One think you maybe able to answer is this; does Ickes again cover the same old ground with the political conspiracies - or does he just skip past all that this time?

Good question, because he has a habit of repeating old material with each book, and that was actually the first thing I wondered and asked as I grabbed the book.    But no, from what I saw, he doesn't rehash all that old stuff.   This time he seems to focus on the new material.   

Yes, it is indeed a controversial topic.    !

One think you maybe able to answer is this; does Ickes again cover the same old ground with the political conspiracies - or does he just skip past all that this time?

Personally, I am of the same view as you - that the reptilians are possessors.  I also believe they may work in an etheral form as depicted in movies like "The Mothman Prophecies".

I also agree that some people appear to merely be empty drones - although that is somewhat of a bold statement because many people don't like to believe that.  Even with people who are into conspiracies and metaphysics I have noticed that the idea of some people being empty drones is almost as much as a taboo as the idea of the reptilians themselves.  Of course there are a lot of psychological reasons someone may appear to be empty - but we cannot be utterly certain that psychology is always the reason for this.

In this case, one subtle difference in his new book is to back away from the idea of reptilians-as-shapeshifters, with the new emphasis being on reptilians-as-POSSESSORS.    Entities that possess and / or shadow people, most notably the royal bloodlines.   I don't know about you all, but this seems more accurate to me.   I've never promoted or believed in actual physical shapeshifting here in 3D, but I've always talked about "shadowing" and possession. 

I haven't read the book yet, only flipped through it, so I don't know if he still adheres to the possibility of shapeshifting, but from the parts I flipped through so far I didn't see any mention of it.

Another thing we noticed in the new book was the way Mr. Icke lays it on the line in terms of the 3 main types of people out there in the world --   He says there are those who are like automatic robot drones, (forget the actual word choice he used), who serve the MCS and who have no hope of being anything but that;   Those who are real but very asleep;  and those who are waking up, ("wanderers" if you will...) who are able to think for themselves, and who are a danger to the MCS.   I've described it this way myself, saying it's important to differentiate between the real people who are just asleep versus the empty ones who are missing something entirely. 

Mr. Icke has never mentioned the automatic robot types before until now.   It seems that maybe Icke has been reading Montalk's articles, possibly?      

Anyway, just thought I'd pass this along, in case anybody is interested in keeping up with David Icke's latest works....   http://www.davidicke.com/

I think that it's basic perception manipulation.  If you say that you are doing something that is perceived as "good" by the other person, then sometimes that person will believe you whether it is accurate or not.

wynderer, thanks for sharing your stories.

If greys and reptilians are archetypes, then I say they are archetypes for fear and control.

I think that there may be something to the idea that the reptilians and greys are such a deep part of our reality that often we are unable to recoginize them and admit that they are real or could be real. 

At this point, it can really be too much for the conscious mind to accept.  I think that humans have firmly placed themselves at the top of the hierarchy of the known universe and do not want to move from that lofty and fragile position.

Just some thoughts.

I hope no-one thinks I'm saying anyone here is aligned or akin to a gray.  I'm trying to understand how we comprehend things in our environment - and how some people have more events of certain types than others.  In a sense, I was agreeing with Montalk:

I suppose the important thing here is that we deal with what we have in and around us with as much awareness and goodness as we can muster.

... Sorry but I had to clarify that thought.

the way that things look, is that nothing is really set in stone, nothing is for sure. with this in mind, i have stopped "believing" this or that to be true, knowing to myself that in some paradoxical way its both; true and not true. then, i move forward with the information to see where else it can take my mind.

Yes, paradoxical but true - wierd isn't it?

The sad thing is, I find that more difficult to do these days - maybe I'm jaded - or becoming cynical.  But there isn't much (if anything) that shocks, or surprises.  However, the one thing I do find fascinating and want to do ... is the Ayahuasca trip.

Bugger that, I'd do it if I could.  Just to shut him (and others like him) up!! And the money would fund my and my husband's trip to Ayahuasca!

Cipher

but now, after being here for a while @ NR, and ive read tons more material on these subjects, my "awestruck interest" in the subjects has gone down, its shifted into a more educational, analytical interest in these subjects.

you know, people get caught up in whats right and whats wrong, whats true and whats not, that they tend to miss the point of the information being presented.

u dont have to believe all (or any) of it, at its most primal state, its all just information/data.

the way that things look, is that nothing is really set in stone, nothing is for sure. with this in mind, i have stopped "believing" this or that to be true, knowing to myself that in some paradoxical way its both; true and not true. then, i move forward with the information to see where else it can take my mind.

try going places you haven't !

oh, and as per the 20,000 challenge to the Astral Travellers - the reason no one would really take them up on this offer is because it is egocentric and monetarilly fueled by a (probably negative) being. a hardcore skeptic who needs proof. well the clairvoyant or astral traveler doesnt feel the need to prove anything to anyone, ya know?

just some thots

I was curious how much people here belive in conspiracies/spirtiual/alternative views.  They're fun to read about it, and the more far out, the better, but I definitely don't believe much of it.  I'm at the point right now we're I think there is some kind of conspiracy involving an elite force attempting to create a one-world fascist state, though I'm not sure if that state is their own idea of a utopia (meaning they think their intentions are good).  Sometimes I also lean towards Icke's idea, though I'm not sure if shapeshifting reptilians are behind the conspiracy.  I would consider myself a skeptic when it comes to dimensions, densities, spiritual phenomena, Atlantis, channeling, auras and stuff that falls into those categories, though I find it entertaining to read, sort of like modern day science fiction for me.

I agree with what you've said, although I don't really lean toward Icke when he talks Reptilians.
Much of his other stuff seems more believable to me. As far as the supernatural, as of late I've
"found" a way in which such things don't "clash" with my more scientific/logical ways of thinking.
If energy does have a "hyperdimensional" aspect to it, thus connecting our three dimensions to
some "higher" dimension(s), then certain things which are "unexplainable" when restricting our
senses to "our" three dimensions, become a little more "understandable". Like reincarnation....
If the "life force" is merely energy which somehow "connects" to this higher-dimensional realm,
then upon death, perhaps the part which exists outside our three dimensions can persist. Then,
if someone else is born such that their "life force" energy is of a particular "frequency", they're
potentially going to "reconnect" to that higher-dimensional existence. But that's all speculation.

I read primarily for educational purposes. For me, the educational process is often enjoyable...
so in a way education IS entertainment. Think of how one feels when they finally "get" a topic.
The bliss that accompanies a "click moment". I love that feeling because it's a manifestation of
"connectedness". It's a trigger that allows me to draw energy from the pursuit of truth, so that
I may continue my quest to be highly connected to truth. Channeling is something I do not buy
into, but I reserve the right to consider it more closely when observations dictate such actions.

I think staying open to possibilities is the important thing, along with using discernment - and not taking anything so seriously as to get a headache! 

After all, as I see it - we're aspects of God consciousness in individual parcels of 3D matter (bodies) doing our best to understand what's going on and why   I don't think its possible to understand everything all at once - i.e. to know the mind of God would blow your circuits ... unless by the grace of God (for want of a better expression - what exactly is grace anyway) we are given 'lifted' to a point of consciousness that is above and beyond duality and separateness.  I supposed 'enlightenment' is the best term.

I've read in the past that Samadhi is the sanskrit term for enlightenment.  Some beings with spiritual practice attain this for short periods of time, but lose it again when they 'come back down to earth' and get back into 3D 'reality'-living.  I belive Nirvakalpa Samadhi is the term used for someone who has practised for so long (and with the ?grace of God) is in  a continual state of enlightenment.  That is, has achieved God-consciousness and is aware of all things and all 'times'.  This is what I feel is Christ consciousness and is what He meant when he said "I and my Father are one".  And that's my understanding of "you cannot enter heaven except by me" i.e. except with this type of consciousness.

I don't know if I'm diverging here, but I'm on a roll, so forgive me , thanks.

Then there's the concept "everything is within you".  Which 'enlightened' ones acknowledge.

Well, what's the 'you' part here?  'You' must be 'consciousness'.  That's the only thing that (I reckon) can stretch to infinity.  Or more accurately, I reckon (god) consciousness is already everywhere/all-time - the only stretching is when we personally stretch our personal boundaries of belief/understanding/acceptance/forgiveness.

In regards to seeing aliens, reptiles etc.  If we didn't have that consciousness within us already, we wouldn't recognize it would we?  For example, I understand when someone is angry, because I've experienced anger.  I can recognize joy, because I've been joyful. 

Perhaps also if we look at how our 3D bodies and brains develop in the womb, we seem to replicate and embody all of the different life-forms that have existed before ... fish, reptiles, etc.  We have the limbic brain, the reptilian brain, the mammalian brain etc.  So we have  within us the capacity to recognize all of these things because we do - in terms of our physically inherited imprinting - contain the essence of these aspects.

Maybe some people are more able to see, for instance, reptilians, because more of their reptilian-pattern DNA encoding is 'switched on'.   Either by 'natural selection', 'random selection in the fertilization process, or 'soul/spirit' direction according to what our soul's plan is this time around.

Another though on aliens.  Maybe they're only 'alien' because we don't fully understand them.  Our fears come from not understanding.  Once we come to know something, we can appreciate it, not fear it and maybe love (in the higher sense) or at least respect it for its part in the overall scheme of things.

But I can say that because I haven't to my knowledge, had any nasty, fearful dealings with these suckers - except in meditation or dream, or alternate reality (in the sleep time).  That seems to be where I do my 'meeting of other beings'.

Having said that, I've met a few reptilians in human clothing in my time (one being a drug dealer - who I instantly felt on guard around as an STS and only later learned his occupation)  - so maybe you can discount that previous paragraph!

I think some of what I said above encompasses "cut-off aspects of outselves".

Wynderer, I understand your not liking conflict, I have Moon in Libra too.  This forum was a bit of a challenge for me at first - but I don't take anything personally now (whether its said directly to a comment I've made - or a post I've read that relates to something I believe). And also I've learned that these lovely NR beings are open to healthy discussion and do not attack or judge (and I'm not saying discern) anyone else's points of view. 

I want to acknowledge though, what you have shared in this post.  Thank you for your openness. I don't see it as a disagreement, but more an extra facet to what we're exploring .

Just another thought.  What we're doing is sharing thoughts.  We're using the written word (until we can communicate telepathically).  We are growing in consciousness as we do this.  Maybe this isn't far removed from the 'hive' mentality exhibited by grays.  They seem to think telepathically and move to some common, unspoken directions. Maybe as we start communicating/connecting more like this, and accept others' points of view, we may 'hook in' to each other on a mental/thoughts level and ... now I'm thinking morphogenic fields etc. You get my drift?

I'm having to not read this forum before I go to bed.  Because when I try and get to sleep, my mind/consciousness/awareness/and third eye region is switched ON and won't turn off for AGES!!!   That's what makes me think about the mental connection we may be making as mentioned in the previous paragraph.

I've thrown a couple of thoughts in to push buttons/boundaries - my own and others! 

Now, I don't want to ramble, so I'll leave it there.

Cipher.

Welcome!  I'm glad that you have started posting here.  I appreciate your comments on this topic.  I think that I understand clearly what you are saying and what you mean.

I just want to point out a couple ideas about how I see the meanings of various words.  You may think of different meanings when you see these words, and that's fine.

I think that being a skeptic is a healthy thing.  For me, I think of a skeptic as a person that questions ideas.  Now, being a skeptic can go too far, but in general I think that it is healthy.

I think of a believer and someone who believes things - someone who has beliefs.  I think of beliefs as ideas that are often held beyond question.  I prefer ideas and possibilities.  Now, if other people have beliefs, that's fine.  It's a commonly used word.  I'm simply stating my personal preference.

Just some thoughts.  No big deal.  But I did want to share these observations.

I just joined yesterday, and this was the first thread I read.  Eeeek!  What a lesson.

I learned that the skeptics and believers are like heaven and hell, and "n'ere the twain shall meet."  I have left two forums for just that reason.  On both, the skeptics pretty much took over and the believers were steam rolled into submission.  It was ugly to watch and I personally got sick and tired of feeling frustrated and thinking that I had to defend myself.  That was unhealthy for me, so I just left. I'm happy to find here that Montalk seems to be a strong "forum keeper upper" and is able to handle these destructive people with diplomacy. 

As to the title of this thread "what point are you at", perhaps the author, now banned, should have titled it "what kooky things do you believe in, and I'll tell you why you're nuts", because he really wasn't interested in anything the members believed in and only wanted to start an arguement.  At least that it how it appeared to me. I'll give it to him though, he was good with words, so I don't think he was unintelligent.  But he had already formed an opinion before he started, and was simply looking for people to disagree with.  That's fine.  There are lots of people like that.  I work with them every day.  <<frown>>  But what is the point of asking people a question unless you expect to learn from them?  Is it then your "duty" to point out their faults?   He left, and the other one got banned.  It was enevitable and I give high marks to all of you who stood toe-to-toe with them and duked it out. 

I'm in the "I've had a few experiences so I think there is more to this world than what meets the eye" group.  I'm going to move on to another thread now, but since I spent about 3 hours reading this one, I felt a need to comment.

Of course, you might have a difficult with someone from the "general public" following the line of thoughts and being able to take it at face value.  But we are not the "general public" here - we are communicating in the Noble Realms!!  And this opportunity is something for which I am hugely grateful.