Kerry's public message to Light Workers who serve the dark

[RMorgan]

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)

My overall stance is that there is no easy way out, yet: and I no longer believe that Bill Wood's testimony can be trusted.

Hi Bill,

I´m glad to see that reason is finally triumphing here.

Anyway, I can´t understand why you did believe Bill Wood in the first place.

I mean, he is just a man talking about a lot of crazy things without absolutely anything to back it up!

So why did you interviewed him in the first place?

Such things don´t damage Bill Wood´s image only. It damages Camelot´s and the alternative media reputation as a whole.

Camelot needs to be more judicious with it´s "sources".

Cheers,

Raf.

[NeverMind]

Posted by RMorgan (here)

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)

My overall stance is that there is no easy way out, yet: and I no longer believe that Bill Wood's testimony can be trusted.

Hi Bill,

I´m glad to see that reason is finally triumphing here.

Anyway, I can´t understand why you did believe Bill Wood in the first place.

I mean, he is just a man talking about a lot of crazy things without absolutely anything to back it up!

So why did you interviewed him in the first place?

Such things don´t damage Bill Wood´s image only. It damages Camelot´s and the alternative media reputation as a whole.

Camelot needs to be more judicious with it´s "sources".

I really don't have a dog in this race, as they say, but I must agree that, from what little (very little) I have seen, the choice of people to be interviewed does appear a little odd. A good example is this Kettler person that I've seen discussed here a few days ago.
From the way people were discussing him - the amount of "coverage" he got here - you'd think he was an important source of "alternative" information, whether one believes in it or not. And all because of an interview by Ms. Cassidy, if I am not mistaken.

Out of curiosity, I went and searched a little, to see how he rated on other websites, dealing with this sort of subjects.
Now, admittedly I am no connoisseur of "alternative" websites, so I may have missed quite a few, but there was practically no mention of him. I did find a thread or two, here and there, but there was no heated argument about him or his predictions.

I was left with the impression that he was simply a guy who used the internet to voice what he thought - or maybe not - in order to get attention and, perhaps, more tangible benefits, too... And that's it? Apparently that's enough, these days, to garner interviews and this sort of attention from people?

Anyone can say anything, especially on the internet. Heck, I'll do it myself, right now:
I predict that on March 14th, 2012, a white glow will appear over Kazakhstan, or maybe Uzbekistan, which only the enlightened ones will be able to see, and a terrible, Earth-shattering disaster will be averted via the ET, who will also replace a few world leaders and influential puppet masters, including Obama and Putin, by substituting their subtle bodies. Oh, and all bank debts by individuals across the world will be erased, effective immediately.
Stay tuned.

There.
Why is my prediction less credible than Kettler's?
Because he is writing about it in a blog?
I can do that. You can do that.
Anyone can do that.

Where do people - interviewers - like Ms. Cassidy draw the line, then, in their choice of interviewees?
(And apparently she didn't even grill him afterwards, about the failure of his prediction to materialise?)

[RMorgan]

Posted by NeverMind (here)

Posted by RMorgan (here)

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)

My overall stance is that there is no easy way out, yet: and I no longer believe that Bill Wood's testimony can be trusted.

Hi Bill,

I´m glad to see that reason is finally triumphing here.

Anyway, I can´t understand why you did believe Bill Wood in the first place.

I mean, he is just a man talking about a lot of crazy things without absolutely anything to back it up!

So why did you interviewed him in the first place?

Such things don´t damage Bill Wood´s image only. It damages Camelot´s and the alternative media reputation as a whole.

Camelot needs to be more judicious with it´s "sources".

I really don't have a dog in this race, as they say, but I must agree that, from what little (very little) I have seen, the choice of people to be interviewed does appear a little odd. A good example is this Kettler person that I've seen discussed here a few days ago.
From the way people were discussing him - the amount of "coverage" he got here - you'd think he was an important source of "alternative" information, whether one believes in it or not. And all because of an interview by Ms. Cassidy, if I am not mistaken.

Out of curiosity, I went and searched a little, to see how he rated on other websites, dealing with this sort of subjects.
Now, admittedly I am no connoisseur of "alternative" websites, so I may have missed quite a few, but there was practically no mention of him. I did find a thread or two, here and there, but there was no heated argument about him or his predictions.

I was left with the impression that he was simply a guy who used the internet to voice what he thought - or maybe not - in order to get attention and, perhaps, more tangible benefits, too... And that's it? Apparently that's enough, these days, to garner interviews and this sort of attention from people?

Anyone can say anything, especially on the internet. Heck, I'll do it myself, right now:
I predict that on March 14th, 2012, a white glow will appear over Kazakhstan, or maybe Uzbekistan, which only the enlightened ones will be able to see, and a terrible, Earth-shattering disaster will be averted via the ET, who will also replace a few world leaders and influential puppet masters, including Obama and Putin, by substituting their subtle bodies. Oh, and all bank debts by individuals across the world will be erased, effective immediately.
Stay tuned.

There.
Why is my prediction less credible than Kettler's?
Because he is writing about it in a blog?
I can do that. You can do that.
Anyone can do that.

Where do people - interviewers - like Ms. Cassidy draw the line, then, in their choice of interviewees?
(And apparently she didn't even grill him afterwards, about the failure of his prediction to materialise?)

That´s exactly my point, dear NeverMind!

I really can´t figure out what are the criteria for choosing which people should be interviewed or not.

Like you said, anyone can make a blog, which is free, by the way, and say whatever they want to say. This doesn´t makes them "whistleblowers" or "sources". This doesn´t proves anything.

I guess the more crazy and bold things you say, the bigger the chances are of becoming somewhat famous within the alternative media scenario.

We can´t confuse internet stuff with reality. These are totally different things.

I assure you that I could make a very good looking blog, saying that I am an ascended pleiadian super soldier jesus, living in the 5th dimensional jupiter, riding a comet who is actually a space ship, to visit some friends in the the hollow earth, right next to the black hole, and lots of people would believe me. This doesn´t mean I´m telling the truth, right?

Would it qualify me as a source or whistleblower? I don´t think so.

So, what are the criteria for choosing potential respondents?

I´m starting to think there are no criteria at all.

Cheers,

Raf.

[NeverMind]

Posted by RMorgan (here)
I guess the more crazy and bold things you say, the bigger the chances are of becoming somewhat famous within the alternative media scenario.

We can´t confuse internet stuff with reality. These are totally different things.

Yet many people seem to be so desperate for the deus ex machina to appear, that even the most outrageous nonsense, repeated blatant failures of short-term predictions - and the most laughable excuses - don't seem to be teaching them anything.
THAT's what I find appallingly sad.

I assure you that I could make a very good looking blog, saying that I am an ascended pleiadian super soldier jesus, living in the 5th dimensional jupiter, riding a comet who is actually a space ship

Yeah, you already ARE saying that, in every post. :-)

So, what are the criteria for choosing potential respondents?

I´m starting to think there are no criteria at all.

I abhor cynicism, but I am starting to think that the only logical conclusion is: whatever attracts viewers/readers... and their money.
But whatever the "criterion" is, the end result IS, without a doubt, discreditation of the "alternative" line of thought in general.

[NeverMind]

Posted by Delight (here)
The schism between one who feels confident in one's place in the world as "creator" and the place held by one who is committed to the position of "receiver" is the for me the cleavage point between the "two earths". I do not see how these two poles can merge? This is something I'd really like to discuss.

For what it's worth, I agree that this would be a very discussion-worthy subject. Totally.

[K626]

The irony is that just as we reach the nadir of extravagant claims, something completely out of this world and unexpected will happen.

K

[NeverMind]

Posted by K626 (here)
The irony is that just as we reach the nadir of extravagant claims, something completely out of this world and unexpected will happen.

That has always been my intuition, too.

Nobody knows the day or the hour.
It will come like a thief in the night.

I have no real reason to doubt those words.

[Lazlo]

I wanted to check up on the Dave Corso testimaony but it doesn't appear to be included in the Camelot library at this point. Anyone have any input as to the story of what went on?

What was the core of his testimony and what happened that it was removed?

[Bill Ryan]

Posted by RMorgan (here)

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)

My overall stance is that there is no easy way out, yet: and I no longer believe that Bill Wood's testimony can be trusted.

Hi Bill,

I´m glad to see that reason is finally triumphing here.

Anyway, I can´t understand why you did believe Bill Wood in the first place.

I mean, he is just a man talking about a lot of crazy things without absolutely anything to back it up!

So why did you interviewed him in the first place?

Such things don´t damage Bill Wood´s image only. It damages Camelot´s and the alternative media reputation as a whole.

Camelot needs to be more judicious with its "sources".

Cheers,

Raf.

Hi, Raf:

I didn't "interview" Bill Wood -- I was invited to join a Livestream conference with him, Kerry and David Wilcock. That's the only time I've ever spoken with him.

I don't know how Kerry connected with him in the first place.... I have no info on that.

A substantial part of what Bill Wood said did tie in with high-strangeness off-record testimony that we received from other sources in 2007-9. (David W expanded on that in the Livestream conference: he was not wrong.)

Bill Wood's subsequent actions (including some off-record correspondence that has never been published) have persuaded me that he cannot be trusted, and is not a reliable source.

Re this...

Camelot needs to be more judicious with its "sources".

I do agree. But in fairness, this is not quite as simple as it is to say.

[RMorgan]

Posted by NeverMind (here)

Posted by K626 (here)
The irony is that just as we reach the nadir of extravagant claims, something completely out of this world and unexpected will happen.

That has always been my intuition, too.

Nobody knows the day or the hour.
It will come like a thief in the night.

I have no real reason to doubt those words.

Yes. Nobody knows. Nobody never actually knew when something big really happened.

It´s absolutely useless to keep looking forward to find predictions and people who are able to predict things.

I´ve never seen, during my life, any bold prediction that actually came to happen. I´m not saying it´s impossible, I´m just saying the probabilities are very small.

Cheers,

Raf.

[K626]

The trend right now is the noticeable ramping up of misinformation or highly complex and confusing data packets with tiny morcels to keep you interested. It means we are approaching an important crossroads. They know it and some of us feel it. Just waiting for the false flag on Iran and then it will all be on. It's gonna be something if you know what you're looking at.

K

[RMorgan]

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)

Posted by RMorgan (here)

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)

My overall stance is that there is no easy way out, yet: and I no longer believe that Bill Wood's testimony can be trusted.

Hi Bill,

I´m glad to see that reason is finally triumphing here.

Anyway, I can´t understand why you did believe Bill Wood in the first place.

I mean, he is just a man talking about a lot of crazy things without absolutely anything to back it up!

So why did you interviewed him in the first place?

Such things don´t damage Bill Wood´s image only. It damages Camelot´s and the alternative media reputation as a whole.

Camelot needs to be more judicious with its "sources".

Cheers,

Raf.

Hi, Raf:

I didn't "interview" Bill Wood -- I was invited to join a Livestream conference with him, Kerry and David Wilcock. That's the only time I've ever spoken with him.

I don't know how Kerry connected with him in the first place.... I have no info on that.

A substantial part of what Bill Wood said did tie in with high-strangeness off-record testimony that we received from other sources in 2007-9. (David W expanded on that in the Livestream conference: he was not wrong.)

Bill Wood's subsequent actions (including some off-record correspondence that has never been published) have persuaded me that he cannot be trusted, and is not a reliable source.

Re this...

Camelot needs to be more judicious with its "sources".

I do agree. But in fairness, this is not quite as simple as it is to say.

Hey Bill,

Yes, I understand your point. I know these things might not be simple.

Anyway, as you refer to Bill Woods saying things that go along the lines of what David W says, I think that everything David W says are mostly public knowledge right now, and literally anyone willing to do a little research could come up with ideas similar to his. In my opinion, this doesn´t qualify anyone as a potential reliable source of information.

It´s easy to use other persons theories and stories to fabricate the illusion of support and evidence. That´s what most of these "sources" do. It looks almost like an infinite chain of mutual support, which doens´t mean anyone is actually saying the truth.

It´s an easy formula. Just take some respected personalities like David Icke and David Wilcock study their work for a while, come up with something similar to create the illusion of solidity and then add some other "new" stuff.

By the way, I wasn´t referring to you personally, I was referring to Camelot, which is one of your projects.

Thanks for the reply. I hope everything is ok with you in Vilcabamba.

Cheers,

Raf.

[Carmody]

Posted by RMorgan (here)

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)

My overall stance is that there is no easy way out, yet: and I no longer believe that Bill Wood's testimony can be trusted.

Hi Bill,

I´m glad to see that reason is finally triumphing here.

Anyway, I can´t understand why you did believe Bill Wood in the first place.

I mean, he is just a man talking about a lot of crazy things without absolutely anything to back it up!

So why did you interviewed him in the first place?

Such things don´t damage Bill Wood´s image only. It damages Camelot´s and the alternative media reputation as a whole.

Camelot needs to be more judicious with it´s "sources".

Cheers,

Raf.

People have to be given a voice. Discernment is in the hands of the individual, as it should be. Situations can evolve to be where they were ---and similar will probably happen again. That much is a 'given', as they say (gonna happen again as that is the way things are).

[K626]

It happens on the internet BEFORE it happens in reality.

K

¤=[Post Update]=¤

Posted by Carmody (here)

Posted by RMorgan (here)

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)

My overall stance is that there is no easy way out, yet: and I no longer believe that Bill Wood's testimony can be trusted.

Hi Bill,

I´m glad to see that reason is finally triumphing here.

Anyway, I can´t understand why you did believe Bill Wood in the first place.

I mean, he is just a man talking about a lot of crazy things without absolutely anything to back it up!

So why did you interviewed him in the first place?

Such things don´t damage Bill Wood´s image only. It damages Camelot´s and the alternative media reputation as a whole.

Camelot needs to be more judicious with it´s "sources".

Cheers,

Raf.

People have to be given a voice. Discernment is in the hands of the individual, as it should be. Situations can evolve to be where they were ---and similar will probably happen again. That much is a 'given', as they say (gonna happen again as that is the way things are).

Looking makes things 'evolve'. But who chooses what we look at?

K

[onawah]

Thanks for the clarification, Bill.
Can you be any more specific about this?
Thanks again.

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)
A substantial part of what Bill Wood said did tie in with high-strangeness off-record testimony that we received from other sources in 2007-9. (David W expanded on that in the Livestream conference: he was not wrong.)

[doodah]

Posted by RMorgan (here)
By the way, I wasn´t referring to you personally, I was referring to Camelot, which is one of your projects.

Hi RMorgan - and hi Bill :-)

I hope you, Bill, don't mind me making a clarification here which will probably sound a bit nit-picky. I just want to point out that "Camelot" as it exists right now is not one of Bill's projects.

PROJECT CAMELOT was originally a joint effort between Bill and Kerry. Then they split. Now Bill's site is Project Avalon exclusively, and Kerry's site is now Project Camelot PRODUCTIONS. PCP. PCamelotP. She is not "Project Camelot," which is still the original site name, with original material generated by Bill-and-Kerry published in the Project Camelot Library.

Although she frequently identifies herself as "Project Camelot," in a legal sense she is not, she is Project Camelot Productions, and this should be remembered. There is a complete misperception that Bill has anything to do with her choices about her website. True, some of this is now rather confusing for people who don't know the history, and as we have here, Kerry's choices seem to kick back on Bill.

I hope I haven't mis-spoken here, Bill. This issue has bugged me for some time, how Kerry seems to forget that she is NOT "Project Camelot," she is Project Camelot Productions.

As for her choices? ... Use discernment; decide for yourself.

Peace everyone,
~ Doodah

[WHOMADEGOD]

Posted by RMorgan (here)

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)

My overall stance is that there is no easy way out, yet: and I no longer believe that Bill Wood's testimony can be trusted.

Hi Bill,

I´m glad to see that reason is finally triumphing here.

Anyway, I can´t understand why you did believe Bill Wood in the first place.

I mean, he is just a man talking about a lot of crazy things without absolutely anything to back it up!

So why did you interviewed him in the first place?

Such things don´t damage Bill Wood´s image only. It damages Camelot´s and the alternative media reputation as a whole.

Camelot needs to be more judicious with it´s "sources".

Cheers,

Raf.

Avalon is doing what it does best here. We are exchanging ideas and thoughts with different perspectives and slowly between us building a picture.

IMO it is is just as crucial to interview disinformers so we cam discern just that.

If all interviewees were, seemingly credible in content, connection and presentation it would not take long for complacency to set in.

Kerry is doing just fine, this forces us to question and remain awake at a crucial axis.

How can you fight the devil when you do not know what he looks like?

Blessings

Mark

[mahalall]

A reminder to be wary of false sadhus
those that talk beyond the jhanas when not having taken the jhanas

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhy%C4%81na_in_Buddhism

[DeDukshyn]

Posted by WHOMADEGOD (here)

Posted by RMorgan (here)

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)

My overall stance is that there is no easy way out, yet: and I no longer believe that Bill Wood's testimony can be trusted.

Hi Bill,

I´m glad to see that reason is finally triumphing here.

Anyway, I can´t understand why you did believe Bill Wood in the first place.

I mean, he is just a man talking about a lot of crazy things without absolutely anything to back it up!

So why did you interviewed him in the first place?

Such things don´t damage Bill Wood´s image only. It damages Camelot´s and the alternative media reputation as a whole.

Camelot needs to be more judicious with it´s "sources".

Cheers,

Raf.

Avalon is doing what it does best here. We are exchanging ideas and thoughts with different perspectives and slowly between us building a picture.

IMO it is is just as crucial to interview disinformers so we cam discern just that.

If all interviewees were, seemingly credible in content, connection and presentation it would not take long for complacency to set in.

Kerry is doing just fine, this forces us to question and remain awake at a crucial axis.

How can you fight the devil when you do not know what he looks like?

Blessings

Mark

I hate to be simplistic, but in reality "belief" is the weapon used against us, and it works because we all believe something. All they have to do is cover all the bases with some disinfo, and then we are basically left with an impossible task.

Let's back this up a minute. What can we do to nullify this process of control? Stop Believing (And thereby continuously allowing all possibilities-important for conscious creation). It may sound weird but if we focus our attention in the experience of the moment and believe the moment, they lose all power over us, as our "choices" are no longer guided by their "conditioning". We have been conditioned to "believe" the opposite is true. I no longer believe anything outright, but rather I entertain considerations based on how much confidence I can give them via my knowledge, external input, logic, rationale, etc. But I never have to believe anything. It is a false notion. I have nothing to defend, thus nothing to lose; and more the wiser. My two cents

[highlyter]

Distractions at work?

From singer/songwriter John Mayer in Waiting for the world to change.. "we're never gonna beat this if belief is what we're fighting for"
Maybe we don't have to beat something, however, we have to elevate the collective soul.
Deciding who a rantor is ranting about...that's just bonkers a little bit.
Say it like it is... call them out in front of all to see...and the brash frustrations are causing way to many interruptions. I've experienced inability to continue watching Kerry for a while simply from the rudeness.
The best ability is dependability and we have to depend on one another to keep the higher vibrations encompassing the globe.
Thank you all for being here.
Love = L et OUR V ibration E volve