Note: It’s almost the eve of my December 19th birthday. Tomorrow I fly to Massachusetts until December 27 to be with son Sean, his partner Nathalie, grandkids Kiera and Drew, and daughter-in-law Sue. I did plan to drive there over Thanksgiving, but was rebuffed by the weather, twice. So I’ll be offline for at least a day.
Meanwhile, I’ve been thinking about doing a post on ETs, asking whether they are all good or all evil or a mixture of both, for quite awhile.
Then, yesterday evening I decided to listen to a new Clif High interview —
— and about 20 minutes in, found it so fascinating that I considered calling my son Colin to tell him about it. Instead, he called me! Right then, that same minute, to tell me about it. The two of us seem so often to be riding the same current.
To sum up: Clif is now coming out saying that basically, all ETs are evil, and that they are here to take over this planet by replacing humans. In this he echoes David Jacobs who was recently interviewed by Richard Dolan. on a video with the scary title, “This planet will be theirs.”
I briefly watched the presentation by David Jacobs at the International UFO Congress a number of years ago, and distinctly remember feeling revulsed by his presence. Don’t know if this reaction was actually just my refusal to take in what he was saying (he was saying the same thing then), or whether it’s really his person that got to me.
I confess, just like Steven Greer — who BTW, considers all so-called ET abductions actually human (by people wearing ET costumes? or, as he says, by “programmed life forms” which we humans make?) — for a long time I wanted to think “all ETs are good.” Then, I began to see the upper and interdimensional worlds rather like the one down here, a dynamic mixture of “mostly good and some evil.” This is where I still stand, though I did enjoy especially the first 40 minutes or so of Clif High’s new interview. He talks about “space aliens” as getting human women pregnant through abductions (this is old news), thereby creating hybrids (again, old news), and then breeding the hybrids again with human women to create second generation hybrids, which he says are then “human enough” to interact easily and stealthily down here to take over the planet. The ETS themselves, he says, communicate telepathically (old news), and can see into each other’s (and our) minds. (I agree: most likely.) BUT, he says, they don’t have a vagus nervous system, and so are not emotionally (hormonally) connected the way humans are (also old news, at least for some ET species).
However, Clif claims, by the time the second generation of hybrids is produced, this new generation is both somewhat telepathic (from ET ancestry) and somewhat emotional (from human ancestry), and so can, remotely or close at hand, mind control both the thoughts of individuals and collective mental currents while appearing to connect with us emotionally.
Thus, he claims: the takeover!
Well now, I’m somewhat telepathic (cf. my connection to Colin last night), and somewhat emotional too, i.e., human, of course. Does this make me a hybrid? Perhaps. Perhaps we are all second? third? fourth? thousandth generation hybrids? Is that so-called “junk DNA” actually something else? On the other hand, it’s certainly true that some humans do seem to lack empathy, i.e., there do seem to be psychopaths and sociopaths (some are in prison; others are the nasty ones running the world, or maybe they are just puppets of the “space aliens” who are running the world? As I recall, David Icke thinks that.)
The point is, I would prefer that we not make such clear, unambiguous distinctions, and then call out one end of the invented duality as bad, the other good. Likewise for dominator/victim. Or predator/prey. Or hey! We can keep on being so simplistically 3D, spewing polarities into the wind and fighting over which is which — but as we do, then let us remember that our feedlots for cattle are exactly parallel what Cliff and Jacobs claim for ETs and “their” humans: i.e., we eat other species; thus they exist for us, so we think. So is our agenda “evil” — for the cattle?
Whatever the agenda of any species, on- or off-planet, I doubt we really know what it is. We just think we know. We surmise, according to our own self- or species-serving lights, how to parse that fundamental 3D polarity: what to consider “good” and what to consider “evil.”
Which reminds me: David Jacobs finds only “awful” implications from his years of work with those who seek to recall buried memories of being abducted. And yet John Mack, a Harvard psychiatrist, also worked with abductees, most of whom found their experiences not just fascinating, but even growth-producing, healing. See Mack’s books, among them Passport to the Cosmos.
Here’s a short excerpt from one of Mack’s presentations:
All of which makes me wonder, once again: DO WE SEE WHAT WE EXPECT TO SEE? Cf. yesterday’s Alt-Epistemology post.
The most interesting part of Clif’s presentation was geopolitical and exopolitical, both: He claims that U.S., Russian, and Chinese militaries are all well aware of the ongoing ET takeover agenda, and are secretly working together to stealthily to counter it. He points out that the massive world-wide surveillance of all phones and screens is needed in order to keep tab on what the nasty second generation hybrids are up to; plus, he claims, both 5G and chemtrails are weapons that help disrupt the “space aliens'” ability to control our minds through telepathy. Hmmm!
Yet, is Clif’s paranoid, dogmatic idea about “evil space aliens” takeover true? I doubt it.
See Barbara Lamb’s Meet the Hybrids for another, and much more positive, point of view.
So we ask again: are all ETs good or, alternatively, are all ETs evil? If good, then perhaps we are polyannas, determined to see through rose-colored glasses. If evil . . . hmmm . . . Might we call the attitude that all ETs are evil “racist”? Or perhaps “specie-ist”?
I’d say, as usual, let’s keep our minds — and hearts — open. Open to our own telepathic powers; open to our own emotional connectivity, and especially, open to infinite possibilities.