In this thread:

https://www.farsightprime.com/forums/general/67983-observation-feedback-on-farsight-publications

... you say:

"Our anti-blocking techniquest require assistance from the group who we call the Good ETs. We cannot do it by ourselves. But those ETs have a near fanatical attachment to free will, and they absolutely will not help unless we specifically request it in our procedures."

To be honest, that doesn't sound healthy. I wonder why they are so fanatical about free will, and as far as I'm concerned, it boils down to what freedom actually is. So here's my view on it, beginning with the definition of freedom:

Freedom is the absence of boundaries or limitations.

As you can see, the concept of freedom is a double-edged sword. The absence of boundaries can be a good thing – e.g. not being imprisoned on a prison planet – but it can also be a bad thing – e.g. being able to hurt others without consequences.

Freedom in itself lacks a moral/ethical component, so we need to define what freedom in a moral sense would be. My definition goes like this:

Freedom in a moral sense is the absence of aggression.

This means that no being is free to aggress against others, as that freedom would result in harm and chaos – which is exactly what we see in the galactic wars.

So, how fanatical are the "Good ETs" about free will? They seem to follow the non-aggression principle, but the statement "they absolutely will not help unless we specifically request it" sounds like they don't follow any moral principle regarding the defense of victims. I mean, not every victim of violence is able to understand the whole situation, but that doesn't mean that the victim needs no help.

I have a theory the the "Good ETs" once tried to help others, but that help ended in some sort of a disaster which they are now trying to avoid.

Would be nice if Harvey could talk about their view on freedom and moral principles.

"do not interfere in a culture's advancement."

But there's no advancement when the culture is held as prisoners/slaves.

"you also need to define 'aggress'"

Aggression is every attempt of enforcement outside of defense.

Enforcement is the use or plausible threat of violence in defiance of free will.

Violence is the application of force in order to violate a right.

Defense is any action which is necessary to avert a present attack on body, life, or ownership of oneself or another.

"Is humanity ready for this?"

People need to know the difference between right and wrong, so they can understand how the states are violating rights and see the nature of the prison government. There are already a lot of people rejecting the wrong-doings of the governments. The "Good ETs" must be distinguishable from that violent government. That's why I think it's important that Harvey talks about their principles and how the "Good ETs" govern themselves. If people can't see the difference, they will stick with what they are used to.

My experience being in a God-like state, is that only suffering and compassion could motivate God to act. The reptilians have little of both, but they do have an AI which rivels the infinite intelligence of God. God could ultimately defeat the AI. But God is rarely in a hurry. You're basically watching a war between a Super Intelligence and an Infinite Intelligence, which acts with the permission we give it from our suffering and prayers. The Good ETs are closer to God, so they have compassion. They have to trust the slow-moving but sure plans of God. To do that they also need to wait for our permission.
The primary mover of the universe is war, not karma. I hate to break this to people. But that has to be true, if you also understand that God respects the free will of ALL sentient beings, even the bad ones. The bad ones are literally weaker than us, because they cannot sway God with their suffering. Suffering and emotions evolved in humans to be so intense, because it invokes God to action.
Is that horrible or do you get it?
I got all this from being in the god-like state for 2 hours.

"The primary mover of the universe is war, not karma. I hate to break this to people. But that has to be true, if you also understand that God respects the free will of ALL sentient beings, even the bad ones."

Bad people do not have free will, because they are not respecting freedom. God allows them to be bad, but that doesn't mean there's no consequences.

"Is that horrible or do you get it?"

I get that you see God as an individual being with its own desires. It's a common misconception.

"I got all this from being in the god-like state for 2 hours."

Whoever told you that you were in a god-like state was lying to you. It's so easy to trick people into believing lies if you know what they want to be true. You obviously want a God that has a desire to help you when you're suffering. They told you what you wanted to hear to feed you the lie of war being the primary mover of the universe. Is that horrible or do you get it?