Anomalies in The Ruiner's material

[Bill Ryan]

.
Dear All,

I'll start this by copying over a post I made on this thread a few hours ago (post #269, here):

Shane/The Ruiner's interview with Kerry Cassidy, 8 Sept 2015

I had written:

Posted by awakeningmom (here)
Isn't Bill scheduled to interview Shane soon? Or has something gone awry?

I don't think Shane would any more consent to an interview (but, to be quite fair, I don't know this for sure).

Over the last week or so, there's been an extensive, detailed written dialog with Shane in which many questions were asked, and many answers were given.

The entire exchange was totally civilized, but was also focused on a number of specific unanswered questions that had not been asked by other interviewers. I wanted to do this in private, rather than 'ambush' Shane on audio (or maybe to be thought to be doing so).

It seemed only fair, because I was troubled: I have always liked him — he is an archetypal, super-nice person — but his story was problematic on several important counts. I urged Shane to be very straight about some things, where we had felt he had not been.

Shane responded in an exemplary way throughout, as one might expect, in terms of his consistent demeanor and courtesy. But reassurance was not forthcoming.

As a result of the answers given, we (the Avalon mods) are unanimous that we cannot any more support Shane's story. As Paul said above, there's more to say about all this (and of course, Shane is most welcome to say what he wishes, and we encourage that), but there's lots of detail involved, and it would take quite some time to lay out in the most understandable way.

Lest this be used by Corey Goode as ammunition to fire at Shane (which I fully expect, but don't actually want to happen), I want to state that it's my very strong opinion that Corey is a pathological liar (or, at best, has been grossly interfered with), and his story, too — a fair amount of which he got from Shane in the first place — is unreliable at best and sheer, deceitful fabrication or plagiarism at worst.

An overarching topic of concern here is that there's reason to believe that there may be a gross strategic manipulation taking place of the alternative community, maybe a previously experimental program now gone operational. Some of those involved, being used as assets, may not even know about it. I'd VERY much like to think that Shane was in the latter category. But there's something mighty strange going on here. If things don't 'feel right' — then this paragraph may supply clues.

I'd like to find ways of discussing this. All of this almost certainly needs its own thread, which of course simple to do if that's the best way to discuss all this.

All this needs more data and clarification. This is what this thread is for.

Back on 28 September, two weeks ago, I started a behind-the-scenes (moderators-only) thread, with the same title as this one. That thread has run to 213 posts. This [below] is the first one.

It presents a concern that (in transparency) it's helpful to share here. Then, we can gradually walk you through our journey of research, and, a few days ago, detailed questions posed to Shane in writing.




~~~~~~~~~


Hi, Folks:

As you know, I've been exchanging some information with one or two of you regarding concerns with The Ruiner's material, and I confess I've been becoming more and more doubtful about its provenance. I'd like to do a bit of a data dump here, so we're all looking at the same page (if we want to! ).

First, here are two documents that may be useful to others... they're Word docs, so they can be searched with some sophistication:

Here's Shane's complete blog:
http://projectavalon.net/The_Ruiners_blog_complete.doc

And here are the two 'Cassandra letters':
http://projectavalon.net/Cassandra_letters.doc

Now, it'd been fairly clear to me immediately that the Cassandra letters could not have written by some wise old near-immortal soul. They looked and felt they'd been written by a young, contemporary person. Quite a few people have said the same thing, of course.

I'm now 95% sure they were written by Shane himself. Below is a linguistic fingerprint analysis. There are quite a few significant matches.

If so, this doesn't look good, because it means that Shane, despite his very pleasant, ever-courteous and consistent demeanor, has been caught in a lie. And if so, we need to know that.

In the Cassandra letters, which together make a short document, there are the following 'fingerprints'. These can easily be seen.

1) Here's an example of two dots, with no space:

"the dark prince has no teeth and there is you..so neither of us will have what we have wanted"

In The Ruiner's blog, there are

• 0 instances of him writing "xxx..xxx"
• 5 instances of him writing "xxx.. xxx"
• 0 instances of him writing "xxx... xxx"

In Shane's Skype messages to Corey, there are also MANY instances of these rather unusual double-dots. This does appear to be a habitual Shane 'fingerprint'.

2) Cassandra writes:

"As you have told me I do not have a heart many times you will understand I could not face you, I didn’t have the heart! ( haha)"

In Shane's blog (4 August), he also writes "haha" here:

"To the email-er: Hey you asked for this! haha"

And in his Skype chat with Corey, Shane writes

"It all has to happen sooner or later.. why not now? Haha"

and

"Our girls could hang out while we go on trips haha"

3) Cassandra signs off a little unusually, with a semi-colon, here:

"Until we meet again;"

Not many young writers use semi-colons these days. But Shane does. In his blog, there are 7 of them. Not many... but still 7.

There are a few more possible indicators, but those others are more indistinct. In my personal opinion, the combination of the above is a bit of a smoking gun. It's not a slam-dunk, but I think it's close.

There's more that adds to the size of the red flag. In his important post here, Shane says:

Posted by Shane (here)
There is this funny misconception that the info I share comes from the Illuminati.

The "intended audience" of the blog is the illuminati. Which means I am talking to the Illuminati members, not to the public.

As best I know, that was the first time Shane stated on record that all this extraordinary information did NOT come from the Illuminati (and was therefore NOT 'inside information' that he'd been briefed on or somehow learned from them) — but was from different sources.

Although this is not in his blog or either of his two interviews, Shane has stated that (paraphrase) he has memory of being Anu's favorite son, and he was trained to be a killing machine.

As a result, he said, he was banished to a desolate planet that contained no sentient beings, and stayed there for thousands of years (or maybe eons). Through sheer will, he broke free and was able to incarnate into the body of a human on earth who had been disposed of. His next incarnation on earth is now Shane, and he has full memory.

This is important, because Shane has NEVER said anything like that on record. What this seems to mean is that at least quite a lot of his data (maybe most of his data) comes from his subjective personal past-life recall.

And while that's to be noted (I have subjective past-life recall, too!), it can be messed with, totally. These things can EASILY be implanted overlays. There's no way to investigate that unless one consults a very experienced past-life practitioner. There's nothing to indicate that Shane has ever done that.

There are [apparent] positives in all this tangle. They need to be noted for balance.

1) Note his two PMs to me on 6 and 13 Sept 2013 (I can copy those here later), fwded to the mods, in which Shane seems to be very genuinely wanting to consult me about a strange, very real, experience he had regarding Giants.

The whole topic of Giants in stasis only resurfaced after that over a year later, when Corey suddenly mentioned them in his then unpublished second interview with Christine (recorded 23 Nov 2014).

(Corey also mentions them, for the first time, in this post, dated 27 Nov 2014, four days after his interview.)

The strong inference from this timing is that Corey got all that from Shane, and then presented the information as his own. We do know that Shane had been in backchannel touch with Corey during the period before his second interview, when Corey started to embellish his story.

2) Another positive indicator (apparently) is that Shane has stated on record (I believe) that his personal invitation to attend a meeting with Anu, in the large meeting room, was a physical event. He has said that.

That doesn't mean it's true, but he's stated that. At least that is helpful, because in much of his other reported information, there is no indication at all of its provenance. (i.e. where on earth — or elsewhere! — it all comes from.)

3) A further 'positive' is that he told me in our long text Skype chat that he knew people personally who were in or connected with the Secret Space Program.

So... he has stated the provenance of SOME of his information. Whether true or not, it's useful he's stated that. (That is the sense in which I mean 'positive'.)

*****

Here's my hypothesis so far. This is subject to change all the time, but it's how I see it at this time of writing, 28 September:

• Shane believes everything, or almost everything, he's saying. He's not a deceptive person by nature.

• He sincerely believed he had good background, big-picture-contextual information that he wanted to share with 'his intended audience', which was 100 or so disillusioned and breakaway members of the Illuminati. I'm sure those kinds of people exist.

• He never anticipated that his blog would attract such a large audience of the alternative community. He's indicated that several times.

• Then, he found himself kind of painted into a corner. He repeatedly said, very properly, that people could accept or reject the information as they chose, and always stated on his blog that it was 'fiction'. But such is (always!) the pressure from the alternative community for information, that he found himself under pressure that he never planned or anticipated. This pressure is not over yet for him by any means.

• Some of his information might really be true, based on real personal experiences. Not just his past-life recall. But it's hard to know which is which, because he's not really saying.

• Separately from the points above, Corey has plagiarized (without source credit, which is what plagiarism is) much of Shane's information and presented it opportunistically as his own.

• So we have the tangled situation of
  — Shane basically having integrity (except that he may have lied at least once, i.e. about the Cassandra letters, and, quite separately, there's some reason to believe there's at least another lie on a separate off-record matter... but that's to be discussed later if appropriate).
  — the situation having run away with him in an unplanned way
  — and that as another unplanned and damaging effect, Corey (who does NOT have integrity) has now capitalized on all of this for his own reasons.

• And, as a conclusion, maybe only a comparatively small amount of this is true. (And, personally, I'd be pleased if it weren't. ) We cannot know unless Shane totally comes clean.

~~~~~~



Again: all that was posted by myself to the mods (who themselves are an extremely able research team), on 28 September.

The first set of questions I sent to Shane in writing, on the morning of 5 October. To his credit, Shane answered them in full that same evening. All that I'll post later (not right now), after members have had a chance to digest and reflect on all this so far. Shane's full answers, and his willingness to be questioned, gave him great credit, but a number of important questions remained.

An extended exchange then ensued, lasting until today. That can all be posted here. I am assuming Shane is willing for that to be shared: he was basically defending his story, and has consistently insisted to the present moment that it was all 100% true and that nothing of any kind had been misrepresented.

Again, as per my post above copied from the other thread, Shane has conducted himself impeccably throughout, and I would like to stress this once again.

[onawah]

Is there any chance we could get a similar summation of what the Mod team discovered about the accuracy/inaccuracy of Simon Parkes' information (another "favorite son" of Anu's, according to him!)?
One question:Did Shane claim that he had copied the alleged letter from Cassandra word for word, or could he have perhaps just been paraphrasing in his own words?
( And thanks to the Mod team, again, for remaining alert, on everyone's behalf. I think another thing to keep in mind is that if we manage to uncover untruths or distortions, it will be to Shane's advantage that we do so, as well, so it's not an attack on him unless we frame it that way, as Bill has been careful to avoid doing, and for which I thank him.)

[Bill Ryan]

Posted by onawah (here)
Is there any chance we could get a similar summation of what the Mod team discovered about the accuracy/inaccuracy of Simon Parkes' information (another "favorite son" of Anu's, according to him!)?

( And thanks to the Mod team, again, for remaining alert, on everyone's behalf. I think another thing to keep in mind is that if we manage to uncover untruths or distortions, it will be to Shane's advantage that we do so, as well, so it's not an attack on him unless we frame it that way, as Bill has been careful to avoid doing, and for which I thank him.)

I'm sure that'd be possible! With enough careful focus, a team of people can look at anything through a really close lens. In Simon's case, I'm not competent to do that, and I don't think the mods are... I'm just not familiar enough with what he's stated on record, and I don't think the others are.

What's important to state here, is that this is not debunking. It's investigation, and is what research really is. The truth is more important than any opinion we each may have, and later (in my messages to Shane) you'll see me explain how important that is.

So an investigation might easily produce all kinds of positive reinforcement, and often does in the hands of a good researcher. One never knows until one starts looking, and asking. That's what we're really all doing together here on Avalon.

Posted by onawah (here)
One question:Did Shane claim that he had copied the alleged letter from Cassandra word for word, or could he have perhaps just been paraphrasing in his own words?

We go into that later. Shane wrote exactly this:

As I said in the first response the second letter was given back to a member of her group/coven. The way that one actually worked was I met someone and was given the letter. I typed it out and brought it back. As per the instructions. I didn't take any pictures or anything as this was never "evidence" and I never planned to present it in any other way.

[Shane]

As it's quite important.

That letter is transcribed by another from me reading it. Punctuation was added by that person and not by myself. It comes from the transcript of the show, not my own recording of the letter.


With love and respect,

[A Voice from the Mountains]

I'm glad to see this, Bill, primarily because the kind of analysis you are doing above is very similar to textual analysis done by scholars on the text of the Bible: very meticulous attention to grammar, the detailed content of every statement, comparing it with historical context to see if it fits, etc. Wondrous things open up with this kind of careful scrutiny.

This is the kind of critical thinking that needs to be brought to more whistleblower testimonies. Text analysis is only one line of investigation that has a solid tradition behind it that can be employed in this kind of analysis, that historians use, for example. There are other tools, for example with video interviews there are certain signs in the voice and body language that psychologists and police investigators use as indications of possible deception. Unfortunately a lot of these signs only really become visible when the person giving testimony is made uncomfortable by applying critical pressure, and most interviews done with alleged whistleblowers today do not apply this pressure, and instead whistleblowers tend to be treated very politely and their statements apparently taken at face value. I understand that there may be reasons for this (a liar would want to avoid any investigator or journalist known to ask tough questions and press deeply) but it also makes later analysis more difficult.

Though conventional scholarship seems very controlled on some level, the methods they employ for investigation should be studied by everyone here. The methods are good. The manipulation in mainstream academia is purely institutionalized I think.

[awakeningmom]

Thanks for starting this discussion and explanation, Bill. I am looking forward to more posts and particularly to the written discussion with Shane.

I was one of the people who also called "fraud" on the Cassandra letter in the Thomas Williams thread (at post #39, and also #43) for the same reasons you mentioned.

https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...=1#post1000210

https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...=1#post1000325

To my surprise and delight, Shane reached out to me by PM and explained to me that he wasn't upset by my accusation, appreciated my questioning, and that the reason the style looked the same was because he had to "type the letter into his blog from something hand-written." He also told me that the hand-written letter had "no punctuation at all" and that it read as one long sentence that he had to fix and add punctuation when he typed it. Finally, he also suggested that he and Cassandra had spent a lot of time together when Shane was in his teen years so they also might share some similar writing/speaking patterns. I hope those answers match up to the ones provided to you....that would be positive.

However, as a teacher used to catching students copying others' work, I'm still fairly confident that Shane wrote the letter himself. But I do believe he wrote it to rally responses and get people motivated to take action/do something/wake up. In other words, I currently believe he did it for a benevolent reason.

I guess once someone is caught lying once, there's the issue of credibility on all other representations. I certainly am wary of/less willing to trust students caught lying/copying, even if I actually "like" them as people and trust they are otherwise "good." And I guess credibility's even more important when you are willing to listen to someone who seems to have some actual intel on what's really going on in this "reality" (or whatever this is). I expect that we all want some damn honest answers and we are all tired of being jerked around.

I have no interest in trashing Shane. My communications with him have been very positive and I like the person he seems to be in his interviews. I'm frankly more puzzled by/interested in the abrupt removal of him from the PA pedestal, and feel like we all really should understand the full why so we can make our own decisions after full disclosure. So I really appreciate your willingness to provide us with that disclosure. Thank you.

[Robin]

In regards to the letters, I would highly encourage you to reconsider your position in determining how a Parent should write a letter. Your assumption is that somebody who is thousands of years old should be well-versed as a scribe. Why would such a powerful magician who has amplified psychic abilities and speaks clearly in telepathic communication, want to dedicate their time and energy writing?

Language to them would be burdensome, clumsy, and an inefficient way of communicating thoughts and feelings. Furthermore, why would they ever bother writing anything down if their main prerogative is to hide all evidence of their existence? Wouldn't oral communication when giving out orders to the chain-of-command make more sense?

The letter as presented shows diction that is not grammatically correct, and a stream-of-consciousness flow of thoughts and feelings. This is more authentic to me, because it shows just how little a powerful being such as this would care in devoting to an art that is very human-based in the material plane. Since Shane spent a lot of time with this being, it would also make sense that his way of communicating thoughts and feelings may resemble Cassandra's (and vice-versa).

I don't know if it is stated here or anywhere else, but Shane edited the first letter on his blog so as to allow the reader to make sense of it. By editing, I mean that he added certain punctuation, and that's all, which is why you picked up on his "fingerprint." I don't blame him for doing so, but perhaps this was his one and only error. His choice to add in punctuation came out of good intentions, and not out of fabricating anything to suit an agenda or spin information.

When it comes to data analysis, obviously it is a good idea to transcribe a document as it was written by the author, so as to preserve the integrity of the individual's unique character. Would you feel more content about Shane's authenticity if he opened up about this basic grammar-editing, and that he can see how important it is to maintain perfect copying from an original document?

Also, as far as I know, the second letter was only revealed on Thomas' interview by Shane orally. It was transcribed by somebody else...not Shane. This discounts your other accusation strait away.

I have more to say, but I don't really wish to embroil myself in drama. The Mods' analysis to me is very elitist, and I do think it's a shame that such things are discussed behind closed doors and the rest of the members here get watered-down versions of data. There are multiple sides of the story for everything, and perceived innocence and wisdom can become clouded by personal ego.

Respectfully intended, as always.

[mojo]

There's a lesson in the OP that can be for others to hear and learn so thank you .. I make the Oregon testimony available to anyone that wishes to understand more in order to earn the trust of our membership.

[Citizen No2]

I see it like this.

The whole Alternative community must accept, if the on-set of the all powerful A.I. is to be believed, or MindKontrol, that we are going to be seeing a lot of 'whistleblowers' whose info, under analysis, turns out to be not as rock-solid as once thought. Now, this could be down to out-right lies, which can be quite easily provable....... but what about this scenario? Manchurian candidate, not with a mission to kill, but a mission to mis-lead. Is there a concerted effort by those who have the means to do so, or is it a case of an individual knowingly telling lies?

If it is a concerted effort by those with means, then why? I used an analogy in a thread a while ago regarding the American air force flying dummy runs over Hiroshima with their bomber aircraft so as to normalise the intended targets to the sight of bomber aircraft.............. are we seeing the beginnings of dummy runs? Why would that be? To normalise us to this type of info so that some known about future event or info does not have the audience pick-up it would otherwise have?

That Shane comes across as a thoroughly decent human being is no guarantee that he is not knowingly telling lies........... but how do you decern such? That Shane could be under the influence of either A.I. or an advanced MK programme, again, how will you know? That Shane is telling the Truth, how will we know?

This episode throws a spotlight on the chink in the Alternative armour. The question is not whether Shane is telling the truth or not, the question should be, how will we recognise the truth when it is told.



Regards.

[A Voice from the Mountains]

Posted by Citizen No2 (here)
we are going to be seeing a lot of 'whistleblowers' whose info, under analysis, turns out to be not as rock-solid as once thought.

Agreed 100%. And why wouldn't we? The CIA had a program training journalists for the mainstream media in the 50's/60's, Operation Mockingbird I believe it was called. They got caught, admitted to it and then said they weren't doing it anymore. Who in the hell believes that?

Now with the Internet, you think agencies like the CIA doesn't once again have an interest in misleading the masses? I'm not saying that Shane is part of some CIA program because I don't think it was that sophisticated in this case. But somebody like Corey Goode, who actually did time in the service, who knows.

I'd give it a 20 to 1 ratio at least, con artists to legit whistleblowers. That's just my feeling on it, throwing it out there, and maybe I'm totally wrong about this. But I guarantee you that someone out there has a vested interest in muddying the waters and that's just one more reason to scrutinize everything we're told, by anyone.

[DNA]

While traversing the various forms out there, I was perplexed to no end at the extent the Ruiner posted on multiple forms.

Back in 2011 I had a job I could basically post on Avalon for 12 hours at a time and get paid for it.
In that time I posted quite a bit here, and as much as I posted I would say my forum presence was maybe a tenth of what the ruiners was across something like ten forums.

This was a significant red flag for me.
This Shane guy was basically posting as a full time job.
His presence was so strangely made continuous I began to wonder if he was a representative of an alphabet agency.
In truth, this is exactly what I deduce.

[Tangri]

Likely, he is one of the readers(26 years old) of Avalon forum. (but, I am not sure if he is a Canadian, he doesn't have knowledge on history of some of events)

https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...l=1#post956254

(No one asked me what inconsistency is present at Canadian event's history.)


Some times(it is polite way to say instate of always) connecting dots are hard. He did good job for an entertainment seekers of alternative media(even though they would find data in Avalon forum's pages but no one wants to leave couch), but still, his reappraisal is too heavy for mass.
If I tell you, I was 15 years old at Boston Marathon bombing event, supporting my mother's run, most of the readers would be ready to listen my experience in that chaos.

In the same time, some of you would have different questions on my story.

https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...l=1#post956546


I am agree with rest of writing, that reason I kept only one part of it.

The party is worth to attend in my opinion. You won't waste your time in it, unlike other posts here (what's up here and today, look what I find at YouTube again, earth is flat,.....,..., threads)

BUT you need a thermometer to catch water's temperature change, since we start this journey in a pot.

https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...l=1#post956579

I want to talk on dark- light terrestrials.

They both believe sacrificing-trust relation.

Lights want you(sacrifice), not reproduce for future liabilities to become an obstacle in full flourish. At exit point, they trust your dignity and maturity, no need for promises, but there is no bridge to turn back.

Dark want you to reproduce, then sacrifice what you reproduced, liability is the subjects's survival instinct.

For blood lines, off springs are disposable with their numbers. There is only one exit with no exception. Every individual is a property of the master.
Mercy or masterly pardon(personal favor) for exit , is not in their vocabulary.

https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...l=1#post956840

What could I write more?

[Bill Ryan]

Posted by Shane (here)
As it's quite important.

That letter is transcribed by another from me reading it. Punctuation was added by that person and not by myself. It comes from the transcript of the show, not my own recording of the letter.

Yes, Shane is right. That letter was transcribed not by Shane, but by Chloe (Thomas Williams' wife) who transcribed the audio of the radio show in which Shane read the letter aloud. The 'haha' was said by Shane, not written by Cassandra.

I've asked Shane if he would send me (or post here) the version he transcribed himself, which he says he has on his phone. He stated that he doesn't have either of the originals, which were handwritten.

He said he was required to return the originals after having had sight of them with permission to transcribe them. He did not scan them, or take a photo with his smartphone, so his transcripts are all that he has (and all that we have).

It seems strange to me (almost unbelievable, in fact) that he was not allowed to keep these handwritten letters as a final memento of someone he was close to and spent a lot of time with, in one letter saying goodbye for the very last time.

I routinely take photos of paper documents to archive them (many reading here will do the same), and with something of this unique nature I'd think that most people would have taken a little trouble to save a good copy.

It takes 10-15 mins (or more, if he did it on his smartphone) to transcribe a handwritten document like that. A photo with the same phone in his hand would have taken 1 second.

It's also not easily believable to me that the letters were written by a wise old soul who had been around for a very long time, communicating (one presumes) in various ways over the ages in many cultures and languages. They show every mark of being written by a young, contemporary person.

The problem, as we'll see, is that there's NOTHING to substantiate the story... totally nothing. One can't prove a negative, so everything is circumstantial. But it casts real doubt on everything. For several days I wrote to Shane, imploring him to help us substantiate his story with something. But nothing was forthcoming. It's a huge problem for a researcher.

And if the story's important (important enough to hold interviews about, write a 40,000 word blog about, and which, if true, is of immense import to us all) — then it's important enough to offer at least a tiny shred of documentation. But that was not even offered, and I was disappointed.

Shane could have said:

"Hey, I really understand the problem. It's not in my hands, which are tied. But I have an idea: if you write a letter, for instance requesting sight of the original letters, or ANYTHING at all that would make the story credible, I will make sure it gets to the right people, and maybe they will respond. I will help if I possibly can."

But he didn't offer that. All he said was (my paraphrase): "Well, I never said I could prove anything, and I always said it was fiction. You'd better assume I was lying."

That's not helpful. It does nothing to serve the truth.

Jumping ahead a little, here's what I wrote to Shane a few days ago. I feel it with everything I do and am. This (in my view) is what this is all about.

Hi there, Shane — apologies: my bad for not getting back to you to thank you for responding to all my questions so promptly. I was not willfully ignoring you. I've had quite a busy day.

Re your reply, you've not quite got it right.

It's not at all that I "can't afford to interview someone who cannot be verified." Henry Deacon can't really be verified, either, and I'd stand by his testimony to Camelot till the end of time.

It's about epistemology. That is: how do we know what we think or feel we know? This question is at a researcher's core.

There are few real researchers around any more. Those who have interviewed you so far are not researchers, at all. (Kerry never was. That's just not her skill set, well-intentioned as she always is.)

Research means being committed to a process where the end product is having a certain confidence in truth.

I am committed to the truth — whatever it is. Nothing less. And my JOB and my LIFE is about telling the truth, because we all deserve it. We deserve it, existentially, because we simply 'are'. We exist. We live. We need, and get our nourishment from, truth.

Truth is part of the Godhead. Anything else is the opposite of that, whatever that is.

If you have lived a strange life, that has granted you personal access to exotic information, in my opinion you have a DUTY to tell that truth. That's a tough deal, but you chose this mission of yours.

So, you have a duty to tell the truth — unless you're going to be punished for it materially, which is a different kettle of fish. But saying you're just a 'story teller' is a cop-out. That's you trying to get yourself off the hook you were born into. You can't do that. You're locked into your own life, for better or for worse.

The best choice is to make it for the better.

So... tell the truth. I can help you do that. Maybe better than anyone else out there. We've had enough 'stories'. No-one needs any more. The community's patience is pretty thin. They may love you at first, but they'll crucify you later if they feel you have deceived (or even withheld from) them.

Do you see?

You can't go back now. You've already taken the 'pill' (as it were: 'Matrix' analogy) that makes you a source of information for a very hungry community that has been lied to over and again. That's tough, also, but you did choose this.

So, my questions were designed to explore just a little deeper, and it was a first stab at a little layer of further research that no-one had yet done. I also wanted to see what you would say about certain things, because of course you don't know what I already know from other sources. But then, cross-checking, and cross-referencing, and aligning, and looking for consistencies, and looking for anomalies, and forming hypotheses, is also part of what good research is, every day. Rich Dolan, Linda Howe, Joseph Farrell are pretty good at that. I'm not too bad when I'm in the zone. There are others, but not too many these days.

I would like to interview you. I would ask tough questions, but I would ask them very fairly. But I would not let you off any hook, as the others have so far, by failing to ask the obvious questions, and not following up at all on some things that you had mentioned in passing.

The interviewer's job (and at my best I am quite a good interviewer, as well as a quite a good researcher) is to totally help and support the witness state their truth as completely as possible. Sometimes, one needs to do very little. At other times, one needs to do quite a bit more.

If you are going to do the 'interview circuit', do it properly. Subject yourself to straight questions. Answer them honestly, and fully, and in detail. Savor that, because that can be the warrior (you) at his very finest hour.

Don't just tell stories. The audience will eventually turn against you for that. We've had way too many of those, already. It's a MEME. And be careful, always, that despite all your good intentions, that you are not being used.

With my love and respect in return ~ Bill

[sarah22]

"Now, it'd been fairly clear to me immediately that the Cassandra letters could not have written by some wise old near-immortal soul. They looked and felt they'd been written by a young, contemporary person. Quite a few people have said the same thing, of course."

At first I thought that as well but then I thought this; that the Cassandra letters might be exactly how an impossibly arrogant, extremely elitist and emotionally underdeveloped person might speak when writing about emotions at the time of her death. Especially one who is unused to discussing, much less valuing, her feelings. They arent that well written and do seem to be in Shane's voice, but here in this post, I am looking at the possibility that they are the real words of a Parent about to die.

In my experience, people who see feelings as a waste of time, can be very bumbling when it comes time to share how they actually feel. They can speak or write just like a 5 year old- not because they are unintelligent but because they have not developed any skill in describing or understanding how they feel.

If what Shane is saying is correct and they have been controlled by Dracos, writing any letter to express sentiment would have been deeply disapproved of but perhaps allowed because she was about to die. From what I have read, Dracos seem to think of emotions as a pathetic weakness of the human race. I wouldn't think the Dracos would be tolerant of too much emotion in their closest Earth contacts, the Parents.
I think these letters from Cassandra show how f@#^ed up "people" like Cassandra really are. I am not trying to defend Cassandra here, but this letter could be seen as an accurate portrayal of a person whose soul has shrunk. Someone who has developed an increasing coldness/arrogance that has allowed her to be ever more distant from the horrors she has caused over the past thousands of years. And if these letters are real, could it be that she hasn't grown at all, but de-evolved on a soul level? That after 1000's of years of life, she has become this immature and arrogant?

And yet, isn't that ridiculous level of arrogance and immaturity exactly what the Dracos ARE like? If the Dracos were mature, wise and balanced, they wouldn't have done what they did. They are highly intelligent but soul growth is different. Suppossedly, they have been this way for 10's of thousands of years... like the house of Abraxas in the Jupiter Ascending movie.

I think Robin above made a great point, about writing as an art. I wonder, would a Cassandra-like being ever really need that skill? Wouldn't she delegate that to someone else? I wonder how many emotional letters has she even written in her long lifetime? Maybe those two were the only ones in thousands of years?

Or.. it's Shane.

Thank you, Bill and Mods, for this analysis, it's been helpful seeing another side to this, very much appreciated.

[WhiteLove]

Thanks Bill for this! Lately there have been multiple accounts of incredible stories being presented to the truth seeking community, where several of these have been incredibly problematic due to lack of evidence, cross correlations and answers to critical questions. There is a danger in this, because one or several of these could be, with or without knowing so, under unknown/known influence to help distort the awareness within the truth seeking community.

Corey Goode (is this his real name?!) and Shane (is this his real name?!) are two examples of this - lots of claims, but is there a single evidence of anything? It is so important in the truth seeking quest, that we do not become victims of deception. When somebody turns to the truth seeking community with something "important", it should be obvious to those coming front that the truth seeking community demands the highest levels of authenticity and truthfulness and that a case without any information on evidence at all, is by default incredibly problematic, and could be met by the truth seeking community as a case of "waste of their time". This should be obvious, so that whenever people actually do step forward in truth, people that are real - with a truthful story and intent - then those stories can shine through in a clear way, rather than having to compete with noise out there.

At its core it kind of becomes an issue in terms of truth seeker authority. If you have someone like say Edward Snowden, and the authority of Mikey (not his real name) is initially being set at the same authority level as Edward due to dynamite but untrue content put front, then that will put Snowden at significant added danger, because both will be grouped together in authority level by the public, meaning a signficant authority drop towards Edward, hence lost protection.

Guys like Edward Snowden, Steven Greer etc., they need to stay at a position of truth seeker authority, because their whole life depends on it. So it must be important that persons that suddenly challenge with similar capacity of knowledge (however false stuff), do not start to eat on the authority of the established truth seeker community.

It should also be clear that when people step forward in the manner we are now witnessing, by allowing that to take place at the scale it does, by enabling that through providing public interviews, there is significant danger possible to play out towards those persons should the false message actually happen to contain some truth and the Cabal happens to have a serious interest in silencing that particular kind of stuff. So eventhough they put themselves at danger by stepping forward, the ones that are enablers of that by providing "the playing field", contribute to that danger.

So when this happens, it is actually most safe for all, to officially consider that none of this that Corey Goode/Shane is presenting is at this point considered important, or is at this point giving these guys any kinds of authority by the truth seeking community... And I guess that is why you are active in this matter Bill, you want to ensure an optimum level of safety and truth towards all.

We know what has happened before to some people having come forward in truth at this capacity with real evidence (guys like Phil Schneider) but got their authority undermined, at a certain point it becomes a matter of life and death. That's why this is not just a matter of what is true and false, but also a matter of what is safe and not in terms of how it is put to light.

[Curt]

Bill, thanks for this discussion- and for the transparency it brings.

I only hope that in the next instance of an 'insider' coming to Avalon to tell their stories, this same level of discernment is brought to bear from the very beginning- and not after they've already been given your considerable support, which carries a lot of weight here and elsewhere in the alt community.

Much heartache and confusion could have been avoided were Shane, Correy and several others' stories vetted this thoroughly from the outset.

It's the old ounce of prevention versus pound of cure scenario.

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by Curt (here)
I only hope that in the next instance of an 'insider' coming to Avalon to tell their stories, this same level of discernment is brought to bear from the very beginning- and not after they've already been given your considerable support, which carries a lot of weight here and elsewhere in the alt community.

That might be easier said than done.

As with most areas of active research, those with something to say don't arrive with their resume completed, their books written and published, and their full story already well told.

Rather the one's with something to say are working with sites such as Avalon and various other forums and media, to develop their story and present it. We, those who follow and study such material, work with those who have something to say, in a mutual endeavor to understand what they have to say and what matters to them, and to refine our own understanding of what's going on and what's important.

Critical strengths and limitations, both ours and theirs, become evident only over time.

This comes with the territory ... of being on the leading (bleeding?) edge.

[Constance]

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)

Truth is part of the Godhead. Anything else is the opposite of that, whatever that is.

And once we have shone a light on exactly what that Godhead/source encompasses, anything that is the exact opposite of that can be seen for what it is. We will no longer be scrubbing shadows off the wall.
I feel that with all that we are currently up against, it is all just shifting sands. The sands shift, we uncover an object, the sand shifts again and it disappears back into the sand.
I really miss Rachels (our moderators) signature where she says "You mustn't be afraid to dream a little bigger darling" I really do.

[Realeyes]

Methinks if any of the great wise sages of olden times were to incarnate now in these present Times, they would all elect to be a quiet and simple road sweeper.

But I get it; an Inquisition was always a big crowd gatherer. I just hope with this devil purging on others we remember to apply the same pointed finger of criticism upon ourselves.

And one day……… hopefully one day….. Maybe Humanity will grow up and lovingly embrace one another and celebrate each other’s individual uniqueness.

Until then it’s more popcorn.

[Daozen]

I think Shane is telling the truth, FWIW. No time to add my 2 cents to the discussion. You know that scene with the house and flowers: Stinger/Caine Wise in Act I of Jupiter Ascending? That is all for real...

If you want disclosure, don't read the blogs; watch mainstream kids movies. Look at that new movie "Pan"... they are rubbing a huge mystery right in people's faces, and all the "in-the-know" Facebook intel jockeys are ignoring it. This used to frustrate me but I am starting to see the funny side now. The ufo alt media is a gigantic psy-op, but I don't think Shane is part of it.

The art of controlled alt media is keeping people behind the curve, while making them think they are ahead of it.