|
Post by 65if2007 on Jul 5, 2011 23:37:03 GMT -5
Maybe. And that song was the one that Iamaphoney reversed for the purpose of creating "Harmless Game". reversed for the purpose of creating "Harmless Game"g ame:
pertaining to or composed of animals hunted or taken as game or to their flesh.phoney's in touch with the ground, on the hunt and after you! backwards! ha ha As is almost always the case in this board, that's way deeper than it needs to be. The overall phoney message might be more like this: 1) "Here's a briefcase filled with who-knows-what. *Come and Get It.*" 2) "Ha ha. There was nothing valuable in that thing, was there? It wasn't worth the trouble, was it?" "But I didn't ask you to go anywhere that I hadn't already gone myself beforehand, and you were never in any serious danger, as long as you used your head and watched your step. You had your little adventure and got to write home about it. So it was all a *Harmless Game*."
|
|
|
Post by 65if2007 on Jul 5, 2011 1:28:21 GMT -5
I said at the time, drop in New England somewhere, heck even make it hard to find, I'd enjoy a good puzzler. Any other NIR New Englanders could join me, would be fun.. Maybe that was the only message the vinyl album was supposed to convey, who knows. Maybe. And that song was the one that Iamaphoney reversed for the purpose of creating "Harmless Game".
|
|
|
Post by 65if2007 on Jul 4, 2011 17:58:25 GMT -5
Maybe it was at someone else's bidding. I live in Central California. I visit my parents maybe once a month or so in Los Angeles. Santa Susanna Park is in Los Angeles County and readily locateable on a map. Rotten Apple 101 was clearly an invitation to "come and get it" -- come to think of it, a McCartney song from "Magic Christian". Iamaphoney has a pretty sizable YouTube following, and Southern/Central California is populated enough that I thought for sure that there must be Iamaphoney subscribers in the area and that one of them would retrieve that thing long before my next visit to my parents. Really, I was amazed that no one had picked it up over the interval of several weeks, but by the time that my regularly scheduled trip came about, I guess that I figured that if it could be done in relative safety, it would "have" to be me.
|
|
|
Post by 65if2007 on Jul 4, 2011 15:05:59 GMT -5
Hi 65, a buck.5 is very reasonable. Ya know how it is - a bunch of stuff in the old basement and out of the few things chucked, one of them could be on the Roadshow - with some high estimates. Well, I liked the adventure and play by play obtaining the stuff. I suppose there's the value in a keepsake way - remembering the moments. I don't know if you like to hold on to certain things for those reasons. I've tuned into the IAAF stuff here and there - back when it was on the new side. If memory serves, I made a little forecast here that we wouldn't be gaining a wealth of info with the series anytime soon. But, I don't know - has anyone really following learned anything substantial? There could be an inside track involved (and I'll reserve why I say that for now) but it could be just an art 'piece' as some have speculated. So, my big question 65 is, if there was another adventure put out there (reasonable distance) - would you do it again? (road trip - wind in the hair - gps at full throttle!!) Good question, Ramone. I guess that my grouchiness stems from the fact that my common sense won out in the sense that there really was nothing of significance in what I found. It also stems from the fact that iamaphoney didn't fullfill his commitment -- made through MikeNL -- to submit to an interview if the suitcase was retrieved. It also stems from the fact that some people here -- still harboring hopes that what I had found contained secret information -- made additional demands on me after the fact -- to bombard all that stuff with nuclear photon radiation; to dust it for fingerprints; to test it for DNA; to go to the trouble of playing a phonograph record that had been in public circulation for 40 years, etc. etc. I mean; COME ON people. And also, it's a little annoying -- though amusing, as well -- that some people still think that I'm part of the iamaphoney corporation, as a result of all this. All of that having been said, you're right; I did have fun -- though again I was worried about running into snakes in the underbrush -- and I would probably do it again. It's about as much adventure as I have had in an otherwise uneventful life. But I wouldn't do it again at iamaphoney's bidding. Maybe I would do it at someone else's. Hope you and everyone else are having a happy 4th of July.
|
|
|
Post by 65if2007 on Jul 3, 2011 13:50:59 GMT -5
But, he is in possession of some COOL IAAF stuff! Ha ha ha. Ramone, my common sense tells me that I should offer to sell it to you for maybe a buck and a half plus shipping. But 1) that probably runs afoul of the rules of this discussion group and 2) the fact that I don't really have any common sense causes the back of my mind to harbor some irrational feeling that maybe this ***t really might prove to be historically valuable after all some day. But that's utterly stupid on my part. Iamaphoney put a lot of junk that he'd scribbled on in an old beat-up briefcase that he probably picked up at a garage sale and made a video in which he dropped the whole thing in a canyon area where it might have been picked up by a vagrant or washed away by the elements. That's how "cool" and how valuable it REALLY is.
|
|
|
Post by 65if2007 on Jul 3, 2011 2:11:27 GMT -5
Hey 65... I'm new to the board. Can I get a clarification- are u Iamaphoney or are u connected to him? Ha ha. I answered this at great length in the "Drive My Car" thread. But the short answer is, "No."
|
|
|
Post by 65if2007 on Jul 3, 2011 2:08:15 GMT -5
To Letter B: No, I definitely am not. To aperiloushint: I just asked you a question. I didn't expect a response in the form of a demand that I proclaim any secrets that I supposedly possess. Now, I'm happy to communicate further with you in this public forum or in private, if you want, but I have no "notes" to compare with yours. I am not at all iamaphoney, and I have no idea about what -- if anything -- happened to Paul McCartney and the Beatles in 1966. You're not the first person to suggest that I was iamaphoney -- I assume that this is because of that briefcase thing. I can't imagine why else anyone would think that I was iamaphoney or that I have anything to do with iamaphoney. But that briefcase thing just brought me to a level of a very very very small player in the whole iamaphoney saga -- kind of a pimple on the butt of the iamaphoney elephant. I still have the stupid briefcase and all of the stupid items that I found in it, except for one item which I sent to jojo. However, I don't know what these items "mean", and suspect that they don't "mean" anything. I know nothing at all about iamaphoney, and, in fact, while all of this was going on, I was kind of/sort of betrayed by iamaphoney -- not in a way that leaves me with any real lingering anger, but still... In fact, it should be clear to anyone who reads what I have written in here that I'm not at all like iamaphoney. My queries are pretty direct: who, what, where, when and why. I don't have much interest in the trippy thematical stuff that most people get off on in NIR that doesn't even really seem to have any sort of direct connection with the issue at hand. I do enjoy the iamaphoney videos and -- in spite of the betrayal that I referred to just now -- I still regard myself as a fan of both the editing and the music -- a lot of the music anyway -- that's in those videos. There's something in that angelic-sounding choir -- those AAAAAAAAAAA's -- that speaks to something in my soul. But that's all I am -- just a fan. I regard iamaphoney's videos as primarily entertainment. Time will tell whether there's anything more to be made of them. So again, aperilous hint, I am happy to communicate with you in whatever forum -- within reason -- that you want, but I'm not who you seem to think I am, and I have no notes to compare with you and no revelations that I'm hiding from the world.
|
|
|
Post by 65if2007 on Jul 3, 2011 1:48:11 GMT -5
Hmm that's weird. I thought maybe someone here would know. I hope he's alright. Tafultong has said before that family issues have become more of a pressing concern for him and that he didn't expect to contribute as often.
|
|
|
Post by 65if2007 on Jun 30, 2011 2:31:56 GMT -5
While there are more 'maybe, maybe not' lyrics and interpreted clues out there, I prefer obvious references and smoking guns. I don't believe in synchromysticism. I believe in occult adepts and intentional conspiracies. Seeing Paul as a returning Christ figure? That's rich. Seeing Paul as Crowley's replacement as the head of Thelema? That I can buy. It's why he sought out Crowley adept Youth from 'The Killing Joke' to work with. Stick with the 'magick/Crowley/Masonic/Thelema' angle and we'll get somewhere. The rest are red herrings. By the way- anagrams are fun What do you think then, aperiloushint? I'm curious. That Paul was never replaced? That it's always been the same individual with Crowleyesque notions? And the famous car-crash clues -- Crowlesque metaphors, rather than hints at an actual event which killed the "original" Paul?
|
|
|
Post by 65if2007 on Jun 30, 2011 0:15:04 GMT -5
Oh cmon' it's fun to get together and sing a tune.. But anyway, it's not so hard to understand, he was in a top earning bracket, and the tax cuts that Reagan was promising would seem attractive to someone who may have started to think about his "earth plane" issues. Of course tax cuts without corresponding spending cuts, well... Ask David Stockman about that. It's fun to get together and sing a tune, but "Imagine" is a holier-than-thou song. That is to say, the people singing it -- especially those who sing it in unison -- "imagine" that they are morally superior to those who don't really want to "imagine" the sort of world portrayed by that song. I have no idea how American taxation codes apply to foreign nationals living in the country and earning their income here. Presumably, the codes apply more or less the same, but if Lennon really did become more politically conservative, I doubt very much that it was because he studied his finances like a bookkeeper and concluded that a Republican administration would be better for his bottom line. Reagan actually garnered the votes of a number of ex-radicals: David Horowitz and Eldridge Cleaver and Eugene McCarthy, to name a few off the top of my head. There was a lot of disillusionment with the Carter administration, so in that light, it's probably not that surprising that Lennon would become a part of it. But I don't even necessarily take this story at face value -- though again, the idea that John Lennon might have become a Reaganaut at the end would be a huge joke on the "Imagine" crowd. But it's quite possible Lennon experimented with political conservatism in much the same inquisitive manner that he would experiment with a new drug or a new book or a new anything. He might have assumed the same interest in Ronald Reagan that he once had in Alistair Crowley or Lewis Carroll.
|
|
|
Post by 65if2007 on Jun 29, 2011 14:38:57 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by 65if2007 on Jun 16, 2011 8:49:25 GMT -5
This is the sort of discussion that causes people to refuse to take PID seriously in the first place. In fact, you are citing from an article that is meant to provide counter-examples for the purpose of ridiculing the whole idea.
|
|
|
Post by 65if2007 on Jun 10, 2011 13:18:02 GMT -5
I Wanna Be a Flintstone - Screaming Blue Messiahs I wander around in the twilight zoneThe middle ground between life and death A little baby Flintstone all on my ownSuggestive of death and rebirth I wander around in the twilight zone A little baby Flintstone all on my own Betty and Barney are the folks next doorThis might refer to Betty and Barney Hill, who were supposedly abducted by a UFO. Is there an alien abduction component to PID?I'm crawling around all over the floorCrawling around all over the floor? Possibly the victim of an automobile accident crawling around all over the floorboard?(Yabba dabba doo time Yabba dabba doo time)Perhaps, Paul -- or perhaps those responsible for his death -- are engaging in a Masonic ritual at this point. I wander around in the twilight zone A little baby Flintstone on my own I wander around in the twilight zone A little baby Flintstone on my own I live in a house with a bedrock doorIs this a reference to the original Paul lying in a coffin? Or to replacement Faul "stonewalling" all inquiries into his origins? I crawl around all over the floor (Yabba dabba doo time Yabba dabba doo time) I wander around in the twilight zone A little baby Flintstone all on my own I wander around in the twilight zone Baby Flintstone all on my own Dino is my dinosaurObviously a reference to Dino Danelli. The reference to "dinosaur" is a little obscure -- but the "dino" theme is repeated. Two Dino's? Two Paul's? Did they take turns impersonating each other? His tail's in the kitchen And his head's out the doorThis could only refer to Dino's height and the size of his head -- another reminder -- as if another one was needed -- that JPM was shorter and had a smaller head than those who replaced him. (Yabba dabba doo time Yabba dabba doo time) Dino Dino (Yabba dabba doo time) Have you seen Wilma (Yabba dabba doo time) (Little baby Flintstone) What did you say Wilma (I wanna be a Flintstone) Wilma (Yabba dabba doo time) Wilma (Little baby Flintstone) Wilma (Yabba dabba doo time Yabba dabba doo time) (Yabba dabba doo time) Wilma Wilma (Yabba dabba doo time Yabba dabba doo time) (Yabba dabba doo time) Hold it hold it hold it hold it Hold it hold it hold it Oh boy Chaos is ensuing. Discordia is running rampant. The Illuminatus Overlords are actually expressing despair over their inabillity to "hold" matterslol Pebbles and Dino had seven sons. You mean, Pebbles and Bam Bam? How do you know?
|
|
|
Post by 65if2007 on Jun 10, 2011 0:40:42 GMT -5
I Wanna Be a Flintstone - Screaming Blue Messiahs
I wander around in the twilight zone The middle ground between life and death A little baby Flintstone all on my own Suggestive of death and rebirth
I wander around in the twilight zone A little baby Flintstone all on my own Betty and Barney are the folks next door This might refer to Betty and Barney Hill, who were supposedly abducted by a UFO. Is there an alien abduction component to PID? I'm crawling around all over the floor Crawling around all over the floor? Possibly the victim of an automobile accident crawling around all over the floorboard? (Yabba dabba doo time Yabba dabba doo time) Perhaps, Paul -- or perhaps those responsible for his death -- are engaging in a Masonic ritual at this point. I wander around in the twilight zone A little baby Flintstone on my own I wander around in the twilight zone A little baby Flintstone on my own I live in a house with a bedrock door Is this a reference to the original Paul lying in a coffin? Or to replacement Faul "stonewalling" all inquiries into his origins? I crawl around all over the floor (Yabba dabba doo time Yabba dabba doo time) I wander around in the twilight zone A little baby Flintstone all on my own I wander around in the twilight zone Baby Flintstone all on my own Dino is my dinosaur Obviously a reference to Dino Danelli. The reference to "dinosaur" is a little obscure -- but the "dino" theme is repeated. Two Dino's? Two Paul's? Did they take turns impersonating each other? His tail's in the kitchen And his head's out the door This could only refer to Dino's height and the size of his head -- another reminder -- as if another one was needed -- that JPM was shorter and had a smaller head than those who replaced him. (Yabba dabba doo time Yabba dabba doo time) Dino Dino (Yabba dabba doo time) Have you seen Wilma (Yabba dabba doo time) (Little baby Flintstone) What did you say Wilma (I wanna be a Flintstone) Wilma (Yabba dabba doo time) Wilma (Little baby Flintstone) Wilma (Yabba dabba doo time Yabba dabba doo time) (Yabba dabba doo time) Wilma Wilma (Yabba dabba doo time Yabba dabba doo time) (Yabba dabba doo time) Hold it hold it hold it hold it Hold it hold it hold it Oh boy
Chaos is ensuing. Discordia is running rampant. The Illuminatus Overlords are actually expressing despair over their inabillity to "hold" matters
|
|
|
Post by 65if2007 on Jun 5, 2011 2:21:55 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by 65if2007 on Jun 1, 2011 19:02:58 GMT -5
Ernest Schultze is a piece of shit writer. Don't believe a single word that comes out of his mouth. His book is a work of fiction. That's kind of "poisoning the well", maccafan. As far as I know, Ernest Schultze has written nothing other than this particular book, so there isn't really enough material on which to judge him as a writer -- and the one book in question that he did write reads pretty well, I think, as a work of fiction, if nothing else. Why should one not believe a single word that comes from his mouth? Do you have reason to believe that he's a convicted felon? A con artist? In any event, you led off your end of the conversation by saying that people who claimed to remember hearing of an incomplete news report -- that was never followed up upon -- of a Beatle in a car accident are imagining or misremembering the event. As far as I know, Ernest Schultze has never had anything to do with this forum, and I simply wanted to point out that here was someone else who felt that he had an independent recollection of a similar news report.
|
|
|
Post by 65if2007 on Jun 1, 2011 18:51:22 GMT -5
What if he took the sandals off to be er...noticed? Well, yeah. He's Paul McCartney -- at least ostensibly -- and so no one would notice him at all if he wasn't barefoot.
|
|
|
Post by 65if2007 on Jun 1, 2011 0:03:55 GMT -5
This thread is ridiculous! There was no report about Paul in a fatal car crash that they said they would cover at 11 pm on 9/12/66 but never did! You people are just making the whole thing up to get attention! It's about as accurate as SunKing's delusional fantasies! (Shrugs) "As a younger man, I stood besides my parents radio in (or around) 1966 and heard a "news break" on the local radio station...I listened to the announcer on that station report that the BBC (whatever that was) had reported Paul McCartney of the Beatles having been in an auto accident and that it was fatal. I was shocked to say the least and no further information ever came from the any of the local or national media about it." - Ernest Schultze, "Carry That Weight" (Xlibris Corporation, 1997)
|
|
|
Post by 65if2007 on May 31, 2011 23:54:34 GMT -5
No, pay attention! This is not rocket science! Of COURSE, everything concerning this subject matter is speculation. That goes without saying. People who claim to KNOW or who claim to be SURE of anything are fooling themselves. Sandals do not look any more "stupid" than severed dolls heads covered with blood. Wearing sandals isn't any more "stupid" than taking LSD and discussing it publicly. The Beatles, as I said before, for better or worse, were trend-setters, and it makes no sense to suppose that none of them would wear a pair of sandals just because some viewers might find them to be "stupid". But even if he wore sandals to begin with, he wasn't photographed wearing them in the final cover shot. He was photographed in bare feet. Hot weather will lead to hot asphalt whether the asphalt is in London or California. That's just a law of nature. You're arguing out of both sides of your mouth. You say, "It's hot. That's why he took his shoes off, to feel more comfortable." Then when you're asked why he would feel more comfortable walking on hot asphalt in his bare feet. you turn around and argue, "Why shouldn't he? It wasn't hot." If walking around in bare feet was the best way to ESCAPE the effects of the heat -- rather than EXPOSING oneself to them -- then why aren't the others also walking around in bare feet? you are twisting my argumentation: Oh no, I'm sure that I'm not doing anything terrible like that. Whatever it is that you just said that I'm doing, I'm sure that I'm not doing it. And my DECLARATION -- because no speculation is needed -- is that ugly ass stupid is more applicable to certain people than it is to inamimate objects. As far as inanimate objects go, severed doll's heads are much more stupid than sandals. The idea that any of the Beatles would have refused to wear sandals because some viewers would disapprove of their fashion sense has to be just plain wrong. Then why aren't the other three Beatles walking barefoot if walking barefoot is both more comfortable and trendsetting? I think that this is the third time that I've put this question to you. I don't know what a "ciggy" is. Is it European for "I'm talking out of both sides of my mouth and pretending that it's the result of a language barrier"? If one is dressing for comfort and it's a hot day, one strips off suits and denim before one takes off one's shoes. No one ever says, "Boy, it's hot here! I'm going to take off my shoes!"
|
|
|
Post by 65if2007 on May 30, 2011 22:19:06 GMT -5
no, no, he did wear sandals at first. you can see that on quite a few photos. and they look stupid. my point is, how would you know if it was so hot that you couldn't walk on the asphalt? It's london not california... fact is: he did not were shoes. fact is: he wore sandals and kicked them of. fact is: abbey road was recorded during the summer. everything else is just speculation. No, pay attention! This is not rocket science! Of COURSE, everything concerning this subject matter is speculation. That goes without saying. People who claim to KNOW or who claim to be SURE of anything are fooling themselves. Sandals do not look any more "stupid" than severed dolls heads covered with blood. Wearing sandals isn't any more "stupid" than taking LSD and discussing it publicly. The Beatles, as I said before, for better or worse, were trend-setters, and it makes no sense to suppose that none of them would wear a pair of sandals just because some viewers might find them to be "stupid". But even if he wore sandals to begin with, he wasn't photographed wearing them in the final cover shot. He was photographed in bare feet. Hot weather will lead to hot asphalt whether the asphalt is in London or California. That's just a law of nature. You're arguing out of both sides of your mouth. You say, "It's hot. That's why he took his shoes off, to feel more comfortable." Then when you're asked why he would feel more comfortable walking on hot asphalt in his bare feet. you turn around and argue, "Why shouldn't he? It wasn't hot." If walking around in bare feet was the best way to ESCAPE the effects of the heat -- rather than EXPOSING oneself to them -- then why aren't the others also walking around in bare feet?
|
|
|
Post by 65if2007 on May 30, 2011 14:31:07 GMT -5
2) Why the sandals on Abbey Road? "It was hot." What? Anyone here ever walk barefoot on hot black asphalt? It burns like Hell! I always understood it this way: It was a warm/hot day so Paul wore sandals. (U can see that in some of the shots). Finally he dropped the sandals because having ugly sandals on your feet while shooting your album cover is not very cool. Probably the photographer told him to drop them. But the thing why he had no shoes on was: "because it was a hot day". no prob there You're still missing the point. If it was a hot day, how and why would anyone attempt to walk on asphalt with bare feet? If walking around barefoot on hot pavement is such a natural reaction to the weather, why aren't the others doing that? Not wanting to have uncool ugly sandals on one's feet isn't an explanation. The Beatles set trends, and the scene on Abbey Road is a surrealistic one anyway, as was the scene on Sgt. Pepper. Anyway, Ian McMillain's story was that McCartney had come in originally barefooted -- not that he'd worn sandals and kicked them off.
|
|
|
Post by 65if2007 on May 22, 2011 23:51:36 GMT -5
www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,128903,00.html Close Encounters of the Third Kind Ha LA! HA LA LE! HA LA! HA LA LE! HA LA! HA LA LE!
|
|
|
Post by 65if2007 on May 22, 2011 23:24:37 GMT -5
There's also a "1-2-3-4" count-in on the original recording of "I Saw Her Standing There".
|
|
|
Post by 65if2007 on May 22, 2011 13:20:13 GMT -5
I was thinking of the ol' George pointing finger thing lol - I knew that.
|
|
|
Post by 65if2007 on May 22, 2011 2:26:34 GMT -5
I doubt it. Didn't the story say that he was taken to the hospital at about 9:30?
|
|