Burisch Forum: Bill Ryan Q & A on Project Camelot

[ryguy]

Xena wrote:

Quote:

Our sources of information were the video done of Dan by Marci and Bill Hamilton in 2002/3

Bill
Could you clarify exactly which video you viewed? Is it the one in 2002 by Bill Hamilton or the one in 2003 by Ron Garner and William Gazecki. If you are not sure which one, could you inform us of where you sourced this video, as it will help fine tune further questions.

It was the 2002 one - I'd forgotten the exact date. I've not seen the other.

[ryguy]

Additional question/answers posted at OM

Yesterday at 2:37am, sexymon wrote:

1. Mr. X and Dan Burisch make different claims about ufo occupants. Do you and/or how can you support both of them?

I'm sure Mr X is reporting accurately and sincerely what he saw and experienced. That certainly seems to be at odds with Dan Burisch's claims.

My only comment is that Mr X's information was from documents (etc) that he saw or read, rather than direct experience, and that was up until the mid-80s. Dan Burisch's experiences are more recent.

Project Camalot's positon isn't to "support" a story. If we think a person, or new information, deserves to have an opportunity to be considered in depth by a wider community, then that's what we'll do. Inevitably, that will lead to controversy at times. We can't promise that all data will align.

We don't see it as Camelot's job to be judge and jury. We'll put a strong filter in place, as best we can, to eliminate cranks and plants. This is actually our major concern - that the Intel community will plant a highly credible "whistleblower" to contact us which then leads us all up the garden path: but we're prepared for that.

Quote:2. Do you investigate those who give you testimony? How do you meet them, or are you given tips and then sniff them out?

We've been contacted by several people, and have initiated contact with others by various means. We have no idea if video interviews will result. This is often a slow process, as there can be a lot of understandable anxiety about coming forward.

In the case of Mr X, I was contacted privately by him in December. After quite a bit of correspondence, we met in April and the interview was conducted a little while later.

The Dan Burisch opportunity came at much shorter notice. We'd asked an intermediary (Bill Hamilton) if he might be able to help arrange a meeting - not an interview - because we were both highly curious; and, as I've met a number of times, there's no substitute for meeting anyone face to face.

When we got the OK, this was at quite short notice. So we did what 95% of people reading this would have done: we said yes, and drove straight to Las Vegas not knowing what was going to happen next. We didn't even know if we would be granted an interview - all that was confirmed was a meeting. That meeting went very well, we built a good rapport, and we were able to do the interview the following day.

Again, I doubt if many people reading this, given the opportunity, would have done anything different. Given the opportunity to go back in time , we'd not have changed a thing.

Quote:3. What is your top objective(s) at Project Camelot?

Great question. We've not been asked this one.

Our senior objectives are (1) to do what the Disclosure Project has not done, as best as I'm aware. I support the stated goals of the Disclosure Project totally, but Steven Greer, as best I know, is still sitting on both a lot of data (and people)... which have not yet been made public. We want to work with Greer, not against him.

2) The second major goal is to unite apparently disparate factions, both within the UFO community and outside of it. We do not intend to cause any splits; we want to work with everyone. For instance, there are considerable commonalities between the experiences of people trying to obtain UFO freedom of Information, and those trying to release research information about Free Energy and other inventions. Both are opposed by essentially the same controlling power groups.

For instance, I was alerted this morning to Stanley Meyer, who was poisoned because he'd invented a workable auto engine that ran very cheaply on water. What he stands for is very closely aligned with what those pushing for UFO disclosure stand for, and yet many reading this may never have heard of him. We plan to help bridge those gaps if we can.

Quote:4. How is Camelot funded and what are the main focus of those funds?

From our own pocket totally, so far. The main expenses have been equipment and travel.

Quote:5. Would you publish anyone's testimony, no matter how far fetched it sounds?

No. If the person "smelled" suspicious to us, we'd check as carefully as we could before going public. Some people have contacted us in the last 24 hours with offers of help with due diligence, and we appreciate that.

Best, Bill

[ryguy]

Yesterday at 10:51am, JLarryX wrote:

1. Do you have an idea to make interview with Paul McGovern?

We asked him, and he has not yet replied. We've also asked several other "insiders" whose names would be recognized by many of those reading this. We don't necessarily expect to hear from them, but we may be pleasantly surprised.

Quote:2. Maybe can you tell more about three surviving members of the squad of astronauts who prepared to go to Serpo? How old they are? How did you know about them?

Not a Camelot question!

Best, Bill

[ryguy]

Yesterday at 7:42pm, ufonaut wrote:

1. Regarding the 12 (or so) individuals who have contacted Project Camelot to date, how many are UFO related, Free Energy, etc?

Most are UFO related.

Quote:2. Could you provide us with a glimpse of what might be in store over the next few months?

We're intending to feature an in-depth iinterview with an elderly man who worked with Otis Carr, Nikola Tesla's student and protegé, when in his early 20s. In the mid-1950s he was one of three pilots who "flew" a 45 foot diameter craft for several miles, reaching their destination instantaneously.

It was powered with contra-rotating rings of electromagnets and capacitors, with an additional component which involved shining light at various frequencies into a large crystal. The critical factor was the pilots' focused intention as a "conscious" part of the system. Soon after the dramatic test flight, their project was forcibly shut down by government agents.

This guy has a 6" thick scrapbook of diagrams, notes, blueprints and photos. We made contact in March, at which time I encouraged him to do a full written report which I promised to publicize to those in a position to duplicate the research.

Shortly afterwards, he went into hospital for a routine knee operation, "accidentally received the wrong treatment", and nearly died three times. He's just emerged, very frail, from intensive care - but is determined to tell his story. Prior to that he'd enjoyed perfect health for 71 years.

This is exactly what Project Camelot is for.

Best, Bill

[ryguy]

Bill's final post - reposted here again to finish off the thread:

Thanks, everyone, for the welcome and the chance to answer questions.

I may have missed some Qs somewhere alomg the line, but if so, this was not deliberate. It was quite challenging (and interesting) keeping up with it all.

Between this and the other forums, you can probably piece together who we are and what we stand for, and why we did what we did... although we do understand it's driven some of you crazy; please understand that this was never our intention. We do not want to make any enemies, and we ask for your support of Camelot's aims in general.

I support anyone who wants the truth.

This Q+A session has also made us realize we need an FAQs page on the site, so thanks for your part of that prompt, which is helpful.

This'll be my last post. Best to all, Bill

[ryguy]

I'm now locking this thread - it can be used as a reference point for discussion in one of the other threads of this forum. If you have any comments, please place it in one of those other threads.

While I expected, or already knew certain answers within this exchange - I was also surprised by a few. I was disappointed by the shortness in some of the answers to the hard questions, but I was also glad to see some expanded answers to some of the questions I thought were pretty pointed and direct. I was pleased to see Bill's comments that they are willing to accept assistance with due diligence. I personally feel they failed this with Burisch - they should, of course, have interviewed him - but could have asked some very probing and revealing questions had due diligence been performed properly ahead of time. This is only my opinion however, Kerry & Bill may feel that due diligence was, in fact, properly performed in this case.

But I do believe this Q&A has been a learning experience for everyone, including Bill & Kerry, and they will be moving ahead, hopefully, with slightly modified methods where due diligence before every interview takes a priority. Not to turn down interviews - but to ask the hard questions that need to be asked.

We move forward with the hope that Project Camelot accomplishes its goals. Good luck to Bill & Kerry, and thanks to everyone for the thoughtful, provocative, and intelligent questions.

-Ry