In David’s current column, (1) he runs through various scenarios concerning Drake – various ways in which he could be being set up to fail. One of them is that Drake may be being fed disinformation that the mass arrests will happen by July 4, either by good sources under death threats or by unreliable sources. The purpose is to see Drake fail and then get cabal hacks in the mainstream media or paid bloggers to play up Drake’s failure and discredit him.

“The purpose could then be to utterly destroy the credibility of the whole ‘mass arrests’  concept,” David wrote.  “In one sudden move — with a very rapid expiration date — you crush everyone who has been tracking and supporting this story, and demolish all their hard work,” he said.

He then fills in the details:

“If Drake was deceived, this type of a move also weakens the actual people who are working to make these arrests a reality — not just those like Drake who are publicly reporting on it.

“By taking down the original messenger and all those who side with him and believe he ‘must’ be right, the movement is destroyed — and very few people even believe it anymore.

“This is also when the sarcastic, witty, tongue-in-cheek attacks go out in the mainstream media and among the ‘paid bloggers’ who are hired to look like real, financially needy, independent investigators and journalists online.


“Once the day comes and goes, the bought-and-sold writers jump right in and have great fun with this. They get their readers to scoff and laugh at the ‘lunatics’ and ‘tinfoil hat conspiracy theorists’ who actually believed such nonsense.

“Underneath the laughter is a sinister message — continually reinforced by a mind-control technique called ‘psychic driving.’ It is important that this remain subconscious, so as to not be too blatant:

“Of course, ha ha ha, our overlords are all-powerful, can never be defeated, will never be defeated, and really want what’s best for us, minus a few billion people — so let’s all laugh at the idiots who risked their little lives to try to put an end to it.”

“Meanwhile, the ‘truth’ guys step up with the Voice of Reason, and continue to reinforce how we are expected to believe only in perpetual fear and darkness.

“A solution must exist, somewhere, somehow — but it’s so impossible and far away that we can’t even really articulate any possible way it could ever actually happen. The best we can do is stay perpetually angry and terrified.”

I know David is being sarcastic when he says that the solution is “so impossible and far away that we can’t even really articulate any possible way it could ever actually happen.” He knows the solution, but the general reader may not, may be discouraged and lapse again into inertia.

David goes on to call this cabal way of breaking the opposition “DDT” and explains:

“UFO investigator Dr. Steven Greer and I have had long conversations about the many thousands of “DDT” campaigns that have been waged against those who seek to uncover the truth.

“‘DDT’ stands for ‘Decoy, Distract and Trash.’ The idea is that they put out information that is similar to the truth, but is not the truth. This information is a ‘decoy’ that will ‘distract’ people from the real information.

“Then, the ‘trash’ part is that the decoy information is attacked.

“Generally the information will include obvious holes that the original investigator did not take time to uncover, in his or her breathless enthusiasm to go public.

“Then, if the real information ever comes out, people will not notice the difference, and think it must all now be fake.

“In a case like this, if people no longer believe a Mass Arrests scenario is real, they may fail to act when it actually starts happening — thereby giving the enemy a greater advantage.”

David has much more to say about other scenarios, but I’ll leave that for you to read further on his site. (2)

We know that the dark ones employ psychological warfare techniques. I personally think we’re farther along than seems to be suggested in David’s column, but David is deeply into the insider scene and I’m not into it at all, so I need to defer to David’s intel and judgment on a matter like what the insiders are or aren’t saying. But the scenarios he paints are informative and should innoculate us against later attacks on Drake by the same people who may have set him up if his intel proves to be wrong.

Rather than simply dismissing Drake out of hand at that time, we might want to consider that he was, in this instance, being set up by the cabal for their own purposes. The cabal created a huge “national-security state” and many people are probably still employed there spinning endless destructive scenarios like this.

So I do want to caution us against acting like lightworker lemmings. The dark depends on us being simply interested in the truth. If they’ve set Drake up and then pull the trap shut, they rely on us to act like truth robots and pile on Drake because what he said has proven not to be the truth.  We won’t make a subtle distinction like seeing that Drake was set up. Or we may see it and think he should have known better.

We’ve been played like this for decades if not centuries and it’s one reason why we were so utterly fooled into thinking that world wars were just causes and false-flag operations were terrorist attacks. We have to start using more discernment than we have in the past.

A second issue David presents is that, according to him, channeled information is pretty weak and unreliable. He says:

“By releasing this dramatic, exciting story [the disinfo story], you also destroy the ‘me too’ channelers whose intuitive ‘sources,’ flying about in silvery round airliners in the clouds, immediately ‘verify’  the information is correct.

“Most channeling is 10-15 percent accurate intuitive information. This gives it enough of an edge, with provably weird and wonderful stuff, that there is a great story there.

“The remaining 85-90 percent is influenced by the conscious mind’s wants, needs and desires — including any strong beliefs.”

Channeled sources are not “me too” commentators. That characterization does not fit for me. The beings whom he lauds in other columns as “management” and “Heaven” are far, far more reliable and far more central to the decision-making process than any insider David is in contact with.

Their information is not “10-15 percent accurate.” It is far more accurate than that, although even they are not the decision-makers, but only spokespeople for the decision makers, and so the information they give out may also be subject to changes – as we have seen in the past. For instance, SaLuSa is a spokesman for the Galactic Federation. He is not the higher council that makes the decisions.

It’s a wee bit disheartening to hear David say that he receives a great deal of toxic email and is impacted by it and that he watches cabalist journalists and paid bloggers undermine courageous truth-tellers and then hear him turn around and do the same to channelers.

The Galactic Federation and the other coalitions of our space brothers and sisters have chosen to communicate with us telepathically, through mediums. That’s their preferred method of communication.

I for one prefer to rely on SaLuSa, Saul, Matthew, the Arcturian Group and others than on Washington and other insiders. And, yes, all of us have been wrong more times than I care to count. In fact, since no major event has happened so far, it’s probably accurate to say we’ve been wrong 100% of the time with any prediction, No prediction has come true, if you allow that the destruction of the underground bases, though it happened, was not predicted. No predicted event has happened.

Not long ago, Matthew Ward acknowledged us for waiting so long without visible evidence. He said: “Your steadfastness in the light has remained strong even though nearly midway into this world-transformational year, nothing that you would consider conclusive evidence has occurred.” (3) I too think that everyone is to be applauded for having gone through so many disappointments and watching so many predictions fail and yet remaining willing to continue supporting and working for the Light.

But I wouldn’t go so far as to say that channeled messages overall are only 10-15 percent accurate. I’d rather assert that those who follow channeled messages have a vastly better understanding of what’s coming up than most others, as SaLuSa suggests here:

“Mankind has had adequate time to start paying attention to the many messages given, that are intended to pave the way for the greater revelations. The ones in the slow lane will have to witness much that will be a great shock to their mindset, but we must get moving. There is no more time to wait until a greater percentage of you are understanding what is about to happen.” (4)

Let me add that the ego (mine, David’s, everyone’s) loves to make itself right and others wrong, to glorify itself and tear others down.  And in many reports we see the ego in operation saying this story is exclusive to our site, and, see, did we not predict that? or I said that back in 1991, etc. I frankly don’t care whether our site is first with any story and I have no interest in beating my own chest. Granted I may slip into it now and again, but I have no programmatic interest in it.

I fully acknowledge the wonderful corpus of work that David has produced that will stand for … well, as long as any information will stand which is about to be hugely expanded or replaced by new revelations from higher beings. David’s place in the history of these times is secure, if that’s something one cares about.

There is a band of dedicated lightworkers on many blogs (Kauila, Wes, Quinn, Lucas, etc.) who don’t care about issues like that and are simply covering the story wherever it leads. And many of them do consult the channeled messages of the galactics, ascended masters, and celestials as some of the most reliable and dependable commentaries available to terrestrials at this time.

Perhaps enough said. David gives us some really valuable guidelines about what to do if Drake’s predictions fail. And sooner or later he’ll probably stop his criticism of channeled sources, just as he wishes that the criticism of “lunatics” and “tinfoil hat conspiracy theorists” (i.e., people who rely on insiders) would also stop. We all of us seem to want criticism of ourselves to stop but sometimes we’re not as willing to stop criticizing others.

And probably some will think that I’m doing the same here with David. And I probably am.

But bit by bit, step by step, we will learn tolerance and welcome different viewpoints without feeling we need to demolish them. As David himself said, we all have a piece of the puzzle. As long as we realize that, we seem to stay on safe ground. As soon as we want to represent ourselves as seeing the whole puzzle, that’s usually where we fall over the edge.

Reposted by


(1) David Wilcock, “The ‘Green Light’: Wouldn’t It Be Nice? 29 June 2012, at

(2) Loc. cit.

(3) Matthew’s Message, June 3, 2012, at

(4) SaLuSa, March 28, 2012, at…