[_X7]

Apparently you assume that many inventors want to energize heat machines with free energy . Yes indeed, that would be a ridiculous outcome, to over heat the planet. However, you miss the goal of many inventors and theorists who rather envision a heat-free energy-system, much akin to the evolution of the light bulb.

Regardless of what the futurists speculate about, there is no solution. (There is no problem either yet). The (very real) potential problem is (intelligently) discussed at 48m30s into this older show: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vghjGwvmrqE&t=48m30s

Thanks there. It is easier to make nothing out of something, rather than something out of nothing.

Your link asserts: "Energy always degrades into heat". Not necessarily as cumulative heat!!! Radiant cooling of the earth occurs with clear skies, where infra red rays remove heat from the earth's surface. Tesla's example of weather control, managed by the hands of truly loving souls, could ameliorate weather systems and heat imbalances of the globe.

Most important is to energize harmonious outcomes which serve the greatest good....

A Youtube without video can serve as an excellent bandwidth saver and helpful convenience besides. Our "free energy" from deeper discussion should not be discounted either ^__^

[Tenet Nosce]

How could such a special situation be allowed when it seems like a free-will abridgment?

Why do you say that it seems like a free-will abridgement?

It appears that much of his learning was not self-determined, or seeded from this 'experiential nexus'. For example, the 'advisor' would change things in his mind, as he slept, apparently. The stories, the training. But then again, as Ra said, they commonly 'get away' with programming people for their use, so there would seem to be some kind of mutual exchange involved. He may very well be part of the 'new breed' and therefore have different balancing concerns.

Interesting. I know I used to rail against the idea of "soul contracts" especially with respect to contact/abduction scenarios. I figured it was just some BS used to get people to accept this sort of thing. But my views have been changing on that. Much due to the book by Dolores Cannon I referenced above.

Well I guess it probably won't be of much further use to talk about Fore's experiences without his own personal input! But just based on what he shared about his pre-incarnative experiences as well as how differently things look to one when they are not limited by this clunky 3D mind we have- I wonder if he didn't in fact agree to all of this beforehand.

I could see myself in a similar pre-incarnative scenario being a bit overconfident in what I thought I could handle. Like taking an attitude that says "Bring it on!" not fully realizing how dense physicality on earth can be. Then getting here and going- "Oh crap. I don't remember signing up for this!"

[Diana]

I could see myself in a similar pre-incarnative scenario being a bit overconfident in what I thought I could handle. Like taking an attitude that says "Bring it on!" not fully realizing how dense physicality on earth can be. Then getting here and going- "Oh crap. I don't remember signing up for this!"

I can identify with that!

[Ali Quadir]

Bumped because it's such an awesome documentary...
The old Url doesn't work anymore, here's a new one..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lEV5AFFcZ-s