|
Post by skyward on Aug 1, 2007 17:29:14 GMT -5
I'm gleaning from the discussion here that IAAP is now offering pretensions of inside knowledge... This is unfortunate. I've seen this before from other posters calling themselves "Sun King" and "Apollo C Vermouth" -- neither of the claims panned out and if anything were proven false; I have to say I'm not expecting anything different this time. So, does this mean that IAAP Inc. has been given the Scarlet Letter and that anyone who finds the series worthwhile is a heretic? Not to single you out, but one might conclude that is a prevailing tone here and, that, I don't quite understand. It seems that anyone who admits to being interested in the series is immediately cast under a suspicious eye by other members of this forum, but maybe I'm just reading too much into it. Why is there also a bit of paranoia as far as who IAAP Inc. really is? I don't see why it matters, it is the content of the message that is important, not the messenger. If there is conclusive truth to be divluged, just how does one envision it would occur? I have no idea. It is possible that there are some out there who DO play the role of an insider or are prone to delusions of grandeur and want to be the Authoritative Beatles Insider with all the info you crave just for the ego kick. Yeah, we should all be skeptical of anyone out there, but I'm not sure I see a reason for the rush to slap the Scarlet Letter on anyone. That truth will likely reveal itself as time goes by.
|
|
|
Post by skyward on Jul 29, 2007 15:07:00 GMT -5
Whenever you hear me say Temple Dors, I am referring to Shirley Temple (#71) and Diana Dors (#70) on Sgt Pepper, who together form the rebus "Temple Doors." The RAOB (#69) is behind the Temple Dors, and Mary Magdalene (Marie Magdalene "Marlene" Dietrich, #67) "has the ear" of the RAOB. The Cup of Christ is the Holy Grail. This is traditionally understood to be the cup used by Jesus for the wine at the last supper. This is the SAN GRAAL, which is Old French for Saint Grail. SAN GRAAL is a wordplay on SANG REAL, which is also Old French, and it means "royal blood." The legend is that Jesus and Mary Magdalene were lovers, and that she was pregnant with his child at the time he was crucified. The womb of Mary Magdalene is the cup, or SAN GRAAL, and the child is the blood of the king, or SANG REAL. The legend continues that the Knights Templar discovered proof of this secret beneath the Jerusalem Temple, and this is how they gained such enormous power and wealth, seemingly overnight. The proof of this secret is protected and preserved by the innermost circles of today's secret societies. This is why the picture of Mary Magdalene having the ear of the RAOB, veiled behind the Temple Doors is such a compelling piece of imagery on Sgt Pepper. And now that I have discovered that the RAOB guy is actually Aleister Crowley it is even more compelling, (to me at least). The pointy ear is perfect, the bald head, the eye... RAOB, is that what is written on his hat? Order of Buffaloes? They use the term brother there; the word brother might mean something other than a sibling. Has anyone ever tried using a mirror on Sgt Pepper along lines that are not parallel to the horizontal or vertical? For example, maybe the goddess figurine is pointing out lines where a mirror might be used? I noticed there are many mirror images that use a vertical or horizontal alignment.
|
|
|
Post by skyward on Jul 27, 2007 10:25:00 GMT -5
Well, the Beatles logo was designed before McCartney died, so it can't have anything to do with that. To be honest, I think theories that involve McCartney and supernatural phenomena are just plain crazy. Why not concentrate on the reasonable aspects? Isn't there anything to analyse anymore? McCartney and supernatural phenomena. Yeah, that includes more examples of 'out-there' theories that are difficult to substantiate and the important thing to remember is just that, those theories can be 'wild and wacky'. Having said that, McCartney, apparently, was into the writings of Crowley, who purportedly transcribed a book 'Liber Al' by contacting a praeternatual being named AIWASS who Crowley described as speaking the words to the book as if speaking over his shoulder. And Denny Laine has said, detailed in a controversial book 'Blackbird' that the McCartney's were very much into Crowley during the mid70s. What is the saying, truth is stranger than fiction? I guess that seems to apply in this case.
|
|
|
Post by skyward on Jul 26, 2007 22:56:22 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by skyward on Jul 25, 2007 19:55:50 GMT -5
stop trolling Jude, it seems like IAAP 's crap is all over the place now, are you him? IAAP uses several different accounts at youtube, and tries the same over here at NIR, enough to blow all of his credibility. And also making me question who you are. It reminds me of all those fake Bin Laden tapes that regularly show up on the media to keep us distracted from what is really going on. Get a Grip All Love Jan In what way does having multiple handles at YouTube blow IAAP's credibility, I don't see it. This Rotten Apple series has really stirred up a lot of tumult and that is something I don't understand. We have video montages, we watch montages and we explore and deduce montages. What does it matter from whom they have been provided, or how is that more relevant than the material in the clips? If you hate the clips, point out the reasons so we all might understand.
|
|
|
Post by skyward on Jul 25, 2007 18:43:12 GMT -5
Well, it's not only the Sgt. Pepper drum, so far we have: Sgt. Pepper: HE DIE MMT: LOOK LOVE: CODE PM BITUS: BILL any more i'll say it's SO obvious: HE DIEd.. just LOOK for the CODE, and the replacement's name is BILL what next? Yeah, that's what I meant. And besides, when we say that "The Beatles" were involved in placing this here and that there, we don't know who, precisely, was responsible for the inclusion. Look at the MMT comic strip/artwork, did any of the Beatles have influence in anything in there, or was it a product of 'The Beatles Machine' meaning everyone responsible in the production of Beatles material. I'm sure there is an answer to the question, but I highly doubt that anyone 'out of the loop' knows the answers. And the answer might be coincidence in some cases, we just don't know the concrete answers, but they are there, regardless. There are answers to every single question we can ask.
|
|
|
Post by skyward on Jul 25, 2007 18:07:24 GMT -5
Ok, I for one have known about the Beatles being into Crowley for a long time (pre-Rotten Apple). I never said anything bad about people wanting to explore this avenue, and I never said that there was no relevance to the Crowley connection. But to completely skip over tons of possibilities and jump straight into Crowley being Paul/Faul's father is just idiotic. Second of all, I never even said "Don Knotts" at all. Never compared anything to Don Knotts, and I don't believe in the Don Knotts theory. Not sure where you got that, but oh well. Ok, why does Faul use the term King of Cosmania? Someone found that Son of Magickian is an anagram of KoC. Yeah it is nebulous, but there it is... And perhaps it is only FIGURATIVE. That is certainly plausible, a figurative connection between Faul and Crowley. Beatlies went on about the LITERAL parentage between JPM and Crowley, and I'm not sure I see anything of relevance there. I brought up Don Knotts to put forth two 'out there' theories and compare how one might be more plausible than the other, not to say that either are probable.
|
|
|
Post by skyward on Jul 25, 2007 17:55:51 GMT -5
You can spend forever exploring ridiculous/baseless possibilities or... It's called Occam's Razor, use it. Crowley is relevant to the Beatles. The Beatles, apparently, used mirror images on the Sgt Pepper cover, and they used reversals in their movies/videos and songs. I don't know how deeply they may have been involved in the writings of Crowley, but I do think it is fair to say that *at least* one of them was a FIGURATIVE 'Son of Magickian', i.e. they were influenced by his work and they adopted some of his stylings. Is it a further stretch to conclude that Faul is the LITERAL son of Crowley? Sure it is, but to compare it to the Don Knotts theory in terms of relative absurdity, I would more likely believe that Faul is a son of Crowley over Knotts replacing Epstein. If someone wanted to delve into the possibility of Son of Magickian being relevant, go ahead, I don't plan to do it myself, as I'm not sure it's possible, but I don't see a reason to come down hard on anyone for testing the waters no matter where it might lead, as long as there is a shred of relevance, and here, in this case, I think there is.
|
|
|
Post by skyward on Jul 25, 2007 16:50:25 GMT -5
Yeah I ridiculed the Son of Magician thing because before I knew it many of you were ready to call Crowley as being Faul/Paul's father... You came to this conclusion... based on an anagram, found in a user video on youtube... Several jumps in logic there. I never came to the conclusion that Crowley was the father of anyone, I considered the intent of the message in the clip and came to the conclusion that there was some type of relveance there; figurative or literal. Watch RA #28 and deduce what is being conveyed and determine if there is sense to it. That is the process. Beatlies took the proposal and ran with it, no one else. And again, what is wrong with EXPLORING POSSIBILITES in order to try to understand and make a conclusion? There is a thread of relevance there, so let's see if there is anything to it... Afterall, that is what we are all doing here, no matter what topic we're discussing.
|
|
|
Post by skyward on Jul 25, 2007 16:40:52 GMT -5
Jude in reply to #697. IAAP reminds me of the current US administration, tainting sourcematerial with manipulative bullshit. His tendency of having several accounts reminds me of the myriad of CIA frontcompanies. Jarvi reminds me of the great artists, laying out the truth for those with eyes to see two words HOLOGRAPHIC UNIVERSE All Love Jan Isn't it a case of you and others seeing the glass half-empty and others seeing the glass half-full? I surmise that the main thrust of the criticism is that IAAP Inc. is scattered at YouTube and the video montages are not what we might call 'straight-forward' and to the point. That is IAAP's method and I think it is worthwhile to scrutinize the clips, and like Jude has mentioned, all the clips... Otherwise, one might come across as sweeping away the entire series because it isn't presented as one might like. You're dismissing everything en masse and I don't think that is a fair response when there are significant items being presented in the material. Are some things erroneous? Probably so, but that doesn't mean we should disregard everything, IMO. For example, this Son of Magickian angle has been ridiculed, but it is an anagram of King of Cosmania, and there are links to Crowley there. This isnt something that is totally irrelevant to the Bealtes history. Look at Crowley's writings on the 'importance' of reversals. I mentioned before, we should probably go through each RA clip and discuss the relevance of meaning of each, otherwise our brainstorming might get too confusing. This thread needs to be divided into smaller pieces.
|
|
|
Post by skyward on Jul 25, 2007 11:09:29 GMT -5
Wouldnt it sound like Yentrac Cm Laup? No, just listen to the end of McCartney. NEE, backwards is EEN or Ian; not YEN. Don't be distracted by the letters, you need to know the sounds the letters make. Afterall, it is the SOUND of the letters that is reversed, not the letters themselves. Tafultong, you're welcome. ;D
|
|
|
Post by skyward on Jul 25, 2007 10:54:03 GMT -5
Having a lot to catch up on being a relative n00b, could someone please explain how Ian Iachimoe is PaulMcCartney backways!! Thanx in advance. When you speak the name Paul McCartney and play it backwards, it sounds like Ian Iachimoe.
|
|
|
Post by skyward on Jul 25, 2007 10:49:23 GMT -5
Now, what if he does know something? Then there are three possibilities. Either The Powers want the secret revealed, or they do not want it revealed, or they do not care. By concluding there are 3 possibilities, you are assuming here that 'Powers' is singular, are you certain that is the case? Well, if all IAAP Inc's clips were removed, now, it would tend to confirm that IAAP Inc. was legit. Assuming PWR or PID, it certainly seems that Faul wants people to know, too, doesn't it? Or he wants people to keep guessing.
|
|
|
Post by skyward on Jul 25, 2007 10:23:31 GMT -5
or- Rotten Apple #28 That is IAAP Inc.'s reference to Crowley and 'Son of Magickian' is an anagram/lexigram? for 'King of Cosmania', which is found on the liner notes to Memory Almost Full. (Anagram - "For My Soulmate LLM" Linda Louise (Lovely Linda) McCartney) And Crowley performed a ritual inside the King's Chamber in the Great Pyramid in, around 1904, where he contacted AIWASS, a demon/djinn/spirit/alien/etc. Does someone want to go ahead and create new threads that will help keep the discussion more focused or should we just stick here? And I encouraged someone to post a note to claudia at YouTube, so don't blame CoconutFudge. Though, perhaps, as CF said, a personal message would've been better.
|
|
|
Post by skyward on Jul 24, 2007 21:01:22 GMT -5
Well then why would IAAP not read them himself? We know he isn't an old british guy.... Why go through the trouble of tracking down some guy that people are going to hear and say "Oh that sounds like so-and-so!" It's either legit, or he's trying to trick us. Yes I know, I'm the captain of the USS Obvious... But still! Well, IAAPhoney Inc. might have his/her/their reasons why, I guess patience is a virtue and all that as to who is talking and if it is relevant or just for effect. And that Red-cowled shape that seems to be wearing the moustache, it looks like a Red Wizard of Thay, Edwin from Baldur's Gate CRPG
|
|
|
Post by skyward on Jul 24, 2007 20:47:19 GMT -5
I was thinking... The old guy in RA #42 says that his breaking rank will come as a shock, but I really don't see how that could happen since we don't even know who it is that is speaking... IAAP must know that if he really wants people to believe him, he will tell us the name of the speaker. Could it be possible that the words were found in a letter or discovered or decoded-and-written and that someone else vocalized the message? Also, I like the Speak and Spell quality (or War Games with Matthew Broderick 'Would you like to play a game?' or S.Hawking) of the narration in 43, but it is a bit tricky to understand at one point... It gives the effect that someone doesn't want to be recognized, but it might just be for effect. And, when you look closely at the CODE, when you see the moustache (upside-down Longhorn) , it appears that there is a Red Cowled shadowy figure behind or wearing the moustache.
|
|
|
Post by skyward on Jul 24, 2007 20:15:43 GMT -5
Looks like #43 needs to be reversed there at the end of the clip.
|
|
|
Post by skyward on Jul 24, 2007 20:06:27 GMT -5
Getting slightly OT but still close to the IAAP vids, but in a broader context, and more credible IMO. 2 vid series connecting the dots between a lot of politics, art, mysticism. A must see. I’d like to share with you 2 very interesting youtube series about Synchromysticism, mindblowing stuff connecting lots of dots. “Exploring metaphysics, the occult and conspiracy theory using synchromysticism. Synchromysticism: The art of finding meaningful coincidence in the seemingly mundane with mystical or esoteric significance.” -Jake Kotze First Jake’s videos www.youtube.com/user/SeallionThen a series of videos by Steve Willner, who is friends with, and thinks very similar to Jake www.youtube.com/user/soundlessdawnAll Love Jan Metatron and the Transformers. soundlessdawn's clips are also fascinating to watch as are Seallion's. You know, I think one of the biggest problems, and maybe the reason for the backlash is that this thread has become a hodge-podge of various tangents. You should start a new topic for those other YouTube montages. The 'Son of the Magician' was a video by someone else, not named IAAP... Maybe IAAP borrowed the clip. And Faul was the one theorized to be the son of Crowley, not Paul. Beatlies went on with the Paul is Crowley's son. I think this thread needs to be split into more distinct threads. I don't know if you need one thread for each RA clip, but maybe go in chunks of 5? e.g. 1-5, 6-10, 11-15... Who is Terry Knight?
|
|
|
Post by skyward on Jul 24, 2007 13:20:49 GMT -5
But that's what we do here in the Paul is Dead community! We scrutinize things. Sometimes things go too far and we start talking about all of the Beatles being replaced post-1966, but I don't see that happening here! The fact is iamaphoney's videos have become very cryptic........ hence the need to decode. IAmAPhoney has packaged a lot of information into the well produced series of RA video/audio clips. It is really no different than taking words and images from message forum posts and packaging them into a neatly produced film clip. IAAPhoney has just become more sophisticated. Everyone is here because, without a doubt, the Beatles gave the impression that someone had died even if they were only being figurative and not literal. Where anyone takes it from there is fair game, really, and whatever theory is proposed should be open for scrutiny and criticism or even fascination. Do I know where some of the audio originates? No, e.g., I didn't have a clue to the 'He is the young Maximus him (hymn)' line came from, but someone did post the source, right? The LOVE album itself was purported to contain a Code by George Martin himself, and they also used their whole enitre catalog of sound clips when mixing the 5.1 surround sound album. The LOVE Album and potential new sound clips should be the topic of a new thread. I am all for IAAP's clips, and heck, anyone else wants to talk about Don Knotts replacing Brian, go ahead, I'll be happy to point out the reasons I think that theory is preposterous.
|
|
|
Post by skyward on Jul 24, 2007 12:29:43 GMT -5
In case you didn't notice, the thread is named after The Rotten Apple. Why should we care about The Rotten Apple? Because iamaphoney is doing way more to convince new people that Paul is dead than any of us here are doing. He and his team are on to something, or at the very least believe they are, otherwise they would have quit a long time ago. I think the RA series is fascinating. Is it all 100% verifiably TRUE? At this point, of course, you can't say it is 100% legit. That is a point of the discussion. I don't think anyone is selling their house to drink the Kool Aid. The series has been chock full of those 'Wow, I didn't notice that before' moments. Lots of symbolism, like the Thrillington album that I have never seen before. If anyone has more specific gripes, then air them out like we're all doing with what we see. We're all just trying to make sense of the smorgasbord of images and sounds.
|
|
|
Post by skyward on Jul 22, 2007 17:47:31 GMT -5
skyward wrote: I was under the assumption that Faul was theorized to be Son of the Magickian? Not Paul?"That has put the gears in my mind into motion. Thank you for posting it. I don't think you're right, but it has made me consider that possibility. Also I have to admit a mistake. Jarvitronics is right. Lexigrams and anagrams aren't synonymous. What I posted were lexigrams. What he posted in Reply 494 were anagrams. With "proper" anagrams, there is a letter to letter relationship. Therefore, with the phrases we're supposed to be looking at: (where did they go?) we should be finding a one to one letter correspondence if we're looking for an anagram. If we want to see what other information is being transmitted, use the lexigrams. (PM me if you're confused.) We know more than we think we do about all this. I'll have more to say in a subsequent post. I mean to say that the clip at YouTube 'theorized' or hinted that Faul might be the Son of the Magician. I'm not sure what to think of the possibilities... Here is a bit o' lyrics from a song in 'Bedknobs and Broomsticks' and it seems to speak to a lot of the head scratching that is going on in these parts: "When you rush around in hopeless circles, searching everywhere for something true, you’re at the age of not believing, when all the make-believe is through.
When you’ve set aside your childhood heroes and your dreams are lost upon a shelf, you’re at the age of not believing and, worst of all, you doubt yourself.
You’re a castaway where no one hears you on a barren isle in a lonely sea. Where did all the happy endings go? Where can all the good times be?
You must face the age of not believing, doubting everything you ever knew, until at last you start believing there’s something wonderful in you.
You’re at the age of not believing and, worst of all, you doubt yourself. -repeat 3rd and 4th verse." And the key magic spell in the movie was ' Substitutiary Locomotion' - Animating everyday objects, like brooms or suits of armor. The Knights' armor drove off the German invaders... ' Substitutiary Locomotion' might be a way one would explain Faul and the Beatles.
|
|
|
Post by skyward on Jul 22, 2007 10:16:15 GMT -5
4000, you've lost me. It's apparent from all the family photos that I have of Paul as a child, that Mary Mohin McCartney gave birth to Paul & is his mother ! I was under the assumption that Faul was theorized to be Son of the Magickian? Not Paul?
|
|
|
Post by skyward on Jul 21, 2007 22:23:26 GMT -5
Angela Lansbury? She was in Disney's 'Bedknobs and Broomsticks' and they acquired the 'Star of Asta(e)roth' in order to defeat the German invasion. A bit of magic there, too. Have no idea about his, Crowley's, offspring, apparently he did get around in that way, so who knows how many children he had? But then, will it be that everyone is under scrutiny? Even Don Knotts? ;D Not?
I find the Rotten Apple series a fascinating montage of 'clues' or symbols. Maybe it can be seen as overload, but I don't have a problem with the clips. They have been 'informational'.
|
|
|
Post by skyward on Jul 20, 2007 21:36:42 GMT -5
So, it seems like someone sent a song for Ringo to use on his album and he declined, then he took the music and added his own lyrics to the song?!? It appears from the text in the clip, that Seth can't sue a Beatle and expect to remain in the biz?
|
|
|
Post by skyward on Jul 20, 2007 18:25:38 GMT -5
3. 00:24 - Image of space vehicle from movie 2001 with B III imposed over it at 24 seconds. The three bars show up in Pink Floyd "High Hopes" video on balloons. Doesn't the B III look like a mirror image of P (photo of a man)UL? Or something like that?
|
|