New Interview Henry Deacon or Arthur Newman

[judykott]

http://vimeo.com/6080732

Rafael Palacious interview at Barcelona Geopolitics of Arthur

Henry Deacon, or Arthur Newman or whoever he is I do not feel he says anything in this interview of 26 minutes, and personally do not trust a word he says anyway. There is something very off about him in my opinion, for one thing in his first interviews he corroborates Dan Burisch that says enough right there for me to feel he is discredited as well as Wilcox. Dan has now distanced himself from Henry /Art or whoever he is in the latest slew of whistleblowers blowing everyone else's tunes in an attempt to make a name for themselves, even if he is a Newman , with newname drop the silent e and you still have an anagram of newman he is saying the same old things.


Seinfeld: Newman worth watching

[cosmictexan]

His name is Arthur Neumann not Newman just so we get the facts straight.

[judykott]

Originally Posted by cosmictexan

His name is Arthur Neumann not Newman just so we get the facts straight.

Just so we get "facts" straight , I said whatever his name is, as you have no real clue what his name is either, it is spelled that way on the interview if you even bothered to watch it and I have seen it spelled Niman as well elsewhere, and Neumann. Henry Deacon or what ever you wish to call him or however you wish to spell his name today, I would not venture to really use the word fact in regards to his name.

[Myplanet2]

Too many friends have become "former friends" after he gets chummy with them. He's one of those 10 foot pole types, in my opinion.

[cosmictexan]

I have watched all the interviews on this sight. There is no need to get Bit**y about it. I thought we were here to help each other not get in a huff. Sorry I posted.

[judykott]

Originally Posted by cosmictexan

I have watched all the interviews on this sight. There is no need to get Bit**y about it. I thought we were here to help each other not get in a huff. Sorry I posted.

I have watched all of the video's on this site as well, and we are here to express our views on what we see and to always have discernment in mind. After all even Bill and Kerry said they do not agree with all that is presented. Nor could they as many of the whistle blowers have testimony that does not agree with each other. My views have changed dramatically after listening to all of them the only fact that I do know is that it can not all be fact.

Sometimes when things are written it may sound one way and you have chosen to interpret your own way, I guess from the lens you see the world through. I perhaps could have put a smiley face on it or something. I was not in a huff, I actually found it humorous thinking about the whole name thing and how we can be led to believe things are facts, and I tend to look at the world with a sense of humor and irony as his name was spelled all of those different ways on different sites after he already changed it from a fictitious one, then to be a Newman. I still find it humorous, so honestly am not in a huff at all. , perhaps it is you in the huff but I will not resort to name calling. Let's lighten up, and continue to explore and we do not have to agree, it's ok

[orthodoxymoron]

When I watch an interview with say Richard Hoagland or John Lear...there is a completely different 'feel' to the interview. They look and sound 'seasoned'. There is a different 'flow' of information. The jury is still out...and hopefully the jurors haven't hung themselves after being exposed to all of the new inside information!

The name game got me thinking. I'd love to see a MAD Magazine issue with Alfred E. Newman(Neumann?) posing as a top level(bottom level?) Area 51 whistleblower!

Remember the old beer commercial where the guy says 'You can call me Ray...or you can call me Jay'?

[BROOK]

Judy..I agree...I'm hearing lot's of very vague answers in this interview..and answers any one of us can get from many sources on the internet...remember

The worst predictions of those who say they "know" have nothing to do with Ultimate Reality.

Do not buy into what others are telling you -- even if those others are people in authority,
people who seem to have all the information and all the understanding and all the answers.

[777 The Great Work]

To become King Arthur of Camelot, you must remove the words from the tones.

[TtC]

Spot on, Judy. I miss my Kilkenny.

[Northern Boy]

Originally Posted by 777 The Great Work

To become King Arthur of Camelot, you must remove the words from the tones.

What i have to leave my sword and stone at home thats no fun it would be easier to pull a rabbit out of a hat

[TraineeHuman]

It seems to me that probably every PC whistleblower who's worked for the government or had access to secret facilities has obviously had and even is having brainwashing and Psy Ops work done on them -- maybe something slipped into their coffee now and then, and so on. Maybe they're at times even unconsciously destructive or misleading or dishonest as a result. But let's not forget, folks, that Dan Burisch/Crain and Henry/Arthur have been two of PC's top star witnesses. They do deserve a lot of respect, if only for the major courage they have shown. It seems to me nearly all of these whistleblowers are quite sincere -- though they're all human and have egos as well, and are under huge pressure too.

The Neumann (also known as von Neumann) surname (German, Austrian and Hungarian) has been one of the most distinguished in the world of mathematics for the last century plus. John von Neumann is particularly famous because he basically invented the first computer. Well, he handled all the theoretical design and invention and conception issues and an engineer worked with him to find a way to wire circuits etc together in a way that would fit his concept. So if the surname was made up, that would have been done at least two centuries ago, folks. Meanwhile, there's no constructive point in dishonoring such a distinguished surname. I'll bet "they" only send the very best and brightest to Mars (well, maybe "Aryan" blood or whatever is required too).

Along the same lines, Greer may well have been unknowingly brainwashed in certain ways. He's also no doubt learnt to be something of a diplomat, at least in terms of doing deals at some levels. He's probably had to, after attempts on his life and successful attempts on somebody who was his closest friend. That doesn't necessarily mean that 90% or 95% or 99% of what he says isn't totally true. I certainly find him one of the most informative of insiders. I'm not saying I trust everything he says, but I do always find listening to him quite inspiring, and informative as well. Respect doesn't cost anything.

[Karen]

Did anyone see this on the Camelot front page?

"Very important note: this is Rafa's accompanying text. We also reference this unaltered. Translate for yourselves. Please do this! [But to offer a hand to those without access to good (human) translation, click here for a pop-up.]"

{Spanish version not included in this post}

Pop-up:
"The third threatened scientist has written to me in a letter that he doesn't want to hear any more talk on the subject. That person climbed on stage holding Kerry (Project Camelot)'s hand when Robert Dean was talking about human bases on Mars, and revealed that he himself was one of those scientists that had been on Mars. (I don't know if those images have also been censored.)

"Miguel Celades impeded humanity from knowing that vital information, taking him off-stage, making him look like a fool, when he was exposing his life so we could know about one of the greatest secrets the Illuminati-Anunnaki hide from us.

"Curiously, I had interviewed him a few hours before (when I still wasn't aware of that fact). Here is the interview in English, which will give you more information about his credibility. He is the mythical "Henry Deacon" discovered by Project Camelot and who has, at last, shown his face.

"Supposedly, Steven Greer came up to him after his brief appearance and told him not to speak about Mars again. That made him exclaim: 'This is a fraud, this Conference is a fraud' after crossing my path in the hallways.

"Now, judge for yourself his credibility as a scientist involved in secret projects."

And then Project Camelot adds this note:
"Important: Henry/Arthur has just replied to us, denying the above report. We will continue to make enquiries and have requested an interview of Rafa. "

[Steve_A]

Hi Everybody,

I watched the interview between Rafapal, the Spanish 'journalist' and Neumann.

I can only say that Neumann appears very vague, always searching for simple answers and to be quite honest, I do not feel comfortable watching him. Not because he frightens me or anything like that, but I don't feel comfortable with his answers whaich at times seem to contradict themselves.

When confronted with a reasonable question he mumbles and becomes very vague as if he was trying to think of good answer, but lacking in sufficient knowledge to give a whammy of an answer to rock the socks off the journalist.

He speaks about pulse weapons (which were invented before WWII - Google 'Joshua'), however there is so much on the internet about these type of weapons used in Russia, US even to be used here in Brazil eventually....

He states that after time of compartimental secrets, they becaome more general and had more compartments, when logic tells me the opposite would be true. If the compartments became more general, there would be less compartments.

When he talks about his filtering of information between customers, he is so off base it's almost embarrasing to watch him squirm. Why give someone all your information you don't want your competition to know. It doesn't make logical sense. Surely you would just release information that you want them to know or are willing for them to know.

Asked about the 'secret government' he doesn't even care to answer the question. He claims he went to Mars, and asked if the secret government had contact with aliens he can't answer, even though he talks about the alien presence as if he has first hand knowledge.

For a scientist not to know anything about Orgone Energy, not even the name of the type of energy, which has been talked about since the 1930s is an absolute shame.

I don't know if its because I'm learning more or the apparent real 'whistleblowers' seem to be replaced by hacks, but I'm starting to become a little dissapointed with the quality of testimony being put out there recently.

I can relate to Greer, in spite of the fact that I can't get to grips with his personality, it's just me, and a few others, but at times I feel there needs to be a better filter on certain subjects (people) to try and keep this sort of theme well focussed.

It will be interesting to see if Neumann presents at Los Angeles in September.

But that's me.

Best regards,

Steve

[TraineeHuman]

I agree with everybody that the interview with Rafa seemed very amateurish. But maybe Arthur / Henry gave it without any preparation, and maybe he wasn't about to reveal any spectacular or even new info to that journalist? And it seemed to me that Rafa may not have done any homework at all to prepare for the interview either. I found Rafa extremely annoying. Indeed, is Rafa even a proper journalist?

[Northern Boy]

26:00 mins of wasted time it would have been more entertaining watching paint dry . Luckily I shut it off after 6:00 mins of watching this shifty eyed bullsh*ter

[lucrum]

I think I only want to say one thing about this:

Whoever the whistleblowers are and whatever they may say, we can all agree that the official story is bogus. So who cares if the guy's name is Newman, Neumann, Niemann or any other version of the same name.

If we use our noggins, we'll surely come through just fine, no need to hug a whistleblower or any other kind of informant to make that happen!

Listening to interviews/speeches are interesting, but the connection is made within yourself regardless who the person speaking may be.

(And that ended up being more than one thing...oops :P)

[Myplanet2]

I agree, Lucrum. I've actually been thinking for a while now that the time of the whistleblowers is about over.

All they can do is point at something that we can then look at and evaluate. But if they are deceived themselves, or even lying, then where does that leave those hanging on their revelations? I think it leaves them chasing their own tails and running down dead end alleys.

what more do we need to know about what is going on? At what point do we know enough, and decide to act in creating a bypass of these nitwits trying to convince us they are in control of us?

I'd have more faith in my heart than my noggin by now, as a side note.

[burgundia]

Originally Posted by Northern Boy

Luckily I shut it off after 6:00 mins of watching this shifty eyed bullsh*ter

so did I....( he was pathetic)

[Northern Boy]

it would be different if they really wanted to say what they know. By now the ones that view them know the story of where they worked why spend 45 mins or what ever going over that again and again in every interview . Bottom line is if there is nothing new to add then the best thing they could do is be quiet . If I wanted Bullsh*t I can go to church every sunday for it

[CanadianBorn]

I have no idea if he is who he says he is but I think you have to remember that he is very new to being a public figure and speaking out about these types of things. Hoagland and Bob Dean for example, have been in the field for a long time and along the way have developed good speaking skills and therefore come across with much more force and charisma. It usually takes people a while to get comfortable with public speaking (especially about such sensitive subjects) and many people are terrified even of the thought of speaking in public.

This interview was certainly not very informative but I would encourage people to give him a little more time before judging him in order to allow him to collect his thoughts and get use to sharing this information publicly.

[Stargazer1965]

Originally Posted by Northern Boy

it would be different if they really wanted to say what they know. By now the ones that view them know the story of where they worked why spend 45 mins or what ever going over that again and again in every interview . Bottom line is if there is nothing new to add then the best thing they could do is be quiet . If I wanted Bullsh*t I can go to church every sunday for it

You know if I was going to discredit PC....I would say I was in the black ops...say I'd been to Mars....Plant someone to vouch for the guy that was already a "whistle blower" and then make everyone look stupid when they get me on camera.

If B&K ever read this stuff.....Just how do you guys check credentials before rolling the film?

[orthodoxymoron]

Originally Posted by Northern Boy

26:00 mins of wasted time it would have been more entertaining watching paint dry . Luckily I shut it off after 6:00 mins of watching this shifty eyed bullsh*ter

You have a way with words Northern Boy! Come on...be nice!

Just listen to everyone...read everything...and don't take any one source too seriously. In other words...consider everything from all angles...all the time. Who really knows who's genuine and who's fake? The most knowledgeable and authoritative alien/ufo expert in the world might be some t-shirt and blue-jean wearing, pot-smoking, hippy-type with a squeaky voice and a foul-mouth. I'm very serious.

[JesterTerrestrial]

Originally Posted by orthodoxymoron

The most knowledgeable and authoritative alien/ufo expert in the world might be some t-shirt and blue-jean wearing, pot-smoking, hippy-type with a squeaky voice and a foul-mouth. I'm very serious.

We can only ****in hope!

[TRANCOSO]

It has occured to me that almost every whistleblower only has a lot of interesting stuff to tell, the first time (s)he's interviewed.