Keys Writings 2013, Part 22

This entry is part 24 of 25 in the series 2013

Dec 7, 2013

12th Key of Knowledge

Larry Writes: So is the name for the Third Key of Knowledge Right Perception or Eternal Words?

The name is  “Right Perception.”

Tom writes:

Maybe JJ, can give us hints or clues to future keys until the time comes when he revels one at the Gathering.


I don’t plan on that but now the Twelveth Key is out I can guide you to a better understanding of that.

Question: What is the name of this Key? If you listened to the audio you should be able to figure it out.

Remember what was said in one of the books.  If the essence of the keys were just given out few would understand or grasp the depth of their meaning.  I gave this one out but no one has given much evidence of understanding it.


Dec 8, 2013

Three Sets of Keys

The Name of the Twelfth Key is, “The Word is God.” Ruth mentioned it in passing and Dan specified it.

Dan asks:

Is WHY Martha believed primary to this effect? If she had believed just because she had seen him bend spoons (perform miracles) before (ie via beastly authority), as opposed to belief due to soul contact, would this still have generated the necessary power? In other words, does the source of/reason for the belief/faith matter? Or is it enough just to believe (regardless of reason)?


There is great power in the blending of male female energies of two individuals as demonstrated by Jesus and Martha.  However there is also great potency in the individual blending with a higher life through the soul.  In this case he would be the female (no matter what his or her sex) and the higher life would be male.


What is a Word which is God?

Why is the Word called God?


Dec 8, 2013

The Word Which is God

Expand Messages Expand Messages

View Source

Let us concentrate on the first question.

What is the Word Which is God?

Dan told us what the Word does which is:

“That which initiates motion (a cause).”

No one has told us what the Word is even though I clearly stated it in the audio. This illustrates that just giving out the information is not enough.  There must be interplay to anchor the understanding of the Keys in the minds of the students.

Larry W writes:

All Words are God/Gods/God’s, because words are sounds/vibrations and all sounds/vibrations proceed from God’s decision to manifest.


Excellent answer Larry and your post as a whole was perhaps the finest you have made. We will return to some of those points later.

The answer is  that ALL words are Gods.

Question: What is the difference between a Word that is spoken or written and seems to produce no effect and those that do? Are some Words Gods and others not Gods?

Again, I ask.  What is the Word which is God?


Dec 9, 2013

Dan’s Question

Dan Writes:

Let me start over. My question was not specific to Martha/Jesus/Lazarus but more generally about whether the source of belief/faith is important to the generation of the male/female power.

I was under the impression that Martha’s belief that Jesus could resurrect Lazarus even after dead more than 3 days was what allowed him to raise Lazarus.

Even if, as you seem to indicate, and instead Jesus actually communed with a higher life, just for the moment lets assume Martha was the female to Jesus’ male. So, assuming this was the case, does the SOURCE of Martha’s belief matter?

Would it still have generated the power even if she had believed in Jesus due to beastly authority (however it may have come about)? Or ONLY if she believed on him due to communing with the God within (soul contact, etc)?


The power of belief is powerful whether it be the belief supporting a beastly authority or a belief inspired by soul contact and verified within.

I would suppose that Martha had such a strong belief because the works of Jesus were verified to her through soul contact, and Jesus sensed this, thus giving her belief more power.

On the other hand, faith healers who set themselves up as beastly authorities sometimes perform real miracles through the power of the belief of their followers who may not have soul contact.

Words are Gods and have great power for good or evil and may be used by a beastly authority or a master.

This brings us to Tom’s question:

is it ok or not to use God’s name in vain and other swear words…in the past awhile back you claim swear words do no harm.


Just because words are gods does not mean that they are all directed toward something desirable or good.

The Bible says that God created good and evil and words bring about good and evil in the world.

The work of the disciple is to use words and thought constructively.


Dec 9, 2013

The Key

The Question: What is the difference between a Word that is spoken or written and seems to produce no effect and those that do? Are some Words Gods and others not Gods?

The group has given some good insights and  comments but no one has answered the question to completeness.

You have said that all words are gods.  Yes, this is true, but what is the difference between a Word that is spoken or written that seems to produce no effect and those that do? Corruption, good and evil, male and female have nothing to do with the core answer.

Let us take the word “rock”.  It is what it is.  It is not corrupt or uncorrupt.  It is neither good or evil, though it can be used in either direction.

This word could be written on a piece of paper and buried in the ground.  In this situation the word is as if it does not exist. Words were written on the Dead Sea Scrolls and buried also and were as if they did not exist for 2000 years.

What calls the word into existence in this sphere of activity?

Good comments Judy, especially this, “Good is presupposed and evil is an after by-product or symptom or distortion of the original intent of Good.”

An example is the work of a computer programmer.  The good is the desired work the program will do. The evil “by-product” are the imperfections that drive users crazy.  However, the ed result after the release of numerous versions will be a relatively perfect or “good” creation.

No one has gotten it yet.  Larry has come the closest with the word “use.”

Hint.  Words can be gods not only to disciples, masters and seekers, but also to those who are totally ignorant and of low evolution.


Dec 9, 2013

Gospel of John

The writings of John were all originally penned in the Greek so it is not productive to translate them back into the Aramaic.  All scholars agree with this.  Here is a quote from the Catholic Encyclopedia.

The Fourth Gospel is written in Greek, and even a superficial study of it is sufficient to reveal many peculiarities, which give the narrative a distinctive character. Especially characteristic is the vocabulary and diction. His vocabulary is, it is true, less rich in peculiar expressions than that of Paul or of Luke: he uses in all about ninety words not found in any other hagiographer. More numerous are the expressions which are used more frequently by John than by the other sacred writers. Moreover, in comparison with the other books of the New Testament, the narrative of St. John contains a very considerable portion of those words and expressions which might be called the common vocabulary of the Four Evangelists.

What is even more distinctive than the vocabulary is the grammatical use of particles, pronouns, prepositions, verbs, etc., in the Gospel of St. John. It is also distinguished by many peculiarities of style, — asyndeta, reduplications, repetitions, etc. On the whole, the Evangelist reveals a close intimacy with the Hellenistic speech of the first century of our era. which receives at his hands in certain expressions a Hebrew turn. His literary style is deservedly lauded for its noble, natural, and not inartistic simplicity. He combines in harmonious fashion the rustic speech of the Synoptics with the urban phraseology of St. Paul.

So your argument that the Gospel of John was originally written in Aramaic is that the Gospel of Matthew may have been?  Does not compute.

It is possible that Matthew Mark and Luke may have been written in Aramaic, even though most scholars believe that even they were written in Greek.  There is no way to tell for sure.

But John’s writings are a different matter. He uses style, phrases and words peculiar to the Greek and the Gospel of John was written around the turn of the century when most church writers used the Greek.  They are about 99% sure that the original Gospel of John was written in the Greek.

The earliest known fragment of the gospels is one of John written just a few decades after the actual book was penned by John and guess what the language was?



Dec 10, 2013

Back to the Key

Ruth came as close as anyone is probably going to get to the key word and that is one must “accept” the word to manifest its power.

Even here this word does not fully describe the process.  The word “embrace” brings us a little closer to the mark.  Even better is this.  The seeker must become one with the word to manifest the word.

Again, one of the best examples of how this works is the movie Rocky II. Rocky’s wife wanted him to give up boxing and in the midst of their tension she became ill and was in a coma. As he sat by her side he decided that if she lived and didn’t want him to fight that he would give up the quest and live a normal life.

Then she miraculously came out of her coma and as he started to explain his decision she grabbed him, firmly looked at him and told him there was one thing she wanted him to do. She wanted him to go back in the ring and win. When se said the word “win” I felt visibly affected as it was a very powerful scene and you could feel the potency of the effect on Rocky. He not only accepted the word, but embraced it and became one with it which gave him the power to manifest it in deed.

Now we know the standard definition of a word as found in the dictionary, but the meaning is much more far reaching as far as the Word is God is concerned.

Question:  What is the full meaning of the Word as it applies to this key?

We are talking about the  twelfth Key, The Word is God.  The Trinity of Key words are accept, embrace merge.

Tom writes:

Also, how old was you JJ when you overcome the dweller in this life time?


I encountered my dweller when I was 16 and it took five years of struggle to put it in its right place.


Dec 11, 2013

So far no one has found the two important words in Dave’s post here:

Hint: How many words did God sound that created the Universe?

A word as understood by this key is much more than a single item in a dictionary.


Dec 11, 2013

More Hints

he group is missing the hint.

Ruth was the first to get the first part of the assignment correct.  The original sound that created all things was one word.

However, the group has missed the hint involved.  Let me give an additional huge hint.

If the first word was composed of many words, as we know them, then perhaps the words we are looking for in Dave’s post are not two ordinary dictionary words.

What are the two real words given in Dave’s post?

Excellent. The key words were The Declaration of Independence and The Gettysburg Address.

The point I was attempting to instil in students is that a word is much more than an item in a dictionary.  Even the whole of creation is a word.  Ther are many words that reside in creation between the universe itself and a dictionary word.

Question: What determines whether something is a word or not?

Name three additional key words that are not dictionary words. One of them should be organic.


Dec 11, 2013

To those who are frustrated at not getting the hints I say:

You’re doing fine. Just look at how dense my character was in the Immortal books.

The problem is twofold.

(1) It is easy to get the wrong idea from hints, even carefully worded ones.

(2) It is human nature to absorb the surface meaning of what we study and think that we have taken it all in.  In the case of these keys, they sound simple so when the basic knowledge is given out the student will assume he understands it.  After all, it appears that Decision and Judgment would be that deep to understand.

By going through the various keys point by point the seeker can discover many things below the surface.

If all of creation is just one word in the mind of God then yes, a sentence, a book or a planet can be a word.

Look in the mirror and tell me of an organic word you see.


Dec 11, 2013

From Eternal Words

Pg 73

“What is a word?”

It seemed to be a very simple question, but one that I found difficult to find words to answer. Finally I answered, “Well, a word is a thing spoken that identifies something.”

Elizabeth grabbed a dictionary, opened it and and added, “It says here that a word is a sound or combination of sounds that symbolizes and communicates a meaning.”

“Now we’re getting somewhere,” he said. “A word is a sound.” What is a sound?”

“Since I play the piano perhaps I can answer that,” said Elizabeth. “The notes on the pioano are sounds and each note has a different frequency or vibration.”

“So a word is a sound, which is, in turn, vibration,” I injected.

“And what does the vibration represent?” he asked.

“Whatever the meaning behind the word is, I suppose.”

“Pick a word,” he commanded.

“How about coin?”

“And when you speak the word coin, isn’t a certain combination of vibrations sent forth to reach the ears of others?”


“And these vibrations represent an idea?”

“Agreed,” I said, trying to follow his thought.

And, in between the thought and the idea, what force acts as the bridge between the two?”

“I’m not sure.”

“Suppose you are reading a magazine and see a picture of a new car. The idea or concept of a car enters your mind. What has to happen within you before you will act and do what is necessary to get the car?”

“I suppose I would have to want the car enough to spend the money.”

“Very good,” he said. “In other words, you first have the idea of a thing in your mind, which is followed by want or desire, which in thrun is followed by the materialization of the physical object.”

“Makes sense,” I said.

“Now a word, you you generally understand the term, starts with an idea. It is followed with a desire to communicate, which is materialized into a vibration that symbolizes the thing, which is, in this case, a car.”

“But there is a big difference between saying the word car and actually having a new Porsche in my front driveway.”

“You think so,” he said with a knowing look.

“”I take it you don’t think so,” I replied.

He pulled out the shiny 1796 quarter again and set it on the table. “This is a coin, is it not?”

“I would think so,” I said.

“Now does the word coin refer only to this coin or to the idea of coins in general?”

“The idea of coins in general.”

“What word then refers to this specific coin?”

“I don’t know,” I said, thinking. “I guess we could call it John’s coin.”

“But there are many who are called John and many coins. What word refers to this coin?”

“How about John the Beloved’s 1796 quarter?” added Elizabeth.

“But I could have two such quarters,” he replied.

“I know you well enough to know you’re leading us to a conclusion that is beyond the obvious,” I said. “You’re not looking for a set of regular words are you?”

“Then what am I looking for?”

“You said you are looking for the word that identifies your coin.”

“Yes.” He noded. “Now what word could it be?”

“Well, I’ve concluded it is not a regular word, but you agree that a word is a vibration that represents a thing. Perhaps the coin’s word is some type of vibration peculiar to itself.”

John smiled and replied, “You’re finally headed the right direction.”




pp. 75


“And what is sound again?”

A light began to go off in my head as I replied, “Sound is a vibration and vibration is composed of waves!”

“And what is the word which is this coin?”

“This is getting interesting,” I mused. “I think I see where you are going. This coin is made up of vibrations, and since vibration is sound, then this coin is made of sound. If we could somehow hear the fine vibrations we could hear the word which is this coin.”

“You start off a little slow, but you usually come through,” John smiled.



pp. 76


“All creation, which appears complex when divided into its many parts, always evolves toward the greatest of simplicity. The element silver is composed of billions of tiny sounds, but the many tiny voices blend in a great choir to make one master sound. To speak the word which is silver, I merely make the one sound instead of the many.”

“But you said the coin is made of two elements, which is copper as well as silver. Is it composed of two words?”

“No. The sound which is silver blends with the sound which is copper to make one sound just as two voices blend to create harmony.”


pp. 88


“To ensure that this would be the case I absorbed and sounded the Word which is Elizabeth when I first met her. Just as the shiny new coin has an uncorrupted word, so do we. The image you see of Elizabeth is the result of her Word sounded in a healthy state. Having this image of her in my room gives me power to restore her to health on either a temporary or permanent basis.”


pp. 89


“And then I demonstrated the truth of this for you in applying it to form. All form is the result of sound, or a word, and all form goes through the process of decay or corruption. But the sounding of the original word on all planes restores the form just as sounding the original phrase in the game restores the meaning.”


pp. 138


“I think I see what you are getting at,” I said. “The idea of a sandcastle, along with its form, continues to exist even if the elements that represent the form crumble.”

“Yes,” he said. “The sand is not the form of the castle, but represents the form. All form represents an idea and all ideas are founded upon some eternal principle. We have therefore the eternal triangle of form, idea, and principle. An eternal word is a word that conveys the true idea so it will never be lost or destroyed. The first sandcastle is long gone, but the original idea is recreated every day, and can be seen on beaches as long as human thought continues on this planet.”

“Interesting,” I said. “So the first sandcastle still exists amidst all the beaches of the world as it is recreated by fun-loving people. I guess we must learn to differentiate between real form and that which makes up the form.”

“Exactly,” said John. “Even though the first sandcastle was not written with a pen or spoken with the mouth, it was nevertheless an Eternal Word that shall not pass away. There are many other ways to write or speak to the mind of another without the use of pen and ink.”

“Like pictures,” injected Elizabeth.

“Actually, all physical communication boils down to pictures,” he replied. “Even the basic alphabet is composed of pictures of symbols, which, when pieced together, create a bigger picture. The first letter of the alphabet is a picture of a sound, whereas a sandcastle is a picture of many sounds.”


Dec 12, 2013

The Assignment:

Name three additional key words that are not dictionary words. One of them should be organic.

Perhaps I need to add a little more explanation. By key words I mean the use of the term “Word” as it applies to this key, which is somewhat different than the dictionary definition of a word.  All the words that fit the regular dictionary definition are included in a good unabridged dictionary.

We are seeking the meaning of a word according to how John was using it when he said, “the Word is God,” and according to its use in the Twelfth Key.

I’ve given some reasonable hints so far including the fact that the creation of the universe is created and sustained by what is considered from a higher point of view – one Word. Now if the universe is created through the sounding of one Word then, from a higher view, a Word is much more inclusive than the thousands of pieces of information in a dictionary.

I elaborated on this at the gathering (Part 18 at about the seven minute mark) and told the group that a word could be a single word, a phrase, a piece of music, a book, or even the Boy Scout Motto.

A Word as it pertains to this Key is a thought seeking manifestation, or a thought in manifestation.

Dan and Adam named a few 12th Key Words that are not in the dictionary.

Dan’s were: “The Adventures of Tom Sawyer”, “The Holy Bible”, “John Lennon’s Imagine”, the “principle of freedom”, and “Soul Contact”.

Adam’s were: Lou Gehrig’s farewell speech, “Soylent Green is people!”

It may seem odd to call all these things words, but they all represent thought in manifestation.  I was surprised that no one got the organic (living) word that you see when you look in the mirror.  That word is you.

Now if your name is Dan, Dan is not the word I am talking about, for the Dan here in the group is a different word than the thousands of other Dans who are out there. Our Dan here has an essence, vibration and thought different than anyone else in the universe.

The universe is one word yet its body is composed of trillions of individual words.

A dog (God backwards) is also one word but is also composed of trillions of words. Some words that come to mind are eye, nose, hair, teeth, tongue, mouth, stomach, brain, cells, molecules and trillions of atoms, each representing a different word.

The Adventures of Tom Sawyer is a phrase representing the Word which is the book, and is composed of thousands of individual words.  But overall, the word which is the book, is thought in manifestation.

Mark Twain heard this particular Word, which is God, within his consciousness and brought it into manifestation.

The question was, “What is a Word?”

The answer is that it is any idea or thought seeking manifestation.

Now let us move on to the second question.  Why is the Word called God and why is this a key to power?


Dec 13, 2013

Judy was correct. There has been some high quality expressions the past few days Group members show what they are made of when challenged.

I can’t possibly comment on all the good thoughts but will add a few of my own.

Let us look at the first question. “Why is the Word called God?”

The Key cannot be understood or used unless this answer becomes clear in the student’s mind.

Why is God called God? Answer: Because He created all things.  What created all things?  Vibration.  What is vibration? The sum of all wavelengths in the universe is The Word.

Is this universe all there is?


Is there some greater being uttering a Word that creates a universe of universes?


Now consider this. A human being is to the God of the universe as is God in relationship to the God of the universe of universes.

Does this mean that God is not really God, but some greater being is?

No.  Neither does it mean that the word which is you is not God.

Neither does it mean that any idea that you have that you are seeking to manifest is not a Word which is God. It is also a Word, which is God.

Absorbing this truth elevates the soul to great heights because it is a key to manifesting the powers of God among men.

Earlier I said that the trinity of words pertinent to manifesting this key are: accept, embrace and merge.

These are helpful, but perhaps[s a fourth word is in order. This is one made up by the Science fiction writer Robert Heinlein in his book Stranger in a Strange Land.  There was not an English word for what he needed to express so he made one up and that word is “grok.”  If you grok something you totally understand it because you merge with it so completely that it is as if you become that thing.

This is what God has done with us who are his words and it is what we must do with our words. And remember, I am not speaking of dictionary words but ideas which are words coming into manifestation through your nurturing power and moved along by their own share of the intelligence of God.

Now tell me.  How and why is this knowledge, when groked, a key to power?


Favorite Authors

Goodreads invited me to list my favorite authors.  Here was my list:

Alice A. Bailey (The best by far)

Ray Bradbury

Dennis Wheatley

Frederic Brown

Robert Heinlein

Dan Brown

John Jakes

Philip K. Dick

George Orwell

Lee Child

Philip K. Dick

Ann Coulter

James M. McPherson

Ruth Montgomery

Elmer Wheeler

Napoleon Hill

Lobsang Rampa


Carl Sandburg

Will Durant

If any in the group have three or more authors they like go ahead and list them. It would be interesting to see what you like.


Dec 14, 2013

Inspiring statement

The Universe is only as large as the amount of Love contained within it. The more you love, the bigger it gets. 🙂


Copyright by J J Dewey 2013

Easy Access to all the Writings

Register at Freeread Here

Log on to Freeread Here

For Free Book go HERE and other books HERE

Check out JJ’s Political Blog HERE

JJ’s Amazon page HERE

Join JJ’s Study class HERE

Keys Writings 2013, Part 23

This entry is part 25 of 25 in the series 2013

Dec 14, 2013

The Word Which is God

Continued from Part 22

The group has made some great comments, but has missed an aspect that is necessary for a full understanding of this key.

Many seem to think that the use of the word which is God requires soul contact, attunement with the will of God, or being a high disciple.  Such is not the case.

Contemplate what has been presented so far and tell us which Word or Words the following manifested:





Osama Bin Laden


Dec 15, 2013

More on the Word

The group seems to be getting the correct general idea on the Word as represented by this key.  I gave this last assignment to insure that it is realized that all words have power whether they are positive or negative or no matter who they came from.

The assignment:

Contemplate what has been presented so far and tell us which Word or Words the following manifested:





Osama Bin Laden


In the context of our discussion it is easy to accept that Edison’s idea of creating a lightbulb is a word that was brought into manifestation through Edison Groking the idea.  But what about someone like Hitler?

One of his words was the creation of the Nazi party as a platform of power to place him into power over the entire country.  This he did successfully to the detriment of the world at that time.

Another of his ideas which was a word was the annihilation of the Jewish race from the face of the earth. He gave this word an unprecedented amount of nurturing, but the Word for the Jewish race wound up dominating.

Reagan nurtured a word that split apart the Soviet Union.

Obama is sounding a word that is designed to socialize the United states with Obamacare being just one ingredient. Fortunately, other words are being sounded in opposition.

Osama Bin Laden sounded a word that that created the threat or terror in the minds of Americans.

Jesus sounded many words successfully.  One of his was, “your faith has made you whole.”

One advantage of sounding this word is that there are few opposing words to people getting healed, though he did face them in his home town and among the Jewish leaders.

The greatest word Jesus or the Christ gave us was his life as a whole. This word is still clothing itself in manifestation.

Here are points that need to be understood.

(1) Words are Gods and have great power to manifest

(2) Words are neither good or evil. Whether they accomplish good or evil depends on how they are directed by those who nurture them into existence.

(3) Those who nurture them into existence can be either on the side of light or dark.

(4) To bring a word into existence requires one to totally accept, embrace and grok it.

(5) Many words have difficulty in coming into existence because they meet with competition and resistance from other words that are sounded with power.  In this case the Word that sounds with the most power will dominate.

Someone asked if a Word played a part in its own manifestation.  The answer is yes.  You are a Word and two things played a role in you manifesting and developing.

The first is other lives who nurtured you and the second is the application of your own intelligence.

Intelligence permeates all things visible and invisible and even words have some form of intelligence. They must be nurtured by manifested lives such as ourselves to stimulate their power to Become through intelligence.

The three steps in giving the Word power to manifest is to accept, embrace and merge, or grok it. This seems like a pretty simple process  but if it were easy we would all be successful at manifesting our ideas.

Question:  Why do people have such difficulty with these three steps? Is it really difficult to accept, embrace and grok something you love and desire?  Why?

Dec 16, 2013

The three steps in giving the Word power to manifest are to accept, embrace and merge, or grok it. This seems like a pretty simple process but if it were easy we would all be successful at manifesting our ideas.

Question:  Why do people have such difficulty with these three steps? Is it really difficult to accept, embrace and grok something you love and desire?  Why?

We cannot apply the three steps to manifest a word until we understand what a word is. I have said that a word is more than the thousands of units spelled out in the dictionary.  A true word is an idea that has the possibility of being distilled in the material world.

It is also important to realize what a word is not.  A useful word is not some vague statement of desire, such as, “I want to make a million dollars,” or I want a better job or the ideal mate etc. The only word vague statements like these represent is an expression that you have desire for a thing. If you say that you want a million dollars you are making the word a reality as you speak because you do indeed want a million dollars.  Now actually getting the million dollars would require a word of a different sort.

A usable word is a definite idea or thought that is correctly communicated to yourself or others. Edison had a specific idea for a light bulb.  He first communicated it to himself so he could understand clearly what he was attempting to manifest.  Then he communicated the word to his fellow scientists who were working with him.  They then proceeded to manifest a Word, which is God. If Edison hadn’t done it, someone else would have.  The Word existed in the higher spheres and was ready to manifest.  Someone merely had to sound it properly and clothe it in the material world.

Let us suppose you were serious about making a million dollars.  You not only desire to make the money but have made a definite decision to do so.  What word would you use?

The answer is that it would have to be a word, that when acted upon would produce the desired results. In other words, the word you need would be an actual workable plan that would produce the money you desire. Now if your plan is to sell refrigerators to Eskimos then you will be disappointed. Such a word does not exist in the ethers.  On the other hand, if you have created a new sauce that everyone loves and have a plan to market it then you may have a good word. You can recognize an actual word through a registration by your soul.

If you say that you want to be healed you are merely expressing the desire of every ill person in the world who is not getting good results.

On the other hand, if you can see your body as healed and  then your physical body moving toward that visualization you may have just pulled a word out of the ethers that has power to materialize.

Once you lock on to a real word, which is God then you can proceed with the three steps.


How does this pan out for all the hundreds of people that buy a lottery ticket and then suddenly win millions of dollars?  Do these people know the Word,or is this just karma?


Winning a lottery has nothing to do with sounding the word. Winning it is just pure luck.  What the winner does with his winnings will definitely affect his karma for the future.

All of us experience unpredictable good and bad events as we move forward in life. How we are sounding our various words will determine whether those events turn into good or bad experiences.  Many lottery winners mess up their lives so much they wind up wishing they had never won.


When you know so much about this Word, and understand it so well,  then how come you have not manifested millions of dollars to build Zion etc?


Because sounding a word to manifest millions is a totally different animal than the Word to manifest Zion.  The Word for Zion has been sounded by teachers and prophets for thousands of years including the Christ himself, and has not yet manifested.  It has not yet manifested because of all the words in conflict, many of which are sounded by the Beast. must be neutralized by the continual sounding and strengthening of the sound of the Kingdom of God upon the earth.

The main word I sound is that of Zion.  It’s existence in the higher spheres is real and its  descent is certain as long as disciples continue to sound the word.  The only thing in question is the time frame. Sounding a word to make a million would only reduce the sustaining power I give to a far more important Word.

Dec 17, 2013

Step One

Once you lock on to a real word, which is God then you can proceed with the three steps.


Step One – Accept

One might think that it would be easy to accept a word, such as a desirable idea passing trough your mind, but such is rarely the case. Let us take the example of a successful word used by Jesus which was “Your faith has made you whole.” If you had a friend who has had a painful illness over a period of years and nothing he has tried has done much good then how would he react to such a word?  Would he accept it?  If you were to tell him that that his faith has made him whole he would most likely respond, “Yeah, right, and what else is new?”


In other words, the person who will benefit the most from the word and actually desires it to be true does not accept the word.


The same problem manifests with those who are wielding the word. They often have difficulty accepting it. Which of us could accept this word that Jesus used and go to a sick friend and say, “Your faith has made you whole?”


Most of us would like the word to be true but just couldn’t accept it. A typical response would be something like this, “If I did that I would just make a fool of myself.  After all, I am nothing special.  I’m not God, or even a saint by any means.”


Thus we have many wonderful words out there that most people would love to see manifest, but they do not manifest.  Why?  One important reason is they are just not accepted.


Where both sending and receiving are involved the word must be accepted by both parties.


Jesus did his part in that he accepted the words he used.  His problem was in getting other people to accept them. The scripture says that he could perform no miracles in his hometown.  Why?  Because these people could not accept his words which is often the case with our family and friends. It is much easier to accept the words of some mysterious stranger from afar.


Jesus had to build acceptance of his words by first carefully picking believing people to heal.  When others saw what he did then their power to accept his words grew. Then as he gained success even many skeptics were won over who then accepted the words of Jesus.


As the acceptance of his words grew he spoke this truth:

“The words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.” John 6:63


To those who did not accept him he said, “my word hath no place in you…ye cannot hear my word.” John 8:37&43


Then he added:

“He that is of God heareth God’s words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God.” John 8:47


Why did he call them God’s words?  Partially because the Word is God. Did he not say, “he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came.” John 10:35


Then he gave this grand key, “If ye abide in me, and my words abide in you, ye shall ask what ye will, and it shall be done unto you.” John 15:7


The power of an accepted word is so potent that when fully accepted you can ask what you will and it shall be done.


Unfortunately, we have difficulty in fully accepting the most wonderful of words.  The seeker is likely to have a number of feelings and beliefs which get in the way such as.


(1) He is not worthy

(2) He is governed by negative words that are controlling him .

(3) Friends and associates influence him with their own restrictive words.

(4) He thinks he is not special as others seem to be.


Yes, it would seem that it should be easier to accept healing words than words that bring illness, words that encourage rather than discourage, words of love rather than hate – but such is often not the case. For many, it is easier to accept destructive words than building ones.  This is an inclination of human nature that the seeker must master and redirect.

Dec 18, 2013

Step Two – Embrace

Acceptance of the power of a word is an important step and opens the door for great events to happen. These range from significant accomplishments to the miraculous. However, acceptance alone is not enough to activate the full power of the word.

Look at it this way. The three key words are linked to the three planes. Acceptance to the physical, Embrace to the emotional and to Merge or Grok to the mental.

Let us again examine the famous word of Jesus, “Your faith has made you whole.” Let us say you lived back then and watched him perform a couple miracles. You decide that just maybe this guy can help you get well and you “accept” the possibility that whatever he speaks to you will actually happen.

You wait in line for your turn. Five people are ahead of you and you watch their interaction with Jesus. The first guy seems to experience a miraculous healing. He second guy seems improved, but not changed that much. The same was the case for the third guy. Then the fourth guy fell to his knees in tears and said, “I know God is with you and that your word can heal, but not sure if I am worthy. My sins weigh heavily upon me. Can you help a man like me?”

Jesus grabbed the man’s hand, lifted him up and looked into his eyes, piercing deep into his soul. The man felt his emotions touched by the master and tears again flowed but stronger this time. The Jesus spoke, “God forgives your sins and you will repay by giving glory to God and his work through me. Do you believe an innocent son of God like yourself is worthy to be healed?”

“Oh, Master, I wish I could be sure that I am innocent.”

“Do you believe the words I speak?” Jesus replied.

“Yes,” said the man. “I have never heard such words before.”

Jesus then grabbed the man by both shoulders and continued looking into his eyes while saying, “Your sins are forgiven you and your faith has made you whole.”

You are watching with interest and see the man is visibly affected and falls to the feet of Jesus weeping and kissing his feet. Jesus pulls the man up and says, “Go your way, sin no more and remember to give glory to God with whom all things are possible.”

The man leaves and the fifth man seems positively affected by the healing he just witnessed. As you watch Jesus heal this person you contemplate the situation. Jesus healed the first person but then didn’t have much results with the next two and the mood seem to dampen. But then this last guy really seemed to turn things around. It just seemed now that everyone in line was bound to be healed. What was different about the fourth guy from the two that preceded him? They all seemed to accept the words of Jesus.

You think about it a moment and you realize that the fourth guy not only accepted the Master’s words, but embraced them. He embraced them to the extent that his emotional self was highly stimulated. It was as if an electrical charge of emotional energy was pouring through his being from head to foot.

Then you realize that if you want to be healed you must embrace the words of Jesus to the extent that your emotions are likewise stimulated.

It is now your turn. Jesus looks at you eye to eye and your heart begins to burn with a spiritual fire. “Yes,” you think to yourself, “I can truly embrace the words of this man.”

Jesus then spoke, and the words seemed alive with power, as if they were living things becoming a part of your very existence.

Yes, for the word to have the power of God our emotional selves must embrace it. When it is embraced a number of things may happen.

(1) Belief and faith is increased dramatically.

(2) There will be a powerful sense of purpose about manifesting the Word.

(3) Determination to fulfill the word will be strong and enduring.

(4) Other people will be positively affected by you.

Indeed, if all involved accept and embrace the Word, which is God, they are at the threshold of manifestation. Just one thing remains to ensure the Word endures.

Dec 19, 2013

So this also works for those people who are more “mentally” focused and who have control over their emotional bodies more than the average person?


Everyone has emotions whether they are mentally polarized or have great self-control.  Now some mentally polarized people have more difficulty I allowing their emotions to embrace an idea to the extent that a point of tension is reached. But to achieve the miracle of manifestation a person must emotionally embrace the idea behind the word he seeks to manifest.

That doesn’t necessarily mean he will weep at the feet of Jesus, as in my example, but the word must be clothed in strong emotional energy to manifest.

Those who have advanced mentally will have an advantage in sustaining the manifestation as you shall see in the next installment.

Dec 20, 2013

Step Three – To Merge or Grok

Indeed, if all involved accept and embrace the Word, which is God, they are at the threshold of manifestation. Just one thing remains to ensure the Word endures.

Many of us have seen faith healers in the media or in person that seem to perform miraculous healings. A popular one I used to watch, now and then, back in the Sixties was Oral Roberts, a famous faith healer in that day.

When the cameras panned the audience you could see that the faithful followers had accepted Roberts as a spokesman for God and that whatever words he spoke were the same as if God were standing there speaking them. Those who had an affliction and came up on stage seemed to be the most affected. Not only did they accept his words as the word of God, but they strongly embraced them emotionally.

Here is how a typical healing would go.  The person would come on stage and Roberts would approach him or her with a couple assistants. After saying a couple words about the power of God and Jesus he would smack the person’s forehead and loudly shout “HEAL!!!” Often the person would be so involved he would pass out and the assistants would have to catch him. After getting possession of himself the subject would often spring around stage gleefully announcing how great he felt and that he was indeed healed.

Now, it is quite possible there was some fraud involved, but I’m sure there were also some actual healings, though many of them were just temporary.

At that time I had a neighbor who was a big believer in Oral Roberts and sent him all the money he could afford each month. Then he finally made a trip to Oklahoma to see him for himself. After he came back he never spoke positively of Roberts again and ceased sending him money. Some say he discovered some fraud or that the healings were just temporary. The excitement of receiving the Word from what was thought to be a true servant had a big temporary impact, but seemed to wear off.

The Word is indeed powerful, even if it comes from the Beast of authority, but there is one final step that must be taken or it’s power will only be of a temporary nature.

To wield the full power of the Word the seeker must feed upon the Word and merge with it, or grok it, until it becomes a part of him. Your brain and emotions will take you to the point of tension so you can feel its power but it takes the mind in contemplation to understand the Word and incorporate it into one’s being so the seeker and the Word are one.

This process of merging and becoming one with the Word takes the seeker away from the Beast of authority so he sees the Word as a power independent of any person on the earth. The final resting place of the word is in his own mind and heart, not in a preacher, prophet or king.

The story of a temporary healing is mentioned in the New Testament:

And Jesus, all alone, went to the feast by the Samaria way; and as he went through Sychar on the way, the lepers saw him and a company of ten called from afar and said, Lord Jesus, stay and speak the Word for us that we may be made clean.

And Jesus said, Go forth and show yourselves unto the priests.

They went, and as they went their leprosy was healed. One of the ten, a native of Samaria, returned to thank the master and to praise the Lord.

And Jesus said to him, Lo, ten were cleansed; where are the nine? Arise, and go your way; your faith has made you whole. You have revealed your heart and shown that you are worthy of the power; behold the nine will find again their leprous hands and feet.

Aquarian Gospel 133:17-22 Also see Luke 17:11-19

The nine thought that all they had to do was to accept and embrace the Word and then go their merry way.  The tenth realized that he needed to keep the Word alive within himself and returned to show appreciation and receive more. This act kept energy flowing to and from the Word within.

To accept a Word of Power opens the door.  To embrace it reveals it’s power, but to merge with it sustains its life and power.


The word is merge…JJ can you give some other examples of merging with the word like when the leper went back to Jesus to give thanks…so that we may better understand how to merge to make it permanent healing.


The merging isn’t something that is always visible or obvious.  Two people may be healed and one may have the problem return while the other does not.  An observer may not see any difference in the two because he cannot understand all that is going on in their hearts and minds.

He who has a sustained healing will keep the intent of the word in his heart and mind.  The healing of the apostle Paul was a good example.  After he was converted he was healed from blindness.  After the healing he kept the power of the word close to his heart as well as acting on the highest he knew to the best of his ability. Positive actions demonstrates to your soul that you are one with the word which gave you power of action.


Is the word like a powerful prayer and ritual in one like I suspected and How did the little girl hear the word when she was dead when Jesus raised her and how did the soldiers servant hear the word when he was miles away and was healed.


The Word is not a ritual or prayer but can be activated by them.

If the person is in the presence of the healer he or she must accept the word consciously.  On occasions where he was not physically present Jesus spoke to the person’s soul where the positive words of God are already planted and ready to be activated.  It takes a high initiate or a healer with help from the other side to heal people who do not physically hear the word.

Dec 26, 2013

Looks like building floating cities is getting more traction.


Dec 28, 2013


Tom gave me a list of accomplishments and asked me if he was an initiate. It wouldn’t be wise for me to start pointing out who in the group would be an initiate and who was not as this could lead to division and hurt feelings. I have and will continue to attempt to try and clarify what it takes to be an initiate.  Then the seeker can judge for himself where he may be and the hopefully see the path before him with accuracy.

The first step on the path is that of the probationary disciple. This is the person who has concluded that there is a path to knowledge, salvation, service etc and makes some sort of effort to tread it.

He treads this path until he becomes a first degree initiate. Here are some of the things that goes into making an initiate of the first degree.

(1) The birth of the Christ in the heart.  This is the core requirement for this step.  So what does this entail and how is this person different from the guy who believes in Jesus and attends church?

Unlike many religious people this person has had a spiritual experience caused by sufficient soul contact that he understands that the God within and the spiritual world are real and not just a belief. He knows there is guidance and contact beyond the physical and there is a living fire within him that he must nourish.  He has faith that this inner life will lead him to some desired end, but knows not for sure what that end will be. He decides to follow this Christ within to the best of his ability.

(2) Physical control. He has control of his sexual and physical appetites.  If he is under some belief system that requires sexual purity he will have the control to be able to abide by it. If he is not under such a system he will formulate one of his own and abide by that.

He has power to abide by his belief system on what is good to or bad to take into his body. If he decides to go on a diet he can abide by that diet.  If he decides to be a vegetarian he can be one. If his religion says he isn’t supposed to eat or drink certain things he has the control to abide by it. If he decides to fast for a week without food then he can do this. If he decides on an exercise program, he can abide by it.

In other words, he has reasonable physical and sexual self control.

(3) He has a desire to initiate that which is new and good and will make some progress in this direction.  Here are some things we may see a first degree initiate do.

• Start a business or assist in starting one.

• Use the creative mind to invent, write about ideas or produce original art.

• Assist in some way to move into the public consciousness or use some new idea, concept or movement.

Dec 30, 2013

The Second Degree Initiate

The symbol of this initiation is baptism, of which the baptism of Jesus was the perfect example.

Let us examine what happened at this event.

Jesus, the man, entered into the rite of baptism, which was a symbol of being born again by the washing away of all sin and guilt. Coming up out of the water the initiate leaves behind the old life of being surrounded and controlled by emotion (water being the symbol of emotion). He comes up into the air (symbol of mind) and now surrounds himself with reason and is dominated by mental energy.

After coming up out of the water the dove representing he Spirit of God alights on and comes into Jesus and settles there.

Eve so, the second degree initiate has an experience where he feels what is called the “baptism of fire.” This is a short taste of what the overshadowing experience of Jesus was like but it will be enough to motivate initiates for the rest of their lives because they now know that a glorious and greater spiritual life awaits the true servants of humanity.

The second degree initiate obtains the keys to free himself from guilt and this is his true salvation in the kingdom of God, for guilt must be conquered before true joy can be obtained and retained.

Before the initiate completes this initiation he must obtain control of the emotions. The first degree person demonstrates control over the physical impulses and the second, the emotions.  Of the two the emotional body is much more difficult to control than the physical.

This is signified by the fact that the baptism of Jesus took place 30 years after his birth.  The long thirty years is a symbol of the long road the seeker has to tread before emotional control is mastered.

Here are signs that the emotional body is under control.

(1) The initiate will be relatively free from glamours.  Glamours can manifest hundreds of different ways and with many subtleties, including the glamour of having no glamour when still dominated by glamour.

Some common glamours that must be mastered are:

(a) Inflated self-importance.

(b) Inflated estimate of his place on the path.

(c) The glamour that the initiate is humble when he still has to master a lot of ego.

(d) The glamour of the messiah complex.

(e) The glamour that the person is special or unique in various different illusionary ways

(2) It is almost impossible to hurt his feelings. You can insult him all you want and he will hold no grievance.  If the situation requires him to smile and be friendly in the face of terrible insults he will have no problem doing so. Any response from the emotional level will be the result of a decision made on a metal level.

(3) He can show forgiveness and friendship instantly when a wayward brother tries to turn around and befriend him.

(4) He doesn’t get depressed or feel defeated.  He continues moving forward in season and out of season, even if it seems dark on the horizon.

(5) He focuses on the positive things from the past, instead of the negative.  He is cheerful in the present and optimistic of the future.

The second degree initiate will have greater power to initiate change than the first.  He is more likely to start, or work with starting something, that will have appeal beyond his local boundaries. Many (but far from all) who have obtained a degree of fame are second degree initiates.


Well I must be no initiate in this lifetime then.


Keep in mind that we are talking about the second initiation.  If you do not feel you fit there that does not mean you are not an initiate of the first degree.


What happens in the case where a dark cloud of negativity and depression is forced upon an initiate and directed by Dark Forces?  What happens in the case of the Dark Night of the Soul?


Depression cannot be forced upon the initiate. The Dark Brothers can send dark energy his way in an attempt to make him depressed or discouraged. The second degree initiate will feel the attack and register it but will not get discouraged and continue onward no matter what obstacles seem to get in the way.


Does a 2nd or 3rd degree initiate suffer from these two instances?


The Dark Brothers attack the second and third degree initiates with a different approach.  They still feel they have a chance to discourage or at least slow down the second degree by a direct attack.  This doesn’t work well for the third degree initiate so they attack those close to him in an attempt to stop him.

They do not attack the second degree initiates that much unless they become key players in moving the light forward or are approaching their next initiation. Most of what seems to be attacks by them are from their own thoughtforms.


Did you show forgiveness and friendship instantly to a wayward brother such as Hitler?  Or does this fall into another category?


A dark brother such as Hitler never tries to turn around but will continue on his downward spiral so this will never be a concern.

Anyone who sincerely attempts to turn his life around should be nurtured to the best of our ability no matter how much they offended us in the past. And the initiate should not hold a grievance, even toward a Hitler, as it only hinders his own progress


Was Judas only a 1st degree initiate?


Could have been.  We do not have enough information on him to tell.


If the molecule is made up of 1st, 2nd and/or 3rd degree initiates, then how do they stay totally in soul if many 1st degree and 2nd degree initiates have lots of glamour or illusions etc which might upset the molecule?


The molecule Jesus created did not always stay in the soul and neither will the first attempts of creation in our age.  It is up to the initiate of the molecule to stay in the soul and keep the molecule in the soul.  This will be difficult at first but when stabilization is finally achieved a thought form of a stable molecule will be created which will help to make stabilization of future molecules much easier.

It would be desirable to create the first molecules of third degree initiates or higher, but theses are difficult to find and gather as they are often involved in their own work and focusing on it.


So does that make the next molecules which are formed one day on Earth to become new Solar Angels to other humans in the next few billion years in a new Universe?


The molecules do not become solar angels but the individuals in the molecule will, though their molecular links will continue. They will become solar angels in this universe which still has a long way to go.  When a new universe is created we start over but from a different starting point.

Copyright by J J Dewey

Index for Older Archives in the Process of Updating

Index for Recent Posts

Easy Access to All the Writings

Register at Freeread Here

Log on to Freeread Here

For Free Book go HERE and other books HERE

JJ’s Amazon page HERE

Gather with JJ on Facebook HERE

Keys Writings 2013, Part 3

This entry is part 3 of 25 in the series 2013

Jan 22, 2013

Debunking the Sandy Hook Debunkers

That was a good common sense article Larry. Link

It reached similar conclusions to myself. I’ve still been researching and contemplating Sandy Hook and have eliminated a number of points that are troubling skeptics. Here are the anomalies and conspiracy points I have discounted.

(1) There were no murders as they were faked.

Some think a conspiracy faked the murders but if you put your mind in the thinking process of a conspirator this would be a foolish thing to do. Even the biased bumbling media would be likely to discover such a thing.

(2) Robbie Parker and others were hired actors.

Again, this is very unlikely as it would be too easy to expose.

(3) Robbie Parker and others were actors and not the real parents of slain kids because they were caught smiling and looking cheerful during interview times.

Their behavior did seem odd but you can’t really predict how various people will handle a tragedy like this. Their odd behavior does not prove anything.

(4) Emily Parker who was supposed to be dead showed up in a photo with Obama after the shooting.

The two photos used for comparison were about two years apart and the girl with Obama was most likely her sister as claimed. After two years Emily would look older than the girl with Obama. Here is a good analysis: Link

(5) A fundraising site was place placed on Facebook before the tragedy. It was explained that the site was created before the event but for another purpose. Then after the massacre the purpose of the site was changed.

Because these and other points have been credibly debunked many dismiss all points presented by skeptics.

The conflicting reports on the guns is troubling as well as the possibility of a second gunman. It is also troubling that the ambulances went to the fire station rather than the school as ambulances were blocked from getting to the school.

Perhaps the most troubling of all is that there are no witnesses that have come forth. All but one who witnessed the shooting is dead. Both the shooter and his mom is dead and Lanza had no friends in the present time.

It is possible that this was a preplanned event but it is much more likely that the details of the event are merely manipulated to give gun control advocates in our government the ammunition they need to bypass the Second Amendment.


Jan 23, 2013

The Lords

Ruth notes that DK mentions quite a few different Lords and wants to know more about them. There are Lords of Karma, Flame, Destiny, Compassion, Liberation, Light and even Evil.

The first thing to understand in reading DK is he doesn’t give a lot of details in defining his terms. He seems to expect his readers to already have a good foundation in Theosophical terms and if details or definitions are missing he expects readers to either get the information intuitively or read between the lines.

He does acknowledge that new readers will have a difficult time in understanding him but encourages them to press forward and if they do that pieces will eventually fall together for them.

Hence there are no locations in DK’s writings where you can go to get clear definitions of the various Lords.

It may be helpful to consider what is meant when a being is referred to as “Lord of’ something. What does this mean? It merely mans that he is a master of the thing specified. Thus a Lord of Light is a being who has mastered the art of staying focused in the light and using such light intelligently. A Lord of Liberation is one who understands the principle of freedom, uses it successfully in his own life and ring-pass-not. He can guide others to the path of liberation.

A Lord of Compassion is one who has great empathy for fellow life forms and loves his neighbor as himself.

Where are these Lords, Ruth asks? There are various lords in the human kingdom and up in the various spheres as well as other planets. How many are there? Who knows? Quite a few all together.

Ruth: I am wondering then, is there a specific distinction or reason between why there are “Masters of Wisdom” instead of referring to them as “Lords of Wisdom”?

JJ They could have called themselves Lords of Wisdom but it just doesn’t sound as cool as Masters of Wisdom. After all, the main master to give out the teachings is Djwal Kool. (Real spelling revealed for the first time)


Jan 26, 2013

Underwater Hotel

Here’s the Latest project that not only houses people on the water but under the water.



Jan 27, 2013

Good Book – Sabbatai Sevi

I just read an interesting book about a little known character in history. His name was Sabbatai Sevi who lived from 1626-1676. He claimed to be the Jewish Messiah and gained quite a following. His work hit a snag when he was arrested by Muslims in Constantinople and later told to convert to Islam or be tortured to death. He decided to convert which discouraged many of his followers but not all. The true believers made all kinds of excuses for him even to the point of claiming that his true self ascended to heaven leaving behind a shadow of himself who pretended to convert.

The book I read is called “The Lost Messiah” by John Freely and is available at Amazon.

A good summary of Sabbatai’s life is found at Wikipedia HERE

It leaves out the important detail that the sultan threatened his life to get him to covert but otherwise is a good summary.

How about you? Have you read any interesting books the past year? If so tell us about one or two of them.


Jan 27, 2013

The Gospel of the Kailedy

Zenochio wrote:

There is a very little-known book that I recently re-read called “The Gospel of the Kailedy.” Very little information is available about this supposedly ancient book–where it came from, how it was found and translated, etc. One website says that those who came over to England with Joseph of Arimathea were known as the Kailedy, and there is speculation that this is Joseph of Arimathea’s own account of Jesus’ life.

JJ The Gospel of the Kailedy sounds interesting. I found a link to the full text here:


Jan 28, 2013


Ruth asks: RJ: “When the door opens once again for the highest from the animal kingdom consciousness to incarnate into human form, will these animal souls incarnate into the newer life forms created by humans?

JJ When the animals through fusion enter the human kingdom they will pick their opportunities to inhabit life forms just as we do now. If technologically created forms are available to humans they will be available to them because they will be human too.

Ruth; Was Hitler going to work on this same technology so he could create the “overlords”? Or was that a different type of technology?

JJ Computer technology was not available to Hitler but the Nazis would have used it when it became available. The Dark brothers have their own technology they could use to incarnate if they could have lowered he vibration of humanity enough to create a window.

Ruth: DK mentions that as we raise our vibration, then we become smaller, and even the animals will become smaller also. Will that take thousands of years for humans and animals to become really small until they “disappear” from sight?

JJ I do not recall DK saying this. Do you have a reference?

Over the millennia we have become larger. The average height around the time of Jesus was around 5’5″ for men. It is possible we may change again, becoming larger or smaller but we certainly will not become very tiny.

Ruth: JJ, I was wondering what your thoughts were about Sabbatai Zevi as being the Jewish Messiah?

Is Jesus allowed to proclaim himself as the Messiah to gain followers?

JJ There is no one to stop any of us from proclaiming anything we want. Where a particular proclamation is good or bad thing to do is another matter.

Sabbatai was no Jesus or Abraham but was a man with a big ego. I suspect he may have incarnated in this life as Chris Nemelka.


Jan 29, 2013

Unusual Questions

I have to give credit to Alex for bringing up questions I have not been asked before. After teaching for all these years this is rare.

Alex follows the teachings of the Raelians which has an unusual philosophy. Here it is in his words:

On the planet of Elohim the things are different. According to Yahweh (related by Claude Vorilhon), on the planet of Elohim, with the help of some medical procedure, they can extend their life span to about 1000 years. (First people on Earth created by them on the same principles also lived about 1000 years.)

However, they can not combat aging completely, nor they can regenerate tissues at will. So after about 1000 years it is time to die… But they found a workaround death.

What they do. Before death of a person they scan his/her brain and store all the thoughts and memories on a computer. Then when the person dies (or before that, does not matter), they scan DNA code from some cells. After that, using the scanned DNA they recreate a physical body with the same features and properties as of the deceased person. This growing of the physical body literally takes 10 minutes! Special machines are designed for that.

Now they have a copy of the deceased person. Now the most important. They download all the stored memories and thoughts from the computer into the brain of this just created body. The person comes back to life, remembering and being fully aware of him/herself. There might be a small memory gap from the time the memories have been scanned last time to the moment of death, but it is not significant. Also it might take some time for this person to readjust to his/her new healty physical body, which would be created usually younger — 25 years of hysical age.

But basically the person continues! Such process of recreation perfomed every 1000 years or in some cases after deaths resulted from accidents.

(Also, using the same technology, they can recreate dead people from Earth. To do that they need to scan the brain and take a DNA sample. They do it on rare occasions under hypnosis.)

Now the questions (assuming that this technology of immortality really exists and not just sci-fi): 1) Which soul reincarnates this freshly recreated body: – the same soul of a deceased person; – any random soul which likes the new young fresh body; – no soul, the copy thus becoming an intelligent robot with only a memory of a certain person?

2) The plot thickens if we take into account that they can create several copies of the same deceased person. Which one will be the real continuation of the deceased person and who will become an imposter? (By the way, the fact that we have many messiahs, Jesuses, Moseses and other prominent figures popping up here and there, is it not because of the experiments of Elohim?)

3) If a random soul enters a recreated body which remembers him/herself as a completely different figure, will it not be confusing for the soul to live in a body with such memories? (End Quote)

JJ Fortunately the Raelians are incorrect about life after death. There are number of spheres of existence of which they seem unaware. Their belief seems entirely centered on the idea that physical reality is all there is.

Even so, in this huge universe there are probably civilizations who have developed the technology mentioned. Assuming this is true let us look at Alex’s questions.

1) Which soul reincarnates this freshly recreated body?

Here on earth 80 years or so in one body is enough for the lessons we have to learn so imagine how we would feel after a thousand years. Most of us would be ready for a new body. If a clone of yourself was created and you had a chance to enter into it you would see from the higher angle of the soul if this is a wise thing to do. Most likely the answer would be no and a different entity would incarnate into it. It would not be a mindless robot unless it was manufactured that way.

2) If we take into account that they can create several copies of the same deceased person. Which one will be the real continuation of the deceased person and who will become an imposter?

Two different clones would normally be occupied by two different entities – similar to identical twins.

3) If a random soul enters a recreated body which remembers him/herself as a completely different figure, will it not be confusing for the soul to live in a body with such memories?

This is similar to the situation of walk-ins that we have talked about earlier. If a different entity occupies the body he would have the body’s memories and at first assume that he is that individual. As time passes he would have personality changes and become the entity he really is but with influences from the body he occupies.


Jan 29, 2013

Only in America

This has been circulating around the internet. No one knows for sure who the original author is but it makes some great points. It apparently was written by a Canadian.

1) Only in America could the rich people – who pay 86% of all income taxes – be accused of not paying their “fair share” by people who don’t pay any income taxes at all.

2) Only in America could people claim that the government still discriminates against black Americans when they have a black President, a black Attorney General, and roughly 18% of the federal workforce is black while only 12% of the population is black

3) Only in America could they have had the two people most responsible for our tax code, Timothy Geithner, the head of the Treasury Department and Charles Rangel who once ran the Ways and Means Committee, BOTH turn out to be tax cheats who are in favor of higher taxes.

4) Only in America can they have terrorists kill people in the name of Allah and have the media primarily react by fretting that Muslims might be harmed by the backlash.

5) Only in America would they make people who want to legally become American citizens wait for years in their home countries and pay tens of thousands of dollars for the privilege while we discuss letting anyone who sneaks into the country illegally just

magically’ become American citizens.

6) Only in America could the people who believe in balancing the budget and sticking by the country’s Constitution be thought of as “extremists.”

7) Only in America could you need to present a driver’s license to cash a check or buy alcohol, but not to vote.

8) Only in America could people demand the government investigate whether oil companies are gouging the public because the price of gas went up when the return on equity invested in a major U.S. oil company (Marathon Oil) is less than half of a company making tennis shoes (Nike).

9) Only in America could the government collect more tax dollars from the people than any nation in recorded history, still spend a Trillion dollars more than it has per year – for total spending of $7-Million PER MINUTE, and complain that it doesn’t have nearly enough money.

10) Only in America could politicians talk about the greed of the rich at a $35,000.00 a plate campaign fund-raising event.

11) Only in America can a man with no background, no qualifications and no experience … and a complete failure at his job … be reelected.


Jan 30, 2013

Interesting Story

Leaked emails prove Obama “backed plan to launch chemical weapon attack on Syria and blame it on Assad”  Link


Copyright 2013 by J J Dewey

Easy Access to all the Writings

Register at Freeread Here

Log on to Freeread Here

For Free Book go HERE and other books HERE

Check out JJ’s Political Blog HERE

JJ’s Amazon page HERE

Join JJ’s Study class HERE

Keys Writings 2013, Part 2

This entry is part 2 of 25 in the series 2013

Jan 17, 2013

Conspiracy Theory Revisited

Blayne: Take 9/11 for instance we have gone over it several times and I have shown people the proof and pointed people to that has proven it beyond doubt with overwhelming evidence far more then Sandyhook yet people still claim they don’t “believe” when it is not a matter of belief it is a matter of facts and evidence. Has anyone looked there beyond a cursory look? Apparently not since no one has come back and refuted a single piece of evidence much less the conclusions of 17 hundred architects and engineers…

JJ The solid evidence for a conspiracy at 911 is miniscule compared to Sandy Hook and I have refuted all the major points of 911 and brought up others that no one has refuted.

The evidence for the 911 conspiracy is similar to the moon landing hoax conspiracy where people just find what they are looking for. There are always coincidences and strange facts surface in a major event and even with Sandy Hook 90% of them have a plausible explanation. Maybe the 10% does too but we don’t have the necessary information. I saw no such 10% that defied explanation from 911. Thankfully we have put the moon hoax conspiracy to bed now we have flown satellites over the landing sites and taken pictures. This has convinced all but a few.

Blayne I would beg to differ. You have not refuted a single point on the site and I have refuted everyone of your points multiple times. 😉

JJ You need to go back and reread our arguments. I think most of the group here would think I refuted them quite substantially.

Blayne:  Of course you think that. However most of those that agree with you just take your word for it.   As I have said no one here including you has refuted a single point on the site. For those that think they already have please put your money where your mouth is and go to the site there is a nice little list of main points on the front page in the far right column pick anyone of those points and refute them here.   They have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt the towers fell because it was a controlled demolition, that it was physically impossible for the planes to bring the towers down. That is much better evidence of conspiracy then Sandyhook and that is just the tip of the iceberg.   There is video of BBC news caster reporting tower 7 had fallen when it was in the background still standing and on an on. There is a mountain of evidence you simply choose to ignore.   If I remember right your main claim is that they could have never gotten all that explosives in place. When it doesn’t matter because it been proven they were a controlled demolition.   Go ahead and make my day.. 😉

JJ I haven’t seen any credible evidence at all that the three towers were the act of a controlled demolition. On a believability scale of 1-100 I would rate this belief as a minus 10 – kinda in the category of Jack and the Beanstock. You and Dean are the only two here I know that accept this.

And I have read a lot of material on this and watched a lot of videos.

Blayne:  So the fact that it is physically impossible for the buildings to fall at the speed they did without explosives clearing the path below them before hand simply means nothing to you… LOL!   There you have it illustrating my point once again. Another dodge with a non answer ignoring the facts and evidence and a poor attempt at ridicule to boot to divert attention away from the facts.   Just curious why for as long as we have discussed this off and on have you refused to address a single fact on the site but instead just make off the wall comments like this?

JJ You sound like the Moon Landing Hoax people and wouldn’t be surprised if you didn’t also at one time believe that. They claimed that the moon landing defied the laws of physics and was an impossibility, but guess what? We now have photos of the landing sites proving for sure that we went to the moon. So I guess the laws of physics were not broken after all. Someone just miscalculated – which happens often.

When we argued this subject I covered the points you brought up. If you brought up some at the site you mentioned then I did cover them. I went there today and didn’t see much that was interesting or coherent.

When we discussed this earlier I countered all the points you made and you merely dismissed them or did not reply and moved on to another point claiming I had not answered when I did. Your mind is made up and we have already covered this subject into the ground so I don’t know why you keep bringing it up again and again. Maybe you ought to read some material on the other side like the book “Debunking 9/11 Myths: Why Conspiracy Theories Can’t Stand Up to the Facts.” If you read only the arguments on one side then that’s what you’ll be inclined to believe.

Blayne: You never refuted anything I brought up.

JJ This is completely untrue. I made dozens of posts refuting you and you were oblivious to being refuted. I don’t have time to get sucked into the same tired arguments again that bore most of the people here. I will post some general principles in discovering the truth behind conspiracies.


Jan 18, 2013

Forest and the Trees

Arguing about conspiracy theories is rarely productive as both sides usually have their minds made up but one thing they are good for is providing fodder for the seekers to sharpen their ability to perceive truth.

For instance, we either went to the moon or we did not. There is no gray area in the truth here. Those who were fooled by the so-called conspiracy evidence need to reflect and examine their thinking and ask where they went wrong. If a person can be fooled on one proven point then maybe he is fooled on a number of items.

The tricky thing about examining conspiracies is that there are real conspiracies in the world so one is foolish to just dismiss them all out of hand. Each one should be examined for its merit and analyzed. Arguing about conspiracy theories is rarely productive as both sides usually have their minds made up but one thing they are good for is proving fodder for the seekers to sharpen their ability to perceive truth.

That said, what are the major and minor points to consider? Do many miss the forest and only look at the trees? Yes, the big picture is often overlooked and those who are deceived get lost in the details.

Let’s see what we should be looking for if we want to find a real conspiracy composed of shadowy characters pulling strings in the background.

Major point: A shadowy conspiracy that must keep its identity secret must be composed of a small number of people to succeed. The ideal number is three. If there are more than six with a general knowledge of what is going on then the chances of the conspiracy being exposed is great and exponentially increases as more participants are added.

Most of such successful shadow conspiracies in our history have been murdering people who are considered obstacles. A conspiracy to murder has the advantage of only needing a small number of insiders to accomplish the job.

Sandy Hook fits in this category. We do not know if there was a conspiracy but one is possible because it could have been pulled off with three to six insiders.

On the other hand, many conspiracy theories would demand thousands of knowledgeable people participating. Two such conspiracies are the Moon landing and 9/11. Because both of these would demand thousands of participants and hundreds of insiders the mathematical probability of them being credible just from this one principle is so miniscule that they should be dismissed out of hand. The reason these conspiracies have to be very limited in number is that when more than six people are involved the chances of someone spilling the beans becomes high. When dozens or more are involved then you can be sure that the conspiracy will be exposed.

There has never been a proven shadow conspiracy that has involved more than a handful of people.

Conclusion: If you want to find a real shadow conspiracy look for one that can be carried out by a handful of participants.

Minor Point: A detail that doesn’t seem to make sense or seems too coincidental.

Sandy Hook has quite a few of these. For instance we have a picture of one of the dead girls, Emily Parker, showing up after the massacre. Then we have her dad being cheerful and laughing just before an interview.

The moon landing conspiracy claimed that the flag planted by Armstrong waved as in a wind which was impossible. Photos showed no stars in the sky and convinced them the astronauts were in a studio. The angle and color of shadows are inconsistent giving them more supposed proof they were in a studio.

Happenings like this are odd but they can be explained away.

The point is that after every major event anomalies will be discovered. A number of strange coincidences always seems to surface, even in events where it is obvious that no conspiracy exists.

Second major point: Real conspirators rely on tried and proven methods and do not want to try something new that requires great risk or would have a high risk of exposing them.

For instance, if the moon landing was a hoax then it would only be a matter of time before it was exposed by another nation checking out the landing sites. Why would anyone risk such a sure fire exposure?

Conspiracy people claim that the Twin Towers was a controlled demolition, but the largest building ever brought down with explosives was the J.L. Hudson Building in Detroit which was only 22 stories high. The Twin Towers were 110 stories and any technology to bring them down would have been very experimental and unproven. Only a fool would have tried such an unproven method and anyone smart enough to get away with a conspiracy is not a fool.

Minor point: It seems odd that the buildings collapsed as they did.

These details prove nothing because we have never witnessed the destruction of a building this size. Trying to guess all the details from theory is like the scientists trying to guess the results of the first atomic bombs going off. They knew nothing for sure until they actually exploded one and examined the results.

Science thought it was against the laws of physics that the universe could be increasing in the rate of expansion, but they found they were wrong when they discovered the very odd fact that the speed of expansion is increasing.

Observations around events that reveal oddities are the rule rather than the exception. A lot more reliable criteria for making a judgment is to look at the big picture and examine what is logical there.

Keith: Ideally, any crime committed can be best achieved by doing it yourself with nobody involved. Crimes can involve many people and succeed. Caesar’s assassination is an example of more than three persons being involved and succeeding. The Kennedy assassination probably involved more than three

JJ I said that three was the ideal number for a conspiracy, not that you couldn’t have one with a greater number. The larger the number the more awkward it becomes.

LWK did a good job in classifying the conspiracies as those that are intended to be kept secret (as the moon landing and 9/11) and those that require secrecy for a short time followed by the incentive of glory and power such as Caesar’s assassination and Stauffenberg’s group.

Another difference is no one can be proven to have known 911 was coming but Hitler knew there was a conspiracy against him. He suspected some of the players but did not go after them because it would hurt his credibility with the military. He was almost relieved after Stauffenberg’s failed attempt. He stated that he finally could go after the conspirators and still keep the support of the military.

All the main conspiracy accusations today involve shadowing characters that do not want to be discovered before, during or after the event.

If Kennedy was killed by a conspiracy I would guess there were only about a dozen who orchestrated it.

By contrast, the moon hoax would have involved over 100,000 – a mathematical impossibility. 911 would have involved thousands which would have made it impossible to keep secret after the event happened.

Let us suppose Stauffenberg and his group assassinated Hitler and wanted to keep it secret. Could they have succeeded? Not a chance.

Even so the thousands of supposed conspirators with the moon hoax or 911 could not have kept the details secret. We would have all kinds of insiders showing up on Sixty Minutes with disguised voices spilling their guts to clear their guilt.

Blayne:You forgot the Gulf of Tonken hoax that got us into the Vietnam war. They have admitted it never happend and it required hundreds of Naval and army personal to keep it quiet. Or how about Operation North woods? Here is a good list of proven

JJ The Gulf of Tonken and other examples prove my point. It was not kept secret. We now know all about it. Conspirators can often keep a plot secret, but after it is executed people pay attention and the truth comes out if there is a significant number of people who know about it.

It has been a dozen years since 9/11 and if it was a conspiracy as claimed then there would be dozens of the thousands involved who would be willing to talk about it just as many are now happy to talk about the Gulf of Tonken.

Blayne: This still does not explain the fact that the buildings could not fall through their own mass at near free fall speed as if there as nothing below them. Most of the building below where the planes hit was completely intact. Demolition is the only thing that can cause a building to do this as it clears the mass below.

JJ Wrong wrong wrong. Demolition is a thousand miles from explaining it because the technology does not exist to take down buildings like the Twin Towers. Your whole point rests on technology that has no existence and has never been tested.

Blayne; The details prove everything in this case…

JJ Then where are your details explaining an impossible demolition??? I have seen no good details on this that go beyond fantasy thinking.

Keith: If 9/11 was a government conspiracy then the individuals behind it in the U.S. facilitated the terrorist attack for their own ends. I do not think they organized the attack from the ground up. They became aware of the pending attack which they could have prevented and deliberately let it happen. If the buildings were demolished by explosives after the planes hit, then the conspirators used their black-ops network to carry it out.

JJ At least you are presenting something that is a possibility here. It is possible some in inner circles knew an attack was coming and did nothing to suit their own purposes.

On the other hand, you think the regular 9/11 conspiracy could have been carried out by few dozen people. This is not possible. There would have been hundreds involved in planning and planting the explosives. There would have been hundreds of soldiers involved in faking the planes and capturing and executing the passengers as claimed.

There would have been hundreds more who participated in faking the phone calls from the planes. This doesn’t count the masterminds who had to include hundreds more in their circle. If it was a conspiracy as claimed I would suspect that there are thousands who could expose it.


Jan 18, 2013


Here is an excerpt from my book illustrating the improbability of orthodox conspiracy theory and 9/11.

So, here’s the situation they present: Bush, the supposed dumbest president in history, was a major player in a conspiracy that involved the cooperation of thousands of participants, pulled off the most infamous disaster in history, and never got caught. Thousands of people are pointing fingers at him, trying to nail him, but he is outsmarting them all, great genius that he is.

Here’s the conspiracy story in a nutshell: Bush and Cheney, in cooperation with invisible power brokers and the military, arranged the hijacking of four planes – Flights 93, 77, 175 and 11. Somehow, after they took off, they were mysteriously snatched out of the skies and taken to an undisclosed location. At this location, the passengers were killed and disposed. The planes were also destroyed, obviously completely pulverized that very day to prevent any recognizable piece from being later used as evidence to the crime.

This was an ingenious accomplishment on the part of Bush and other conspirators when you take into account the whistle blowers at minor atrocities such as Abu Ghraib. 9/11 was much bigger than making men perform tricks while naked.

Just imagine being in the military and designated as one of those disposing of the passengers. Four planes land and all the hundreds of passengers are unloaded and lined up to be shot. You and dozens of others are to kill them and dispose of the bodies. Isn’t it amazing that not one of them has anonymously spoken to the press?

After the planes were snatched out of the air, an amazing thing occurred. They were replaced by missiles or special pods created by the government. These missiles were painted and fixed up to look like planes, but were not planes. These missiles had no passengers on board, but were specially designed to accomplish the evil deed.

They had to make it appear that the passengers were still on board to the end so they faked phone calls made from passengers to loved ones on the ground. All the dozens of loved ones involved were fooled into thinking they were talking to the real person because the government somehow knew in advance who was going to be on each plane and duplicated the correct voices in advance using voice technology. Conspiracy people do not even ask how a bungling bureaucracy can even manage to successfully retrieve the phone numbers of the correct loved ones to call, let alone make them think a computer voice is a family member.

I don’t know about you, but if a computer called me pretending to be my wife, I think I could tell if I was talking to her or not.

The missiles then went about to accomplish their evil mission. The first was substituted for Flight 93 and crashed in a field in Pennsylvania.

What was that about? I know if I were a conspirator, the last thing I would do is to go through all that trouble just to crash a missile in a field. Strange.

The second, the substitute for Flight 77, crashed into the Pentagon. What was that about? The military attacking itself? Oh, yeah… that was just to remove suspicion. That really worked, didn’t it? Even though dozens of people saw a plane, some even close enough to see the passengers, they were fooled. It was really a missile.

The other two missiles, which replaced Flights 175 and 11, plowed into the two Twin Towers buildings. Though millions of people saw the video of this, what they saw were not planes, but missiles or specially built pods that landed in just the right places to not interfere with the planned explosive demolition.

Explosive demolition?

Yes, and this is the amazing part. The conspiracy people believe that the Twin Towers and WTC 7 were brought down by a controlled demolition by the use of pre-planted explosives. Even though the largest demolition by explosives has been just over 20 stories, the conspirators decided to go for the Guinness Book of World Records. They increased that record not twice, or four times, but over five times and did it simultaneously with not one building, but two, along with a smaller record-breaking building on the side.

They didn’t care that the technology for such an unknown feat had not been perfected or tested. Instead, they recklessly went ahead blowing up the buildings, just hoping everything would work as planned. This would have indeed been a dumb thing to do, but it turned out that Bush was extremely lucky that things worked out.

Planting the explosives was the difficult part and really illustrates the hidden genius of Bush to have pulled this off.

Hundreds of workers with blow torches and construction tools would have had to enter the buildings and, without being seen, tear out the walls in thousands of locations in each of the Twin Towers. Then they would have had to pull out blowtorches and cut out “V” notches in the thousands of steel beams that supported the towers.

Next, they would have had to wire one explosive charge to another in thousands of locations, destroying and disrupting offices as they moved along. After this, they would have had to repair their destructive work before each worker entered his office again. The repair would have had to be so seamless that none of the thousands of people in the Twin Towers would notice that any changes were made.

Even more amazing is that none of the hundreds, or perhaps even thousands, of demolition workers have spilled their guts. Not one of them has gone to the press to become the hero of the ages. Maybe the conspirators had the military kill them all.

Again, the question arises. When the military lined up and gunned down all the demolition workers, was there not one of the assassins that had a prick in his conscience and was willing to tell his story?

I guess not.

It must have been the genius of Bush that pulled this all off so seamlessly.

If you believe this is the way 9/11 really happened, then I have a bridge to sell you, cheap.

Sorry, I do not have time to answer all the time consuming questions. Instead, just google the answers or go here:

We have already covered this subject to death and I have no interest i repeating what I have already said.


Jan 19, 2013

Re: Forest and the Trees

Blayne: The Gulf of Tonken incident did not come to light for decades Along with many other incidents…. there goes your point. There have been dozens willing to talk about it.

JJ The truth of the Gulf of Tonkin was available from the beginning. A number of insiders tried to reveal the truth. Senator Wayne Morse had an informant shortly after the incident that revealed the truth to him, but wasn’t able to stop us going to war. The 9/11 incident was much more massive and would have involved many more people but we have no Senator or member of Congress claiming to have an informant giving us details of a conspiracy.

Not one insider has come forward with any testimony on a 9/11 conspiracy let alone evidence of a demolition. If your belief were true many would have come forward by now.

JJ Quote Wrong wrong wrong. Demolition is a thousand miles from explaining it because the technology does not exist to take down buildings like the Twin Towers. Your whole point rests on technology that has no existence and has never been tested.

Blayne: Yet the fact remains they fell at near free fall speed mainly into their own footprint. The only way that could happen is to have their mass below them cleared out of the way and the only tech that we know of that can do that is controlled demolition.

JJ You keep bringing up this freefall doctrine just like you did a couple years ago when we covered it thoroughly. We both gave our explanations and now you want to do the dance all over again. Why? You’re not giving any additional light this time around.

The last time I gave you this reference: LINK

And here is a more recent one illustrating that the freefall was not such a freefall after all.


Of course the conspiracy people counter this but unconvincingly.

Blayne: Also I wonder why you think taking down the towers would be any different then any other high rise? The tech has existed for decades.

JJ You have absolutely no proof of this. Either prove it or quit making this claim from the seat of your pants.

JJ Quote: Then where are your details explaining an impossible demolition??? I have seen no good details on this that go beyond fantasy thinking.

Blayne I have posted them many times.

JJ Strange. You keep saying this but I have not seen it. Has anyone else?

You then want to bring up many details that we have already discussed. If you want my answers on the rest of your questions go back two years and read my posts. They are still there.

I will add this interesting quote from the popular Mechanics book on the subject of demolition.

“if you look at any building that is imploded, the explosives are primarily placed on the ground floor and the basement,” Loizeaux (a demolition expert) says. “Why? Because you want to remove the columns when you have the majority of that stored potential energy above where you’re taking the columns out. You want to release as much energy as possible. if you look at the collapse of these structures, they start collapsing up where the planes hit. They don’t start collapsing down -below.” Loizeaux says even if explosives had been placed on the upper floors, they would have generated significantly more dust and debris than mere “puffs.”

Despite his credentials as a physicist, Jones is among those who make faulty assumptions about controlled demolition. in putting forth his case that the buildings were brought down with explosives, Jones writes: “Roughly 29000 pounds of RDX-grade linear-shaped charges (which could have been pre-positioned by just a few men) would then suffice in each Tower and WTC 7 to cut the supports at key points so that gravity would bring the buildings straight down.”

According to Loizeaux, Jones is simply wrong. “The explosives configuration manufacturing technology [to bring down those buildings] does not exist,” Loizeaux says. “If someone were to attempt to make such charges, they would weigh thousands of pounds apiece. You would need forklifts to bring them into the building.”

The biggest commercially available charges, Loizeaux tells Popular Mechanics, are able to cut through steel that is three inches thick. The, box columns at the base of the World Trade Center towers were 14 inches on a side. If big enough charges did exist, Loizeaux says, for each tower it could hypothetically take as long as two months for a team of up to 75 men with unfettered access to three floors to strip the fireproofing off the columns and then place and wire the charges.

“There’s just no way to do it,” Loizeux says, adding that it is similarly implausible that explosives could he smuggled into the buildings. “If you just put bulk explosives in file cabinets next to every column in the building, it wouldn’t knock those columns down. It would blow the windows out. It would trash the [building] and probably blow out two floors above and a floor below . . but it wouldn’t knock the [buildingl down.”


Jan 19, 2013

If It Will Save One Life

I’ve always hated the “save one life” argument. The Left uses it as an emotional argument often to take us away from freedom. They used it to create the irritating 55 MPH speed limit and all kinds of regulations. They have spent up to a billion dollars to save a life with nuclear energy regulations where for about a hundred bucks they could save a sick kid in Central America.


Jan 19, 2013

Re: 9/11 Analysis

Dean You should have already researched it.

JJ I have researched supposed whistle blowers before but new attempts at supplying them come up all the time. None from any insider and none with any convincing evidence.

Dean: I already gave you witnesses in the link, there is many more I didn’t reference, but you are so much in denile so nothing will help you?

JJ You’re dreaming of another reality. Just make a feeble attempt to give us one actual whistle blower that goes beyond someone hearing a noise, hearsay or something. Give me one like the actual witness to the Gulf of Tonkin that was on the ship and spilled his guts to Senator Morse. Maybe you could supply a soldier feeling guilty for gunning down the passengers of the planes after they were miraculously snatched from the air – or maybe someone who fabricated the cell phone calls or helped plant the explosives etc.

Blayne’s whistleblowers “FBI translator Sibel Edmonds, the most gagged woman in America, having the State Secrets Privilege imposed on her twice, went public last year to reveal that Bin Laden maintained “intimate” relations with the US right up until 9/11.

JJ It’s common knowledge we supported Ben Laden during the Russian war with Afghanistan and if we kept some links going that proves nothing. This gal was no insider with any knowledge of a conspiracy.

Blayne: Another whistleblower is former Sergeant in the United States Army named Lauro “LJ” Chavez. Chavez was stationed at MacDill AFB where he claims he witnessed unusual preparations for a potential airplane hitting the base on the morning of 9/11 and distinctly heard officers talking about a stand down. This led him to go public in questioning the NORAD stand down and the demolition of the twin towers.”

JJ Again, a million miles from an insider. Lots of people have heard strange stuff. Listen to Coast to Coast and you’ll be amazed, but observations and hearsay does not prove a conspiracy.

As I said, out of the thousands that had to be involved not one with real knowledge has come forth. Surely one of the hundreds that had to plant the explosives would feel enough guilt to come forward. The fact that no one has ought to tell you something.

Good information on the black boxes is here:

Blayne: Again if no conspiracy can exist without an original conspirator coming forward how did the Manhattan Project stay secret?

JJ The Manhattan project didn’t stay secret. Right after the bomb hit Hiroshima everyone knew about it.

It is fairly easy to keep preparations a secret but after they are executed it is another matter. After 9/11 was executed some participants would normally come forth – particularly rank and file workers just doing their job planting explosives.

JJ Of course the argument made in the video is invalid. The speed of a transfer of force is faster than freefall which explains the supposedly strange data.

Blayne: You have never gotten past the fact that it is physically impossible for a plane and low grade fire to bring down a metal framed building much less the speed of the fall. Yet you continue to thumb your nose at over 1700 architects and engineers informing you of that fact… Talk about fantasy land geeze..

JJ Nothing to get over. It fell at the speed it fell whatever that was for there seems to be lack of agreement on this except for certain truthers who are always 100% sure they have the facts right.

This is just like the moon hoax conspiracy except the moon hoax people had better evidence.

To calculate what an event would accomplish when it was a one of a kind event often results in occurrences that baffle calculations.

Keith listed a number of them from the Moon Hoax but at least he accepts the photographic evidence of the landing sites we now have. The laws of physics were not violated. Instead many just either calculated incorrectly or used bad data in the process.

True believers will never prove their 9/11 conspiracy theories because they make no sense. 20 years from now we will still have no insider whistle blower and the truthers will continue with this same tired debate.

On Sept 11, 2010 we started going back and forth on this subject for about two weeks through about 200 posts. I’ve tried to not repeat myself this round but I think we have covered this enough so unless some really significant new material is presented this will be my last post on this subject for some time to come.

Easy Access to all the Writings

Register at Freeread Here

Log on to Freeread Here

For Free Book go HERE and other books HERE

Check out JJ’s Political Blog HERE

JJ’s Amazon page HERE

Join JJ’s Study class HERE

Keys Writings 2013, Part 1

This entry is part 1 of 25 in the series 2013

Jan 1, 2013

Celebrities For Gun Control

Check out the celebrities who are for gun control HERE


Jan 3, 2013

Are We Crazy?

Ruth gave an interesting link to a study that gives evidence that people like us are more unstable than most. And who are people like us?

They are those who are not a part of an organized religion yet claim to be “spiritual”

Read over the article and then answer some questions: (LINK)

(1) Does this study reflect the truth?

(2) If so why are those who seem to have taken a higher path having mental problems? (3) Or have some or all not taken a higher path?


Jan 4, 2013

 More on Sandy Hook

I got sidetracked tonight watching videos about the inconsistencies of the Sandy Hook shooting. There are an increasing number of things that just do not add up. Take a look at these videos.







Jan 5, 2013

Mysteries of Sandy Hook

LWK Have you ever seen an event like this (mass school shootings, theater shootings, Murray Bldg., World Trade Center, etc., etc.) where there were not apparently huge conflicts between initial reports and later reports?

The media almost always reports initially with whatever gossip, second or third hand reports – anything or anyone they can stand in front of a camera – at the beginning? They don’t give a damn about truth initially, they just want to have breathless reporters reporting on something.

What would be really surprising, and I mean _REALLY_ surprising, would be an event where initial reporting was found to be even remotely accurate. 🙂

JJ In other incidents like this and major events I often find the media distorts the news to fit their agenda, but with few exceptions the actual facts are usually fairly accurate. For instance, NBC edited George Zimmerman’s statement to make it sound like he was a racist when the unedited version presents a different story.

In reporting the Aurora shooting they speculated there could be an accomplice but didn’t put it forth as fact.

With Sandy Hook the media put forth a lot of things as fact and then retracted and changed the story or just acted like the original reporting did not exist.

For instance, the original reports had Adam using handguns with his rifle in the car. This was changed to him killing the kids with a Bushmaster AR-15 rifle and maybe a shotgun in the car.

I haven’t seriously considered a conspiracy since the JFK era but this one has my attention. I haven’t concluded some insiders planned and executed the whole thing but it does appear we do not have the whole story and there is some type of cover-up going on.

Here are just a few of the problems involved.

(1) The Medical examiner who was supposed to be a sharp intelligent guy sounds like he can’t articulate a sentence that makes sense. LINK

(2) Reports of multiple shooters from witnesses now ignored. LINK

(3) Victoria Soto’s RIP Facebook Page created 4 days before shooting, has recently been taken down. Numerous other pages claiming inconsistencies have disappeared. LINK

(4) Sandy Hook Principle Gives Interview After Being Reported Dead. LINK

(5) Sandy Hook father, Robby Parker, appears to be acting for the cameras. How can he be smiling and taking pictures after his daughter was gunned down? LINK

(6) Facebook is Deleting accounts that don’t jive with the official story. LINK

(7) Sandy Hook Children Practicing Evacuation Drills Before Shooting LINK

(8) Adam Lanza’s Hard Drive was destroyed and his mother was killed making it difficult to discover many details.

(9) Why was he wearing body armor if he planned to commit suicide?

(10) How did Lanza manage to carry 90 magazines which was needed for all the shooting?

(11) Connecticut police spokesman threatens to arrest independent journalists and whistleblowers LINK

(11) No footage of the shooting has been released even though it must exist.

(12) Emily Parker appears to show up after she is dead. LINK

(13) It is odd that Emily Parker’s donation website designed and developed and rolled out the same day as the shooting. LINK

(14) Why is there no record of Adam Lanza’s existence for the past three years?

(15) How could he have his brother’s I.D. when his brother hadn’t seen him for two years?

(16) Why are all the families given a “minder” and none but Robbie Parker (who may be an actor) are allowed or willing to talk to the media?

We could probably add to this list. If anyone thinks of something let us know.


Jan 5, 2013

 Re: Mysteries of Sandy Hook

lwk: After the Oklahoma City Bombing there were very quickly reports of middle eastern men seen near the building (and later reports they were seen with McVeigh). Those reports quickly stopped and were later ignored.

JJ This is another event I have wondered about. In this case I doubt that a government conspiracy engineered the catastrophe but think there have been some mid eastern contribution that was covered up or not investigated.

As far as Sandy Hook goes, all your explanations are possibly true, but because of the number of things that have to be explained away the whole thing smells fishy. I doubt that there was a major conspiracy but my best guess so far is this.

The Feds who arrived on the scene represent a mindset against the Second Amendment and are pro Obama. The first thing they look for is ammunition to use against conservatives. If Adam did the killing with handguns when a so-called assault rifle was available then this was not a situation for their maximum advantage. They caused the story to be recast so the main weapon was the Bushmaster.

There could have been an accomplice who a quick check turned out to be an Occupy Wall Street character so the FBI sequestered him and he was never heard of again. The case against guns would be much better if the gun owner seemed like a right winger as Nancy Lanza seemed to be.

Actually, it has not yet been reported which political party any of the Lanzas belonged to. Nancy appears to be a right wing gun owner and that’s what the media wants, but it is entirely possible she was a Democrat, being from such a liberal state.

All this is mere speculation, but this story does have enough mysterious elements that I am pretty sure some important facts are missing.


Jan 6, 2013

Re: Are We Crazy?

We’ve had several good comments on this question but you hit the nail on the head Larry. This answer is very close to what I had in mind. The story of Hercules going insane for a while illustrates this problem.

The only thing I might add is there are some who are just drifting and not on any path who have not achieved soul contact who rebel for the sake of rebellion or are disconnected merely because they are lazy.


Jan 8, 2013

Heaven On Earth if You Ask Me...


Thought some here might be interested in this. He is the JJ of Self sufficiency and farming IMO. This is the future!

Check out this guy’s farm in the Austrian Alps. Simply Amazing in high altitude what they grow and do with his own brand of permaculture and makes a good living too with no subsidies no fertilizers or chemicals etc… It’s heaven on earth if you ask me!

Wow this guy uses rocks to heat his fish ponds with the sun this guy is amazing what he is doing we can all learn from him. He is even growing citrus at 4000 feet altitude with no greenhouse… It doesn’t give details on the citrus so I have to find out how he is doing it. But he says terracing and rocks and raised beds (not like what we do) create micro climates and more heat etc…

Amazing stuff and the place is just beautiful around a hundred acres or so. LINK

More Sepp Holzer wisdom! Raised bed gardens and orchards with no irrigation needed. This is Awesome! LINK

This can be done in your backyard too. Imagine a garden you don’t have to water or weed? Wow! JJ Good find Blayne. I watched all three videos. If the guy can have that much success at 4000+ feet imagine how much easier it would be at 2-3000 feet. I am amazed he can raise lemons there and never saw a good explanation as to why he could do that. His system is really quite complex for a plain spoken farmer and I would think one would have to put in some serious study to duplicate it. I’ve always envisioned the Cities of Light to have sustainable farming something like this.

I have an idea for you. If you ere interested you could probably make a good living giving lectures and classes on this type of farming. You’d have to get a sound knowledge of it though. I did a search on Amazon for the words “Temperate Permaculture” and quite a few things came up. I ordered one from my library.


Jan 8, 2013

Principles & Matter

John Crane asks: One question I always meant to ask JJ is what is the true principle and the false principle behind the creation of the etheric physical plane and the dense physical plane. What ARE those principles? And, what is the difference between a TRUE principle and a FALSE principle? If a principle is false, is it really a principle?

JJ Good question, John.

First, this teaching came from DK and he never explained why physical matter is not created on a principle but etheric matter is. He merely stated it as a fact several times in his writings.

Concerning DK’s views on principles it is interesting that he never uses the term “false principle” or talks about such a thing. It appears that his view is that either a principle is in play or it is not.

He most likely believes that physical matter is not based on a principle because it is merely a lower reflection of etheric matter. The etheric is created first and the physical follows. Therefore, the principle that creates physical matter lies in the source of creation of etheric matter.

That principle of which I have extensively written about, is the interplay of positive/negative male/female energies.


Jan 9, 2013

Alex Jones Interview

I decided to write another letter to my local paper on the attack on Alex Jones. Here it is:

The Alex Jones-Piers Morgan confrontation was great entertainment and the left would certainly like to portray Jones as the spokesman representing Second Amendment advocates but such is not the case. Most Second amendment advocates I know think he is somewhat of a nutcase and is far removed from their idea of presenting a case.

On the other hand, Piers was not to be outdone in the craziness department. The next day he had a panel of anti gun advocates and Buzz Bissinger of the Daily Beast suggested that Piers take Alex up on his boxing match challenge and show up with an automatic weapon and shoot him.

To this Abby Huntsman (Huffington Post) responded: “I’d love to see that” [laughter] in uniform.”

Then Piers Morgan showed approval stating: “I’ll borrow my brothers uniform.”

Alex Jones was just overly aggressive in presenting his case but the Piers Morgan peace group talking of killing Jones was beyond the pale.

Piers argued with Jones that the super strict gun control measures in Britain led to fewer gun killings. True, but North Korea has virtually zero domestic gun deaths. Is that where we want to go? He overlooked the unintended consequence that England and Wales lead the Western world’s crime league, with nearly 55 crimes per 100 people and your chances of being mugged in London is six times higher than New York. References:  LINK 1  LINK 2  LINK 3


Jan 9, 2013

Gun Warning from Russia

You’ve got to read this:


Jan 10, 2013

The Point of Tension

Blayne JJ seems to think the millions of innocents killed in the middle east to combat the dark forces is acceptable collateral damage.

JJ First, let me point out that millions of innocents were not killed in the War in Iraq. According to Wikileaks revealing of classified information there were 66,081 civilian deaths.

On the other hand, if there is a reasonable chance of preserving freedom it is worth most any cost, even the lives of millions as happened in World War II.

Then too there is a time to fight physically and a time to strategize and fight on the emotional and mental planes.

General Washington realized that it was not wise to stand and fight to the last man against overwhelming odds. If he had done this just once we would not have a USA. Instead, he attacked sparingly, retreated liberally and waited for his moment which finally came on Christmas Eve when he crossed the Potomac.

Even though Washington and his rag tag army fought against great odds they had a huge advantage over gun supporters today who want to take on the government. They had an organization with about a third of the population solidly behind them.

In our recent past any group who has stood up to the government has been small and when the firing began no one came to their aid.

This tells us that it would take a big event to cause gun supporters to unite enough to become a major threat. It would take something like Obama issuing an executive order to confiscate all guns.

He’s smart enough to not do that so he will proceed one step at a time.

The question now before us is what his next step will be. He has indicated he will make one and Joe Biden has suggested that he will bypass Congress and issue an executive order.

My guess is this. He will seek to ban all semi automatic weapons. Then he will wait until the next disaster and seek more control with the goal of reaching a complete ban by 2016.

Now is the time to attempt to influence public opinion, not by firepower but by our words, feelings and thought.

Unfortunately the greatest power of persuasion here at the end of the Piscean influence is through the emotions and the killings at Sandy Hook have pressed powerful emotional buttons. It doesn’t matter that mental plane logic tells us that more people are murdered with hammers and bare hands than rifles. Therefore, we need to put the Sandy Hook killings in context. Context does not enter in to the emotional plane. Those 20 kids are dead and by George we need to do something so it never happens again.

The NRA does a good job of making mental arguments but they need to fire back on the emotional plane. They need to run ads giving emotional testimony from people who have been saved by guns.

We are at an awkward point now. The next step is to wait and see how big of a move Obama will make and then seek to influence Congress and public opinion in the opposite direction. A point of tension will most likely come but it has not yet arrived.


Jan 10, 2013

Re: The Point of Tension

Dan: Just to clear ANY ambiguity, by “firepower” you are talking about some kind of armed revolt/uprising against the govt, you are NOT talking about arming/protecting one’s self/family normally as one should see fit such as with a handgun or etc. Is that correct?

JJ Correct. Any group right now that is seen by the government as organizing an armed revolt will be in danger the next four years. The best thing Second Amendment advocates can do is link up through the net so they can band together should a point of tension come. Without that point of tension they will loose.


Jan 10, 2013

Re: Alex Jones Interview

A agree. Jones did not turn up for a debate but to filibuster and dominate. He threw out a few good facts but didn’t tie anything together and wouldn’t answer Piers’ question. He could have easily defeated Piers if he had answered his questions when he asked them and gave a couple intelligent ones back but as I said people judge mostly by their feelings and most had the feeling that he was a crazy man so that negated any good facts he presented. To prove my point consider this question.

What are people discussing: The context of Jones’ dialog or the way it was presented? So far the answer is 99% the latter.


Jan 10, 2013

Re: Alex Jones Interview

JJ What are people discussing: The context of Jones’ dialog or the way it was presented? So far the answer is 99% the latter.

Dean I don’t agree only those that are infantile are discussing that.

JJ Everyone here including you must be infantile then because we have not been discussing the words he said but only the way he said them. Can you supply any source where people are quoting his actual words in support of the Second Amendment or to show he won the argument? They may exist, but I have not seen them.


Jan 11, 2013

Piers Met His Match

You have to watch this debate between Piers Morgan and Ben Shapiro. Shapiro dominated him and was a 1000 times more effective than Alex Jones. LINK


Jan 11, 2013

The Future of Gun Control, Part 1

My last post had a massive typo in the headline. I deleted it and am replacing it with this one.

There are two approaches Obama can take with his gun control measures.

(1) The “boil the frog slowly” method so he gradually gets his way.

(2) Take bold measures and deal with the awakened frogs.

The Left normally uses method #1. They proceed step by step until the frog (the people) is sufficiently neutralized and then they will proceed boldly.

If the Left sticks with method one, disarming the people will take much longer than Obama’s next four years but it could go something like this.

2013 Banning the sales of so-called assault rifles and large capacity magazines but stopping short of confiscating the ones already in the people’s possession.

2015 Because of additional shootings with “assault rifles” already in circulation the word is that this type of possession is too dangerous for our kids. A program is initiated to buy them back from citizens willing to turn them in.

2016 The buy back program was only mildly successful but crazy people still surface with assault weapons killing people. The media goes crazy with the stories and Democrats clamor for more action.

Finally, a law is passed making assault weapon illegal to own. People are told to turn them in or suffer prosecution. They are smart enough to not go on a door-to-door search at this time as they deem it too dangerous.

About 40% of the illegal guns are turned in.

After this there are regular stories about gun owners arrested here and there that are caught with the illegal guns. This tends to cause many owners to fear and a trickle of guns continue to get turned in.

2018?? There are still incidents of crazy people murdering with assault weapons and the Left demands more action to save our children. Those who still possess the illegal guns are told to turn them in or they will be taken by force. If they have to be taken by force then the offender will face jail time.

After this warning all but the strongest willed turn in their guns.

The authorities then go after the owners a little at a time and avoid any mass door-to-door searches. They go through their list and begin issuing warrants for their arrest. If they turn themselves in their penalty will be light. If not then the results will be dire. When a person turns himself in the authorities then go to his home when he is away and search his premises and take his guns.

Those who do not turn themselves in are considered dangerous so they stake them out and when they are out of the house or at work they approach them and arrest them. Later they search their homes and take their guns.

2020-2040 There are still shootings, many with regular handguns. The confiscation of handguns follows the same process as with assault weapons, leaving only hunting rifles and eventually the process repeats itself with those until the United States is declared to be a “gun free zone.”

Blayne: When California banned assault rifles only about 10% complied. So I think your 40% number is a bit high.

JJ I don’t think California went after the owners or threatened prison time just for possessing arms they acquired legally.

On the other hand, if there was a serious threat of prison for those who were to continue to possess certain types of firearms after a ban with a command to turn them in then I would still guess that about 40% would comply.


Jan 12, 2013

The Future of Gun Control, Part 2

The Bold Approach.

2013-2016 Obama uses an executive order to ban the sales of so-called assault rifles and large capacity magazines and makes the very possession of them illegal. All owners must turn them in or suffer the threat of jail.

Most of the blue states cooperate but some of the governors of the red states announce that they will not enforce this decree because it is unconstitutional.

Gun advocates organize in all states and soon there is talk of a new civil war between the states. Many gun owners in blue states move to the red states.

Congress tries to step in and bring order but Obama is stubborn and insists his decree be followed. He calls on the military to take over the capital of one of the rebel states to set an example. Some of the soldiers go AWL to protest but most obey. They are met with resistance and the new civil war begins.

It’s not a prophecy. I presented two different paths that the Left could take and the probable outcomes if such steps were taken. Obama isn’t likely to take the bold step I referenced – at least not as a first step.


Jan 12, 2013

A Story to Convince the Left

The Left may not think it is necessary to have guns to protect your family, but protecting your dog may be another matter.

Here’s a story about a guy who shot a burglar who was attacking his dog. When the bad guys start choking your dog that may be too much for even a leftie and just may convince him to support the Second Amendment.


Jan 15, 2013

Best Sandy Hook Video Yet

Sharón sent me this and I don’t know how anyone can watch it and not question the orthodox version.



Jan 16, 2013

Re: Best Sandy Hook Video Yet

I’ve spent most of the night doing additional research on the Sandy Hook shooting so I don’t have much time left to write a post.

I’ve read quite a few that claim to debunk the conspiracy. Most of the debunkers do a very poor job and instead of refuting with facts they paint anyone who questions the official version as crazy people who are truthers and racists who believe every conspiracy out there. I despise these people who use name-calling as their main weapon of argument.

In addition to name-calling they mischaracterize and distort the beliefs of most skeptics. They paint with a broad brush stating that we believe no one was killed, the people interviewed were actors and the Jews did it.

True, there are a handful with black and white beliefs who have reached some wild conclusions, but I find most skeptics are like me who are open to explanations but have not received satisfactory ones from some of the mysteries.

For instance, who was the handcuffed “suspect” they had in the police cruiser described by an eye witness on the scene? Who was the “suspect” they had in the woods behind the school, as seen by the helicopter?

Some say this was Chris Manfredonia, the father of one of the students who was looking for his kid.

Manfredonia is the athletic coach for the school. The man in the woods is not likely Manfredonia. The man in the woods is tall and slender, while Manfredonia is stocky. Also why would an athletic coach be wearing camouflage pants to school as the mystery man was wearing?

It is very questionable how many guns were used and which ones did the killing.

Unlike other shootings not one witness have come forth to describe the incident.

Usually in an incident like this twenty or so are wounded but in this case all involved were killed but one and we have not heard from the one.

It is unlikely a nerd like Adam would have been a good enough shot to have killed all 20 small kids in such a short time leaving no survivors.

I’m not big on conspiracies but it appears that we do not have all the truth on this. I hope this eventually gets thoroughly investigated.


Jan 17, 2013

Re: Best Sandy Hook Video Yet

JJ: I despise these people who use name-calling as their main weapon of argument.

Ruth: That word seems a bit harsh coming from you.

Do you mean that you despise their personalities?

JJ The answer should be obvious. Do you think I despise their souls? Of course not.

Ruth: Personally, who cares if people use name calling. It is just part of the programming humans instill and use against each other, but it doesn’t need to be taken as a personal insult and it doesn’t even need to affect our emotions. You teach that.

JJ No I don’t teach that. What I do teach is that the emotional bodies of all of us are affected in both positive and negative ways and it is important that we recognize both reactions and not deny or suppress them. If we do we are headed for ill health on a number of levels. The important thing in dealing with negativity from others is not to ignore or pretend the negativity does not exist or that it has no effect on your emotional body but to make decisions based on looking at the soul.

Yes, my personality despises name callers, probably similar to the way the personality or Jesus despised the money changers at the temple before he chased them out. I have no problem with that. On the other hand, because I attempt to decide from the viewpoint of the soul I do not reply in kind by calling them names back but attempt to influence them by other means.

Yes, I see their souls from my soul, but I see their personalities from my personality and will allow my personality to honestly feel whatever it wants to feel. The personality though is not the decider. It can influence, but the decisions are made on a higher level.

Easy Access to all the Writings

Register at Freeread Here

Log on to Freeread Here

For Free Book go HERE and other books HERE

Check out JJ’s Political Blog HERE

JJ’s Amazon page HERE

Join JJ’s Study class HERE