So does this mean Kerry and Bill disagree with Jim Humble???

franciejones · 01-01-2009, 08:19 PM

I was wondering if this tickled anyone else's brain. After the Jim Humble interivew went up, this below copied message was at PC.

A NOTE ABOUT WHISTLEBLOWERS AND RESEARCHERS that you find on these pages:

We, Kerry Cassidy and Bill Ryan, do not necessarily agree with or endorse all of the views presented here. What Camelot is about is the investigation into the mysteries that surround us. We are all, in a sense, investigators of our world. And while we, as individuals, may not agree with everything presented on our site, we fully support freedom of thought and speech as well as the Quest for truth. --31 December 2008

This was never an issue before as far as I knew. Did anyone else wonder if they were referring to the most recent interview?

mpea · 01-01-2009, 08:29 PM

Hi Francie,

No, I didn't take it to mean the Jim Humble Interview in particular.

I read the statement to mean that the the content of posts was the opinion of the writers/researchers and did not represent the opinions of Bill and Kerry.

It's up to us, the reader, to take on board what resonates with us and discard the rest.

Peace and blessings

mpea

Quote:

Originally Posted by franciejones

I was wondering if this tickled anyone else's brain. After the Jim Humble interivew went up, this below copied message was at PC.

A NOTE ABOUT WHISTLEBLOWERS AND RESEARCHERS that you find on these pages:

We, Kerry Cassidy and Bill Ryan, do not necessarily agree with or endorse all of the views presented here. What Camelot is about is the investigation into the mysteries that surround us. We are all, in a sense, investigators of our world. And while we, as individuals, may not agree with everything presented on our site, we fully support freedom of thought and speech as well as the Quest for truth. --31 December 2008

This was never an issue before as far as I knew. Did anyone else wonder if they were referring to the most recent interview?

franciejones · 01-01-2009, 08:32 PM

Very true mpea...I was thinking that their newest statement has ALWAYS been implicit. I was curious as to the "why now" part of it.

THE eXchanger · 01-01-2009, 08:45 PM

i believe, it is a good way
for them, from a legal aspect --
to state it eXactly, as, they have

that way, the legal aspect rests with who made the statement
and, NOT with them, NOR,
do they say, that they agree with what others says

eurosceptic · 01-01-2009, 08:57 PM

it must be key to the whole thing to have the ability of free thinking/speaking as it is not total control

Anchor · 01-01-2009, 09:27 PM

FJ: I dont think its anything like that.

Bill & Kerry's opinion may carry more weight than average in some peoples eyes, and my guess is all they are trying to do is say, look, just cause we report on this doesnt mean it is "validated" by us in anyway - please use your own discretion.

It shouldn't need saying, but it does - some people still follow like sheep.

A..

01-01-2009, 09:32 PM

There's always a danger on this kind of forum, especially where the owners are public figures, that some people will assume anything that gets posted is endorsed and verified either by themselves or Project Avalon/Camelot. I've just had a situation where a member found something in a thread that concerned them and quit the forum, the implication being that Avalon itself and/or B&K were spreading disinfo.

The message they posted simply spells out that the contents of individual posts and threads are solely the responsibility of the posters- Avalon and B&K simply provide the platform. It's up to the members to decide whether they believe the information or not.

The majority of the membership accept this as a given, but there will always be those who don't understand that right away. Hopefully the message will prevent situations like this occurring again.

That's my personal take on the message- this post isn't endorsed by B&K either

I also have no idea if B&K are even aware of the situation I mentioned above, so please don't infer that was the reason for the message either.

alyscat · 01-01-2009, 09:58 PM

Personally, I think it's wise - particularly when you have an interview with someone who is involved in any sort of healing situation. Before, we've just had whistleblowers, not healers, as I recall.

We're just too darn litigious in the US, and the FDA and AMA and any number of 3 letter organizations who would like to "get at" Jim, might conceivably try to leverage through B&K.

alys

orthodoxymoron · 01-01-2009, 11:06 PM

The role of Bill and Kerry seems to be alternative truth seeking and reporting...not spoon-feeding, hand-holding, and babysitting a bunch of crybabys.

01-01-2009, 08:19 PM	#1
franciejones Banned Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 307	So does this mean Kerry and Bill disagree with Jim Humble??? I was wondering if this tickled anyone else's brain. After the Jim Humble interivew went up, this below copied message was at PC. A NOTE ABOUT WHISTLEBLOWERS AND RESEARCHERS that you find on these pages: We, Kerry Cassidy and Bill Ryan, do not necessarily agree with or endorse all of the views presented here. What Camelot is about is the investigation into the mysteries that surround us. We are all, in a sense, investigators of our world. And while we, as individuals, may not agree with everything presented on our site, we fully support freedom of thought and speech as well as the Quest for truth. --31 December 2008 This was never an issue before as far as I knew. Did anyone else wonder if they were referring to the most recent interview?

01-01-2009, 08:32 PM	#3
franciejones Banned Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 307	Re: So does this mean Kerry and Bill disagree with Jim Humble??? Very true mpea...I was thinking that their newest statement has ALWAYS been implicit. I was curious as to the "why now" part of it.

01-01-2009, 08:45 PM	#4
THE eXchanger Avalon Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Spiritual eXplorer-Canada Posts: 4,915	Re: So does this mean Kerry and Bill disagree with Jim Humble??? i believe, it is a good way for them, from a legal aspect -- to state it eXactly, as, they have that way, the legal aspect rests with who made the statement and, NOT with them, NOR, do they say, that they agree with what others says

01-01-2009, 08:57 PM	#5
eurosceptic Avalon Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: The Flatlands of Eastern England Posts: 226	Re: So does this mean Kerry and Bill disagree with Jim Humble??? it must be key to the whole thing to have the ability of free thinking/speaking as it is not total control

01-01-2009, 09:27 PM	#6
Anchor Avalon Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Sydney, NSW, Australia Posts: 2,280	Re: So does this mean Kerry and Bill disagree with Jim Humble??? FJ: I dont think its anything like that. Bill & Kerry's opinion may carry more weight than average in some peoples eyes, and my guess is all they are trying to do is say, look, just cause we report on this doesnt mean it is "validated" by us in anyway - please use your own discretion. It shouldn't need saying, but it does - some people still follow like sheep. A..

01-01-2009, 09:32 PM	#7
Steve_G Guest Posts: n/a	Re: So does this mean Kerry and Bill disagree with Jim Humble??? There's always a danger on this kind of forum, especially where the owners are public figures, that some people will assume anything that gets posted is endorsed and verified either by themselves or Project Avalon/Camelot. I've just had a situation where a member found something in a thread that concerned them and quit the forum, the implication being that Avalon itself and/or B&K were spreading disinfo. The message they posted simply spells out that the contents of individual posts and threads are solely the responsibility of the posters- Avalon and B&K simply provide the platform. It's up to the members to decide whether they believe the information or not. The majority of the membership accept this as a given, but there will always be those who don't understand that right away. Hopefully the message will prevent situations like this occurring again. That's my personal take on the message- this post isn't endorsed by B&K either I also have no idea if B&K are even aware of the situation I mentioned above, so please don't infer that was the reason for the message either. Last edited by Steve_G; 01-01-2009 at 09:36 PM.

01-01-2009, 09:58 PM	#8
alyscat Avalon Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Washington state Posts: 743	Re: So does this mean Kerry and Bill disagree with Jim Humble??? Personally, I think it's wise - particularly when you have an interview with someone who is involved in any sort of healing situation. Before, we've just had whistleblowers, not healers, as I recall. We're just too darn litigious in the US, and the FDA and AMA and any number of 3 letter organizations who would like to "get at" Jim, might conceivably try to leverage through B&K. alys

01-01-2009, 11:06 PM	#9
orthodoxymoron Avalon Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Lunar Base II Posts: 3,093	Re: So does this mean Kerry and Bill disagree with Jim Humble??? The role of Bill and Kerry seems to be alternative truth seeking and reporting...not spoon-feeding, hand-holding, and babysitting a bunch of crybabys. Last edited by orthodoxymoron; 01-01-2009 at 11:15 PM.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode