I think Ra might be hiding something

[Dtris]

there are a lot of inconsistencies in the Ra material

see this review on amazon:

"In 35.8 of the Law of One Books, the Ra Collective talks about Abraham Lincoln in a positive way. However, Abraham Lincoln was part of the evil agenda. Abraham Lincoln had no wish or desire to free the slaves. One of the main reasons that the South went to war with the North was over the proposed 40% tax rate, not slavery. (See Morrill Tariff Act of 1861.) If it’s true, Abraham Lincoln said, “I can’t let them (the South) go. Who would pay for the government?”

Lincoln’s concern was to keep the Union together at all costs—not freeing the slaves. (Read Lincoln’s letter to Horace Greeley, August 22nd, 1862.) The Union was about enslaving ALL OF THE PEOPLE with taxes and laws created by the rich. (This was the dark Reptilian agenda of the time.) Lincoln had no wish to give freedom to the people, and he only signed the Emancipation Proclamation in the hopes that the southern slaves would rise up and riot against the South so the southern armies would go back home and protect their land and families. As we already know in the U.S., this didn’t happen, and the Union enslaved the population anyway—not just the innocent African slaves. (By the way, thirteen U.S. Presidents owned slaves. Eight U.S. Presidents owned slaves while they were in office. How much more proof do you need that we are controlled by the dark side? We went from racial and sexual slavery to financial slavery.)

The Ra Collective said that Abraham Lincoln was a walk-in. What kind of walk-in soul would enslave all of the people and force them to live under laws created by the rich? The only walk-in that would do this would be a dark, evil soul, not a loving soul. Furthermore, an advanced walk-in soul would have followed the supposed law of free will and asked permission of the people for everything. This walk-in soul, through Lincoln, never asked the people what they wanted. This walk-in forced the people—North and South—to live by laws created by Lincoln and the rich. That is not the same free will that the Ra Collective talks about. This is extremely suspicious."



i dont know what to make of this. i wish i had psychic powers and could just pierce the veil and see what is really going on but i dont. we are all blind and as long as we are blind we are never going to be able to fight the true enemy.

I am not sure you should be using book reviews on Amazon as debunking material. Also this view of Lincoln is just as or even more distorted than any other popular view. It also ignores the rest of the history of the time. The abolitionist movement was not new and was almost a century old before the war.

In the United States, all of the states north of Maryland abolished slavery between 1777 and 1804. But antislavery sentiments had little effect on the centres of slavery themselves: the great plantations of the Deep South, the West Indies, and South America. Turning their attention to these areas, British and American abolitionists began working in the late 18th century to prohibit the importation of African slaves into the British colonies and the United States. Under the leadership of William Wilberforce and Thomas Clarkson, these forces succeeded in getting the slave trade to the British colonies abolished in 1807. The United States prohibited the importation of slaves that same year, though widespread smuggling continued until about 1862.

Jolted by the raid (1859) of the abolitionist extremist John Brown on Harpers Ferry, the South became convinced that its entire way of life, based on the cheap labour provided by slaves, was irretrievably threatened by the election to the presidency of Abraham Lincoln (November 1860), who was opposed to the spread of slavery into the Western territories. The ensuing secession of the Southern states led to the American Civil War (1861–65). The war, which began as a sectional power struggle to preserve the Union, in turn led Lincoln (who had never been an abolitionist) to emancipate the slaves in areas of the rebellion by the Emancipation Proclamation (1863) and led further to the freeing of all other slaves in the United States by the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution in 1865.

Under the pressure of worldwide public opinion, slavery was completely abolished in its last remaining Latin American strongholds, Cuba and Brazil, in 1880–86 and 1883–88, respectively, and thus the system of African slavery as a Western phenomenon ceased to exist. See also slavery.

As someone who is active in the exploration of this area of study, I'll comment here that the Amazon reviewer is more accurate than the Brittanica entry.  The (pre-war) abolition of slavery in Northern states was.....selectively enforced.  I have a friend who had ancestors in Ohio and Indiana who owned slaves during the time of the War Between the States, and another who had slave-owning ancestors in Illinois.

For a good critical scrutinization of Lincoln, I recommend the pamphlet entitled Shattering the Icon of Abraham Lincoln, by Sam Dickson, which most definitely does not "ignore the history of the time".

What laws are not selectively enforced? What time has slavery not existed? It still exists today, the only difference is it is illegal so underground. Saying a Amazon reviewer who is promoting an agenda that Lincoln was trying to enslave the world thru a monetary system is more reliable than an encyclopedia which made no claims whatsoever as to motive or goals, is frankly ridiculous. While there are many reasons for the war, it would have never happened it it wasn't for the abolitionist movement. The reviewer can be completely accurate in his quotes and facts, none of which make any difference to what I quoted from Brittanica, nor does the fact that slavery existed in the north in contravention of law.