Cliff High view on Bill Ryans accusations - Page 4

sjkted · 12-31-2009, 07:46 AM

Folks, we're in the information age. AFIK, the term "private e-mail" is an oxymoron. If something were of a private nature, then why would anyone put it in e-mail? Surely the sender would know that it could be easily forwarded to someone else.

--sjkted

sjkted · 12-31-2009, 08:23 AM

http://projectcamelot.org/questions.html

Do you stand by your witnesses' testimony? Do you 'vet' them to ensure they're telling the whole truth?

We believe that 90% (possibly 95%) of the information on our site is accurate.

We welcome all information and feedback to help us verify challenging and important claims.

hmm...

Anchor · 12-31-2009, 08:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sjkted

Folks, we're in the information age. AFIK, the term "private e-mail" is an oxymoron. If something were of a private nature, then why would anyone put it in e-mail? Surely the sender would know that it could be easily forwarded to someone else.

--sjkted

The intent was clear.

Respecting that intent would have been nice.

A..

Carol · 12-31-2009, 01:59 PM

I would like to remind everyone here that Kerry does not believe in banning and is for total transparency. The exceptions being posting porn and threatening another member which were instant bans. For the past year no one was banned until recently. Revealing the truth was what this forum was based on. Bill was not threatened and appeared not to have made a complaint. So why the ban? Francie shared an email, not a PM. If it were a PM on this forum... then a ban is appropriate. However, there is a big difference with this particular situation because she was exposing the truth about an unsolicited email. Bill took a risk but did not have her prior agreement for confidentiality. Bill is also quite capable of standing up for himself. I have both watched and read where Bill attacked people I respect, even resorting to calling them names and certainly don't expect to see him banned. I would hope that rather then becoming entrenched in an unfair ban, consideration is given in the broadest perspective here as to the intention of what Bill and Kerry wanted when setting up this forum.

The following is a true story. There was a member of a spiritual zendo residence that made others uncomfortable. The others conspired to get rid of this member and the member became so uncomfortable that he left willingly. However, the spiritual leader went to the member who left and asked him to return. The member said no, so the spiritual leader told him he would even pay him to return which he then did. The moral of the story was that this member who others didn't like was a trigger for their egos and also an opportunity for them to work through their own unresolved ego issues. Francie did NOT do anything wrong but it seems others think she did. Yet even if she had.. it still is not worth a full out permanent ban. Why so harsh?

Dood · 12-31-2009, 03:00 PM

I am curious as to why the staff is ignoring Carol's posts on this subject of Francie being banned.
As many know that Carol was around here for a long time.
Longer then most and she has seen and heard many things here.

As I stated before Carol and I did not see Eye to Eye on some issues but we always worked it out and never treated each other with disrespect.
However here with this ISSUE (and it is a valid ISSUE) I have to fully agree with what Carol is saying.
She knows full well what the T&Cs are here.
And the fact that no T&Cs were broken. I have yet to see one staff member point to chapter and verse in regards to Francie Jones.

Making up new rules on the fly hurts credibility and integrity.

All of this could have been avoided IF the person that sent the emails asked Francie to AGREE to not share them.
Like I pointed out before just saying it within a email does not give 'protection'.
Francie deserves the choice to agree or not.
If Francie would have wrote back as to "Yes, I agree to keeping this private..." and so forth then there is something to go on.

Otherwise there is nothing.
Also the permanent Ban is a bit harsh.
I have seen far worst.
For example the deletion of other people's Whistle Blower Sub Forums.
(A little over a year ago)
Whistle Blowers left because of this...Two in particular that I have gotten to know.
That happened here and the vBulletin Logs proved WHO did it but, that person was not punished or anything.
These were what are called 'Hard Deletes'. Meaning they cannot be recovered.
You have go through and extra step in order to Hard Delete other wise it is a 'Soft Delete' and can be recovered.
Others were blamed for it and the Forum Logs do not lie...
The original Admin (Sean..who by the way set this ALL up on his dime in the beginning) and the 2nd 'Original Admin (Colin) both read those logs.
They know the person that did it but, that person was let off the hook.
I am purposely keeping the name of the person that did these hard deletes out of respect to the forum.
However, this person is very well known...

So I will ask again as to why is Carol being ignored?
Her points are valid and deserve attention.
Many may have not 'liked' Carol but, many members did like and appreciate her also.
She has worked very hard for this forum....
Most of you members have no idea how much time Carol put in here along with a few of the other Early original Moderators.
(I am not forgetting them....however they know that I always appreciated their hard work too)

To moderate is not about any kind of power. It is about responsibility.
It is about being above the fray and keeping your integrity intact.
It is not easy and mistakes happen. Admitting to those mistakes is what shows character and integrity.
We all make mistakes. I know I do and when I have to admit to the mistakes I have made it is not a comfortable feeling at all but, a rewarding one over all.

I truly mean no disrespect to anyone here or anyone on the Staff but, I have to in good conscious say what I believe in.
I strongly suggest to reconsider what has transpired here and do the 'Correct Thing'.Allow Francie Jones back on line here!

Thank you for your time!

Carol · 12-31-2009, 04:14 PM

I appreciate your post on this Dood. What saddens me greatly is also looking at other long-time members who were recently banned, francie is just one of several. Whatever happened to the concept of a time-out? These were valuable members who have contributed a lot since the forum came into existence and it just is heart-breaking to see a pattern of complete censorship for these long-time contributing members going on in this forum. Were these permanent bans approved of by Kerry or Bill ~ which mods had done in the past?

Seashore · 12-31-2009, 04:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carol

I appreciate your post on this Dood. What saddens me greatly is also looking at other long-time members who were recently banned, francie is just one of several. Whatever happened to the concept of a time-out? These were valuable members who have contributed a lot since the forum came into existence and it just is heart-breaking to see a pattern of complete censorship for these long-time contributing members going on in this forum. Were these permanent bans approved of by Kerry or Bill ~ which had done in the past?

Should there be a separate thread on this topic? Or is there already a thread on this topic?

Carol · 12-31-2009, 04:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seashore

Should there be a separate thread on this topic? Or is there already a thread on this topic?

No. The ones controlling the reigns know what is going on and it doesn't do any good to push as it only entrenches a particular point of view. I know in my heart what is happening is not right, yet this is what is. I've already expressed how I felt and am finished with this topic.

Seashore · 12-31-2009, 05:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carol

No. The ones controlling the reigns know what is going on and it doesn't do any good to push as it only entrenches a particular point of view. I know in my heart what is happening is not right, yet this is what is. I've already expressed how I felt and am finished with this topic.

Thanks, Carol.

I feel that we have a festering wound here and we'd better tend to it.

clarkkent · 12-31-2009, 05:25 PM

i agree , if you guys want to talk in depth about forum rules and banning a seperate thread would work nicely, im all for it and against the recent ban.

but i would like to see the cliff high /bill , "whistleblowers' issue get back on track, if only so if bill reads he can see how dissapointing his response was and how just about everyone agrees cliff made valid points that he evaded and stooped to name calling. pretty uncharactistic of bill and a bummer to see ..

Seashore · 12-31-2009, 05:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by clarkkent

i agree , if you guys want to talk in depth about forum rules and banning a seperate thread would work nicely, im all for it and against the recent ban.

I took it upon myself to do this. Here's the link:

http://projectavalon.net/forum/showt...576#post213576

Sarahmay · 12-31-2009, 06:10 PM

What I saw was this: Bill sent Francie a private email and asked her not to post the content...she did anyway, to make her point. I would expect to be banned for this. It is his forum, and he shouldn't have to deal with that.

sjkted · 12-31-2009, 06:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sarahmay

What I saw was this: Bill sent Francie a private email and asked her not to post the content...she did anyway, to make her point. I would expect to be banned for this. It is his forum, and he shouldn't have to deal with that.

How about this? If Bill and Kerry want the support of truth seekers, they shouldn't censor the whistleblowers.

--sjkted

sjkted · 12-31-2009, 06:36 PM

http://pakalert.wordpress.com/2009/0...melot-exposed/

I know Bill has semi-responded to this with his letter to Jeff Rense, but consider this issue of how Bill Ryan is not responding to Cliff's accusation and continues to give praise to how wonderful Deagle is in his latest "interview".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ic70cVN5IdQ

Listen to Bill's description of whistleblower testimony. He's not discerning and searching for the truth -- he's just weaving together a bunch of stories into a semi-coherent picture with an installed viewpoint. This is beginning to look no different than how the bible was created.

Folks, there is something VERY wrong here and I think we may be getting a little closer to it here.

--sjkted

YinYangMind · 12-31-2009, 07:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carol

I appreciate your post on this Dood. What saddens me greatly is also looking at other long-time members who were recently banned, francie is just one of several. Whatever happened to the concept of a time-out? These were valuable members who have contributed a lot since the forum came into existence and it just is heart-breaking to see a pattern of complete censorship for these long-time contributing members going on in this forum. Were these permanent bans approved of by Kerry or Bill ~ which had done in the past?

Carol, I agree with your observation. It's seems to be developing into a difficult situation where niether the mod's or Bill & Kerry appear interested in getting to the truth especially since there has been a deafening silience from B&K with only the mod's stating policy and protocol with little convincing substance. I keep coming back to see where the discussion is headed hopeful that Bill will respond/reply...to no avail. I too am getting tired of the obfuscation and may just not bother any further.

BTW, got your message on my profile, thanks! I've tried to find a way to respond/reply even leaving a message on yours but can't find anyway to do so. I did visit your web site and signed up for your email subscription (KnowledgeTreks.com).

All the best & Happy New Year!

YinYangMind

eleni · 12-31-2009, 03:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by YinYangMind

Curious, how could someone be 'banned' and still post?!?

Very strange indeed...the mystery thickens...

No mystery- she was banned after she posted that.

sjkted · 12-31-2009, 03:53 AM

From Bill Ryan:

Meanwhile, Clif's reason for escalating this issue publicly was - I'm as sure as I can be - an excuse to raise the profile of his allegations against Bill Deagle. So I will not be wrestling with him anywhere.

But I'll make this simple response here (or else people will wonder why I'm not saying anything) - and then Clif can shout from the rooftops if he wants to make an idiot of himself.

The issue is this. We will protect Camelot whistleblowers against smears and innuendo. If not us, then who? This is our job and is one of the reasons Camelot exists.

I think it is quite honorable of Bill and Kerry to protect their witnesses. If the person is a real whistleblower, then they could very well be in danger of losing their job or even their life. I can understand this.

What I don't understand is why Bill is using the words smears and innuendo. I haven't seen anyone here who is smearing Bill Deagle, but I see a lot of people who are questioning his message and questioning the credibility of Camelot to continue to rely on him as a continuing "witness". Deagle has already given all of his information, so a discussion would not in any way jeopardize his position since everything is already out there. What's the harm with an intelligent discussion on the merits of Deagle's INFORMATION and NOT HIMSELF as a person?

Please note I used the word discussion not debate. For me the definition of discussion is: I share my information and you share your information and the two of us honestly try to make sense all of it. The word debate means that I try to "prove" my point and discredit you while you attempt to assert your view.

Bill and Kerry apparently worked quite diligently to bring on Dr. Steven Greer who had a very different perspective than they did. Why don't Bill and Kerry interview Cliff and Bill at the same time?

Why is Bill not responding to the substance of what Cliff said? This just seems like a red herring to me.

--sjkted

clarkkent · 12-31-2009, 05:32 AM

this is the same ol' forum nonsense with mods and banning, it gets very old.
(and i totally agree she shouldnt have been banned)

the issue at hand is bill who i usually find reasonable, completely sidestepped answering cliff highs statement and went the extra step to call him and idiot and mis characterize cliff as "shouting from the mountaintops"

more and more it should be clear to everyone that bill and kerry (while having decent intentions) have a world view and an agenda to support that view regardless.

this means that they dont thoroughly research their "whistleblowers" nor do they even argue with them as long as it supports their view (whereas if someone differs they make themselves look petty and unprofessional as in the case with greer, a laughably bad and unprofessional interview)

the sad thing is for over a year they've driven and extremely paranoid "gloom and doom" world view. they will post every bit of non sense from sources they have never seen ( as in "hawkeye" who was saying the "roths' were all but taking over with martial law last year.)

i wasnt a fan of st clair but now i see he was level headed in distancing himself from B and K. what bugs me the most is that kerry specifically seems to have gotten a huge head over camelots popularity and genuinely thinks she is privy to the latest cutting edge info in the conspiracy world, yet if someone like Greer offhandedly mentions the PTB having a device that can materialize astral entities, she brushes past that little bit of info ive never heard before and lets her ego get into a pissing contest.

imagine if bill and kerry genuinely sought info regarding all these matters , we all would be privy to info that would let us be more informed and make up our OWN minds all the better. but no bill and kerry have a set agenda and if people like Cliff call into question the validity of their "witness" they will stand by them no matter how idiotic their claims are.

folks, no one is going to learn the whole picture , or very much if it ,by following camelot. kerry and bill want to believe we're at war with bad guy aliens and spiritually at war as well, they believe the same story youll find all over the net or in your local barnes n noble new age section, that our gov is in league with evil aliens and that reptillians are eating babies and that were headed for martial law and ultimate disaster. people who fall for this are getting half truths mixed with a truckload of BS.

if thats what you believe or want to believe, then camelot IS for you because they'll never deviate from that line of thought and they'll line up their mystery guests to support this view, even if they think they're moses and were offered to rule the planet as king "Penis of the Dragon" (thats what "pindar" means) yes thats straight from ol dr deagle himself.

in my opinion "camelot" via kerry and bill have a naive outlook thats ultimately negative and narrow minded and serves the agenda of the PTB perfectly. they have an inflated sense of importance by the hits their website receives and the cash given to them by regular folks with dayjobs to fly them all around the globe gathering what is essentially disinfo.

this rebuttal by cliff was at least an opportunity for them to stand and answer and admit they can be wrong about their "whistleblowers" or even just answer questions with integrity, instead it was a response that was evasive and immature.

this is the issue at hand, mod banning/power/rules aside.

http://superstrangeland.blogspot.com/

jazzgad · 12-15-2009, 10:35 PM

shiva the destroyer thank you for posting this excellent response by Cliff

the whole Project Camelot was big lesson and exercise of discernment for me
and I m great full for it .I view PC and as many other like Alex Jones
as another attempt to confuse and delay humanity collective awakening
The end result is that I pay atention not to some external authority
which in this new to me field could be some guy with a hat digital camera
and black projects connections but to what my intuition and heart is telling me .

orthodoxymoron · 12-16-2009, 05:05 AM

Once more...I just consider everything connected with controversial and hard to verify subjects...as being science fiction...which could very possibly be true. I try to listen to a wide variety of sources...and look for commonalities and verifications. Many of the subjects we discuss are hard to pin down with any conclusive finality.

This world is truly a world of arguing, fighting, suing, slandering, warring, etc. I really want a world ruled by we the people of the world...but sometimes I really wonder if we're ready to do this. We may have to endure the New World Order for a few decades or a few centuries...before we become responsible and peaceful enough to properly rule ourselves.

I wonder...did Art Bell get involved in this sort of thing? He seemed to be pretty detached...with almost a skeptical amusement toward a lot of his guests and callers. Whether this is a good thing or not is another question. Did Art Bell ever defend Jonathan Reed? Did you ever see the Art Bell Burrito connected with this case?

Keep up the good work...Cliff and Bill. This sort of thing goes with the territory...I guess.

Namaste

sjkted · 12-16-2009, 06:09 AM

FWIW, here's my $0.02.

Like most people here, I have seen all of the Camelot interviews and followed their work for the past few years. I agree with some of the above posts that at this point with what I have seen and experienced, the idea of having an identity "created" with friends and people to corroborate and a background created from thin air is completely plausible.

I've heard from some PA members that everyone is doing their part in a spiritual sense, including Deagle and Burisch, but my point is that we are coming to a turning point and we are in the middle of a war here. No, I'm not expecting that the NWO is going to bust down my door and blow up my house -- this here is a spiritual war. It's a war for hearts and minds and support and whether the world becomes a place of liberty and beauty or tyranny and death.

It is for this reason that we must hold whistleblowers and any leaders like Bill Ryan to the highest standards. I'm not suggesting they need to perfect or even right all of the time. I'm also not even suggesting that we censor anyone, even a person highly suspected of disinfo. I'm just saying that when they say something that is totally out there that they need to be called on it.

For example, if someone were a expert witness for a court, their credentials, work experience, CV, etc would be reviewed by both sides and if they said something that appeared to be without support, they would be thoroughly questioned by the opposing counsel.

If I were a scientist being interviewed on the MSM news and I was saying that they sky was falling and that we're all going to die a brutal death, I would be thoroughly questioned and the news station would interview other expert witnesses to corroborate my testimony. Considering all of the propaganda/disinfo created by the MSM, why should we accept an even lower standard? -- i.e. trust me, I'm an insider. Don't ask questions!

For me, Deagle makes the grade as far as his background is concerned. He has an MD and experience in black projects, but the real failure is when PC fails to question him on his statements. It's another failure when people take his information as being credible, just because it's being reported.

dolphin · 12-16-2009, 06:18 AM

sjkted, you couldn't have said it any better!

and wow, bill ryan, name calling, that says it all... why should pc defend a whistleblower, even if that whistleblower is sending out false info??? you'll still defend him/her? i thought pc was about finding out what is REALLY going on, not more disinfo...don't we have enough of that from the mainstream media?

Bobbie · 12-16-2009, 05:30 AM

Sometimes kind and gentle souls can make the mistake of unknowingly befriending wolves in sheeps clothing. Those wolves know exactly how to ingratiate themselves to and abuse the goodness of another human being. That's the con and they are very proficient at it. It calls to mind a famous quote, "So great the con of man". Project Camelot's charge to discover truth is such a risky and treaterous business - especially when dealing with the destiny and future of mankind as a whole. Unfortunately a good practice might just be to keep business business and friends friends - never allowing the twain to meet....and leave it at that. As hard as it is to accept sometimes, not everyone is our friend and may we have the wisdom to know the difference. Blessings to all and may grace and goodness follow us all the days of our lives.

no caste · 12-16-2009, 06:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shiva777

That is how an open, asymmetric social organization is created. Not through ordo ab chaos, but rather through continuous recharging of harmony within the chaotic environment.

shiva777 - I have always appreciated the work of Clif High for the reason I quoted. I don't want to wade into the fray of picking, choosing or whatever alliances or loyalties between [x,y,z]. His predictive linguistics & economic analysis can really help out with preemptive kinds of energies. I have seen it that way anyway, and find it a valuable source of information (when I check it). I also don't fault Clif High for digging deeper for more information.

Harper · 12-16-2009, 07:17 PM

I find I flip flop from time to time trying not to buy into anything, hook line and sinker but there is always a turning point for me eventually. B. Deagle's was the photo that he had of himself dashing into a car looking terrified. Who took it and why did he have it and post it as verfiication that someone was after him and this is where I will get in trouble with some people, same for Miriam Delicado. She had a road accident that appears to have happened but who took photos of the aftermath, when they still were not sure if everything was going to be ok.

So who takes photos of themselves, or has others do it in the most treacherous of situations?

Doesn't jig with me ... that said everyone has some truth

nuf said.. methinks

12-31-2009, 07:46 AM	#1
sjkted Avalon Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: LA County Posts: 361	Re: Cliff High view on Bill Ryans accusations Folks, we're in the information age. AFIK, the term "private e-mail" is an oxymoron. If something were of a private nature, then why would anyone put it in e-mail? Surely the sender would know that it could be easily forwarded to someone else. --sjkted

12-31-2009, 08:23 AM	#2
sjkted Avalon Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: LA County Posts: 361	Re: Cliff High view on Bill Ryans accusations http://projectcamelot.org/questions.html Do you stand by your witnesses' testimony? Do you 'vet' them to ensure they're telling the whole truth? We believe that 90% (possibly 95%) of the information on our site is accurate. We welcome all information and feedback to help us verify challenging and important claims. hmm...

12-31-2009, 01:59 PM	#4
Carol Project Avalon Hero Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Big Island, Hawaii Posts: 2,008	Re: Cliff High view on Bill Ryans accusations I would like to remind everyone here that Kerry does not believe in banning and is for total transparency. The exceptions being posting porn and threatening another member which were instant bans. For the past year no one was banned until recently. Revealing the truth was what this forum was based on. Bill was not threatened and appeared not to have made a complaint. So why the ban? Francie shared an email, not a PM. If it were a PM on this forum... then a ban is appropriate. However, there is a big difference with this particular situation because she was exposing the truth about an unsolicited email. Bill took a risk but did not have her prior agreement for confidentiality. Bill is also quite capable of standing up for himself. I have both watched and read where Bill attacked people I respect, even resorting to calling them names and certainly don't expect to see him banned. I would hope that rather then becoming entrenched in an unfair ban, consideration is given in the broadest perspective here as to the intention of what Bill and Kerry wanted when setting up this forum. The following is a true story. There was a member of a spiritual zendo residence that made others uncomfortable. The others conspired to get rid of this member and the member became so uncomfortable that he left willingly. However, the spiritual leader went to the member who left and asked him to return. The member said no, so the spiritual leader told him he would even pay him to return which he then did. The moral of the story was that this member who others didn't like was a trigger for their egos and also an opportunity for them to work through their own unresolved ego issues. Francie did NOT do anything wrong but it seems others think she did. Yet even if she had.. it still is not worth a full out permanent ban. Why so harsh? __________________ Aloha, thank you, do jeh, toda, arigato, merci, grazie, salamat po, gracias, tack, sukria, danke schoen, kiitos, dank u, mahalo nui loa Images to nourish the spirit: http://mistsofavalon.invisionplus.ne...&showtopic=198

12-31-2009, 03:00 PM	#5
Dood Avalon Golden Oldie Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 36	Re: Cliff High view on Bill Ryans accusations I am curious as to why the staff is ignoring Carol's posts on this subject of Francie being banned. As many know that Carol was around here for a long time. Longer then most and she has seen and heard many things here. As I stated before Carol and I did not see Eye to Eye on some issues but we always worked it out and never treated each other with disrespect. However here with this ISSUE (and it is a valid ISSUE) I have to fully agree with what Carol is saying. She knows full well what the T&Cs are here. And the fact that no T&Cs were broken. I have yet to see one staff member point to chapter and verse in regards to Francie Jones. Making up new rules on the fly hurts credibility and integrity. All of this could have been avoided IF the person that sent the emails asked Francie to AGREE to not share them. Like I pointed out before just saying it within a email does not give 'protection'. Francie deserves the choice to agree or not. If Francie would have wrote back as to "Yes, I agree to keeping this private..." and so forth then there is something to go on. Otherwise there is nothing. Also the permanent Ban is a bit harsh. I have seen far worst. For example the deletion of other people's Whistle Blower Sub Forums. (A little over a year ago) Whistle Blowers left because of this...Two in particular that I have gotten to know. That happened here and the vBulletin Logs proved WHO did it but, that person was not punished or anything. These were what are called 'Hard Deletes'. Meaning they cannot be recovered. You have go through and extra step in order to Hard Delete other wise it is a 'Soft Delete' and can be recovered. Others were blamed for it and the Forum Logs do not lie... The original Admin (Sean..who by the way set this ALL up on his dime in the beginning) and the 2nd 'Original Admin (Colin) both read those logs. They know the person that did it but, that person was let off the hook. I am purposely keeping the name of the person that did these hard deletes out of respect to the forum. However, this person is very well known... So I will ask again as to why is Carol being ignored? Her points are valid and deserve attention. Many may have not 'liked' Carol but, many members did like and appreciate her also. She has worked very hard for this forum.... Most of you members have no idea how much time Carol put in here along with a few of the other Early original Moderators. (I am not forgetting them....however they know that I always appreciated their hard work too) To moderate is not about any kind of power. It is about responsibility. It is about being above the fray and keeping your integrity intact. It is not easy and mistakes happen. Admitting to those mistakes is what shows character and integrity. We all make mistakes. I know I do and when I have to admit to the mistakes I have made it is not a comfortable feeling at all but, a rewarding one over all. I truly mean no disrespect to anyone here or anyone on the Staff but, I have to in good conscious say what I believe in. I strongly suggest to reconsider what has transpired here and do the 'Correct Thing'.Allow Francie Jones back on line here! Thank you for your time!

12-31-2009, 04:14 PM	#6
Carol Project Avalon Hero Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Big Island, Hawaii Posts: 2,008	Re: Cliff High view on Bill Ryans accusations I appreciate your post on this Dood. What saddens me greatly is also looking at other long-time members who were recently banned, francie is just one of several. Whatever happened to the concept of a time-out? These were valuable members who have contributed a lot since the forum came into existence and it just is heart-breaking to see a pattern of complete censorship for these long-time contributing members going on in this forum. Were these permanent bans approved of by Kerry or Bill ~ which mods had done in the past? __________________ Aloha, thank you, do jeh, toda, arigato, merci, grazie, salamat po, gracias, tack, sukria, danke schoen, kiitos, dank u, mahalo nui loa Images to nourish the spirit: http://mistsofavalon.invisionplus.ne...&showtopic=198 Last edited by Carol; 01-01-2010 at 03:02 AM.

12-31-2009, 05:25 PM	#10
clarkkent Avalon Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 319	Re: Cliff High view on Bill Ryans accusations i agree , if you guys want to talk in depth about forum rules and banning a seperate thread would work nicely, im all for it and against the recent ban. but i would like to see the cliff high /bill , "whistleblowers' issue get back on track, if only so if bill reads he can see how dissapointing his response was and how just about everyone agrees cliff made valid points that he evaded and stooped to name calling. pretty uncharactistic of bill and a bummer to see ..

12-31-2009, 06:10 PM	#12
Sarahmay Avalon Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Sedona Arizona Posts: 549	Re: Cliff High view on Bill Ryans accusations What I saw was this: Bill sent Francie a private email and asked her not to post the content...she did anyway, to make her point. I would expect to be banned for this. It is his forum, and he shouldn't have to deal with that.

12-31-2009, 06:36 PM	#14
sjkted Avalon Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: LA County Posts: 361	Some Things Don't Go Away http://pakalert.wordpress.com/2009/0...melot-exposed/ I know Bill has semi-responded to this with his letter to Jeff Rense, but consider this issue of how Bill Ryan is not responding to Cliff's accusation and continues to give praise to how wonderful Deagle is in his latest "interview". http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ic70cVN5IdQ Listen to Bill's description of whistleblower testimony. He's not discerning and searching for the truth -- he's just weaving together a bunch of stories into a semi-coherent picture with an installed viewpoint. This is beginning to look no different than how the bible was created. Folks, there is something VERY wrong here and I think we may be getting a little closer to it here. --sjkted

12-31-2009, 03:53 AM	#17
sjkted Avalon Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: LA County Posts: 361	Re: Cliff High view on Bill Ryans accusations From Bill Ryan: Meanwhile, Clif's reason for escalating this issue publicly was - I'm as sure as I can be - an excuse to raise the profile of his allegations against Bill Deagle. So I will not be wrestling with him anywhere. But I'll make this simple response here (or else people will wonder why I'm not saying anything) - and then Clif can shout from the rooftops if he wants to make an idiot of himself. The issue is this. We will protect Camelot whistleblowers against smears and innuendo. If not us, then who? This is our job and is one of the reasons Camelot exists. I think it is quite honorable of Bill and Kerry to protect their witnesses. If the person is a real whistleblower, then they could very well be in danger of losing their job or even their life. I can understand this. What I don't understand is why Bill is using the words smears and innuendo. I haven't seen anyone here who is smearing Bill Deagle, but I see a lot of people who are questioning his message and questioning the credibility of Camelot to continue to rely on him as a continuing "witness". Deagle has already given all of his information, so a discussion would not in any way jeopardize his position since everything is already out there. What's the harm with an intelligent discussion on the merits of Deagle's INFORMATION and NOT HIMSELF as a person? Please note I used the word discussion not debate. For me the definition of discussion is: I share my information and you share your information and the two of us honestly try to make sense all of it. The word debate means that I try to "prove" my point and discredit you while you attempt to assert your view. Bill and Kerry apparently worked quite diligently to bring on Dr. Steven Greer who had a very different perspective than they did. Why don't Bill and Kerry interview Cliff and Bill at the same time? Why is Bill not responding to the substance of what Cliff said? This just seems like a red herring to me. --sjkted

12-31-2009, 05:32 AM	#18
clarkkent Avalon Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 319	Re: Cliff High view on Bill Ryans accusations this is the same ol' forum nonsense with mods and banning, it gets very old. (and i totally agree she shouldnt have been banned) the issue at hand is bill who i usually find reasonable, completely sidestepped answering cliff highs statement and went the extra step to call him and idiot and mis characterize cliff as "shouting from the mountaintops" more and more it should be clear to everyone that bill and kerry (while having decent intentions) have a world view and an agenda to support that view regardless. this means that they dont thoroughly research their "whistleblowers" nor do they even argue with them as long as it supports their view (whereas if someone differs they make themselves look petty and unprofessional as in the case with greer, a laughably bad and unprofessional interview) the sad thing is for over a year they've driven and extremely paranoid "gloom and doom" world view. they will post every bit of non sense from sources they have never seen ( as in "hawkeye" who was saying the "roths' were all but taking over with martial law last year.) i wasnt a fan of st clair but now i see he was level headed in distancing himself from B and K. what bugs me the most is that kerry specifically seems to have gotten a huge head over camelots popularity and genuinely thinks she is privy to the latest cutting edge info in the conspiracy world, yet if someone like Greer offhandedly mentions the PTB having a device that can materialize astral entities, she brushes past that little bit of info ive never heard before and lets her ego get into a pissing contest. imagine if bill and kerry genuinely sought info regarding all these matters , we all would be privy to info that would let us be more informed and make up our OWN minds all the better. but no bill and kerry have a set agenda and if people like Cliff call into question the validity of their "witness" they will stand by them no matter how idiotic their claims are. folks, no one is going to learn the whole picture , or very much if it ,by following camelot. kerry and bill want to believe we're at war with bad guy aliens and spiritually at war as well, they believe the same story youll find all over the net or in your local barnes n noble new age section, that our gov is in league with evil aliens and that reptillians are eating babies and that were headed for martial law and ultimate disaster. people who fall for this are getting half truths mixed with a truckload of BS. if thats what you believe or want to believe, then camelot IS for you because they'll never deviate from that line of thought and they'll line up their mystery guests to support this view, even if they think they're moses and were offered to rule the planet as king "Penis of the Dragon" (thats what "pindar" means) yes thats straight from ol dr deagle himself. in my opinion "camelot" via kerry and bill have a naive outlook thats ultimately negative and narrow minded and serves the agenda of the PTB perfectly. they have an inflated sense of importance by the hits their website receives and the cash given to them by regular folks with dayjobs to fly them all around the globe gathering what is essentially disinfo. this rebuttal by cliff was at least an opportunity for them to stand and answer and admit they can be wrong about their "whistleblowers" or even just answer questions with integrity, instead it was a response that was evasive and immature. this is the issue at hand, mod banning/power/rules aside. http://superstrangeland.blogspot.com/ Last edited by clarkkent; 12-31-2009 at 05:36 AM.

12-15-2009, 10:35 PM	#19
jazzgad Avalon Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 119	Re: Cliff High view on Bill Ryans accusations shiva the destroyer thank you for posting this excellent response by Cliff the whole Project Camelot was big lesson and exercise of discernment for me and I m great full for it .I view PC and as many other like Alex Jones as another attempt to confuse and delay humanity collective awakening The end result is that I pay atention not to some external authority which in this new to me field could be some guy with a hat digital camera and black projects connections but to what my intuition and heart is telling me .

12-16-2009, 05:05 AM	#20
orthodoxymoron Avalon Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Lunar Base II Posts: 3,093	Re: Cliff High view on Bill Ryans accusations Once more...I just consider everything connected with controversial and hard to verify subjects...as being science fiction...which could very possibly be true. I try to listen to a wide variety of sources...and look for commonalities and verifications. Many of the subjects we discuss are hard to pin down with any conclusive finality. This world is truly a world of arguing, fighting, suing, slandering, warring, etc. I really want a world ruled by we the people of the world...but sometimes I really wonder if we're ready to do this. We may have to endure the New World Order for a few decades or a few centuries...before we become responsible and peaceful enough to properly rule ourselves. I wonder...did Art Bell get involved in this sort of thing? He seemed to be pretty detached...with almost a skeptical amusement toward a lot of his guests and callers. Whether this is a good thing or not is another question. Did Art Bell ever defend Jonathan Reed? Did you ever see the Art Bell Burrito connected with this case? Keep up the good work...Cliff and Bill. This sort of thing goes with the territory...I guess. Namaste

12-16-2009, 06:09 AM	#21
sjkted Avalon Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: LA County Posts: 361	Re: Cliff High view on Bill Ryans accusations FWIW, here's my $0.02. Like most people here, I have seen all of the Camelot interviews and followed their work for the past few years. I agree with some of the above posts that at this point with what I have seen and experienced, the idea of having an identity "created" with friends and people to corroborate and a background created from thin air is completely plausible. I've heard from some PA members that everyone is doing their part in a spiritual sense, including Deagle and Burisch, but my point is that we are coming to a turning point and we are in the middle of a war here. No, I'm not expecting that the NWO is going to bust down my door and blow up my house -- this here is a spiritual war. It's a war for hearts and minds and support and whether the world becomes a place of liberty and beauty or tyranny and death. It is for this reason that we must hold whistleblowers and any leaders like Bill Ryan to the highest standards. I'm not suggesting they need to perfect or even right all of the time. I'm also not even suggesting that we censor anyone, even a person highly suspected of disinfo. I'm just saying that when they say something that is totally out there that they need to be called on it. For example, if someone were a expert witness for a court, their credentials, work experience, CV, etc would be reviewed by both sides and if they said something that appeared to be without support, they would be thoroughly questioned by the opposing counsel. If I were a scientist being interviewed on the MSM news and I was saying that they sky was falling and that we're all going to die a brutal death, I would be thoroughly questioned and the news station would interview other expert witnesses to corroborate my testimony. Considering all of the propaganda/disinfo created by the MSM, why should we accept an even lower standard? -- i.e. trust me, I'm an insider. Don't ask questions! For me, Deagle makes the grade as far as his background is concerned. He has an MD and experience in black projects, but the real failure is when PC fails to question him on his statements. It's another failure when people take his information as being credible, just because it's being reported.

12-16-2009, 06:18 AM	#22
dolphin Avalon Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 277	Re: Cliff High view on Bill Ryans accusations sjkted, you couldn't have said it any better! and wow, bill ryan, name calling, that says it all... why should pc defend a whistleblower, even if that whistleblower is sending out false info??? you'll still defend him/her? i thought pc was about finding out what is REALLY going on, not more disinfo...don't we have enough of that from the mainstream media? Last edited by dolphin; 12-16-2009 at 06:33 AM.

12-16-2009, 05:30 AM	#23
Bobbie Avalon Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Mystery Mesa, Magic Mountain, California Posts: 110	Re: Cliff High view on Bill Ryans accusations Sometimes kind and gentle souls can make the mistake of unknowingly befriending wolves in sheeps clothing. Those wolves know exactly how to ingratiate themselves to and abuse the goodness of another human being. That's the con and they are very proficient at it. It calls to mind a famous quote, "So great the con of man". Project Camelot's charge to discover truth is such a risky and treaterous business - especially when dealing with the destiny and future of mankind as a whole. Unfortunately a good practice might just be to keep business business and friends friends - never allowing the twain to meet....and leave it at that. As hard as it is to accept sometimes, not everyone is our friend and may we have the wisdom to know the difference. Blessings to all and may grace and goodness follow us all the days of our lives.

12-16-2009, 07:17 PM	#25
Harper Avalon Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Paris Posts: 467	Re: Cliff High view on Bill Ryans accusations I find I flip flop from time to time trying not to buy into anything, hook line and sinker but there is always a turning point for me eventually. B. Deagle's was the photo that he had of himself dashing into a car looking terrified. Who took it and why did he have it and post it as verfiication that someone was after him and this is where I will get in trouble with some people, same for Miriam Delicado. She had a road accident that appears to have happened but who took photos of the aftermath, when they still were not sure if everything was going to be ok. So who takes photos of themselves, or has others do it in the most treacherous of situations? Doesn't jig with me ... that said everyone has some truth nuf said.. methinks