TGU session 10-30-01 (2)

[continued from yesterday’s post]

R: Okay, and so on the question of the number of amoebae. Can we think about numbers of amoebas?

F: [laughs] 100.3.

R: I don’t want to know how many [they laugh] But is there some limit to the number of amoebas?

F: Well, we don’t really have any idea. It’s not something we’ve observed. It isn’t like new beings are created absolutely. Lives are created in the physical and go out again, but that’s not the same as creating a life from our point of view. However, that doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen. We don’t know. We’ll look around.

R: You don’t think a couple of amoebas get together and create a third?

F: [chuckles] You may be really disappointed in the other side. [they laugh]

However, it is an interesting question. This may be one more thing that we have to look around and consider. If something comes up, we’ll let you know. You know, it isn’t like we sit around and take censuses. But we haven’t observed it, but maybe new –

Well, we can’t envision it, actually. We can’t envision new things being created. We envision beings coming from one portion and going to somewhere else. The equivalent would be, they’re born into one area and die from another area, but the total is presumably the same. If we come up with new information, we’ll let you know. And if you want to ask it, in slightly different ways every so often, that would be fine too. That might help. Don’t take that as an assignment, however. It’s only if you want to do it.

[to here]

R: One of Frank’s fan club members asked a number of questions that were follow-ons to the dream analysis questions we had last week. And the first question he had was, “does amoeba mean the same as unconscious?”

F: Hmm. Well, that depends on what either of those mean to you! [laughs] But to answer the question in the spirit that it’s meant, the contents of the amoeba might be perceived by an individual as part of the unconscious.

R: Then he also asks whether it’s the same as –

[change sides of tape]

R: Okay, I was asking a question there about whether we could equate amoeba and Jung’s collective unconscious.

F: We would say rather that Jung was courageously pushing into territory that seemed occult to his contemporaries, and it was nearly totally unknown territory. Starting from the point of view that thought that individuals were real, as he did, that’s how he experienced it. If you will think in the terms that we’re encouraging you to think — that is, of all of us being one on this end, and you appearing to be separate on your end — a lot of what Carl Jung did accurately report will be seen to be very inaccurately interpreted. Or, let’s say we can come up with a better interpretation for you. You can come up with it yourselves. He was a wonderful trail breaker, and had he been more accurate, he probably would have been disregarded entirely, and could not have served as the halfway house. You see?

R: All right, this person is also asking you to differentiate between dreams and lucid dreams. There’s a definition of that on this level, and I don’t know if there’s any reason that you would want to get into a discussion about that, but —

F: Well, a way of looking at it — in our view the most productive way of looking at it — is that a dream comes to you when your flashlight is either nearly off or dim, and a lucid dream comes when your flashlight has for one reason or another become more intense. So that really lucid dream and unconsciousness are a contradiction in terms, whereas a regular dream and unconsciousness are not quite contradiction in terms.

If that’s not helpful, we’ll go back over it again, or add more.

A regular dream comes, and your own ability to apprehend it and to participate in it is very limited. And a lucid dream and a dream may be the exact same thing, but your ability to interact is greater, because for some reason or other your energy of consciousness is greater, and that’s the difference, not a difference in the incoming experience.

R: In a lucid dream you’re more a participant.

F: That’s right. It isn’t that you’re more a participant because something came along that you could participate in more, it’s that you are in a condition of being able to do it. You don’t control the dream in either sense. The dream is coming to you. But how you interact to it depends on your own ability at the moment, which among other things includes your energy and your awareness. We’re trying to de-emphasize the idea of a difference between a regular dream and a lucid dream, and strongly emphasize the difference between where you are yourself between the one and the other.

It’s meant to encourage you to realize you can do much more. Even the people who teach you how to do lucid dreaming –their techniques amount to through the back door increasing your consciousness of it, to putting more mental energy in it. When you do that, then the dream doesn’t change, you change. You experience it as a lucid dream. It’s the same as it was. Your experience changes because you’ve changed the amount of energy that you have at your command.

R: Mm-hmm. Well now, this same question includes asking the extent to which either dreaming or lucid dreaming are different from out of body experiences or phase shifts.

F: Well, a phase shift is an out-of-body experience, and we prefer Monroe’s term of phase shift, as we said before, only because it helps to eliminate that nuance of going somewhere, where there’s nowhere to go. But if you will look at the previous answer, this should be obvious in that context. A phase shift is again a different level of energy from a lucid dream and from a dream, and it’s well known that you can move from one to the other to the other if you can increase your energy.

The variable the variable that’s not commonly known is that your own ability to mobilize your energy and your consciousness — your psychic energy — varies for reasons that are obscure to you. Therefore, it appears to you as though sometimes a dream will come, sometimes a lucid dream, sometimes the opportunity for an OBE or a phase shift. But what actually has varied is not the incoming experience. What’s varied is your own mobilization of energy. [pause]

So what has happened is that people, in beginning to look at these things, have made names naming what they think are three different experiences. The incoming data, the nature of the dream, is the same in three instances; it’s what you can bring to it that varies. That’s why the one unvaried incoming experience looks different.

[chuckles] We have a feeling that we could have said that much easier and much quicker, and now every word that we’re adding to it is making it less clear.

R: I was just remembering how annoyed Bob Monroe was when he was told by the lucid dreamers that out-of-body experiences were nothing but lucid dreams. He felt really put down by that.

F: Mm-hmm. And rightly so, because they were not saying in that what we’re saying! They were saying it was inaccurate observation on his part. [they laugh] Which is not what we’re saying.

R: All right, this is a continuation of questions by the same individual. He doesn’t think he creates the realities he finds himself in, even though he can change some things about that realities.

F: If by “he,” he means his conscious self, we entirely agree with him.

R: That sounds like what he meant. He does not create the realities. They are —

F: By definition your conscious self does not create your dream.

R: Okay. I don’t know if he’s now talking about dreams or moving on. I think he is still talking about dreams. So you’d say the amoeba is possibly creating the reality.

F: We wouldn’t say possibly.

R: Yes. But it’s not conscious. Some aspect of the amoeba.

F: That’s correct.

R: Okay. And he asks if he’s dreaming now.

F: Ha, ha! That was noted. Wonderful accurate perception. Although it might be slightly more accurate to say you are being dreamed.

R: By the amoeba?

F: [sigh] What you just said isn’t wrong, but it’s not complete either. But let’s leave that for a while, and we’ll tell you why. Because, were we to say more now, people would be inclined to take it as the final word, or to discard it, but more damaging would be to take it as the final word, whereas if we just leave it like this now, some people will think about it, and ponder it, and it comes better when it comes to you rather than us giving it to you. It’s stronger. We don’t mean to be too mysterious about it, but sometimes mystery is a powerful teacher.

R: All right, then the final question he had is, who creates realities, and the entities in the dreams and phase shifts?

F: We would say, the shorthand is the amoeba creates them. Not a totally complete answer, but for now. Certainly your scientists who think that dreams are the consequence of unassimilated daily activities are – that leaves us speechless. [they laugh] Dreams often use the residues of daily experience, but — [laughs] Oh, it’s funny. [laughs]

R: All right, we have another questioner here, and you’re going to have to give me some feedback on how long you wish to go on.

F: This is the illuminati?

R: Yes.

F: That has bothered Frank quite a bit, all week. And is quite productive.

R: Okay, let me ask the question as it’s posed here.

F: Um, ask it in sequence, if you would, and give us time each time, rather than read the whole thing, because there’s no way we could respond to it that way.

R: Okay, then, it’s: What do you know of the reptilian agenda?

F: Nothing.

R: The 13 Illuminati bloodlines?

F: Um, we’d better answer what she means rather than what she says. Because to answer what she says, the answer would be “nothing.” What she means we’ll get to in a bit. Go ahead.

R: Control of the human race by chloride, chemtrails, using humans as puppets, as in the 9-11 disaster.

F: Nothing.

R: Injection of minute computer chips by a flu other injections.

F: Less than nothing.

R: The building of prisons, concentration camps throughout the United States for people after martial law is declared.

F: Nothing.

R: And FEMA, she wanted to add. [FEMA is the Federal Emergency Management Agency, officially tasked with coordinating response to disasters such as hurricanes, but suspected by some of having another agenda.]

F: Well we know plenty about FEMA, everyone does, but not what they mean, so the answer should be nothing in a sense.

R: Okay.

F: Now, let us really get down to this. This is going to take a little bit, but it’s very worthwhile We began by telling you that this is quite disturbing material, and not many people are going to like it, necessarily. Which is bothering Frank, you see.

R: Mm-hmm.

F: [pause] When a person who is idealistic, or even decent – using good and evil terms, but we need to use them for the moment – when a good and decent person sees what to them appears evil, it is very natural for them to oppose the evil. That’s the nature of things.

When such a person gets into a state of fear, the fear conjures up the shadows in all directions, and if they are not careful they will wind up in a labyrinth of shadows that leaves them feeling powerless, threatened, oppressed – and they can wind up becoming some of the worst oppressors the world has ever seen. We’ll give you specific examples, because Frank’s got ‘em in his data base. And the first one is something that was called the Great Terror.

Back in the 1700s, in France, when the French Revolution began, the peasantry and the lower middle classes overthrew the aristocracy, which had kept them very severely downtrodden. In their initial freedom, for the first time in recorded western history the great terror came, the great fear, because they began to fear that there were plots to re-deprive them of their freedom, you see. Having gained an amazing change in their lifetimes, they feared that that change would be overthrown, because they knew full well, and accurately, that the old order wasn’t going to just throw up its hands, but would counter-attack them. Having no way of gauging what the counter-attack would be, having no experience of the aristocracy and what their limitations and abilities were, the minds of the people began generating more and more fears, and the fears became exaggerated. And the fears had no limits, because they had no data, you see.

Now, it’s well known how rumor will exaggerate, and it’s well known, or should be well known, how a mob will have a mentality lower than any of the individuals comprising the mob. Put those two things together, and you have the emotional beginnings of the reign of terror, that happened in France. The Reign of Terror was started by people who themselves were in terror. They were fearing to lose what they had gained; they knew they had real enemies, but didn’t know where they were; they knew they were facing real dangers but didn’t know what they were, and they knew they had to take action, and the action took on a life of its own. As it always does.

The Russian Revolution happened in more or less the same way. The peasants freed themselves from a thousand years of oppression; they were being attacked by real forces from the west and also they were being opposed by forces of their own aristocracy, who were also of course being financed and supported by the west. Again, not knowing who the enemy was, not knowing what the enemy could do, not knowing the limits and nature of the threat, the terror that they were in created a terror that was aimed outwards. And to look at it from a point of view of good and evil, evil came directly from fear, and the fear came from people who were doing something that they regarded as good, countering something that was too vague for them to be able to attack.

And we’re going to bring in an example that bears on it, although it’s not directly to it, and that is the Luddites. You may have heard of people who in the early 1800s in England began smashing machinery — looms and things — because they recognized that automation, even the limited kind of automation that was there then, was going to put people out of work, and they knew there was no social support network — there wasn’t even a word for such a thing — and they knew they were facing starvation and ruin. And so they began destroying the machinery, trying to protect what they knew, against they knew not what. All right. Now, that’s not relevant in the form or the terror; it’s relevant in the form of the unknown that’s going to transform their lives there.

Now, let’s come more directly to the question.

The people in America and certain countries in Western Europe have a great disadvantage in that they mostly believe that their government is good, whereas most of the rest of the world knows that their own governments are not good. Americans are beginning to realize that government is not good, and in that realization, it leaves them somewhat at sea. When people are faced with realizations that they can’t handle, and dangers that they can’t weigh, one possible result is to follow people who say, “it is the Bilderberger group, it is the Illuminati, it is this, it is that, it is the Rockefellers, it is George Schultz, it is – name something.” Even though, or perhaps we should say because, they know there is a threat, they cannot judge the threat, and they’re willing to listen to someone who tells them with great confidence, “this is the threat, I know what it is, here’s what you need to do.”

Now, we’re probably going to offend everyone in sight, but – that’s the way it is. Government at all levels, top to bottom, is set up for one reason but actually functions at a day-to-day level for a different reason. A government functionary is in business primarily to protect his own function, and secondarily to profit from that function as he can, depending on his own level of what you might call corruption, and what he might call self-interest. There was a congressman who said that the motto of Congress is “nothing for nothing”; that is to say, having the ability to make a decision that will make major money for one sector, or cost money to another sector, they see no reason not to profit personally from that decision.

It’s worse than that, though.

In your time, your governments have totally become captive of those who have the money. Money has always run politics, but in this case, you now have your criminals running your institutions. People know this, and are getting somewhat desperate about it, but they haven’t thought it through to realize that it isn’t a few criminals who threaten an otherwise good institution, and it isn’t that some people are good and some are evil. It is that, inherent in the nature of your society as constituted is the predatory society that Bob Monroe talked about. Once organized criminals overcame the reluctance that they had to take over civil society – and they did have such a reluctance – there was nothing to stop them from doing it. And they have done it. You have things done in your name every day that would appall you, were you to be aware of it, and you have no more ability to stop it than you have to fly to the moon, in your body.

Now, when you watch people overseas cheering because Americans were killed, you are seeing those people reacting to what they know of what your government has done in your name. What they don’t know, of course, and you do know, is what their government is doing in their name.

In such a predatory situation, predators rise to the top of the heap, in terms of power and influence, and for you to assume that your secret services, or your law enforcement officers, or your government officials of any kind, have anything that they hold higher than their own self-interest would be naïve to an almost unforgivable extent at this point, because there’s too much evidence against it.

Very bleak picture that we’ve just painted here, but it’s important for you to realize that we see this. Having said this, this is not the whole picture, and the people who are following the trails of the Illuminati and the other secret societies that they think are running things don’t realize that what they’re doing is making a behind-the-scenes assumption that government is usually good and is being threatened by a takeover by these people behind the scenes. In actual fact, governments are always in one way or another a conspiracy. You have had the unusual experience of having governments that were more or less neutral, and in fact in the perspective of history almost startlingly idealistic, particularly the British, the American and the Scandinavian governments. They were almost uniquely – well, we can’t at all say corruption-free, but they did their jobs, and their ideal was to do the job, rather than the ideal and the necessity being “milk the job for what it’s worth so that when you’re out of office you won’t be destitute.”

Now, we want to change the point of view a little bit. Take a congressman, or a policeman on the take, or any corrupt individual anywhere, and what you will find is a person in a position who says, “I am here for now; I won’t be here forever, and these people –” For instance, a policeman guarding rich people. He doesn’t regard rich people as being better than him because they have money, he regards them as having money because in one way or another the deck was rigged. We would not disagree with that. So it becomes harder and harder for a policeman to maintain social order – which is what he’s supposedly paid to do – when what it really means is protect the privilege of people who he may not have any respect for at all.

If you have a civil servant who has to make a zoning decision, or a decision between contractors, the idealistic way of looking at it is, to do what’s in the public interest. What seems like realism to him is, “these people are going to make a fortune on this; there’s no reason why I shouldn’t have some of it myself. I would be a fool not to.” So you have a situation in which your average citizen is taught an entirely incorrect view of civics and politics, and is kept in the dark about the real way that your society is managed, because t is not in the interest of the people who own the media and the means of information to make those things known.

In that situation, which could be defined as a vacuum of information, people see with their eyes that things are rotten, but they don’t know why, and they don’t know how, and so there comes the great terror, you see. Now, the joker in the deck is this. That’s the grim situation as it looks from a Downstairs perspective, but guess what. The deck can be stacked from the other side, and we’re stacking it every day. Does that adequately answer the question, do you think?

R: [pause] Well–

F: We sense “no.” [they laugh]

R: You’re stacking the deck.

F: Oh, sure. Remember, we said on 9-11 that all the people who were in the planes and the buildings, including the hijackers, were all volunteers? That’s what we mean. We’re inventing the scenarios as we go along. We, as one, have our own game plan in order to move your society from where it is to where it will be more effective in bringing us to the next level that we’re talking about. We don’t really care so much who gets a sewer contract, and we don’t care whether cocaine flows between countries or not. What we do care is, whether we move toward the next level of being where you will all live more conscious of other aspects of yourself. That is to say, we will begin to create One World, all right, but it’s going to be one world of people who are aware of their connection to us.

In other words, your next step is, you’ll recognize yourselves as individuals, and you’ll also recognize yourselves as part of us. And when that happens, the political problems and the social injustices that many of you attempted to concentrate on will fall off by themselves. You know, when people change their view of themselves to realize that it’s not just a pretty fantasy to say that all men are brothers, but to realize that you’re much closer than brothers, when people realize that they themselves are part of an immortal being, and their neighbors and friends and lovers and opponents and enemies are part of that same being, it changes everything. So, we’re not concerned with politics or ideology except in terms of pushing the society.

R: And so all is well.

F: All is always well. [pause] Now, let’s go on – This is a little personal, but he doesn’t care.

This is part of the struggle that he’s having in terms of living in faith. One learns to live in faith by increments. And so, he learned to live in faith about his business years ago, and say, “well, I don’t know where the money’s coming from, I don’t know where the customers are or what will happen, but my feeling is, it will be okay, I can live knowing that we’ll be taken care of because we’re doing good work.” And that came to him. But this level now is one he’s still struggling with, because he knows enough, in enough levels, of the seemingly invulnerable, sickening corruption of the whole thing. He loves his country, and he hates what it’s becoming, and he hates the way it’s been hijacked, and what’s been done in its name, and he recognizes his own helplessness on a Downstairs level to do anything about it. And he’s had to learn, as you all have to learn, to live in faith that all is well, all is always well. But that doesn’t come easy. It may come easily, and if it does, you’re fortunate. But it may be a struggle. It may be a very serious struggle.

Ah! An example. Just as many of you had a tremendous problem with the people who got killed in New York that day, he did not, because in his case he said, “okay, I can see that, that’s part of the plan.” But there are other things that he has to struggle with. That’s all. The only way to learn to live in faith is to live in faith, and that implies a struggle, until you get past it at whatever particular issue is there. Many people worry about their health, or about their life insurance; what’s going to happen in their old age. Or they worry about crime or they about the million things people worry about. And many of those he doesn’t worry about. But he’s not truly worrying about things, there are still things that concern him. Okay? [pause]

We seriously doubt he wants us to say any more about that! [laugh]

R: I’d just like to ask, in responding to this person’s question, because of all of the suggestions being made about the Illuminati and all the others, what’s an appropriate response for people to make to it?

F: Oh that’s an excellent question! The appropriate response is what we just said; learn to live in faith. That doesn’t mean to put blinders on and walk around saying “all is well” as a mantra, it means reaching within yourself and developing your own consciousness and getting a better relationship with us, and a wider and a deeper relationship with us, and at some point you’ll know that all is well.

Now. That says nothing about whether or not a person should get involved in politics or should get involved in civic affairs, or put on camouflage clothing and head for the hills. It doesn’t say anything about that. But it says that one – and to our mind the one – effective response is to become more closely tied to your own Upstairs development, and to live your life according to your guidance. Everything else can be and often is only a distraction from your real task.

R: So even the notion of trying to be helpful to your fellow man in whatever way you can contribute —

F: Well, there’s certainly no contradiction there. You know yourself, looking at your own self, as you increase your links to your higher self, to your larger being, to your unconscious self, as you firm those links, you become more altruistic, you become more interested in doing good, which is the only useful thing you can do over there. So to our mind that takes care of itself. We can’t imagine becoming in closer touch with their higher self and becoming more selfish, or becoming more interested in piling up goods and the stupidities of power and wealth.

R: Okay, I guess I am still wanting to speak to the people who are supporting these organizations that seem to me are so awash in fear.

F: Yes, well, we don’t think there’s really a rational counter to such fear, if it doesn’t come out of a person’s personal experience of knowing that they are protected and that all is well. And we don’t know any other way for them to get that experience except to deepen their relationship to their larger being. And then if that deeper relationship tells them there is a danger, well and good. But we think that many people fall into fear because they fear that they’re on their own. That is to say, that there is nothing policing the universe except Downstairs.

And so they engage in romantic dreams — or in desperate dreams — of guerrilla warfare against an all-encompassing state, or of political campaigns that will overthrow the corrupt, and all that. To our mind, that’s escapism. And you’ll notice, we have not said they’ve made up a threat that doesn’t exist. We’ve said that they are being inappropriately concrete about the threat. They’re thinking they know more about it than they do, and they’re not addressing it in the most effective way, which is to strengthen themselves as individuals by connecting with their higher selves. That will seem to be nothing by quietism or escapism, but “seeming” doesn’t have much to do with what really is.

R: This is so important, and so importantly said, that I would like to cut this off for tonight.

F: All right.

R: More questions will be available next time.

F: All right, that’s fine. Well, we thank you for your participation.