|
| |
| | Page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165 | Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans?
| AC Invictus
User ID: 3888
7/7/2005 2:10 PM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
That´s hardly an open forum, is it? You have to sign up and everything. GLP is the only real open forum I´ve come across... the true fountain of all truth and wisdom :)
It´s fitting the debate should take place here. If they want to come over and defend themselves on this site, I´m sure they´d be welcome. |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 343
7/7/2005 2:34 PM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
I fail to see what being fat, or being anything
for that matter, has to do with the information
presented.
The information may be totally false, partially
false, whatever. The deal is, the information is
interesting. The woman, in the many chapters of
The Wave I read, did not claim to be STO or in
any other dimension or better than anybody else.
She is obviously well read and extremely
intelligent, I have seen no requests for money,
although I have not explored the rest of the
website.
I have noticed comments on this thread indicating
very little knowledge of what the website is about. It is about discovery, it is about
learning, it´s about a quest for enlightenlent.
Anybody that goes there for a few minutes and
then determines "it´s all bullshit" is, in my
opinion, guilty of a rush to judgement. |
| AC Invictus
User ID: 3888
7/7/2005 2:42 PM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
Well said, AC. I think any reasonable person with a desire to learn instead of judge will come to the same conclusion. That´s why I´m trying to figure out what Chandra´s angle is.
I´m not rushing to judgements about her, I just wonder why she is being so irrational. Well that, and not many people actually bother sticking to a debate here. It´s mostly "hit and runs". That alone puts up a red flag around her... I do it because I enjoy the debate itself, but not many others do, and Chandra seems to find me rather "disconcerting" whereas I simply find her amusing.
But let´s hope Chandra hasn´t decided to run. That would be a tacit admission of her being in the wrong :) |
| chandra battershell
User ID: 13383
7/7/2005 3:46 PM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
Again everyone notice how Invictus is trying to make me the issue.
I am still waiting for your reply from the email that you are going to send to Laura Knight Jadczyk so we can clear up the issues.
And I am not going anywhere. This is too good to miss! |
| Shrink
User ID: 11897
7/7/2005 4:18 PM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
"I am still waiting for your reply from the email that you are going to send to Laura Knight Jadczyk so we can clear up the issues."
As I see this discussion, the issue we’re trying to clear up is whether the personal life of some Jadzcyk character on the internet matters to anyone, but yourself of course.
In other words, whether an internet site should be judged by the merits of the information it presents, or the personal life of the person who owns it.
"And I am not going anywhere. This is too good to miss!"
I’m sticking around too :) This obsession of yours is absolutely fascinating...now you’re asking random strangers to email a stranger and ask her personal questions (?!?) Iiiinteresting...
 |
| AC Invictus
User ID: 3888
7/7/2005 4:53 PM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
Chandra dearest, please, I´ve already conceded that Laura is a "psychopathic intellectual cleptomaniac monster with voices in her head that call themselves the Cassiopaeans." What more do you want? I don´t need to email her, since we are in full agreement - for the sake of argument, at least :)
Besides, she´d probably deny everything, so what´s the point?
You are not the issue.
Laura is not the issue.¨
The information itself is the issue, and that´s up to each individual to discard or use as seems best to them.
That´s my point, do you agree with me? Because if you do, then we can just end this discussion on a note of effervescent elation that we´ve contributed in our own small way to the cause of understanding and the furtherance of good will and peace towards man.
If not, then we seem to still be talking right past each other. If that is indeed still the case, then it´s absolutely fascinating how such a thing can happen between two intelligent, well-intentioned, and unbiased people such as you and I. Especially if both of us are just hoenst seekers of knowledge, crossing paths in cyberspace.
|
| anon
User ID: 9323
7/8/2005 6:53 AM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
i have never seen anyone be quite so condescending as shrink and invictus to chandra...i recognize their condescending and overbearing manner from the late cass forum, where women were to be patted on the head
and told they were being ´amusing´ and ´irrational´
and then arbitrarily shutting down the discussion themselves, giving no one else an opening to continue
all too familiar
i see neithet invictus or shrink will answer the quite brilliant questions chandra put forth
it seems to me that shrink and invictus are closet cass/laura gofers, two of her pop people
i said before, i KNOW for a fact that laura FAKED the transcripts
if she did THAT
her whole SITE is similarly suspect
but of course shrink and invictus will go on their merry way rationalizing what i said as inconsequential
pair of idiots |
| anon
User ID: 9323
7/8/2005 6:56 AM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
the information itself is the issue, and that´s up to each individual to discard or use as seems best to them
and HOW are you supposed to distinguish teh SWITCHEROO that laura has made
she presents allegedly valid info then does the switch
it is the oldest trick in the book
and in fact laura IS the issue, her actions, the ppl she mixes with, the ppl she attacks and the ppl she has scammed and ripped off
take your head out of your ass invictus |
| anon
User ID: 9323
7/8/2005 6:59 AM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
i thought it extremely interesting that rumor has it the fbi wanted to extradite her for her financial scam on inet
and the 100k in mastercards, she once said they had many cards with high credit lines they could
be using
so i guess they did
ran them up, go bakrupt, flee the country
of course all of this may be just rumor, but it sort of sounds in character |
| AC Invictus
User ID: 3888
7/8/2005 7:10 AM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
Don´t mistake style for substance anon. I´ve been on this forum for a while, used to be avatarded as Sol Invictus, and anyone who knows me knows that what I post has little, if anything, to do with the Cass site or their philosophy. Philosophically, I´m more inclined towards the old Viking belief systems, and I´m not particularly into "Eastern mysticism", though I´m slightly more interested in the whole "grail quest" angle.
I´m just doing this because like I said, I enjoy a good debate.
And regarding that, I´ve already conceded every single point that Chandra has made. She´s won "her" debate. You´ve won "yours". If you say the transcripts were edited, well, you were there, I wasn´t. How can I argue with that? I´m not going to call you a liar, because that´s just your word against mine. Even so your word is obviously more informed than mine, unless a Cass insider can show up to refute it.
The condescending tone is an attempt to actually make her (and you, if you like) either address the arguments that I made in my last three posts about the hundreds of pages of referenced material gathered from dozens of different sources, or else at least get you riled up enough to show that you have an emotional vested interest to discredit her.
You´re doing a good job with that second part now, so I suppose I should just let you carry on ;) |
| ANON
User ID: 14639
7/8/2005 9:09 AM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
at least get you riled up enough to show that you have an emotional vested interest to discredit her.
there you go again playing games, like u are doing with chandra
and what is wrong with having an emotional vested interest???
yes laura did me wrong personally, and she did the same to my friends, all ex Cass members - she stole from us, she used our energy and our writing and research and editing and transcription talents - she stole ideas and books and she gave nothing back at all other then hurt for all of us
is that an STO person?
she talks the talk, as does ark, but they then turn around and exhibit pure psychopathy in their personal actions, their interaction with people
yes i will discredit her, just as will discredit any con man or woman - it is the right thing to do if it gives pause to even one person who may be sucked into their clutches
if that person reads this thread they will go in eyes open and forewarned
think with a hammer right?
knowledge is power right?
add in any C catchphrase of laura´s plagiarised choice
so you go ahed sol invictus with your games on this thread, have fun |
| AC Invictus
User ID: 3888
7/8/2005 9:28 AM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
Anon, I´m not playing "games", I´m being forced to resort to standard debate tactics when people refuse to address the issues. I was posting with a genuine interest in finding the "objective truth" of the matter as I always do on GLP, until I noticed that refusal to address some points I make indicated that it was "personal" for you and Chandra. If it was personal, I couldn´t have the objective discussion that I was interested in having.
Now really, in light of your last post, I think we finally understand each other. At least, I see where you´re coming from.
"yes laura did me wrong personally, and she did the same to my friends, all ex Cass members - she stole from us, she used our energy and our writing and research and editing and transcription talents - she stole ideas and books and she gave nothing back at all other then hurt for all of us"
That´s absolutely a fair thing to say, and I respect you for just coming out and saying it. What I wish you would understand is that it doesn´t change anything for *me*. I didn´t go to the site to make friends, I didn´t go there to "join them", or "help them". I went there for information, and I came away glad that I had done so. I imagine a lot of other people feel the same way.
It´s like if you go to college and you and your professor end up with a huge personality dispute. Sure, continue to speak out against his character, maybe even warn other people not to talk to him. But taking it one step further and then saying that all the history he taught you was wrong, and telling other people not to believe any of his historical information, is just a little too far... Especially if he had some interesting theories backed up well enough by extensive corroborating evidence that others could benefit from.
I have no interest in stepping into a character dispute, I never have, because as they say, there are three sides to every story, "yours, mine, and the truth." I haven´t heard anything from the Cass people, and even that would probably have a slant on it, so I´m left with what I was doing in the first place:
Judging the cassiopaea.org site on the information presented. And the information, in my opinion, is good - WHEN, of course, read critically, like all things should be. Warning people away from the site because of personal differences with the owners is a bit selfish, in my opinion. |
| Vinnie the Foo!
User ID: 7575
7/8/2005 1:40 PM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
Chandra,
If you´re not Vinnie (which I suspect you are since your rants and arguments are eerily similar in style), then maybe you should do a little reasearch about this guy.
You´ll find tons of information about him and his relationship with Laura, Ark et al.
Now, if you´re not Vinnie, then instead of whining and ranting about the bad people that Laura and group are, why don´t you present your evidence supporting your accusations? If you can´t present any proof, then maybe you should join Vincent Bridges and gang. That´s what they´re good at.
I´ve been to Laura´s sites and never was I obligated to spend any money and as a matter of fact, I took a lot from their site what with the tons of useful and informative information that´s there, most free. No one is forced to buy something and I think only idiots and morons will have their money stolen away like you claim. And whose fault would that be anyway?
Bottom line is, if you don´t like the information they are offering, who the hell is forcing you to read them? If you don´t like them, create your own website, put you own information and see if people will read them.
Go get a life! |
| Vinnie the Foo!
User ID: 7575
7/8/2005 1:49 PM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
And Anon, rumor is rumor. How easy is it to check the facts? If you have the smoking gun about this FBI gig, then fer humanities´ sake, present them here!
Like the C´s said, IGNORANCE ENDANGERS. But I´ll add that not only does it endangers, it makes an idiot out of you!
At least Laura and group checks their facts before presenting them. Not that they are 100% true all the time. No one is prefect. |
| Chandra, Dusty, etc. etc.
User ID: 7575
7/8/2005 1:58 PM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
Chandra, Dusty
If you want to participate in the discussion here, make sure you use different Used IDs. You can fool yourselves but not everyone here.
Hahaha, how does it feel communicating with one´s self? My, you´re even worse than Laura. At least she´s communicating with her "future" self. You´re creating a paradox here you know!  |
| chandra battershell
User ID: 12934
7/8/2005 2:03 PM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
Goodness gracious Vinnie the fool! That was one angry post! I thought this was an open forum discussing Laura Knight Jadczyk.
I guess I could say that if you don´t like what I am saying on this forum you also don´t have to read it.
But as long as this forum is discussing Laura Knight Jadczyk I have a right to say what I want. Even if you don´t like it.
But please, can´t we keep this civil? I am shocked that so many people wish to attack me just because they don´t like what I am saying.
Not one person has even tried to prove that what I am saying is false or wrong instead they attack me. I hope that this is not an indication of the mindset of the average follower of Laura Knight Jadczyk. If it is then perhaps Cassiopaea is actually some kind of cult.
When Shrink accused me of spreading hearsay and when I then went directly to the source by posting questions straight to Laura Knight Jadczyk I was attacked for that also!
And I am not Mr. Bridges but I am familiar with Laura Knight Jadczyk´s plagiarism of his work and I understand why he may not be happy with her. How would you like it if someone called you a psychopath on one hand and stole all of your years of research on the other? With an inner anger like you possess I imagine that you would not be very happy either.
That said I thought that I would entertain everyone with a few quotes that I have gathered about Laura Knight Jadczyk and the Cassiopaeans while we are waiting for Laura Knight Jadczyk to reply to the nine questions I have already posted.
"The Cassiopaeans (whoever or whatever they really are) may be part of a cosmic (or not so cosmic) intelligence plan that is fiendishly insidious and devious …”
-Richard Sauder
“Ark says that he is a physicist. But when I gave him some fairly simple mathematical equations to do for me, he couldn’t do them.
-Stan Tenen
“Channelling, aliens, and the New Age are all attempts by the Controllers to destroy old religions and to create new religions so that the people will be absolutely under their command. The Cassiopaeans are part of this master plan …”
-Lincoln Lawerence
“She took all of my money and time. And then when I asked her one simple question about who won the House Raffle she kicked me out of the group and began calling me a psychopath.”
-Pamela Dotson |
| Shrink
User ID: 8370
7/8/2005 3:04 PM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
ChandraWhen Shrink accused me of spreading hearsay and when I then went directly to the source by posting questions straight to Laura Knight Jadczyk I was attacked for that also!
.........
I wasn’t attacking you, Chandra, but your suggestion rather...you have to admit, strangers writing strangers asking personal questions is fairly bizarre behavior, no?
I’m getting the distinct impression that you’re very sensitive to being ‘attacked’ personally...for example, you wrote:
“I am shocked that so many people wish to attack me just because they don´t like what I am saying.”
So, let me get this straight. You feel strongly that personal attacks are out of order and people here shouldn´t ´attack’ you. Instead they should focus on the material you present. Is that a fair assessment?
If that´s how you feel, then why wouldn’t you afford Jadzcyk the same courtesy?
Why do you get to attack her personally, instead of attacking her material?
Focus on her material rather than her person. Attack the material all you like and critique it, please (and here I mean the specific theories and ideas). Now that would be an interesting discussion!
All *you’ve* been doing so far is attacking the person, something that apparently "shocks" you when you think others are doing it to you.
I think it´s called ´reaping what you sow´.
Shrink |
| chandra battershell
User ID: 5689
7/8/2005 6:22 PM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
Shrink
I know that you are European and so the law in Europe is much different than here in the US.
The Supreme Court has ruled several times that if someone is in the public spotlight their entire lives are open to the scrutiny of the public.
Laura Knight Jadczyk falls under this same modality. She has gone public, with her website, with the attacks on Weider and Bridges (personal attacks I might add where neither party is allowed to defend themselves), with the House Raffle( where no one is allowed to ask who won), with her fascist ideas such as organic portals (where if one suggests that it is a very unhealthy concept they are called a psychopath by Laura Knight Jadczyk). She is the one who has placed this all up on her site. I am responding to what she has put up.
I think the Supreme Court is right. If someone goes public and attempts to influence public opinion they must fall under scrutiny of the public eye. If Jimmy Swigert tells us that God will condemn someone for having sex out of marriage and then is caught with a prostitute this bears our scrutiny. Their private lives become public once they begin going public. A lot of people go public, realize that they cannot stand the heat and run back to their old private lives. It seems to me that several followers of Laura are now on this forum trying in vain to attack me for placing her under the eye of public scrutiny. I guess she can´t handle the heat. Bt it is far too late for that.
Like you said - what you reap you sow |
| frederico Gonzalez
User ID: 11570
7/8/2005 6:49 PM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
Hi
Just been following all of this as well as anyone can on a friday night,and as an avid reader of the Signs of the times i have to ask what those folks ask....wheres the proof of the accusations against these folks.
They do a great job...Give me the proof they are what the whinging dudes are saying..............
get a life
frederico |
| Real haphazzard
User ID: 6513
7/8/2005 6:57 PM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
This thread looks like it is about to get really interesting, I will be keeping my eye on this one!
|
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 8226
7/8/2005 8:30 PM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
Chandra,
I think Shrink is really Laura. You posted a thread with her name in it, she noticed it and is here to defend Laura/herself.
But how to reconcile the side or defense that Laura has presented against Vincent on her site versus Vincent´s version? They are both so negative toward each other that the truth probably isn´t either one of their versions.
AC Invictus, Some people find it hard to let go of their illusions. Sounds like you may have to revise your ideas about Laura and her supposed "ideas" and "research", - It could all be bogus misinformation and a total waste of time - but it won´t come easy will it. I´m adjusting also. |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 7575
7/8/2005 8:30 PM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
Chandra, I don´t think asking you for proof is the same as attacking you. You´ve been posting information than you can´t back up and you quote individual after individual as if their quotes are gospel truth. Have you checked your facts concerning these people? Don´t you know how internet works?
What you do is spread gossip which is better published in a tabloid. Open discussion is healthy as long as the topics are well backed up with facts and not senseless trash.
And who is Jimmy Swigert? Did you check before you posted whether there´s such an individual by that name? There´s Google you know. You see, the problem is you create your own stupid reality and then accuse people of attacking you when they tell you that you´re living in a tra-la-la land.
If you´re just trying to be funny, then by all means be funny. |
| frederico Gonzalez
User ID: 11570
7/8/2005 8:52 PM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
real haphazzard
love the popcorn bucket......
I dont know much about Laura though in the morning or afternoon (it is saturday) i shall read what i can.
Im all for openess,and the topic here hasnt really opened up here for me......Im hearing disgruntlement and a lot of emoting about things, though there are no real links to any proof...something one can get ones teeth into...
As I have said The Signs of the times page has always, i have found been a good collector of news.and they obviously upset the powers that be by what they write.
They do link to their collected news items thus showing they are not making it up. One also realises that there are people who do not like the truth being seeded onto the WWW..So one realises that there are folks about who may be employed to discredit them.....
All i want is the truth...so can we keep to verifiable facts,i really cant take into account ,they did this to me tales without verifiable facts.... if what is said about people being ripped off by Laura then i am sorry that one has had to suffer....BUT Facts are what i need in these times...I just cant take someones word for anything just because they say so. |
| Shrink
User ID: 8370
7/8/2005 9:26 PM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
Hi Chandra,
It’s getting later here across the Atlantic, but I just caught your message before I turned in, so a quick response. You wrote:
.........
“I think the Supreme Court is right. If someone goes public and attempts to influence public opinion they must fall under scrutiny of the public eye.”
..........
So basically we agree! This is also a public forum, and you are here to attempt to influence public opinion, so you too can fall under the scrutiny of the public eye. Yes?
Let’s look at the scrutiny you came under from me. You came in here as a psychologist (my future profession!), started “diagnosing” people over the internet, and showed excessive emotional interest in convincing *other* people of that "diagnosis". That kind of behavior sheds a bad light on the profession. That was why I started focusing on you, I simply did not see the reasons behind your motivations or behavior.
Now, if you had come in here and said “Hello, I am Vincent Bridges, I had some past experiences with these people, they plagerized me and this is my opinion about the Cassiopaean people...’, I don’t think I would have responded.
But as it is, by the Supreme Courts declaration, which you agree with, you’re fair game too, wouldn’t you say?
I understand this sort of public scrutiny has the Supreme Court of America’s seal of approval, and I respect that. There’s also similar scrutiny of the private lives of Royals over here, which I always found uninteresting as well. That is indeed one way this discussion can go, personal attacks back and forth in an endless cycle of vehemence.
Personally, I continue to be more interested to know why it is you find the site *itself* so ‘dangerous’...surely the majority of people who visit it will never come into personal contact with the owners. Therefore their personal lives are uninteresting to me.
I’ve been reading bits and pieces of the site now, and I haven’t come across anything ‘dangerous’ so far. Just ideas. If you have something ‘dangerous’ for me to read, please send a link along and I´ll take a look, OK?
Shrink |
| Shrink
User ID: 8370
7/8/2005 9:28 PM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
"I think Shrink is really Laura. You posted a thread with her name in it, she noticed it and is here to defend Laura/herself."
What? Wow, what tangled web Godlike weaves! I´m in Ireland, check my IP adr.
Shrink |
| OPie
User ID: 14283
7/9/2005 1:19 AM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
Okay. I was a member of the inside group at Cass for many years until I finally paid attention to the red flags and creepy feelings I’d been trying desperately to ignore, and quit.
I was also one of those who transcribed the original sessions. And, yes, when they were published on the website they had been changed. One was changed considerably. She had been charged with this by others before, and until I saw it happen first-hand, I didn’t believe it was true. I figured she changed punctuation or corrected things, but that’s not what happened with the sessions I transcribed. She leaves out a lot of the conversation with the C’s. Sometimes this is because it’s personal, and it’s nobody’s business but hers. She spends an inordinate amount of time (or at least did when I was involved) grilling the C’s about who in the group (meaning the Quantum Future School now) is really a spy for the matrix and out to get her. One of the group members that she decided to single out as a spy and kick off the group (mainly because she spoke up and said maybe Laura was wrong about Vincent Bridges) was, according to the C’s anyway, not a spy or “agent” as Laura refers to them. She would also ask if Vincent Bridges was out in the desert concocting magic spells to hurt Laura and Ark. And she would make very denigrating comments about group members, all of whom were very close to her and devoted a good portion of their lives trying to help her and probably thought she was appreciative and cared about them. But the worst changes, to my mind, were that she would change the answers the C’s give. And she would change the answers to be more apocalyptic.
Now the problem with this is that if she changed the two that I transcribed, how many more of the sessions were tampered with? If you find one piece of work that’s bogus, how can you trust the rest? Those who are defending Laura by saying that her work is good and valuable are missing this point. Her work is not good and valuable if it’s not true. Once you find that she has tampered with it so that it fits into her own belief system, you have no way of knowing how much of the rest of the work has been massaged.
And the house raffle? Well, something is certainly not right there. At least a year after the raffle and after Laura had moved to France, another ex-Cass member checked with the tax rolls for the county in which Laura had her house. It was still listed in her name; there had been no transfer of ownership to anyone. Now if someone had won the raffle, this would not have been the case. And if they couldn’t find the original winner for whatever reason, then surely a second name would have been drawn, and on and on until there was a viable winner. Seems sorta dishonest to me. The name on the tax roll was Laura Martin, which was her name before she married Ark. Oh, and that reminds me of something else, something which speaks strong to Laura’s character. The house used to belong to Laura’s husband (or maybe both of them), but when Laura kicked her husband out (you know, the guy who married her when she was pregnant with someone else’s baby and took her and her children in and gave them a home for many years until she found someone whose advanced degree in physics would give her own work more credence), she told him that she would have him charged with sexually abusing the kids if he didn’t sign the house over to her free and clear. At least that’s what she told us. She was very proud of her creativity and thought it was very funny. She truly didn’t recognize that this is bad behavior.
And organic portals? That’s not an original idea either. That was not something she was told by the C’s; that came out of her reading Mouravieff, which was introduced to her by Ark. She started telling the group that if they were getting grief from their relatives, spouses, friends, and so forth about their involvement with the C group and Laura, then these people were probably OP’s, who because they were essentially empty shells, were being used by the matrix to get to them and shut them down so they wouldn’t find out the truth. The number of divorces and separations in the group after this was staggering and somewhat alarming. And some of these people sold all they owned and moved to France. I heard from someone who was over there that they were basically being used as cash cows to support those not to the manor born but aspiring to it.
As far as the attempted murder charge, for me the jury is out on that. Laura had just turned 18 and the guy, who was one of the good old boys in a southern town, tried to rape her. She grabbed a frying pan and hit him over the head several times. I would have done the same thing. Did it really happen that way? Apparently the jury thought so, because they exonerated her. On the other hand, she’s very good at playing the damsel in distress, so she could very well have played the jury. Probably the truth will never be known about this, especially since it happened so long ago.
For those of you who are defending Signs of the Times – no one is talking about Signs of the Times. No one cares about that. Even Vincent said that was pretty well done. I frankly find it boring and redundant, as the same thing has been done by other websites for years. They started doing it because when one of the group members posted research on the pentagon hit on 9/11 not appearing to be truthful, they got more hits than anything they’d ever published. In other words, being a bug under the skin of the prevailing system was possibly much more lucrative than reporting on shape-shifting reptilians. What I am concerned about is all the other stuff on the site – The Wave, the organic portal articles, and so forth.
What Chandra suggested about people writing to Laura is precisely what Laura does to others. Every time someone would question her, especially if it was on the net, she would have group members bombard them with letters and emails until they finally threw up their hands in defeat and despair. She also has group members get involved in other groups, then drop information about her and the C’s in order to get more people to come to the site. In fact, I suspect that the posting that started this thread was to promote her new book and wasn’t really a question about what people thought at all. The same question is probably being posted in other groups and bulletin boards around the internet. She also had her group members set up their own websites to promote the C’s. If you google Cassiopaea, you’ll find all these websites that promote the C’s – weird little websites that have absolutely nothing else on them. These are Quantum Future School members proselytizing for their leader.
Chandra, I’m surprised that Stan Tenen is saying anything against them. They contacted him and made good friends with him during the Vincent Bridges debacle in order to get the information he had on Bridges and Dan Winter, including information he had but wasn’t allowed to present in court (supposedly). He was only too happy to have sympathetic ears. I guess he finally figured out he was being used.
Laura has made a big thing out of Fred Irland being an agent and out to get her. But he didn’t leave because of the material. He left because she thought it was perfectly okay to place her suppositions on his sexuality on the internet for all to see (I think this was when she was writing the Wave series, but I could be remembering wrong at this point). At the time, she asked all of us if we would have been upset or if we saw anything wrong with what she wrote. A number of us did, which honestly surprised her. I repeat, she was honestly surprised. She truly does not understand that there are limits on what you say about people and that most humans intrinsically know what these are; apparently this was never taught to her. On the Cass (QFS) group, she would periodically post personal information about group members, information that was told to her in confidence, then be surprised when they would be upset. I always found this to be one of the most interesting and intriguing things about her. It’s like a part of her development is missing.
And Shrink, if you’re going to call Chandra to task for using Laura’s words as a guideline to her underlying psychopathy, then call Laura on the same thing. This is one of Laura’s favorite tactics. Anyone who was ever on the Cass group (as I suspect that you have been and probably still are) knows that. Laura considers this to be one of her best talents. So, in all fairness, to have the same tactic used on her should be perfectly acceptable.
But the question seems to be, is her work dangerous? Probably not really to the government, and not to the “matrix”, but it could well be dangerous to her readers. When people start leaving their loved ones because they’re told that they’re out to keep them from finding the truth, when they sell their nice little homes and give the money to Laura and Ark so they can continue to live in a large villa in southern France, when they’re stripped of everything they’ve ever held to be true and ripped away from their families and are given lies to fill the void, then, yes, it’s dangerous. More importantly, it’s unconscionable. It’s no different than what religions have done to people for years, and it’s equally heinous. Most of the people who read the site (and it’s very entertaining and interesting, I admit) will be just fine. But those who are drawn in to join the group may be giving up more than they realize. They may well be selling their souls to a false god and when the disillusion hits them – and it will – it may well be their undoing.
These are the things I have seen, first-hand. They are not rumors, they are not hearsay. But I remember very well from my own experience with the C’s, that those who want to support Laura will discount anything that doesn’t fit in with their picture of her. And this will continue to happen until they see something themselves that they can no longer ignore. The amount of time it takes for this to happen is different for each person and probably is somewhat commensurate with how much of themselves they’ve invested with Laura and the group. I ignored my red flags for literally years.
b |
| A Spade is a spade
User ID: 11806
7/9/2005 3:17 AM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
Hi chandra battershell/Shrink,
I was there at that time
and I called it for what is was
at that time
What is the significance now?
Perhaps advertisement?
"or someone who is not loved´
NEW "KEYWORD FOLKS"
endless bullshit
mad cow dis ease
STOP THIS NOW |
| AC Invictus
User ID: 3888
7/9/2005 5:42 AM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
Thank you OPie, for a clear, honest, and rational post. You come out saying who you are, what your agenda is, and give a pretty even handed assessment of the pros and cons of the site based on your personal experiences as a former "insider".
How refreshing!
And how different from Chandra, whose continuous attempts at obfuscation and persistent stubborn refusal to admit she is doing anything other than acting out of the goodness of her heart. I´m sorry Chandra, don´t mean to single you out like that, but when you don´t want to debate me anymore I have to make my own conclusions ;) But I´ll get to that in another post, perhaps, if Chandra comes back.
But OPie, you say
"Most of the people who read the site (and it’s very entertaining and interesting, I admit) will be just fine. But those who are drawn in to join the group may be giving up more than they realize. They may well be selling their souls to a false god and when the disillusion hits them – and it will – it may well be their undoing."
and I appreciate your use of the words "may well be", and not "will inevitably" be their undoing. I think it´s a mistake to assume that people like Laura and Ark who run the Cass site are somehow above the whole ego thing, and equally so it would be a mistake to assume that oneself is. Ego clashes can, and do happen, probably equally often among "conspiracy circles" as in real life.
I´m a pretty easy going person, I´ve been around the internet "spiritual theories" block a few times, yet even I sometimes get sucked into real disagreements with people. No one has done it for a while, but I know that if someone slanders me or tries to "screw me over" in some way, I certainly won´t turn the other cheek. Nor do my belief systems require me to, I personally think a strong ego is a good thing, as long as it is tempered by wisdom. Ego clashes are not always a bad thing, sometimes they´re a valuable learning experience if one doesn´t become obsessed with trying to "destroy" your perceived enemies at the expense of more constructive pursuits.
*cough*Chandra*cough*
You also said
"But the question seems to be, is her work dangerous? Probably not really to the government, and not to the “matrix”, but it could well be dangerous to her readers. When people start leaving their loved ones because they’re told that they’re out to keep them from finding the truth, when they sell their nice little homes and give the money to Laura and Ark so they can continue to live in a large villa in southern France, when they’re stripped of everything they’ve ever held to be true and ripped away from their families and are given lies to fill the void, then, yes, it’s dangerous. More importantly, it’s unconscionable. It’s no different than what religions have done to people for years, and it’s equally heinous."
and again, thank you for giving a clear and rational answer! But certainly you didn´t leave any family members or sell your house? I didn´t either. Neither did my friend who has been on the QFS board for a few years. People with relatively well-functioning lives, good relations with their families, and people who feel they can "advance" in their present circumstances do not do this.
The people who do this are already "fed up" with the world in one way or another. They are not going to just sit there and live out the rest of their lives in a miserable state. Better, I say, they go live in a Mansion in France and *try* to figure out how the universe works rather than join Al-Queda or some other organization like maybe an extreme environmentalist group, or whatever else, that actually does real bodily harm to people :P
Of course the site can be "dangerous." It´s not for everyone. It´s CERTAINLY not for the gullible who are looking for a "leader", because people like that will always be disappointed once their two braincells start communicating and then they see that their leader is just a person like anyone else and not some divine flawless being. I´m not insulting your intelligence here btw, you´re obviously not one of those types.
I´m talking about the people out there who don´t want to think for themselves and want to be "saved." Like I said, I´ll send them to a Church. At least their "leader" is a non-corporeal cosmic being, and as such, they won´t be disappointed... at least, not until they die.
But people genuine looking for the truth, and those who can think critically, should take a good, long hard look at the site - at least, in my opinion. Like you and everyone else, I can only argue this from my personal point of view and not from the "cosmic truth" perspective.
I´m glad I went to the site. I was never exploited. I never sent any money. I´m probably quite a bit smarter from the experience, and I probably learned a thing or two about discernment in the process. I wouldn´t deny anyone the same experience just because there are potential pitfalls. That´s what makes the site so interesting. It´s slightly dangerous, it makes you think and question.
It´s not for people who want to float on a pink cloud and visualize world peace though, granted. People like that should avoid it like the plague. Your warning about joining the group or getting "too close" is well noted, but I think that goes for *any* kind of organization. I personally am never going to join a secret society, an online group, or a political party. I prefer to think independently at all times. Some people work better in groups though, so it´s up to each individual based on their own temperament what to do.
Well, I might join a group if they had demonstrable superhuman powers or something... you know, like a Jedi Academy :P But even then I´d just join to learn the skills, not the dogma! |
| Anonymous
User ID: 12262
7/9/2005 8:49 AM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
I’m a drop-in to this forum, brought here by some questions I was asked by someone else involved in this discussion. (Some of my friends are strange, I admit.) I’ve read the whole thing with a sense of actual revulsion for both the subject and the nonsense accreting around it. But, since I was asked to comment, let me just say that my remarks are intended to help all of you embroiled in this discussion no matter how ridiculous it seems to me.
First of all, let me just give some background. I’m a law student, work part time for a firm of solicitors, (vacationing in Spain at the moment) and most of the subjects this forum discusses are poppycock in my opinion. I want to say "get a real life," but I´m going to try to consider that all of you really think that what you are discussing has earth shaking ramifications and other similar nonsense does find its way into courtrooms. There are all kinds of eccentric people on the planet, there just seems to be a lot of them collected together here. Well, one man´s eccentricity is another man´s way of life.
As my friend suspected, it does appear that there are some legal issues here in this forum that could be brought to bear from both sides of the big water.
First of all, person with ID “Chandra” writes:
<<But as long as this forum is discussing Laura Knight Jadczyk I have a right to say what I want. Even if you don´t like it. >>
Well, let me just say that is not entirely true. You do NOT have the right to say what you like about another person without taking responsibility for it. What you are saying - and that goes for several of you - is defamatory and may also be libel.
Now, the libel, defamation, and slander laws in UK and Europe are somewhat different from those in the U.S. where, you ostensibly, still have your so-called “first amendment” rights. In the U.S., to some extent, you are allowed to defame a "public" person, but you may not libel them. Libel is pretty strictly defined in the U.S. as to whether or not what is said is TRUE. Well, there may be some truth written on this board, but so far, I haven’t seen any evidence that would be admissible in a court presented to back up one single claim made by anyone here.
In the UK and in Europe, libel, slander, defamation, is somewhat differently defined. You are not allowed to say things about a person that may damage them in any way even IF those things are true! You may certainly think that a person is a crook, but you can’t say so in public or in print. In fact, you cannot even email defamatory statements about someone privately. If the recipient chooses to, they can turn the email over to the person about whom you have written, and it can result in a court action with damages awareded to the victim. If you think they are a crook, you must file a complaint with the proper authorities, submit your evidence, and then let the court make the decision as to whether the individual can be considered a “crook” or not. Even then, there are strictures on whether or not you can “advertise” this fact - even by email! The key question that the court looks at is: whether the information damages the individual’s ability to live their life in peace, make a living and support their family, and so on.
I don’t know whether anybody participating in this board even cares about legal liability, but the “owners” of the board ought to. The fact is that there is pending legislation on both sides of the Atlantic that will make such discussions as this one, where a person’s reputation - and thus their ability to live and work in peace at whatever they choose to do - is being damaged, a criminal offense.
Of course, I’m very entertained by the legal issue of whether or not a person is entitled to refine (edit) their own creative work, as would be the issue of the channeled messages some of you have talked about. I think that the court would decide that entities such as the “Cassiopaeans” are simply one element of the creative process, and so if Ms. Jadczyk chooses to edit her material, she is legally entitled to do so. I detect that some of you really believe in channeling and therefore are highly offended by the thought of any alteration in the material, as though somehow it “belongs” to you - or the public. I don’t think a court would see it this way.
Now, as to the issues of alleged “criminal behavior,” this is far more serious and precise. Here, many of you are on quicksand and you need to come up with some proof - and I mean evidentiary proof of the kind that could be submitted to a court - very fast or remove your claims from this public board. Proof can be documents or sworn statements posted as images on the internet, and so on. You need to get this proof up there, posted and linked. I say this for your own good, and not because I care one whit whether or not you are convinced that you have some mission to save the world from Ms. Jadczyk.
All in all, there’s a lot of accusations flying, and nothing - absolutely nothing so far- in the way of evidence.
Another point that underlines this necessity for evidence: you learn very early when reading law is that so-called “circumstantial evidence” is a real quagmire. There may be many explanations for what is observed by an outsider. I do think it is a good idea (as someone proposed) to either ask Ms. Jadczyk herself, or post the evidence, so why don’t some of you do that? There could be many explanations for the things you are all talking about that have nothing at all to do with criminal behavior.
On that subject, I will also point out that I know, for a fact, that if she was really “wanted by the FBI,” that she would be in custody today. It is not true that France resists extradition. The Einhorn case cited was very specific in that it involved the death penalty which France is against. There’s no comparison between murder and a raffle scam. So I think you can all safely assume that Ms. Jadczyk being wanted by the FBI is a rumor that has been created by someone and propagated. Not very sporting, I should say, but more than that, clearly libelous.
Then, of course, there are the implications that Ms. Jadczyk is somehow a violent person because of an event in her past that led to legal charges. That was of more interest to me, and so I did have a look to see if there was anything about it on the net. What I found was this page on Ms. Jadczyk’s website:
[link to www.cassiopaea.org]
From this page, you can access a letter from the solicitor who defended her in that case. She apparently had to resort to asking him for this letter to defend herself against some pretty vicious accusations by this Mr. Bridges. You can view the letter here:
[link to www.cassiopaea.org]
Judging by the “tone” of the letter, I would say that her solicitor was being quite emphatic in his use of the terms “found not guilty and fully exonerated.” He also notes that all costs were taxed to the State which strikes me as a statement in itself.
The consequence of bringing up something like this and using it to defame someone could be very serious, especially since there is evidence - and here I point to the posted letter that can be verified - that would be accepted in court that such claims are defamatory.
The final thing I want to say refers back to the impending legislation that may affect us all: it is obviously such discussions as this one that are giving the internet a bad name and could very well lead to administrative actions that hinder freedom of exchange for everyone. In this sense, ALL of you are guilty of being bad apples that spoil it for the rest of us.
That’s just my opinion, but it’s based on some facts and reasonable observations. It’s also not intended to harm anyone, but to help. |
| frederico Gonzalez
User ID: 11570
7/9/2005 10:53 AM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
Thank you Anonymous User ID: 2741 for possably bringing this thread into some sense of order......
proof,evidence and documentation is what is needed here instead of tales of woe that may not even be true.....
I agree that if Laura K .J. was wanted by the F.B.I then it is my belief that the French would have extradited her on a request from said alphabet people.
Thank you for what you have posted and i paste in here........
It is my hope that evidence of Laura K.J. s Alleged wrongdoing will be brought forward for the people in this thread to consider....
It is hard for me to believe that the people who run the "Signs of the times" would be nasties........though as i have said if evidence and/or documentation can be brought forward one would have to consider it.................
If not my interest in this thread will evaporate as quickly as it arised and i shall move on.....thinking maybe some folks here may have a hidden agenda to defame Laura K.J.
Truth and proof,truth and proof......im fed up being lied to.
User ID: 2741 wrote:
Then, of course, there are the implications that Ms. Jadczyk is somehow a violent person because of an event in her past that led to legal charges. That was of more interest to me, and so I did have a look to see if there was anything about it on the net. What I found was this page on Ms. Jadczyk’s website:
[link to www.cassiopaea.org]
From this page, you can access a letter from the solicitor who defended her in that case. She apparently had to resort to asking him for this letter to defend herself against some pretty vicious accusations by this Mr. Bridges. You can view the letter here:
[link to www.cassiopaea.org] |
| | Page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165 | |
|
