All Episodes
Previous Next
April 6, 2011 - Project Camelot
01:01:55
PROJECT CAMELOT INTERVIEWED BY MEL FABREGAS, VERITAS SHOW PART ONE
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Thank you.
Thank you.
So, let me see, maybe...
You're a lot bigger than me, so you take up more space.
I'm not a lot bigger than you.
Sure.
5 4 3 2 And this is Mel Fabregas from the Veritas Show.
And I have the pleasure, the privilege to be here in the same room with two people that have been an inspiration to our show.
We're at the UFO Congress in, where are we?
Not Nevada.
It's in Phoenix, Arizona in February of 2011.
And Carrie Cassidy and Bill Ryan from Projects, Camelot and Avalon respectively.
We're doing great.
This is a little meeting to be noted in the annals because whereas the three of us have been communicating together for quite a while, we never actually met in the same room as you said.
And so it's a privilege for me too.
This is great because the last time we did an interview was in the Awaken Aware conference at the end of that in September 2009.
That's true.
That feels like about a hundred years ago, right?
And so it's all very appropriate.
There's a lot of appropriateness going on here because Mel is one of the people who would be right at the top of my list for somebody who gave us an opportunity to make another joint statement 18 months later.
So here we go.
Well, I remember the time when we did the interview, a lot of people were talking about, they're going to separate here and there.
But I've always found that there's a synergy between the both of you, regardless of you being in different parts of the world or different projects.
We always think of the both of you as a synergy.
It's very important for people to keep that in mind, that it doesn't matter that the two of you are working separately, you're still working for the same common goal.
So I'd like to know, what is happening with both of you now?
What projects are you dealing with?
And now that we have you in the same room, tell us more.
Ladies first.
Oh, well...
I mean, I would say that what's going on here is that Bill and I have sort of formed a pact and we've decided that we will honor our friendship regardless of what goes on between us in terms of personal opinions, perspectives, and where we're coming from at any given time.
And in this sector that we're in, it's very highly charged.
People often have differences of opinions.
Good friends have partings of the way.
There are all kinds of feuds going on.
And we witnessed this from the outside when we first got together, actually.
And one of our vows at that time is Project Camelot, which has been over five years ago now.
Was to sort of build bridges between people and not to be one of those groups that goes out and badmouths other groups.
And whereas we have our detractors out there and we're aware of them from time to time, we try not to do that.
And so what has gone on has been very interesting in the sense that over the last, I guess, two years, I would say, After working together pretty much almost 24-7 on all the interviews we did worldwide, and we were very fortunate to be able to do that, we obviously got to know each other extremely well.
But what had happened is we became sort of targeted.
And so on top of our growing, you know, as people do grow, and our growing maybe differences and feelings that There were areas that I wanted to delve into that Bill was not as interested in and witnesses that I wanted to talk to that Bill didn't necessarily even believe.
So we come and vice versa.
What happened is that, in a sense, you could have looked at it as we expanded Camelot to allow for us to each to have sort of our own sections of the website.
But as it happened, there was a parting of the waves also because I think Some incidents happened that stimulated us making a very firm division in the sense that Bill went on to Project Avalon and I backed out from Project Avalon that we originally created together and sort of gave him that Venue, whatever you want to look at, however you want to look at that, which was a forum and a small website originally.
And he can talk more about where it's gone from there.
And then I sort of stayed on the Project Camelot, but I expanded it to be called Project Camelot Productions, as most people will know and be familiar.
And then I went out on my own and did a number of interviews.
And Bill has done a number on his side as well.
And so that allowed us to really go off in different directions.
And I think Camelot as a whole has benefited, and that's my view.
And we have really...
We've had an incredible time in the last two years, but it has been on and off been contentious in terms of our philosophies and our points of view on different issues and different individuals, different subjects.
Kind of going head to head, even very recently on the Charles material, for example.
And I don't think that's a bad thing, personally.
I think that because we are sort of in a place where we agree to remain friends in spite of our differences, and I think anyone who gets into this sector and reaches that place where you can actually pull back and understand that the human Feeling that the love between you is strong enough to sort of overcome the sort of temporary earthly divisions,
if you will, that the ultimate mission that we're on is the same, which is to get the truth out to the people.
That's never changed and that is our effort.
Now how we go about that is very different.
And so we need to acknowledge that.
Our personalities, this is what we brought to Camelot, was that we were like two halves of the whole.
We really brought different perspectives and came from completely opposite angles to the same point.
And that was our strength.
It also became our challenge, if you will.
So I would say your turn.
Before you give me your feedback, Bill, I have to say that the topics that we all cover Are not happy-go-lucky topics.
They're very intense.
Absolutely.
They're frustrating sometimes.
Just to know that the force that we have to fight every single day, it will be very difficult for two people to get along 100% of the time.
So it's understandable that Differences would surface and conflicts would surface.
It happens to everybody.
But the fact that you are in different parts of the world has also helped to bring more truth out, because before you would do your interviews pretty much together, but now you're probably producing more interviews separately.
Bill, tell us your point of view.
One thing I want to say is that great organizations and great people throughout history have great problems.
If you go and talk to a multi-billionaire successful businessman and say, well, you must have had it easy.
He said, no, no, no, I had it tough.
And the measure of anybody when they get to the end of a project or they get to the end of a lifetime or end of the mission is not what size your problems were, but how you handled them.
And so inasmuch as all of this is a learning process, the thing that unites us, I think, and we had some speed bumps along the way, but they've been, it's been a process which I've learned a lot from, which I've appreciated, and which I think has been beneficial for everybody,
and also seeing the way that we handle the situation as an example, because when you're a little bit in the public eye, as we are, sort of, I kind of jokingly call us minor celebrities in the alternative world, Movement, if you like.
We're also there to set an example, and a lot of people were really quite upset when we seemed to fly apart, because they thought, well, if these guys can't keep it together, what hope is there for the world?
And it's like what Gandhi said, that we are the change.
We have to be the change that we want to see out there.
And even though when we came together as Camelot in 2006, we never planned anything.
It just happened.
It was very organic.
It just rolled like a giant rolling snowball down a very steep mountainside.
We didn't plan anything at all, but it turned out that the yin and yang of our personalities, our approaches, our experience, everything we brought to the table, it was a perfect complementary fit.
For many reasons, but also because we weren't funded, because we just had this little tiny camera in our pocket, we didn't really know what we were doing, but we just went out and all these doors magically opened for us, we became sort of I mean, this isn't meant to be egoistic, but we were told that we became grassroots heroes for a lot of people.
It's like, look what you guys can do.
You go.
And so we went.
And everywhere we did go, we encouraged other people to do the same.
We said, look, we're not special.
We're not different.
We're just a couple of people who, because of our life circumstances, we didn't have families.
We didn't have jobs.
We didn't have mortgages.
We didn't have real estate.
We weren't locked down in any one place.
We could just pick up this ball and run with it.
And this is one of the things that united us both, the fact that for whatever reason, whether we're smart or whether we're dumb, we're both pretty fearless.
It's like, okay, come get me, I don't care, I'll just come back.
I'm not afraid of dying, and neither are you.
And this is one of the...
Many examples, and I think that without, as I said, without deliberately setting out, it's kind of been that way, because people are looking out there from the seats in the audience saying, look at what these guys are doing.
And this is what unites us, the fact that we're committed to the truth, we're going to get there whatever it takes, we have different styles, but that's okay, because we can look at this big elephant from all kinds of different angles.
And when things started to get difficult for us at the end of 2009, what had happened back then was that we had upset a lot of people.
There's a story here that has not been told.
In my personal opinion, and I'd love Kerry to comment on this, we'd upset seven significant groups of people by the time we got to the back end of 2009.
And a decision had been made to take us down one way or another.
You agree with that?
Yeah, that much I believe is true, although I think who decided that and the groups that sort of set to work on that were different.
It doesn't matter.
It's like, who killed JFK? Probably everybody wanted him out of the way, you know.
In our case, the first group we upset with Illuminati themselves after we messed with Leo Zagami.
Then we probably messed off the...
Oh, and the Vatican.
Yeah.
I'd like to explore all these areas because there's a lot of rumour out there of what influences you had in the separation.
Forces from the powers that wanted to be that wanted to see you separate so that you could fall.
There's a lot of rumour out there and I'd like to make sure that we can set the record straight.
And you mentioned a few names.
Well, sure.
I mean, this is a long list.
I only just started two of them.
So, my take on it is that We probably upset the Illuminati after our Leo Zagami interview in February 2008.
About six months after that, we met Jake Simpson.
And behind Jake Simpson was...
It could have been the present time Anunnaki, but we upset somebody.
Because the information that he revealed through us was really on the edge of a lot of stuff that hadn't been published before, and we know that there are anarchy connections behind Jake, or rather operating in the realms that Jake was kind of touching into, because he told us.
I need to interject, but Leo Sargami, a lot of us know who he is, but give us a little bit of a background of these individuals that could have been forces that worked against you.
Yozakami was an Illuminati whistleblower.
He came out, he talked to us for two hours saying, this is what's going on, this is who the Illuminati are, this is who I am.
He had a whole sheaf of papers, he wanted to talk about everything.
He was doing what he could in his own style to blow the whistle on what the Illuminati were up to.
Very soon after that he was taken back.
He was taken back.
And I'm as sure as I can be personally that at that point they set, Some of their stuff on us, because they use magic, and they really do use magic.
And I don't mean kind of hocus-pocus stage magician stuff.
I'm talking about deep, dark, black magic.
And this is a reality.
Now, this in itself is a whole radio show for you.
So, I mean, we can't even go there here.
We just have to acknowledge its existence.
Would you totally agree with that?
Yes, but you have to understand that Leo Zagami came from the dark side of the Vatican.
So it's not just Illuminati in a general sense of that term, because that's a very wide...
Bucket at this point on the planet, but but what we're talking about is this specifically The dark side of the Vatican having to do with the black Pope etc etc etc So I want I just want to clarify that and it's a big box of stuff It's got a lot of stuff in it.
We don't know exactly what's in there, but there's something in it and the only real reference point I'm making here is that we upset whatever it was that was in that box and Right, and one of the indications of that was, because we didn't just come to this conclusion out of nowhere, was when we went and interviewed Lucas Cantamberlo about Planet X, and our car was broken into at the Milan airport.
And then we flew to Norway right after that, and that was when our car was...
So it was in between those two interviews to interview.
We interviewed Leo Zagami in Norway.
Yeah.
All of that kind of stuff.
And so that was one incident.
We also had the flat tire at the top of...
But we're going into too much detail here.
I know, but they also need the nuts and bolts of how this threat manifested.
Right.
Right, okay.
So, there's some connection between Leo Zagami and the Illuminati, and at that point, I think, we became a red flag on someone's radar.
Okay.
Then soon after that, six months after that, we had the whole Jake Simpson stuff.
Jake Simpson is a whistleblower who worked deeply...
In the, how can we say, the intelligence, military intelligence of several major Western world countries.
He's psychically trained.
He knows a lot of stuff.
We have a report on the Camelot website about it.
And what he would do, and this is a very important story to tell here.
Let me see if I can do this in just a minute flat.
When he told us stuff...
He would be very guarded, and he'd be talking in code words, and he'd be talking really enigmatically, almost like he was looking around him psychically if anyone was listening.
Now, there wasn't anyone around.
He'd do this even if he was on his own.
And then ten minutes later, he'd say something much more clearly.
And after a couple of days of this, I said to him, you're timing what you say to us, aren't you?
And he said, yes.
He said, I'm avoiding the sweeps.
And I said, well, what are the sweeps you're talking about?
Is this electromagnetic surveillance?
He said, no.
He said it's something that makes electromagnetic surveillance look like it's in the Stone Age.
And to cut this long story short, he told us that there was a surveillance system that operated in hyperspace that's been in existence for more than 20 years in which any conversation anywhere Can be plucked out of the reality matrix and downloaded to a database.
They don't need microphones.
It's not even done electronically.
It's a hyperspace thing.
But it's in AI. It's AI. I mean, get to the bottom line.
It's more than Escherland?
No, it's much more than Escherland.
It's got nothing to do with code words.
What he told us, I'll tell you what he told us.
This is my paraphrase of what he told us.
Somebody right now, probably in Pine Gap or one of these places, could decide that they wanted to figure out what Mel had said to Bill and Kerry yesterday.
And then they dial it up, and they pull it out, and they find it.
It's directly connected into the Akashic records, if you like.
It's not limited to time.
Now, they can't get everything because they can't analyze the data.
So they still have to be specific, and it's not 100% perfect.
But when I was talking with Jake, at the very, very end, I had an interesting experience.
Well, we had that experience, excuse me, because I was there too.
But the experience I had was after you went to bed.
I know, but it was happening before that.
I understand that.
I'm just reporting the experience that I had.
Okay.
It was very late at night.
We were having a barbecue out on the terrace in the sunshine.
Late at night in the sunshine.
We were having a barbecue out on the terrace in the heat of this tropical environment.
It was very, very pleasant.
Carrie had already gone to bed.
It was about 2 o'clock in the morning.
And Jake said, I've got some stuff that I really want to tell you because you're...
Because you're leaving tomorrow, and I'm going to take a risk and tell you this stuff.
And he was in a rented villa, there was no electronics around, nobody could have predicted that we were going to have this conversation.
He started to talk about it, and he had to work really hard to make his mouth move.
He described it as fighting your way, like a cartoon character trying to fight their way through a bubblegum bubble.
And on the other side of this, I was falling asleep.
Suddenly, I was going really dopey, like I'd just been injected with something.
And I was fighting to stay awake.
He was fighting to talk.
He forced himself to tell me whatever it was that he told me.
We kept on going until about 4 o'clock in the morning.
I went off to bed.
I saw him for breakfast the next day.
And I said to him, you know what?
That weird thing that happened last night, I can't remember what it was that you were trying to tell me.
And he said, you know what?
It's just as well.
And so I don't even know what it was that he was trying to tell me.
It wasn't a chemical mind wipe but there was a remote influence going on that was shutting the whole conversation down because it knew that it was happening and it's triggered to respond in that particular way and since then I've talked with other people who've had that same experience.
And then, of course, we wrote the whole thing up as a report.
Now, that upsets somebody.
That information's never been out there.
Although a lot of people watching this now, listening to this now, have never heard this information before.
They've had this technology for 20 years.
Well, yeah, and a lot of people don't read, actually, you know, because we make videos, a lot of people miss some of the written reports, which are just as important in some ways as the video.
Google Project Camelot, Jake Simpson.
Yes, but I just want to interject here that actually when we were talking to Jake, this was happening the whole time, and that we tapped into it, we discussed it, actually, before I went to bed, and that I was feeling the same effects of it, which is why I went to bed.
So, you know, just to put in context...
You also suffer the same symptoms.
Yeah, absolutely.
It was being targeted at us.
And I decided to stop fighting it and just get away from there, is what happened.
And you stayed.
I figured maybe he would, because he was really struggling before I left.
I don't know if you remember that, but these are sort of smaller details.
But the gist of the thing to move on, and because we don't have all day, is to go to, yes, we upset them at that point, and obviously that was a trigger issue.
Then there are other groups that we've...
This is the second item in a seven-item list.
The next one is Pete Peterson.
Dr.
Pete Peterson.
And if anyone watches our interview with Pete Peterson, once again, Google Project Camelot and Pete Peterson, you will see at the very, very end of the second part a wonderful, very amusing little cameo in which Pete was really aggravated by a little comment that Kerry said based on her intuitive pickup of something that he had not said.
In the final part, which was Kerry's turn in the ring, because we were doing tag team with this whole thing, to talk, then Kerry really pushed the envelope, as she does, very, very well.
And we later learned, much later, a year later we learned that we upset the Pentagon so much that somebody wanted to take Kerry out.
They wanted to kill her.
They wanted to kill her because of that.
Well, they were planning to.
So that was the word we got.
So at that point, we also...
What is it that was, if you don't mind me asking, I remember a certain point of the interview where you said, if I tell you, they'll kill me and they'll kill you.
What was it that was said that was so upsetting?
Okay, Bill, let me talk about this, if you don't mind.
I just want to say that we have to be careful here, okay?
So rather than answer you too directly, what I want to do is urge people to re-listen to that interview, and it's well worth it.
There's a tremendous amount of value.
He's one of the best witnesses we ever had.
Now, after he did the interview, it took us a month to get clearance to release the interview.
He did not want to really release it.
We didn't get clearance.
Well, we finally did from him and then he took it back a few hours later.
And then he regretted it and so he's not in contact with us as a consequence of that sort of back and forth right now.
However, he was brought back into the Pentagon.
There's evidence that he had some health problems as a result of the interview and so on.
So it's not just one way.
This is another thing.
And his wife died.
Yes.
And I just want to say that some of the things that we've experienced go beyond us.
That the trouble that we had that was a result of some of the people that we upset on high levels in terms of running the world, so to speak, and be they ET or non-ET, Goes into the witnesses that revealed some of the information as well.
They have been taken off, out of the game, so to speak, in certain ways.
They're not coming forward.
They're not as much and so on since having done the interviews.
Right.
After Pete Peterson, the next one was Dan Beerish.
Dan Beerish came to the...
A conference that some people had organized in Zurich in Switzerland, and there was a question and answer session, an open panel, David Wilcock was there as well, and he was asked a question about vaccinations, because this was in the middle of this whole swine flu thing, which a lot of people got very exercised about.
And that created almost a minor riot, because Dan was standing up and saying, and I wasn't expecting this to happen, this wasn't rehearsed, it wasn't prepared, we never knew the question was going to come.
He said there's nothing wrong with vaccinations, and basically he was defending the party line.
Kerry, who wasn't at that conference, got very alarmed, because my position was unclear, because I was being a moderator on this, and I seemed to be allowing it to roll.
And people were saying to me, well, you know, are you supporting Dan?
Why do you let him talk for so long?
It's just my style.
I just let people talk.
So Kerry posted a statement, a very clear statement on the Camelot website, saying that we do not support the public vaccination program.
In fact, we don't even believe that vaccinations work.
And then after you had done that, I immediately posted my own post saying that I completely stand with you on that.
I fully agree.
This is my personal position.
Very shortly after, Dan Beerish and Marcy McDowell, now I think called Dan Crane and Marcy Crane, they distanced themselves from us publicly and attacked us viciously using a lot of stuff that was very untrue.
Dan was a personal friend.
We love the man.
He makes his decisions based on the information that's provided to him and he's heavily controlled.
We lost Dan as a friend and to this day I have no idea what his personal position is on this.
We upset her, but just the way that that taps into this list of antagonists that we generated was it's quite possible that there's an MJ-12 connection in there because we upset them.
Yes, but I actually have to bring my piece to this because what happened also was that there was some behind-the-scenes machinations going on during that conference which indicated that there was some premeditation on their part in terms of them beginning to pull away from us even before this sort of incident.
That happened with Dan.
And there was a simultaneous experience or occurrence that happened.
And I was not invited.
I was not allowed to come to that conference, even though I wanted to.
But Henry Deacon was there.
And he was also there.
He went on stage.
And he backed Brian O'Leary in terms of free energy on stage.
And he came forward there.
You want to say who Henry is?
Henry Deacon is one of our witnesses.
He's a person who has worked in block projects who was very unusual in that he didn't specialize in and get into this silo sort of notion.
He was more like, and this is a loose sense of the use of the word, but a project manager.
And he worked for various Three-letter agency, four-letter agencies.
And so he had a wider view of the big picture than most witnesses or people that work in black projects usually ever get.
So he is one of our best witnesses to ever come forward.
But at any rate, what he did on stage with Brian O'Leary, the ex-astronaut, who was also a Camelot witness, Was to support him and to stand by him.
This happened simultaneously, whereas at the same time, Dan and Marcy were also doing something behind the scenes with regard to Bill in a hotel room where he was surreptitiously supposedly filmed saying negative things.
About me.
And what happened was that it appears that that was a premeditated event that Majestic must have set them up to do.
That's correct.
There was some kind of a sting involved there as well.
There was.
So then what happened right after that conference Was that everyone was so surprised that Henry Deacon came on stage and revealed who he was that the organizers of the Barcelona conference that happened a couple weeks later invited Henry Deacon and paid his way to go down to that conference.
And they actually didn't want him to speak.
They just wanted to allow him to be there.
I'm not sure what was going on there with their sort of You know, motivation or whatever, but obviously they were interested to meet him personally, I imagine.
And what happened there, and this is where we angered another group, or the same group even more, you might say, was that Henry Deacon, at the end of Bob Dean's talk about Mars, a very wonderful talk that's on the Internet, in which Bob Dean did a wonderful presentation on Mars, Henry Deacon went on stage and revealed that he had been to Mars.
I had suggested to him that this was an opportunity to do so since we were frustrated that he didn't have an opportunity to actually speak himself and then he actually told me no first of all and then I left and went across the auditorium to where I was sitting on the other side and then I saw him actually go up to the front of the stage and having changed his mind I accompanied him on stage simply to give him sort of moral support This is the first time he
ever went public in terms of revealing who he was and the fact that he'd been on Mars.
And he was extremely nervous.
He's been widely criticized because he didn't go into any depth at that point.
But we were actually told to get off the stage.
It was something of a contentious event.
Bob Dean was more than happy to have us there at the end of his presentation.
We have a long history with Bob Dean.
But we don't know exactly what went on there, except that I do know that Stephen Greer seemed to be instrumental in some way at the back of the stage after we left the stage in Barcelona.
And there were some incidents with regard to free energy activists, and they had some misunderstandings, thinking that Greer had threatened them when, in fact, he didn't.
And we were instrumental in clearing that misunderstanding up.
The upshot is that there was no question that Henry was threatened about a week after that.
He arrived at Amsterdam where he'd also been invited to do a conference.
Everyone flocked to that place thinking he was going to say more about his Mars experience and he talked about vitamin D3. Right.
Which is very important, but nonetheless, it was clear, he made some clear statements to us.
And a lot of people said, who's got to him?
Indicated that he was then afraid.
And we knew him in depth.
We spent hours and hours with him, even staying with him at some point, or vice versa.
And so I have to say that we knew his personality well enough to know that he had seemed to have been threatened, even though he denied being threatened, and that's important.
And the interesting thing is that Jake Simpson, who we were talking about just a few moments ago, he's got a deep understanding of some of these things.
He said, I think to you, Kerry, personally, he said he will never be permitted to talk about the reality of the Mars program in public.
We crossed a line, you see.
If you've got an anonymous whistleblower who hasn't got a face, who's just got a pseudonym, And who hasn't got a real name and never appears on any stage and just writes anonymous reports, you've got the plausible liability built into that as a fuse in the circuit and people can say, well, you've got enough people on the internet saying that he's crazy and that he's unreal, we don't need to worry about that.
He's actually operating as a problem for Camelot and it doesn't really matter.
As soon as a guy comes up saying, this is my real name, this is who I am, I've got a face, and this is my story, then it crosses a line.
And that line was another line that was crossed in that summer of 2009.
One piece of it, Bill and Kerry, that people like Jake Simpson or Henry Deacon are stopped from talking about Mars, but here we have Andrew Boshago, for example, a practicing attorney who talks for hours and hours about Project Pegasus and what he went through.
I just don't understand why one side can talk and then you have Laura Eisenhower talking about the same subject.
Yeah, but you have to understand that what we deal with are whistleblowers with hands-on experience in sort of this more mainstream paradigm.
In other words, this was a guy who really did work for black projects.
He signed non-disclosure agreements, okay?
Whereas Andy Bishago and Laura Eisenhower are more experiencers coming forward, okay?
They don't have the credentials in the black projects, which make them the kind of real-world threat that the mainstream would take seriously.
Now, that doesn't mean their stories aren't true.
It simply means that if you wanted to back that up with documentation.
Now, Andy is trying to bring documentation forward, but even that is very difficult.
He may be successful, ultimately, but one cannot say.
I can certainly tell you that Henry Deacon is a much bigger threat to the national security state, if you will, the powers that be, because of who he is and where his access, if you will, than either of them.
So it's a level of threat, if you will.
There are two more groups that we upset, but we still haven't got to those yet.
At the Barcelona conference also, There was an interesting encounter with Stephen Greer that has become infamous.
We never planned to interview him.
We hoped to interview him.
We had figured that we would never get the chance, and actually he crashed in on us and said, okay, I want to do an interview right now.
We weren't prepared.
If we could go back in time, I think we would have done it in a different way.
But what happened was a clash that was rather like Ali versus Frazier, because there was no way that Stephen Greer, in the opinion of us both, Could be allowed to say the things that he was saying which are not true on three different counts.
He had stood up the previous day in front of the Barcelona crowd, a thousand people in the auditorium there, to say three things that were not true.
One is that as a fact he was saying that there are no extraterrestrials which are not benevolent.
Secondly, he said that the That all abductions were millabs.
All abductions were basically complicated technological psyops that were orchestrated by the American military.
And thirdly, he said, unbelievably to a lot of people who heard it, that there's no ongoing relationship between the American military and any extraterrestrial race.
I mean, John Alexander could have said all of those things.
And you said, on the Camelot site, what did you say?
Yeah, if you don't mind.
What happened was, the reason Stephen Greer kind of barged in after our interview, we had done a future talk in this little tiny room behind the stage at Barcelona, and we were sort of secluded, and we did a future talk there with Henry Deacon and Bob Dean and Alfred Weber.
Right at the end of it, Stephen Greer walked in with his entourage, sat himself down and said, okay, I'm ready.
Let's do the interview.
At that point, we were sort of taken off guard, but we were willing to play ball.
We did warn him before that interview that it would be contentious because it was obvious.
The day before, he had done exactly as Bill said, and I took issue with that.
I said that this cannot go, because the reason it couldn't go was that people respected him because of the disclosure project.
And so for him to go on stage and suddenly say these untruths, people would tend to be misled.
On the Camelot blog, you said it was insidious.
Absolutely.
And so what happened was, of course, he doesn't read my blog, but someone in his group was a Camelot fan and follower, whatever you want to call that.
And they read my blog.
They saw the post I made.
And they told Stephen.
And so that's why he came in.
And we were basically in a position where a certain contentious battle was going to take place.
At that point, we basically said, okay, fine, we'll go ahead with it.
And I have to say that, unfortunately, starting an interview like that has never happened to us before, and it's never happened since.
But we're going to play ball.
And should something like that happen again, you know...
That's okay.
But what I want to say here is that he handled himself well.
He was sort of his typical demeanor.
And the two of us basically kind of dealt with it as we do in our typical personality styles.
I have to say that I was a lot more combative than normal because I was absolutely...
Outraged.
Well, no, but I was...
I was outraged, so you must...
No, but my point of view was that it was really important that I make clear to him that these sort of untruths could not fly and that we took issue with them and that somebody out there in the community needed to do so and needed to do so in a public way.
And there are a lot of people in the alternative media who share our view and will not say anything about it.
We were the first to call the emperor's new clothes.
It's like, listen, this guy's an opinion leader.
He's somebody who inspired a lot of people in May 2001 with the Washington Press Club Disclosure Conference.
Everyone's been looking for him for leadership ever since, and now he's saying this stuff?
Who's he working for?
You know, I'll leave that as an open question.
Right.
Okay, so, but what you're saying is that we angered whatever group he's working with.
Whatever group he's working with, we pissed them off as well.
Okay, so that's number six.
All right.
Now, and if that wasn't bad...
Why did you say the latter part?
Why did you say that the group was upset?
What happened to you to come to that conclusion?
Well, when we're done with all seven, we'll go and explain what happened to us as a result.
But my one-line answer to that is that if we up Stephen, I mean, what would have happened?
He would have reported that up the line because he does have connections in Washington.
This is known.
He's put this on public record.
He has a retinue taking care of him.
He talks to congressmen.
He talks to people in military intelligence.
He's proud of that.
And so, inasmuch as some of those might have been supporting his stance, this means that if we're an enemy of Steve's, we're an enemy of theirs.
And we became dangerous at the moment when we became like the child in the crowd saying, the emperor's got no clothes.
Okay, and that just put us in another set of crosshairs.
Maybe that's not what actually caused the damage, but it's just like, it's an interesting story to tell because we were amassing enemies.
I mean, you only need one bullet to kill you, but seven will do the job as well, you know.
The last one, finally, is a story that isn't, it's a, it's a, um, an A whistleblower of a different kind who had approached us way earlier in that year, 2009, but we finally secured an interview which was in the form of a transcript we published.
It was an authentic transcript with somebody who had become a whistleblowing enemy of the Church of Scientology back in 1982 and was instrumental In a huge change of paradigm of how the Church of Scientology operated.
This person was a Scientology whistleblower in 1982.
They had become famous in those circles.
No one knew who they were.
They went under a pseudonym, Dane Topps, which is a very unusual name.
And even in the world of Scientology, nobody knew who this person was.
They were a complete enigma.
And in the Conscious Life Expo in February 2009, this person came up to me in Starbucks and started talking to me.
They said something just as a little float to see whether I... And I said, are you trying to tell me that you were Dane Tops?
Because I knew this story.
And this person said, yup.
You are now the third person who knows.
Kerry then became the fourth.
This was a huge story.
And that interview is on our website as well.
So not to go into too deep with that, but the Church of Scientology, Bill is also a member of what's called Ron's Org, which is a free zone Scientology group.
That is an enemy of the Church of Scientology already.
I'll clarify that there, because I've heard some...
Rumors floating around that you are a Scientologist, and you might want to clear the air on this one.
Oh, I can clarify.
Yeah, sure.
I mean, there's no air to clear.
There's a document on the Internet called the Church of Scientology Enemies List.
I'm one of the people on that list, and I'm proud to be on that list.
I've never been in the Church of Scientology, ever.
I've never been a member of the Church of Scientology.
But back in 1982, as a result of what Dane Topps had done, This person created an enormous split that the planet that was the Church of Scientology became fragmented into large and small asteroids all over the place.
We've now got an asteroid belt of Scientologists.
There's still one big body there, which is the Church of Scientology, but I will tell you here, on record, I don't care who hears it, the Church of Scientology is black, it's controlling, it's into mind control, the people go in there and they never come out.
And I do not support what they do in any way, shape, or form, but Ron Hubbard, in my personal opinion, was a genius.
And the work that he's done has played a part in changing the consciousness of humanity ever since he wrote his book in 1950, which is when that all started.
And the techniques which he uses have been adopted by many...
There's alternative therapeutic programs all over the world without even knowing that they come from Scientology.
And there are groups that keep quite a low profile that work therapeutically using Hubbard's original techniques which haven't been altered and abused by the Church of Scientology to be To be manipulative and controlling.
Because like the surgeon's knife, it can be used to kill or cure.
Any techniques that reach deeply inside the human mind, inside the deeply psyche, inside the human psyche, can be used in any way at all, and it depends on the intention.
If the intention is an honorable ethical intention, you can create miracles with this stuff.
Okay, but let's talk about the various, rather than go into Scientology any deeper, let's basically say that you're part of what's called Ron's Org.
It's called Ron's Org.
Can you explain this?
Yeah, sure.
Ron, his name, Ron's, was what?
L. Ron Hubbard was affectionately known as his friends.
Scientology uses a lot of acronyms and abbreviations and an organization, they call it an org.
So somebody, when this started back in 1980, they decided that one of the lifeboat organizations, one of the splinter groups, the largest asteroid in this smashed up planet, It was suggested that it be called Ron's Org, and the name has stuck.
And so this organization works primarily in Europe.
There are quite a few in America, an enormous amount in Russia, where it's taken off like wildfire.
There are tens of thousands of people worldwide, and they're continuing Hubbard's work.
Something that not many people know.
My first whistleblowing endeavor, this is a little scoop for you, Back in 2000, let me get the date right, I can't remember, 2003, I think it was, something like that, I was part of a group that took all of Hubbard's published works, millions and millions of words, hundreds of books, Lectures, all of which were copyright owned by the Church of Scientology.
We digitized the whole thing and made it freely available all over the internet.
That genie is out of the bottle now.
You can find anything about Scientology that you want on the internet, and that's because of the group that I was working with at that time, not under my name.
At that point I didn't have the courage to do anything under my own name.
But I was instrumental in making all of that stuff deeply...
Okay, but we need to say that Ingo Swann is a Scientologist.
So was...
Many, many people in the intelligence field are...
So was Hal Puthoff, so was Pat Price.
Everybody who is involved in the SRI... They were early Scientologists.
They were.
They all had dabbled in it in the early days.
Okay, most people left when the church went black...
Basically.
And that there was a thought that originally maybe it hadn't been.
Whether or not that's the case, I don't think we need to debate that here.
But it's important to know that a lot of people in the intelligence world have started out in some aspect of early Scientology.
They broke away because almost everyone discovered that the church was on the take and so on and so forth at a certain point.
So just to clarify that, the SRI, the Stanford Research Institute remote viewing experiments that were CIA-funded, that were done by Hal Puthoff and Russell Targ in the early 1970s, they were both Scientologists.
Pat Price was a Scientologist, Ingo Swann was a Scientologist.
The remote viewing protocols that are now widely made available by Ed Dames, those were based on Scientology techniques.
Actually, I'm not sure that they were, so I don't want to get into all of that.
I'm talking about the protocols to do with the session.
No, and I don't agree with it.
Okay, so I just want to say there was an overlay, there was an interaction with Scientology that these individuals had, okay?
How much of it went into the remote viewing protocols that were used later?
And there are many different approaches to remote viewing also.
So we can't...
I don't want to get into that detail, but let's move on.
That's correct.
There are many different protocols.
One of the protocols...
It is based upon Scientology counseling techniques.
But the point here is that we angered the Church of Scientology by bringing Dane Topps forward.
And I interviewed this person.
Bill was there as well, but I did most of the interview.
And it's in written form on our website for anyone who's interested.
It's a fascinating interview, and we do recommend it.
But the point is that those were the groups that we were going up against.
And Scientology, the Church of Scientology is well known for going after its enemies, With electronic warfare and so on.
They use a lot of hocus-pocus, both electronic and magical, in the background to take people down.
Black magic.
And the Church of Scientology have destroyed a lot of people.
They destroyed Werner Erhardt, the founder of the S-Training.
They created that whole split.
This is a whole story that we can talk about in another interview.
The Church of Scientology certainly doesn't like me at all.
And I don't know whether they were instrumental in the wedge that finally split the Camelot log, although now it's been...
I mean, we're proud and pleased that we've got over that.
And we're putting it back together again.
But what we're really doing here is just telling the story of the...
Let's put it this way.
The pressure that we were under, the vectors and the forces that were against us, and the fact that as two individuals, individuals in the sense of individuals who are watching this right now, we didn't have...
Electronic countermeasures.
We didn't have billions of dollars to fight this stuff with.
We were just talking to each other over email and Skype and getting into all kinds of battles.
And what happens, of course, the way that they take people down is by injecting conflict into relationship.
It's always worked.
It always will work.
And what they do is they amplify existing weaknesses, and it's easy to do because no human being is perfect.
So if there's a little Difficulty that we had, a little disagreement, a little irritation that we had, and either way, it would be blown up to a Richter scale 10 earthquake, and there would be this huge fight that was way out of all proportion, and then the architects of this...
Exactly, exactly.
Right.
But let's actually come to the present day, because I think we've kind of dealt on that for long enough.
Yeah, absolutely.
If you don't mind.
There's a story that's never been told.
No, absolutely.
This is very important to tell a story.
But I think this is more than he even was reckoning for.
What I want to say, though, is that fast forward, so you know we have at least seven groups, if you want to call them seven groups, some of which may overlap, by the way, that we seem to have been aggravating, that It manifested in certain ways in our personal relationship, our interaction, but also in regard to individuals that they sent in to work with us in different ways, to have relationships with us, and so on, that added to the problems that we had.
In some ways, whether they knew they were being used by those organizations is a whole other matter, and we can't go into that.
But there were definitely individuals that were also sent into our midst that sort of increased our animosity towards one another in regard to mostly the philosophies that we were starting to diverge in relation to.
But what I want to say here is that now you have to come to, more recently, the experience with Charles, this person called Charles, it's not his real name, obviously, who Bill recently, relatively recently, interviewed and put on the net, calling it the rulers of the world.
And that was an added...
Sort of divisive or divider in regard to our relationship that has happened in early fall, I guess.
And that has a whole story behind it.
I don't think we have time for that here, but I do want to say that in spite of that effort, we're here now.
We came to the conference together.
We are...
Moving forward, we've done interviews together, and actually, you know, we're getting along fine, so we've kind of moved beyond this.
But it's important to know that they haven't given up, I guess you might say.
There are a whole bunch of people who are overjoyed to see us together, and this is the reason why we're here, actually, is to talk to people together, to meet old friends together, To do interviews like this together, we needed to make a public statement that we're working together, we're still friends, I'm going to jump into Kerry's car, we're going to go off back, we've got joint projects, I don't know how long I'm going to be in California for, we've got all kinds of things going on in the background.
We will continue to do our own work because we've got some people who prefer my presentational style.
There are some people who prefer Kerry's presentational style.
And Mel, there are people who prefer your presentational style.
And all that is fine and good.
The whole thing is a big smorgasbord.
You know, people can help themselves to all this stuff.
Absolutely.
And one thing which we've said right from the beginning, it's not a competition and it shouldn't be a competition.
There's a way that everybody can win here.
I support Kerry's work.
She's a person of enormous integrity.
Okay, don't start with that.
I support your work.
You're a person of integrity.
But yes, this is...
You don't want me to say nice things about you?
No, I don't want to do that.
This is turning out to be a very, very enlightening conversation between the both of you and I. And I was only going to have one segment, but I'm willing, if we're not evicted or vacated from this room, if you're able to stay for another segment, I would like to make it a full show, because there's a lot happening in the year 2011, and we all know 2012 is coming soon.
A lot of people think that because we interview, the answers lie with others.
But we tend to connect dots and the two of you have probably connected more dots than a lot of people.
And I would be willing to stay for another segment if you have the time so we can explore that after you continue explaining what has happened to you in the past year.
Sounds good to me.
I'd like to do that.
Okay.
We'll let this continue until this day finishes.
Okay.
If I can say this just as a break point here.
If we're going to go on for another hour, I would be delighted to do that, but I'd like to have a sandwich and a cup of coffee.
That only needs to take three minutes because I eat quick.
Let's finish this thing and we can take a break and eat and do whatever.
Yeah, that would be great.
Let's see.
I have...
About seven, eight minutes left if you want to wrap up what you were saying about the seven forces you like.
What did you see as a consequence of those groups?
Well, I could use some of those seven minutes by carrying on saying nice things about Kerry, but you don't want me to say nice things about you.
Please, let's talk about the matter at hand.
I think compliments are very nice, but I think that we can contribute more here.
Okay.
If you get hit by a hail of bullets, you don't actually necessarily need to analyse where they come from.
You just need to know that you got hit and the fact that you've upset somebody.
And in as much as The way that these bullets work, and let me change the metaphor here, they're not bullets that just go through any armour.
They capitalise on existing weaknesses.
They're aimed at chinks in the armour.
They're also wedges that enlarge those chinks in the armour.
And it's very easy to get into a victim state, say, look what they did to us, look what they did to my marriage, look they killed my dog, look they did this, look they did that.
But actually, the responsibility is within ourselves to be strong enough to be able to withstand this kind of stuff.
If we were perfect human beings, they wouldn't be able to touch us.
And therefore, there is always something that we can do.
Every time we have a disagreement, and we will have disagreements, and the reason why we have disagreements is because we care a great deal, and we're passionate.
We're both very strong characters, indeed, and we can both stand like our feet are planted in concrete and not move at all sometimes.
When this kind of things happen.
And then it's a question, just as I was saying right at the beginning of this, that highly successful people have enormous problems.
And if we're faced with an enormous problem, then it's a question of how we handle that.
And that's entirely up to us.
Well, I wouldn't say that we have enormous problems.
I think that would be going over the top.
I mean, I actually think we actually get along very well.
But yes, we will have challenges along the way because we will have witnesses come forward.
And this is where you get to the root of the issue, which is really that because now Camelot and Avalon have a profile and have sort of an image out there, and we are looked to to interview people, to be investigative reporters, to go down the rabbit hole, to reveal the truth to people.
What we come forward with Reflects on each other and reflects on basically Camelot and Avalon and how people perceive the work we do now and the work we've done in the past.
So it becomes a body of work and you as a journalist, Mel, can appreciate this.
And so I think that that's where we get into a thing where we're, in a sense, we're part of something bigger than ourselves, okay?
And it's become a presence on the Internet.
It's become a known factor in people's lives, in changing people's lives.
And so what happens as you go along and you gather all of that, then what happens The next person we bring forward reflects on the whole, and it becomes very, very intense.
And I have to say behind the scenes that people don't maybe realize this, but the Camelot witnesses are people that we have ongoing relationships with normally, even long after the first interview is done.
And it's an interesting thing.
Maybe this doesn't happen all the time.
But they even weigh in with us on the current witnesses.
Maybe that's not known.
And we don't go out and say, well, so-and-so said this about so-and-so because we're not playing that game.
But it's important to know that those people that have been interviewed by us are also concerned.
For example, if we should go off the deep end and start losing our focus and start interviewing people that are telling lies, for example, one right after the other.
Now, it's a given that anyone we've interviewed is bringing their filter into the information they reveal.
And so within that scenario, you have to understand that there will be inaccuracies.
There will be untruths.
But what we are doing is putting a camera in front of people and allowing the viewer to make up their own mind.
We are not saying this is truth anymore.
What we're doing.
Just let me finish.
It's accompanying us on our journey.
This is the original philosophy.
It's like, come with us on our journey of learning.
Come with us while we're talking to this person.
Come with us while we're hearing this for the first time.
By the same token, we also have to make an evaluation.
We're not going to interview somebody who is, like I said, basically giving you a load of bull.
Okay?
What we do is we select a witness based on the amount of truth we believe they can bring to the table.
That's really important.
Okay, so with that in mind, we move forward.
And what has happened as we've done that, as we move forward, some of those individuals have become more contentious because what they bring to the table may be extremely controversial.
So by that token, what we have is we have individuals, we have our audience who are all weighing in with us As well as our differing opinions over what witness was selected, why, what they're bringing to the table, and whether that information is really helping to show what is ultimately our mission, what we call the big picture.
Do they have a piece of the puzzle that hasn't been revealed up to then?
Or if they have one that has been revealed, do they bring new elements to it?
Do they bring a new perspective to it?
Why are we spending our time interviewing them?
And this kind of pressure, if you will, or perspective is what has come around all the people we are now interviewing.
And so with that in mind, We have the most recent event with Charles which became contentious on both our parts.
Now, what I would say about that is we don't want to go into that because there's no time for it here.
But I do want to say that I acknowledge that from my point of view and from the point of view of a group of people out there, We find his information to be questionable, highly questionable.
Who he is is questionable, and so on and so forth.
I just want you to be completely clear about this, that this is your personal opinion.
Yeah, I just said, from my point of view.
Okay, I don't know how else to put that.
No, you said we.
No, I said from my point of view and a group.
Now, there are groups of people, they start to faction out.
30 seconds.
Okay.
So in your case, you know, Bill brings forward a witness.
I've done the same thing with the Heather material, for example, another very controversial piece of information and a couple of witnesses, Ben Murphy and a person who called themselves Heather.
And so what happens is Bill found that to be contentious and a whole group of people found that to be contentious and to be questionable as well.
And that's all fair.
In other words, what happens now is that as we move down this road, getting closer and closer to 2012 and beyond, the witnesses that we brought forward up to now are questioning.
They are bringing forward new material.
I have to stop you because the day will end, and I don't want to leave a cliffhanger, but...
I just left a cliffhanger for the next segment, so we're going to take a little break, and we'll be right back and continue with this exciting conversation with Carrie Cassidy and Bill Ryan from Projects Camelot at Avalon.
We'll be right back.
This is Val Fabregas from The Veritas Show.
▲
Export Selection