THE RULERS OF THE WORLD: a new Project Avalon video interview

[SPIRIT WOLF]

Thats a great pity, but from what he said and from what I observed he might just do so, on his terms. I have little doubt all responses here have been noted and will be acted upon, not in any bad way but sufficient for them to guage what we all think, say and do, and expect. They will take appropriate action by way of no second interview, or maybe a second one but steered in the way they want

[Fractalius]

Well Bill, that opinion would have to be based on a particular personal expectation on what was desired by those peoples.
It may make sense, as if this was a disclosure attempt or an attempt to "talk" then it was executed very amateurishly on their behalf. Maybe they may take stock and come back with an approach that is not insulting to the intelligence? The responses here are not disrespectful to these purported 33, they are more so pointing out the flimsiness of the witness as an 'ambassador' to the 'cause'?

[xm15e2]

yea, it seems like almost anyone read what you wrote about the video on avalons home page before watching, it seems thats where all the questions revolve, people simply need to stop waiting to see his identifacation and simply put faith into the fact that if more is needed and hes real, we will know, if charles is who he IS, than hes capable of sending bill someone that can answer our questions better, in other words i think questions and answers are a bad topic to get into with that interview, its only been a few days and bills been on the road, why not just wait a few and see if one of the men in the video finds a way to help clarify, that video deserves time, and thought instead of conclusion and question

[3optic]

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)
My opinion at the moment, based on the responses I've read so far on this forum and elsewhere, is that there is no way that Charles would do another interview, or that any more information would be sanctioned by the controlling group.

I have to express a certain amount of frustration with the way some chose to approach this subject matter. There seemed to be far too much moral grandstanding, finger pointing and exploration into presumed character flaws of 'Charles'. If I knew people who behaved this way in my social circle, I'd be hesitant to disclose anything with them let alone if they were strangers.

[truth will win out]

Posted by 3optic (here)
I have to express a certain amount of frustration with the way some chose to approach this subject matter. There seemed to be far too much moral grandstanding, finger pointing and exploration into presumed character flaws of 'Charles'. If I knew people who behaved this way in my social circle, I'd be hesitant to disclose anything with them let alone if they were strangers.

Take your toys and go home when questioned? We have a right and a duty to have doubts and ask questions . We have been lied to and manipalated for way to long to just go along with everything.

[cloud9]

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)
My opinion at the moment, based on the responses I've read so far on this forum and elsewhere, is that there is no way that Charles would do another interview, or that any more information would be sanctioned by the controlling group.

Dear Bill,
I'm sorry to be so insistent but what kind of reaction were you or him expecting? Based on your comment, our responses have been inadequate in some form so I conclude that Charles would feel threatened? Perhaps disappointed? Sad?

A person used to deal with situations out of "norm" for us and used to "fix" problems wouldn't stand our skepticism?

Again, I say this is in a very polite way as it's not my intention to offend anybody but we are dealing with big and serious subjects that affect all human kind and it's just fare that we have this kind of reaction to all of this. Or do you think we are overreacting?

How else can we know the truth? Or part of it?

We are in such disadvantageous position and we have been lied so much that if he or them don't allow another interview to clarify things, what's the point of the interview in the first place?

[3optic]

Posted by truth will win out (here)
Take your toys and go home when questioned? We have a right and a duty to have doubts and ask questions . We have been lied to and manipalated for way to long to just go along with everything.

This is actually a forum for questions so you certainly shouldn't feel your rights have been trampled. Secondly this eagerness to fall into the roll of a victim is an indicator of a lack of ability to engage in a dialogue in any meaningful way.

[bashi]

Posted by Ahkenaten (here)
it is well to remember that more than likely PART of their intention is to sow dissension amongst us

i was just waiting for this one.
Do you really think that we are soo important to them?
They can do without us and we can do without them, no question!
The question is: What will They do then and what we can do then...

Why can`t we show some Greatness and welcome an open dialogue without being concerned whether they like me/love me or want to use me for a special diet?
Is it only Bill who has this Greatness?
Are we sooo unsure of ourselves?

[SPIRIT WOLF]

O no siree, my past has allowed me to be very sure of myself, I cannot speak for others of course

[Bill Ryan]

Posted by Fractalius (here)
Well Bill, that opinion would have to be based on a particular personal expectation on what was desired by those peoples.
It may make sense, as if this was a disclosure attempt or an attempt to "talk" then it was executed very amateurishly on their behalf.

Actually, I disagree - I honestly think it was extremely clever.

[bashi]

Posted by cloud9 (here)
Dear Bill,
I'm sorry to be so insistent but what kind of reaction were you or him expecting? Based on your comment, our responses have been inadequate in some form so I conclude that Charles would feel threatened? Perhaps disappointed? Sad?

A person used to deal with situations out of "norm" for us and used to "fix" problems wouldn't stand our skepticism?

If i would be Charles, by now i would be MAD AS HELL.
It seems you guys are showing NO understanding for people much different than internet-bloggers.
Have you heard of self-respect? These people have a lot of this (maybe too much), because that is needed to be brave and fearless.
For people which are used to kick ass (so to speak), this type of response is just UNBEARABLE.
Forget the idea of Charles replying directly on this forum. Just forget it ...

[Ahkenaten]

So Bashi - OK, for clarification -do you think then that there is "an appropriate" response of Avalon members to this interview? I personally have no problem with being open to dialogue it is just that - for me - I am not convinced of the authenticity and credibility of "Charles." Authenticity and credibility are a little different than wanting them to like me or me liking them. If Charles is NOT an ambassador from 33 or TPTB, then what are we dialoguing about? If he IS it would seem to me that a little more in the way of establishing trust and veracity needs to be done and if the other side is sincere - it seems they would respect that. Picture yourself locked in mortal combat with an adversary as an example and this adversary has expressed the intention of eliminating billions of human beings. Suddenly the adversary sends an ambassador to establish a dialogue. Wouldn't the first item be establishing the identity of the ambassador? Wouldn't his identity need to be vetted out FIRST before the exchange proceeded to the next step? That seems only basic diplomacy 101 to me. It would seem if the other side was sincere they would fully expect serious interrogation on this FIRST important point. Again - this is only me personally. So, you are saying I should set my concerns aside and move directly into dialogue, and that if I do not feel comfortable I am not properly rising to greatness? Taking my scenario further, what if the Ambassador, if not properly examined, turned out to be a poseur sent to purposefully misdirect my people. Would it not be my job, in the interests of my people, to thoroughly satisfy myself on the first point, credibility before proceeding? Because this is a Forum with many people and divergent points of view, isn't it putting an awful lot on both Bill and Charles to satisfy us on that point in an initial interview? With My Warmest Regards - Ahk

[truth will win out]

Didn't know I was a victim for stating a fact about being lied too,I chose to think for myself and form my own opinions... First off your the first to engage me so I would say your tone isn't loving and meaningful at all. carry on.

[bashi]

Posted by Ahkenaten (here)
So Bashi - OK, for clarification -do you think then that there is "an appropriate" response of Avalon members to this interview? I personally have no problem with being open to dialogue it is just that - for me - I am not convinced of the authenticity and credibility of "Charles." Authenticity and credibility are a little different than wanting them to like me or me liking them. If Charles is NOT an ambassador from 33 or TPTB, then what are we dialoguing about? If he IS it would seem to me that a little more in the way of establishing trust and veracity needs to be done and if the other side is sincere - it seems they would respect that. Picture yourself locked in mortal combat with an adversary as an example and this adversary has expressed the intention of eliminating billions of human beings. Suddenly the adversary sends an ambassador to establish a dialogue. Wouldn't the first item be establishing the identity of the ambassador? Wouldn't his identity need to be vetted out FIRST before the exchange proceeded to the next step? That seems only basic diplomacy 101 to me. It would seem if the other side was sincere they would fully expect serious interrogation on this FIRST important point. Again - this is only me personally. So, you are saying I should set my concerns aside and move directly into dialogue, and that if I do not feel comfortable I am not properly rising to greatness? Taking my scenario further, what if the Ambassador, if not properly examined, turned out to be a poseur sent to purposefully misdirect my people. Would it not be my job, in the interests of my people, to thoroughly satisfy myself on the first point, credibility before proceeding? Because this is a Forum with many people and divergent points of view, isn't it putting an awful lot on both Bill and Charles to satisfy us on that point in an initial interview? With My Warmest Regards - Ahk

How will you do the vetting, by running in circles on the forum without input from Bill or Charles?
Can't we operate on a basis of "suspended judgement"?
Do you think Bill has been brainwashed, so that he has become one of Them?

.

[Anchor]

Further to my earlier post, I have thought of a third possibility.

I think that the thinking-matrix/complex that we are part of, known as Project Avalon, has been played/probed in an experimental fashion. I actually have a high opinion of this forum as a collection of diverse approaches to discrimination - which when summed and averaged is very powerful.

It is something that probably does present a problem that needs fixing for them. My feeling on this is that we are seeing the research phase of that "fixing" process.

John..

[Ahkenaten]

Bashi - I agree - we seem to be in a pickle here........it seems somewhat analogous to our present dilemma with our "elected" officials in govt to whom responsibilities are delegated, in the US each representative "represents" millions of people and for many of us in the US we do not feel persuaded we are on the collective right path and part of the problem is the structure of the system (delegating responsibility) that got us here................it is clear that there is not consensus in Avalon on this issue unless we, the Avalon members give Bill our 100% endorsement and accept everything on its face. I have no idea what the solution to this issue is.

Suspended judgment seems like a working alternative, albeit not optimal...............I have no idea if Bill is brainwashed and I for one certainly never suggested that!

[Fractalius]

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)
Actually, I disagree - I honestly think it was extremely clever.

I can also understand that thinking too even if it be cognitive dissonance for me to do so.
I would see that as. "Here's a guy, who exhibits the world view we share in a less sophisticated way of presentation."
The scenario here, is there has been an amount of inactivity of material released by you in the past few months, (I had been checking back for the release of the Jordon Maxwell vatican video for some time).
It is expected that there is going to be 'excitement' over something new. And then the topic is this that we are in. The clincher is the concept that not only is the content of the video to be absorbed, but like no other time, we are also supposedly being officially watched for responses. The degree of cleverness in this, is dependant on what exactly is wished to be extracted as litmus, and whether that is a thing that thinks outside of the square or the opposite.
I am just new here. I might add, that I am often direct, but respect everyone for their part they have to play, and do not intend callousness or judgement. Merely pointing out it is either insulting to the intelligence or a test of the intelligence. Either way, without further contact, it is not conducive to proper discussion?

[bashi]

Posted by Ahkenaten (here)
Bashi - I agree - we seem to be a pickle here........it seems somewhat analogous to our present dilemma with our "elected" officials in govt to whom responsibilities are delegated, in the US each representative "represents" millions of people and for many of us in the US we do not feel persuaded we are on the collective right path and part of the problem is the structure of the system (delegating responsibility) that got us here................it is clear that there is not consensus in Avalon on this issue unless we, the Avalon members give Bill our 100% endorsement and accept everything on its face. I have no idea what the solution to this issue is.

Suspended judgment seems like a working alternative, albeit not optimal...............I have no idea if Bill is brainwashed and I for one certainly never suggested that!

We are people with different background and experiences, with Bill being one of the most experienced here. Bill has given Charles his seal of introduction and that should be worth something, isn't it?
I also think that a kind of "suspended judgement" is not optimal, but it is better than skinning the messenger to see his flesh.

Let me tell you that i have recognized a pattern in Charles behaviour, a pattern i have experienced before...

[Elly]

It is acceptable to have doubts and questions. But when I read "psychopath" or "sociopath" as a description of Charles on many posts, I'm just baffled. Based on such limited information on a person, from one interview released only two days ago... To much energy is spent in analyzing- criticizing Charles in my opinion. It's counterproductive.

Bill announced he was planning a comprehensive additional release. He believes this interview is significant. Let's wait and try to understand why. Patience should be expected.

[3optic]

Posted by truth will win out (here)
Didn't know I was a victim for stating a fact about being lied too,I chose to think for myself and form my own opinions... First off your the first to engage me so I would say your tone isn't loving and meaningful at all. carry on.

Not all of my interactions are sweet caresses, Truth. Your choice of words painted a an unambiguous picture of victimization. Are we clear on who lied to or manipulated whom? About what? The quote below is for you.

xo