Fukusjima

[Oceania]

umm, who's the conspiracy theorist now? i'vde not paid anyone anything.

[Richard]

umm, who's the conspiracy theorist now? i'vde not paid anyone anything.

In Smurfworld you have.

Richard

[Oceania]

wut
Smurfs don't have money

[Bring4th_Austin]

But aren't we trying to move beyond that? Isn't that the whole point of awakening? To attempt to see each other as us?...as one?...as divine in their own right?

Richard

It's easy to see others as part of the One, love them as the Creator, and acknowledge their choices. But that doesn't mean we can't classify them as bent on self-preservation, manipulating, and controlling.

The hierarchical system of corporations is strikingly similar to the hierarchical system of STS social complexes described by Ra. Naturally, in a mixed STO and STS world like ours, within an organization there will be good and bad people. But it's naturally the STS individuals going for the power-grab that make it to the top.

In a new book called "The Psychopath Test" by Jon Ronson, he interviews and examines corporate CEOs. The qualities shown and praised by corporate CEOs as being beneficial for making it to the top in the corporate world are very similar to that which classifies individuals in society as psychopaths, and are even more similar to that which Ra would describe as an STS polarizing individual.

These news corporations are structured exactly the same as any other STS structured complex, and the people at the top with the most power are adept at exercising their controlling power especially within their own organization.

It's not a conspiracy theory, the facts are verifiable. The top 1% of income earners have quadrupled their income in the last 30 years while the middle-class income has stayed the same. And a fact I'll let you verify on your own if you wish: how much of the world's wealth is owned by the top 1% of the population? Same question for first-world countries?

Check out that book, it's really interesting.

[Oceania]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pla...SM#at=1054

video on 9/11. points to some of the holes in the 9/11 stories. why would politicians lie? oh wait, maybe it's cuz they orchestrated the whole thing. it's not judgemental to acknoledge the truth.

[Monica]

How does the Elite stop anyone from following their own convictions?

The same way any employer does. If employees don't follow orders from their supervisors, they lose their jobs. It's that simple.

How do you know who gives what orders to whom and if they are..or are not "good" people?

I have no doubt that most of the employees at FAUX News are good people and truly mean well. But they have families to support and bills to pay, like everyone else. They aren't going to rock the boat, for fear of losing their jobs.

Case in point: Myself. Several years ago, I was working as a software engineer for a well-known educational testing company. I was very disturbed to learn that my supervisor routinely manipulated the statistical data to reflect whatever results they wanted. I was also very disturbed to learn that gifted kids were falling thru the cracks, because the tests were designed to encourage conformity. I read essays by highly gifted kids, who failed the tests and had to repeat 9th grade, all because they chose to wax eloquent instead of following instructions which, in all likelihood, they considered pointless. Their giftedness shone thru, but we weren't allowed to use our judgment. We were told that if they didn't meet the exact criteria, they were to be given low scores. I remember a particularly poignant essay by a teenager, detailing in exquisite, emotionally charged prose, how she would better her life, in response to the prompt, "describe the house you will be living in 10 years from now." But she was given a low score, because she failed to state which color carpet her house would have.

These incidents bothered me so much I had trouble sleeping. These were real people to me! I thought about those teenagers who would be repeating 9th grade, when I knew they didn't deserve that. They weren't illiterate. On the contrary, they were gifted! But because they didn't conform, they were penalized.

This was highly unethical. I wanted to speak up, but there was no one to speak up to. My immediate supervisors didn't care, and it was a large corporation, of which we were only a small branch. This policy extended throughout the entire corporation and even the entire industry! There was nothing I could do, short of starting a protest, gathering my friends and picketing the company. Even that probably wouldn't have done any good, and I would have lost my job for nothing.

I needed that job. I had to put my own family first. I couldn't jeopardize my job, because of something that was pervasively spread throughout the entire industry.

So, after my feeble attempts to protest, I shut my mouth and did as I was told. But inside, I vowed to leave that place as soon as possible, and, once free of it, work to expose it.

Later, when I did leave, I did speak up here and there. Nobody cared.

I don't think I'm a particularly bad person. :-/ But just substitute FAUX News for that educational testing company. Same scenario. Those are just regular folks working there, with families. They don't want to lose their jobs, just like I didn't.

That's how they do it.

Here's another great example. Check this out:

News Reports WTC7 Fell Before It Happens!

Watch the entire piece in order to fully appreciate its significance. (It's only a few minutes long.)

Was that news reporter oblivious to the fact that the building she was reporting as collapsed, was still standing right behind her? She probably had no clue. She was just reading the script she'd been given.

WHY was she given that script? Why was she told to report that WTC7 had collapsed, 20 minutes before it actually collapsed? No skyscraper had ever collapsed due to fire, ever before in history, and yet 3 did that day. WTC7 wasn't even hit by a plane.

Is this news reporter a good person? She probably is. But did she speak up afterwards? Probably not. The news footage was abruptly pulled - sudden technical difficulties, but not before lots of people had recorded this irrefutably incriminating evidence.

This bit of footage makes the point that the average employee is not necessarily privy to the machinations of his/her employers. And, yes, major news media like BBC routinely engage in disinfo.

This video I just linked, is proof.

[Oceania]

you're a good person, i'd have done the same thing. you gotta put your family first.

[Monica]

you're a good person, i'd have done the same thing. you gotta put your family first.

Thank you, Oceania!

I witnessed FAUX News censoring Ron Paul and skewing the results of the primaries. I have, buried in my email box somewhere, a snapshot of the original Associated Press report, showing Ron Paul in #3 position. But when that same news report got to the mainstream media, they actually doctored it and put Mitt Romney or Mike Huckabee (forgot which) in the #3 position! It's the exact same footage, but obviously doctored.

In another case, newspapers removed Ron Paul's name in their version of the report. The original mentioned the major candidates, and showed Ron Paul along with the others. But in the doctored versions, Ron Paul's name was simply missing. All the rest of the text was identical, but Ron Paul's name had been removed. I saw this happen several times.

Then there's the time Newsweek and Time both ran the pic of the 'fake' Bin Laden. This was way before I knew the truth about 911. I remember getting the magazine out of the mailbox, and telling my husband, "But that's not him! It doesn't even look like him! He has a much longer nose!"

It was just soooo obvious! I was incredulous that they'd think the American people were so stupid, to fall for such a poorly executed scam.

But alas, they did. Same with 911. There are so many smoking guns on that, it blows my mind that so many people are still oblivious.

So yeah, and then there's Keith Olbermann. He very nearly crossed a line many times. But stopped short of giving any hint about 911, and in fact took the opposite approach and gave a blistering rebuke to the Truth Movement. I don't believe for a second that he doesn't know the truth, because he's a really smart guy. But there was too much at stake.

[Oceania]

i'm pleased they're lying about Paul, it means they think he has a chance. i hope in today's climate, that people begin to listen. and think. and that will give Ron what he needs. they can't lie anymore, we have internet.

i totally thought he has a longer nose, Bin Laden, and a leaner longer face as well. it was clearly not him. people were so shocked and pissed and prolly racist as well that they thought arab is an arab and they all look alike... there was a lot of racist hate. anyone that looked muslim was scary it seemed. i guess it was easy to pass him off. i'm not saying everyone is a racist, i just think it's easy to manipulate a scared and confused people into fearing an entire race. happened with the japanese, the germans etc.

[3DMonkey]

Thanks for the story, Monica. That's "real". I have mixed feelings about it. (optimistic and pessimistic )

I don't want to give my opinions on it. I just want to say I like reading about it, even though it tears at my insides

[Bring4th_Austin]

Monica, thank you so much for sharing that story. It's a poignant example of exactly what we're discussing, and I think it drives the point home well.

There are good people, like our own cherished Monica working for corporations which much follow the directives of the people who hold more power. These people realize that things aren't right, that something should be done to reveal or stop a situation, but the power isn't in their hands; it's in the hands of their supervisor's supervisor's supervisor's supervisor.

One of the most disturbing things is the fact that in America, public companies (like the news corporations) are obligated by law to protect their shareholders investments above everything else. Above the environment, above the well-being of the public, above integrity.

[Richard]

I'm not defending any news org. I'm defending the people no one here knows who work there, raise their families, take care of their ailing parents and deal on a daily basis with same crap you and I do every day. The only thing is, they happen to work for an organization run by...people you've deemed less than savory?

But "you" don't live their life. "You" can't see the pile of unpaid medical bills on thier kitchen table while they struggle with ailing parents or children. Or the prospect of a job loss that will cause them to lose thier home.

There is no black and white here. We're wading up to out necks in grey and people are tossing off judgments like there in no tomorrow. Sometimes it seems..of late...the philosophy of the LOO has taken our humanity out of the equation.

Richard

[Bring4th_Austin]

Richard it seems like you may be missing a very important point we're trying to get across, and you even illustrated something Monica talked about herself in your post.

We can use Monica's story as an example. She's one of these people you're talking about, the good people working for the corporations. She noticed a problem...let's say, much like a reporter would break a story. She went to her supervisor about it...much like a reporter would take the story to her editor. To protect the company and its profits, her supervisor (either under their own directive or the directive of and even higher superior) downplayed/ignored the issue...much like an editor would do the same thing if there were some negative political/public implications for the news corporation from the story.

So, it has little to do with these people. Yes, they have piles of unpaid medicals bills....yes, they're parents, possibly of ailing children...and yes, the prospect of a job loss may cause them to lose everything and put their family in danger (much like in Monica's story). So what to they do? Defy their bosses and break the story some other way, surely condemning their job, losing their source of income, insurance, and general well-being?

Or do they keep quiet, keep their job, and do what their bosses tell them?


Do you think the CEOs of these corporations have some unpaid medical bills piling up? Do you think that their children have ailments they can't afford to cure? These are the one's who hold all the power in the company, and if you take a look at the book I recommended ("The Psychopath Test"), you'll see that many of them admittedly have psychopathic, STS tendencies. It's not condemning nor judgmental to say somebody who admittedly uses people for their own benefit is Service to Self. We can still see them as sparks of the creator, and love them as part of the creation while we disagree with their choices.

I'm not quite sure I can understand where you're coming from...Monica's story painted a very good picture of the situation for the good people within corporations, did you read its entirety? Do you see how her story may relate to that of someone in a news corporation? She's obviously an example that good people work for these corporations, but she's also a very good example of how the corporate heads can exert their power over someone to suppress information. You don't feel like Monica is a lone example do you?


Monica also linked a video which shows an exact example of what we're talking about. Do you think we're judging the woman reading a prompt, telling us the WTC7 collapsed when it is clearly standing behind her? Surely not, we realize she's simply a worker doing what she is told. Just because what she is saying isn't true doesn't mean we're condemning her as a liar, but there's obviously more to this story than just her reading a prompt about WTC7 collapsing before it even collapses. There are other people behind that lie, the people that make the decisions and the choices. Not the good people you are talking about.

[unity100]

I'm not defending any news org. I'm defending the people no one here knows who work there, raise their families, take care of their ailing parents and deal on a daily basis with same crap you and I do every day. The only thing is, they happen to work for an organization run by...people you've deemed less than savory?

But "you" don't live their life. "You" can't see the pile of unpaid medical bills on thier kitchen table while they struggle with ailing parents or children. Or the prospect of a job loss that will cause them to lose thier home.

There is no black and white here. We're wading up to out necks in grey and people are tossing off judgments like there in no tomorrow. Sometimes it seems..of late...the philosophy of the LOO has taken our humanity out of the equation.

Richard

excuse me, but we are not working on an organization that is founded and furthering of the interests of the few, to enslave the many.

so then, having to take care of someone, is an excuse for doing as such, furthering dastardly deeds ?

my my. with that logic, a lot of things can be justified.

everyone is responsible with what they do. law of responsibility. there are no exceptions to it. you did, what you have done.

[Bring4th_Austin]

Orange ray protection of One's tribe is a tricky beast.

[Oceania]

well i support the people who have to take care of their families. i think the way to change the world is being good yourself and voting for the right people. not going against windmills.

[Monica]

everyone is responsible with what they do. law of responsibility.

Yes, and if I remember correctly, the more one is aware, the higher the responsibility.

Many people contribute to negative entities unwittingly. Once their eyes are opened, they share in the responsibility.

The situation is complicated by the money system and the fact that most people have to work in order to survive and care for their families. That too is responsibility. It would be irresponsible to neglect one's children.

One should not be in such a dilemma, to have to choose between caring for one's family and doing the 'right' thing at one's job. But the structure of 3D creates these dilemmas, as catalyst.

The reason for the dilemma is that most people are employed by others, and therefore involved in a contract. The contract is that they must obey their supervisors, in order to collect a paycheck. This puts them in a difficult position. They have sold their freedom, essentially, in exchange for a way to earn a living.

I would not judge someone in such a situation. It is the nature of the reality we currently live in. Some cases are very clear: The attorney who defends a murderer who he knows is guilty (he could have declined the case)...the medical doctor who knowingly promotes drugs that cause harm instead of heal, to pay for his million-$-house...Those are clear cases of unethical behavior because of greed. But the man who works for a minimum wage at McDonald's? His options are limited. Once his eyes are opened to the atrocities of the meat industry, his best option might be to work at Wal-Mart instead. But wait! Wal-Mart supports sweat shops. Yikes! What to do? Where can he work that doesn't support something negative at all?

For me personally, I remember very clearly making a conscious decision to work towards financial independence, so that I no longer was beholden to any supervisor or corporation. It is against my principles to suppress my own convictions in order to please the supervisor and keep my job. So I elected to be self-employed. I no longer must answer to anyone in order to earn a living, and I can choose a livelihood that helps people, instead of hurting people.

This didn't happen overnight. I wanted this for many years before it actually manifested. But the seeds were planted when I worked for that unethical company in that unethical industry. I didn't even like working for them at all, since I believe the educational system primarily teaches children to conform. (I homeschooled my son.) But there are a lot of things about society I don't like. We can't always just up and leave, unfortunately. That would be a disservice to our families who depend on us. But we can make decisions to work towards a way of life that is more in alignment with our principles.

I spoke up at the time. I questioned and I challenged what was happening. My efforts were wasted. Had I persisted, I would have gotten fired, and my family would have suffered. Had such an action at least done some good, then I could say, maybe it was worth it, to support a bigger cause. But getting fired would not have done any good at all. None of those children would have been helped in the least, by my foolishness in trying to stop a train by standing on the tracks. The person standing on the tracks just gets splattered!

Better to jump off the tracks, let the train go by, and then work behind the scenes to redirect that train, if possible.

Or choose to fly on an airplane and avoid the train altogether.

[Richard]

Re-Post

---

everyone is responsible with what they do. law of responsibility.

Yes, and if I remember correctly, the more one is aware, the higher the responsibility.

Many people contribute to negative entities unwittingly. Once their eyes are opened, they share in the responsibility.

The situation is complicated by the money system and the fact that most people have to work in order to survive and care for their families. That too is responsibility. It would be irresponsible to neglect one's children.

One should not be in such a dilemma, to have to choose between caring for one's family and doing the 'right' thing at one's job. But the structure of 3D creates these dilemmas, as catalyst.

The reason for the dilemma is that most people are employed by others, and therefore involved in a contract. The contract is that they must obey their supervisors, in order to collect a paycheck. This puts them in a difficult position. They have sold their freedom, essentially, in exchange for a way to earn a living.

I would not judge someone in such a situation. It is the nature of the reality we currently live in. Some cases are very clear: The attorney who defends a murderer who he knows is guilty (he could have declined the case)...the medical doctor who knowingly promotes drugs that cause harm instead of heal, to pay for his million-$-house...Those are clear cases of unethical behavior because of greed. But the man who works for a minimum wage at McDonald's? His options are limited. Once his eyes are opened to the atrocities of the meat industry, his best option might be to work at Wal-Mart instead. But wait! Wal-Mart supports sweat shops. Yikes! What to do? Where can he work that doesn't support something negative at all?

For me personally, I remember very clearly making a conscious decision to work towards financial independence, so that I no longer was beholden to any supervisor or corporation. It is against my principles to suppress my own convictions in order to please the supervisor and keep my job. So I elected to be self-employed. I no longer must answer to anyone in order to earn a living, and I can choose a livelihood that helps people, instead of hurting people.

This didn't happen overnight. I wanted this for many years before it actually manifested. But the seeds were planted when I worked for that unethical company in that unethical industry. I didn't even like working for them at all, since I believe the educational system primarily teaches children to conform. (I homeschooled my son.) But there are a lot of things about society I don't like. We can't always just up and leave, unfortunately. That would be a disservice to our families who depend on us. But we can make decisions to work towards a way of life that is more in alignment with our principles.

I spoke up at the time. I questioned and I challenged what was happening. My efforts were wasted. Had I persisted, I would have gotten fired, and my family would have suffered. Had such an action at least done some good, then I could say, maybe it was worth it, to support a bigger cause. But getting fired would not have done any good at all. None of those children would have been helped in the least, by my foolishness in trying to stop a train by standing on the tracks. The person standing on the tracks just gets splattered!

Better to jump off the tracks, let the train go by, and then work behind the scenes to redirect that train, if possible.

Or choose to fly on an airplane and avoid the train altogether.

Sorry..something happened on that last post...so here we go again.

But you are applying a couple of personal instances like a giant paintbrush, Monica. I don't know the answers...but I know enough that its not my place to judge anothers path. Or why they are in the situation that they are. Perhaps they have something to learn working there? Perhaps they have to come to decision to do something else with their lives..like you did? Would you deny them that experience and / or catalyst?

If the existence of one (or more) STS corporate entity provides the catalyst for a few to awaken..is it a good thing? Or a bad thing?

To each their own, I guess. I won't judge another by their choices in life. They probably made them for many reasons they are aware of...and for some they aren't aware of. As all of us do.

Richard

---

I'm not defending any news org. I'm defending the people no one here knows who work there, raise their families, take care of their ailing parents and deal on a daily basis with same crap you and I do every day. The only thing is, they happen to work for an organization run by...people you've deemed less than savory?

But "you" don't live their life. "You" can't see the pile of unpaid medical bills on thier kitchen table while they struggle with ailing parents or children. Or the prospect of a job loss that will cause them to lose thier home.

There is no black and white here. We're wading up to out necks in grey and people are tossing off judgments like there in no tomorrow. Sometimes it seems..of late...the philosophy of the LOO has taken our humanity out of the equation.

Richard

excuse me, but we are not working on an organization that is founded and furthering of the interests of the few, to enslave the many.

so then, having to take care of someone, is an excuse for doing as such, furthering dastardly deeds ?

my my. with that logic, a lot of things can be justified.

everyone is responsible with what they do. law of responsibility. there are no exceptions to it. you did, what you have done.

Yes, yes...we are all well aware of the black and white world of absolutes that you inhabit Unity.

Richard

[Bring4th_Austin]

I think you are mistaken in thinking we are judging the individuals themselves. There judgement is not of the people, but rather the quality of the information provided by their institution. The STS corporate heads are simply playing the game. It's your choice whether or not to buy what they sell.

[Richard]

I think you are mistaken in thinking we are judging the individuals themselves. There judgement is not of the people, but rather the quality of the information provided by their institution. The STS corporate heads are simply playing the game. It's your choice whether or not to buy what they sell.

]

Are you completely sure that all the corporate heads are STS? How do you know there is not one..or more newly awakened corporate heads who is/are trying to postively affect his/her sphere of influence?

My whole point from the beginning is that everyone associated with organizations unpopular in certain circles is being painted with an STS paintbrush.When the reality is, you simply don't know.

Its not us against them. Its us realizing that they are us and accepting the paths they have chosen. Knowlingly or unknowingly.

In truth there is no right or wrong. There is no polarity for all will be, as you would say, reconciled at some point in your dance through the mind/body/spirit complex which you amuse yourself by distorting in various ways at this time. This distortion is not in any case necessary. It is chosen by each of you as an alternative to understanding the complete unity of thought which binds all things. You are not speaking of similar or somewhat like entities or things. You are every thing, every being, every emotion, every event, every situation. You are unity. You are infinity. You are love/light, light/love. You are. This is the Law of One.

May we enunciate this law in more detail?

Richard

[Monica]

But you are applying a couple of personal instances like a giant paintbrush, Monica.

If I had said that everyone should do exactly as I did, that might be true. But I said no such thing. I offered my own experience to illustrate a point.

Here's another example:

I had the fortune of meeting John Robbins, heir to the Baskin-Robbins fortune and author of several books on the meat industry.

John's dad (or maybe it was grandfather, not sure) had a heart attack, and he began to question if maybe all that ice cream and heavy meat diet had something to do with it. Another family member told him, "No, John, his ticker just stopped." He didn't buy it.

John walked away from his family fortune and wrote several books, started doing seminars, etc. to educate people about how animal-based diets are destroying their health and the planet.

He took that catalyst and did something about it.

Now, we don't know all the details. He probably still had a safety net; ie. could have returned to his family when times got rough. Still, I greatly admire what he did. He did what he could, given his experiences and circumstances. And he has helped a lot of people.

How many other people would have just stayed in the business, because of greed? How many heirs to other harmful corporations, like McDonalds etc., continue to collect their profits, knowing that it's essentially blood money?

I don't know the answers...but I know enough that its not my place to judge anothers path. Or why they are in the situation that they are. Perhaps they have something to learn working there? Perhaps they have to come to decision to do something else with their lives..like you did? Would you deny them that experience and / or catalyst?

I don't understand your point, Richard. I offered my own experience as an example to illustrate precisely the point you seem to be arguing for: That we really can't judge the individual people working for STS-oriented corporations. I also stated that such situations are catalyst.

If the existence of one (or more) STS corporate entity provides the catalyst for a few to awaken..is it a good thing? Or a bad thing?

Understanding that it's catalyst doesn't mean we just go along with it. Once we are aware that we're contributing to STS actions, we have a responsibility to do what we can to minimize our contribution to the STS agenda. That doesn't mean we let our children starve! Our first responsibility is to our families, for we have a contract with them far more sacred than any contract with any employer.

I'm not sure how much more clear I can be, after using my own case as an example. My point was that most of those STS corporations employ thousands of people like me - people who are basically good and wouldn't knowingly contribute to the actions their employers are engaged in.

But, once we awaken, we begin to realize that we are conscious beings and have the power, to some extent, to shape our reality. I say "to some extent" because we're all trapped here in 3D, and subject to consensual reality. But, at the same time, we can begin to make different choices, and manifest different realities.

So, I wouldn't judge the hard-working mother who is struggling to support her family. I wouldn't expect her to just quit her job, and allow her children to suffer, especially when her losing her job accomplished nothing. But, I would hope that she would begin to consciously work towards a different livelihood, that is in alignment with her highest principles. Everyone CAN do this. Maybe not overnight. But they CAN do it.

To each their own, I guess. I won't judge another by their choices in life. They probably made them for many reasons they are aware of...and for some they aren't aware of. As all of us do.

Like abridgetoofar, I too am wondering whether you read all of our posts. I invite you to re-read posts # 64,66,68 and 73.

[Bring4th_Austin]

I think you are mistaken in thinking we are judging the individuals themselves. There judgement is not of the people, but rather the quality of the information provided by their institution. The STS corporate heads are simply playing the game. It's your choice whether or not to buy what they sell.

]

Are you completely sure that all the corporate heads are STS? How do you know there is not one..or more newly awakened corporate heads who is/are trying to postively affect his/her sphere of influence?

I have discussed this in detail in previous posts, and I would be happy to clarify any of my previous points if you care to ask about them specifically. I would suggest a third time you check out the book "The Psychopath Test" by Ron Jonson to understand the type of people which flourish in a corporate hierarchical organization. The book is not just about corporate CEOs and their traits in common with psychopathy and is interesting as a whole, but putting the magnifying glass on previous and existing successful CEOs is an eye opening revelation.

My whole point from the beginning is that everyone associated with organizations unpopular in certain circles is being painted with an STS paintbrush.When the reality is, you simply don't know.

We're not diagnosing everyone within certain organizations with a STS mindset. In a hierarchical system such as a corporation, all it really takes is one STS person, the person at the top, to exert their power on everyone below them.

Its not us against them. Its us realizing that they are us and accepting the paths they have chosen. Knowlingly or unknowingly.

I couldn't agree more, but I'm afraid this is an unrelated comment to the point that Monica and I are trying to get across.

[unity100]

excuse me, but we are not working on an organization that is founded and furthering of the interests of the few, to enslave the many.

so then, having to take care of someone, is an excuse for doing as such, furthering dastardly deeds ?

my my. with that logic, a lot of things can be justified.

everyone is responsible with what they do. law of responsibility. there are no exceptions to it. you did, what you have done.

Yes, yes...we are all well aware of the black and white world of absolutes that you inhabit Unity.

Richard

law of responsibility, acts in blacks or whites. it is not 'my' world.

'but i was doing that for xxxx, yyyy' is not an excuse for evading or alleviating the effects of what one was responsible with.

if you want an example, you may look at Ra, you may look at atlantean group, you may look at south american group.

their intentions were pure and great, and at least one group's endeavor has been successful to a great extent.

and then what happened ? they are incarnated here, in order to clear the distortions they caused.

law of responsibility is exactly what it is - responsibility. your actions, have consequences, and these consequences hold power over your fate. in short, you are responsible with your own fate to a great extent.

Are you completely sure that all the corporate heads are STS? How do you know there is not one..or more newly awakened corporate heads who is/are trying to postively affect his/her sphere of influence?

My whole point from the beginning is that everyone associated with organizations unpopular in certain circles is being painted with an STS paintbrush.When the reality is, you simply don't know.

"Are you completely sure that all the corporate heads are STS? " -> let me answer that :

yes.

a negative social construct or society is something that does not let anything else than entities negative enough to undo others to get to the top. this is the nature of that route.

in case you had at all engaged in, for example, politics, or had the chance to see the backstage of politics through any way, you would know. it is a good example.

it is impossible for any decent, honest person without any stains in his/her past, to rise in political ranks. the best shot they can - and this is by a good shot - being some local activist/politician in municipal level. even that is hard.

the reason is because the hierarchy that is already established, has stains and dirty dealings in between themselves all around, and they not only dont support someone who has to oblige others through those stains and interlinked dealings, but also they cant - it is a danger, a liability. a person who is clean enough can cleanse/remove most of those with shady past. such people are not supported if they attempt to rise to power, and if they succeed in it in any way, they are removed through any means possible, ranging from mild measures to fake scandals or character assassinations.

it is not too different in corporate world. you cant rise to top, if you are not reliably controllable. vice versa also holds - if you are reliably controllable, you are expected to control others reliably. so the cycle reinforces itself.

Its not us against them. Its us realizing that they are us and accepting the paths they have chosen. Knowlingly or unknowingly.

most unfortunately at this experiential nexus, it is us against them. due to the unfortunate amount of technology given to this planetary society, separate choices are not possible - you cant isolate yourself from others that may seek to undermine/control you.

In truth there is no right or wrong. There is no polarity for all will be, as you would say, reconciled at some point in your dance through the mind/body/spirit complex which you amuse yourself by distorting in various ways at this time.

that point, is not this point.

This distortion is not in any case necessary. It is chosen by each of you as an alternative to understanding the complete unity of thought which binds all things. You are not speaking of similar or somewhat like entities or things. You are every thing, every being, every emotion, every event, every situation. You are unity. You are infinity. You are love/light, light/love. You are. This is the Law of One.

May we enunciate this law in more detail?

Richard

yet for some reason, this octave is created by infinite intelligence to have those distortions, to go through them, and to get to the point above through them.

http://lawofone.info/results.php?session...=1&ss=1#23

These distortions remove the focus from the One Infinite Source of love and light of which we are all messengers, humble and knowing that we, of ourselves, are but the tiniest portion of the Creator, a small part of a magnificent entirety of infinite intelligence.

...........

long story short - attribution and references to future states and situations, does not make current situation those situations.

[Monica]

law of responsibility, acts in blacks or whites. it is not 'my' world.

Once it's clear what one's responsibility is, then yes.

What's not black-and-white is defining that responsibility. Real-life situations aren't black-and-white. They're complex.

law of responsibility is exactly what it is - responsibility. your actions, have consequences, and these consequences hold power over your fate. in short, you are responsible with your own fate to a great extent.

I agree with this. We are each responsible for our choices.

That's not to say anyone should judge anyone else. We might think another person made a poor choice, but we cannot really know, without being in that situation ourselves. For example, it would be wrong for me, who has a husband, to judge the choices of a poor, single mother. I can't know how her struggles might be different from my own. Or someone with no children to support, to judge someone with children. The game changes when one is responsible for others. It's much more complex, when children are involved.

"Are you completely sure that all the corporate heads are STS? " -> let me answer that :

yes.

a negative social construct or society is something that does not let anything else than entities negative enough to undo others to get to the top. this is the nature of that route.

In the conventional corporate structure, you're probably right. However, new companies are being formed, with new structures, that empower their distributors, rather than feeding the shareholders. Network marketing and direct sales companies utilize a new, cutting-edge marketing structure that largely eliminates the dog-eat-dog, back-stabbing aspect. They are based on the concept of cooperation instead of competition.

Some STS entities sometimes infiltrate these STO structures. Likewise, I'd surmise that sometimes, occasionally, some STO entities somehow manage to infiltrate the STS structures.

Hence, I'd agree that it's very difficult, and maybe even nearly impossible, but I wouldn't say it's impossible. There are exceptions.

it is impossible for any decent, honest person without any stains in his/her past, to rise in political ranks.

Rare, but not impossible.

it is a danger, a liability. a person who is clean enough can cleanse/remove most of those with shady past. such people are not supported if they attempt to rise to power, and if they succeed in it in any way, they are removed through any means possible,

Very true! Which is exactly what they tried to do with Ron Paul. He was censored.

ranging from mild measures to fake scandals or character assassinations.

Or actual bodily assassinations!

it is not too different in corporate world. you cant rise to top, if you are not reliably controllable. vice versa also holds - if you are reliably controllable, you are expected to control others reliably. so the cycle reinforces itself.

Yes, that is probably true most of the time.

In truth there is no right or wrong. There is no polarity for all will be, as you would say, reconciled at some point in your dance through the mind/body/spirit complex which you amuse yourself by distorting in various ways at this time.

that point, is not this point.

Agreed. That quote is taken out of context. In this context, this is the density of Choice. Maybe appropriate is a better term than right. What is appropriate for an STS entity, isn't appropriate for an STO entity.

long story short - attribution and references to future states and situations, does not make current situation those situations.

True. Although, having the vision of that future state, can help us draw that reality to us.

[Oceania]

I think you are mistaken in thinking we are judging the individuals themselves. There judgement is not of the people, but rather the quality of the information provided by their institution. The STS corporate heads are simply playing the game. It's your choice whether or not to buy what they sell.

]

Are you completely sure that all the corporate heads are STS? How do you know there is not one..or more newly awakened corporate heads who is/are trying to postively affect his/her sphere of influence?

My whole point from the beginning is that everyone associated with organizations unpopular in certain circles is being painted with an STS paintbrush.When the reality is, you simply don't know.

Its not us against them. Its us realizing that they are us and accepting the paths they have chosen. Knowlingly or unknowingly.

In truth there is no right or wrong. There is no polarity for all will be, as you would say, reconciled at some point in your dance through the mind/body/spirit complex which you amuse yourself by distorting in various ways at this time. This distortion is not in any case necessary. It is chosen by each of you as an alternative to understanding the complete unity of thought which binds all things. You are not speaking of similar or somewhat like entities or things. You are every thing, every being, every emotion, every event, every situation. You are unity. You are infinity. You are love/light, light/love. You are. This is the Law of One.

May we enunciate this law in more detail?

Richard

Richard, noone, except Unity here and i disagree with him, said all the corporate heads are STS. we're trying to show you why "conspiracy theories" aren't gobblygook. you're forgetting the point of our convo.

and we're not in Ra's density, we do have polarities. STO entities are less likely to get or want positions of power, so usually that leaves the STS entities but of course there can be good corporations as well. and i hope this is the time they begin emerging. as times are a changin. but at the moment, we're still dealing with a reality where STS entities are running harmful corporations, that's a fact, not mumbojumbo. you said you don't believe in conspiracy theories but if you actually watched the videos we gave you and i dunno, read that book you were recommended or did research, maybe you'd think differently. the proof is out there and you can always ignore it if you want. like most people do. if you want to ignore it, tell me and i'll stop arguing my point.

[unity100]

Once it's clear what one's responsibility is, then yes.

it is always the entity's responsibility. thats why choice exists.

What's not black-and-white is defining that responsibility. Real-life situations aren't black-and-white. They're complex.

according to law of responsibility, if you had aided a negative effort, you had aided a negative effort. your justifications and reasons and excuses and whatnot, would not change that. the inertia created with that act, will keep going until offset through any means.

That's not to say anyone should judge anyone else. We might think another person made a poor choice, but we cannot really know, without being in that situation ourselves. For example, it would be wrong for me, who has a husband, to judge the choices of a poor, single mother. I can't know how her struggles might be different from my own. Or someone with no children to support, to judge someone with children. The game changes when one is responsible for others. It's much more complex, when children are involved.

it is not complex at all. regardless of circumstances, law of responsibility will act.

billions of entities had innumerable justifiable reasons for what they did in regard to money system, trading, ownership systems since the start of second cycle. did any of those justifications, causes, excuses prevent the ENTIRE planetary population's lifespan from getting permanently shortened ? nay.

In the conventional corporate structure, you're probably right. However, new companies are being formed, with new structures, that empower their distributors, rather than feeding the shareholders. Network marketing and direct sales companies utilize a new, cutting-edge marketing structure that largely eliminates the dog-eat-dog, back-stabbing aspect. They are based on the concept of cooperation instead of competition.

the system acting against individuals in the corporate world is no different from the system acting against corporations in the corporate world, if you consider corporations as individuals.

those corporations which are more dastardly, will work with equally dastardly corporations, and either consume or put down corporations that are not like them. this may happen through any means.

Hence, I'd agree that it's very difficult, and maybe even nearly impossible, but I wouldn't say it's impossible. There are exceptions.

can you name just one exception ?

Or actual bodily assassinations!

that was the thing of earlier decades, like at least 30 years ago. character assassinations are questioned less than real assassinations, and seems to be the order of the day since a while.

[Oceania]

Unity, do you think it's responsibility-free to sacrifice the ones you are responsible for to stand up against giant corporations? that's also a responsibility and if it's so black and white, you're in an impossible situation.

bodily assassinations aren't overwith, you can kill someone and make it look like a disease.

[Monica]

We're not diagnosing everyone within certain organizations with a STS mindset. In a hierarchical system such as a corporation, all it really takes is one STS person, the person at the top, to exert their power on everyone below them.

Exactly.

[unity100]

Unity, do you think it's responsibility-free to sacrifice the ones you are responsible for to stand up against giant corporations? that's also a responsibility and if it's so black and white, you're in an impossible situation.

my opinion in this does not matter.

law of responsibility didnt blink for even late 6d social memory complexes, which had best of intentions in their heart (according to their perception), and got permission from council of nine.

[Bring4th_Austin]

Unity, do you think it's responsibility-free to sacrifice the ones you are responsible for to stand up against giant corporations? that's also a responsibility and if it's so black and white, you're in an impossible situation.

It's an evolutionary trait to view one's responsibility to protect one's tribe as more important than protecting any other-selves, especially a larger group of other-selves. Unconditional love is unconditional love; being part of your family is a condition. Loving someone more because they are naturally of that condition isn't unconditional.

But who can honestly say they are free of this orange-ray behavior though? Who can say their love for their children is equal to that of their neighbor? Or their community? Or someone, some random part of creation, that they don't even know?

I don't think that's a lesson required for us to learn in 3rd density.