Article - Laura Knight-Jadczyk
As a result of the rather shocking news that Frank has joined the forces attacking Cassiopaea, briefly outlined for general readers elsewhere on the site, we have received many encouraging emails and phone calls from friends and readers (and readers who have become friends), many of whom know the "inside" story to one extent or another, asking me to please continue with Amazing Grace for ALL the readers. So, considering the circumstances, I have been persuaded to momentarily put aside other work to do exactly that. However, let me say that it will not be done with the kind of detail that will go in later when I prepare it for book format. It will, however, serve the purpose of clarifying many things.
Having begun writing about these matters, we have received many emails from readers who have thanked us for bringing these issues to the fore. As one reader pointed out, for those who resonate strongly with MOST of the material, this now gives a platform from which they can "revisit the concepts with a mental filter allowing for new interpretations." I have noted before there are many instances when the experiences "behind the scenes" had a great deal to do with the direction of the questions, and now we begin to understand exactly how the internal drives of the participants could act to skew that 30 percent of material that felt "off" even to the casual reader. On August 8, 1998, an interesting series of remarks were made that seem to be almost a prediction about the present events:
Notice that above, C's are pointing out that it is only "largely" accurate, and this is the statement upon which the next comments are predicated.
This remark refers specifically to me (Laura) and Ark, since the question related specifically to our efforts to publicized the material on the website. C's repeatedly, throughout the sessions, talked about a certain "destined" activity for the two of us in concert with others we had yet to meet. I once asked specifically about this "destiny" and the answer was very curious, especially the reference to Frank's role:
The remark about being put in touch those of "rare ability" (clearly plural) undoubtedly referred to Frank with the agenda of his controllers to extract information and destroy, AND Terry with his role as protector AND Ark with his role in the "mission." It is quite clear that even though the agenda of those operating behind Frank was not favorable, as noted in the January 10 session, the effect was to "wake me up." I am still somewhat uncertain about the last remark: which individual are the C's referring to as not having had a past life on 3rd density earth? Ark, or Frank or Terry? We had started out discussing Ark's role in the "mission," and the C's brought up the issue of their having put me in contact with "those of rare ability" in order to communicate, and then they come back to "recognizing signs..." which takes us back to Ark. For the moment, my interpretation is that Ark is the only one with a recent past life on the earth, and that of the three, neither Terry nor Frank had recent past lives on Earth. Of course, that suggests that the three of them are 4th density beings, though obviously of different orientation.
So my question as to whether Frank was The Channel was effectively answered. The material that came through when Terry was present to counterbalance the negative agenda of Frank was obviously far more reliable, and we will encounter this factor more than once as we go along. Going back now to the "prediction" given in August of 1998:
Now, the interesting thing about the website at this particular point in time, i.e. 1998, was that we carefully avoided any distinction of persons in talking about the work of the Group. At this point in time, we simply referred to the "Cassiopaean Group," with no distinction as to persons, and certainly no hint that all of us felt funny about Frank's claims and participation. I refused to make any one person the "source," referring to it always as a "group," and that irritated him to no end. Frank had been "agitating" a very long time for us to proclaim him as The Channel, and to attribute all of the material to him. This process had been an ongoing theme of manipulation on his part for several years, at that point, and I strenuously resisted making the C's a "cult of personality" for Frank, which he clearly resented, but attempted (ineffectively) to conceal. There were numerous instances in the transcripts where it was his agenda, or the agenda of his Controllers, to proclaim him as The Channel, but usually this occurred when Terry was absent, or when there were not sufficient others of positive energy present in the room to counterbalance what we now see was a very powerful STS force.
In the above excerpt, it seems that there is a hint of an accusation that we are "taking credit" away from Frank, and that is certainly the way Frank felt; but his view was largely constructed in his own mind and had no basis in reality. Since he did not have a computer, he did not have an opportunity to view and read the website, (though we often suggested to him that he ought to do it at our house, and even write and contribute to it, which he never did because it took time away from his watching of sports on television.) The facts were that no one individual was being credited with the C's material. It was presented as a "group" effort. That was all. So, at one and the same time, we see a personal prejudice of Frank's "skewing" the response, but the C's managed to turn it into a "save" by inserting the word "onus" and giving the warning about something "hitting the fan."
I ought to make it clear that my own view of Frank was very sympathetic. And that is one of the chief things that can be learned from this account that I am sharing. The fact is, those with powerful STS agendas CAN and DO utilize all kinds of ways and means of manipulating emotions and perception in order to make themselves appear to be helpful, benevolent, giving, kind, and usually to evoke pity and sympathy. They can speak or channel truth in order to insert a single "twist" that leads the uncritical thinker off-track, and that is why we have always promoted the idea of "critical channeling."
We received a post from an individual who says that telling the story of the behind the scenes dynamics "discredits the entire channelled material from beginning to end." And such a view, of course, relates directly to the C's remark above: "Resist urge to place credit/onus on yourself. E.G. if "you know what hits the fan," do you wish to be in the line of fire?"
By "saving" the remark this way, the C's were warning us that there would be an operation put in motion to discredit that portion of the material that was "largely accurate," as they put it. And this is most certainly what has been identified as the current activity of Bridges and Williams and Co. And indeed, by NOT telling this story of the background earlier, we have most certainly left ourselves open to these attacks.
The C's are very precise in their use of words, and the remark included the word "onus." This is a word that generally refers to a "dirty task," or a burden or the "burden of proving" something. The evidence will show that we certainly were not claiming credit for the material ourselves, but we were most definitely protecting Frank by not sharing the issues that we are now discussing. In this way, we had taken upon ourselves the "onus" of defending corrupted material that was indefensible. And, by taking on ourselves the burden of this defense, by NOT dealing with the issue of what we already suspected to be a source of corruption; by continuing to keep the "door open" for Frank to make a different choice, even though, by that point in time, we knew that his days with the group were numbered, we still continued to protect him. This protection even extended to the point of giving him a pseudonym in Amazing Grace so that I could compromise between telling the story as accurately as possible, and still protect Frank. As one observer on the sidelines once remarked (and it incensed me greatly because I was protecting Frank) "Frank plays on your sympathy like a Stradivarius."
As to whether our decision to try to give Frank every chance possible to make a different choice was the correct one, and whether the present "hitting of the fan" of the operation suggested by the C's in the above excerpt will permanently damage and discredit ALL of the material, will have to be up to the reader. We think that telling the truth is the only way. It is then up to the reader to decide what he/she wants to credit and what not. One learn lessons, one learns truth, and one tells truth. That is how we see it. We do believe that the truth will survive the attacks.
Getting back to the August, 1998 excerpt, since I had been so careful to NOT make the material a "cult of personality," I simply did not see what the C's were trying to tell me. I brushed aside their remark about something "hitting the fan" if I did not make clear who was doing what in the project.
And regarding how I ought to deal with telling the story, the C's clearly said:
The owners and publishers
of these pages wish to state that the material presented here is the product
of our research and experimentation in Superluminal Communication. We invite
the reader to share in our seeking of Truth by reading with an Open, but skeptical
mind. We do not encourage "devotee-ism"
nor "True Belief." We DO encourage the seeking of Knowledge and Awareness in
all fields of endeavor as the best way to be able to discern lies from truth.
The one thing we can tell the reader is this: we work very hard, many hours
a day, and have done so for many years, to discover the "bottom line" of our
existence on Earth. It is our vocation, our quest, our job. We constantly seek
to validate and/or refine what we understand to be either possible or probable
or both. We do this in the sincere hope that all of mankind will benefit, if
not now, then at some point in one of our probable futures.
Contact Webmaster at cassiopaea.com
You are visitor number 15937 since April 16, 2009[TextCounter Fatal Error: Could Not Increment Counter].