Wilcock Prophecy! [Archive] - Divine Cosmos Discussions

ctx82003

07-08-2002, 10:53 AM

David,

I have read your prophecy piece a couple of times and am a bit
confused on what it is saying.

Is it suggesting that the overall stockmarket crash will be over by
mid summer 2002? -- or that it will just be a new measuring point
bottom? Or that it will just be a signpost on the way down?

Latter there is a prophetic comment that it could run into fall
2002?

Best Wishes,
Lorin

William Foster

07-09-2002, 07:50 AM

<table bgColor="#ffffff">
>It will run into 2016 at least. By then, we won't recognize the world we live in now.
>yours,
>Bill Foster
>
<blockquote style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message -----
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black">From: ctx82003 (reikimstr@aol.com)
style="FONT: 10pt arial">To: asc2k@yahoogroups.com
style="FONT: 10pt arial">Sent: Monday, July 08, 2002 9:53 AM
style="FONT: 10pt arial">Subject: [asc2k] Wilcock Prophecy!
>
<tt>
David,

I have read your prophecy piece a couple of times and am a bit
confused on what it is saying.

Is it suggesting that the overall stockmarket crash will be over by
mid summer 2002? -- or that it will just be a new measuring point
bottom? Or that it will just be a signpost on the way down?

Latter there is a prophetic comment that it could run into fall
2002?

Best Wishes,
Lorin

</tt>
<tt>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
asc2k-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

</tt>

<tt>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service (http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/).</tt>
</blockquote>

ctx82003

07-09-2002, 09:22 AM

Bill,

I understand what you are saying and my analysis tends to agree with
it.

But David's prophecy piece had me a bit confused as to what it was
inferring.

If there is a true "evening out" this downdraft has to last much
longer than midsummer to fall of 2002.

Best Regards,
Lorin

--- In asc2k@y..., "William Foster" <fosterwg@l...> wrote:
> It will run into 2016 at least. By then, we won't recognize the
world we live in now.
> yours,
> Bill Foster
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: ctx82003
> To: asc2k@y...
> Sent: Monday, July 08, 2002 9:53 AM
> Subject: [asc2k] Wilcock Prophecy!
>
>
>
> David,
>
> I have read your prophecy piece a couple of times and am a bit
> confused on what it is saying.
>
> Is it suggesting that the overall stockmarket crash will be over
by
> mid summer 2002? -- or that it will just be a new measuring point
> bottom? Or that it will just be a signpost on the way down?
>
> Latter there is a prophetic comment that it could run into fall
> 2002?
>
> Best Wishes,
> Lorin
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> asc2k-unsubscribe@y...
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.

greenlantern113

07-09-2002, 12:37 PM

>check out the latest Ruppert article on Rense:
> http://www.rense.com/general26/ftw.htm

Thanks for the article, David, it was very informative. There was
one part that stood out to me, and I was wondering about your
thoughts on it, since it seems to be counter to what the latest
article was saying. This is from the first paragraph of the
conclusion:

"Don t believe for a minute that the richest of the rich will be hurt
by the coming collapse. The only ones hurt will be you and me."

Moreover, the whole point of the article seems to be that wealth is
not going to be destroyed so much as transfered, making the rich
richer. Or rather that the rich have a corner on all the assets of
this country as a result of America's massive debt, and so their
wealth will be more valuable and ours will be extinguished as
worthless.

Is this view reconcilable with your latest article? I wonder if,
when they are talking about "the richest of the rich," how many
people they are referring to, because that could be the key. If
we're talking about the true elite, that could be well under a
hundred people, wouldn't you say? And then the vast majority of the
haves would be on equal par with the have-nots.

Thanks,

Jeremy

David Wilcock

07-09-2002, 12:55 PM

From: "ctx82003"

> But David's prophecy piece had me a bit confused as to what it was
> inferring.
>
> If there is a true "evening out" this downdraft has to last much
> longer than midsummer to fall of 2002.

DW: There was a reading from the early days, circa 1996, that said, "The
fall of consumerism will take more than a decade." I've said before that the
540-year cycle finish for the fall of Rome transferring as the fall of the
current US order is no later than the latter portions of 2003. This isn't
some instant-grat big bang, but rather as the readings said - an economic
collapse that will define / has defined a new bottom-line point for global
financial markets. So buckle your seatbelt, as the ride could get bumpy very
soon... check out the latest Ruppert article on Rense:

http://www.rense.com/general26/ftw.htm

Peace be with you -

- David

ctx82003

07-09-2002, 01:15 PM

David,

Thanks for the comment;

I read that piece from copvcia, last nite, -- I provide analysis for
forementioned IF and follow the numbers closely. I am in total
agreement, as all things real as opposed to paper will gain in value -
- unless your real value is on paper, like a heavily mortaged home --
as the mortage market will be the next crash. Denver, mortage
foreclosures up 30%!

I am not so sure that U.S. bonds are the place to be if the dollar
drops 40%.

If one thinks critically about it; if there is to be a true "evening"
then the bond market will also get slapped because that is where so
much "haves" wealth is parked.

Best Wishes,
Lorin

--- In asc2k@y..., "David Wilcock" <david@a...> wrote:
> From: "ctx82003"
>
> > But David's prophecy piece had me a bit confused as to what it was
> > inferring.
> >
> > If there is a true "evening out" this downdraft has to last much
> > longer than midsummer to fall of 2002.
>
> DW: There was a reading from the early days, circa 1996, that
said, "The
> fall of consumerism will take more than a decade." I've said before
that the
> 540-year cycle finish for the fall of Rome transferring as the fall
of the
> current US order is no later than the latter portions of 2003. This
isn't
> some instant-grat big bang, but rather as the readings said - an
economic
> collapse that will define / has defined a new bottom-line point for
global
> financial markets. So buckle your seatbelt, as the ride could get
bumpy very
> soon... check out the latest Ruppert article on Rense:
>
> http://www.rense.com/general26/ftw.htm
>
> Peace be with you -
>
> - David

David Wilcock

07-09-2002, 04:26 PM

From: "greenlantern113"

> Moreover, the whole point of the article seems to be that wealth is
> not going to be destroyed so much as transfered, making the rich
> richer. Or rather that the rich have a corner on all the assets of
> this country as a result of America's massive debt, and so their
> wealth will be more valuable and ours will be extinguished as
> worthless.
>
> Is this view reconcilable with your latest article? I wonder if,
> when they are talking about "the richest of the rich," how many
> people they are referring to, because that could be the key. If
> we're talking about the true elite, that could be well under a
> hundred people, wouldn't you say? And then the vast majority of the
> haves would be on equal par with the have-nots.

DW: This is the one major point that I disagree with Ruppert on, and is why
I have not linked to this article on the website as of yet. The elites
themselves are in much the same predicament as those most poor - they have
unsustainable lifestyles and are unable and / or unwilling to let go of any
major aspect of those lifestyles. There are too many people who all expect
to be taken care of for this to keep on working. Once they start trying to
destroy each other, they will have nothing left to fight over - and that is
what is now happening, if you read the latest from Skolnck.

Peace be with you -

- David

William Foster

07-10-2002, 03:32 AM

<table bgColor="#ffffff">
>David:
>I could not agree with you more. Everyone will suffer a wealth decrease in the coming depression. There were other parts of his article I don't think were based upon sound financial facts but by in large, it was excellent and his warnings were right on the mark.
>yours,
>Bill Foster
>
<blockquote style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message -----
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black">From: David Wilcock (david@ascension2000.com)
style="FONT: 10pt arial">To: asc2k@yahoogroups.com
style="FONT: 10pt arial">Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 3:26 PM
style="FONT: 10pt arial">Subject: Re: [asc2k] Re: Wilcock Prophecy!
>
<tt>From: "greenlantern113"

> Moreover, the whole point of the article seems to be that wealth is
> not going to be destroyed so much as transfered, making the rich
> richer. Or rather that the rich have a corner on all the assets of
> this country as a result of America's massive debt, and so their
> wealth will be more valuable and ours will be extinguished as
> worthless.
>
> Is this view reconcilable with your latest article? I wonder if,
> when they are talking about "the richest of the rich," how many
> people they are referring to, because that could be the key. If
> we're talking about the true elite, that could be well under a
> hundred people, wouldn't you say? And then the vast majority of the
> haves would be on equal par with the have-nots.

DW: This is the one major point that I disagree with Ruppert on, and is why
I have not linked to this article on the website as of yet. The elites
themselves are in much the same predicament as those most poor - they have
unsustainable lifestyles and are unable and / or unwilling to let go of any
major aspect of those lifestyles. There are too many people who all expect
to be taken care of for this to keep on working. Once they start trying to
destroy each other, they will have nothing left to fight over - and that is
what is now happening, if you read the latest from Skolnck.

Peace be with you -

- David

</tt>
<tt>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
asc2k-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

</tt>

<tt>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service (http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/).</tt>
</blockquote>

William Foster

07-10-2002, 03:34 AM

<table bgColor="#ffffff">
>Hi Lorin:
>I couldn't agree with you more either. Bonds are long term debt instruments and if you (as I do) believe interest rates are headed higher, then you want to be on the short end of the interest rate curve, not the long end.
>yours,
>Bill Foster
>
<blockquote style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message -----
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black">From: ctx82003 (reikimstr@aol.com)
style="FONT: 10pt arial">To: asc2k@yahoogroups.com
style="FONT: 10pt arial">Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 12:15 PM
style="FONT: 10pt arial">Subject: [asc2k] Re: Wilcock Prophecy!
>
<tt>

David,

Thanks for the comment;

I read that piece from copvcia, last nite, -- I provide analysis for
forementioned IF and follow the numbers closely. I am in total
agreement, as all things real as opposed to paper will gain in value -
- unless your real value is on paper, like a heavily mortaged home --
as the mortage market will be the next crash. Denver, mortage
foreclosures up 30%!

I am not so sure that U.S. bonds are the place to be if the dollar
drops 40%.

If one thinks critically about it; if there is to be a true "evening"
then the bond market will also get slapped because that is where so
much "haves" wealth is parked.

Best Wishes,
Lorin

--- In asc2k@y..., "David Wilcock" <david@a...> wrote:
> From: "ctx82003"
>
> > But David's prophecy piece had me a bit confused as to what it was
> > inferring.
> >
> > If there is a true "evening out" this downdraft has to last much
> > longer than midsummer to fall of 2002.
>
> DW: There was a reading from the early days, circa 1996, that
said, "The
> fall of consumerism will take more than a decade." I've said before
that the
> 540-year cycle finish for the fall of Rome transferring as the fall
of the
> current US order is no later than the latter portions of 2003. This
isn't
> some instant-grat big bang, but rather as the readings said - an
economic
> collapse that will define / has defined a new bottom-line point for
global
> financial markets. So buckle your seatbelt, as the ride could get
bumpy very
> soon... check out the latest Ruppert article on Rense:
>
> http://www.rense.com/general26/ftw.htm
>
> Peace be with you -
>
> - David

</tt>
<tt>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
asc2k-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

</tt>

<tt>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service (http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/).</tt>
</blockquote>