The Elephant or to Kick a dead Horse

'Dont talk about the Elders because the Elders could have informants'.

Thanks Tips.

Also consider that Allen Smithee has returned and is also, I believe, once again one of "Kaspar's neonates". And consider that I am, in fact, torn to a certain extent regarding these matters. As Smithee and myself (among others such as the dearly departed and sadly missed Torrens) have long known ever since our earliest nights as base apprentices, the same rights and freedoms we all purportedly enjoy de jure; that is, according to law on paper are not always the same de facto; that is, in actual daily practice.  I do not know if this is common knowledge amongst all of you, but by merely existing Smithee and I and, indeed all Tremere everywhere are well on the way to blood bond with all our elders.  Without divulging the pertinent details, of course, a major component of our Embrace includes taking the blood of the Seven, the founding members of the clan and the highest tier of the Pyramid we all serve.  We begin our unlife with such a bond, with blood peculiar to forming such bonds in the first place.  Now, we all had to do this so it's not like this confers any undue advantage.  I did it, and I presume Smithee and the others including Kaspar had to as well.  That I did it quite willingly and gladly for the power is besides the point and water long under the bridge by this point.

Now having said this, allow me to propose a hypothetical situation:  if you believe Kaspar capable and willing to do what you speculate, if he was somehow able to hold someone like the Prince in such thrall (and I am honestly not privy to the depth and/or breadth of his personal abilities), how much more then might he do to, say, persons much more firmly under his jurisdiction?  What bonds of blood and compulsion might such persons labour under, with only the will to power enabling them to speak out?  I only say this to make it clear to all of you exactly what you may be dealing with, as a courtesy.  We may not be "informants" in the sense that we wish active malice with intent upon any of you, but that's not always an active choice we might be able to make.  That said, we have no problems aiding any of you and/or conducting the business of our kind so long as it does not threaten the salient interests of the Chantry.  Where our superiors are concerned, we do (un?)fortunately have more than one master, with all the possible internal conflict and hand wringing that implies to some degree.  I can say for myself that I do not personally hold any malice or animus towards any of you, and am concerned only with the welfare of the Chantry and the city (in that order).  Thankfully, so far those concerns have happily intersected.  On the day that they do not?  Well, I suppose we'll cross that bridge when we come to it, but you know where I must stand that day.  Hypothetically speaking, of course.

At one point in recent mortal history, there were grave misgivings in many countries about allowing Roman Catholics into high public office, the thought being much the same; that they would be beholden to more than one master and the Pope and the Vatican might have undue influence in temporal affairs.  This was a major strike against John F. Kennedy in some circles, yet there he sat for a time.  I'm sure you can draw similar parallels with us.

(OOC: I may or may not have been burning mad Willpower to even say any of this to you.  Why would I feel like I needed to do that, I wonder.  'Tis cause for speculation, no doubt.  Cue knowingly winking emoji )