redcairo

It is unfortunate that people are sad. These are my people too. I would die for them if I needed to serve defense with weapons, and I would hope to provide for them if I were in a role that made policy or law. Just because they wanted someone to win I disliked (granted I disliked their enemy candidate too) doesn't mean I laugh at their grieving or fears. There would have been the same on the other side if it had gone the other way and it could have. RC

I don't watch the news, which is probably for the best actually, but it does mean that my by-proxy info tends to vary in quality, I admit, so I may be missing something. My understanding from context is that he wished to: a> deport people here illegally (often not always from mexico) (not gonna be able to happen more than a fraction at best, not with kids or people with kids or anywhere near the number, but would be nice if we could merely START doing this at least with people arrested! as a process in every state); and b> refuse new-visa entry to people who have not followed the legal immigrating process (there is a line! they can get in it) and particularly if they openly espouse a philosophy that literally advocates non-assimilation, subversion, gov't overthrow and enslavery of others (usually this is islam); I don't find either of those approaches horrific or racist or nazi, they actually seem fairly reasonable if one's interests are in the safety, welfare and future of the country. Neither of those things would threaten people who are hispanic because they are, or people who are already citizens who are muslims because they are. Both, of course, are often referred to in slang in passing -- mexicans, or muslims -- but surely this topic has been done to death enough to know the context in which it's addressed. "Assuming" that he must mean the larger context of just-seize-and-deport non white people for no reason except they're not white -- that's surreal. RC

You have to understand that the media has convinced people that DT is so horrifically evil that if he got into office, jackboot nazi thugs would be going through the streets rounding up non-white people. I literally had people texting this sort of thing to me last night, deeply upset. So of course they are hysterical that he won. They really believe it's the end of the world. RC

I agree that there are many inflammatory posts and that there have been some pointedly anti-semitic posts. You are correct that it is not appropriate to diss people for race, religion or gender. However, you do tend to be unusually proactive in taking offense on behalf of others. :-) RC

Fortunately for all of us I guess, being a kinder, gentler-to-women guy is probably not the first requirement for being CEO of the most powerful nation in the world. In his next life, maybe. RC

Well I am pretty sure that people use the Anon cover to send WikiLeaks stuff -- and I am pretty sure that most governments trying to get something public they can't officially make public are likely to use that route. So they might be CIA but they're probably everything else, too. I find it difficult not to cheer Anon like they're Robin Hood sometimes. Even though other times it's really not that way at all. RC

Anonymous can't be conflated with WikiLeaks... not only are they not the same, but Anon doesn't have ANY center. Anybody can say anything claiming to be from Anonymous. And not everyone who wants to do so is good. Hence my caveat-ing out the better from the worse in that one. :-) Yeah they said there was more coming but who knows... it is their timing and it does seem they have done what they could to get info out as they could, and a lot of it. It's not like they're funded like a major news media. If they hand over less than the expect on something in a tiny timeframe that doesn't make me cynical about the entire org. They've spent a lot of years -- and a lot of time harrassed and indirectly imprisoned (and killed, it seems) -- to do what they do. RC

They claimed to have information people sent them. What did they claim that they haven't backed up? (Serious question, I don't follow news really, just occasional topics I see on a forum.) RC

Howdy! Temporal archetypes (again this is probably the wrong word but is commonly used in some work) can be a composite such as the coming board meeting Monday, the pain in my left knee, and my current lack of money. They function as "autonomous identities" quite well and can even function as guides, but I do not consider them "entities" or "beings." That is what I was referring to. Apologies if I phrased it poorly. (Even as guides if they are to stick around they have to be given thoughtform energy for it. Of course that goes even for thoughtforms themselves (e.g. of an statuette, I have several thoughtforms I've been "given" from the inside and have to pointedly focus with sometimes to maintain their "presence" around me).) Aeons (of the universe, such as Tarot, the Elements [chemistry's ToE]) have a power and sentience degree which experientially are very different from that noted above. This could be the thoughtform energy poured into them by billions of people over time, of course, but regardless of why, they simply do. I have no interest in that kind of thing personally. My views on this are currently in flux. I call myself an accidental animist -- I came to the belief system via experience not intellect -- but I've had a number of experiences where I am forced to dramatically reconsider what I think about every particle of energy in our perceived reality -- from metal to gumwrappers to skyscrapers -- and in the rare moments that is not utterly frying my brain, it is making me think my whole definition of life and sentience has been wrong all along. It'll probably take awhile to work that through. This comes with the above views-in-flux for me, as it's part of the same inner information. It's always mutual, I get. If we write a story, a song, build a table, the consciousness inherent in that energy already existed and is as much a part of the creation as we are. Our belief that it's all-us (most people, most the time) is just a belief. Kind of like getting information and being sure we imagined it, even though we did not create it on purpose. Of course we did -- imagination feeds information INto us, not just out from us, it's our personal interface with the cosmos... most everything feels like that when in a light brainwave state, as a result. Part of the same stuff above for me, although this one I've been stumbling over much longer. I'm not sure what 'is' for me, is for everyone else, I mean I kind of assume it -- but maybe not. I've been working on coming to terms with an understanding that I am an 'emergent property' of a group of 12 and I'm pretty much the composite-energy-CEO to be 'driver' in this identity-instance for this focus-reality. I spent awhile freaked out, going, "I'm not real! OMG! I'm not even real!" after understanding that the first time LOL. The spirit is in them. Of course I am them. Sort of. Identity is by far the most infinitely complex and confusing topic of everything I've ever dealt with. The more I understand from the inside, the more the "walls of separation" seem to fall. That doesn't mean there aren't different kinds of Beings for example -- a tree is not a cat is not a person -- but they are all beings and they "overlap and merge" to a far greater degree than we might imagine at times. Maybe it is ever thus. I think of it more like there is an energy and the interface of our current instances perceive it according to our capacities, which vary, but as-perceived, that instance is still a legitimate being -- an aspect of something we couldn't name if we wanted to, but we can name the 'Aspects' Mary, or Diana, or whatever. None are accurate beyond the aspect-instance, but all have accuracy within the larger Identity, I suspect. All theory of course. I only met so-called Mary a couple of times (and I had a knee-jerk rejection of the whole christianity thing) and she was ass-kickingly powerful both times and I'm not even Catholic. I no longer make assumptions about her. I think she and other semi-deities may be something we really just aren't equipped with current neural patterns to fully understand. At least not while in an alpha/beta state, as something we can bring to verbalization. The identities I've been working with the last couple of decades do have certain recognizable elements, and identify themselves when asked in different ways. That doesn't mean that things "are vs. aren't" identities or beings -- that's too simplified and polarized -- everything is an 'identity' if it's talking to you and I think we can communicate with most anything (a key feature of humans possibly, unless trees and squirrels and mailboxes do this too). It just means that even if, for example, all animals are animals, still some are clearly more like a duck than a giraffe. Same in the interworlds. I can't say I know the underlying source or meaning of anything -- even my kitchen table -- I'll leave that to the sages for now. But I do know that as long as it looks like a table when I experience it, I can probably interact with it as if it is, and so far that has always worked for me. :-) Best, RC

WikiLeaks -- and some of the more charming and less terrifying elements of Anonymous -- are like society's immune system trying to fight back. :-) RC

I agree that the term 'archetypes' is over, badly, and incorrectly used -- by me greatly too. We really need a few words in this area that our language just doesn't have. There are identities which are the collective composite energies of our intent which are, as a result, half-us. Then there are identities which are autonomous and often far more powerful, present, and long in duration, than us. We might get 'our version' of them but they are who they are regardless of us. The former are like 'personalized' archetypes. The latter are like Archetypes capital-A and tend to be way, way more powerful and impactive. The former are good for meditative work on your problems. The latter may range from changing your life to having you for lunch. I think a lot of this stuff is greatly underestimated in terms of the repercussions on every level that interaction can bring. RC

True story: I was 18 and working at the Rennaissance Faire south of Los Angeles which is like a big hippy fest outside the public open hours. I was new to it and it was a few days in but was my first. Since I think everyone but me was stoned (goody two shoes even back then apparently) they were sleeping more soundly perhaps. It was just dawn, still dark but for the tiniest light on the horizon, when the most god-awful sound awoke us. I figured out it was bagpipes but why anybody would ever play them let alone at that hour and so loudly was beyond me. Everyone was awake around me now. "Why doesn't someone tell that lunatic to stop?!" I asked rhetorically, but the guy nearby says, "It's the Scots." and turns over and goes back to sleep. People grunt agreement, and go back to sleep. In the middle of that caterwauling! As if "It's the Scots." explains everything. I look at all the people around me who are now resting blissfully again, as if their brains simply adapted on the spot. I certainly wouldn't be sleeping any time soon. Determined to go tell this person to wait until the bloody daylight at least, I get dressed as fast as I can. That was my "press all molecules of body fat up into your bosum" outfit mind you, as apparently the primary currency of that period of history was women's breasts. (I sold pinwheels during the day. We lolled over our booth's counter, waiting until the boss and no kids were around to bustily breeze at couples in the worst possible low english accent, "Oh c'mon now! Buy the lady a stick she can blow on all day!" We thought we were so hilarious.) I stomp toward the noise, morning hair and no mirror probably looking like medusa, toward the ghastly wailing which is now in some kind of more-than-one-of-them discordant chaos -- really? Did these people never hear of harmony?? I asked myself, now righteously fuming about this chaos waking up the ENTIRE camp -- and as I get nearer to it, I hear this occasional, THUD. Wail-breathy-wail-eeeeerrrrrghhhh-THUD. That only adds to the mystery. I'm getting close now and I see several other people, hair akimbo, clothing hastily thrown on, most of them men, standing around with their arms crossed and their mouths frowning. They're moving back and forth because they're cold, but they're apparently watching something and they're not saying anything which is beyond me for why, because I'm pretty sure all of them, like me, came to give these insane rising-dawn bagpipers a piece of their mind. But as I come around a corner I see why. The Scotts, you see, were merely 'infamous' for playing their bagpipes at the break of rising dawn. What they were really locally famous for, though, was: a - being REALLY. BIG. MEN. I mean really big. Like "I'd have played pro football but I kept making them cry so they sent me home" big. Or maybe those are just the ones that go out in the morning with the pipe players to intimidate the locals. And b - apparently their primary hobby -- no idea if this was related to what they were selling at the Faire or not -- was AXE THROWING. So we stood there, in some degree of awe at these huge men throwing sharp axes at pieces of wood like a jolly contest they all have before breakfast, and we considered telling them what we thought of them making all this noise in the morning. And we looked at them. And they barely even deigned to look at us. And we went back to bed. And that was the Scotts in Los Angeles in 1983. Bet they're a bloody riot back home in Scotland. :-) RC

Gee whiz, Joe, you say that like it's a bad thing. (...) Policy didn't start moving fast until Obama. The medical thing -- in a system like ours, it's nothing like it would be in a system where megaubercorps aren't running all the agencies, education, licensing, drugs, most food, and profits -- has deep roots into everything and is a profound, really profound, policy change -- it isn't just about medicine, it's about 'control' in so many ways. Given HC's insistence she will take down the 2nd Amendment, and O's actual inroads to by proxy undermining it indirectly, it seems likely something is going to happen there, and possibly about the 1st A as well -- that'll be the most 'official' policy change in our history if it happens. As far as people overseas hating Reagan, let 'em hate our government, I am more concerned about US having reason to do so! RC

Rabbit by her side Mother wolf awakens cubs Life is not passive

I know this will make some people laugh at me but I love ASMR. Hopefully this video will begin where I set it, and not play a loud ad (youtube is killin' me with those). In fact please start with stuff on mute just in case, as most of these vids need to be turned up, but... ASMR is meant to be listened to ideally with headphones, calmly, so you can hear scratching, rubbing, crinkling, tapping, brushing, whispering, tinkling, clicking, and other sounds that have an interesting and often very positive effect on the nervous system. Visuals can sometimes do it also, like a close-up focus to the camera. This led to some interesting (and sometimes hilarious, and sometimes predictably semi-erotic) roleplaying youtube enthusiasm but that's not really what it's about. A lot of people just like plugging that option into just about everything. :-) Ever go to the hair salon and while they are working on you, have a nice moment of a 'warm shiver' from the attention? This is basically an ASMR effect. "Attention" can do it, but sounds work unusually well -- stuff you'd never expect. I found one vid once that had this 'chittering' almost bugs, which I didn't like intellectually but my body seemed to like. There's a whole world to this and different people respond to different "triggers" as the sounds are referred to. Sometimes you can respond a lot to something and then it fades but if you don't listen to that for awhile, the response comes back. Usually if you are calm, ideally close your eyes but you don't have to (sometimes certain visuals help for whatever reason), you'll find something in the wide collection available on yt that you will respond to. You will get fuzzies, shivers, tingles, there are different terms (and feelings). Allegedly this is not the same nerve response as 'frission' from music. This video is a woman I like who was one of the earliest people into the ASMR yt world. This is mostly a rubbing and slightly scratching sound video with occasional tinkling from some earrings. She tries to be so cool on camera and usually fails just slightly -- rather like she is so pretty, but not quite too pretty -- she is adorably dorky sometimes. I love the sound when the finger-mics brush the earrings. I often respond to "nearly inaudible rubbing" (though I sometimes have to SEE it or at least know it's there), so if you didn't already think this was weird, now you will. This vid should start right at the point where that kind of thing begins for a short time. This videos is mostly of fake fingernails on wooden boxes and some artsy objects. This one, you really would need headphones to hear properly for reaction I suspect but if you have them esp. earbuds some people would probably like it. Or hate it. :-) Don't forget to start with mute if you've turned sound up in case of ads... If you prefer "visuals" instead, this is a role-playing sci-fi vid done by a woman I think is a game programmer and got into making highly "specialized" videos for ASMR. It doesn't really trigger me but the section of the vid I am linking to has a couple example of using visual and sound (mostly sound here but visual too) to provide an 'enjoyable' effect. Obviously if your environment is not too bright, nor your screen, and you are sitting calmly with full screen this goes a little better. Most visual stuff works best I find if you fix on a spot and look there and don't move your eyes around the screen much. Edit to add: this has a variety of different sounds and transitions and is pretty decent. Well and that is ASMR. Sometimes I put on several different ones at the same time in multiple tabs. I find it very relaxing. :-) RC

I would like to see a succinct list of the 'executive orders' signed in the last 50 years. I bet that would be terrifying -- from presidents on both sides. I keep wondering when the people who voted for CHANGE are going to realize not only did nothing change, but we got so much more war, and even "new improvements" like making the wickest uber corp lawyers into "Czars" with power. Can we still blame George Jr. for everything? Last I heard, everything in the world was still his fault by 9am daily. A friend on a food forum told me she voted for HC the other day because, and I quote, it is time for a woman president. I thought, why does nobody else have time? Shouldn't everyone who is, say, a midget, be looking at their watch and going, "Fred, it's time! It's time! We should be president now because we're short!" Or italian-americans, have we had a sufficiently italian person in the big chair? IS IT TIME YET? So we don't need to be picky about person as long as "it's time" for their category, right? Is there some kind of modern mayan-like clock for this "timing?" Like this chair, and that chair, and then THE END OF THE WORLD AS WE KNOW IT or something? :-) RC

Only in a functional system. We have gradually devolved a system where good people are wrecked by it, and gradually, good people have no desire to be part of it any further, and the worst people thrive within it. By worst I do not mean cackling calculating evil overlords. I mean people who simply do not care about the details. They don't do things to destroy our country on purpose; nothing really matters, they just do what gives them leverage or advantage in some way. (I'm suddenly reminded of one of the most upsetting lines in a movie. It was a harrison ford movie I hated, which is rare as I like him. Too much 'personalized' violence. Anyway, these people have kidnapped a family and are preparing to possibly murder them, and the teen girl asks a young man, why do you hate us? And he says, "I don't hate you. I just don't care about you." True but disturbing, and that is what a lot of society today may amount to. There was a book I never read called "kids without conscience" that I think was on the same subject. That people with bad intent toward others are not what is scariest; people who feel nothing in particular for others are what is actually kinda terrifying.) So you make a system worse until a man gets a single vote on a "legislative package" that contains a ridiculous array of stuff, and he can't choose which, and he's voting against things he wants and for things he doesn't want no matter what decision he makes. You make it a series of complex packages he wouldn't have time to read the detail for if he never slept and had 10x as much time, so he's actually oblivious to a lot of the elements of it anyway. You force him to rely on other entry-level affordable people to do a good majority of his work he couldn't possibly have time for, though he'll pay for having to trust their judgment. His enemies will use against him votes he didn't even want to make, but had to, in order to vote for or against something more important at the time. All of this then sets things up so he has little real way to demonstrate what he stands for vs. dislikes because it's all blurred. In short, anybody who wants to "accomplish something" -- anything really, let alone something GOOD -- is immediately going to be exasperated to the point of helpless frothing rage by such a situation and, if they have any survival skills, are just going to walk away, or never go near it to begin with. If you create a situation where the most dynamic people consider it a boggy sandtrap of failure and misery, you're not going to get very many good people vying for those jobs. You get what's left. When most voting is a choice between the hyena and the tiger, you aren't choosing to live, you're choosing how to die. On the other hand... I remember seeing a quote from a yogi of some sort, that said if he'd known in other lives what he knows now, dying would have been so much more fun. RC

Interesting! I don't think I have an answer, but I have a couple thoughts. (Ouch! Oops! I thought! LOL) To a great degree (perhaps entirely) our thoughts our bounded by our belief systems, which are, short of already being enlightened, inaccurate at best, and a big mess at worst. So perhaps it is technically true that all thought is imperfect -- corrupted -- fundamentally. Sometimes when I have had a really powerful internal experience, and I am in the aftermath of it, and gradually pondering it, I will be told to stop thinking so much about it, and I can "feel" the "why" -- because the very act of "thinking about it" is analytical, which is, by its nature, "separate." It forces a "me vs. the other thing" mentality. I have often had difficulty in some experiences because if I don't kind of turn off my brain, the process of "thinking ABOUT it" will separate me from the "living it" and actually interfere with the experience. So perhaps it is technically true that all thought is inherently divisive, at least in that way.0 An author I like often said that the NOW (or the "present" as eastern folks might say) is "the point of power." And that whatever we "focus upon" is what our power pours into. ("You get what you concentrate upon. There is no other main rule.") There are probably slightly different ways to use and interpret each of those words. Most words especially in english have some problematic translations. For example, 'thoughtless' is not the same as 'not holding opinion' rather in the same way that "childish" is not "childlike." That's awesome. I think that is basically the "living" vs. "thinking about living" thing. RC

election chaos minds and galaxies spinning black moon void of course (edit later: oh! I didn't realize I was supposed to use the last line of the post above! Which would have been a better first line than I had. Sorry!!)

Thanks for the response. I only read daobums and a food forum at the moment, so I guess "what I can do" to avoid WWIII is covered. Ok you guys I did MY part of the work. Now fix this. RC

There is a state of mind I have only been blessed enough to have a few times, temporarily. And in that state of mind, I understand that everything is exactly how it is supposed to be, how it has chosen to be. That the polluted river and the stunted tree are not accidental and they are having the experience they have every right to have and are learning from it. That in a universe where the soul is aware, nobody is born or dies by "accident." That the energy of the Sun, and of the Earth, is so massive, that our thoughts we can actually do her in are charming humor. There have been better and worse than us before, and where are they now. Right. She is still here. This is a virtual reality holodeck. We chose to buy tickets for the show that is going on during our lifetime. Not because we thought it would be rainbows all the time. But because it was an action-adventure show. That it is. Unfortunately, The rest of the time I just think it's a crazy fuckin' world and it's probably not going to end well for humans. On the bright side, We have at least 28 minutes left of the movie. :-) RC

A "chorus" of sign language! That's both hilarious and awesome! RC

Most theories about what cannot be, or isn't logical, are forced to preclude a "multiverse" concept. Because if this is truly the nature of the universe, then pretty much all bets are off for what "might be" concerning other-identities. (Or even our own identities in other parallels, as I call them. Or us as other identities in other parallels.) I think a couple decades of active imagination meditation work are part of this, but I really dislike that term, because it is so misleading about the experience. It is only consciously imaginative when you are new and really bad at it. :-) With skill, even in a fully alpha/beta state, you learn to "allow the autonomy" of all that is perceived as not-you.... just like it works in real life. If the brainwave is closer to theta the experience is more "vivid and visceral." I was a hypnosis nut for about 15 years, and studied biofeedback and so on, so intentional brainwave states were already my thing even before I ran into this kind of meditation. The public seems to think brainwave states are like some kind of switch. The terms only refer to the 'dominant' quantity of waves in a certain frequency bandwidth. You can be walking around calmly and have everything from gamma to delta in your head -- it's merely that you will have 'mostly' beta (eyes open, conscious motion) with a degree of alpha (the calmness). But there's still plenty of other stuff going on. And you can entrain yourself to change this. At one point in my life I thought the archetypal world had "accidentally animated itself" for me somehow -- I mean, I was a logical, practical person, and if you switch timelines when you're home at lunch (mind-bending), talk to entities in the night (mind-bending), and then you gotta get up early to give a presentation to the board of directors the next morning, it can be a little disconcerting. You come up with all kinds of theories to try and explain it to yourself in a way that doesn't require a straightjacket (or a chemical lobotomy of drugs). Because of the meditation I'd been doing, and my long experience with my own states of mind, I was pretty sure I'd become able to hold a fairly high degree of delta while keeping enough beta for alertness. (I was almost never not lucid in dreams, and even had periods where despite my body sleeping I was utterly lucid 24/7 for days at a time.) (Probably an over-stim chakra side effect, is my theory now. Although I had been lucid in most dreams -- and even intentionally if I chose -- my whole life anyway. Wish I still had that ability. It's rare now.) So I was talking to this friend a couple years later, who had been a manager in a sleep research center for awhile. I told her I thought I was holding more delta especially in that earlier era, and I was wondering, could "Information streams" that normally are only perceived by the deeply asleep brain, be perceived by the conscious brain in that case? And seem real to me? I mean -- the information (energy) being 'real and valid' -- just that normally you would not 'perceive and translate' it unless you were sleeping. I told her, in addition to some of the anomalies from the earlier time, of some recent experiences I'd had back then (I think this is circa mid to late 90s) where I had been deeply asleep, and was abruptly woken. It was more like just stepping sideways into this world rather than going through a linear waking process. But the thing was, at the moment I awoke, I had been doing something with other people in another world that was ABOUT this world, and when I awoke it was utterly real to me -- even though I knew I had been asleep, even though I understood it had to be a dream, it didn't matter, my brain interpreted it as completely real, as much as anything tangible in my outer life. It was like I gave instant-validation to it. She said actually, it's interesting you brought that up. She told me that she had, on a few occasions, had someone be in deep delta and wake up abruptly -- and insist that another person had been there that they were having a conversation with and, even though they understood they had to have been dreaming, they still insisted that as far as they were concerned, it was still utterly real. She said it happened more than once, and the anomaly for her was that they were in deep delta and you're not supposed to be dreaming in deep delta, yet they were describing things that clearly seemed like a dream. And the second anomaly was that even though they had to know it was a dream, to them it was still real-valid. So I had this idea for awhile that perhaps my brain was simply carrying a larger quantity of theta-delta streams around while I was awake, as a side-effect of my practices, and it was sort of "expanding the frequency bandwidth" that my brain was likely to perceive energy within, and translating it in accordance with my biological filters, belief systems and expectations. I think it is possible that culture, genetics or both could lead people to perceive a "larger bandwidth" of energy than our focus-reality normally makes manifest. I have a friend in the Ozarks who has seen a ton of anomalous beings in the forest where he grew up -- and a couple of them were wild predators or seemed like it and terrified him -- most of this stuff gets no press because it doesn't fall into the "aliens probed me" meme. Later in life he was to find that at least some of these things, which were utterly novel to him a kid and young man, are found in old native legends, or in grimoires of allegedly mythical things. In my current multiverse model, there is (to shrink this down to human brain sized linear logic, which of course it's not) a collection of energy (or something that, eventually down the line so to speak, has an emergent property that to us, is). Every individual 'perception' that is created (and infinitely, these are created) basically has their own interpretation of all that -- a reality distinct to them. However that perception is probably categorically grouped -- in our cases, it's in a certain range of frequency, and within that it's a certain biological (massively filtering) creature, and within that there's a certain cultural set. And so when a given area or group of energy is experienced, it is likely to be experienced "very similarly to" other perceptions which have the same "settings." That doesn't mean whatever is being perceived is some objectively-same-thing. There are no objects-things, there is no objectively, there is only energy perceived subjectively. But we see it "basically" as similar-same for the same reason most people see trees and rivers the same way. I suspect the underlying energy is similar; but the individuals experiencing it will be filtering/morphing it into what works for them. So maybe in a world where people walked around in cloaks and had cultural stories of the fey with pointed ears, that is what they would experience. But maybe in a world where anything foreign is alien, it seems like that instead. I think Jacques Vallee and Richard Thompson have both done an excellent job of providing historical review of stuff that parallels modern cultural reports, making it patently clear to anybody with half a brain that is exposed to this that nothing new is going on and we just have different labels and contexts now. (Despite that I dislike the title, and that Streiber wrote the foreword -- I'm sure the publisher thought that was cool at the time -- the book "Alien Identities" by Richard Thompson is totally worth reading. It is one of the few books I have kept on my shelf since I first read it, circa 96 or so. He is a Vedic scholar.) I met what I called 'the blondes' and the 'fragiles' well before I actually realized other people called these 'nordics' and 'greys.' I thought aliens looked like the thing on the Streiber book, which I avoided even looking at if I could help it, in bookstores. I didn't think of them as aliens. I just thought of them as other-beings. I figured if there were ANY other beings than us, then probably there was no limit. But it was mixed in with all kinds of other symbolism. I had what amounted to celtic lore, modern alien lore, south american shamanic lore, all in the same experiences sometimes. Those were usually visions or dreams back then. Some readers may be happy to know that I do not talk to aliens anymore. On the other hand, just a couple of months ago I was utterly wide awake and getting up when a man walked in my bedroom door who was not in my manifest-focus-reality. And, another ref to mixed up cultures or timelines: he had very pronounced cheekbones, and medium dusky skin, but the top half of his face, to his cheekbones and nose, were a dusky red color. It struck me as vaguely familiar but not until later did I conclude I think I might have seen ref to it as a mask for south american shamanic stuff, at some point. But this was his actual skin. So later, thinking about it, I wondered if they were 'trying to look like' his people. Anyway he just walked right in and talked to me. I have had some very conscious awareness of stuff before, especially a few aspects of self, but he was just a guide and it was utterly clear. I was blown away by the experience. What if some peoples, via genetics or culture or some other factor, were simply able to perceive such things all the time, or some of the time, or in certain areas (who knows why, environmental effect)? Psychically, when you hear (it's more like feel, but it feels like "the tiniest whisper-voice ever") an insect like a spider, it "feels" tiny. But there's no reason for it to feel tiny as far as I can tell, except that this is my "translation" of part of the nature of the being. Trees "feel" deep. Planets (by their definition, not ours. Ganymede believes he is a planet) are gods-little-g's. Sometimes when I first perceive something, it will have clear symbolism I have learned to understand means, "this being is way more powerful than me." Like they will seem huge to me, or they will be sitting up on something high above me. It's just my symbolism. If I am unable to perceive something clearly due to some distortions in my relationship with an energy, I will perceive it in ways that show me this -- it may seem 'multi-faceted' or it might be a guy with a bear head or wings or, in one memorable case that made me laugh (it's one of my Aeons who is in two parts), it's a horse. I was told (from the inside) that it's simply how my brain is forced to 'translate' for me. By the same token, sometimes there is an energy very powerful but I really just don't have capacity for most of it, and if I perceive that thing at all, I am likely to perceive some incredibly "shallow version of it." Literally like it's a paper doll or a cartoon or something, it will be completely different than how I am perceiving everything around it. It's all just symbolism. But that's all reality is -- even this focus-reality, let alone any of the infinite others. That doesn't mean the entity/experience doesn't have validity, it just means that in my instance of the universe, everything is translating through my frequency bandwidth, through my biological filter, and the last part of that is my brain, with its culture and experience and beliefs -- and finally, the imagination which 'creates' something called "reality experience" for us out of that energy, rather than our just existing in the middle of a bunch of pink noise. I suspect that there a lot of parallels that are, to put it one way, "closer to" us and that we are likely to run into at some point in life. It is possible (even probable I think) that the evolution of the energy gateways within us (our chakras) have something to do with this. So chances are we run into "generally" the same kind of energy. Sometimes a really powerful entity that might span millennia of our time. Sometimes a 'people' who, while individuals vary, generally look about the same with our filters in place, though their clothing and detail might vary with the culture of the person perceiving it. In magickal workings one may be taught to actually expect certain identities, or recognize certain correspondences, and by this realize some of what you're working with. I avoid any such exploration as any 'expectation' on my part makes me invalidate myself usually so I avoid it, but later (usually after I have recorded an experience somewhere, and someone better educated on such things contacts me) I find it interesting. When I was temporarily involved in that world (magick), I used to regularly have experiences with things about a couple days or week before first hearing or reading about them, as if my exploring mind were ahead of me. (I did that with books, too, nearly channeling whole sections of them intuitively just prior to reading them. Seth [Jane Roberts] and Crowley were very strong with me that way.) I was never into summoning anything -- frankly the other worlds seemed more than capable of getting their ass here all on their own if you asked me -- but I ran into stuff that to this day I think is freaky. Like once, I saw a magickian friend in a world I was in while dreaming -- (an interesting thing we call 'when the body, hardwired to this frequency and beat-pattern, reflects some small portion of brain activity, from the larger self, during far more complex activity in what we would call "there" if we knew it. This causes our people to assume nothing whatever is happening except a moment of brain activity, and we ignore a huge percentage of our human experience as assumedly "doesn't count" as a result.') -- and when I was trying to find to where he had vanished, I met this group of girls, like six or seven siblings, and the youngest, I was talking to her and she wouldn't answer me. I got mad and yelled at her and she just walked away as if I could not hold her. I told my friend who got a kick out of that, as he was really "involved with" this so-called entity named Madimi who was the youngest in a "seven sisters" mythology. Did I perceive that because HE believed it and it was part of his construct? Or because it was a third-thing from either of us? Maybe there is no such thing as a difference. At the time I'd never met him except online and phone and never heard of the entity. I have learned to not invalidate what seems like 'symbolism' because everything is symbolism. How we perceive a butterfly, a tree, a skyscraper, is just as symbolic as anything else -- it is all translations at the final point of our nervous system that give us the "immersion effect" of reality. I've been fully lucid in innumerable realities, many of which I totally understood were considered 'a dream world' from THIS reality -- but at the time, I understood this reality to be just as much a dream as anything else. If the multiverse is truly infinite, then it just doesn't matter. I sometimes say: Every time I wake up here, it seems so real! :-) RC

Wow, that is quite a mini documentary. I can see intentionally inflammatory in many areas of course. But that doesn't necessarily mean it isn't so. Good reason for banning firearms for law-abiding citizens in the USA: put that kind of situation (like the first woman in the video was in) in most the states I've been to, there'd be a self-armed local militia telling the masses in parade to go around. Well probably except in California. There'd be some gigantic welcoming committee, funded by the Teacher's Union and staffed by social media recruits from third-wave feminism. Here in Oklahoma though, which happens to be the reddest red state in the union last time I checked the election-results by county for a big election, I suspect it would go differently. I'm a southern coastal California ("valley") girl relocated here to the flat edge of the Ozarks (the very NE corner of OK, near Joplin MO) so I'm kind of lost between two very different worlds. :-) RC