Extraterrestrial Prevention of Extinction Level Events

[Omni]

Wrote another blog article, this time on extraterrestrial prevention of Extinction Level Events(ELEs).

Extraterrestrial Prevention of Extinction Level Events

I was told by a telepathic source identifying as extraterrestrial, that they and their 'federation of sorts' have been making sure certain events do not transpire on earth. Once a civilization gains a nuclear arsenal Extraterrestrials are always close by.

What I was told is earth has been protected from Extinction Level Events for quite some time. E.L.E.'s such as meteors(pictured above).

The Sun




Nukes

Threats to earthly civilization whether manmade or natural I was told Extraterrestrials have ways of preventing. Certain things like being enslaved are often not something Extraterrestrials can intervene on due to Exopolitical Agreements.

Intervention is something Extraterrestrials can rarely do. But when it comes to Extinction Level Events (ELEs), they have had this planet covered for a very long time...

If one researches military men testifying to UFO activity around nukes, it is a valid premise ETs are interested in us having nukes. Extraterrestrials will not allow a few degenerates to destroy the world... Not in the cards.

Source Link: http://omnisense.blogspot.com/2015/0...ention-of.html

[Sunny-side-up]

Yes Omniverse I believe that to be so!

[yelik]

Yes, Omni
it's common knowledge they've deactivated nukes many times since it was first developed in 1945. It's not good for us or the wider cosmos, it likely tears a hole in the fabric of space. Despite that we've still exploded them on Mars in an attempt to terraform, the one fired at the moon I understand was deactivated.

[sheme]

But i wonder if the Nihilists have created a weapon of mass destruction that meets with the approval of the Council Galactica! "Just the destruction of humanity" then a new piece of paper...... to start again. Noooooooooooo! I do not give my consent. Going to bake some bread with love -loads of monsanto busting love.
LOve is all we need..https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ydfH7iuLR0I

[Maia Gabrial]

Certain things like being enslaved are often not something Extraterrestrials can intervene on due to Exopolitical Agreements.

How can they honor exopolitical agreements? No govt or military can make agreements for people on the whole. No other person can do that either. The ET's need each and every person's permission and consent first, don't they? I think more of Earth's humanity needs to know that. Then maybe the abductions and experiments would stop unless the ET's want to violate Universal Law and suffer the consequences....

What do they tell you about that, Omniverse?

[Kano]

So the extraterrestrials aren't necessarily white hats from a human perspective. They are just interested in protecting the planet itself. Otherwise, what happened during Nagasaki, Hiroshima, Tunguska (maybe), and countless other nukes that have been discharged on land and water.

In my opinion, ET doesn't subscribe to the Gaia hypothesis, at least not the ones shutting the nuke stations down. I believe these types of ETs are actually more concerned about the fabric of space/time being ripped/punctured when these nukes are detonated. As above so below which means there is a hierarchy in "heaven" too. Rips in space/time could potentially allow some nasty buggers into a plane of existence that has been controlled by the same entities for a near eternity. Of course the controlling entities wouldn't want that.

Despite all my rage, I am still just a rat in a cage...

[EWO]

One thing that doesn't quite make sense is, if the ETs monitor and can disable our nukes, and the governments know this why do they keep researching and developing new bigger WMDs if they can never use them. Seems like a waste of money and time.

Is there evidence to suggest that maybe they are NOT actually building new nukes, for above reason, but rather just pretending to be building them so not to arouse suspicion?

[ghostrider]

Posted by EWO (here)
One thing that doesn't quite make sense is, if the ETs monitor and can disable our nukes, and the governments know this why do they keep researching and developing new bigger WMDs if they can never use them. Seems like a waste of money and time.

Is there evidence to suggest that maybe they are NOT actually building new nukes, for above reason, but rather just pretending to be building them so not to arouse suspicion?

The Et's always abide by strict rules , it is Earth mankinds' choice , live or die ... they have made not so subtle moves to get our attention , our leaders ignore the signs ... a ship buzzes a nuclear site , shoots a beam , the nukes go off line , it should tell you that nukes are a bad idea and not allowed ... the ET's know full well the dangers of nuclear power , their forefathers destroyed an entire galaxy long ago ...

[Omni]

Posted by Maia Gabrial (here)

Certain things like being enslaved are often not something Extraterrestrials can intervene on due to Exopolitical Agreements.

How can they honor exopolitical agreements? No govt or military can make agreements for people on the whole. No other person can do that either. The ET's need each and every person's permission and consent first, don't they? I think more of Earth's humanity needs to know that. Then maybe the abductions and experiments would stop unless the ET's want to violate Universal Law and suffer the consequences....

What do they tell you about that, Omniverse?

The rules for determining a ruling power of a planet were decided by both polarities of ETs if what they said is true. So some of it is not what I'd consider "fair". From what they told me when a power on earth gets nukes, as well as mind control technology and interstellar space travel, they become an exopolitical entity. From what I understand of the US shadow government is they have either conquered the world's governments technologically and covertly, or they reached agreements internationally to become the main exopolitical power of earth. I tend to think some nations leaders have betrayed us by agreeing to things. The UN etc. Overall the leaders of planet earth do not represent the populations wishes. I have went over this plenty of times with them how I disagree with certain exopolitical rules. Seems they have to go by who has the power over the planet, instead of democracy. After global first contact there will be world votes etc...

ETs themselves usually can't do things to someone unless that person consents. So exopolitics is pretty fair on an individual level, but on a government level it seems the reptilians have a decent amount of power.

Many of them wouldn't want us to be enslaved, but due to exopolitical restrictions cannot stop it from happening in many cases.

their forefathers destroyed an entire galaxy long ago ...

I would see this as a flawed universal mechanic if one planet could destroy an entire galaxy. I think it is not true personally as I believe all universal mechanics are perfect.

The idea ETs are looking out for themselves when protecting earth is not something I give credence to. I think their highest concern is the genetics that took hundreds of thousands of years if not billions of years to get where it is now on earth. The irrepairable things that would happen if a nuclear war happened is too much to just allow for them. Some things are repairable. Other things once done cannot be undone. The good ones try to use their exopolitical power to preserve life in all forms, and as pristine as possible. Due to dark powers in exopolitics and non-intervetion rules they can't do so much at times. It isn't because they view it as unethical to intervene if what they told me is true. Only a certain amount of things they consider unethical to intervene on, and the fate of our race being controlled by a bunch of transhuman heartless men isn't one of them. In other words they would intervene if they could on situations such as enslavement set up by dark ETs. And they do watch over and make sure certain things do not happen. So they do intervene at times(covertly to us), as well as use their exopolitical power to get things they want done.

If nukes destroyed a galaxy they would not be allowed at all. As you can see in Japan they were used. Also in numerous testings in the Nevada desert they have gone off. I think they were allowing us to learn from such things initially. It wouldn't make sense to allow that if it could destroy the galaxy.

[amor]

Hello Omniverse: Also, those extraterrestrials are living on this planet and nuclear detonations would also kill them both here and inter-dimentionally.

Re the post on Jan 5, 2015, concerning the Alien found in Iran who was neither dead nor alive, I followed it through to a Russian blogger who reported that he had been resuscitated. He came to warn the world of our time of a recurring earth disaster. I think it was Planet X and the Dark Star. The Russian psychic who communicated with him before he could speak got the words Cancer, words meaning Leo and that very bright star (Arctarus) at the point on the Bootes constellation. This is the track being taken by Planet X in the sky. He mentioned the Cross formation with the Dark Star at the center. It was said he came from the year 12000BC, which was later disputed. I think he came from that civilization which was destroyed, before the Flood. A Hebrew scroll was found indicating to me that he was found and resuscitated during the time of Moses at the passage of Nibiru around 1600BC, was put back to sleep and reawakened by the scientists of today. He may be sent on into our future to give warnings to them also.

[BF88]

Hello Omniverse thank you for another great post! They are always very interesting to read. The whole ET prevention of extinction thing is interesting, I do believe it to be true and the reason they do not interfere in wars etc is the whole free will business. What I cannot understand, though, is the non interference in wars where civilians are the main victims (which arguably is most of them) and we are not talking of the military doctrine version of who is a combatant and who is a civilian definition, I mean real civilians who chose not to be part of it at least not consciously anyway. Perhaps due to being a human being at this time I am incapable of understanding any reason, but I doubt the non interference has anything to do with, for example, necessary sacrifice for a bigger picture.

The non prevention of enslavement though I think I have mentioned earlier, from what I have been told is due to the 'slave masters' ET or otherwise not actually doing anything different to what human beings do to other creatures on the planet. If it is acceptable for us as a more advanced species to farm cattle, why would it not be acceptable for a species more advanced than us to 'farm' (for whatever purpose) human beings? This was the general direction of the conversation it is by no means 'word for word'. The 'non interference' rule you speak of in your link sounds somewhat familiar, I think it covers non interference with the activities of the different groups of ET's as well rather than just the creatures of Earth.

Edit: Do you think the level of interference plays a part in this? obviously helping one single person overcome a fear for instance is less of an interference than entire planetary manipulation.

[Koyaanisqatsi]

A healthy mindset for us is to believe nobody is going to save us. It might make us more accountable

[Omni]

Posted by Koyaanisqatsi (here)
A healthy mindset for us is to believe nobody is going to save us. It might make us more accountable

ETs wont save us from ourselves. Humanity has a lot of work to do. However what sense would it be to just allow meteors to destroy a planets life when you can prevent such? There is a strong NLP with 'ET saving us' on Avalon. I don't see it reasonable to generalize prevention of extinction with saving us from the cabal.

I agree it's healthy to not rely on a savior. I don't think ETs are qualified as saviors of us in full just because they prevent a few things...

Posted by BF88 (here)
Hello Omniverse thank you for another great post! They are always very interesting to read. The whole ET prevention of extinction thing is interesting, I do believe it to be true and the reason they do not interfere in wars etc is the whole free will business. What I cannot understand, though, is the non interference in wars where civilians are the main victims (which arguably is most of them) and we are not talking of the military doctrine version of who is a combatant and who is a civilian definition, I mean real civilians who chose not to be part of it at least not consciously anyway. Perhaps due to being a human being at this time I am incapable of understanding any reason, but I doubt the non interference has anything to do with, for example, necessary sacrifice for a bigger picture.

I think the biggest reason why they can't intervene on wars is dark ETs love war and they hold power. They immerse themselves in virtual reality and human death and sacrifice seems to be an obsession of theirs. They interface the emotions of the people dying. It is addictive to them I'm told.

Eventually there will not be war on earth I believe. So they will have to move on.

The non prevention of enslavement though I think I have mentioned earlier, from what I have been told is due to the 'slave masters' ET or otherwise not actually doing anything different to what human beings do to other creatures on the planet. If it is acceptable for us as a more advanced species to farm cattle, why would it not be acceptable for a species more advanced than us to 'farm' (for whatever purpose) human beings? This was the general direction of the conversation it is by no means 'word for word'. The 'non interference' rule you speak of in your link sounds somewhat familiar, I think it covers non interference with the activities of the different groups of ET's as well rather than just the creatures of Earth.

Edit: Do you think the level of interference plays a part in this? obviously helping one single person overcome a fear for instance is less of an interference than entire planetary manipulation.

I'm not totally sure what your question is, maybe I'm tired... But non-interference is a general guideline more than a strict rule. If the powers that be on a planet embrace a certain ET agenda, it seems there isn't anything the opposite side can do to stop it.

[BF88]

Posted by Omniverse (here)

Posted by Koyaanisqatsi (here)
A healthy mindset for us is to believe nobody is going to save us. It might make us more accountable

ETs wont save us from ourselves. Humanity has a lot of work to do. However what sense would it be to just allow meteors to destroy a planets life when you can prevent such? There is a strong NLP with 'ET saving us' on Avalon. I don't see it reasonable to generalize prevention of extinction with saving us from the cabal.

I agree it's healthy to not rely on a savior. I don't think ETs are qualified as saviors of us in full just because they prevent a few things...

Posted by BF88 (here)
Hello Omniverse thank you for another great post! They are always very interesting to read. The whole ET prevention of extinction thing is interesting, I do believe it to be true and the reason they do not interfere in wars etc is the whole free will business. What I cannot understand, though, is the non interference in wars where civilians are the main victims (which arguably is most of them) and we are not talking of the military doctrine version of who is a combatant and who is a civilian definition, I mean real civilians who chose not to be part of it at least not consciously anyway. Perhaps due to being a human being at this time I am incapable of understanding any reason, but I doubt the non interference has anything to do with, for example, necessary sacrifice for a bigger picture.

I think the biggest reason why they can't intervene on wars is dark ETs love war and they hold power. They immerse themselves in virtual reality and human death and sacrifice seems to be an obsession of theirs. They interface the emotions of the people dying. It is addictive to them I'm told.

Eventually there will not be war on earth I believe. So they will have to move on.

The non prevention of enslavement though I think I have mentioned earlier, from what I have been told is due to the 'slave masters' ET or otherwise not actually doing anything different to what human beings do to other creatures on the planet. If it is acceptable for us as a more advanced species to farm cattle, why would it not be acceptable for a species more advanced than us to 'farm' (for whatever purpose) human beings? This was the general direction of the conversation it is by no means 'word for word'. The 'non interference' rule you speak of in your link sounds somewhat familiar, I think it covers non interference with the activities of the different groups of ET's as well rather than just the creatures of Earth.

Edit: Do you think the level of interference plays a part in this? obviously helping one single person overcome a fear for instance is less of an interference than entire planetary manipulation.

I'm not totally sure what your question is, maybe I'm tired... But non-interference is a general guideline more than a strict rule. If the powers that be on a planet embrace a certain ET agenda, it seems there isn't anything the opposite side can do to stop it.

What I mean is how would one define 'interference'? to even be allowed here I had to promise not to interfere although it could have been one of those jedi mind tricks people say they play. My question is, how little do you think the level of acceptable interference is? Where does the red line sit. I hope i have explained myself a little clearer sometimes I tend to drift off into a metaphor that only I would understand!