Adventures With Cassiopaea

Chapter 4

After the session above, and my sense of unease about it, I sat down with Frank and went over many of these clues about the channeling with him, pointing out the discrepancies in his own view, and what the Cassiopaeans had said, and how I thought the phenomenon actually operated. I also made it pretty clear that I was becoming exhausted carrying the load of my own life, and his inability to adjust to this reality as well. I urged him to make more positive efforts, to think about the many positive experiences he had had, and to try to help me by helping himself. I pointed out how much work I was doing, and how little he was doing, and that if we continued on this way, I would soon run out of gas and then nothing would get done. Terry and Jan added their input to the situation, and it seemed that, with their presence, Frank stabilized somewhat.

We knew that he had a problem with Dark Forces battling for control of his mind, and I pointed out that this was obvious evidence that he was a higher spiritual being otherwise they wouldn't be fighting so hard to take over his mind. With this encouragement, he appeared to renew his commitment to fighting them in a more productive way.

The sessions themselves reflected this temporary defeat of the Dark Forces, producing material of much greater clarity and validity.

01-11-95
Q: (Susy) Why are you choosing Laura and Frank to transmit this information?
A: Because balancing fields are correct.
[...]
Q: (Barry) Is this channeling going to go beyond the primitive method of one letter at a time, or is it going to go into the method of writing or typing or direct channeling consciously or unconsciously?
A: Can now, less danger of corruption through this method.

In retrospect, the remark about "balancing fields" being "correct" is rather curious if balance means half STS and half STO. There is also the possibility that this remark reflected the presence of Terry as a member of the group, as well as the fact that I had taken steps against Frank's continued manipulations. I was also becoming far more vigilant about potential corruption, taking greater care with framing my questions, and just generally employing reason and perspicacity in the feed-back loop.

At this point, things took an interesting turn. Tom French entered the picture. As I have written elsewhere, the story goes like this:

Back in 1995 I gave a little talk to the Clearwater, FL, MUFON group (was invited, did not solicit them) and, in the audience, was a St. Pete Times journalist, Thomas French, who was, apparently, quite taken with both myself and what I had to say. He was looking for something "new and different" to write about, and I just sort of "fit the bill." As he described it to me, he was "falling asleep" through all the speakers before me, and when I started to talk, he "woke up, for sure!" He approached me after the meeting and pretty much pleaded with me to give him an appointment to "talk to me."

I was EXTREMELY reluctant, as you might guess, knowing what kind of treatment folks who have the courage to ask questions generally get from the mass media. He promised fervently that I would have some considerable degree of input into what was published - that he would certainly go over everything with me prior to publication, and work with me on any objections and concerns. He further urged me to read some of his previous work to get a feel for how he approaches his subjects. I did, and he seemed to have a deft and sensitive touch.

After some lengthy negotiations, I agreed to let him follow me around with the intent of my story being a single thread of a 7 part series that he thought might even ultimately be a book as well. There were 7 subjects: a homicide detective, a doctor/director of an AIDS clinic, a pre-school for children from Cambodia and Laos who had been rescued out of the horrors of revolution and violence, a single mother raising children in a drug and crime infested slum, a fundamentalist preacher, myself, and Tom French, himself, who is the grandson of a Freudian psychoanalyst.

Presented in this manner, as a single thread among many, I thought it would be a unique approach as a part of a whole work whose subject was more or less "good and evil" in different contexts.

Now, what I did NOT write about in the above passage was the effect that this event had on Frank and why there was the need for "lengthy negotiations" and why I was so reluctant, and just a whole host of interesting little things behind the scenes.

Terry and Jan, being the editors and publishers of a regional MUFON journal, had been instrumental in arranging for the little "talk" at MUFON. Terry was pretty excited about the C's "take" on the alien abduction issues because it had been an area in which he had invested a goodly amount of time in hard research and where he had access to materials through MUFON that were not ordinarily available to the average person. He knew that something was going on because the C's seemed to "know" things that were not in the public domain. And so, even though it was a "channeled" source of information, he thought that the material itself stood on its own.

But, since MUFON is mostly a "nuts and bolts" organization, we discussed it and agreed that we would try to limit what was said to mostly nuts and bolts events, such as the sighting of the Black Boomerangs, the work with abductees, and with just an aside mention of the Cassiopaean contact. We had discussed privately who ought to be the one to give the little talk and I was elected because we all were aware that Frank, even though he had a nice speaking voice, tended to be long-winded and to get side-tracked on irrelevant issues. There was also some concern that he would turn people off with their perception that his manner was "superior." We knew that he couldn't help acting this way, but we also knew that a lot of people weren't as willing as we were to accept Frank as he was.

Terry and Jan both gave a short talk each, and then introduced me. I only spoke briefly, pretty much giving a report of the UFO sighting I had experienced myself, and listing some of the things that had been revealed to me by abductees under hypnosis. It really wasn't much of a talk, for sure, and the only time I had ever spoken in public before was a speech contest in high school (which I won, though I don't, to this day, remember what I said), and I just took Jan's advice and found a person to the front of the audience to "speak to," and pretended I was talking to that person alone. Aside from some difficulty breathing, I survived.

When Jan introduced me to Tom French after the meeting, and he indicated he would like to interview me, I thought that it was the group he was interested in, and I was excited for the C's. I said something about the fact that we were all together on Saturday nights, and that would be the best time, but he insisted that he would call me and make an appointment later in the week.

Frank was, as might be expected, utterly ecstatic that Tom was interested in writing about us. He just knew that this was the door to fame for the C's, and him by virtue of association! He told me to be sure and call him the instant the interview was scheduled. He would take time off from work, if necessary to be there.

When Tom French finally called, he made it clear that it was me he wanted to talk to - alone. I was confused and felt just a little trapped because without Frank and Terry and Jan there, what was I going to say? I certainly couldn't make any kind of commitments for them without them being there. I even outright suggested that they ought to be present, but Tom was firm. He wanted to talk to me, and not the group. Reluctantly, I agreed.

When I told Frank that the journalist didn't want to talk to him - at least not yet - he became very sour and critical. He spent hours and hours giving me instructions on what I was supposed to say, how I was supposed to act, and the image I must convey to Mr. French in order to make him understand just how important the C's were to the world, (and Frank, by default). Most of his comments were aimed at undermining my confidence. He described in great detail all of the people in my position who had been interviewed by journalists and that, without exception, they had been ridiculed and made to look like fools. He outlined exhaustively the detrimental effects this would have on me, my children, and life in general and specific. And of course, the problem was that I was just simply too na´ve to know how to talk to a journalist and not get taken in by conniving and trickery. All journalists were the scum of the earth, and I was going to get slimed.

By the time he was done, I was ready to call Tom French and cancel the whole thing. But, before I did, I wanted to discuss it with the C's. In their responses, it is clear that Frank's attempts to undermine my confidence were skewing the flow. He was emoting to the max!

03-07-95
Q: (L) Okay, there is a journalist coming here on Friday who wants to talk to me...
A: Be open in your mind regarding the flow of the situation. You have a tendency to forget that all do not share your ability to expand consciousness so easily.
Q: (L) So, you mean he is going to be a real skeptic and I am going to have to deal with validation issues?
A: That is not the point. The audience will be looking for flaws in the materialistic reference point, so you must be cautious, lest you be made to look irrational.
Q: (L) Well, then I guess I better not talk about exorcisms or anything like that.
A: Balance.
Q: (L) Okay. I will try to stay balanced. I don't want to have to leave the country.

The fact is, no one but Frank has ever suggested that I discuss metaphysics and the paranormal in any kind of irrational way. No one but Frank has ever suggested that I forget the limitations of my audience. In fact, in retrospect, it is singularly curious that as long as he thought that he was going to be interviewed, he was extraordinarily enthusiastic about the idea. The instant he realized that it was me who was going to be interviewed, it became the Titanic of ideas: doomed to hit obstructions and sink unless I listened to Frank and managed to convince Tom of how the story ought to be told which was, of course, as Frank wanted it to be told. After his hours and hours of indoctrination, Frank was finally assured that I would do as he wanted - that I would convince Tom of the importance of writing about the C's group, and then, being reassured, he again became enthusiastic about the idea. I would be the public relations agent, and fame was only a hop, skip and a jump into the future!

At that first interview, Tom made it pretty clear that he was not particularly interested in the C's material - or channeling in general, or Frank in specific - he was only interested in the fact that I was interested in "investigating unusual things" while still being a more or less "ordinary" wife and mother. I admit that I tried every way I could to turn his interest to the C's, and by default, Frank. I failed. He had an idea, a plan, and I was part of it; but most definitely he was in charge of the execution and he was confident that he knew what he was doing, how to do it, and what his audience liked and expected. In the end, he turned out to be right. But that didn't stop me from trying regularly and repeatedly to shift the attention to the C's, and the group, and Frank.

Aside from the shocking effect of this revelation - that anyone would be interested in my very mundane life of struggle and worrying about how to make ends meet - my very first thought was "Oh, no! How am I going to tell Frank?!" How was I going to tell Frank that Tom French was not really interested in the channeling except insofar as it was one of the tools I was using to pursue my interests while raising a family? Frank was so sure that this was going to be the opening of the door to fame and glory! Frank was so excited that now, people would finally see that he was a force to contend with - a channel - and one that had attracted the attention of a real journalist at that! After all his excitement, after all of his hours of instruction to me about how to conduct myself in the interview so as to place him and the work in the proper light, how was I going to tell him that Tom French was more interested in an overweight, stressed-out, middle-aged housewife, than in a brilliant, highly developed spiritual being who was channeling 6^th density light beings such as himself? Frank had placed so much confidence in me to be able to turn Tom French's attention toward him, and I had failed. It was going to be a negative experience, and I just couldn't figure out how to tell him without triggering another series of suicidal rants.

Fortunately, I didn't have to deal with the issue the next Saturday night, because that was the day we took the C's out of the closet for a public test drive at another MUFON meeting. It wasn't until the following session, on March 18, that I broke the news.

The reader who is astute will notice that, up to this point in time, we had sessions very frequently - usually more than once a week, but certainly every week. However, we now encounter an anomaly: there is a break here - the next session in the file listing is April 15, almost an entire month later. And therein hangs a most interesting tale.

Because Terry and Jan had brought a guest with them to the March 18 session, they left early. Frank wanted to do what he usually did after a session which was to hold court and discourse for several hours about whatever came to mind. The rest of us had endured this a sufficient number of times that, after awhile, we had a sort of unspoken agreement to not ask a question, because asking Frank a question meant that he would talk for at least another hour. These sessions drained everyone, and no matter how many times anyone hinted that they were exhausted, Frank would brush their need for sleep or getting home before the sun rose aside with and insouciance that was completely incomprehensible. I wrote it off to his arrested emotional development, that children don't think about the needs of others, and since I had sort of "taken Frank to raise," I tolerated it as best I could.

The only person who seemed to be able to stand up to Frank in these late night marathons was Terry. Jan and I would sit there like zombies throughout these dialogues, voicing our quiet requests for sleep at periodic intervals, ignored by Frank, and with Terry refusing to leave until Frank had, so it was often a stand-off. And for the reader who thinks that it should have been a simple matter of just asking Frank to go home, believe me - I did that over and over again. His answer to that was "Just five more minutes! You can give me that! After all, I have listened to your problems before!" And the five minutes would turn into an hour. If I reminded him of the instant when the five minutes was up, he would suggest that I was not being a very giving person if I was not willing to listen to him when he needed someone to talk to.Never mind that it occurred over and over and over again. After a certain number of these experiences, a discussion about it came up with Terry and Jan and they agreed to not leave without helping me to launch Frank out of whatever chair he had taken possession of, and maneuver him to the door.

But, on the night of the incident we are approaching, Terry and Jan had to leave right away to take their guest home. That left Frank, S** and myself, and I knew I was in for a long night. After my explanation about Tom French's lack of interest in the C's, (which is still his position, as he stated just the other day), Frank's mood was brittle and artificially bright. He was behaving in a way I had never seen before, and it seemed almost bellicose. I was tired and in no mood to sit up until 4 a.m. discussing anything and I suggested repeatedly that I was exhausted and would like to close up the house and go to bed. S** was exchanging light banter with him, also suggesting that the two of them should leave so I could go to bed, and to this day I can't remember exactly what was said, either by the two of them, or myself, other than that it was in the "light banter" mode of trying to convince Frank that it was time to say goodnight - a difficult task under any circumstances. I may have teasingly threatened to turn him into a pumpkin or something equally silly. The only thing I DO remember is that what he said next was so completely out of context, and out of proportion to anything that I had said, that I will never, ever forget it. He said: "Well how about this: I'm going to tell [your daughter] that [her father] isn't her real father!"

Doesn't sound like much, does it? But the point was that, of all the private things I had ever confided to Frank, this was the one thing that he knew would hurt and upset me the most. As a mother, I am a Tigress, and it is a very dangerous thing for anyone to threaten to hurt one of my children, physically, mentally, emotionally, or any way.

As those who have read Amazing Grace know, my first child was adopted as a baby by my first husband after we married. She never knew any other father, and as far as the two of them were concerned, he was her father. Of course I realized that, at some time in her life, we would have to tell her the facts, but at that particular moment, it was NOT the time to do it and I had made the big mistake of confiding my concerns about it to Frank.

My daughter was, at that point, in the midst of a teen-age crisis. It wasn't unusual or overly serious in any sense, but she is a very sensitive child, and was particularly vulnerable.

Yes, I am familiar with all of the pro and con arguments about how to handle such issues with children, and in the end, I believe that it is up to the judgment of the parent who, after all, knows the child best. And in this case, I had already clearly expressed the opinion that it was not the time to tell her; that it would be a disaster because her own emotional development was at a delicate stage, and Frank knew all of this. He had gone to great lengths to inquire about what was bothering me, to pretend sympathy and interest in order to extract the details from me. And here, now, for the first time, I clearly saw WHY Frank spent so much time pretending interest in certain people. Indeed, with his rant about being so spiritually superior, his interest was projected like a benediction of approval, but the now obvious TRUE motivation was revealed: he pretended interest, not because he was really interested in the person, but because it was his agenda to extract information that he could later use to control the person. He was nothing more or less than a common con-man, and I use the term in its original meaning as one who gains the confidence of another in order to get something from them.

With stunning clarity, I saw that the embezzlement episode wasn't just a glitch in his life, an act of desperation in a difficult situation. I saw that he had not, indeed, been taken advantage of by "Dane" or anyone. I saw him clearly and without blinders or wishful thinking. He was not a pitiful, damaged soul who needed to be helped, he was a predator. Nothing more, nothing less.

And he chose to try to control and hurt me for no reason other than the fact that he believed that I had turned Tom French off to the idea of writing about the group, (mainly HIM) and focusing on me. And it was totally untrue. He was jealous, and felt that he was entitled to what he had not worked for, and if he couldn't have it, he would hurt me through my child.

I was almost speechless. I calmly told him that I could not believe that he was such a low-life as to do something so despicable as to hurt my daughter. He stuttered out a protest that he had only been joking, that it just jumped out of his mouth and he didn't mean it. And I replied that it was "out of the fullness of the heart that the mouth speaks." Obviously he would never have said such a thing if he had not already thought about it in those terms. And then I told him (rather calmly, which surprised me), that he had better go home and do it NOW, and spend some time thinking about what he had just said.

He left.

S** and I sat there, speechless, and just looked at each other. Neither of us could believe this revelation of Frank's viciousness and meanness. Finally, S** tried to smooth things over by saying that Frank obviously wasn't "himself." He was under stress. He was overtired. It was late. All kinds of excuses.

But nothing could excuse the fact that, in his anger at me, justified or not, Frank had expressed the idea that he would willingly harm an innocent person I loved because he knew that this was the most direct and vicious way of hurting me. And nothing is more despicable than that. The only kinds of people I have ever heard of who consider such actions to be acceptable, are the lowest criminal types who are even despised by other criminals. Felons who hurt children are often placed in solitary confinement in prisons because the other prisoners will try to kill them. Hurting a child to hurt the parent is an unspeakable act of cowardice and depravity.

In the days following this event, I was rather startled at the view of Frank that was opened to my mind. All of the aspects of Frank that I had been ascribing to the possibility that he was, truly, a higher spiritual being who was just having a battle with Dark forces - and the battle was explainable because he WAS a higher spiritual being - were now perceived as simply expressions of a very narrow, selfish, conniving, manipulative, and fundamentally mean character. I could see nothing positive in him at all and I marveled that this was so.

I was not as aware of the chemistry of the brain then as I am now, and I was very curious about this effect. How could it be that the mind can shift so instantaneously from one perspective to another? How completely the light had changed on my perception of him, and all of the things I had formerly excused, shoved under the rug, giving a positive "spin," or taken his word for, now appeared to me in an altogether different context. Had I really been wearing the proverbial "rose colored glasses" all that time? Or was what I was thinking NOW the distorted view?

In retrospect, I realize that I was, in fact, having a serious lesson in how our thinking is controlled or clarified by our chemistry. As I now know, when a shock is received, or a threat of danger, the mind becomes acutely clear and lucid and what IS becomes evident to the extent that every nuance of reality is exposed to view with a clarity that is stunning. I suppose that this is a condition of evolutionary advantage; the creature that cannot see clearly when in danger does not survive. And I suspect that the same is true whatever the soul orientation. Any individual, when shocked, will suddenly see who is and is not "like them," and thus a danger to their existence.

Because I was so furious, I didn't trust myself to speak to Frank. But I certainly had plenty I wanted to say. I decided to write a letter to him, since I was still too distraught to speak to him.I still have the notes of the quotes I used in this rather lengthy missive wherein I itemized his every flaw in excruciating detail, even pointing out that I could see his disdain for normal human relations as supreme selfishness. I realize now that I was hoping that Frank would respond by saying: "indeed, I agree with all you wrote, and I am truly all those things, it was just a momentary lapse, please accept my apology," and so forth. Among the quotes I included in my letter:

Master K'ung said, There are three sorts of friend that are profitable, and three sorts that are harmful. Friendship with the upright, with the true-to-death and with those who have knowledge is profitable. Friendship with the obsequious, friendship with those who are good at accommodating their principles, friendship with those who are clever at talk is harmful.

Confucius:..people of superior refinement and of active disposition identify happiness with honour...

Aristotle: But to die to escape from poverty or love or anything painful is not the mark of a brave man, but rather of a coward; for it is softness to fly from what is troublesome, and such a man endures death not because it is noble, but because he is afraid.

Ever will a coward show no mercy. Sir Thomas Malory

To see what is right and not do it is cowardice. Confucius

Cowardice is the mother of cruelty. Montaigne

From Emerson: Persons with character are as easy to spot as if they were a different color. Self-trust and the perception that virtue is enough is the essence of character. It is the natural tendency to defy falseness and wrongÄ It speaks the truth, and it is just, generous, hospitable, temperate, despises pettiness, and is scornful of being scorned. Character persists when the mood has passed in which the decision to act was made. Character displays undaunted boldness and a fortitude that does not wear down or out.

When the soul is not master of one's reactions to the world, then that soul is everyone's dupe. The person of character is not for sale. He does not ask to dine nicely and to sleep warm. He does not need plenty; he can lose with grace. Character is persistent. The person of character makes a choice based on honorable considerations and sticks with it and, no matter what, does not weakly try to reconcile itself with the world.

Most outstanding of all is the good humor and hilarity of the person of character. The great will not condescend to take anything seriously. The heroic soul is not common nor can the common be heroic. The person of character always does what he is afraid to do. Greatness ignores the opinions of others.

The person of character knows that he is born into a state of war and his own well-being requires that he should not go dancing for peace. Knowing this, he collects himself and neither defying nor dreading the thunder, he takes both his reputation and his own life in his hand, and, with perfect calm and politeness, dares the hangman and the mob by the absolute truth of his speech, and the correctness of his behavior. Toward all external evil, the person of character affirms his ability to cope single-handedly with an infinite army of enemies. To this military attitude of the soul we give the name of heroism.

Heroism is self-confidence which ignores the restraints of prudence, because of the natural energy and power of the belief that it can repair any harms it may suffer. The hero possesses a mind of such balance that nothing can shake his will. Pleasantly and merrily, he marches to the beat of his own drum no matter what disasters or dissolutions take place around him. He is in the world, but not of it. He does what he does because it is the thing to be done at the moment and he is present and capable of doing it. There is a quality in him that is negligent of expense, of health, of life, of danger, of hatred, of reproach, and knows that his will is higher and more excellent than all actual and all possible antagonists.

His victories are by demonstration of superiority. The most violent or conniving person learns that in this person there is resistance on which both impudence and terror are wasted. This resistance is faith in fact and right. The natural power of the heroic character is like light and heat, and all nature co-operates with it. The reason why we feel one mans presence, and not another's is as simple as gravity. Heroic characters are the conscience of the society to which they belong.

No change of circumstances can repair a defect of character. The heroic character does not accept the conventional opinions and practices. He is a non-conformist. Acquiescence to the establishment indicates lack of character which must see the house built before they can comprehend the plan.

There is a class of individuals which are endowed with character, heroism, insight and virtue. They are usually received with ill-will by the masses. No one can use common beliefs to understand these characters. They cannot be judged from glimpses. They need perspective, as a landscape. You cannot understand them by popular ethics nor by simple observation of their actions. It is said that He who confronts the gods knows heaven. This is the nature of the person of character.

In past times of violence, every person had many opportunities to prove his worth; therefore, every name that has emerged from the masses can teach us something of heroism, character, and manners. Personal force never goes out of fashion. Persons of valor become known and rise to their natural place. In any milieu, heroes and pirates are worth more than talkers and clerks.

The heroic character perpetuates good breeding. Good manners are a spontaneous fruit of the heroic character. The heroic character is a person of truth, master of his own actions, and expresses that mastery in his behavior, not in any manner dependent and servile either on persons, or opinions, or possessions.

People of character are an energetic class, full of courage and of attempts which intimidate their paler brethren. Being up to the demands of their very nature, they can out pray saints, out general veterans and outshine all courtesy. They are comfortable with pirates and scholars. Persons of character sit carelessly in their chairs and are too excellent to value any conditions.

Money is not essential to the aristocrat, which is the true class of those of heroic character. Society among aristocrats is mutually agreeable and stimulating. By swift consent, everything superfluous is dropped, everything graceful is renewed. Good manners are a formidable defense against the common people.

The manners of the aristocrat are aped by the commoners, but never understood.

Aristocrats never do as the common people do when following fashion. They understand that "fashion" is virtue gone to seed. Aristocrats are sowers, people of fashion are reapers.

Each person's position in life depends on some symmetry in his inner makeup. A natural aristocrat will find his way to those of his own kind. Those of good breeding and personalsuperiority readily find each other. A person should not go where he cannot carry his whole sphere with him. A defect in manners or character is usually a defect in perceptions. In addition to personal force and perception, an aristocrat is also good natured, generous and obliging.

Times of heroism are generally times of terror, but the day never dawns in which this element is without value. Latent inner power is what we call Character, a reserved force which acts directly by presence, and without means. It is conceived of as a certain undemonstrable force, a Familiar of Genius, by whose impulses the hero is guided, but whose counsels he cannot impart. Character is of a stellar and undiminishable greatness. [Ralph Waldo Emerson]

I lambasted him up one side and down the other. I told him in no uncertain terms that, if what I had seen on the night of March 18 was the REAL Frank, then he was not any of those things that we had discussed so many times. I wanted the real Frank to please stand up. Tell me one way or another. And if you say one thing with your words, and behave another way in your actions, how can I believe what you say?

What happens after such a "seeing" is that the chemistry of the "shock" begins to dissipate, and the normal chemistry resumes, and the ability to see and think with such clarity recedes. I began to doubt what I had seen. I began to doubt my perceptions. The rose-colored glasses of "giving the benefit of the doubt went back on, and my mind began to work on the problem of how to reconcile. Because, after all, if I wasn't there to help Frank, to make a place in the world for him, who would do it?

Continue to Page 24

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
Copyright © 1997-2009 Arkadiusz Jadczyk and Laura Knight-Jadczyk. All rights reserved. "Cassiopaea, Cassiopaean, Cassiopaeans," is a registered trademark of Arkadiusz Jadczyk and Laura Knight-Jadczyk.
Letters addressed to Cassiopaea, Quantum Future School, Ark or Laura, become the property of Arkadiusz Jadczyk and Laura Knight-Jadczyk
Republication and re-dissemination of the contents of this screen or any portion of this website in any manner is expressly prohibited without prior written consent.

You are visitor number [an error occurred while processing this directive] .