posted 10-02-2003 03:18 PM            

It is called "is this an MI6 confession or what"

The man has ripped a couple of posts of mine on the E-Y forum, completely out of the evolving thread they were part of and pasted them wholesale into this EFF post. He has woven around them a bizarre tale of extreme paranoia in which i seem to be cast as (still--sigh!) as a sort of MI6 super agent who is subjecting poor Mark to continuous psychic attack. Don Croft has already graphically alluded to this going on--but this is the first i hear that i am to be framed as the culprit.

It is all complete tosh.

My rebuttal of these absurd accusations is on the E-Y forum since yesterday and i have imported it here since it contains the background to all this 'agent' nonsense as it arose at cloud-busters.com and i have already undertaken to present that information here. This is a good opportunity to do that. Also 24hrs and more has passed and it is quite plain that Mark Davey has no intention of playing fair and posting my response on his new site.

If there are members of cloud-busters here i would be glad to hear there take on this stuff. My first post here gave a bit of the story, this shows it was all well underway before i was booted. They had it in for me pretty much from the get go..........
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dear List Members,
This post i am called to respond to qualifies, i think, as THE most peculiar event in a very strange year.

I shall reply to it all in due course but first must set a little background. Frankly i am sick to death of the shabby behaviour of this whole bunch of shameless and excessively paranoid and fearful people who are the elite of the cloud-buster network. This post of Mark Davey's i have just read at his new EFFs forum where he has pasted it all from this site. I have come back to my mailbox to reply to it.

It began when i read the adventures of Don and Carol Croft on the E-Y site. I tried to deal with that exciting information and the implications for someone who had been enthusiastic about Reich's ideas about 30yrs ago, with some impeccability. I made a point of not reading anything at the cloud-busters forum before i had digested those strange tales--up to episode 34 i seem to remember. I also skimmed the previous history at the old yahoo forum. I wanted to be sure i took it all on board in a proper order. So in due time i joined cloud-busters.com. My first post was triggered by a peculiar computerglitch as i was reading a lengthy thread on the new member forum where the various 'heavy hitters' were planning a succour punch assault on the NWO or somesuch. Being a computer novice i thought of hacking (i now know the glitch was simply a heavy traffic error message) Anyway having put my head over the parapet as it were, i introduced myself briefly and undertook not to post again until i had done something substantial to post about. I'm spelling this out in such detail to make the point that from the get go my whole way of dealing with cloud-busters has, i think, been honorable. True to my word i did not post again until a week or so later when i had chucked a few TBs into Bristol docks. In the wake of that and in my enthusiasm at the confirmation's from doing it i also wrote to Ken Adachi at Educate Yourself to express some gratitude for the sheer fact of those tales being on his site. I even gave him my CC number and offered a small donation to his expenses with the site. Somewhat to my surprise i received no reply, nor was the donation taken from my account. I left it there until many months later when all the agent crappola had erupted. Around that time he assured me that the thing had probably got lost in the general press off email which he generally has to deal with. Credible enough.

In any event back around mid november i noticed (others may recall them also) 2 or 3 posts from Don Croft about looking out for agents who might approach you as your latest and newest best friend. Well i had received no such approaches and had certainly not made any. But...but, with hindsight it is easy to imagine a conversation between Ken and Don which may (or may not) have taken place in which this new Brit was mentioned. If i was a betting man, my money would be on Don to make the equation between friendly email and agentship which obviously was made.

At the same time as this i was posting to a meandering thread on the CB forum which Mary K croft had started, about atomic blasts in ancient India. Also around this time MaryK was locked out of this E-Y forum for some reason, but for some strange reason a mail cicular from her turned up in my mailbox--that was puzzling so i wrote to her about it. There was an odd response (sincere or playact--who can say) that would have me believe that while she already had this forum thread going with 'orgonote' she was not aware i was the same person. In any event around that time she and captain_Dragon_Farstar both dropped me pronto like i was something trodden in--from both the forum thread and the private email referred to.

By now (back half of Nov'02) every time i logged onto that forum waves of paranoia would strike. Much email was flowing i suspect to suggest 'orgonote' = agent. Not back-biting of course.

By Dec 9th and 10th i was subjected to 2 days of psychic attack by a CB forum member (apparently) entailing his astral presence at the start, his return with a couple of black entities which he set on me the first day. On the second he sent various waves of more puny thoughtforms or whatever, remotely, only turning up himself at the end of it. At the time i thought in my innocence that this was the work of some anti cloud-buster agent. I am now enclined to think the operator had been engaged for the work probably by Don Croft--sort of psychic pit bull.

By January this year, these pleasant and friendly 'light warrior' people had the first PWs and Shiva at their disposal and treated me to two evenings of astral entertainment with those tools. Now recall the early protocols for those. To be attacked with them i must have been regarded as a definite bad hat, yeah? They would have expected my head to pop-off, or heart to explode or somesuch--many of you will have read the ripping yarns about this stuff. In the event i found it fascinating and quite jolly. Wouldn't that imply that i was a clean hearted individual by those same protocols, yeah? Something wrong somewhere folks! What do you think they changed--my rep? or those protocols? You got it THE PROTOCOLS of course. That's integrity Don Croft style BE WARNED.

Captain Dragon Farstar in one or another of his many 'teach ins' on these difficult subjects about which he is soo informed tells the rank and file of CB folk that they keep the agents around from time to time for the lessons they provide. Does anyone know what was learned from my continued presence? i was a moderate and, i hope, useful poster. I'd built a CB, had gifted orgonite to the limit of my resources. I had refrained from posting about any of the above matters in the forum's interests. They had to wait, i think, until i broke a rule. Throughout this time i had not the remotest idea that i was regarded as an agent. I had maintained private ongoing email with Don Croft in which he maintained the pretence (it is now clear that pretence it was)of freindship. I had even told him privately, for information, about the psychic attack business--the irony of it is breathtaking i find.

By early march, unwittingly i gave them the opportunity. I was very angry at a post from dragon accusing another member (sgt shultz) of being an agent. I thought i was just the right side of the flaming and baiting rules, but with a subtle 'post hoc' nudging of the goal posts, which now outlawed sarcasm, i was out. Cbswork was in like flynn on the same thread with the fabulous tale of Lance Thorogood the 00 license to kill MI6 agent. This stone killer monster (supposed to be me) had twice implanted and programmed Jeff Baggaley (tiospaye1) when he stayed with me in Bristol. Since then i have emailed those of the accusing mindset, first to ask why i was banned--no reply. Then to protest and endeavour to prove my innocence--no reply.

I contend that this manner of dealing with the thing. In camera accusation and conviction with zero discussion or information or justification is behaviour which precisely resonates with the style of the Bushco patriot act regime these people reckon they are fighting. If there are any agents doing the work of what they like to call these days 'the old villain' it is actually Don Croft himself and his close acolytes and latest internet puppet Mark Davey. This is very sad. A house intent on dividing itself.

Mark Davey does not know me at all. He only has the opinion of me which presumably Don Croft has shared with him. Some weeks ago he posted some foolishness about agents, hinting at Dons infallibility in discerning them. I wrote to him privately. Without replying, he posted the entire email on cloud-busters forum. I wrote to enquire at his motive--no reply. I can discern no reason for that action other than to make mischief at the CB forum. He is clearly locked into this accusing mindset and beyond the reach of reason, as are the others, it seems to me.

I shall now reply to sections of his post.

----- Original Message -----
From: Superpower For Peace
To: Educate-Yourself_Forum@yahoogroups.com
Cc: Don Croft
Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2003 5:16 PM
Subject: [Educate-Yourself_Forum] Re: To think, or not to do?

Dear Educate Yourselfers,

Ummm, me thinks something is a foot and not quite right here. Philip
Aherene's first post earlier today is not very coherent and from someone who
is exceptionally intelligent and well versed I find it a bit odd. Why at the
end of his first post has he added a personal word for a guy called
suckingeggs who is not a handle member of this forum.

(P) It was an impulse simply. Having got to the end of the post it struck me that it was especially apposite advice for you with your professed engagement with an invisible fight. MaryK has a way with aphorisms which her readers will be familiar with. A recurring one is something to the effect that whereas honest people hear the truth, the dishonest can only discern lies in all they hear. There is something in the notion i guess, but you need to be sure what side of the equation you are really on. That advice i offered you can safely be taken at face value and would serve you well. That you choose to see in it something sinister is entirely your affair. As to the handle 'suckingeggs', that came to mind simply because in recent days you were in my mind under that name since i had been ploughung around posts at CICDD and CTC where that is your name. 'Sucking eggs' 'superpowerforpeace' or 'Mark Dveay' or EFF2 it's you isn't it? What's the beef?

Then he responds to
seanjohns reply with a more fuller explanation about his remote viewing
powers etc and refers to a forum where the moderator is under psychic
attack. but, the educate yourself members would not be aware of who or what
the forum is?

(P) Precisely so. In my book it would not have been ethical to use this story as the example for the point i wanted to make if relevant parties could easily be identified. It was completely appropriate that i make it plain to list members that there was not the remotest connection with any of this forums interests or members.

The most incredible thing about this response is that the same
suckingeggs is also the moderator on www.ethericfreedomfighters.com and is
also under consistent psychic attack.
(P) There is nothing remotely incredible about this. It is simply a coincidence of no significance whatsoever.

But folks it gets even more interesting, for this sucking eggs guy is also
the owner of the forum and is called EFF2, that is in partnership with Don
Croft ex cloud buster forum, the very same forum that Philip Aherene was
banned from for being an MI6 agent,

(P) He has not been banned for being an MI6 agent. This is impossible since he has never been an MI6 agent. All i KNOW is that subsequent to my banning i have been accused of being this thing.

which he has categorically denied and
keeps denying on every site he joins

(P) Too damn right. When it arises and only then i certainly deny it. Why would i not? It's called self defence.

while stalking suckingeggs and EFF2
allegedly for banning him from the new etheric freedom fighter forum.

(P) This notion of 'stalking' is purely your own. I turned up at CICDD because i was researching your background--as i explain there. I joined and posted there because their concerns, it emerged, interest me. I have hardly flayed you there if you are honest. You don't mention that i made posts there against the chemtrail debunkers which like flies to s**t YOU had attracted there along with there off topic obfuscations. You don't mention either that i defended Don Croft from falsehoods about his commercial interests in orgonite posted by one of those debunkers. A defence, i note which YOU did NOT make, though you might have reasonably been expected to, being as you say partners and all. Here are URLs to the CICDD posts in question.........
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cicdd/message/8087
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cicdd/message/8088
Also you mention 'suckingeggs and EFF2 as if they were 2 different people, they are both you, man!

And what do you mean 'allegedly banning him from the eff forum'. Here is a mail i sent you and Don in the wake of my deleted post from that new forum--to which neither of you have replied of course. "allege" my butt, do you deny you received this mail or deleted the post AND the subsequent post asking what rule had been broken.
~~~~~~
Subject: etheric freedom fighters eh?

So you two deserve each other.

The name intrigued, now it's plainer you actually ARE fighting etheric freedom. In the sense that you don't want people to have it.

On your new proboard forum you have a category, a section for agents and handlers only, hahaha.

But in fact a designated by you 'agent' posting there is deleted and subsequent login disallowed inside one hour. You cannot accuse me of subterfuge, i never pretended to be anybody else. I cannot think of an unoffensive word to describe you or this, and since you are so sensitive i'll refrain.

You cannot tolerate a gentle post as innocent as this:-

Is this a door i have my foot in?
« Thread started on: Today at 3:06pm »

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Making a first post in *this* section is by way of wry comment that i come here with some, ah, baggage.

In a way i'm in *this* section, though, under false pretences since i have never been, am not, nor will i ever be, an agent, a handler or the dupe of either.

I hope that is clear enough. Of course i recognise that that is just what that figment of fevered imagination Lance Thorogood {Lic. Kill} would say, but there as they say, you go.

The theatre of the absurd indeed. How ironic that the moderator of this post is he who has honed this fantasy so assiduously since mid november last. But i've no wish to burden these pages with the silly tale unless someone expresses a burning need to know.

The morbidly curious might bookmark this URL
http://www.troo.info
If in the future i can be bothered i may post the saga there, it's hardly a high priority though so don't hold your breath. Just a guy digging a hole at present--'under construction' as they say.

Well, apart from all that it has certainly been kicking off in the world of the orgonised, eh?

I'm pasting in 3 brief posts from the other place from the somebodies left thread which capture the spirit of comment i might make there were i allowed to

09/07/2003 14:48 My Public Files | My Other Posts | Email Me Edit Post # 43220
lightgrrl
Member
243 Posts
Registered Sep 2002
Been down this road before, people. The more we dwell on the differences, the worse they will become. Please, let's maintain our focus and stay the course. You never know, Don could be back before too long. I've seen it happen before. Fingerpointing and namecalling will yield nothing except happy illuminati pigs, so let's avoid that, shall we?

Isn't this a fine example of why we MUST learn to get along? Not to be spineless or abandon your closely-held beliefs, but just to GET ALONG so we can succeed. Can't we agree to disagree and get on with our work?

Is that so much to ask of this intelligent, caring group of people?

Report post to Moderators IP: Logged

09/07/2003 15:00 My Public Files | My Other Posts | Email Me Edit Post # 43222
sgt_shultz
Member
66 Posts
Registered Feb 2003
I'm not very happy either. Actually it's got me all upset.

In fact, I'm so upset I gotta go BUST something. IN FACT, I'M GONNA GO THROW TBS OUT MY WINDOW AT STRATEGIC TARGETS and..and..and BURY HOLY HANDGRENADES IN STRATEGIC LOCATIONS!

HELL, I'M EVEN GONNA THROW SOME RESONANT-CHAMBER ORGONITE DEVICES INTO SOME LARGE LAKES AND MAYBE EVEN A RIVER!

I agree with you, Lightgrrl.

Come on people......chin up. Let's get on with it.

-Marty
Edited by sgt_shultz on 09/07/2003 at 15:00 PST

Report post to Moderators IP: Logged

09/07/2003 15:06 My Public Files | My Other Posts | Email Me Edit Post # 43223
lightgrrl
Member
243 Posts
Registered Sep 2002
Roger that, Sgt.

I'm really pleased that of all the people it might have been it was the excellent Sgt Schultz who i stuck my neck out about when angry certainly, and defended against accusations of being an agent coming from someone of dragonly disposition, back in March. Got me booted of course, but then it was only a matter of time i now understand.

Irony abounds.

Cheers
phil (((secret)))agent Fission Chips.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
it's pretty pathetic, guys, really. You pretend at humour but have none, you pose at promoting etheric freedom but kill it, you pretend at integrity but lack it, profess honesty but are incapable of it. What are you? What is left?

EGO
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The plot thickens what a strange coincidence Mr Aherene, care to explain or
offer a link to the forum you are referring to?

(P) No as said--nothing strange about it. NO plot to thicken, it is all in your mind i think.

I shall certainly not offer a link to the forum in question. As explained ethics require that for it's proper use as example anonymity be maintained. Rest assured it has nothing to do with you for sure, nor any body on this list (i am fairly certain) Is this so odd, really? Why has everything got to do with you? Are you sick or something?

And further, you are saying
that you helped remote view this guy and saw his fear and pain and he
shunned away from you. Is this not a confession of psychic attack,

(P) In no way is it such a confession. The usefulness of this particular example is precisely that it showed the different effect of the same energy, as a balm for the attacked innocent, and as torture for the nasty attacker. It sounds pretty much the same as the sort of thing Don and others recount in connection with PW stories, doesn't it? If you get any sense of what i posted you will notice these elements 1. i am asked, 2. i am given permission, as i put it , i am graced to do it, and 3. no 'tools' are engaged. In case you hadn't noticed the energy in question is simply love, yeah?

the same
attack that Don Croft refers to at
http://eff2.proboards21.com/index.cgi?board=targets&action=display&num=10647
74300 and the reason you were banned from Cloud Busters and EFF?

(P) Nothing whatsoever to do with it--i hope that is by now clear. Why i was banned from either forum you and Don know--i have never been told, you people don't believe in that simple courtesy do you?
Also aren't we led to believe that Don with the support of the wondrous talent of his wife and you with your partner in psychism always know where the attacks come from? Why are you asking me about it?

I make it very plain here and now. I have NEVER in this life psychically attacked anybody, let alone you or Don or any of the other nasty people that have been gathered against me through this year.

I shall wait and see if you are honorable enough to post this riposte on your EFF forum where you have already seen fit to paste your post to this list with the whole thread. Bloody outrageous behaviour i reckon.

I respectfully request that you clear this matter up for the membership as
you were the person who wrote both the articles below.

(P) ""respectfully" "RESPECTFULLY" you don't seem to have the remotest idea of what respect even means.
I hope i have made it plain enough for any of the membership here--perhaps rather plainer than you might have hoped for.

regards
Mark

Mark Davey
aka superpowerforpeace
aka suckingeggs
aka EFF2

(P) Thank you to the list members forbearance if you've read this far, for being subjected to all this nonsense.
Cheers
phil

> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 17:27:52 +0100
> From: "philip AHEARNE"
> Subject: Re: Re: To think, or not to do?
>
> Seanjohn,
> Great post. It's all paradox, eh.
>
> Nothing needs to change. (without THAT realized, nothing can be changed,
even though change is all there is (??)
>
> Peace can only happen in the human heart. (and if you're considering any
one elses, it ain't happening in yours. If it ain't happening in yours it
can't happen in theirs (??)
>
> In the light (??) of those statements, action at a distance or the
engineering of non-local events is less a matter of projecting thought at
them than of operating a mind which is already enfolded in the heart, and
shifting attention to that part of that heart which is ALREADY AT that
locale.
>
> The realised heart is already anywhere it needs to be, to be and hence do
whatever it needs to. This cannot be to accomplish an item on some ready
made agenda. It will be, can only be, something new. If it isn't like this,
best not bother, for the outcome can only be part of the problem, never part
of the solution.
>
> This may seem like semantic chopping--but imo it is simply how it is.
>
> Cheers,
> phil
> P.S.--just for that 'suckingeggs' guy, if your out there. THIS is the
nature of your invisible fight so take notes. And less of the judgemental
attitude would help your efforts--not to mention less effort!! Just BE, and
see what you get.
> Message: 5
> Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2003 02:47:56 +0100
> From: "philip AHEARNE"
> Subject: Re: Re: To think, or not to do?
>
> Hi,
> Yeah it's pretty abstruse. After posting it i wondered if i should have
done--it seemed true and to make sense at the time.
>
> I was not setting out to be a clever clogs and shall try to clarify.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: seanjohn050
> To: Educate-Yourself_Forum@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2003 11:14 PM
> Subject: [Educate-Yourself_Forum] Re: To think, or not to do?
>
>
>
> >
> > Nothing needs to change. (without THAT realized, nothing can be
> changed, even though change is all there is (??)
>
> I don't necessarily agree that NOTHING needs to change. Just that
> the ups & downs along the way to change are part of the process, and
> symbolic of progress.
>
> (P) From any ordinary perspective it's abundantly clear the world needs
to change. I'd be nuts to deny it. It's all going to hell in a handbasket in
a myriad ways. Every human here (on the planet) knows it, yet clearly by our
actions we collectively continue screwing it up.
> In the light of the new reading you referenced i was trying to scratch
the surface of what's going on. 6 billion or whatever people here, but only
one person--who doesn't seem to be home, do you get the level on which that
makes sense?
>
> This ongoing creation is in totality and balanced as it is that way, an
expression of perfection, yeah? To look to change it, through the
application of some configured prescription or worked out agenda,
entails/implies a view of it in which it is not perfect. Sorry god old chap
you got it wrong, we'll just tweak it here, and here--oops! we seem to have
buggered it some more.
>
> All *that* happens because the agenda--any agenda arises from some where
other than the heart. If you know the heart, truly know it, this is
obviously true. The heart has no agenda, it is always new.
>
> In this sense it is perenially true that 'nothing needs to change'. Does
it help if i write no thing needs to change?
>
> So if it isn't 'things' we look to change what is it, and how is it
accomplished without agenda?
>
> I humbly suggest that it is the heart , the collective heart, allowed
it's own expression that will in the end accomplish what must and will be
accomplished. This is the ONLY way it can come about, and humanity is to be
obliged to learn this lesson. It's sad that humanity is such an idiot that
it insists in learning it the hard and painful way. After the infinite
chorus of "yes, but"s has finally exhausted itself i suppose it can happen.
Shouldn't take more than a thousand years or so i guess!
>
> >Peace can only happen in the human heart. (and if you're considering
any one elses, it ain't happening in yours. If it ain't happening in yours
it can't happen in theirs (??)
> >
> > In the light (??) of those statements, action at a distance or the
> engineering of non-local events is less a matter of projecting
> thought at them than of operating a mind which is already enfolded
> in the heart, and shifting attention to that part of that heart
> which is ALREADY AT that locale.
> >
> > The realised heart is already anywhere it needs to be, to be and
> hence do whatever it needs to. This cannot be to accomplish an item
> on some ready made agenda. It will be, can only be, something new.
> If it isn't like this, best not bother, for the outcome can only be
> part of the problem, never part of the solution
>
> I'm kind of lost on this part. Could you clarify it a little.
>
> (P) i'll try. I've taken the liberty of reinserting the second statement
from my initial post. It seems to be part of it to me.
>
> A little background might help me to clarify this. About 30yrs ago i got
introduced to kabbalah and a little later a sufi tradition based on a
collection of supposedly secret writings (certainly never published--nor
will they be). I seemed to take to this stuff, action at a distance and so
on, but pretty soon i realised there was a conflict in me in these sometimes
rather ritual approaches and my instinctively devotional nature. All this
stuff somehow came to me--from halfway round the world some of it, rather
than me seeking it. A lot of 'waking up' went on, obe's, weird experiences
like completely disappearing--like being there but with no discernible body
anywhere for a while, bizarre in anyone's book, full blown kundalini
experiences and so on. Somewhere in there i made a choice--i didn't want the
power of all that stuff, i knew i didn't want the agenda that went with it.
If you like i asked god to deal with it, i was there if and when it might be
useful, but deployment
> --that was his bag: and so it has been and become. In this sense i *am*
an agent, but of god or truth (certainly NOT MI6 fun though that might be,
LOL)
>
> So in practical terms what does this amount to and what can i say to
enlighten the riddle i posted there? This is typical enough. Some while ago,
out and about, on the street, walking along suddenly the K thing comes on,
(nothing to do with chakra's really, fwiw) it's up in the penthouse--i know
by now that when this happens i'll soon meet someone or circumstances where
this is relevant, and sure enough i bump into this out of his mind young
man. If locked on a back-ward somewhere was 100% this guy might have been
running at about 80%. In the state i'm in i can perceive to a whisker how
all his energies are running. I encounter this, however, with no formulated
diagnostic notions whatsoever. I'm not even making it up as i go along, what
ensues is as new to me as it is to him. In no way do i touch anything that
'is wrong' in him. Something in me attracts, pulls gently on, the innermost
in him, it comes up through all that crap he's indulging or trapped by. If
now he chooses
> to change, that is up to the disposition of his own heart. He has not
been manipulated, he has not been 'treated', he has simply been enabled to
become reaqquainted with his own innermost self. The condition i left him in
was somewhat the wacky side of normal i'd say. Right now, as i sit at this
keyboard, months ago though that was i can sense in the palm of my left hand
the reality and present state of his assemblage point as i held it very
briefly in the parting pat on the back i left him with. He's rather steadier
than he was then (from time to time i recall him in that fashion)
>
> It's a scalar phenomena if you like to look at it that way. I haven't,
as i sit here 'gone to him' or sent anything to him. In a real sense i am
there already because a seed of my heart is in his, whether he is conscious
of it or not. I didn't invade him with it, he invited it in when his heart
saw it was available. He could be anywhere on the planet or off it, and that
would be the case. SO we are each other--or can be.
>
> Don't think, or suppose that i do, that this sort of thing makes me some
sort of walking saint, because it isn't so. Just human. The challenge still
is to live a life where i am properly and fully available for this if that
is what i am meant to be engaged in/by.
>
> Usually when this sort of thing occurs remotely i don't even know who
the people are or the situation, so be it, the agenda isn't mine. More often
than not if i think to 'put someone on the list' i get a 'nope'--for some
reason not appropriate. Sometimes i get a 'yep' and off it goes.
>
> Case in point that illustrates another aspect of this approach. Just the
other day a friend brought to my notice a situation in which somebody in
there role as an internet forum moderator was getting badly attacked,
psychically, by somebody they had taken to task about some post or other. (i
must insert, this is not a forum which anyone on this list goes to or has
connection with, to my knowledge. I've never posted to it myself so there is
no connection to be made should anybody be curious) The attacker had a rep
as some sort of black mage. Anyway i was asked if i could help. My response,
it won't surprise you, is not 'i'll see what i can do' but rather 'i'll see
what i may do'. In the event i was graced to be able to contribute
something.
>
> We say every day 'the sun came up' or 'the sun went down' In truth that
is the appearance only and not what actually occurs. It's easy but the same
sort of casual error for me now to say 'i went to that person' or 'RVed that
person'. Quite ok in ordinary speech, but in trying to clarify i'll be
pedantic and express the actuality (imo) 'i placed my attention on my heart
which i allowed to arise at that persons location', to some extent what i am
drew their innermost through the fear which allowed the experience of attack
in the first place (can't root without that fear), from there i followed,
with attention, the link to the attacker and so arose at his location. His
disposition to this same energy in his locale was not as to a balm but as to
something that seemed to scald him. As i loved him more, so the more did he
shrink and cringe away from it, to the point of virtually screaming, until
it was indicated i should return my attention home.
>
> So it goes.
>
> I've been a bit long winded but i hope to some point.
>
> Thanks
> phil
>
> "Life is real, only then, when i am"
> ........G.I.Gurdjieff
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

One last comment. Some of that stuff may sound as if i'm talking out of my a$$, but if you are interested in the context in which it arose, it makes rather more sense in conjunction with the E-Y thread which it is part of.

posted 10-06-2003 10:19 AM            

It's horses for courses in a way. I think i'm more inclined to that sort of esoteric weirdness than political argy-bargy, though get involved a bit with that too.

Those posts which Mark picked up on make a bit more sense in the context of the thread they were ripped out of i think.

I've pasted below my response to someone else who had a problem with it and had asked me to clarify it some. I'd be interested if it had any appeal for you, or makes more sense of it. It's a controversial point of view i realise.
~~~~~~~~~

Bless your heart Karlin,
It's nice to read through a post from you which doesnt seem all spikey at
first glance. Have to read it again to see what it means in a mo.

If i got the hump replying to you before it probably wasn't fair, since it
was the wretched yahoo glitch i was miffed with and had no right to take it
out on you.

So i'll do my usual pedantic plod through your post, ripping it to shreds
:-)
and boring the a$$ off everyone else if that's ok with you.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Klavin Beastly"
To:
Sent: Sunday, October 05, 2003 12:00 AM
Subject: Re: [Educate-Yourself_Forum] Re-orgonote - think or do.

>
> Okay okay my friend, lets both breath IN a some point here.
> I truly sympathise with your two-hour loss in responding to my 'response'.
> If I added to your stress by mis-reading your post, bummer, sorry, but,
well
> I did, didn't I...

(P) No worries!
>
> I seem to have gotten the idea that you were defending the works of god
> as our best bet for future life on earth.

(P) Well, at some level i feel pretty sure i would have been doing just
that, that's how sickening us believers can get. Just remember we can't help
it.

I am not being deliberately
> 'obtuse'.

(P) Well that's alright then. Having looked it up, you wouldn't want to be,
eh?

I admit I needed to look it up, being unsure of its defintion.
> "ob·tuse: Lacking quickness of perception or intellect. Characterized
by
> a lack of intelligence or sensitivity: an obtuse remark.
> Not distinctly felt: an obtuse pain.
> Not sharp, pointed, or acute in form; blunt. Having an obtuse angle: an
> obtuse triangle.
> Botany. Having a blunt or rounded tip: an obtuse leaf" -from
dictionary.
> END DEFINITIONS>
>
> orgonote - Blunt, insensitive, I imagine, is what you referred to. I can
> be like that when I see GOD as part of an argument or issue. Religion
needs
> a recall.

(P) Fair enough. Let's leave it out.

But lets talk about your post. I had a lot of trouble seeing the
> point, I admit. Maybe I should have left it alone, being unqualified to
> figure it out.

(P) As long as you don't put yourself down. Your not unqualified to have an
opinion. It's only a daft post on an internet forum, not Proust!

> On the other hand, I figured that maybe it just didn't make sense,

(P) If that was your reality it's a perfectly valid opinion, and it doesn't
bother me.

> possibly,

(P) Probably even? Go on, admit it, you thought it was boll**ks. That's
alright. It makes me happy to find you disagreeing with something (which is
your natural right) without getting knotted about it, yeah?

and hoped you would clarify if I prodded you [which is a bit
> obtuse, I admit].

(P) Well i'm happy to try. [it's actually quite sharp, Karlin, good prod]
>
> You write about the need to change, and then say that the human heart has
> allways been doing the guidance and will continue to do so, and in that
> respect, nothing needs to change. Is this better, more like what you said?

(P) Remember my first post on this topic was a reply to Seanjohn so it might
help looking at it in that context (or not). He had been reading something
new and this is a little bit of what he found there......
""I just started reading a very unique book
called "The Breakthrough Experience" by Dr. John Demartini. I'm only
at the 3rd chpt., but so far it basically states that the universe
is in complete balance at all times, and that there is a an equal-
opposite energy for every "emanation". This balance is the essence
of unconditional love. ""

There is lots more , but this is the sort of thing i was responding to.

I kicked off by saying it's all paradox--or something like that. I just
looked *that* up to keep on track, it says...."seemingly absurd though
perhaps actually well-founded statement; self-contradictory or essentially
absurd statement"

So i'm warning in a way, that i'm attempting to say something which is
(perhaps) essentially impossible to say. The aim of this, if you can pull it
off, is that it can point up some valuable truth with any luck. If it worked
or not is up to the reader to judge. Your opinion that it made no sense is
as valid as another's opinion (possibly) that it did make sense.

So the 1st of my two barmy and paradoxical but perhaps not totally useless
statements was this

"Nothing needs to change. (without THAT realized, nothing can be changed,
even though change is all there is (??)"

Try this. Recall a time when you were simply, quietly, peacefully and
blissfully content. Just a moment maybe. A gorgeous day, the play of light
on some water, the sun through some leaves, the face of a smiling child--you
get my drift, a moment of perfection. Every human, i suggest, even in the
midst of misery can recall such moments.

At such times one is aware , and might even say to oneself "this is it,
nothing needs to change". For a moment it's all perfect because the heart is
in tune with nature. On the same wavelength. It resonates with the same
quality in nature around it. All of a piece. A delicious moment.

At such a time my first statement "nothing needs to change" is obvious and
no problem. It gets awkward and paradoxical--seems to make no
sense--extending the idea to a situation that is horrible or painful for
oneself or anybody else, and that IS the state of the world for most people
in it, horrible and painful. It's bloody outrageous really, me sitting here
with food in my stomach, clean water to drink, a computer to play on and
time to do it. Try talking about this in Zambia for instance, "it's all
maya, pal, don't worry about it". It wouldn't garner much credibility. Does
it all make sense, if so, how? Or is it all just mad, then why doesn't
humanity in total, right now just top themselves?

"Nothing needs to change" is short hand for everything is unfolding as it
should. Right now as you read this the totality of nature or creation or
everything that exists is the expression of love. That is all that is ever
going on. There is constant change, constant motion, but always
perfectly balanced and in it's totality the expression of love. That's a
longer version of "nothing needs to change"

It's paradoxical because from another perspective which certainly you, and i
suppose, everyone here is well aware of it is complete bol**x. Because
obviously very much on this planet needs to change if humanity is going to
make it here anymore at all. We would agree on THAT i'm sure, yeah?
Accomplishing that neccessary change is what we want, we are all groping for
the 'how' of it and clearly not finding it very much--in general.

The core of the paradox is where i suggest that none of this in an obvious
way *needed* change can be properly accomplished unless from a consciousness
that REALIZES that nothing needs to change--a subtle understanding,
underlying the perception of the obvious need. Why is that? Because that
consciousness embraces, comes from, flows out of the heart. It is rooted in
the taste of that 'gorgeous moment' i alluded to earlier, even if at present
'shit' is going on. That is the consciousness which must be applied to
problems if it is to engineer working solutions, imo.

Does this heady notion have any practical significance? I believe so. In the
last 7 years we in the UK have had this Blair government. It came in with
loads of promises, has flung enormous sums of money at the health service,
transport, education etc etc. It is now emerging that every thing by and
large is as bad as it ever was, nothing has changed very much for the
better. Why? I suggest because every penny has followed 'head generated
ideas'. The real aim all along was to be seen to be 'tackling the problems'
'hitting the targets' 'good presentation', so even if they mean well they're
lost before they start because all the activity is misconceived, it is all a
means to an end, the end being to get in power again, so they can do more of
it, so consumed are they by the totally prideful notion that they know what
to do, when in truth none of them have a clue. Any one who even stands for
office, by that very fact is almost certainly a rascal. And 'we the people'
collude in this ongoing farce.

You could fill the total bandwidth of this site with examples and only
scratch the surface, Every field of human affairs it's the same, battling
away to secure advantage over some alternative. Every individual is doing
it, every collective is doing it and it all adds up to the mess we are in.
One of the core illusions i am dangerously suggesting is that any of it
matters. The brutally true fact is none of it does. All that matters is the
heart. The surface world is total crap because humanity has made it that
way. Why? How? Because as best they can manage it (and they manage it pretty
well) as far as surface affairs are concerned they never let the heart get a
look in.

So that 1st barmy/paradoxical notion flows into the 2nd........"Peace can
only happen in the human heart. (and if you're considering any one elses, it
ain't happening in yours. If it ain't happening in yours it can't happen in
theirs (??)"

After the foregoing this may seem a little less opaque. The first part i can
really say no more about--take it or leave it. The next bit, by
'considering' i mean giving thought to in the sense of worrying about,
judging that some other heart 'needs' this or that, ought to change in this
or that way, something is wrong with it. As soon as *that* is all going on
even if up to then you were in your own (heart), you have instantly lost the
peace of your own--in that present moment you have preferred this piece of
considering instead. That is okay, it doesn't matter at all (see above) but
that is what happens--how it works.

Consider this situation. There is some group say, and something is being
given away--a freeby on offer. Sweeties, money, a car, a nugget of
truth---an open and relaxed heart that might be in that group will take no
less pleasure at someone else receiving the gift than getting it themself.
An open heart knows that we are all one so it makes no odds. That's why,imo,
it is the only place world peace can happen.

Some may counter that this is all very well but runs counter to human
nature. I wouldn't disagree. A dog or a lion or an elephant doesn't have
this problem. Those creatures are complete in themselves. Whatever they do
they are always a perfect expression of their nature--they can't get it
wrong, they will always be real, always be true. In this sense they are
complete. It is not like that with humans. Something is unfinished and we
have to finish it (or not--it doesn't matter, see above) we 'need' to raise
our game to embrace this heart stuff. Noone is going to do this for us, we
have to do it for ourselves.

How? Is it hard? No it is as easy as falling off a log, you have only to
want it. The hard fact is that most people don't want it--or if they do they
want it for themselves, to improve their lives or somesuch, because they
think something needs to change. Do you begin to get a glimpse of what i'm
on about i wonder? The 'trick', if you like, is in realising that you don't
so much 'have' an open heart as allow an open heart to 'have you'. That is a
very crucial distinction, and it is a manifest certainty that the world and
his wife (and the kids) prefer to have their own tight, life throttling grip
on their own shrunken hearts--keep that old heart chakra down to the size of
a fleas arse, and revel in the all consuming ego--than allow their lives to
become the expression of the being that yearns to flow from their own
innermost, up and through all their surface bodies and into the world
beyond, there to transform it. That is ok, it's their choice which they are
free to make. Whatever. It doesn't matter, nothing needs to change (see
above). Strictly personally i don't much care. It is their business, i deal
with mine.

The rest of what i said i have expanded on already and got in trouble on
account of it. Suffice to say that it is the inherent nature of a realised
heart (when in that state) to have scalar correlates--remember this post
only arose in the context of a thread about action at a distance, ok?

If anybody finds this all a bit offensively and pointlessly long winded, i
remind you that the initial post was very brief, and the expansions have
been requested.

Another thought. Since there is the free energy trundling along here also at
this time, i may say that whole scene provides a powerful model of all these
principles (and the ignorance of them) being played out. This is a link
which Leslie Pastor has put up here before which expresses that neatly and
better than i could on the bottom half of this page--a good read. http://www.luisprada.com/Protected/the_world_of_free_energy.htm

I think the rest of your post is covered already, Karlin........and i'm
pooped anyway

Cheers
phil

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
What do you reckon? Load of tosh or useful perspective?

posted 10-08-2003 07:38 PM            

As a master of cut'n paste Mark will appreciate the appropriateness of rounding the thing out here also in a proper fashion. His comments would be welcome though not expected.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dear Mark Davey, aka Superpowerforpeace, aka Suckingeggs1, aka EFF2.

Some days have elapsed and the sound of your silence here is deafening--although overwhelmed by your noise over at EFFs

----- Original Message -----
From: Superpower For Peace
To: Educate-Yourself_Forum@yahoogroups.com
Cc: Don Croft
Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2003 5:16 PM
Subject: [Educate-Yourself_Forum] Re: To think, or not to do?

""Dear Educate Yourselfers,

Ummm, me thinks something is a foot and not quite right here.""

This is how you started your slandering post--which you also pasted up on your EFFs board, presumably with the intent of making your faithful there into my enemies also. How kind, and etherically free of you.

You concluded the slander with this.

""Is this not a confession of psychic attack, the same
attack that Don Croft refers to at
http://eff2.proboards21.com/index.cgi?board=targets&action=display&num=10647
74300 and the reason you were banned from Cloud Busters and EFF?""

The thread you put a link to here has strangely disappeared in the last few hours, completely gone? Is that because somebody contributed to it with a different view of things from yours. One man's etheric freedom is another man's tyrrany it appears--at least in your little world.

""I respectfully request that you clear this matter up for the membership as
you were the person who wrote both the articles below.""

Well,i did clear it up,just for you---nobody else had asked for it. Your subsequent further slanders on your own board (since mysteriously deleted, as noted) made it plain you were still lost in your bizarre paranoia about this.

Perhaps i'm old fashioned but i think these circumstances call for an apology from you.

Or at least an explanation.

Comment??

And *here*, where you have put your nonsense in front of 700+ people, not there where there are, what? about 150 (it's hard to keep track as the revolving door there spins so fast)

I think now, an honorable man would respond. If you do not, then i won't post again about it but shall make private conclusions about your character.

phil aka, orgonote.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That, i think, is likely to be the end of this chapter at least of the agent fable.

Not the end of the main theme of course, for this mindset, so assured of it's knowledge and powers of discernment when it come to sussing out agents.

Were i tomorrow to walk on water or raise the dead, Mark, Don and their cronies would simply marvel at the advanced stage of MI6 technology.

"agent", i come to learn is a label once applied can never be removed. Accuracy for these folks has nothing to do with it. It is all about the expression of prejudice, paranoia and malice.

In the minds of these world saving 'light warrior' elite, 2+2 will forever = 5.