Page 11 of 53 FirstFirst ... 89101112131421 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 165 of 785

Thread: What Motivates Bill Ryan of Project Avalon Community Forum?

  1. #151
    Senior Monk Gio's Avatar
    Join Date
    26th September 2016
    Posts
    7,335
    Thanks
    7,963
    Thanked 37,157 Times in 7,350 Posts

    Thumbs Up

    Quote Originally posted by araucaria View Post
    Hi Gio, good to be interacting again with you and some others. I gather you have a health issue; I am sure it will be resolved with all due haste.

    I have no speculations to make about Bill Ryan’s motivations. As with anyone else, if one digs deep down through the endless layers of trauma and hurt and sickness that have afflicted humanity over eons, and turned victims into perpetrators, one will doubtless find them to be pure. That attitude is for myself. For the sake of others, however, I have to prefer a much more severe and pragmatic stance. When enough people independently reach the same conclusion identifying a particular source with too much harm to too many people, then it is time to do something.

    As to my own motivations and late arrival on this board, I do have a bit of ’splainin’ to do, which reflects indirectly on BR. My last post on Avalon was on 5 July. From a public forum standpoint, I am just a member who hasn’t posted for a while. However, there was a disagreement with the forum owner which was promptly hidden in the members only section. I may or may not repost some of that material, I really don’t know. But it means my online presence is effectively a misrepresentation of who I am and what I am about. I enrolled here notably to correct that, but also of course in order to carry on where I left off. I have not retired from PA, mostly to maintain ready access to my personal intellectual property there, but since to post again would amount to backing off and toeing the line, I am not prepared to do that.

    Regarding who I am, something has not changed: this is reflected in my keeping my earlier screen name. The araucaria input here carries on from the araucaria input over there, and defines a singular source, the individual human being at the keyboard. What has changed is my transfer of my activity from a forum that is dysfunctional as a community to one seemingly more aware of the problem, hence likely closer to finding a solution. The notion of the collective, the community, i.e. how we deal with the self/others dichotomy, being central to my thinking. I intend to start a thread on that subject in the near future.

    I read a lot about the inadequacy of duality. If you don’t like duality, then you are in for a hard time, because duality is merely the beginner’s introduction to all-out multiplicity. And a harder time still if your answer is to go off crying for an immediate return to oneness with mother. Or if you short-circuit the open-ended dialectical process in a circular Problem-Reaction-Solution approach. Or if you are a slave to artificial intelligence, stuck in binary processing. We are actually dealing in fuzzy logic.
    These forums are fuzzy sets where ‘the degree of membership of a person in the set (...) is more flexible than a simple yes or no answer.’

    The challenge of the universe is multiplicity out of oneness; you can work your way all the up to an ultimate creator of everything, but that challenge of dealing with multiplicity will still be the same at the very highest level. It may actually be that the ‘Creator’ has got itself as it were into a tight spot that only tiny finite beings can extricate it from. But this would only be a time-based way of saying that multiplicity is here to stay, and so are ‘we’. Intrication and extrication are timeless, i.e. ever simultaneous.

    In relational terms, this means there is self and there are others: not others as part of self, or for that matter self as merely part of others – both selfhood and otherness defining each other and taking the process further. I am what I am both in function of the traits I have and in function of the traits I do not have but see in others. On the face of it, my one self stands little chance amid increasing millions, billions... of others, all increasingly different in increasingly different ways. One can understand the perceived need to look after one’s self as a precious expression of oneness. Unfortunately it doesn’t work that way. We are all unique, hence being unique is actually what draws us all together: uniqueness is the commonest characteristic in the universe. The unique self is so in its element that it can take care of itself. Instead of ‘it’s all about me’, we can truly say and thrive on ‘it is all so NOT about me’. It is all about others and otherness: they are for real – except of course any who would exclude themselves from that reality.

    This applies to the example of Bill Ryan and Avalonians, who are not reducible to mere sub-elements of BR, others as parts of self. The subject of our disagreement boils down to this very concept of the collective, and the discussion (or non-discussion) merely proved my point (to myself at least) in demonstrating how one is individualized, isolated and basically shown the door. This of course is nothing new to those here who have experienced the same thing, but it would appear that it has to be experienced first-hand. Each has to pass through a kind of turnstile to gather on the other side. I like how Nothing puts it: ‘just a test for individuals to pass on their way to becoming, aware’. A possible analogy might be culling the herd, but the one proposed was cell renewal: a forum is supposedly like a human body, which discards dead cells up to 100% in seven years. Here’s me thinking it was just a community of entire human beings, no reductionist analogies involved: some will come and go, others stay longer. Not just thinking this: actively working to make it happen. Meanwhile, BR combs out his dandruff...

    I joined Avalon as a possible source of answers to questions raised in my... literary research. This involved a range of topics to be found on such sites: esoteric spirituality, the Maya... and things like, What does the word “cosmic” mean on a Nato document? (I had found the answer to that in a Camelot interview with Bob Dean.) This is otherness bordering on intrusion, but how many others will have similar stories. You soon notice the difference between joining a forum and joining a public library: you are dealing with people first, and information second. It is not a private blog, talking to maybe no one but oneself; it is not a private correspondence of just two people exchanging; it is a full-grown grapevine of multiplicity in action where no individual can take charge, claim control or otherwise determine what goes on in any substantial, meaningful way. You always get a whole lot more than you bargained for. And conversely, you always give a whole lot more than others bargained for. This is the fact of life that the manipulators deny, and their followers are victims of that denial.
    This was for me a total reversal of perspective, for here were people with very real issues, while I had only fictitious inquiries of no importance – no importance, that is, until I adjusted my focus upon the people.

    Good forum members are drawn in to mingle and led to stay on this basis of giving something (not everything) to some (not everyone) and taking something (not everything) from some (not everyone). They are not necessarily blinded by a cult. We have cultish practices all around us; if you want to do something different, you have to do so in the midst of all this cultishness – or at least as much of it as you can stand, at the risk of finding yourself intolerably alone. No analogies involved: if the above analogy were valid, then one would have to accept the body of Avalon having a collective soul and thereby allowing also for the ‘death’ of the ‘cell’ Bill Ryan. (Maybe it will never come to that, because he provides quality too.)

    So we have two alternatives that can no longer be ignored. One alternative is this: Bill Ryan does not consider himself a cell of the body, but its owner, its soul, its puppet-master. However, when we consider his forum to have taken on a life of its own, we move into a well-known archetype: in reverse chronological order, you have Collodi’s puppet Pinocchio that comes to life and inevitably ‘misbehaves’; Pygmalion’s statue of Galatea; then going way back to whoever ‘created’ the human race: was it the Annunaki, claiming ownership, or some benevolent entity creating us for our own sake, in precisely the way we tend to bring up our own children? This marking precisely the dividing line between healthy behaviour and the behaviour of the bloodline family elite.

    Hence there is a very clear divide right there that extends back in time to the year dot. Life itself is a ‘loose cannon’ spraying death on anyone unable to relinquish the illusion of possible control. Conversely, life showers gifts on anyone giving up that illusion. We are all at some stage in that process of learning to deal with life. And part of that process involves learning to distinguish between helps and hindrances. In theory Avalon should be a help, but for many, it would appear that Bill Ryan is proving a hindrance. That is what priests and gurus and authoritarian regimes do; they create bottlenecks. People used to pass through the Berlin Wall at Checkpoint Charlie, until they discovered they could clamber over wherever they pleased.

    Returning to the body/cell analogy, the other – collective – view of the singular undying element – as opposed to its above-described self-perception – is as a foreign body. A piece of wartime shrapnel, for example, will survive all subsequent cell renewal and you will take it to the grave. Alternatively, a cancer cell or a virus may well take you to the grave. As we know, viruses get a good press these days (they are good press): whenever someone launches their little ‘it’s all about me’ bomb, it’s called ‘going viral’. What I am advocating is something rather different; we might call it ‘going virile’. Virility means manly strength – manly as opposed to virulent or predatory. Unfortunately two roots have become entwined. Virtus (virtue), originally manly excellence, and by extension all kinds of excellence –very much including specifically feminine excellence – became mixed up with virus, derived from a Sanskrit word for the venom of a poisonous serpent. The entanglement is actually rather worse, but that is enough for now.

    Hence Jengelen’s snaky/unmanly transgender sideshow is actually very much on topic here. Even though any or many of the details may be wrong, we are truly seeing, not a desirable feminization of our macho society, but its effeminization. Bill Ryan is accused of preying on vulnerable females. I have no input as to the ‘preying’ side of the affair; what is obvious enough, however, is that he certainly hangs out a lot with vulnerable females. From his own apparent ‘all is self’ viewpoint, this would suggest that basically he is one himself. I am reminded of the intrepid hero Achilles, who didn’t want to fight the Trojan War, and went hiding among the skirts of some princesses. He didn’t want to fight because he had been told he would get killed, and that wasn’t in the script because, apart from that heel, he was supposed to be immortal. In other words, the hero of no-risk killing sprees chickened out.
    http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entr...?utm_hp_ref=uk

    My entire criticism of BilL Ryan can be summed up as a deficit of ‘virile’ courage. I just read something by a French writer about it being in human nature to beget a project and also to strangle it. What I mean by virility is the courage to beget a project and nurture it to fruition. That is feminine courage and masculine courage combined. It has to be a collective effort in order to work. This is not going to happen with Bill Ryan in charge, which is why he is now in my rearview mirror, about to disappear altogether from view. I am thinking TOT might yet achieve this goal. As an aside, I prefer the spelling ThOTh, but for reasons that have nothing to do with mythology or theology; simply, Thoth as the entity or principle behind our learning to read and write, which is our medium on these boards.

    My problem with second-guessing motivations is that it is basically undecidable whether BR created a forum for good motives and then subverted it, or if it started out for perverse reasons and was positively subverted by certain contributors. None of us master the harm we can do while trying to act for the best. By the same token, none of us master the good we can do whatever our motives. For example, have I, by staying on at Avalon considerably longer than others here find acceptable, contributed to the harm caused to the vulnerable female segment of the population, or possibly done more good than harm? This is a question I cannot answer. I can only adjust my position instinctively in light of fresh data, and even then, even now, I cannot be sure this is for the best in any absolute way.

    I have laboured for several weeks to produce this post, which I still find unsatisfactory but will share anyway. However, the point being that everything is inevitably so, it is perfect in its own imperfect way as a small step in a given desired direction. That direction is towards relief of pain. To the extent that Bill Ryan is a source of considerable pain, I have a further matter to discuss in another post. This post has been on the subject of motivation in the abstract, which may resonate for some. What follows is more concrete, which may possibly be persuasive for others.
    Quote Originally posted by araucaria View Post
    The idea behind this second post is to tackle Bill Ryan in the open on his home turf, which I take to be providing an enabling platform for whistle-blowers. That at least is how he started out with Camelot. Since I stopped posting, the Pete Peterson business has come to bite him in the rear, but until now I haven’t had an opportunity to comment. It is shockingly not good enough to be apologizing only once found out that absolutely no due diligence was done in terms of checking credentials. It is counter-productive to be quoting the behaviour of Henry Deacon/Arthur Neumann as the perfect counter-example showing how things should be done. The honest reaction would have been, many years ago, to admit publicly, ‘If this is how it is done, then we slipped up badly with the other fellow.’ And take down the interview. And post a warning in its place.

    Admittedly, it may seem a bit late for me to be talking. What happens is that we all focus on some of the things we find important; there are other things we also find important, but in a finite world, constraints of time and space mean that we cannot address every issue all at once. Meanwhile, some of these other things become urgent until they scream for immediate attention. What is urgent right now is to provide a contradictory reading of the Bill Ryan situation. Thank you for this thread, which has been doing precisely that. Below is the second of my two cents-worth, which is as timely as I can make it. ‘October the First is Too Late’ is the title of an SF novel by the astronomer Fred Hoyle; maybe not quite: I signed up at 11.17 on 1.10.17, bang on time if you ask me. I even answered 11 to a forward-looking question about the month of November.

    Strangely, while I have little or no recall of anything Pete Peterson actually said, I do remember a few things said about his Camelot interview – notably the amount of off-the-record statements he made in addition to the on-the-record statements, the life-threatening nature of any lapses in this regard, and hence the need to submit the interview for clearance. Unsurprisingly, this approval never came, but the interview was published regardless. This whole scenario needs dismantling.

    A few preliminary remarks.
    An official spokesman is qualified to make controlled on-the-record statements revealing previously off-the-record material. Everyone else signing non-disclosure agreements has to treat info like apples and oranges in the Garden of Eden: you are welcome to make yourself sick on these oranges, but don’t you dare touch them apples!
    A genuine insider respects this boundary to the best of his or her ability; but a leak may occur inadvertently, with an apparently harmless exchange possibly generating unforeseen results when applied to a different, outside, context. For example, while waiting at the photocopy machine, John Brandenburg shows his Mars xenon isotope material to a nuclear physicist waiting behind him, who blurts out, “Someone nuked them!”, and then on realizing the scale of his tiny mistake, promptly disappears (Death on Mars, p. 109). Brandenburg receives this cross-fertilizing insight, but he still has to do his homework. The actual disclosure is innocent enough in itself, and the leak is quickly mended; it only becomes a bombshell in this new other-worldly context.
    A genuine whistleblower is someone who deliberately crosses this boundary, making controlled leaks revealing previously off-the-record material. A genuine whistleblower is, if not an intruding outsider, a former genuine insider who is not an official spokesman, but becomes a shadow spokesman with divided loyalties – their loyalty to their employer now comes second to their loyalty to society at large. Unfortunately their betrayal/illicit intrusion makes them pretty unbelievable: discredit (loss of reputation) leads to discredit (loss of credibility). The Trojan prophetess Cassandra was blessed with an ability to make correct predictions and cursed with universal incredulity.
    A total hoaxer is a parody of the above, just a shadow speaking mostly for himself. A disinfo agent (willing or involuntary) is personally neither officially official nor genuinely genuine, and the same goes for their info. They produce a different kind of shadow, like projecting a rabbit on the wall with the hands in a given position: some parts may resemble fingers, but overall the illusion prevails.
    Finally, there is the reporter, who listens to and passes on information from all the above sources, with various combinations of objectivity and commitment depending on where they lie on a spectrum ranging from the mainstream journalist to the alternative researcher. Note that objectivity and commitment are independent parameters, not opposite ends of a single continuous scale. In other words, greater commitment is not incompatible with greater objectivity, nor does a non-committal attitude guarantee such objectivity.

    However, to add a little historical depth, one might further mention the category of witness. The Greek word is martyros, and the early Christian martyrs were witnesses to spiritual values who blew the whistle on the political elite who were suppressing disclosure in these matters. In those days, the only genuine whistleblower truly was a dead whistleblower, since martyrdom combined in a single event the act of disclosure (profession of faith) with the elimination of the witness. This was verging on suicide, and as suicide is often contagious, it soon became a public health issue only resolved at the Council of Nicaea, which established a basis for dealing with it without undermining the root cause. Suicidal martyrs are a public health issue to this day, as we all know, and are generally neither heroes nor villains: just victims.

    Hence the true, deliberate whistle-blower, spouting forth and getting killed for it, would be a latter-day martyr. All very admirable, but you don’t assert the glory of life either by taking it or by losing it cheaply. We don’t want that kind of whistle-blower any more than we want jihadists: the real task is to combine witnessing with survival. There are of course people paying with their lives for speaking out: this is precisely why it is so shameful to be playing games while at the same time claiming to honour their memory. My preliminary conclusion on the Peterson situation is that in this case we have no martyrs: we have survivors bearing witness – so far so good – but their testimony is false. Bill Ryan admits that Peterson’s evidence is not credible, but fails to see how it reflects upon himself. His own act is equally fake, as is easily demonstrated (see below).

    So where does Pete Peterson fit in with the above dramatis personae now that doubt has been cast on the value of his info? Doubt must also be cast on his requirement of submitting his interview for prior approval: it was tantamount to claiming status as an official spokesman. That was never going to happen regardless of whether his bona fides are phoney. Why? Because any genuine official disclosure would pass through the normal open channels, and he likely had no access to those channels anyway. Quite simply, if an agency has anything they want us to know, they have the front office to issue the necessary propaganda. No need for undercover agents. Propaganda by definition is issued loud and clear, far too loud and clear to be entirely true. However, the falsity of the front story does not make the undercover story necessarily true: to think otherwise is the definition of gullibility.

    Hence the ‘on-the-record’ info was basically garbage. Any genuine whistle-blower info had to be the ‘off-the-record’ variety. In other words, Peterson was not blowing the whistle, he was holding out the whistle to Project Camelot, saying ‘Just blow it and you’re dead’. In other words, we don’t need to know the value of his data to know that he is a hero in the Achilles mould: when the going gets tough, he... passes the buck to Bill and Kerry, who, perfectly understandably, sit on the information. They don’t want to be martyrs, which means they don’t want to be whistle-blowers either. And that amounts to saying they are pretending, they are playing games, they are not for real, they are fakes. They are themselves withholding information that they claim to be an important part of a necessary disclosure. We don’t know how important it actually is, but it sure makes them look important.

    The question of sanctions for overstepping prescribed limits then becomes somewhat academic. Kerry Cassidy, Bill Ryan once claimed, was nearly killed for publishing off-the-record material. He actually gave that as a major reason for their split. This claim also needs reviewing in light of the fact that said off-the-record material is now likely to be as worthless as the rest. Were the circumstances of this attack ever given? Did a bullet whistle past Kerry’s ear? Did she take a sip from a cup of coffee that tasted of bitter almonds? Did the brakes on her car fail? I don’t recall anything of that nature.

    The thing about David Wilcock’s story is that he provided a garage bill as evidence that he did at least suffer some kind of mechanical failure. Regardless of what we make of this in real-life terms, it does make sense at the symbolic level. He was trying to stop doing whatever dangerous thing he was doing, but couldn’t, because his ‘braking system’ was faulty. It may be that he simply can’t drive. Going downhill, you brake very little, by relying on your engine brake, i.e. by staying in low gear. Too much ‘high octane speculation’ I reckon.
    On the other hand, about the Kerry Cassidy accident – again unless I’m mistaken – we can say precisely nothing, rien, nada. To the point that some doubt even if there was ever a split in any real sense at all.

    The question now becomes: who would kill in reprisal for disclosing as genuine, material from a hoaxer/disinfo agent? Answer: no one. The more the merrier. Let them do their worst.

    The kindest possible interpretation of what, if anything, occurred is that Cassidy, perhaps like Wilcock on a previous occasion, was prey to a panic attack. This is a very real phenomenon. No one can be criticized for succumbing to such an experience. But the reality (the panic attack) is based on an illusion (it has a cause, but no concrete cause). Again, who was responsible: Peterson’s superiors? It turns out, as far as we know, he had none. Peterson himself? Really? The only real enemy seems to have been the equivalent of Wilcock’s undermaintained brakes.

    The not-so-kind interpretation would be to repeat that they are pretending, they are playing games, they are not for real, they are fakes.

    This story has a corollary, which might lead us somewhere in practical terms.
    The corollary is this: if the alleged threat came through disclosing material from a whistle-blower as TRUE, then there is no reason for anyone to kill in reprisal for presenting material from a disinfo agent as FAKE. If Peterson is seen to be a freelance agent, then it should be possible for Camelot or Avalon to publish his off-the-record statements as disinfo with no fear of threat to life or limb, since the risk of reprisal was in all likelihood part of the disinfo. As I said above, if someone could kill, then who would that someone be? Not the usual suspects.

    It would be useful indeed to know all the many things that are supposedly too secret to tell and yet probably false. This would be no betrayal of a private conversation. It would be an instance of the alternative researcher turning non-suicidal whistleblower. It could and should happen, but I am not holding my breath, because on previous form it would require quite a U-turn. It would also be useful to know what dangerous piece of information Kerry Cassidy let slip. That information is already public anyway, and since the danger has passed, it is a reasonable question to ask what it was, or alternatively what the reason might be for not answering that question. Once again, saying someone will get killed is no longer a credible response. It might be true, but it is not credible. The whistleblower community has painted itself into a corner.

    The afore-mentioned previous form can be summarized as follows. Bill Ryan presents himself as a serious, committed reporter or alternative researcher. He has already admitted to being totally unserious (unprofessional or if you prefer, dangerously amateurish) in the basic matter of checking credentials. He is no reporter, but a fake newsman. He is not at all committed to the whistle-blower cause, since he declined to share what he had been told and is now prepared to throw Peterson under the bus at the first sign of trouble. And he is no researcher: had he done his homework to back up any of this stuff, as I explained John Brandenburg did, he would have discovered something to set off alarm bells. Maybe he did, but he never reported it; on the contrary, one may want to explore how much of his posting has been based on the lies. And finally he is no alternative researcher: whether deliberately or otherwise (I really don’t care either way), he is providing more mainstream entertainment, targetting and diverting an often vulnerable audience who are searching in deadly earnest.

    The above is no more than a submission. If Bill Ryan is man enough to respond, I am prepared to back down on anything that he is able to explain more satisfactorily. But again, I am not holding my breath. On Avalon, he let his lady friends tell me he didn’t want me out. I pointed out that his silence spoke otherwise, since he hadn’t and wouldn’t say so himself. This he confirmed by maintaining his silence; nor did he respond to my criticisms, other than to say I needed to supply more evidence – which I did – again no response.

    In a court of law, no defence is no defence: you are doing nothing to avoid being found guilty as charged. Internet forums are not a court of law. But then neither are they meant to administer justice; what they can and should be doing is warning users against abusers of any description. When a forum owner is accused of something, he can simply say (or silently express), Get out of here! If he is accused of something from a tiny forum like this one, he may think he can afford simply to ignore it. Silence is a fuzzy concept because no defence is sometimes the plea of the unconcerned innocent, although more often it is due to there being no possible adequate defence. Like an amber light that may mean stop and may mean go, silence may mean innocent and may mean guilty. It doesn’t mean undecidable. At an amber light, a decision is unavoidable one way or the other. Let’s see how Bill Ryan’s silence might be viewed as culpable.


    Since the basic accusation is that he is a fake, pretending to be someone and do something he is not, most notably by holding info from Peterson allegedly at personal risk to his life, this amounts to pretending to play Russian roulette. How does this work? Well, I guess there are various ways of making sure that your empty chamber is lined up so that you can safely pull the trigger. That would be like publishing Peterson’s harmless on-the-record stuff. Or you can simply not pull the trigger at all. That would be like withholding Peterson’s unverified off-the-record stuff. I am suggesting a third solution: that these cartridges are blanks and so the trigger can safely be pulled. The only shred of credibility left to BR would then be to fire his revolver till empty, which he absolutely cannot do. Why? Because either he would publish nothing but provably dud info, or he would fire live ammunition only identifiable as such by the physical damage to himself. He would need the courage of a true witness to take that risk; it’s not going to happen.

    This is what I mean by painting someone into a corner. He has set up an amber light that is neither red nor green: what do you do when you cannot go and you cannot stop? Float off right out of this reality into another dimension, I guess.

    How might this work? How can idle conspiracy nonsense turn lethal? Umberto Eco’s 1988 novel Foucault’s Pendulum describes how some publishers (nowadays it would be conspiracy site owners) end up very dead after making up additional material to sell in their catalogue. Hoist with their own petard is the phrase that comes to mind: they are killed by their over credulous readers who take it all seriously.

    Eco is reported as saying that Dan Brown is a character in his novel. I submit that Bill Ryan is another. All these characters have a real life equivalent. Hence David Wilcock might well be genuinely afraid for his life. This is the part of the story that maybe comes closest to being real. Being personally on the side of life every time, I suggest that, to avoid the story-book ending, there is a life-giving way out for these people. Let them just desist from their present activities, and go and do some real, serious work – I recommend heavy labour. They really have no choice, because their once over credulous readers are dwindling in numbers, wising up and walking away. It is like reverse blackmail: you just stop cashing in, go away and nothing will happen to you.
    Stop strangling your own project. Stop detracting/distracting from the main task at hand, which is to build up a community, a community of communities.

    I said that this forum was a ‘tiny’ TOT. This was not meant disparagingly. On the contrary, you guys have built a solid base on which the forum can grow. I am here to assist in that process of ‘Together we make a difference’. – Important note (abusers beware): ‘together’ does NOT parse as ‘to get her’. – Coming alphabetically after TNT, TOT could be quite explosive...


    Quote Originally posted by araucaria View Post
    Hi Gio, good to be interacting again with you and some others.

    This post has been on the subject of motivation in the abstract, which may resonate for some. What follows is more concrete, which may possibly be persuasive for others.
    A Hi/Five/Welcome Araucaria

    Thank you for joining us all here at the TOT forum !

    Your posts are truly 'a visual feast to the eyes and the mind' ...

    Please give us some time to take it all in ... :spinning:

    Blessings Gio

  2. The Following 12 Users Say Thank You to Gio For This Useful Post:

    Aianawa (6th October 2017), Aragorn (2nd October 2017), araucaria (3rd October 2017), Dreamtimer (2nd October 2017), Dumpster Diver (3rd October 2017), Elen (3rd October 2017), Emil El Zapato (2nd October 2017), enjoy being (3rd October 2017), heyokah (3rd October 2017), modwiz (3rd October 2017), Paloma (2nd October 2017), sandy (3rd October 2017)

  3. #152
    Senior Member Fred Steeves's Avatar
    Join Date
    1st May 2016
    Location
    U.S.A.
    Posts
    2,644
    Thanks
    4,968
    Thanked 12,015 Times in 2,615 Posts
    Hi there Araucaria,

    Pleasant surprise seeing you over here. I saw your name down below as a new member, and was curious what you were going to be about.

    In all honesty I never read many of your posts, well, very far anyway, because I just don't generally like to read voluminous posts. However, I *was* privy to what was contained in that Members Only thread, and found it most interesting. It's always nice to see the light bulb in the head turning on like it did for you, and there really wasn't a lot of wiggle room for Bill to try and respond to any of it. If he won't respond to what you said there, he certainly won't be respond to anything you say here. He has an awful lot to answer for, and the 5th Amendment is his greatest friend.

    He certainly isn't the only one in this community that has much to answer for, but he *is* a great poster child for the rampant deceptions.

    And yes, to learn the unique lessons he and others like him have to offer, are incredibly valuable. It truly is an initiation of sorts. Nothing was right on with that.

    Cheers
    Last edited by Fred Steeves, 2nd October 2017 at 15:15.
    The unexamined life is not worth living.

    Socrates

  4. The Following 12 Users Say Thank You to Fred Steeves For This Useful Post:

    Aianawa (6th October 2017), Aragorn (2nd October 2017), araucaria (3rd October 2017), Dreamtimer (2nd October 2017), Dumpster Diver (3rd October 2017), Elen (3rd October 2017), Emil El Zapato (2nd October 2017), enjoy being (3rd October 2017), Gio (2nd October 2017), heyokah (3rd October 2017), modwiz (3rd October 2017), Paloma (2nd October 2017)

  5. #153
    Senior Member Emil El Zapato's Avatar
    Join Date
    3rd April 2017
    Location
    Earth I
    Posts
    12,191
    Thanks
    36,640
    Thanked 43,100 Times in 11,915 Posts
    "The kindest possible interpretation of what, if anything, occurred is that Cassidy, perhaps like Wilcock on a previous occasion, was prey to a panic attack. This is a very real phenomenon. No one can be criticized for succumbing to such an experience. But the reality (the panic attack) is based on an illusion (it has a cause, but no concrete cause). Again, who was responsible: Peterson’s superiors? It turns out, as far as we know, he had none. Peterson himself? Really? The only real enemy seems to have been the equivalent of Wilcock’s undermaintained brakes."

    Martin Heidegger would characterize the panic attack as 'active Nothinging'. Seems quite appropriate!

  6. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to Emil El Zapato For This Useful Post:

    Aianawa (6th October 2017), Aragorn (2nd October 2017), araucaria (3rd October 2017), Dreamtimer (2nd October 2017), Dumpster Diver (3rd October 2017), Elen (3rd October 2017), enjoy being (3rd October 2017), Gio (2nd October 2017), modwiz (3rd October 2017), Paloma (2nd October 2017)

  7. #154
    Retired Member United States
    Join Date
    7th April 2015
    Location
    Patapsco Valley
    Posts
    14,610
    Thanks
    70,673
    Thanked 62,025 Times in 14,520 Posts
    Welcome Auracaria, so good to have you here. I look forward to your posts and the richness therein.

  8. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to Dreamtimer For This Useful Post:

    Aianawa (6th October 2017), Aragorn (2nd October 2017), araucaria (3rd October 2017), Dumpster Diver (3rd October 2017), Elen (3rd October 2017), Emil El Zapato (2nd October 2017), enjoy being (3rd October 2017), Gio (2nd October 2017), modwiz (2nd October 2017), Paloma (2nd October 2017)

  9. #155
    Administrator Aragorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    17th March 2015
    Location
    Middle-Earth
    Posts
    20,241
    Thanks
    88,440
    Thanked 80,974 Times in 20,256 Posts

    Thumbs Up

    Quote Originally posted by araucaria View Post
    [...]

    As to my own motivations and late arrival on this board, I do have a bit of ’splainin’ to do, which reflects indirectly on BR. My last post on Avalon was on 5 July. From a public forum standpoint, I am just a member who hasn’t posted for a while. However, there was a disagreement with the forum owner which was promptly hidden in the members only section. I may or may not repost some of that material, I really don’t know. But it means my online presence is effectively a misrepresentation of who I am and what I am about. I enrolled here notably to correct that, but also of course in order to carry on where I left off. I have not retired from PA, mostly to maintain ready access to my personal intellectual property there, but since to post again would amount to backing off and toeing the line, I am not prepared to do that.

    Regarding who I am, something has not changed: this is reflected in my keeping my earlier screen name. The araucaria input here carries on from the araucaria input over there, and defines a singular source, the individual human being at the keyboard. What has changed is my transfer of my activity from a forum that is dysfunctional as a community to one seemingly more aware of the problem, hence likely closer to finding a solution. The notion of the collective, the community, i.e. how we deal with the self/others dichotomy, being central to my thinking. I intend to start a thread on that subject in the near future.

    [...]
    Thank you for two very well-written posts full of insightful contemplations, Araucaria. You've now conditioned us to want more. By all means, keep it coming!


    Now, with that out of the way...




    = DEATH BEFORE DISHONOR =

  10. The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to Aragorn For This Useful Post:

    Aianawa (6th October 2017), araucaria (3rd October 2017), Dreamtimer (3rd October 2017), Dumpster Diver (3rd October 2017), Elen (3rd October 2017), Emil El Zapato (2nd October 2017), enjoy being (3rd October 2017), Gio (2nd October 2017), modwiz (3rd October 2017), Paloma (2nd October 2017), sandy (3rd October 2017)

  11. #156
    Retired Member
    Join Date
    6th August 2015
    Posts
    1,853
    Thanks
    4,608
    Thanked 11,685 Times in 2,094 Posts
    Maybe he resents not being ridiculed on TV like David Icke. I presume Davids site still has a forum, it would be one of the longest running if so.
    Kind of different though, comparing the two englishmen. One is actually an active researcher and has some fame. The other is just some small fry in comparison who has never really published much of true worth.
    Not that by any way am I any sort of David Icke fan... Just enjoying highlighting the actual calibre of contribution vs the attention given, which I find a little bewildering.

  12. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to enjoy being For This Useful Post:

    Aianawa (6th October 2017), Aragorn (3rd October 2017), araucaria (4th October 2017), Dreamtimer (3rd October 2017), Dumpster Diver (3rd October 2017), Elen (3rd October 2017), Emil El Zapato (3rd October 2017), modwiz (3rd October 2017)

  13. #157
    Senior Member donk's Avatar
    Join Date
    26th December 2013
    Posts
    1,262
    Thanks
    2,045
    Thanked 6,020 Times in 1,226 Posts
    Strangely, while I have little or no recall of anything Pete Peterson actually said, I do remember a few things said about his Camelot interview – notably the amount of off-the-record statements he made in addition to the on-the-record statements
    I remember two things about it:

    1. David Wilcock was there (and barely really around BR or PA before or since...if at all)
    2. It was most of the most vocal around PA during my time (and I've even since...right up til recently) referring to it as the most compelling of the "groundbreaking work" Bill and Kerry did

    Bill Ryan presents himself as a serious, committed reporter or alternative researcher. He has already admitted to being totally unserious (unprofessional or if you prefer, dangerously amateurish) in the basic matter of checking credentials. He is no reporter, but a fake newsman. He is not at all committed to the whistle-blower cause, since he declined to share what he had been told and is now prepared to throw Peterson under the bus at the first sign of trouble.
    I disagree...I think it took him a minute...and Peterson's image REALLY melting down faster than Wilcock's....to start his 180 on ol' Pete. I can't imagine it was easy for him to admit he made a mistake, especially of that scale...that was shocking to me. But I have seen a ton of peeps praising that interview and the "intel" PP brought to the table, right up til when he started appearing on Gaia.

    I also disagree BR's JUST a "fake newsman"...intentional or not, he's a "fake whistleblower creator", that's why I insist on continuing to share my experiences with him. It's a pattern and I like discussing it with people who hopped on (and got off) the Bill wagon at various times, whether it be Serpo, Charles, Inelia, Corey, or whoever. I even saw him take a little credit for Wilcock getting a popularity boost.

    This is what I mean by painting someone into a corner. He has set up an amber light that is neither red nor green: what do you do when you cannot go and you cannot stop? Float off right out of this reality into another dimension, I guess.
    Heh...nice one...I once painted Bill in a corner, over his handling of LRon's OT3, which he shut down any attempt of conservation about and outright hid (to protect us), in his "open forum" where science and spirituality supposedly met, in a "safe" place to discuss EVERYTHING.

    That's when I stopped enabling and started trying to hold him to his own standards. He didn't like my ways...even followed me here to tell me how irresponsible I was being putting people in danger, even suggested that my posting the document he described as entity infested (CG's wife read my story I think ) may have been the cause of the MS attack I got that lead to the diagnosis I had revealed there. Whatever his motives, he's a strange duck

    Anyways, great posts. Nice to see you here.
    What is the purpose of your presence?

  14. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to donk For This Useful Post:

    Aianawa (6th October 2017), Aragorn (3rd October 2017), araucaria (3rd October 2017), Dreamtimer (3rd October 2017), Dumpster Diver (3rd October 2017), Elen (3rd October 2017), Emil El Zapato (3rd October 2017), enjoy being (3rd October 2017), modwiz (3rd October 2017)

  15. #158
    Retired Member
    Join Date
    6th August 2015
    Posts
    1,853
    Thanks
    4,608
    Thanked 11,685 Times in 2,094 Posts
    And the Pete Peterson one I have no interest in touching that tarbaby. I remember the name back several years, there were a few completely absurd names they came up with and that was one in which I chuckled and clicked 'Next'.
    From the gist of things reading above, regards KC an'all, sounds like another wind up.
    Wasn't it in the 'other BR' thread where Kerry Cassidy, and the Australian, and DW, were shown up as faking a death threat?

  16. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to enjoy being For This Useful Post:

    Aianawa (6th October 2017), Aragorn (3rd October 2017), araucaria (3rd October 2017), Dreamtimer (3rd October 2017), Dumpster Diver (3rd October 2017), Elen (3rd October 2017), Emil El Zapato (3rd October 2017), modwiz (3rd October 2017)

  17. #159
    Retired Member
    Join Date
    22nd September 2013
    Posts
    1,141
    Thanks
    15,854
    Thanked 7,406 Times in 1,137 Posts
    araucaria >>>Welcome aboard the good ship TOT

  18. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to sandy For This Useful Post:

    Aianawa (6th October 2017), Aragorn (3rd October 2017), araucaria (3rd October 2017), Dreamtimer (3rd October 2017), Dumpster Diver (3rd October 2017), Elen (3rd October 2017), Emil El Zapato (3rd October 2017), enjoy being (3rd October 2017), modwiz (3rd October 2017), Paloma (3rd October 2017)

  19. #160
    Retired Member France
    Join Date
    1st October 2017
    Posts
    26
    Thanks
    57
    Thanked 191 Times in 26 Posts
    Quote Originally posted by Fred Steeves View Post
    In all honesty I never read many of your posts, well, very far anyway, because I just don't generally like to read voluminous posts. However, I *was* privy to what was contained in that Members Only thread, and found it most interesting. It's always nice to see the light bulb in the head turning on like it did for you,
    Thank you Fred and others for your welcome and comments. I do not see this as a kind of ‘Road to Damascus’ moment. I mentioned traffic lights. What has happened is no more than a bump at a crossroads: I nearly missed my turn-off, and BR didn’t see me coming through an amber light. I am on the same bumpy journey as before.

    As evidence of continuity, the long post issue was actually part of the ‘discussion’ at PA. BR was thanking my long posts almost up to the day when he decided he’d had enough. When I say he didn’t see me coming, I mean he was thanking stuff he hadn’t really read or fully understood. Maybe he is going senile, but there is more to it. What I see is an adept of the short post. This is where it gets cultish.

    Short messages are great for conveying already-formed ideas, but pretty useless for accompanying the thinking process per se. I can tell you via twitter that the answer to Life, the Universe and Everything is 42, but unless you ask to read the thousands... of pages of calculations in fine print, it becomes a magic formula, a religious dogma to accept or reject, or a joke. Bill Ryan says things like 42 with utter conviction, and is often met with equal certainty, but there is no fine print to back it up. It was a matter of time until he clashed with someone doing something very different. But these accidents do take time: just how long is ultimately irrelevant. I had been a thorn in Bill Ryan’s side for quite some time, but I didn’t really start noticing until he became one for me. I don’t agree that I was in the wrong place; it was a place where, even in hindsight, I could possibly have been of help.

    A long post is actually only a couple of pages of printed text; it is not a 400-page book. In mine, you get to see the thought process in action, falsifiable: exposed to criticism, disagreement and/or improvement. In other words, my process is part of a bigger, joint process – working ‘together’. This collaboration is possible because for all its length, it is imperfect and incomplete. This is in total opposition to the current conventional wisdom whereby anything that cannot be said in 140 characters, or maybe a few multiples thereof, is not worth saying. There is a great deal that will only be found in all those 400-page books. If you don’t study some of those as well, you are short-changing yourself.

    The more one reads/writes, the more one tends towards doubt and reticence on every subject. To put it another way, things fade into unimportance. BR’s favourite word is ‘important’: it makes me cringe. Over the summer, I turned my desk round to face the other way. Has this fresh perspective changed my thinking? I can see a couple of trees I couldn’t see before: maybe I can channel them! Well probably not; the idea was simply to move a little closer to the radiator. Utterly insignificant – or seemingly so, like the fine print people ignore at their peril.

  20. The Following 13 Users Say Thank You to araucaria For This Useful Post:

    Aianawa (6th October 2017), Aragorn (3rd October 2017), Dreamtimer (3rd October 2017), Dumpster Diver (3rd October 2017), Elen (3rd October 2017), Emil El Zapato (3rd October 2017), enjoy being (3rd October 2017), Fred Steeves (3rd October 2017), heyokah (3rd October 2017), modwiz (3rd October 2017), Paloma (3rd October 2017), sandy (4th October 2017), Zebowho (5th October 2017)

  21. #161
    Senior Member Fred Steeves's Avatar
    Join Date
    1st May 2016
    Location
    U.S.A.
    Posts
    2,644
    Thanks
    4,968
    Thanked 12,015 Times in 2,615 Posts
    Quote Originally posted by araucaria View Post

    Short messages are great for conveying already-formed ideas, but pretty useless for accompanying the thinking process per se.
    Ha ha ha, you and Aragorn should get along great in the essay department!

    Me personally, I am hoping one day to gain such a thorough understaing of the meaning of life, that it can be freely expressed in the form of a parable.

    P.S.

    Aragorn you know I love you man, just razzin ya a bit.

    My apologies, back to topic.
    The unexamined life is not worth living.

    Socrates

  22. The Following 12 Users Say Thank You to Fred Steeves For This Useful Post:

    Aianawa (6th October 2017), Aragorn (3rd October 2017), araucaria (3rd October 2017), Dreamtimer (3rd October 2017), Dumpster Diver (3rd October 2017), Emil El Zapato (3rd October 2017), enjoy being (3rd October 2017), heyokah (6th October 2017), modwiz (3rd October 2017), Paloma (3rd October 2017), sandy (4th October 2017), Zebowho (5th October 2017)

  23. #162
    Retired Member United States
    Join Date
    7th April 2015
    Location
    Patapsco Valley
    Posts
    14,610
    Thanks
    70,673
    Thanked 62,025 Times in 14,520 Posts
    It seems to me that the substance rather than the size of a post is what matters. Being concise is nice. But certainly not the only way. I like the opportunity to see the thought processes. (or lack thereof)

    I like how you didn't know he was a thorn in your side until you were one in his. It shows, to me, how you were being you, and doing what you were there to do. For him on the other hand, you weren't being the kind of instrument that he wanted. Shame, he ends up missing value that's right in front of him.

  24. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to Dreamtimer For This Useful Post:

    Aianawa (6th October 2017), Aragorn (3rd October 2017), araucaria (4th October 2017), Dumpster Diver (3rd October 2017), Emil El Zapato (3rd October 2017), enjoy being (3rd October 2017), heyokah (6th October 2017), modwiz (3rd October 2017), Paloma (3rd October 2017), sandy (4th October 2017)

  25. #163
    Senior Member donk's Avatar
    Join Date
    26th December 2013
    Posts
    1,262
    Thanks
    2,045
    Thanked 6,020 Times in 1,226 Posts
    I mentioned in this thread (and elsewhere) I thought one of Bill's main motivations is to be seen as IMPORTANT within the community.

    It's sort of a trying to get to the front of the line of "researchers" (and posters and youtubers) falling all over each to try to show lies and logical errors in the stories anyone getting attention (importance?) with their tales. It was distressing to me at first to see how much the "community" seemed to like and even need the obvious stated for them, but it looks now like it's all gotten so silly that most can see any "whistleblower" testimony can at best be talked in circles about and in most cases just shit upon

    So the "important" peeps all start blowing each other over their superior discernment and "research methods" and interview skills and compare themselves to Richard Dolan, as if he's ever brought any clarity to anything. It's been a slow motion train wreck watching the "community" go from something try to hold the veneer of "scienctific method" and logic and discernment to blue bird/beam stories that started once upon a time in a Project not so far way

    It would be kinda comical if it wasn't so tragic and frustrating. My biggest problem with him was not the flaws in character I would often point out, but with what I saw as direct insults to my intelligence with some of the crap he pulled, and his forum enables. I think you (and carmody) were important to him in order to make him look/feel smart...right up til he started realizing that in the depths (it's not the length of your posts that is difficult for most people, I think) of your writing you exposed he ain't as sharp or smart or discerning or logically sound as he likes to appear
    Last edited by donk, 3rd October 2017 at 12:35.
    What is the purpose of your presence?

  26. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to donk For This Useful Post:

    Aianawa (6th October 2017), Aragorn (3rd October 2017), araucaria (3rd October 2017), Dreamtimer (3rd October 2017), Dumpster Diver (3rd October 2017), Emil El Zapato (3rd October 2017), enjoy being (3rd October 2017), Lord Sidious (3rd October 2017), modwiz (3rd October 2017), Paloma (3rd October 2017)

  27. #164
    Retired Member United States
    Join Date
    2nd December 2015
    Location
    American Southwest (currently)
    Posts
    2,602
    Thanks
    12,814
    Thanked 13,156 Times in 2,620 Posts
    Welcome Araucaria. I surprised myself by reading your posts. As a short attention span ne’er do well, it is an accomplishment for me. I’ll post something in future on it for Donk to disparage, to be sure.

    I’ll say just one thing now, though, mostly for the Donkster. I think it unfortunate we tend to focus on personalities rather than ideas. I still think our biggest concern should be the chaotic sun and it’s affect on the planet. Yes, I know DW talks about it all the time, but no one has postulated any counter information, just ad hominems against Will-talk-about-his-cock. I’m concerned that he has presented a lot of info backing it from all sorts of religious and historical documents and has several other folks along with several sun scientists making noises in the same direction.

    Donk will respond below re: thread derailing.

  28. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to Dumpster Diver For This Useful Post:

    Aianawa (6th October 2017), Aragorn (3rd October 2017), araucaria (3rd October 2017), Dreamtimer (3rd October 2017), Emil El Zapato (3rd October 2017), heyokah (6th October 2017), modwiz (3rd October 2017), Paloma (3rd October 2017), WantDisclosure (3rd October 2017)

  29. #165
    Retired Member France
    Join Date
    1st October 2017
    Posts
    26
    Thanks
    57
    Thanked 191 Times in 26 Posts
    Quote Originally posted by Dumpster Diver View Post
    I think it unfortunate we tend to focus on personalities rather than ideas. I still think our biggest concern should be the chaotic sun and it’s affect on the planet.
    Hi there Dumpster Diver, nice to meet you (or am I supposed to know you from elsewhere? )

    I intend to get off this thread and do my own thing just as soon as new members are allowed to. Regarding the chaotic sun, Richard Michael Pasichnyk explains in The Vital Vastness how, contrary to common belief, the Sun’s activity actually lags behind whatever is happening on Earth. This would mean that earthquakes are not so much an effect of solar activity as a cause. The simple conclusion is that we just need to start behaving and the Sun will respond accordingly.
    http://www.livingcosmos.com/vital.htm

    To understand how this would work, imagine a kind of reverse astrology. We all know what various aspects of Mars do to us. It is a kind of self-fulfilling prophecy until we decide that we’ve had enough of this. If enough people were to snap out of it, then ‘Mars’ would be forced to behave less belligerently in return, and everyone would get to benefit from it. Has it ever occurred to you what the astrological role of Earth might be on another planet? I imagine it is a mixture of very sweet and absolutely horrid. People are easy to get on with when they are nice, and horrendous when they turn nasty. The Sun and the planets are probably no different.

    Joseph Farrell in Cosmic War is very much into ultra-sophisticated weaponry and technology. Yet when he describes how the power-giving 'Tablets of Destiny' had to be rewritten after the explosion of a planet, it strikes me what he is talking about is astrology. All the different transits and aspects would have changed and needed recalibrating. This is extremely low-tech, highly explosive magic. Next time you see old grumpy in the mirror, just smile at him and see how he changes: you will feel much better for it. The rest is simply a change of scale. Let’s work at our own human scale and let the pantograph do its work.

  30. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to araucaria For This Useful Post:

    Aianawa (6th October 2017), Aragorn (3rd October 2017), Dumpster Diver (3rd October 2017), Emil El Zapato (3rd October 2017), heyokah (6th October 2017), Melidae (3rd October 2017), modwiz (3rd October 2017), Paloma (3rd October 2017), PurpleLama (3rd October 2017), sandy (4th October 2017)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •