This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
A channelled message from God? And Mother too? Also Gaia; same thing of course. How do you channel something that's only a projection of the mind? Not God. How can anybody talk to 'God' when He's beyond all concepts, all dualism? Only crazy people and New Agers can talk to God. And Jesus freaks of course; good churchgoers. I can't take it any more. It's beyond credulous. Yet, the messages are often quite subtle, especially the Galactics', when they talk about progressing beyond duality, etc. Then the website goes and spoils it all with these ridiculous claims as to the sources. They never seem to see the self-contradiction involved. But the Galactics talk in the same terms too- that they take their instructions from heaven, God. I assumed at best they mean it metaphorically, even if it's interpreted and carried out in pragmatic terms. Either a lot of people don't get this at all, or the channellers are full of crap, or it all is. But there was so much predicted, decades ago in the Carey material – The Third Millennium – that has come about, such as 'fall' of Communiism and the economic meldown. It's a confusing business. It also utilises New Agey terms in a far less off-putting way. But I can't very well believe something just because I might want to believe it. I was pretty confident about the Carey material, for all my doubts, even posting some of the chapter on the future economic scenario shortly before it happened, though the book was published in '91. I'd thought about tweeting it, but changed my mind after hearing Wapnick on 2012, though I had it on you tube for two years, before they changed the format and it vanished. Just in the nick of time. Mass arrests? The massing of the Galactic Federation of Light? The coming Golden Age? Ascension? And that's just one site. These are very intelligent people. There's David Wilcock, others. They seem to have little doubts if any as to.... It's obvious they truly believe all of this will transpire. The situation is almost too bizarre now for that reason. That they can all possibly be so.... mistaken. This is really going to be interesting. To me at least. One of the interesting things about reading The Mind Parasites is that it brought to mind his early journals; it read almost like an extension of them, if a more adult version. What I mean is, it took me back to them, the sense of discovery I felt. It was only excerpts,
a part of the biography, The World of Colin Wilson by Sydney Campion (I was unaware he went on to write a sequel, unpublished). I was 20 at the time and absolutely revered CW, was almost as convinced of his genius as he was himself. He demonstrated you could absolutely believe in yourself and your destiny if you chose to, if you were determined enough; though now I might see that determination as part of making the illusion real by making heavy weather of it. But it was the sense of the apparent uniqueness of his ideas, the range and depth of them that was so fascinating. He was the archetypal writer. His was a journey I could believe in and share; even try and emulate in some form, one day, somehow – once I got to grips with my misguided sense of loyalty, commitment to unappreciative others. I felt that same sense of involvement, the excitement of the journey, the exploration of ideas, the sense of his absolute belief in his own importance while reading The Mind Parasites. It was bringing it all back to me, the early excitement I'd had when I first read it, when I was 19. There's also an element of scepticism on my part now, the awareness he's not quite the bees knees he assumed himself to be. The fact that the thrust of his philosophy and psychology is based on Husserl's idea that perception is a kind of grasping mechanism, as he explained. CW was always fond of describing it as being similar to an arrow; that perception is an act of intention. If we don't sufficiently 'intend' or fire it with sufficient force, the beam of intention, perception, can fail to hit its target, then we find we haven't grasped it or taken it in. I recall an example where he talked about someone who complained their sexual orgasm was failing to satisfy; I forget the context, though I'm sure it was non-fiction. The answer, as he said was that the person had been masturbating in a state of distraction, that what he needed to do was focus his mind, his concentration on it, then he would grasp the experience- though he's went from saying that masturbation is one of man's higher evolutionary faculties to it's something a mature person grows out of; whatever a 'mature' person is exactly, in terms of an insane world. Presumably someone who doesn't masturbate beyond a certain edge and is married, to boot, as that would be most undignified in any conventional terms.... Anyway, it's all about developing the hidden or subconscious powers of the mind, getting in touch with 'the secret life' (probably based on the play by Granville-Barker that he discussed in The
Outsider), the source of 'power, meaning, and purpose'. He puts the latter in quotes. He has an amazing ability to expand on all this, developing it into an intensely exciting and interesting tale. It's obvious the mind parasites of the novel are a metaphor for the ego, the false self we all tend to identify with for the most part. There's an interesting aside, later, where he describes them as an extension, an epiphenomenon if you like, of human beings – whereas it's more accurate to describe human beings as an 'extension', a projection, of the ego-mind. Perception, too, may well be 'intentional' in terms of grasping what's going on in the world, but both perception and the world itself are part of the projection, the illusion, as are other people. There's little if any awareness the world is a projection of the mind. On the other hand, he has his moments, but there's no doubt his outlook, his philosophy, is dualistic. He's very good at describing the subtleties of his beliefs, such as the difference between animate and inanimate matter, but both are part of the illusion all the same. He uses the same terms, the belief in the 'élan vital' -- vitality and 'life', the 'life-force' etc., whether describing the qualities of a person or an aspect of the mind, though he's as often talking about the brain and areas of the brain, which has 0 to do with mind. It's easy to be a bit of a smartarse about this having studied the Course, but for me, it's important to know; it's been a long journey and it's the difference between false and true empathy, dualism and non-dualism. It follows from his philosophy that he believes in developing the powers of the mind. His main protagonist, Gilbert Austin, clearly an idealised version of himself, and his colleague, develop incredible 'mind powers'; the ability to delve into their own subconscious depths, telepathy and PK -- Psychokinesis to the extent that they can levitate, even disintegrate blocks weighing thousands of tons. They even power their spaceship through PK. Again, this is all very well and adds to an exciting story, though the main thrust of it is finding a way to defeat the mind parasites, but it will never solve anything. The real problem of the mind is guilt. I'm sure he'd see this as negative in the same way he sees ACIM as negative, but a dualistic approach never got to the heart of the matter. None of which gives any indication as to how enjoyable the novel is, what an entertaining writer he is, how subtly he develops his theme/s. But what was interesting also was that his description of the mind parasites and the fear they arouse in him, and later, others, almost presages his later experiences of panic attacks; it's
virtually a prediction of them. There's an important section later in the novel, where he describes using all this will-power to blast the parasites. This, as he says, turns out to be a huge mistake; it only makes things worse. CW desribed his experience of panic attacks in Mysteries, in 1978. It happened in 1973 when he was working on the partwork magazine, Crimes and Punishment. I bought them while I was still at school. He was commissioned to write all the introductions, one a day, then the publishers said they needed him to increase his output to one and-a-half each day. It was the stress of this that brought on his panic attacks. He described them in the introduction to Mysteries, then later, in Access to Inner Worlds, published in 1983. What's interesting is that at one point he describes trying conquer them by sheer will power. This turns out to be a big mistake, only making matters far worse, potentially, as he discribes. In retrospect, the answer seems obvious. No one can dispel illusions by making them real; and no one would fight against something if he didn't believe it was real. Instead, he puts it down to a kind of childishness, the 'emotional body' acting up, pulling a fast one, calling his bluff. And that the 'solution' lay in countering that by calling its bluff, not giving into it; his own metaphor for the ego. There's some truth in that, but it sounds like just another form of relying on ones own strength and will-power. Again, he has a very subtle way of describing all of this, 'recognising' that because we identify with the ego, we believe ourselves to be alone, only he describes it in terms of left and right brain consciousness; that it's the left brain that believes itself to be alone, unaware it has a helper, the intuitions and pattern-making of the right. But the brain is just an aspect of the body, as the the personallity, the psychological body. I'd like to go through the novel again, once I've finished it, quoting some parts, various sentences, to illustrate this. In a way, I'm surprised he didn't remark on this, in later books, though not in the way I've just put it. But is it possible he didn't see the connection, even in his own terms? I'm sure he'd see this as relatively unimportant as long as he went on to solve it on his own terms; but did he? I read that he got the idea for the mind parasites through William Burroughs; but as I recall, I'm sure he said he took it from a sentence in his The New Existentialism, published the previous year, in 1966. The copy of TMP I'm reading is a Panther paperback from 1969. It was first published in '67. I do have The New Existentialism. I ordered a copy back in '86
from The Anarchists Bookshop on Candlemaker Row. That street is now Minion central, like every central street in Edinburgh. The bookshop is long defunct, the city Council got rid of them, as they did with the Forest Café more recently. The day I picked up the book was the day I discovered ACIM, in the same bookstore. Yet another huge tome, not immediately discernible as to its contents, I decided I had far too many reading 'projects' as it was, that I would come back to it another time. It took another four years, by which time I was 30. But it was a year after first discovering it that I came across Creative Aggression by Herb Goldberg and George Bach, published back in '74, exactly the book I needed, so, everything in its right place, so to say. There was another theme to TMP, and this is quite startling. It's that the parasites use the Moon as a kind of reinforcer for their negative influence. There are also a lot of other beings -- life-forms -- trapped in the Moon, embedded in its very molecular structure. He has his colleague say that it was Gurdjieff, the Graeco-Armenian magus, who said that humankind is 'food for the moon'. He also mentions various scientific mavericks, such as Hans Hoerbiger, others – the first time I'd ever heard of them, as was often the case in reading him, he introduced me to so much – who had various theories as to the origin of the moon and its purpose. CW goes into various aspects of the influence of the moon on the earth. There's the well-known higher incidences of crime as well as agitation in mental hospitals of course. Suffice it to say he puts it all together and ties it up very adeptly. The startling part is that since the novel was published in 1967 originally, David Icke has advanced, in all seriousness, a variation of sorts on the same theme in his last tome, HUMAN RACE, Get off Your Knees. It took me two months to get through it. It's pretty stupendous. Unlike CW, he isn't presenting it as fiction. While I was reading TMP, the possibility that CW did believe in it did cross my mind. He's written elsewhere that one can say something in a fictional work that would be impossible as non-fiction. It seems self-evident that if he had presented the food for the moon scenario as an actual theory he'd be treated as a kind of laughing stock -- as some still see Icke for that reason. But by presenting it as science-fiction CW can be praised for his remarkable inventiveness. I don't know how seriously he took the idea; it's clearly a parable, a brilliant metaphor for the ego in general. Early in the novel, the mind parasites are presented as aliens that have infiltrated the mind, until Gilbert Austin, the central
character, an idealised version of CW, comes to realise they're a part of human beings themselves, a split-off, shadow part. What else could he be taking about but the ego? Only, he believes they exist in the hidden, subconscious recesses of the brain and that the solution lies in increasing the powers of the mind- which he keeps equating with the brain. (He carries on the same theme in the later novel The Philosopher's Stone). He's certainly aware that our reality lies somehow beyond time and space but he has a confusing way of keeping both sides in mind; his belief that spirit is in the process of increasing its foothold in matter. This is pure dualism, but it's common in New Age thought-systems. A bit of an irony. In retrospect, It's interesting to see 'where he's at' in the novel, at the age of thirty-six. He speculates, in only semi-fictional terms, as to whether the source of reality, which he believes to be a benevolent force, 'is the ultimate 'Creator' of the Bible, or whether it depends on some still deeper source.' It doesn't. But it isn't the God of the Bible either, who was made in man's image; the writers of the Bible who invented a childishly cruel and capricious God based on their own projections. He goes on the add 'that the mystery of time remains untouched' as well as the fundamental question raised by the philosopher Heidegger: 'Why is there existence rather than non-existence?' then adds 'The answer many lie in a completely different dimension, as different from the world of mind as mind is different from the world of space and time.... ' But another dimension would still be a part of space and time, just another space and time in another part of the universe, surely? Just me? Yet I do know he believes the Self to be outside of space and time. He's just said so. In effect, he's always known the answer. He could have capitalised Mind in the later context, then it's as clear as day. This could be almost the equivalent of the 'decision maker' as described by Ken Wapnick, the part of the mind that's outside of time and space that decides between the ego and the Holy spirit. Elsewhere -- in The Books in My Life, CW has said he believes the world was created by a kind of demi-God; which more than implies it wasn't created by the Creator/God at all. There's obvious parallels between the Course's (The) Real World (of the mind) and the fictitious illusory projection of the ego we take to be the real world, not to mention that PKD believed this world was false, a sort of overly that covered the real world. What is missing in CW's conceptions -- though he did write a brilliant essay on time for the compendium volume The Book of
Time in 1980 or so -- is the awareness that space and time and everything that appears to manifest specifically, is a projection of our minds. And not just the brain either, which along with the body and the world are projections too. Not that it's any great surprise now. As Wapnick pointed out a while back, the greatest scientific and theological minds of centuries tried to solve this problem, unaware that everything they took so seriously was merely a projection. CW still doesn't fully accept it, stating in his later autobiography Dreaming to some Purpose, the very first chapter -- Giving God Back his Entrance Ticket, that he always believed other people to be somehow unreal. Yet, later, he goes on to quote Einstein, saying that he 'doesn't believe God plays dice;' that he does believe in the objective reality of the world. An odd contradiction, as if he wants it both ways – to be seen as both the mystic and the hard-headed scientist. Yet he seems to have no trouble with it. I recall many years back he said somewhere -- I've long forgotten which novel -- “That some people even believe the world is a kind of dream.” It was self-evident he saw that as unrealistic; perhaps even 'unscientific' in the sense that the physicalists are the first to cite it as the probability one is 'incapable of facing reality.' But this isn't reality, as any fule kno, now, or at least they should, in one form or other. The Mind Parasites is still a brilliant metaphor for the ego's unconscious fear of God (as well as that it's the source of his panic attacks), even if he wasn't aware of it in such terms, nor is he now, or at least would countenance such a notion, I think. I don't think his ego can deal with it. He'd also have to broaden his Husserlian concept of perception, turning it on its head almost. Perception isn't the cause of anything, it's an effect, as is the world. Icke has long hit on this, needless to add now, virtually claiming it for himself, or his own channelled sources, though he doesn't write in terms of a God, Christian or otherwise, but of infinite, eternal Consciousness; a confusingly new-agey term, not to mention it's dualistic in that it confuses two entirely seperate levels. As the Course states, consciousness is the domain of the ego. It's worth repeating. Its whole concept of forgiveness stands or falls by it. Or, to put it another way, its concept of forgiveness falls apart within a dualistic framework. Unforgiveness and the belief in guilt is the problem, though as Wapnick might add, the problem lies only in the belief there's a problem. Developing ones PK powers to the extent of shifting the moon from its orbit as described in the
novel won't make any difference, even if it is an extension or concomitant of the development of their 'evolutionary powers'. It's only a dream of evolution in any case. The whole thing is an agreed on mass hallucination. Good to know. I'll need to brush up on DI's conception that we're 'food for the moon' of sorts; he does quote Ouspensky on Gurdjieff at the beginning of the book. It's always possible Icke came to it himself; he acknowledges others have held various theories about the moon, as does CW in MP. Jim Marrs wrote about the moon as an artificial satellite in Alien Agenda, years later. CW wasn't going that far, even in fictional terms. He tends to go for a 'subtler' approach; he took a similar approach to the possibility of time-travel in TPS, sticking to it as an aspect of the mind- though his character develops the ability through experiments on the pre-frontal cortex of the brain. Any volunteers? CW does believe in the galactics; not that he refers to them in such terms. Again, it's a remarkable presage to future developments, not to mention current developments at the time, not to mention ongoing developments right now; the kind of thing as written about in The Stargate Conspiracy. One might say CW has quite a long history where the galactics are concerned. He went on to be enthusiastic about The Only Planet of Choice. But I'm getting ahead of myself again, no 'pun' intended. Not that I have much to say about it in this context. His character in TMP is automatically promoted in a sense, through his evolutionary and emotional development, becoming a member of the galactic community, one of 'the universal policemen'. CW has Gilbert Austin describe himself as such without a hint of irony. This might be worth touching on. It's possible to see now, with the benefit of some hindsight -- not to mention some foresight in the case of PKD's Radio Free Albemuth, posthumously published in 1982, and Icke somewhat after the fact -- that there's a singular 'naivete' in CW's viewpoint, politically; or is it a certain canniness masquerading as naivete? It's not exactly They Live; more Independence Day. Gilbert Austin and Chums eventually save the day (though there's a twist of sorts at the end) with the eventual full co-operation of the government along with the President of the United States. He/they even have lunch with him, telling him (not asking or advising) what his next move/statement should be -they'd thwarted the mind parasites efforts to provoke all out thermonuclear warfare and then some. This is a far cry from what many are saying/writing about the US government now, post 911,
but 'conspiracy theories' were there long before, too. David Icke is the obvious example that comes to mind, in his exhaustive studies, but there were many before him. But what is interesting is that as political speculation/sci-fi, though it is only in part, one could describe it as spot off. On the other hand... there's The 2012 Scenario website. They're very much pro-Obama, seeing his role as a peacemaker working in very difficult conditions; that he can only do so much under the circumstances but is working in tandem with the goals of the galactics as best he can, while playing along with the Illuminati and the goals of the NWO like a good actor. In fact the outcome is dependent on him. This is, admittedly, very hard to swallow, much as I'd love to believe it. But there's a lot about the galactics that's hard to swallow now, not least the repeated emphasis on Ascension and the Golden Age soon to be upon us. Update: http://the2012scenario.com/2012/09/president-obamas-re-election-part-of-thegolden-age-master-plan/#more-143297 The scenario as presented by others, most 'definitively', some might say the most extremist -- not me – by DI is the diametrical opposite of CW's scenario in TMP. In Icke's scenario and others, the PTB are definitely not the 'good guys', they're the pawns of malevolent-minded extraterrestrial inter-dimensional entities, the Reptoids. The Greys were subordinate to them it seemed, though apparently the benevolently inclined galactics have got rid of them. But according to Icke and others, earthly politicians are the tools of the Illuminati, themselves slaves to the Reptilians. And, one might add, all slaves to the ego and the belief in the illusion, the hologram, the prison matrix. When I say CW may just be 'canny', I don't mean he has some kind of sinister agenda – though the outcome of such a mindset could be, as described in the Stargate Conspiracy. I mean I think his viewpoint is based on a form of unconscious denial; which might be hard to believe if one bears in mind the psychological and philosophical subtleties of TMP alone. But I've been aware of it before; he knows how to fit in; he can be a bit of a populist of sorts; he knew how to say the right thing. (Sometimes, to my mind, he's defied and denied all logic in terms of some of the baser thoughtprocesses of the common garden variety sociopaths, as well as those in high places; maybe he didn't want to seem 'elitist'.). I think it's somewhat disingenuous that he presents it as an aspect of his emotional and intellectual maturity, dismissing the observations of TSC out of turn,as he did; in fact anything that might upset the
wrong people and even remotely bring or provoke the possibility of danger to himself and his family. I think that's partly his motivation. Unlike Icke, who bases his safety on high-profile exposure, one could say. If any harm ever came to him it will only confirm the veracity of his.... oeuvre. Whatever CW and some of his elitist fan-base might say to the contrary, I think it's clear the 'wrong' people do exist and there's a lot of them about. It's just a pity he and they were so slow in anticipating them. To my mind it's more accurate to say they inadvertently and not so inadvertently contributed to bringing the situation about in that they share a similar if carefully concealed/'unconscious' fundamentalist outlook. Instead of warning us they glossed over or ignored it. There's little doubt we're heading for a police state. Many would say it's already here, and have been writing about it for quite some time. For some reason, CW, his brilliant critical analyses of Nietzche on the culture of his time, others, notwithstanding, couldn't seem to see this. David Icke is clear that he sees sees Ashtar Command (and the Galactic Federation of Light), Benjamin Crème and 'the World Teacher' as a plot of the NWO. That it's part of their goal to found a one world religion along with a one world army, and a microchipped population connected to a centralised computer. Or that they're working in tandem with it. For myself, for what it's worth, as far as the galactics are concerned, I just don't know. I don't fully believe in any 'world teacher' except Wapnick and ACIM. Neither CW nor DI seem to be capable of any kind of true rationality where Jesus or ACIM is concerned. CW simply ignores or sidesteps the strongly 'Christian' aspects of the Ken Carey material which is so inextricably bound up with 'archangelic extraterrestrial intelligences'. There's also the fact the galactics are still positing not just the possibility or belief, but, the certainty that 'Ascension', the 2012 event -- 'the moment of quantum awakening', the advent of the new world, the big tomali, will come about. If and when it doesn't, what's to take seriously about them any more? even though I have found many of their message almost sublimely uplifting (They saying also, that not everyone will experience it, for it's a matter of 'lifting our vibrations.'). I still feel the same way about Carey's Third Millennium for the most part. It hasn't quite sunk in even yet that it isn't going to take place. I've been 'waiting' since '91, since I first read the book, then the earlier ones; though RAW discussed the McKenna's Timewave Zero in Cosmic Trigger 1 back in 1977 -- I bought an American paperback edition second-hand in 1990 but didn't read it for a year or two. Even Icke believes it will happen,
but some years later, in 2016 or thereabouts. Or he did; he's since qualified it again, believing it to be some kind of New Age confidence trick. It's more than beginning to look like it. No one has the metaphysical and psychological grasp of the situation as Wapnick does. CW doesn't believe in it, but that didn't stop him writing a best-seller, From Atlantis to the Sphinx, based on the ideas of Graham Hancock and Robert Bauval for the most part, others, which centred on, however indirectly, an upcoming quasicosmic event -- 2012. Thanks for wasting my time writing a book based on ideas you don't even believe in, Colin. There's far more to the book though. But it's obvious that in TMP he takes 'the extraterrestrial hypotheses' very seriously. He was integral in opening my eyes to it, though I had long been fascinated by anything UFOs and the paranormal in general since my early teens. It's clear the Galactic Confederation do see their role as universal policemen, at least where the earth is concerned; they've been talking about the upcoming arrests of the Cabal and change in the economic and political order -- or disorder -- for months now; but in reality, years -- decades. I could do with getting up to date on their messages, though the banking industry has been rocked in recent weeks; there's even talk of criminal prosecutions, though it's probably just talk. If this ever does take place it will verify the long held predictions and promises of the galactics -- or the tip of the iceberg of them. It doesn't surprise me CW sees them as his true (space) brothers in evolution if you like, considering his opinion of human beings in general sometimes, certainly in his earlier years; one of the things that endeared me to him. I felt as akin to him as he does to these more evolved, apparently enlightened beings, and as akin to them too in a sense. I loved his writing, how he thought, as well as what he wrote about. He really lit up my life, as did music, as did John Peel, Bowie, others. Not all famous people are interesting, but most people are basically dull; one could say they're unknown for a reason and will stay unknown for a reason. But not all 'nobodies' are uninteresting, as CW well knows. As he said somewhere, the only difference between him and others, the unknowns, is a matter of application; that he applies himself in a way they don't; but there are lots of very intelligent, amusing, interesting people out there. Or 'out there'. The writers of The Dark Gods are definitely of the opinion the whole weird UFO scenario is just one big black Cabal -- or just
about. I found it an incredible, uplifting experience in its way. The reason for this is that it seems to have been written in 1978 for the most part, though it was published in 1980. It may well plunge us into the deep end without preliminary as CW says in the preface, also from '78, but this is almost disingenuous too, if inadvertently. If anything, the large last section written by Anthony Roberts is almost tentative in its conclusions, acknowledging that on the face of it, for some, their thesis might be too difficult or outlandish to consider seriously. In the light of future developments, the appearance of David Icke, others, and their books expanding on this cosmic conspiracy in a way the authors could never have envisaged, possibly, it makes their book seem downright prophetic -- though it does, as they point out, draw on mainly two far earlier works. It's also intersting it was written at the same period as CW published his second epic study on the the occult, the paranormal, and the supernatural, Mysteries, in 1978. (The first was The Occult of course, back in 1971). I was all of nineteen at the time, bought it shortly after, tried to work my way through it when I was twenty (and before that, the Occult during the same year). But of course I had no means of putting it all into some kind of perspective; his writing, the book itself, was the perspective. He seemed to be writing about the most interesting ideas in the world, it seemed to me. In reality, he could have mentioned so many other writers, such as Philip K Dick, or Terence McKenna, or Brad Steiger along with other writers on the paranormal and related subjects. He'd mention PKD after the success of Blade Runner, mentioning the film itself, then wrote an essay on Dick years later, titled, Was Philip K Dick Possessed by an Angel? There's 0 on him in Alien Dawn, published in 1998. In the case of Brad Steiger (Eugene Olson), another super-prolific writer on the paranormal etc., it seems to me as much an aspect of specialness -- ego – as it might be a temperamental or idealogical difference in viewpoint, that, for whatever reason, he wasn't inclined to set any store by Steiger (and wife's) writings, apparently (It might be worth pointing out Steiger has a distinctly Christian emphasis in some of his writing, such as in Revelation. The same could be said of Steiger towards CW, I've no idea; I read CW for decades before I became aware of Steiger. But PKD took an interest in his writings, was excited by Revelation. I've still barely scratched the surface of his writings. One sees the same thing in artists, writers in general, musicians too; they have their preferences; it can all get pretty cliquey, ignoring each others work;
one has to discover things for oneself. I was also too busy reading the books CW discussed as well as vainly and vaguely trying to keep up with other material from my own cultural milieu, so to say, not least John Peel. ....But I felt a real sense of exhilaration reading The Dark Gods, once it was clear what it was about and the extent of the conspiracy they were describing, very much the grand conspiracy; a conspiracy of Ickian proportions one could describe it as. They – Geoff Gilbertson and Anthony Roberts, discuss some of the very same subjects, only, Icke takes it all further. But it really only confirms most of what he said. They're even touching on the Reptilian theme, though not as explicitly. One could say it's all there. The exhilaration stemmed from, I think, the increasing realisation that people have been 'on the case', trying to get to the roots of this conspiracy for a long time -- a very long time. And from the awareness, the conviction, that this global covert psyops situation will come to be recognised as being a part of it, a nasty little offshoot if you like, in psychological terms, but also an integral part of it, a virtual world cult now, of epic proportions in its own way, of 'artificial synchronicity' (to confuse and interfere with ones perception of everyday events), permeating every aspect of society. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OvVVQuzduo&feature=youtu.be And people still ask how the Nazis could have happened. The answer, at least in part, is that every generation is told it's necessary, appealing to their sense of nationalism -- not a good thing -- at the same time as they're happy to see themselves as important, essential even, as well as that it's big and clever. It must be, no matter how trivial in practice, how asinine, for it's devised by adults in Authority, who told them to go out and practice the gospel of 'dark NLP'. That's why I’m all the more convinced that the higher up the pyramid it goes, the more psychopathically orientated it is; that the essence of worldly power, its motivation, goals and aspirations, is the opposite of anything that might be termed 'normal'. One might expect them to be 'neutral' in some sense, that they just happen to be more materialistic, say. It turns out it isn't anything of the kind, or just that. They worship Lucifer, the false God, 'Satan', call him what you like. They're actively against Jesus, Christianity and God. They're Satanists, 'devil/demon'-worshippers. I might have guessed, but didn't need to; Icke has been saying it for years; The Dark Gods says the same. Not that I literally believe in the devil or the demonic, but who knows for sure where the latter
is concerned? Jesus, in The Urtext version of the Course, the earlier, unedited version, seems to say that there are no demons, the concept is purely psychological. Presumably this can also include some aspect of the mind that can manifest paranormal effects, such as poltergeist occurrences. CW takes much this view at the end of the forward to The Dark Gods, saying he attributes it to the hidden side of the mind, but, as he writes, 'it would be flatly absurd to exclude other possibilities.' Before that though, he's made the point of subtly dismissing -or 'disposing' of -- the notion of any evil spirits or 'Dark Gods', also having said he 'feels rather as if T H Huxley might have felt if he'd been asked to introduce a volume of Cardinal Manning's sermons -because the writers are convinced Ufologists as well as believing in the objective reality of their Dark Gods.' The are some odd contradictions and ironies here, not tooooo difficult to discern now, but not so easy to explain. However subtle CW's viewpoint, he did come to take some of the pronouncements of the 'space brothers' seriously, such as 'the Nine Principles' of Uri Geller fame as well as his mentor, Andrija Puhariich, as described in The Occult, and Mysteries as I recall, and later,The Only Planet of Choice which he discusses at some length in Alien Agenda, twenty years into the future, though he presents a semi-sceptical account in Mysteries. There's the benefit of some hindsight here, as well the publication of The Stargate Conspiracy only a year later, where Picknett and Prince picked up on these themes, tying it in to a global conspiracy that involved the Intelligence agencies, the CIA and MK-Ultra mind-control experiments, along with an apocalyptically themed fundamentalism linked to the belief in the reality of the ancient star gods of Egypt. The latter, is exactly what CW took seriously, whatever he believed their ultimate origins to be. He dismissed the conspiracy and fundamentalist aspects – that there's a covert effort to sneak in a dark Crowley-inspired religion by the back door, that will replace Christianity. In short, a reintroduction and expansion of the theme of the earlier Dark Gods, the conspiracy and political side he downplays through inference and omission. It's ironic he then goes on to cite Madame Blavatsky, when, later in the book, the authors are clear in their opinion she was a major player and influence in the goals of this dark, quasicosmic conspiracy to do away with Christianity and the real God, to replace Him with the 'light' of Lucifer. They posit that this is the goal of all these secret societies, from the early Illuminati, to the Order of the Golden Dawn and the Rosicrucians and others, to the the
Theosophical society to The Anthroposophical Society based on the teachings of Rudolph Steiner, to the Scientologists and the Atherius Society, Illuminati beliefs and goals overshadow them all. CW also seems to be as disingenuous as to the authors ultimate conclusions when discussing the possibility of disembodied spirits, raised by the book as he says, and the possibility they could be 'evil'. He remarks that 'The very title of the book implies that the answer is Yes. But such a belief raises basic philosophical problems. It is true that 'dualism' is one of the world's oldest forms of religion -- the belief that there are forces of evil as well as good in the universe. I find myself inclining more to the notion that there are such things as 'forces of good'.' He goes on to qualify this with a subtle mini-discourse on the meaning of evil, the gist of which it shouldn't be taken literally. But his explanation is itself dualistic in that it accepts a dualistic world as a reality. Dualism may well be a form of religion as he says, but it also means what it means, as does non-dualism. And this is the crux of the matter. To me, it's just muddying the waters when he goes on to discuss the problem in further 'dualistic' terms, psychologically; it's all a bit circular and self-serving. It's illogical to then go on to say this seems to dispose of the notion of evil spirits or 'Dark Gods', more than implying it's the authors of the book who have a dualistic, 'simplistic' outlook, before going on to qualify that by acknowledging the possibility of 'non-physical ('or at least, non-fleshy') life-forms,' saying they must be subject to their own forms of limitation. As I said, he goes on to quote Blavatsky, who 'taught that our earth is the lowest of seven possible 'planes', the most heavily weighted down with matter, the very density of which permits a a far higher level of achievement than any other plane.' Which is fair enough, except that's pure dualism too. It's dualistic, misleading, disingenuous. '.... Living creatures without dense physical bodies might well experience their own forms of rage and frustration. Which in turn, suggests that they might be capable of their own forms of mischief.... In short, as I have suggested elsewhere (Mysteries, then later, Afterlife, others), the spirits that seem to to spend so much time manifesting themselves through mediums may be the crooks, murderers and juvenile delinquents of the 'astral plain'.' This may well be true, but any plane or dimension, astral or
otherwise, that involves the body, is an aspect of the ego. As he goes on to say, he prefers to keep an open mind. Not quite as open as he presumes; adds, 'that as a matter of common sense' -whatever that is, exactly -- 'I am personally inclined to explain most paranormal phenomena in terms of our 'hidden side of the mind'. But it would be flatly absurd to exclude other possibilities.' Except when he does go on to exclude them, such as the non-dualistic metaphysics of ACIM, to name the Course specifically in this instance. It's no wonder that with this convoluted complexity, subtle distortion almost impossible to discern, he couldn't deal with the uncompromising clarity and simplicity of the Course. There is, as almost always, 0 about the fascist and Nazi connotations with many of the players involved. But the point is, the authors of The Dark Gods themselves go on to state that the 'dualistic war' of the 'dark gods' is a metaphysical 'teaching mechanism', allowing created life the freedom of choice for spiritual growth back towards equilibrial godhead.' Whatever that is. Oneness with God, I imagine. They also state, in so many words, that the purpose of all this quasi-co(s)mic crazymaking is so we learn to rise above and laugh at dualism. The authors, as is clear from the former statement, believe we're 'created' by God, that this is 'life', as is the world -- which is itself dualisitic. With all the references to ley lines, 'sacred' spots and places etc., they presumably subscribe to the notion of the earth as a living entity. On the other hand, so to say, I'm sure they put 'sacred places' in quotes themselves. They also scorn the notion that paraphysical occurrences originate from 'earth sources'; the researches of Paul Devereux and others. CW, in Mysteries, remarks that 'the dean of modern ufologists, Brinsley Le Poer Trench' -- Lord Clancarty -- 'takes a midway view in Operation Earth, in which he suggests there are two lots of space people, 'the real Sky People, who have been around since time immemorial', and some more sinister aliens, who live somewhere near (or inside) this planet; these two factions, he suggests, are engaged in a war to control the minds of men.' Now we're getting somewhere, perhaps. I'll quote the whole of the next paragraph because it's very succinctly and articulately put. It's also an excellent instance of his disingenuously 'well-balanced' style. He's so adept at writing in the style of the expertly impartial, almost sceptical, 'playing the devil's advocate' mode, it's easy to let slip from mind just how sympathetic
he came to be to this hidden and unacknowledged Millennial/Apocalyptic agenda, along with Graham Hancock, Robert Bauval, James Hurtag (The Keys of Enoch), Whitley Streiber, others, as described in The Stargate Conspiracy. 'Most of the writers on UFOs direct a certain amount of indignation -- or sad reproach -- at the millions of sceptics who persist in believing that the whole phenomenon can be explained in terms of hysteria or hallucination. But his attitude is in itself unrealistic. Before anyone can be justly blamed for refusing to 'face facts', it must be shown the facts are there to be faced. And the most baffling and frustrating thing about the UFO phenomenon is that the 'facts' point in a dozen different directions. If, as ufologists believe, these craft are controlled by extraterrestrial intelligences, then it seems to be their deliberate policy to provide evidence that will confuse even the believers.' Good one. But he's just acknowledged there could be two factions of space people/brothers. In The Dark Gods, the authors acknowledge much the same, otherwise their argument would be wholly negative/pessimistic. It's surely possible then, probable, one might think, if we acknowledge the existence of both factions in whatever form, that it would be the 'negs' who are intent on causing most, if not all of the confusion? Are we really going to postulate that more enlightened, wiser beings would practice some form of cosmic gaslighting, crazymaking to get the best out of us in terms of emotional and intellectual development? Or in evolutionary terms as CW might say. Anything’s possible I suppose. The writers of The Dark Gods seem to accept such a stoic notion; that it all does us good in the end. Jesus, in his course says much the same thing: that 'Everything works for the general good except in the ego's judgement'. But he also emphasises 'Love does not kill to save'. I think negative is negative, as is murder, death; the only answer is to recognise them for the illusions they are. The same has to go for any negative entities or occurrences. It depends on how we interpret them and who with. It might be kept in mind that I'm commenting on writings from over three decades ago. I can come to CW's Alien Agenda later, along with others- such as Keith Thompson's Angels and Aliens and Brian Appleyard's Aliens, the former published in 1991 and the latter in 2005 (I met him at the Book Festival at the time, after his talk/interview, had him sign the book, asked him why he didn't include any Ken Carey, insensitive dipstick/clod that I can be). The galactics themselves acknowledge the existence of other, negative craft/extraterrestrials,
this in messages from just some months back, saying these have been excluded, quarantined from the vicinity of the earth. CW, in Alien Agenda, published in '98, quotes 'Tom', a sort of spokesman for the Nine in The Only Planet of Choice (channellings from 'the Nine' -- who claimed to be the original Egyptian gods, and were later the 'stars of The Stargate Conspiracy) as saying the Earth itself is under quarantine. None of this is there in the 'Messages from Space and Time' chapter of Mysteries, for the book was yet to be published -- or channelled for all I know, though he does mention the channel, Phyllis Schlemmer, a friend and associate of Andrija Puharich (along with John Whitmore, 'Bobby Horne', 'a half-Indian psychic healer' -the Nine claimed the Egyptian gods in previous incarnations, as CW 'sceptically' remarks on in Mysteries), Geller's former mentor; they'd parted company by then, though not before they had a series of incredible, hair-raising adventures involving the galactics -the Nine in this case -- who claimed to be the source of Geller's paranormal abilities. The Only Planet of Choice came later. CW's account is based on Stuart Holroyd's Prelude to the Landing on Planet Earth. Holroyd went on to publish Alien Intelligence in 1979, a year after Mysteries. CW quotes Jacques Vallee, who says it's as if the whole UFO problem is designed to confound whatever angle one tries to approach it from; I'm paraphrasing. That he believes they 'represent another level of existence, cutting through ours at right angles'. CW's quote- part of it. Vallee says a powerful force is influencing humankind, but whether the source of it originates in the mind (heck, it's all in the mind – but it's 'out there' too) or alien intelligences, he's not sure. CW, as he frequently reiterates, believes they originate from some aspect of 'the ladder of selves' -his own concept (and very reminiscent of the Course theme, its supplement, The Song of Prayer), that they come, as he's said, from some hidden aspect of the mind, whether that's the subconscious or the superconscious. In short, that they're some form of projection, as Jung has said; he mentions Jung. CW probably hits the nail on the head at the end of the chapter, when he states we're not who we think we are, that the I that we believe we are is some kind of impostor, that in some sense, everyday existence isn't what we take it to be. He's good at this. It's quite uncanny. He does it again, some years later at the end of A Criminal History of Mankind, published in 1984, where he says the criminal is a kind of illusion, a 'spectre of the brocken'. He may as well have stated he believed the whole
thing to be an illusion, just come right out with it; but he doesn't, till years later, in his later autobiography, and even then he can't quite state it categorically. He does mention T. C. Lethbridge again, featured in the first chapter of Mysteries (I did go on to read most of his books many years ago; they were quite fascinating). Lethbridge believed UFOs came from other dimensions, as he says. That has to be the 'answer', doesn't it? They're shapeshifters -and not necessarily in the Reptilian sense either. They've learned or evolved to traverse other dimensions at will. They state this themselves, that they're from the fourth dimension; or the fifth. I could be thinking of the band from the Sixties. Kidding. We're third dimensional, apparently. Suffice it to say it's all there in ET 101, as well as the communications of the galactics themselves, if 'themselves' they are. There's also Carey's Starseed Transmissions from almost the same year as CW's Mysteries, though it was publihsed in 1982. He didn't include or discuss these in Alien Agenda, though they make nonsense of his claim in Mysteries and elsewhere that 'spirit messages' are invariably trivial. There was always more to them than the mediumistic messages he focused on. Carey's sources, as I've said, make it abundantly clear that they're 'archangelic, extraterrestrial entities' that can shift from 'spirit' to more tangible dimensional frequencies; they can appear to us in ours, for it's only a plane of existence, another lower vibrational frequency. Not only that, but they claim to be an aspect of us, and that we are them, in a non-linear sense; time is an illusion, after all, as are we. The only lesson worth learning, eventually -- and as time is illusory, and a lesson already learned, it's only the ego that makes it seem interminable, nigh on impossible -- guilt isn't real and forgiveness is the last illusion, but the one that will dispel all the rest, as Jesus says in ACIM. If there really are 'malevolently inclined 'aliens', then they're an illusion, as evil doesn't truly exist, as CW believes (He believes it doesn't truly exist); but then neither do the more benevolently inclined ones; nor do we, in reality. But one can't go through life denying ones existence; it would get us nowhere, and, as the Course states, is an unnecessary form of denial, unworthy of us. To all intents and purposes we do exist, clearly, until we've learned our lessons here. The 'alien agenda' may well be an important aspect of that; it looks like it is. The negative extraterrestrial purpose might be to hinder us in our emotional development and evolution; it looks like it is. CW quotes Vallee, saying that we seem to be under a control system; that's the purpose of the UFOs, whether positively
or negatively. It's possible the negative experiences of John Keel, others, might just be a reflection (projection) of their own egos in a negative sense, and the 'psyche'/egos of the people involved, in The Mothman Prophecies But they can hardly be blamed for that, in the way way we're not always responsible for the projections of others; or at all sometimes. The important thing is how we choose to interpret it; that dictates our response. But it doesn't surprise me that that extraterrestrial entities might indulge in some cosmic, crazymaking shenanigans on a far larger and unsettlingly disturbing scale -- in the same way the covert minions seem to be the 'footsoldiers' of sorts whose mission it is to crazymake the world, or certain 'psychic' nodal points on it -- the selected 'TI's' -- on a far more 'provincial', parochial scale, even if it is global. This could be the 'secular' ego response, through the negative extraterrestrials controlling the Illuminati/'Elite' from the top down, right down to the minions and their targets, often artists and other 'sensitives'. The potential harbingers of the real world in the present, if you like. In an upside-down world, maybe the nobodies are not quite as unimportant or inconsequential as TPTB and others would have us believe. I don't necessarily believe that in the sense they might, but that doesn't mean they don't; it doesn't prove they do either, but what I do know for sure, illusory or no, is that it's happening. You could put it down to 'simple' fascism, the rise of the police state, however hidden, covert, as PKD well knew, or you could also seriously consider the possibility of a malevolent inter-dimensional aspect or infiltration and agenda, just as Icke has described. The problem is whether the galactics are a part of that covert agenda too; the proverbial wolves in sheeps clothing. I'm inclined, at the moment, to go with the writers of the Dark Gods. It could be a very subtle form of fundamentalism, coercion, through dissociation of some kind. (If that seems as far-fetched as considering the probability They exist, consider the negative entities/extraterrestrials can't be sane, or they wouldn't behave as they do and have the agenda that they do). On the other hand... maybe the benevolently inclined galactics have as much trouble with the true definition of nondualism and level confusion as the rest of us (Donald Neale Walsh and Barbara Marx Hubbard come to mind, both fervent believers in the upcoming transformation of consciousness/2012). And can they really be blamed for the followers they've attracted over the decades, if not centuries? To top it all, and confound me beyond comprehending, I did have a sighting some months back; one of their ships made an appearance in the evening, after I'd had a very
tough, harassed afternoon. I kid thee not. I couldn't see it as anything other than an emotional/ psychological boost, as that was the effect. But as for insidious and subtle forms of fundamentalism and fascism, I only have to recall the scenario as described in Picknett and Prince's The Stargate Conspiracy. I'll probably never believe in this 'Matrieya', 'World Teacher'. The problem is in accepting a dualisitic solution. This is why CW can never seem to see beyond his own dualistic outlook; it's ego-based, however subtly disguised; it's why he went on to prefer the channelled messages of 'Tom' and others of The Only Planet of Choice (At one point Tom states Jesus came from the planet Hoova; absurd) to the uncompromising nondualism of A Course in Miracles. It's why he sided with and championed clever self-deceivers and closet millennialists in the apocalyptic vein, like Hancock and Bauval, who, as Picknett & Prince point out, demonstrated the same inflexibility in attitude as the orthodoxy they claimed to be improving upon. Carey's sources were always cognisant of non-dualism; they're also couched in a distinctly 'Christian' context, as I say. It will be a great pity if their often sublime messages amount to naught (0). He had some pretty fantabulous messages -- virtual essays -- for his blog; I'd like to get up to date; that and see what the galactics are saying too. None of Carey's ever claimed to be 'the Nine'. But the Galactics were the source/s of the supremely funny and erudite ET 101. For all my reservations, I'm forever curious, fascinated.... seduced? I try and balance it by keeping up with Facim's latest articles, excerpts, videos. That, and watching episodes of Third Rock from the Sun. I recorded them a while back. It's brilliant. I've been a fan for years. Robert K. Hogg AugustSept 2012
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue listening from where you left off, or restart the preview.