The Jonathan Reed Hoax - Project Camelot impersonation on YouTube

[tone3jaguar]

Go to the manticore forum following this link, then read down to the 4th post that was made by Mel.

http://www.manticore.com/viewtopic.php?f=36&t=1810

I feel bad now because I had not remembered that Mel had specifically posted "don't quote me" after he typed and posted that he was introduced as Jake Simpson. I had read it the day before and only the facts of what I had read still lingered. I hope Mel is not mad. He is my favorite host.

[K626]

The tribe must hold.


Peace and Love.

K.

[redtailhawk]

Originally Posted by tone3jaguar

Go to the manticore forum following this link, then read down to the 4th post that was made by Mel.

http://www.manticore.com/viewtopic.php?f=36&t=1810

I feel bad now because I had not remembered that Mel had specifically posted "don't quote me" after he typed and posted that he was introduced as Jake Simpson. I had read it the day before and only the facts of what I had read still lingered. I hope Mel is not mad. He is my favorite host.

I can't, one has to be a member to read the forum.

I find it disturbing that Mel posted here on this forum, that he did not even remember the man's name, yet reveals a whistleblowers name in his forum....adding "don't quote me". I trust when Kerry says she would never introduce John Burns as Jake Simpson, so it makes me wonder where he got his information. How very uncool of Mel, sounds like he has some explaining to do.

[manticore]

Originally Posted by redtailhawk

How very uncool of Mel, sounds like he has some explaining to do.

redtailhwak,

I will give you the courtesy this one time, as you seem to be acting as some kind of de facto investigator. I said I didn't remember the name of the person who I was introduced to and even said "don't quote me". I have been introduced to many people during last week. Either way, it's none of my business who this man in question is or is not. The names in question were being discussed by other members directly from this thread.

Tone3Jaguar misunderstood and has already replied above stating what I said. If you are accusing me of anything, you better have something more concrete than speculation, in order to substantiate your claims. I would strongly suggest that you get your facts in order. This is a very sensitive situation and there is no need to exacerbate it with gossip.

Mel

[redtailhawk]

Originally Posted by manticore

redtailhwak,

I will give you the courtesy this one time, as you seem to be acting as some kind of de facto investigator. I said I didn't remember the name of the person who I was introduced to and even said "don't quote me". I have been introduced to many people during last week. Either way, it's none of my business who this man in question is or is not. The names in question were being discussed by other members directly from this thread.

Tone3Jaguar misunderstood and has already replied above stating what I said. If you are accusing me of anything, you better have something more concrete than speculation, in order to substantiate your claims. I would strongly suggest that you get your facts straight.

Mel

Here are some facts for you.

Straight from your forum to ours:

Pineal, I also received a few e-mails stating the same. If I remember correctly, Kerry introduced me to him as Jake Simpson (from Australia, if I remember correctly)...or could it be John/Jake Haupmann?

Please don't quote me...

Mel

Yes, I was introduced to him. It is him. I read a thread over at Project Avalon and Kerry has confirmed she has been traveling throughout Europe and the USA with him. She also confirmed that Bob Dean met with them last week. I was there. I saw them meet. I am 100% positive this is the man. However, there are two sides to every story. Kerry is stating her version and Bill is also stating his.

From the outside, it looks to me this is a divide and conquer approach by TPTB. Whether this is true or not, the outcome is the same. There is infighting everywhere. That is why i choose to remain neutral and escape from any unfolding drama in exopolitics, guests of the show, etc.

Now you know why I don't have partners. My only partner is my wife...and she's not even involved with the show (perhaps indirectly with moral support).

Cheers,

Mel

[mntruthseeker]

All I can say is WOW

The plot keeps getting thicker and thicker

What a sorry state of affairs

[cloud9]

After reading all this thread I'm surprised nobody made a comment about gita's post # 105 which I think it's the wisest one. Everybody is just focused in the conflict and the she said/he said.
Bill and Kerry, I just hope the two of you can find common ground again and even with separate sites, a lot of people are looking up to both of you. I admire you both I wish you the best.

[burgundia]

Originally Posted by cloud9

After reading all this thread I'm surprised nobody made a comment about gita's post # 105 which I think it's the wisest one. Everybody is just focused in the conflict and the she said/he said.
Bill and Kerry, I just hope the two of you can find common ground again and even with separate sites, a lot of people are looking up to both of you. I admire you both I wish you the best.

you are right. I read gita's comment , intended to say sth about it but was in a hurry to go to work. You are absolutely right. It is one of the best if not the best commment on this thread...

[Stargazer1965]

Now back to the fake Camelot Channel....I posted "THIS IS FAKE" comments and they never showed though other positive comments have.

I used the REPORT button but all it seemed to do was report the background image.....

I'll keep trying

Peace Y'all

[tone3jaguar]

Originally Posted by redtailhawk

I trust when Kerry says she would never introduce John Burns as Jake Simpson,

Why would you suddenly trust what she says after all of the fragmented behavior lately? Let it go.

[Northern Boy]

Originally Posted by tone3jaguar

Why would you suddenly trust what she says after all of the fragmented behavior lately? Let it go.

I couldn`t agree more T3J it is what it is accept it

[redtailhawk]

Originally Posted by tone3jaguar

Why would you suddenly trust what she says after all of the fragmented behavior lately? Let it go.

I trust both Kerry and Bill...they both know me personally. I think they are both fine and courageous people; and I love the work they have accomplished. What I care most about is the confidentiality of witnesses when their identity is supposed to be protected, and that is why this matter has meant so much to me.

[Linda]

Originally Posted by tone3jaguar

Why would you suddenly trust what she says after all of the fragmented behavior lately?
Let it go.

Let it go?

We all have the right to ask questions or come to our own conclusions based upon on our own personal experiences and research.

People will "let it go" when they are good and ready to and not because someone tells them to.

Many of us have not made a judgment call yet and just sit back and watch who says what.
Your constant bashing of Kerry has been noted.

Some of us can actually think for ourselves and will never go along with "the crowd" because we are AWARE on how the game is played.

This whole thing is much deeper and uglier than just 2 personalities clashing.
People are not so stupid anymore and will not believe things just because someone says so.
We have to use our own minds and think outside the box.
Peace.

[mntruthseeker]

Thank you my dear Linda

Its how I feel because to me no matter who RedTailHawk is, he/she is someone that deserves the same respect as any other member.

It makes no difference who you are or what you do outside of here

You should not be treated any differently.

Not too many people come forward but I noticed that over 1000 people have read this thread since the remarks to RedTailHawk were put here

Every person that participates at this forum should be held as an honorary member.

[tone3jaguar]

I am taking a break from all of this drama for a few days. No forums for me, I am going on a Forum fast. See you all next week.

[jacody]

All I can say is that things shall get worse before they get better, but they will get better.



In hopes that better comes soon, jacody

[MONITOR]

Third party Law:

Violence and conflict amongst individuals and nations have been with us for ages and their causes have remained a complete mystery. If Chaldea could vanish, if Babylon turn to dust, if Egypt could become a badlands, if Sicily could have 160 prosperous cities and be a looted ruin before the year zero and a near desert ever since-and all this in spite of all the work and wisdom and good wishes and intent of human beings, then it must follow as the dark follows sunset that something must be unknown to man concerning all his works and ways. And that this something must be so deadly and so pervasive as to destroy all his ambitions and his chances long before their time.

Such a thing would have to be some natural law unguessed at by himself.

And there is such a law, apparently, that answers these conditions of being deadly, unknown and embracing all activities.

The law would seem to be:

A THIRD PARTY MUST BE PRESENT AND UNKNOWN IN EVERY QUARREL FOR A CONFLICT TO EXIST.

or

FOR A QUARREL TO OCCUR, AN UNKNOWN THIRD PARTY MUST BE ACTIVE IN PRODUCING IT BETWEEN TWO POTENTIAL OPPONENTS.

or

WHILE IT IS COMMONLY BELIEVED TO TAKE TWO TO MAKE A FIGHT, A THIRD PARTY MUST EXIST AND MUST DEVELOP IT FOR ACTUAL CONFLICT TO OCCUR.

It is very easy to see that two in conflict are fighting. They are very visible. What is harder to see or suspect is that a third party existed and actively promoted the quarrel.

The usually unsuspected and “reasonable” third party, the bystander who denies any part of it, is the one that brought the conflict into existence in the first place.

The hidden third party, seeming at times to be a supporter of only one side, is to be found as the instigator.

This is a useful law in many areas of life.

It is the cause of war.

One sees two fellows shouting bad names at each other, sees them come to blows.

No one else is around. So they, of course, “caused the fight.” But there was a third party.

Tracing these down, one comes upon incredible data. That is the trouble. The incredible is too easily rejected. One way to hide things is to make them incredible.

Clerk A and Messenger B have been arguing. They blaze into direct conflict. Each blames the other. Neither one is correct and so the quarrel does not resolve since its true cause is not established.

One looks into such a case thoroughly. He finds the incredible. The wife of Clerk A has been sleeping with Messenger B and complaining alike to both about the other.

Farmer J and Rancher K have been tearing each other to pieces for years in continual conflict. There are obvious, logical reasons for the fight. Yet it continues and does not resolve. A close search finds Banker L who, due to their losses in the fighting, is able to loan each side money, while keeping the quarrel going, and who will get their lands completely if both lose.

It goes larger. The revolutionary forces and the Russian government were in conflict in 1917. The reasons are so many the attention easily sticks on them. But only when Germany’s official state papers were captured in World War II was it revealed that Germany had promoted the revolt and financed Lenin to spark it off, even sending him into Russia in a blacked-out train!

One looks over “personal” quarrels, group conflicts, national battles and one finds, if he searches, the third party, unsuspected by both combatants or, if suspected at all, brushed off as “fantastic.” Yet careful documentation finally affirms it.

This datum is fabulously useful.

In marital quarrels the correct approach of anyone counseling is to get both parties to carefully search out the third party. They may come to many reasons at first. These reasons are not beings (people). One is looking for a third party, an actual being. When both find the third party and establish proof, that will be the end of the quarrel.

Sometimes two parties, quarreling, suddenly decide to elect a being to blame. This stops the quarrel. Sometimes it is not the right being and more quarrels thereafter occur.

Two nations at each other’s throats should each seek conference with the other to sift out and locate the actual third party. They will always find one if they look, and they can find the right one. As it will be found to exist in fact.

There are probably many technical approaches one could develop and outline in this matter.

There are many odd phenomena connected with it. An accurately spotted third party is usually not fought at all by either party but only shunned.

Marital conflicts are common. Marriages can be saved by both parties really sorting out who caused the conflicts. There may have been, in the whole history of the marriage several, but only one at a time.

Quarrels between an individual and an organization are nearly always caused by an individual third party or a third group. The organization and the individual should get together and isolate the third party by displaying to each other all the data they each have been fed.

Rioters and governments alike could be brought back to agreement could one get representatives of both to give each other what they have been told by whom.

Such conferences have tended to deal only in recriminations or conditions or abuses. They must deal in beings only in order to succeed.

This theory might be thought to assert also that there are no bad conditions that cause conflict. There are. But these are usually remedial by conference unless a third party is promoting conflict.

In history we have a very foul opinion of the past because it is related by recriminations of two opponents and has not spotted the third party.

“Underlying causes” of war should read “hidden promoters.”

There are no conflicts which cannot be resolved unless the true promoters of them remain hidden.

This is the natural law the ancients and moderns alike did not know.

And not knowing it, being led off into “reasons,” whole civilizations have died.

It is worth knowing.

It is worth working with in any situation where one is trying to bring peace.
Another very important factor in third party technology is false reports. False reports are written or spoken statements which turn out to be groundless or deceitful or which knowingly contain lies.

We know that a third party is necessary to any quarrel.

In reviewing several organizational upsets, it was found that the third party can go completely overlooked even in intensive investigation.

By giving false reports on others, a third party causes harm and wreaks havoc amongst individuals and groups.

In several cases an organization has lost several guiltless staff members. They were dismissed or disciplined in an effort to solve upsets. Yet the turbulence continued and the area became even more upset by reason of the dismissals.

Running this back further, one finds that the real third party, eventually unearthed, got people shot by false reports.

One source of this is as follows:

Staff member X goofs. He is very furious and defensive at being accused. He blames his goof on somebody else. That somebody else gets disciplined. Staff member X diverts attention from himself by various means including falsely accusing others.

This is a third party action which results in a lot of people being blamed and disciplined. And the real third party remaining undetected.

The missing point of justice here is that the disciplined persons were not faced with their accusers and were not given the real accusation and so could not confront it.

Another case would be a third party simply spreading tales and making accusations out of malice or some even more vicious motive. This would be a usual third party action. It is ordinarily based on false reports.

Another situation comes about when a person in charge of some area who can’t get the area straight starts to investigate, gets third party false reports about it, disciplines people accordingly and totally misses the real third party. This upsets the area even more.

The basis of all really troublesome third party activities is then false reports.

There can also be false perception. One sees things that don’t exist and reports them as “fact.”

Therefore we see that we can readily run back an investigation by following a chain of false reports.

In at least one case the third party (discovered only after it was very plain that only he could have wrecked two areas of the organization, one after the other) also had these characteristics:

1. Goofed in his own actions

2. Furiously contested any reports filed on him

3. Obsessively changed everything when taking over an area

4. Falsely reported actions, accusing others

5. Had a high casualty rate of staff in his area

These are not necessarily common to all third parties but give you an idea of what can go on

From experience in dealing with ethics and justice matters in groups it is apparent that the real source of upset in an area would be false reports accepted and acted upon without confronting the accused with all charges and his or her accusers.

A person with any degree of authority in a group should not accept any accusation and act upon it. To do so undermines the security of one and all. One could, as a start, refuse to act on any information unless it were proven by personal investigation not to be the action of some third party.

On being presented with an accusation or “evidence” a person in charge of some activity should conduct an investigation of false reports and false perceptions. In this way one can then verify such reports and arrive at the true source of the trouble and avoid disciplining individuals who may be innocent.

Justice, then, would consist of a refusal to accept any report not substantiated by actual, independent data, seeing that all such reports are investigated and that all investigations include confronting the accused with the accusation and where feasible the accuser, before any disciplinary action is undertaken or any penalty assigned.

While this may slow the processes of justice, the personal security of the individual is totally dependent upon establishing the full truth of any accusation before any action is taken.




Taken from the Scientology Handbook

[Jonathon]

Is this a test?

I have to commend many of the fine spirits here who have refused to allow themselves to be dragged down the mole hole - picking sides and polarizing these events any more than they already are.

Bill represents an excellent archetypal masculine energy - collected, tactical, rational. Kerry, an excellent archetypal feminine energy - passionate, emotional, engaging. Both energies are needed to maintain balance in the material. I think we may all agree on that. The current arrangement (division through a central portal) may be a good compromise at this juncture, however if this situation is allowed to deteriorate further your work and credibility may be at serious risk (which, in my humble opinion, is the precise result sought by the originator of this hub-bub).

Wikipedia: An infectious disease is a clinically evident illness resulting from the presence of pathogenic microbial agents.

Cancer: is a class of diseases in which a group of cells display uncontrolled growth (division beyond the normal limits), invasion (intrusion on and destruction of adjacent tissues), and sometimes metastasis (spread to other locations in the body).

I think we all get it.

My humble advice... cut it loose and pronto. Whatever IT is ain't worth it, nor is IT what it appears to be to whomever is seeking it.

Forgive the obvious inflection here, however with all the love I can muster I must ask: perhaps you should have been expecting and preparing for this? The both of you have monster-sized targets on your backsides and this should come as no surprise. Further, you aren't hard people to know and your weaknesses are evident - you both appear to have enough integrity and character not to hide behind some fiction of yourselves. Expect your buttons to be pushed. Expect your greatest fears and desires to be used against you. These are the shoes you have so graciously selected. We salute you both for that. Furthermore, we are here to support you. Perhaps the silver lining here is that you now realize this fact and, indeed it is no accident, are now here.

You both have my support, however I doubt this is the poetic and artful ending either of you intended (if indeed one was intended at all).

Now for Ghandi:
A coward is incapable of exhibiting love; it is the prerogative of the brave.
A small body of determined spirits fired by an unquenchable faith in their mission can alter the course of history.

Breathe deeply. Surrender. Smile. Jump.

[burgundia]

Mother earth is shaking all over the world now, releasing some negative energy...maybe the forum is "shaking" for the same reason....

[MONITOR]

How to Find a Third Party

The way not to find a third party is to compile a questionnaire that asks one and all in various ways, “Have you been a victim?” Do not ask questions such as, “Who has been mean to you?” or other questions which would tend to elicit answers that the person has been victimized. This kind of question will not locate the individual stirring up conflicts between people but may only name executives and others in the group who are trying to get people to do their jobs and be productive!

Anyone who uses this approach (1) does not find any third party and (2) causes people to mentally or physically collapse to the extent that they cannot function causatively.

By definition, a third party is one who by false reports creates trouble between two people, a person and a group or a group and another group.

The object of the investigation, then, is to find out who has been spreading false reports in order to stir up conflicts between people or groups. To find a third party one has to ask those involved in the dispute questions along the following lines:

1a. Have you been told you were in bad?

b.What was said?

c. Who said it?

2a. Have you been told someone was bad?

b. What was said?

c. Who said it?

3a. Have you been told someone was doing wrong?

b. What was said?

c. Who said it?

4a. Have you been told a group was bad?

b. What was said?

c. Who said it?




To find a third party; ask who has been telling people that others were bad, doing wrong, etc.


An entire group can be asked such questions, and when the results are viewed. . .



. . . one person’s name will appear far more often than others. This is the person to investigate for creating disharmony and conflicts.



A questionnaire like this should have a limiter such as “On your job________?” or “In your marriage__________?” or “In this family__________?”

It may also have a lot of answers so leave ample space for each question.

By then combining names given, you have one name appearing far more often than the rest. This is done by counting names. You then investigate this person.

By following this procedure, you will find out exactly who has been stirring up conflicts and thus open the door to their resolution.

With this tool in your hands you will be able to change conditions between family members, associates and groups you come into contact with and restore harmony.

It is the solution to a host of ills that have worried men for ages.

[TheChosen]

Mel is the best alternative radio talk show host out there.. and that's the result of him asking the right questions to his guests, which again is the result of project camelot influence as he himself noted. I feel quite annoyed when other radio hosts get some great people on their show but then start asking completely irrelevant questions. I feel the negative remarks for him are the result of people having their bubble burst and are now looking for blood.. It was a simple misunderstanding, get over it and use your own intuition when judging people

[mntruthseeker]

Originally Posted by TheChosen

Mel is the best alternative radio talk show host out there.. and that's the result of him asking the right questions to his guests, which again is the result of project camelot influence as he himself noted. I feel quite annoyed when other radio hosts get some great people on their show but then start asking completely irrelevant questions. I feel the negative remarks for him are the result of people having their bubble burst and are now looking for blood.. It was a simple misunderstanding, get over it and use your own intuition when judging people

A simple misunderstanding ? Says who ?

I have a copy of the full blog which I copied yesterday before it was conviently erased. Why was it erased ?

The blog was not part of an interview, you are wrong......So read the words before you insinuate anything. So he didnt get this information by asking the right question.

I myself, pride myself with telling the truth and seeking the truth.

I'm sorry that this came out, I admired Mel for the work he does.

I seen another side of him when he came down and let his temper fly all over a member here that simply asked a question. That particular member is one that Bill knows quite well and I would hope that Bill realizes who is friends are and understand that his friend was actually shaking pretty bad over what happened and shaking for quite a long time Would be nice for Bill to contact that person and see for himself

So by saying we need to use our own intuition before judging someone.................goes both ways.


I do not follow a trend of people that is going ot just agree to agree . I will only agree if its the right thing to do.

[manticore]

Originally Posted by mntruthseeker

A simple misunderstanding ? Says who ?

I have a copy of the full blog which I copied yesterday before it was conviently erased. Why was it erased ?

The blog was not part of an interview, you are wrong......So read the words before you insinuate anything. So he didnt get this information by asking the right question.

I myself, pride myself with telling the truth and seeking the truth.

I'm sorry that this came out, I admired Mel for the work he does.

I seen another side of him when he came down and let his temper fly all over a member here that simply asked a question. That particular member is one that Bill knows quite well and I would hope that Bill realizes who is friends are and understand that his friend was actually shaking pretty bad over what happened and shaking for quite a long time Would be nice for Bill to contact that person and see for himself

So by saying we need to use our own intuition before judging someone.................goes both ways.


I do not follow a trend of people that is going ot just agree to agree . I will only agree if its the right thing to do.

mntruthseeker,

Kerry and Bill have already corresponded with me. The reason that the thread was locked and some of the posts removed was to avoid further misunderstanding and commotion. We are supposed to stand behind Kerry and Bill during these difficult times. Project Camelot is their child. Stop wasting your time by focusing on me.

I'm glad to continue communicating with Kerry and Bill and will do whatever I can to assist in any way possible. Time to move on mntruthseeker. There are more important issues to be reconciled at this time.

Cheers,

Mel

[Linda]

Hi Vickie, I was not sticking up for anyone and anyway I don't know who this
RedTailHawk is.

I was merely addressing the comment on being told "to let it go" that I feel is very wrong for anybody to do. Ever.

We all need to make up our own minds about this huge drama.

[mntruthseeker]

Originally Posted by Linda

Hi Vickie, I was not sticking up for anyone and anyway I don't know who this
RedTailHawk is.

I was merely addressing the comment on being told "to let it go" that I feel is very wrong for anybody to do. Ever.

We all need to make up our own minds about this huge drama.

Actually I didnt think you were. I seen it as someone that spoke their mind and wasn't moved by others. I seen over 1000 people visit the thread after it happened and no one spoke up until you.

I personally do not know who RedTailHawk is.......never seen a post of theirs before, I just didnt like what I had seen said to him/her


I read what he/she said and trust she would not put it down if it wasn't true
They personally know Bill and Kerry and was not taking sides in anything but wondered how information was leaked out. Something that is important to all whistleblowers, wouldn't you think ?