posted on Feb, 15 2009 @ 12:21 AM
S: You tend to spell a lot of things wrong.
J: Yes. Keeps you underestimating me and, well, spellcheck is a real PITA. But seriously, I'd rather use my time conveying information.
S: Project Bluebeam is a Pleiadian project?
If its not, it sure has a lot of them clustered around it.
S: Seems pretty nefarious for a group that is supposed to be benevolent.
J: Pliedians and benevolence. Even Hidden Hand had something nice to say about them. To be honest, I don't have anything really to say disparagingly
about them either. But why do they keep showing up at hot spots? I'm not big into guilt by association but they are either the wisest of people, or
the dumbest (kind of going hand in hand with something PH said).
But I will admit that they've helped me out quite a bit here and there. Thanks Pliedians.
S: Are there positive and negative Pleiadians? I think I've heard that there are, but I am wondering what your take on this is.
J: Pliedians are like any other person, there are good and bad apples, but for the life of me, I can't think of the last time I said to myself "Now
there goes a bad Pliedian." I can remember thinking that about several nephs and humans though.
S: Can you offer any insight into Billy Meier's "Pleiadians" vs. George Green's "Pleiadians" vs. Miriam Delicado's "Pleiadians," ? Meier and
Green's seem like deceptive "doom and gloom" proponents while Delicado's seem to be more positive, but that's just based on their own individual
accounts and my opinions of them. Is it possible that every contact just understands the same message in a different way? After all, these beings are
telepathic, and I expect that a 3d human might have difficulty in fully translating the message through a medium that he/she is unfamiliar with...
J: You have to remember what I just said above, and the fact that there are groups that aren't pliedian that respond to pliedian honor who are in
process of discovering how to implement it in their own groups. And of course there is intentional name misuse.
However, they are tough as nails and you'd be very surprised in how rough a situation they can be in and still remain cheerful.
S: Do you have the same understanding of the "densities" as H_H and others (Ra, etc.) do? If it is different, how would you describe the levels of
spiritual growth? It would seem to me that if you serve Lucifer then you would both have a similar understanding of this.
Yes, I have saught out a cohesive theory that agrees with what I have seen, what I have studied and about the only thing that agrees with what I agree
with is the Ra/Sethian Materials. Rather than support something that is incorrect or doesn't have a chance to make a positive difference, I naturally
have a hard time putting in the leg work to support it. I don't beleive in decrying anything either, I figure if its not meant to be, I'll just let
it whither by attrition.
S: This does correspond with H_H's story, if only in the slightest possible way. What say you?
J: Yes. It is said that Jehovah is I AM, and the Light-Bringer is I AM BECOMING. Stability is a virtue of Jehovah, and stagnation is one of his vices.
Curiosity is a virtue of the Light-Bringer, and instability is one of his vices.
For Ra to say what he did about a being many times considered evil I think indicates Ra is an enlightened being, able to see the good in the bad and
the bad in the good.
J: You said that you recently had contact with Lucifer. What was the nature of this contact?
L: Spiritually. One of the things I've never been able to figure out is why you can't request non-transferance. It seems that even saying "I'm not
seeking contact at this time" seems to put an even bigger bulls eye on your head. There has to be some natural reason for this.
It seems that I am compliant with quite a few Beings agendas, thank goodness. Not that much explaining of why I'm doing X at any given moment.
We spoke a bit. I was suprised at how "American" they were if that makes sense. Having talked to quite a number of beings, most tend to have a more
archaic or futuristic sense of reality. These were one of the few that actually sounded like they'd be right at home in the USA. Not what I was
S: Hahah. You're not quite as "consistent" as I had hoped for, but I'm starting to find more understanding in your words. Keep it up.
J: LOL. You know you were slightly impressed when you pointed out that inconsistancy and how I linked two things I had already said together in a way
that made sense. I didn't even have to give an excuse, I just said, look here, look here and its consistant.
Any time Suterlaben, any where. You'll probably catch me one of these times. Anyways, its a fun game, I think. With so many serious Games going on a
bit of silly, mental fun is healing.
S: "There is no planet X where you are looking. In these days of Hubble telescopes and millions of scientists, you would think that you good men
would trust them. Keep this up and you'll start thinking that the earth is hollow, or conceivably even flat."
I think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone on ATS who trusts NASA. And H_H did state, very matter-of-factly, that the Earth is definitely hollow.
Though I picture it more in a honey-comb fashion for a few (hundred?) miles beneath the surface, and from there its pretty much as our science
textbooks show, rather than being hollow like a basketball.
And we may be "conspiracy nut jobs" here on ATS, but not "flat-Earthers." That's whole other range of looney.
J: Its interesting you mention this because I purposefully don't correlate spiritual phenominon with actual physical coordinates for safety
Also, its interesting that you went for ego instead of mental on this one. In that you could have spun around and said "Well, where should we be
looking?" but you went for the bait instead. Look, its already understood that you gentlemen are intelligent. However I still don't understand how
you each internally look at (science) "the earth is solid" and (intuition) "the earth is hollow" and hang onto those two facts at the same
You, Suterlaben, do show promise in your explination here because it shows an intellectually sound idea of how solid vs. hollow Earth could work,
without invalidating several centuries of gravitational theory, education and common sense.