Re: Oxley and Phelps schism over Papal Nobility power

From http://z10.invisionfree.com/The_Unhived_Mind_II/index.php?showtopic=31294&view=getnewpost

Re: Oxley and Phelps schism over Papal Nobility power

Dear Eric & Craig

Some thoughts on your recent exchanges:

Since Vivian came forth with his information on what he calls (in various combinations) the Ptolemaic Gray Papal Bloodlines, I have been of the opinion that this is a fruitful line of enquiry & area of research & Craig's forum threads dedicated to this investigation is to be commended.

However, although I do think that there is a certain logic & elegance to this contention, for me the matter, due to the limited evidence that I have been presented with, is not proven. That there are influential members from within at least some of these dynasties that have been named that are of much influence & importance is unarguable. That they - or at least certain heads of these houses - rule over the Jesuit General is arguable & certainly not proven, i.e. it is an "act of faith" to state this as definite. That Pepe Orsini even exists, let alone controls the Jesuit General, can only be taken as a matter of faith based on one source & although I have great respect & appreciation for Vivian being prepared to share his experiences & time with us, I have to leave the matter as an open question & no more than an unproven (to myself at least) possibility. This is why I never changed the information at my internet research resource regarding the specifics of who controls the pinnacle of the Mystery Babylon agenda, which listing is I believe, the most accurate breakdown of relevant particulars available anywhere. This is available at the following URL:

http://realityresearch.wordpress.com/about/

Craig: As your correspondence to Eric has been the far more heated of the two, the following thoughts are directed at yourself in particular:

While I am all too aware that you will be unlikely to appreciate my saying so, I feel that it would be unwise to ignore that the tone of your recent correspondence to Eric on matters concerning the precise nature of the capstone of the pyramid of covert global control has been unnecessarily & unfortunately highly antagonistic - as mine was when I came to the conclusion that the Geneva Bible was the Bible that we should refer to as the true Bible of the Reformation, as a historic truism, regardless of any disposition toward this or the King James Authorised Version whether pro, con or indifferent. I had in retrospect realised the poor manner in which I had presented my realisation to Eric & acknowledged that I had neither done justice to myself nor to Eric in writing on the matter in a manner that was by any interpretation, heated & unlikely to allow welcome opportunity for reasonable discourse on the matter.

As is probably obvious, I too (as Eric as indicated that he may have to as a result of force of a number of circumstances) have stepped back from regular email, forum & blog posting, due to two or three main factors:

The need to do fresh, indepth, independent research, not to be diverted by endless debate, in order to bring truer perspective, depth & accuracy to my understanding & presentations of said research, in order to not become a self-regurgitating propagandist, rhetoricist or polemicist;
The need to get my finances back on track (which have been precarious for many years now - & which you said that you were disappointed to hear that I would need to focus on, a position that I can not comprehend the reasoning behind);
The need maintain some balance of interests in order to provide the energy & inclination with the fuel necessary for long term interest in the covert global power structure & the agenda behind it.

I will take this opportunity to say that I have not been impressed by the ignoring of my correspondence on many occasions both via email & on the forum. I do not require indepth replies to each & every piece of correspondence, but an acknowledgement of issues addressed even if merely commented on with an agreement to disagree would be at least a common courtesy. This has led to a discouragement to participate at the forum - as it can not be reasonably called such under such circumstances as just given. In fact open, genuine discussion & exchange of ideas is so often undermined as to bring into question the very purpose for its existence. You may threaten me with a ban from your forum or even ban me outright, but this of course will prove my point & no justification can do any good to demonstrate anything to the contrary.

Also: I have requested more times than I can remember for my email address to be changed on your various email lists to:

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

As I have stated on a number of occasions:

Please remove my xxxxxxx account from your list as the xxxxxx account as the xxxxxxx doesn't show as being read when I view it via my email client (being xxxx rather than xxxx) or vice versa & as such is a pain to maintain. Emails to the xx a/c are happily received though.

I have had to ask this also of Eric, Vivian & Douglas, on a number of times, but all have eventually helped me out with this basic request.

We can all move forward to being in more efficacious positions of learning & sharing that benefit all or we can fall into ultimately self-defeating positions of petty rivalry & unfortunate antagonisms. Please do both of us a favour & acknowledge my most basic of requests, as I have done for you on each & every occasion over the past two & a half years. This is just a basic level of respect that is needed in order to maintain any kind of mutually beneficial correspondence & sharing of findings of mutual interest. I am happy to meet in the middle, but can not do myself the disservice of paying respects that I do not receive in return. Your studies & findings & your willingness to share them is to be commended & is exemplary, please do not let yourself down in matters of basic civility, as it benefits no-one but your declared enemies.

While I highly value my privacy & take certain measures to place some limits on intrusions into this, I have said to Eric that I am happy to have a conversation with him on his radio show, maybe not every week, but on a semi-regular basis perhaps if I feel that the first of such occasions goes well & is edifying for all. I do not find public speaking to be an area that particularly attracts me, but recognise that it could be a rewarding opportunity to share my findings via different means with people who may not have looked into entirely the same areas as myself & to kick around ideas with Eric, who has graciously shared so much in the way of information, reasoning & articulated thought with me innumerable times in recent years. I encourage you to the same Craig, after you agree to disagree with Eric.

Okay: I have just now read your latest post at the forum, the lengthy one where you refer to my highlighting of the Geneva Bible's suppression by King James' High Commission. While I agree that you bring a reasonable number of valid points worthy of discussion & inquiry to the table & are to be commended for looking into areas that are seldom discussed, I feel that it is incumbent to state that you leave little room for Eric to have open discourse. I do not see that he has deserved such an outpouring of anger, as his use of "English hat" does not seem to me to be calculated to ridicule you & that seems to have triggered your lashing out.

Please let your response to my points to be an opportunity to demonstrate the strength of your integrity.

In summation: Let's all calm down & put these hostilities aside & work toward the increased awareness of all & always be prepared to agree to disagree. When the full truth is revealed to us by the highest of powers, all of us will be humbled by our ignorance.

In truth & awareness -

TS

http://realityresearch.wordpress.com



reality research resource
exposing rome's covert global power structure & the mystery babylon new world order agenda