Channeling the universe

Time for one of my lectures, following my channeling post. Speaking personally, there have been many times where I have either seen certain things as obvious and had no teaching about what was going on, and spoken about something and material came along I hadn't even known but just came to me. On both of these occasions (with a lot of testing of both myself and many other people) I believe what we are doing is connecting to that frequency, and like a radio that particular information is there. Like any other radio some have better aerials than others, and when we do it easily and naturally we have started with a good one, and then need to practice to increase the ability.

The downside is as we didn't learn this information officially, it's tough as hell to explain it to other people. Even though wise after the event nearly everything has turned out to be correct, until that occurs people just assume you're making it up. I can't prove to anyone why anything is as it is I receive in this way, any more than I can confirm the ability itself unless records are kept for ages and for a large group of others. But this is traditionally the highest knowledge, that which we know, the teaching is to fill the gaps below. But that's how things work, and impossible to beat the system, and maybe the more we share the fact it may well be that way it may become more well known and as a result tested and accepted. As it's there either way.

Blogging is a great way to set it off. If nothing's happened but I want to write I open the box and write, and get most of my best material. Conversations with God is a whole series of books written that way, and whole operas and pieces of music come to composers whole which they just write down as dictated. Where does it come from? The same place as the radio waves, we are tuning in and collecting the information from a source which contains it all. My work on fraud wasn't by finding damning figures proving someone was cheating, but reading accounts which were clearly wrong at some level, and then looking for anything I could to see where the evidence was. My radar is thorough. I've picked up dangerous criminals in seconds who ended up having spectacular records, as I felt they were so. I think the negative vibes are always stronger to pick up, it's like walking on broken glass in comparison to feather pillows of good stuff which to me barely registers. I can also pick up what women are like long before I tested the theory, it was just a natural awareness of what was there and why. I'd never read a book or been told about it but just knew about it many years before my friends caught me up and found the same things. Give me any set of rules- religious, political or whatever, and I can almost instantly tune in and pick up the bad ones, and have caused a lot of trouble (with no success) throughout my life from school onwards trying to get them changed. Being intuitive often I can't explain why they are wrong, but I can feel the difference between having them and not. And I can sometimes work out why they were put there in the first place to keep us down and stop us having access to the sort of powers we otherwise could freely.

Politics is an intuitive minefield. With practice, as like most things it grows with use, I can spot good and bad ones the same way as criminals, and can nowadays also spot really good people as well but that did take a lot longer. I can reliably say certain individuals in the public eye are the best or the worst, not necessarily why, but they feel like it to me and once I watch and listen they go and be who they felt like. Tony Blair is an egotistical school bully, who learnt not to beat up his victims but charm them to give him the power so he could lord it over them with their consent, and then royally fuck them up. David Cameron is an empty headed shell with a good heart but no brain so does and says whatever he thinks is right without a clue what he's doing so pretty random and subject to the forces of his ministers. Having a good heart his final decisions are usually good, if allowed to complete them by the Lib Dems, but hasn't a clue why. And as it takes one to know one I can pick up fellow channelers. Peter Hitchens was on TV last night and he picks the same things up, Lord Monckton is both a saint, a genius, and a channeler. David Davis is a good sensible politician forced onto the back benches as he's kept his principles while his party wanted to be popular rather than right.

Barack Obama is a great test. I tune in and get nothing. That means he does not exist. He has pretty well got a clean slate and been employed to do a job by others such as the Rockefeller Foundation and all connected with them. He doesn't care what he does, he has no ego (how can a zombie have an ego), but just does what he's told whether it's to hug a flood victim or pay a billion dollars to Arab terrorists. It makes no difference to him either way. No wonder his and his family's records are sealed- I've never come across an alien but if there was a case for who could be it he'd be the top candidate. He may well simply be a long term operative, picked at an early age and created a history to make him look genuine, while he could be anyone from anywhere trained to take over the country and possibly infiltrate many others while in power. Fantasy? Maybe we'll know in a few years, but his emptiness is as real as anything. Mitt Romney is a hit man, who does whatever he wants to get there, but as he was working for himself and not really backed by Rockefeller couldn't do a thing. Ron Paul is another channeler, he just knows the score and won over more Democrats than his own lot as they were also tuned in to that frequency. But he inspired many new faces and win or lose has affected many of the people touched by the truth frequency. Obama won as he was set up to win, as what he had to do couldn't be done in a single term as who'd vote someone back who made America a third world country? That will come, quickly or slowly, as he has been put there to do it. But in the great scheme of things you can't do that twice. The people who were hypnotised to vote him back will be so alienated by the disaster he will create they will be lost to them for life.

What else? Firstly, it's not just a few people who can do this- we are all equipped the same and mainly dismiss the information as our minds assume it can't be right without evidence. Feeling something is evidence especially once you've seen you were right. Keep doing it. Pick a few names and tune in, it won't be long before the tap turns on and it flows. (my computer just added around 100 blank pages below this when I clicked a different tab and returned, that's never happened before).

So doing this myself is practice. I want to provide more and more. I had lessons for a couple of years as well which helped a lot, and once you see your first successes it will click and you will start doing it properly.

The spiritual traditions have always said this, if you have any teacher you can and will find errors and ignore them among the rest of the good stuff. In the end you'll work out the best teaching as a combination of what they've all said, and of course as many teach different things only you are there to decide which is right as you can't follow them both or all. Believe me if Maharaji's Knowledge did it all for me I'd have stuck there in 1997 or so and done nothing else, as many lucky disciples do. But although it extended my consciousness limits for a few minutes so I knew it was possible, it happens so rarely I kept looking and learning. I got the awareness method in 2004, it's done bugger all so far and then found Higher Balance, although self taught, believed in everything I did already and teaches methods specifically to do what I wanted to do for exactly the same reasons. Just enough has worked so far to know he's on the case, as usual the exception rather than the rule for me, but he's got the keys. I think the next stage for me is asking others for questions so I can get enough chances for spontaneous answers on any subject required without me having to think of more.