David's Blog, Saturday 2/21

[Deerclan]

i am glad to see david starting to take charge of his own productions. i think this will be a big turning point for him.

[Meriut]

yeah...it sounds really wonderful!

i have a deep feeling that these conferences/productions are going to really take off and we can say we remembered when he was just starting out ( so to speak- even though he's been doing this for years already).

would love to make it to one of them...easiest for me would be the phoenix conference...unless he comes to sedona! :d

i just have such a great feeling for david's future...such light!!

blessings,
meriut

[Deerclan]

from his latest blog, he has apparently begun to discover that the range of people attracted to spiritual energy & spiritual events unfortunately include the mentally needy - people who are wide awake but whose feet are planted solidly on the planet 'xenophobia' at the far ends of the nebulae 'grandiosity.'

some folks never manage to make the needed rational connections between the spirit, the imagination, and the physical universe, and they seem to believe that whatever they encounter in the imagination is *exactly* how it is in the 3 dimensional plane. for example, there may be hundreds of atlantean-pleaidian shamans from peru walking the city streets, but most of them do not scream curses and terrorize crowds of people who've gathered to hear a spiritual teacher. jung talked about such folks as being the ones who cannot swim in the river with the mystics, but end up drowning in it instead. i'm sure jung saw many of them in his practice as a psychiatrist, especially in the early days of his career, when he worked mostly in mental hospitals.

i myself have met a few such "atlantean-pleaidian-peruvian shamans" - the kind who'd never made it quite all the way back down to earth - during the years i did mental health counseling for the state penal system. my job was making the determination whether they presented a real threat to themselves & others, or whether they were just trying to milk some extra privileges out of the system. david says in his blog that he's never seen such things, and i can attest, it will give a person a jolt the first time.

it takes some hard experience to learn that the threat of serious harm to a group far outweighs the obligation not to provide unlimited opportunity to a disruptive individual as a way of trying to be "nice" to him. it goes against our natural empathy, but i guess it goes back to the law of one, which combines both love and wisdom. that is, it does little good to be "nice" & do what another person wants you to do, *if* it is likely to end up with some third party being harmed. my years of professional experience tell me david's associate was absolutely 100% correct in assessing the potential for violence in that scenario. i think it could easily have been much worse. she did the right thing by staying passive and praying -- exactly the same thing i did, when i was trapped in a similar situation in my office for an hour. it was a terrifying experience, and i hope david's associate is ok.

overall i continue to be impressed with the way david handles challenging situations with maturity beyond his years. being a public figure changes the rules in a couple of important ways, and david is making the transition from 'unknown nice guy' to a being public figure with increasingly heavy responsibilities, and he's doing it with grace.

[BridgeBuilder]

what was fascinating about this person was how much he looked the part. usually the sorts of people you describe don't have access to the money for such an elaborate costume. even his ruddy dark skin and long dark hair looked the part. and the spider david reports jumping onto his friend is intriguing too, although it could have been a "coincidence".

the man had a sort of self-perceived "righteous anger" about him, which actually contributed to the authenticity, not saying it was justified in this context or expressed appropriately. it was not exactly chaotic, as one might expect, but very focused and deliberate, but yes indeed with a simmering potential for danger. and as i mentioned in the blog comments, even george noory later acknowledged there was some merit in what the man actually had to say, despite the inappropriate manner in which he said it.

i think had he not calmed down for the pre-q&a panel presentation, he would have indeed been thrown out immediately. that also suggested some sense of control on his part, that he would be able to quiet down and wait for the q&a.

at the end of the day, i have absolutely no idea if this guy was even close to being what he said he was. in some ways, it almost looked like an intentionally staged performance, and that continues to cross my mind, especially given what would have been quite an expensive costume if you tried to put it together in l.a. is there anyone else who would intentionally want to disrupt a panel of this nature and fund the effort appropriately? the sorts of people you describe are often indigent and would not be able to afford such elaborate suede clothing, authentic talisman-like jewelry, etc., but one cannot rule out the possibility.

as a member of the audience, i did personally feel endangered, i must admit, just from the potential collateral damage if he had done anything physically threatening to the panel. not to mention i was very concerned for the entire panel's safety - it was both surreal and disconcerting to say the least. i suspect there were a number of us suppressing our fears as best we could and holding the entire room in the light.

in peace,
bridgebuilder

[voidofsilence]

listening to the rumor mills radio show right now. as for the cle 09 i was not able make it to the infamous panel where the person had an outburst although i was upstairs near the check in/ticketing booth talking with some people i had met and the person who had freaked out in the panel was upstairs cussing out some of the security (must of been after he was escorted out from the panel). i was about 10 feet away and i had no idea of why he was acting this way.

needless to say it was quite suprising and i was really baffled as to why someone would be wanting to disrupt such a harmonious event.

i wish i could be making the new york conference. ironically enough i am going to be in maryland that weekend for a previously commited event. i'll be in new york on the 25th and then i am flying back out west on the 27th. i wonder why this ended up happening?

[mmariebored]

it's good that david mentions the incident about the crazed guy in his blog. that will stick in everyone's mind and his new audience will be much better prepared to deal with such a person. he needs to hire a bodyguard. if he hasn't noticed by his emails, his enemy list is growing proportionately with his popularity, increasing the odds of possible harm to him. not trying to be a fearmonger, just good to take precautions, a hired person isn't going to sit there like a frozen spectator.

[coneyisland]

i think i would have definitely had someone call security. i guess it's from being brought up with a firehouse dispatcher as a father...

i'm so glad i found divine cosmos, what a massive wealth of information for people who need to fill their consciousness coffers. i"ll be sad when i get done reading everything.

[felixnova]

so is there some footage of the incident somewhere publically available?

[Deerclan]

usually the sorts of people you describe don't have access to the money for such an elaborate costume. even his ruddy dark skin and long dark hair looked the part.

it's possible, but i say it's also irrelevant "who" he is.



the man had a sort of self-perceived "righteous anger" about him, which actually contributed to the authenticity, not saying it was justified in this context or expressed appropriately. it was not exactly chaotic, as one might expect, but very focused and deliberate, but yes indeed with a simmering potential for danger.

paranoia can leave a person extremely focused. paranoia is one of the primal frameworks for holding one's thoughts together. it works very well. for that matter, so can a brain tumor. a tumor in a specific part of the brain is what motivated the infamous texas sniper.



and as i mentioned in the blog comments, even george noory later acknowledged there was some merit in what the man actually had to say, despite the inappropriate manner in which he said it.

no disagreement there. although the native american blood in me can be measured to a small fraction of my total volume, nevertheless it is possible for me to get myself worked up to quite a head of steam when it comes to the topic of how the cherokee were treated by the first white residents of georgia. the *&^%%$ state government lied, the federal government deliberately exploited christians to help make the cherokee docile, and the list goes on and on. there is merit to the anger. there may be focus also, for reasons i cited above. but what grade would you assign the man on communication skills? most people i have ever met who are highly spiritually evolved are excellent communicators, and usually skilled diplomats as well. my concern here is that david take this type of threat seriously, as a threat to what he is building. on the other hand, it is possible that the guy was following inner wisdom, for the sole purpose of putting things on the table for discussion that have not been on the table for discussion. for instance, i can p*** off a fundamentalist preacher in three minutes by speaking uncomfortable facts about the cherokee. i've done it. white americans are simply very unaware and highly uneducated to basic facts about indigenous peoples and tribal cultures. however, it still seems far more likely to me that the guy presented a threat because somebody forgot to tighten the nuts on his head gasket. i could be wrong, of course.



i think had he not calmed down for the pre-q&a panel presentation, he would have indeed been thrown out immediately. that also suggested some sense of control on his part, that he would be able to quiet down and wait for the q&a.

everybody can exert control, if they see that it is to their advantage to do so.



at the end of the day, i have absolutely no idea if this guy was even close to being what he said he was.

my contention is that it does not matter. i can be a licensed psychologist, plumber, preacher, or social worker, and still go off the deep end.


in some ways, it almost looked like an intentionally staged performance, and that continues to cross my mind, especially given what would have been quite an expensive costume if you tried to put it together in l.a. is there anyone else who would intentionally want to disrupt a panel of this nature and fund the effort appropriately? the sorts of people you describe are often indigent and would not be able to afford such elaborate suede clothing, authentic talisman-like jewelry, etc., but one cannot rule out the possibility.

nevertheless, it still needs to be dealt with for what it is - conduct that is a public nuisance, disruptive, abusive, and which presents a threat.



as a member of the audience, i did personally feel endangered, i must admit, just from the potential collateral damage if he had done anything physically threatening to the panel. not to mention i was very concerned for the entire panel's safety - it was both surreal and disconcerting to say the least. i suspect there were a number of us suppressing our fears as best we could and holding the entire room in the light.

in peace,
bridgebuilder

in our state law at least (i'm not sure about federal law), the instant that the man put fear of physical harm into other people, he committed the crime of "assault." if any threatening physical conduct had followed, that would have added the crime of "battery." whether it is a kindergarten teacher, veteran of our armed forces, or planted spy, assault and battery against listeners needs to be prevented. i'm talking about this for david's own sake, and the sake of the organization. that means dealing with an event on its own terms. even if the man is an atlantean peruvian shaman, he still needs to learn how to behave in public if he is going to attend public events in america.

[BridgeBuilder]

but what grade would you assign the man on communication skills? most people i have ever met who are highly spiritually evolved are excellent communicators, and usually skilled diplomats as well. my concern here is that david take this type of threat seriously, as a threat to what he is building. on the other hand, it is possible that the guy was following inner wisdom, for the sole purpose of putting things on the table for discussion that have not been on the table for discussion.

diplomacy was definitely not part of the equation here. as i said, it was acknowledged that there was some merit to what he had to say, regarding suppressing the ego, etc., but there is no doubt he was way over the top in the way he expressed it, even namecalling at one point, right before he was thrown out. it was either staged for effect or i would have to say some sort of imbalance was present here, even if just the imbalance of unchecked fury.


nevertheless, it still needs to be dealt with for what it is - conduct that is a public nuisance, disruptive, abusive, and which presents a threat.

i can't disagree with you there.


in our state law at least (i'm not sure about federal law), the instant that the man put fear of physical harm into other people, he committed the crime of "assault."

he didn't exhibit any weapons or threaten physical violence, nor did he appear to physically resist being ejected, so i really don't know if this would qualify as "assault". the fear was due to thoughts of "what is this guy going to do next?".


whether it is a kindergarten teacher, veteran of our armed forces, or planted spy, assault and battery against listeners needs to be prevented. i'm talking about this for david's own sake, and the sake of the organization. that means dealing with an event on its own terms. even if the man is an atlantean peruvian shaman, he still needs to learn how to behave in public if he is going to attend public events in america.

absolutely. i hope you don't think i'm condoning this man's behavior in any way. it was completely inappropriate. and of course, we all want david to be safe at future events, as well as any other presenters and attendees.

ultimately, despite of course taking appropriate and reasonable precautionary measures in the future, i personally think everyone must place trust in spirit and the light surrounding and protecting this work. indeed that is the reassurance which was with us in the audience that day, even if our initial reaction was fear.

in peace,
bridgebuilder

[tuesday]

wow. i'm glad everybody's okay.

[Deerclan]

he didn't exhibit any weapons or threaten physical violence, nor did he appear to physically resist being ejected, so i really don't know if this would qualify as "assault". the fear was due to thoughts of "what is this guy going to do next?".

a menacing threatening presence is enough.




i hope you don't think i'm condoning this man's behavior in any way. it was completely inappropriate. and of course, we all want david to be safe at future events, as well as any other presenters and attendees.

not in the slightest. i see it as something we're all somehow feeling the need to struggle with, even though in the "real" 2 x 4 world it does not seem to be our problem. those of us who value david's work just seem to be feeling uneasy, and we're just talking over different facets of our uneasiness. it's all productive far as i'm concerned.



ultimately, despite of course taking appropriate and reasonable precautionary measures in the future, i personally think everyone must place trust in spirit and the light surrounding and protecting this work.
bridgebuilder

ab-so-mega-lutely. i came to the same conclusion. thank you for putting it into words. that at least brings it to some place of peace & closure for me.

deerclan

[BridgeBuilder]

those of us who value david's work just seem to be feeling uneasy, and we're just talking over different facets of our uneasiness. it's all productive far as i'm concerned.

i'm relieved you do understand where i'm coming from. and i too have felt the uneasiness, as well as its productiveness. being in that room on that day made it tangibly present for me, surfacing what i personally need to deal with. some of these fears transcend incarnations, in my opinion, as historically boldly expressing one's truth has not always ended well on this planet. times are different now.


ab-so-mega-lutely. i came to the same conclusion. thank you for putting it into words. that at least brings it to some place of peace & closure for me.

ultimately i know david is protected and has nothing to fear. none of us has anything to fear in the light of the dawn we all can see. we couldn't be more safe in the embrace of the love and light that binds us all together. i'm happy we can both come to a place of relative peace and closure.

i am very much appreciating our conversation deerclan, as well as this forum overall. thank you.

in peace,
bridgebuilder

[Deerclan]

i'm relieved you do understand where i'm coming from. and i too have felt the uneasiness, as well as its productiveness. being in that room on that day made it tangibly present for me, surfacing what i personally need to deal with. some of these fears transcend incarnations, in my opinion, as historically boldly expressing one's truth has not always ended well on this planet. times are different now.
bridgebuilder


metoo,bridgebiolder. one thing you said prompted me to stop and think:

"being in that room on that day made it tangibly present for me, surfacing what i personally need to deal with. some of these fears transcend incarnations, in my opinion, as historically boldly expressing one's truth has not always ended well on this planet."


a couple of questions came to me when i read that comment of yours. first, i think many in americam society (not sure if you're american) fall in 1 of 2 categories: either (1) whipped into passive submission, believing their only valid way to assert themselves indidually is to buy *my* combination of name brands, as if they derive their permission to exist from kneeling & bowing to corporate mentality. (2) the other side of the coin, the "pro linebackers" of business who believe not in individual expression, but in a "maim & destroy" business & legal ethic.

it is truly hard to live in the middle, because people have learned to freakout when somebody speaks out & voices disagreement assertively. but clash of ideas is healthy, a way to test out different ideas & pre-test which ones have better survival value. when i do this, people often seem to mistake it for the clash of egos, the clash of people, and the determination that "....this here town ain't big enough for the two of us," as they used to say in old dime westerns.

that makes no sense to me, but it demonstrates how we've been conditioned to believe we are economically in a two-tier culture, either masters or slaves, in a culture of economic masters & slaves. all i have to do to see it is speak out confidently, & unless i am voicing the party line of whatever group i'm with, i see people get tense as if they believe a fight is about to break out, and i see fear in their eyes. i know it's a little different up north where unions have made the working classes more comfortable with conflict as a helpful part of life. but even up north there are limits. last time i visited up there i tested it out. i was near new york city, in a conversation, on a city bus, and i voiced years worth of my observations loudly enough for everyone to hear me well"

"whenever people up here hear me talk in my slow southern drawl, they assume i am *stupid.*"

you never heard a bunch of new yorkers get so quiet, so quick. you could have heard a pin drop on that bus, it's as if they thought i was crazy and might pull out an old civil war musket any second and start yelling rebel yells in the name of granny & uncle jed clampett.

bold assertiveness of any ideas outside the accepted mainstream *terrifies* people. that seems to be a universal law, as far as i am able to ascertain -- and it's even true in academic circles, maybe more than anywhere else. a friend just loaned me a book aboujt a guy named immanuel velikovsky, a scholar who got crucified by the mainstream academic community for daring to think differently about the solar system. i've only read a short way, but it appears velikovsky in the 40's presented ideas similar to the ones sitchen presented 30 years later in the 70's with more success.

so you tell me, bridgebuilder, because i'm still just thinking it over. are we three the same? velikovsky in the 40's, me in new york city, and the peruvian shaman in david's presentation? do we all three strike raw nerves of terror, because in our own way each of us represents a place in society that has been cruelly repressed? i don't know how many people realize it, but all it takes to get the label "bigot" hurled at you is to open your mouth in public and utter the word "y'all." why? i've studied it at length, meditated on it deeply, and the only answer i seem able to come up with is that is the *only* way the united states of america is able to tolerate its own guilt over having attacked it's own people, permanently destroyed that sector of its own economy, and humiliated its own people into a deep deprivation and a convenient shame-based silence. i.e., we can live with ourselves because we *know* anybody who says "y'all" on a new york city bus is a bigot, we *know* that!

so we all live with our illusions comfortably wrapped around us, and the way earth's history has evolved, the only way one group has ever prospered for long was at the expense of another group who suffered for the wealth and privilege of the first group.

it's a fact -- no one of us who has ever tasted repression is "nice" enough about it to help people be comfortable at a nice dinner party held in the nicer parts of town. was there a way the peruvian shaman could have spoken his heart and his mind, and left the big group feeling comfortable?

were the feelings of threat that hung so palpable in the air (from your own description, bridgebuilder) just the release of raw pain, based on years of suppression? did he really do anything worse than i did to those poor "dam-yankees" (an old southern expression describing decades of frustration over a permanently broken economy) on the bus? were they any less comfortable than david's listeners?

i don't know, bridgebuilder. i'm just starting to ponder some things your comments brought up in my mind.

one thing is sure. when a whole population suffers, and the rest of us are able to put it out of sight & out of mind as a convenience to ourselves, we sure are surprised, shocked, and jolted any time we see even a small trace of the raw pain, anger, and yes, self-protective violence of self-defense, come out.

let me put it this way, and then i'll close.

i used to have a hobby that is no longer safe to speak about openly. it is a fine old tradition, part of rural life that jefferson & our other forefathers spoke about with affection. it is the hobby of shooting.

now understand that for many reasons that i won't go into, i have gone through enormous changes in my attitudes towards that particular sport. part of my change began on a list of like-minded others, after i saw how terribly they acted when i asked an uncomfortable question. the thread was about food stamps, and my question was, "why do you guys get so angry about somebody eating?

i got a whole new perspective on my cohorts in the shooting sports. i believe that some of those guys rose to such a fever of rage that if they could have gotten me alone .... i'll say no more. it was just incredibly ugly.

so, a day or so ago an idea popped in my head, to go back to that forum, get on one of the political threads about "immigrants," and start out mouthing a popular line. my imaginary post went something like this:

"i fully agree 100% with you guys who hate the idea of those dang immigrants coming here to our land and taking over. we speak one language, here, and by gosh, it ain't mexican! i feel strong about it, dangit! so i'm drawing the line in the sand, and i'm drawin' it here -- any o' you who can't learn our language, learn to speak cherokee like an intelligent civilized human being, you need to get back across the border!"

but i won't do it.

i am too afraid.

so it remains in the category of things that physicists call a "thought experiement," like schrodinger's cat.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/schrödinger's_cat

what happens basically is that politically dominant groups project their own murderous hatred onto those they repress. this is simple fact known to fields of study like sociology & social work. and it's my everyday experience.

thank you for the conversation as well. would it help us to review the event at david's presentation some more, and look for other teachings in it?

respecfully,
paul

p.s. please excuse my typing at the top. i was holding a young bird my wife had retrieved from our cats, trying to revive him, and typing one-handed. he's gone. he helped me teach our 3-year-old daughter about letting go of things we love while he was here, and he taught me things about various shades of the basic color of blue in his wings i never had any idea where there.

[transiten]

just before reading this i saw the peruvian shaman in the 2012 prophecy-thread just posted by lighteye...he didn't appear that threatening to me:confused: but it was a short passage and i was safe at home of course..

i can totally identify with the "loudspeaking" on the bus...that's something i've done too...on a bus...and on stage...having been heavily emotionally repressed and silenced to speak about it.........same thing.

transiten

[BridgeBuilder]

first, a note to transiten, the videos on youtube do not appear to include the q&a session when the person in question actually was thrown out of the room. however, it does demonstrate how he did indeed acquiesce when told to wait for the q&a session, something i noted earlier. i found it fascinating to review what little was recorded, just to see how it meshed with my own recollections.

deerclan, when in a situation like this, one reacts based on one's conditioning, that is true. i do not believe people were reacting out of any sort of prejudice, however. in fact, there was a certain mystique about this man's appearance, as if he really could be from macchu picchu. i personally did not feel my own reaction was based on adverse cultural stereotypes, quite the contrary actually. if he had expressed himself with less anger and volatility, he may have held the entire audience in rapt attention.

as for other types of conditioning, in case you didn't know, i'm a woman (sometimes people interpret "bridgebuilder" and the way i write as male - i guess it is just the male/female balance of my many incarnations on this planet). as a woman who can at times still be rather timid (in real life, and surprisingly not when i write), the conditioning of my own past is such that i do not respond well to unpredictable anger from a man, having been adversely impacted by such anger in the past. so that would of course influence my perception of this event, particularly since i happened to be sitting in a readily accessible area on the side of the room. but even so, whether male or female, i think many people in that room had legitimate concerns, including david, primarily since there was no predicting if this man was simply exhibiting what some have termed "righteous anger" or if he could launch into violence.

fortunately, i don't think it was this man's intent to be violent. it was indeed his intent to express "righteous anger", unfortunately in a way that undermined what he was trying to say, and as i have already said, some of what he said was later acknowledged by the panel to have some merit.

indeed there is a great deal of conditioning in our society, much of it harmful in nature. i won't disagree with you there. part of the liberation of the remarkable time in which we are living is no longer allowing oneself to be enslaved. indeed, just speaking for myself, i become less and less timid and controlled each and every day, throwing off the hidden shackles of my past daily.

are you familiar with the 1960's movie "the time machine", loosely based on the novel by by h.g. wells? i was thinking about the movie this morning, one of my favorites from my childhood. so many of us have been trained in our society to be dutiful eloi, ignorant of our victimization by the denizen morlacks. the only difference between us and the eloi is that they didn't need to work, while we toil daily for cloaked morlack taskmasters. one day i awoke to the knowledge of being an eloi, and i no longer cared to play the dark morlack game any longer, despite living a life of relative comfort and illusions of security in return for my enslavement. perhaps i am far less timid than i give myself credit for, even in "real" life. do you remember how "the time machine" ends?

in peace,
bridgebuilder

[FIIISH]

reasonable precautions need to be taken.

this shaman apparently wanted to make an impression on
others, and that he did.

perhaps it was a test to see how everyone would react?

do we choose to react in fear, or consider just exactly
what it was that he was so angry about?

i find this interesting as i am fighting a battle in my own
life between reacting to perceived threats out of fear and
anger, not reacting at all, or acting out of love.

it's very easy to give in to fear and anger. it takes
strength to not react or act assertively rather than aggressively.

you may consider asking your angels to assist you with non-reaction
or acting out of love.

[One 66]

the so called shaman guy was just load, rude and obnoxious! everything he accussed the panel of being, he was! that guy had some issues and was trying to blame everyone else for them rather than face the music and deal with these issues within him himself! i laughed when i heard what he had to say because it just sounded so... fake! was he a threat, no... if he was no words would've came out of his mouth but instead it would've been action only. load mouths like him i've dealt with throughout my life growing up, and once confronted man to man, they buckle up and back down quick!! simply put, he was disrespectful and egocentric! a bad combination to to say the least...

one 66

[transiten]

...and also he didn't look very "peruvian" to me and i doubt he is a shaman, a sharlatan maybe;)

transiten

[Mozart]

...and also he didn't look very "peruvian" to me and i doubt he is a shaman, a sharlatan maybe;)

transiten


i agree totally. i have met a peruvian shaman, the real thing, when he came to my hometown to give us a speech and, wow, he was wonderful, so, to me, it is very, very unlikely that this obnoxious "peruvian shaman" dude was really what he claimed to be. his behavior was so far out of the normal behaviors of a peruvian shaman, plus the words/phrases that he chose are totally unlike what a real-thing peruvian shaman would say.


and the real-thing peruvian shaman was amazing. he was very much focused on humanity being one; he emphasized that each of us have direct connections to the one infinite creator and that we really don't need shamans like him, though they play the role of humble reminders of our own divinity within each of us; he said that the earth is in great pain, but that she is also getting a lot of help from unseen helpers; that there is no society/group of people that are greater, nor lessor than others -- different, yes, but not above, nor below.


at one point, it started to rain while we were standing and sitting on rocks right next to our beloved local river (the yuba river in california ... google it and you'll see what a great river it is) and he said that the gods were giving us the gift of rain, that to not look at rain as a "bad thing" at all, as he was sensing the grumbling that some people were doing about the rain. so we decided to move as a group to a local house that had a large outdoor pavilion that would keep us out of the rain and allow us to keep going. so i was walking right behind him as we were walking up the steep slopes of the canyon to get to the trail that led to the road and he was walking barefoot -- very tough skin! -- and walking right on top of the very, very sharp rocks that were at the river at that point. nobody in town that i know of could walk on those particular, slanted, serpentine rocks, much less in the rain and right on the tip-top points of those rocks, but that real-thing peruvian shaman walked on them like a mtn goat. i asked him through the interpreter if the wet rocks hurt and he smiled and said "no and those rocks give me energy every time i step on one."


and, most of all, he spoke through an interpreter who knew the peruvian lang and someone had asked him that did any of shamans that he knew spoke any english and he said, "no, just badly-broken english" and he spoke that with a sheepish grin on his face saying "ok" with a thumbs-up signal, which cracked us all up.


so for that so-called "peruvian shaman" to be yelling at the la expo in clearly-spoken english with the uses of phrases/words and cuss words that are quite familiar with americans, is so out of the ballpark in terms of what the real ones do, that it is safe to conclude that this dude ain't what he claims to be.

[Deerclan]

deerclan, when in a situation like this, one reacts based on one's conditioning, that is true. i do not believe people were reacting out of any sort of prejudice, however.

no, i doubt anyone there was reacting out of prejudice either. i probably did not express myself very clearly, and in fact i felt like i was stumbling around trying to find the right words. i was intending to talk about the bigger picture, and the history of hundreds of years of repression making it difficult for open & emotionally honest conversation to take place. i was thinking of the people in that room more as heirs to that overall situation, rather than active participants. my apologies if it seemed otherwise, because "racism" is one of those things that is impossible to defend against, and i sure don't want to put anybody in that position. i'd never really thought about it before, but there seem to be several "self-proving" accusations in today's political climate:

i'm not a racist.
i'm not an alcoholic.
i'm not a homophobic.

either of those three statements is often taken as "proof" that you are in denial. interesting corner we've painted ourself into here, isn't it.

so i hope that clears up any misunderstanding i caused with my previous post.

bridgebuilder also writes:
"... i do not respond well to unpredictable anger from a man, having been adversely impacted by such anger in the past. so that would of course influence my perception of this event[/quote]

i think that's probably true of a lot of people. open anger used to terrify me.

thanks again for talking it over.

d.

[Deerclan]

simply put, he was disrespectful and egocentric! a bad combination to to say the least...

that certainly was my clear first impression, one. thanks for chiming in -- i think that probably helps put things into perspective. :)

deerclan

[MarkM]

it seems a truism that wherever light gathers, there are shadows cast. the brighter the light, the more stark is the manifest relief of the shadowscape.

as we have points of light shining out into the dusk - rather than having a world in which light comes from everywhere and is able to permeate all crannys, (as it seems to not be here) there are necessarily shadows cast.

the shadows, such as have been summoned in this instance, merely serve to remind us all of the lingering yet still omni-present condition of mankind on earth; closely in the thrall of the sense of separation, relative merit of our each to the other, and the still overwhelming need of mankind to have the fear and anxiety we harbour be projected to us from 'outer' sources.

we really can't expect negative greetings to be barred at the door. this episode, regardless of where the gentleman may hail from, serves to illustrate the divinely mandated requirement that we in our present condition of quantitatively relating to the mind/body complex as ourselves, still require catalyst for finding or discerning the all important distinction between what we've been conditioned to believe we are, as to what we are.

i've been practicing the art of observing my thoughts and feelings, trying to be from the standpoint of relating to being the observer of same. key to this for me has been in trying to distinguish between brain circuitry psychobabble and the 'me' who watches and observes the non-ending mindspeak.

the 3d mind seems to necessarily think in terms of relative value and infinite gradations of what amounts to survival instinct, perhaps vestiges of 2d animal kingdom modes of living. our human trappings of sophistication and self centered concepts of intellect and worldly success seem to relate to the left over issues of survival of the fittest. at the same time, we all have ego issues, and strive to be 'relatively' presentable to our fellows.

now, this is our human condition, and is, i believe, indicative of the way we are supposed to be, in terms of our historical 3d experience. yet some of us are feeling the need to break out of the 'relativistic' aspects of being.

the conscious life expo represents an attempt on the part of some of our leading lightworkers to oomph as many as possible out of our collective relativistic dream state. the neg greetings represent nothing more than an illustration of our prompting to wake up. it's almost poetic, to me, to see such a voice voice it's unsatisfaction with the result of our collective need to hang on to isssues of separateness, and concept of 'me'.

we are all being challenged to come to a place wherein all others are known to be the creator in manifestation, where differences between us are absolutely secondary in consideration to oneness of all, and that we share one being - each charged with the glory of expressing a unique slant on all there is. the eventuality of seeming 'neg' greeting (now this is just my opinion) is intended by our higher selves to point to the futility, for those seeking higher spiritual identification with that aspect of ourselves which does not perish, of continued and increasingly desperate identification with the perishable aspects of our persons.

the watcher of our dramas, knowing the relatedness.. no, oneness of us all, non-appended to any expected personal biased outcome, and evenly appreciative of all experience, is perhaps that which survives - and grows. meditative initiative?:) is true service to others an inner gut knowing that we are the same being? different only in outer clothing?

maybe the watcher is more closely identified with the latent social-memory-complex of earth-humanity, of which we've heard so much. (law of one stuff)

mark, who wishes he was as smart as you.;) just kidding... i think...

[transiten]

so for that so-called "peruvian shaman" to be yelling at the la expo in clearly-spoken english with the uses of phrases/words and cuss words that are quite familiar with americans, is so out of the ballpark in terms of what the real ones do, that it is safe to conclude that this dude ain't what he claims to be.

thankyou mozart for that confirmation and a delayed thankyou supermanny for your lecture on how to use the quotationbutton for deleteing parts of the message which i tried for the 1:st time today. had this been an astrologyforum i would have said "guess my transits". pm me if you are interested;):d:cool

finally adding a sync; i have no tv but my new tenant have and yesterday i watched a very interesting documentary on the "inca-uprising" in 1532 when pizarro came to peru. the historybooks have not told the whole stroy-surprise surprise-the reason the spanyards could so easily conquer the incas was that other native tribes, tired of the incan supremacy helped pizarro and his little army of 200 men to conquer them.

venus is soon going retrogrde, reevaluation of relationships, for good or bad. pizarro had a young mistress from the mountaintribes and her mother sent an army to protect lima where they lived, when attacked by the incas trying to take it back from the conquistadors.

well now we're off topic perhaps! i'm going to call my peruvian friend francisca born in the mountains outside lima:)

transiten

[mmariebored]

so for that so-called "peruvian shaman" to be yelling at the la expo in clearly-spoken english with the uses of phrases/words and cuss words that are quite familiar with americans, is so out of the ballpark in terms of what the real ones do, that it is safe to conclude that this dude ain't what he claims to be.

while i sort of agree about the yelling, as it indicates a lack of self control, i disagree about the choice of english he used to express his points.
it's a very shallow perspective to view a word such as <other word for donkey> worse than and/or "bad" but not a word such as "poopoo". is the animal worse than what he eliminates? this makes no logical sense, particularly in a setting of people who claim to be of a higher awareness. a higher awareness would be exposed to many more perspectives than those of their own and therefore the terms not accepted in the social setting they were raised in would hold little value, knowing that what's not accepted in one culture may very well be commonplace in another.

you can mentally assult a person with socially acceptable words, is that to be considered "better" than aimlessly throwing around wording from a vocabulary of your own choice?

this is why i feel that the yelling was more an act of harm than his choice of english, because, in most cultures, yelling is an indication of aggression and a pre-harm warning.

[MarkM]

it's a very shallow perspective to view a word such as <other word for donkey> worse than and/or "bad" but not a word such as "poopoo". is the animal worse than what he eliminates? this makes no logical sense, particularly in a setting of people who claim to be of a higher awareness. a higher awareness would be exposed to many more perspectives than those of their own and therefore the terms not accepted in the social setting they were raised in would hold little value, knowing that what's not accepted in one culture may very well be commonplace in another.

marie, you touch on an interesting and little known fact, which may be not altogether historically provable, but rings true to me.

in the days of olde england before the norman conquest in 1066, the saxon words for such things as the procreative act, certain body parts and the like were replaced by the more 'socially acceptable' terms in latin, such as coitus, vagina, gluteous maximus, excreta, etc.

today the old words still exist in common english usage, english speakers know them well;;) but the conditioning that the saxons underwent back then to take their own terms to be coarse and socially unacceptable leaves us today to commonly view these terms as uncouth swear words, not useable in polite public arenas.

originally, though, they were the mainstream and accepted terms for the saxons, not perceived as being particularly dirty, but rather the accepted norm. mark

[mmariebored]

thank you, mark, that is a subject that has bothered me for a long time.
i enjoyed reading up on the saxons tonight, due to your post, and the forced changes made to their language, etc.

[Deerclan]

today the old words still exist in common english usage, english speakers know them well;;) but the conditioning that the saxons underwent back then to take their own terms to be coarse and socially unacceptable leaves us today to commonly view these terms as uncouth swear words, not useable in polite public arenas.


mark, there is interesting info on that topic here:

http://www.whitesmoke.com/english-vocabulary-beginnings.html

"another fascinating example of the social divide between language users of middle english is shown in nouns denoting different kinds of meats. the english speaking peasants who raised the animals used the anglo-saxon words (swine/pig, sheep, ox, cow, calf, deer), whereas the french speaking elite, who could afford eating these meats regularly, used the french equivalents ( pork, bacon, mutton, beef, veal, venison, respectively)."

basically the poor guy raises the "pig," and the rich guy eats the "pork."

[mmariebored]

i explained it to my son like this, there are people in this world whose ears are much more delicate, and we have to cater to these delicate ears so as not to cause "harm", even if the harm is in their own imagination.

[Ultramind]

hey everyone, i have compilled a list of links to "all" the blog entires that dw has done since the opening of this website. i am a fairly new member to this forum but i have been coming to this website for just over a year. i am still trying to catch up to all the entries in the list of blogs and i have been running into the problem of getting mixed up with all the blogs that i have read with the one's that i haven't so i decided to put together a list of direct links to the blog entry followed by a check box to determine whether or not i have read it. if there is any new comers to this site or anyone who is trying to catch up and read through all the blog entries and is interested in getting a copy of this than pm me and i will send you a copy in your email. this is a microsoft excel spreadsheet so bear that in mind.

peace and love everyone!

[aqcheryl]

the man "from" maccu pichu can be found here:

alienshift 2009 (http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=david+wilcock&www_google_domain=www.google.com&emb=0#q=david+wilcock&www_google_domain=www.google.com&emb=0&start=20)

if for some reason the link didnt process, just go to videos.google.com and search 'alienshift' youll see either one google vid almost 30 min long, or a 3 parter that i believe comes from youtube (less quality).

you only see the guy after he starts yelling, the person in the audience turns, you do see him. but nothing about disrobing. i wasnt there, just heard this listening to the rumor mills interview

[Deerclan]

the man "from" maccu pichu can be found here:

alienshift 2009 (http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=david+wilcock&www_google_domain=www.google.com&emb=0#q=david+wilcock&www_google_domain=www.google.com&emb=0&start=20)


can you direct me to the approximate point in the video where this happens? i'm interested in seeing the whole video later, when i'm not quite so pressed for time. thanks!

deerclan

[aqcheryl]

ok the panel goes like this.... introductions down the line, starting with david... then after the intros they start down the line again this time with a short "excerpt" if you will of each individuals stance on 2012. when the line makes its way back down to the mexican guy (i forget his name, but hes second to last)... its during his part the man comes in yelling that they are all jokes.
i think they all handled themselves very well, most people would be pissed. but see thats what it means to be on a higher spiritual level - to not let anger in your heart. anyways after he yells, the person recording turns around, and you see the guy standing there and then is approached by either hotel staff or convention staff.
i dont remember the timeframe but its definitely past the halfway point on the 30 min one.