Recommended Articles or Essays:
INTRODUCTION
Isn't this world a funny place? After watching some 30 videos in the South African Desteni Series called 'Exposed: The History of Mankind' I decided that I had seen enough to get an impression of what the perspective entails. Perhaps some in the Desteni Group would think it too premature to write anything about this before having seen every video in the series (which is heading for 70 at the moment), but you know me (see Study Everything Before Drawing Conclusions), I wanted to describe the effects the information in the videos had on me. This page presents some thoughts on the comparisons between this perspective from the Desteni Group that I will refer to as Jack's Perspective on the History of Mankind, or Jack's Perspective, named after the dimensional person behind the series and Mila's (from the SSOA) perspective.
RELATIVITY OF THE ACCOUNTS
Before I move on I would like to say that I really had a laugh today: not because of Jack's story, but of the funny situation that I find myself in: here you have the history of the world according to Jack and there is the history of the world according to Mila (History of the Human Dream) and when I looked at them both I had to admit that I really couldn't tell which account of the story was right. Would I opt for Jack's story because of the pretty face of the portal, or would I hold on to Mila's perspective because I was more acquainted with it? Would I perhaps go for Jack's tale because of all these stories on the deconstruction of heaven? Would I perhaps trust these people like Jack more than Mila's sources?
The funny thing is that I really can't tell at this moment and I think hardly anyone can be sure right now. So, I tend to approach people who are sure about either one or the other perspective (or perhaps yet a few other accounts of our past) with the idea that they must have somewhere along the line decided to just go for one perspective: as if they were in some shop trying to find a 'new coat of history' to wear and they just chose a nice one that looked good in the mirror according to their eyes at the moment. Having said this I want to say that I cannot be sure which tale is more right and perhaps a creative mix of the two (with a grain of salt of some other perspective) is more accurate.
In the page with the slightly provocative title 'Cut the Athena Crap' from September 2006 I concluded that it would perhaps be better to spend not too much time on thinking about our history because our minds were simply too deluded to have the ability to say anything sensible about it. It would probably be more useful to work on the clearing of the mind (or brainwashing it properly with a nice de-electrifying cleaning soap) from its various degrees of angular, distorted thought-form.
When that is done to a certain degree we might be more capable of getting in touch with our history, not by either believing Jack or Mila, but because of knowing it through some 'genetic' or perhaps even a swell 'holographic' connection with our ancestors (oh, what a swell party this is!, or watch the video at the bottom). If our ability to understand expands, in line with our level of harmlessness I think we would have a good chance of connecting with the real truth ourselves. That would be the ultimate verification of any story on our common past. Until I guess we all have to pick out an account of history which suits us best.
COMPARISONS
I don't want to give a too detailed account of Jack's story. You could have a nice and long sit by watching the series yourself (start with part 1 and then use one of the index pages (youtube, veoh) on the South African site to look for the others. The first video was put on-line somewhere near the end of August 2007.
Even though I still suppose most of the readers are familiar with Mila's account on history (I used to be a kind of SSOA-spin off remember with renegade SSOA-people visiting it), but perhaps that is not the case any longer. I will therefore talk about both these accounts of history in a way as if you are not familiar with any of them. If I'm wrong in interpreting these stories, please email me by dropping a letter in the box at the bottom of this page. I'm only human, but I love it!
What both accounts have in common is quite an important role of the Anu. Within Mila's account Anu himself is hardly mentioned whereas in Jack's story he plays a crucial role. In Jack's account both Anu, Enki, Enlil and Marduk are fooling around with the apeman in order to develop a human being. In Mila's account it is mainly Marduk and Inanna that are responsible for a certain brand of humans.
That by the way is an interesting difference: In Jack's story the creation of mankind started with the dawn of the Anu on Earth, whereas in Mila's story it all started with the Sirians creating 18 human races, only to be followed by the Anu some 140,000 years later. The Anu would - in Mila's account - only be responsible for the Anu-slave race, which would have been a combination of one of the then present Sirian 'root races' with their own genetics. They would have added their genetic lineages to humanity which eventually led to a presence in nearly everybody on this planet today, well, with at least one lineage (of the 25 or 144 lineages that were used to build your biology from, but that is a different story altogether, as Jack would say).
In Mila's account the Anu would only be responsible for the creation of the white race and not for all the others. In Jack's account you hear nothing about the differences between the races. In both accounts the Sirians play a role. Jack portrays them as really sly and evil, but Mila has a more balanced perspective: there were various factions within the Sirians that had different intentions.
Something else that both stories have in common is that humanity was mainly used for the benefit of others, be it the Anu or the Sirians. The Anu are the worst kind of characters in Mila's account, almost responsible for everything that has gone wrong on this planet (besides a number of other reasons). In Mila's account there is no mention of any Atlanteans before the seeding of mankind, whereas they are duped by the Anu to inhabit their 'physical human vessels' in Jack's account. Mila only uses Atlanteans to refer to those living in Atlantis before it desintegrated some 10,000 years ago.
The reason why the Anu seeded humanity is about the same in both stories: they needed humanity to dig for gold: they needed slaves which could do it for them. In Mila's account the Anu created their own brand of humans from their own genetics (and that of another Sirian race) because they couldn't make the then present human beings work for them: they were too advanced to be enslaved.
That is another difference in both tales: The Sirians created 18 races, of which only 7 would have survived, with a reasonable set of genetics (expressed in number 15,000 elements in the DNA), whereas the Anu only created a inferior slave race with far less elements within them (5,000 and later even only about 1,000 for the warriors). The Sirians didn't create human beings for working in the mines, they had other reasons (to experiment, to provide a possible exit when the ascension of their own planet would fail, to dump karma etc). They would have even sent people with 36,000 elements in their DNA to allow for the 'soul fusion' of the physical with the soul in order to lift the body to another dimension.
Jack's account is full of stories about systems implanted in men to keep them enslaved, whereas Mila stresses the enslavement because of the narrow genetic possibilities of many human beings, especially those of Anu inheritance, but gradually as all genes and lineages started to intermix narrowing down virtually everybody, including the general vibration of the planet as a whole.
Mila provides possibilities for change: she presents the possibilities to collect our genetic memories by removing karma from the genetic lineages: by removing the karma (mainly through understanding and forgiveness) the physical body would be able to return to its original state, far more advanced than the Anu-slave variant. There would be a minor problem for those with mainly anu lineages: they would only be able to return to their original maximum, which is either the 5000 or 1,024 level. Beyond that they would have to return to the place which resonates more with them: the place where the Anu came from.
Mila also makes a link with the rising temperature of the planet: she regards that as a sign that the world is returning to its original state, meaning that it would eventually return to become a fifth-dimensional star, just like Sirius would have accomplished some 120,000 years ago. We would be able to hop along the ride if we would only adapt our genetics to that rising level of 'consciousness', which is a rather positively used word in Mila's account. We would not be alone, we would be on a planet that is determined to accelerate its level of vibration. I haven't heard Jack talking about this at all, perhaps he has in some later interviews, I cannot tell yet.
TEMPORARY CONCLUSION
After having written this comparison I can't help but noticing that Mila's account is far more detailed and worked out than Jack's tale. Jack doesn't really seem to have the gift of the gab so to say. That however doesn't mean that Jack has to be wrong. He is simply not as detailed, although he is very detailed about every little addition to the human body in the beginning. Perhaps more details will flow in, but I don't expect much change in the general outlines of the story.
For now I see no reason to change my working hypothesis from Mila's to Jack's. Although I have developed some doubts about some elements of Mila's story I still think it is far more elaborate than Jack's. It also provides clues to change matters and that makes it all the more interesting: I guess the methods are about the same. Although I haven't heard Jack talk about ways to make changes (for he was talking about our possible history, not about ways to fix it), I suppose that it is in line with the idea that it is all about the way we view reality.
If we realize the distorted nature of many of our thoughts and we learn to fix them or no longer accept them as being part of our reality construct, we can change our level of awareness. We are able to end the mode of enslavement and become humans as we were once meant to be: not the humans that were seeded here on Earth, but the human beings that was the original design, the design that formed the blueprint for all humans throughout all universes (including the Sirians and Annunaki, which in Mila's perspective weren't Reptilian at all). The Reptilian myth would have arisen because of some other race that had interfered in humanity's history (perhaps see Reptilians).
Gibbon,
September 2007
P.S. I also posted this article on the Desteni forum.