STA Network Home

STA Front Page

Surfing The Apocalypse Network

Forum Index | News and Conversations | Log in | Register | Help
               

Surfing The Apocalypse is Reader Supported.

Please consider making a donation by clicking the button below.

 


 

 

Avatar

CASSIOPAEANS - MALAYSIA AIR FLT MH17 (NEWS AND CONVERSATIONS)

by Il_Bagattel, Monday, July 21, 2014, 06:01

A rather lengthy session was held last Saturday night, July 19, 2014, with the Cs. This is the snip relative to the Ukraine "crash". I have posted this on both forums. Its here for conversational purposes and hopefully won't get pushed off the page too fast.

Q: (L) Okay. We're going to change topics here. As you know, we just had this plane fall out of the sky over the Ukraine. Immediately the US blamed Russia, and then it started blaming the Russian-aided freedom fighters in East Ukraine. Meanwhile, the Russians say it was clearly the Ukrainians in conjunction with US/NATO/UK/Whoever. So, I guess the first thing we ought to ask is: What brought the plane down?

A: [Spiraling] Bomb on the plane placed there prior to departure.

Q: (Pierre) Schiphol airport, again! The famous Underwear Bomber place! So, MOSSAD?

(L) Who was involved?

A: Note change in altitude for "signature".

Q: (Perceval) From 35 to 33...

(L) 33. Is 33 the clue?

A: Yes. Consortium. And who is at the top of this STS pyramid??

Q: (Perceval) Figures.

(L) Who is at the top of this pyramid? And who is at the top?

(Perceval) MOSSAD.

(L) MOSSAD? The Israelis?

A: Yes

Q: (Perceval) It seems the goal was to further demonize Putin and Russia. But was it also to distract from what's happening in Palestine?

A: Absolutely!

Q: (Pierre) Is it only coincidence... before MH 17, there was MH 370, this plane that disappeared from the same company. Is it just coincidence that the two incidents involve the same airline company?

A: Another "signature".

Q: (Data) Why did the plane deviate from its usual course?

A: Instructed by ATC.

Q: (Perceval) Air traffic control at Schiphol?

A: Kiev.

Q: (Perceval) So, some agent...

(L) There was some control by MOSSAD in Kiev, and that whole Nazi business going on there...

(Kniall) They've been there for DECADES!

A: Yes!

Q: (L) I think that was answering Kniall there.

(Data) Why was it necessary to change the course with a bomb on board?

(L) So it would fall where it did. They had to change the course to put it in the middle of the war zone.

(Ark) The Russians were saying that the timing was a little bit miscalculated because it was supposed to come down closer to the Russian territory so that it would be easier to blame Russia.

A: Yes.

Q: (Pierre) It exploded too early.

(L) Yeah, they're so lazy, they never get anything perfect.

(Chu) Or too impatient.

A: But most people are so gullible it doesn't matter.

Q: (Perceval) You can say that again.

(Kniall) Another signature. That suggests some planning at a level behind the first Malaysian plane...

(L) No it doesn't. It's just like answering back to what happened to that first one.

(Pierre) It's like, "They removed the 370, so we'll bring down the 17!"

A: Yes

Q: (Pierre) Which is really screwed up when you think about it. The signal is strong, ya know? Okay, we make MH 370 disappear. And the only answer they have instead of behaving better is, "Okay, we bring down MH 17, and we increase even more the lies and suffering!"

(Perceval) So these signatures are used for what? Just for fun? For whose benefit?

A: Pride, hubris, warnings to those who know.

Q: (Chu) On the session when we talked about the interpreters and stuff, the plane {that disappeared, Flight 370}, if I understood correctly, was a message...

(L) It was a warning...

(Chu) To not go too far.

(L) And they've basically answered by saying, "Up yours!"

A: Yes.

Q: (Chu) So would that mean that there really is a "law" that can prevent them from really going full-blown and starting a war?

(L) There's no law that can prevent them, no.

(Chu) They can go to war if they want to. It's just not in their interest to go too far.

(L) I don't think they think about what's in their interest. I think they're too far gone.

(Perceval) Well, hang on... The original idea was that it was some kind of bleedthrough [4th Density]. So, it was a natural thing. It wasn't necessarily a warning from anybody. They just interpreted it that way. They didn't see it as something was telling them, "Don't you dare!"

(L) Yeah, they don't see it that way. But it SHOULD have been a warning IF they had been paying attention.

(Perceval) As in a cause and effect kind of way. If you keep going like this, you're gonna...

(Chu) But the effect would have been that they would have seen it as, "You can't go too far here..."

(L) IF they had understood it. If they had understood that the conditions that were causing bleedthroughs and so on and so forth were a result of their actions and their behaviors globally speaking... If they had understood that, they would have said, "Hmm, weird things are happening. Let's rethink what's going on and what we're doing!" But instead, they interpreted it...

(Pierre) And they did the opposite, and they're raising the ante. They're worsening the situation.

(Perceval) What I was thinking earlier on was that, if the original idea was that they couldn't go too far, as in spark a major war with Russia by sending NATO into the Ukraine or whatever, they backed off from that because of their interpretation of the {disappearance of Flight 370}... As in, a plane went missing, it's a bit dodgy, we don't know what's going on, let's just cool it a bit...

(L) Somebody backed off...

(Perceval) Somebody backed off. So if that's true in that sense, shooting down a plane was like a Plan B or a second option that wasn't the full-scale kind of war {they may have been planning; it was on the level of mass emotional manipulation; an information war as opposed to an actual war. Because it's an all-out information war going on now because of this.

(L) Well, let me ask this: 20 years ago, on 3rd December 1994, you gave a series of short little prophecies. Being so long ago, they kind of hit to the side, but one of the first was, "Ukraine explosion; chemical or nuclear". The second one was: "Hawaii crash; aviation, possibly involving military." And those two were juxtaposed next to each other, and there was a semicolon and period, and then the next sequence began. The next sequence was a series of earthquakes in California, destruction of California, Mount Lassen, several other volcanoes along the west coast of the US erupting, the sea floor subsiding, and so forth.

Quote from previous session:

{3 Dec 1994: Ukraine explosion; chemical or nuclear. Hawaii crash; aviation, possibly involving military. More California seismic activity after 1st of year: San Diego, San Bernardino, North Bakersfield, Barstow: all are fracture points. Hollister, Palo Alto, Imperial, Ukiah, Eureka, Point Mendocino, Monterrey, Offshore San Luis Obispo, Capistrano, Carmel: these are all stress points of fracture in sequence. “Time” is indefinite. Expect gradual destruction of California economy as people begin mass exodus. Also, Shasta erupts; Lassen activity. Ocean floor begins to subside.


Getting to my question: Was that “Hawaii crash” a reference to what has happened here recently, like for example with MH 370 and MH 17? Even though the original was Hawaii, I would say Malaysia is in the Pacific more or less, so it's kind of sideways... Was that a reference to these events, even that far in advance?

A: Yes.

Q: (Perceval) So that was seen that far in advance as a marker, as a major event. There's been a lot of stuff that has happened since then that they didn't mention. So, why did that one stand out 20 years ago? Why did this event stand out so strongly? Are we all screwed?

A: Interpretation is key. The elements here are metaphoric. That far in advance it can only be approximate. However, note the confluence of major elements in terms of similarity.

Q: (L) So, Ukraine obviously has been known in advance as a flashpoint, and there is some awareness of... Could it be said that these sorts of things were already in the minds of some planners that far in advance?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) So, they change or shift their plans...

(Perceval) When you say planners...

(L) Do you mean human planners?

A: And 4D STS.

Q: (Perceval) The ones who jump around in time and stuff.

(L) So they change things to confuse things. Well, they once said something about how they can change things. They specifically said something about that: moving back and forth in time.

Quote from previous session:

{7 Jan 1996: The forces at work here are far too clever to be accurately anticipated so easily. You never know what twists and turns will follow, and they are aware of prophetic and philosophical patternings and usually shift course to fool and discourage those who believe in fixed futures.}


(Perceval) Can I ask how long in advance this bombing of MH 17 was planned? Like in a practical sense?

(L) Practical sense like right now?

(Perceval) As in today? How long ago did they decide on it?

A: 3 weeks.

Q: (PoB) It was well organized with Kiev moving the ground to air missile launchers closer...

(L) Yeah, they made a plan, and they moved those launchers in place to confuse the issue. They turned them on so that the radar would be read by the Russian detectors, they planted the bomb... That was probably the easiest part: getting the bomb on the plane. The Israelis run that airport. It could have been a timed bomb, or it could have been a triggered bomb. It could have been triggered by the accompanying jets that were seen flying alongside it, assuming they were there.

(Perceval) I wouldn't think that would even be necessary.

(L) It could be just a timer. Hell, it could be set off by dialing a telephone or something.

(Pierre) You know, it's roughly three weeks before... It's roughly the beginning of the Gaza invasion. They're starting to bomb Gaza, and they already know, "Okay, we are going to bomb and kill all those civilians, and there'll be this international uproar. So in two or three weeks, we need to create a diversion. Let’s bring down a plane!"

(Perceval) Or they see how it goes. It's part of the plan...

(Pierre) Yeah, and if necessary, we bring it down.

(Perceval) Were the Israelis or someone working for the Israelis responsible for the murder of those three Israeli teenagers?

A: Yes. How else to get a conflict going?

Q: (Perceval) That's what they've always done.

(Timotheos) Is there any significance to the fact that there were a hundred or so AIDS researchers on board that plane?

(Perceval) Were there that many?

A: Not as many as that.

Q: (Perceval) Yeah, apparently there weren't that many.

A: And, no.

Q: (L) They just were there.

(Perceval) It was just a random plane in the sense that it fit the bill.

(L) And they made sure they didn't have anybody they didn't want to kill on there.

(Perceval) In terms of the propaganda war and the kind of lower-level conflict, I suppose you would say that it is between the US and Russia...

(Kniall) Is there some understanding between the US and Russia that Israel is the wildcard?

(Perceval) No, that's not what I'm thinking of. In terms of these people at the top of the pyramid, do they feel threatened in any way by what Putin and Russia is doing, or is that merely at the lower level of geopolitical chessboard nonsense?

A: They are incapable of seeing outcomes other than what they wish.

Q: (Perceval) I think way back just after 9/11, there was a reference made to the "Russians" having some evidence about 9/11? Is that true, or am I...?

(L) No, that wasn't in the sessions.

(Perceval) Do the Russians have any data on the truth of the 9/11 attacks?

A: Yes.

Q: (Perceval) Would it ever be in the realm of possibility, or within Putin's power to release that kind of information just to mix things up in the information war?

A: Strong possibility if the tide of public perception can be adjusted.

Q: (Pierre) And does that evidence involve the US and/or Israel?

(L) Well, since we have a pretty good idea of who did it, we know the answer to that. Okay, so that leads me to a question that's been on my mind for the last day or so. I noticed that the "Black Hats", the bad guys, the whole pathological community seem to be quite well-organized and unified to some extent in their public activities. For example, Israel is able to get all these students, the Hasbara program; the Pentagon has hired all of these people to engage in cyber warfare; there are trolls that go all over the internet swaying public opinion and writing commentary. Edward Snowden has come out and explained exactly how it's done. I mean, they have a HUGE, elaborate cyber warfare program and train people to get out there and work for the control of people's minds. It's just absolutely staggering. So, one thing about it that really gets me is that first of all, even with this revelation of Snowden that has hit all the major media, people don't stop and think that EVERYTHING that's going on could be part of that disinformation program! The second thing is, why is it that people with peaceful, world-benevolent opinions and approaches - people of conscience - can't get together in the same way that evil does? Evil seems to coalesce, and people of conscience seem to... it's almost like their conscience forces them to fight with each other! I mean, assuming they even have a conscience. What's the deal here? I want to know.

A: First of all notice that the STS side uses two hooks: money and promises of power. It is not so much "unity of purpose." Secondly, just as you have learned from your studies of psychology and from the work of Gurdjieff, people with the genetics for "soul" or conscience are very wounded by the programming of family and society.

Q: (L) So, it's their wounds, their programming, their buffers as Gurdjieff says, that keeps them all pointing in dozens of different directions with different opinions, ideas, wounds, fears, and so on. And that prevents unity. Is there anything that can change that?

A: Sure!

Q: [laughter] (L) What?

A: Work or a huge shock!

Q: (Perceval) A huge shock like a giant fireball? Giant meteorite or an earthquake?

A: Some cosmic activity might do it provided the seeds of knowledge have been planted as you have been doing for years now. As we once said, from the fire comes light. There are several levels of meaning there.

Q: (L) Cosmic fire, maybe?

A: Yes!

Q: (Pierre) Cosmic activity can help this seed to grow?

(Chu) No, I don't think that's what they're saying.

(L) I think they're saying that that's the shock. And if there is a seed there, and if there is any potential in the individual, if the shock doesn't kill them, then...

(Pierre) So the shock due to cosmic activity is what will make the seed grow?

(Ark) No!

(Chu) The seed of knowledge has to be there for people to interpret it, right?

(L) I think they already have to have it inside them, then they get a shock, and then afterwards...

(Pierre) Yeah, the shock makes the seed of knowledge grow...

(Ark) No! The knowledge cannot grow by shock. The knowledge can grow only if you get more truth. Shock may only cause the seed to do some job.

(L) Like what?

(Ark) I mean, because you may know things, know things, know things... and do nothing! And then, there comes shock, and then you realize that your knowledge - you were not using your knowledge!

(Perceval) It seems to me that this might apply to a lot of forum members who have been just quietly absorbing the information, but unable to do anything with it because of all this programming and stuff. The seed of knowledge has been planted in those people, but they haven't actually done anything with it.

(L) But when it becomes real...

(Perceval) When they realize that, "Holy shit, this isn't just theoretical! A fireball just blew the crap out of Washington, DC!"... God willing... [laughter] Suddenly it's true for them, and it may activate the knowledge that they've been growing slowly inside.

In support of this scenario is the conspicuously absent sign of a missile exhaust trail in the video of the MH17 explosion.

The full session can be read here.
http://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic,35463.0.html

There is much in the beginning of the session regarding the discovery that Julius Caesar was the template for the Jesus myths. This line of inquiry was begun after a couple of years of historical research. The information was presented to the Cs on the July 12, 2014 session, with some pretty startling revelations.

No belief required. Take it or leave it.

Share/Bookmark
  1128 viewsreport

Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

243625 Postings in 105323 Threads, 514 registered users, 101 users online (0 registered, 101 guests)
RSS Postings  RSS Threads | Contact
Privacy Policy | Home | Main | Index