|
|
Post by vOOdOOgurU on Jan 28, 2013 16:42:44 GMT -5
Stanley Kubrick is absolutely integral and essential to any of this. For one, he was probably the greatest director cinema's ever known. That's an opinion. But when you get to his meticulousness in his craft, is where he "shines". I'm sure you may have, or you may not have seen a thread about Kubrick's The Shining actually being a complete reversal of King's novel. Everything is flipped, like a mirror image. If you haven't heard this, I think just typing in google Kubrick reversals of King + Shining. Something should come up. Once you realise what was was done, and it makes absolute sense he did it, you realise he was one of the greatest directors that ever were. If not the best. An example being that in the movie, we never see "Tony". He's a voice that comes from Danny's stomach. Not so in the novel. And one thing that goes very far to say that in the novel the Outlook is haunted, but in the movie, the people are haunted is that certain events that happen in it, clearly suggest the one with The Shining, is Jack Torrance. Danny has it, but not to its full potential. We know this, because he never actually uses it. He doesn't use it to escape Jack in the maze. He uses his wits. It's Jack with The Shining. But The Shining corrupted by its owner's faults, addictions, and weaknesses. When the movie is seen on this level, it's ONE OF THE GREATEST MOVIES EVER MADE! When Danny asks Halloran what's in Room 237, he tells him NOTHING! But we think he's lying. When Grady tells Jack he's always been the caretaker at the Overlook, we think he's telling the truth. Kubrick totally plays with Truth and Lie there. Halloran DOESN'T think anything's in Room 237. He's telling the truth! His Shining doesn't work like that. And Kubrick gives you examples throughout the movie how his Shining does work. And Grady, well, he's just a liar. Full stop. But what do we believe? Which makes that end image of Jack in the summer of 1921, which can't be, because the song that's playing isn't from 1921, and the event actually looks like New Year's Eve doesn't it. It's a lie. But he is forever entombed in that picture, which I believe isn't shown once on that wall, throughout the entire movie. It's all a Lie. But Scatman's telling the Truth, and we doubt his word. AMAZING movie. Paul Is Dead is forever entombed on Sgt.Pepper. I believe albums previous all led up to that, precognitive, planned, what have you. It's all there. The entombment was the logical conclusion of the actions that came before it. It's the actions we are unaware of. We are not privy to. Simply because we are not staying at The Overlook.  We are visitors, and can only see a few rooms. It does not mean that we CAN'T see what's there. It just means our perception is biased simply because lack of information prevents comprehension. On a subconscious level we can perceive SOMETHING has happened. And pick up on those supposedly synchronious events, which in truth may be just the chronological order of the events as they transpired, beyond our information threshold. Something happened for sure. And it's told pictorially, musically, by people who are also picking up on those events seen and unseen. The vibes. The energies. The personas and psyches of the key components to the act. Whatever events transpired, they led to Paul becoming entombed forever in Paul Is Dead. It could be existential. It could be magickal. It could be physical. Whatever it is, there is no doubt whatsoever it has happened. Whether clues or hints were placed with motive, or an unconscious agenda, or dictated by powers that be; whatever that is that is spread out over subsequent releases, is there whether you want to see it or not. It's PWR, PID, PIA. It's all 3. All 3 combine to make the whole. A trinity of belief in the there and not there, the impossible and possible. EYES WIDE SHUT and PID. Hmmm. Maybe a stretch. But I'm of the belief anything's possible. Just like I think Rosemary's Baby is a INVOKE BABALON FOR DUMMIES course provided by Polanski and a consumer audience unaware of what Jack Parsons or L.Ron Hubbard set out to accomplish in 1946. And if they succeeded. Or brought in Oppenheimer to seal the deal. Eyes Wide Shut is an interesting movie. The inclusion of The Process Church symbol right there says to me, okay Paul. It also says to me RFK assassination. It also says to me Charles Manson. It also says to me Son of Sam. And possibly the Zodiac. Everything's possible. |
|
|
|
Post by vOOdOOgurU on Jan 28, 2013 16:58:16 GMT -5
You have the "precognitive" events of the Beatles cartoons showing Paul (The Beetle Killer) killing the other three. In essence, it tells you I ONE I X before it ever was. Or Paul suing the other three in 1970. Or there just being a division between 1 and 3. It may say, this is what is to happen. This is an event to transpire. We look at it like, oh my god what a coincidence. Or how odd that. But what if it is actually like reading a novel. We know Chapter 17 is ahead. We are on Chapter 5. Because we're only at Chapter 5, does not mean that Chapter 17 doesn't exist yet. It's there! You just have to turn the pages til you get to it. And the events that lead up to it, have already been written. Its your choice whether you want to skip a few chapters or not -- but also realising in doing so, that you may miss WHY certain events happened as they did in Chapter 17.
(this is when one questions why I pick certain numbers. I don't know. I just did. Surely it will mean something somewhere else in some other time.)
BEATLES FOR SALE
Paul is pictured next to Jayne Mansfield. Mansfield is pictured from the film It Takes a Thief. She portrays a character named Billie. Mansfield "loses her head" in a car accident in 1967. Paul "loses his head" in a car accident and is replaced by someone named Billy. A thief of his identity. It Takes a Thief.
HELP
Title says it all.
RUBBER SOUL
REVOLVER
SGT PEPPER.
What are these albums telling us? A rubber soul. A fake soul. Or something else. A bendable, stretchable soul. It could mean anything. Revolver. Something that spins. Does it spin down into the grave. The soul. The spin. The afterworld/Death.
What are these albums telling us? Include Yesterday & Today and its allusions to Osiris and his death & resurrection, and the battle between he and his brother Set. Go back to HELP and any allusions to the signs of the grades and Crowley Magick.
What are these albums telling us in their order? What chapter are they in the tale. And where are we?
|
|
|
|
Post by vOOdOOgurU on Jan 28, 2013 17:07:28 GMT -5
WHAT IF the battle of Set and Osiris is still taking place? It is ongoing.
WHAT IF Rhiannon is still finding Pwyll on the Tor, that should you stand on this hill of enchantment, most people will stay away from you and it.
WHAT IF Jenny Wren is telling you to look at Our Mutual Friend and its story of a man who returns from Africa only to find he has been reported dead and his body found in the Thames.
What If.
What If these aren't just human beings re-telling stories cuz we're in a creative rut, or have a new way of telling the same old story.
What if we're actually caught in a loop. A circular pattern of events that merely change faces, names and places, but essentially keep the same "program" running endlessly. It is not re-telling. It is the same event happening over and over again, but our perception that tells us Time happens, and Space happens, and there is a Past, Present and Future, and that there is Birth, Life, Death cannot allow the same people to take part in that event over and over again. So we shift positions merely because the program itself only allows certain criteria to be entered in as "data". Or as "energy" to keep the program running. To keep it in its loop. Or Wheel of Fortune. Or Endless Knot.
What if.
|
|
|
|
Post by jpmtruthcanuck on Jan 28, 2013 18:45:20 GMT -5
Yes! Then we have EYES WIDE SHUT. One of my theories about PID has always been that Paul became involved in a secret society in London that consisted of super-rich occult practitioners who were into rituals. I've imagined that Paul was invited or stumbled into what he thought was a private party of London super-rich and found out too late that it was a dangerous cabal of lecherous, murdering, luciferian, sex ritualistic and blood ritualistic, occult, Crowley worshipping wealthy socialites who would kill rather than be exposed to the public. If you imagine the mansion in EYES WIDE SHUT is not in New York, but just outside London (Kubrick lived just outside London) and substitute the Tom Cruise character with original Paul McCartney. Maybe Kubrick heard the real story and put it on film using Tom Cruise as a doctor to represent Paul McCartney, the pop star. Maybe that's how Paul was killed --- by venturing into this party that turned into something he couldn't escape from and ended up some kind of blood sacrifice. Chilling to think about. Kubrick using EYES WIDE SHUT to tell us what happened to Paul. In the movie, Tom Cruise escapes. Maybe Beatle Paul was not able to escape and was killed there at the masked sex ritual 'party'. I don't know, that's kind of a stretch, but Kubrick was quite enigmatic himself and his films were no doubt, enigmas. Kubrick, I believe, learned about many, many secrets of London high society. He was right there living in the countryside near London. Wow, you've presented a theory that I didn't want to think about. I was hoping it was a simple accident, not this dark stuff. But, if true, it might explain why the other Beatles went along with the replacement coverup. |
|
|
|
Post by superman on Jan 29, 2013 15:16:05 GMT -5
What If these aren't just human beings re-telling stories cuz we're in a creative rut, or have a new way of telling the same old story. |
|
|
|
Post by multiverser on Jan 29, 2013 21:26:10 GMT -5
I agree with you guys! Before we leave the subject of EYES WIDE SHUT, I believe that Kubrick meant it to be one, big, dream sequence from first frame to last. There is a dream within a dream, when the Nicole Kidman character dreams of having sex with the Naval officer. But anyway, next time you watch it, try thinking of it as "nothing is real" but it is someone's dream or a couple's dreams intertwined but it is just one, long dream from first frame to last. It works much better as the penultimate Kubrick masterpiece when I look at it that way, and I'm convinced that's what he was doing.
On another level, the PID level, imagine that the wife, Nicole, is Jane Asher, Paul's off and on live-in girlfriend. Paul is wealthy and has a big, swank, London apartment. Paul & Jane go to a socialite party, like, a record producer's Christmas party. Beautiful girls there try to seduce him, while a luciferian, old, sex addict tries to seduce Jane. Everything proceeds just like the movie EYES WIDE SHUT. Only it's in London, it's Paul & Jane, the piano player dude is an old chum of Paul's who didn't quite make it to stardom in the music biz, but he plays at these secret society parties at mansions near London. Just look at the whole film as Kubrick telling what happened to Paul, but Kubrick disguising it as a doctor and his pretty wife in New York and the mansion near New York. Maybe Paul did escape the mansion and try to shake off the luciferians, but is told by the record producer (in the billiards room) that he's in too deep. His actual killing is not shown in EYES WIDE SHUT perhaps because it was the original ending, but Kubrick's studio insisted the film had to be recut to have the toy store ending. Kubrick was bumped off, I believe, because he portrayed what really happens at these secret society parties. Perhaps Paul's car was run off the road into a lamp post and he was decapitated. After all, Teddy Kennedy's car was run off the road when agents tried to kill him, his car went into the creek, and his young squeeze was drowned.
I like to brainstorm on these things. "He didn't notice that the lights had changed" --- Paul didn't notice that before finding out about the secret society he was relatively safe, but now (the lights had changed) and they assassinated him by forcing his car into a light pole.
|
|
|
|
Post by multiverser on Jan 29, 2013 21:42:58 GMT -5
Before we leave the subject of multiverses or parallel worlds. Where I differ from Michio Kaku and Lisa Randall is that they believe that we cannot observe, detect, or contact any of the parallel worlds. They believe that these worlds are totally separate from each other.
What I believe, and this is really mind bending, is that each of us has a soul that is connected to consciousness, and that during our lives we skate across the parallel worlds without realizing that we have left one and instantly jumped into another (ten somersets he'll undertake on solid ground and lastly --death-- through a hog's head of real fire). The process is seamless to each of us.
When something happens, or a decision is made, we 'skate' in a direction into another world and then another and another. Remember the sound George Martin and John Lennon used of the radio tuner skipping through all the stations and landing on Shakespeare which is just synchronously at the point of "O untimely death!"
Where 'soul' is concerned is the thing Buddhists call Karma. If your decision/action is good, you'll skate right into a better world. If a decision/action of yours is bad or negative or selfish, you know, something that hurts other souls in some way, you will skate right into a worse world where some thing or things bad are happening.
I believe there is a parallel world where Paul didn't die, there was no Sgt Pepper album but a continuation of the happy 'boy meets girl and she loves you' type songs, only more and more advanced. In that world, we could still have all the songs about love, even All You Need Is Love. Pretty, positive songs and none of this 'I buried Paul' spookiness.
That world exists somewhere in a parallel universe where nothing bad happened to the oiginal Beatles --- they sort of lived happily ever after: John and Cyn stay together, Paul marries Jane and they have a happy life, George and Patti never split up (she never has an affair with Eric), Ringo never gets strung out on cocaine with Nilsson & Moon. You get the idea.
Somehow, I skated into this world where Paul Is Dead and all that mystical weirdness is still branching out and proliferating. Yes, in the world I'm in now, the Sgt Pepper cover is a funeral scene just as Derek Taylor admitted to. The guy on stage today singing "give the other fellow hell" is some macabre replacement for the Paul I liked in 1964.
What did I do to deserve this? How did I get here? The endgame hasn't arrived out of iamaphoney... what could that mean?
|
|
|
|
Post by multiverser on Jan 29, 2013 22:02:12 GMT -5
If the multiverses, parallel worlds theory of Michio Kaku is correct (he's only wrong on the inaccessibility part), then when Derek Taylor said, "Paul isn't dead" he was telling the truth. Somewhere in an alternate universe, in a parallel world, Paul didn't die. So that makes Derek Taylor right. But in this world we are in now, Taylor was lying. Paul died.
|
|
|
|
Post by vOOdOOgurU on Jan 30, 2013 5:09:17 GMT -5
Only it's in London, it's Paul & Jane, the piano player dude is an old chum of Paul's who didn't quite make it to stardom in the music biz, but he plays at these secret society parties at mansions near London. Or introduces Paul to the Process Church of the Final Judgement, like Peter Asher did. Or introduces him possibly to the edicts of Scientology, which William S Burroughs was a practitioner of. And actually in 1969 sent a massive diatribe against L.Ron Hubbard, and openly asssociated Charles Manson with Scientology. Meanwhile in August 1969, the Process Church produces a polemic about Race Issues and bringing the Pope to justice. [THE PROCESS (CHURCH OF THE FINAL JUDGEMENT)]. Flagellation expiation or indulgence/Weapons of War and Slaughter. A Processcene on Race. Films of Violence. Untitled leaflet & Trial and Judgement of The Pope at The Process. The topmost flyer is a series of two lectures by Process members, the next is for two ‘Processcenes’ on Race and Power with a mock trial and discussions of Mao, the third is for an analysis of 5 films including Polanski’s ‘Two Men & a Wardrobe’. The leaflet discusses Process courses and Processcenes in general. The ‘Pope’ poster declares that members of the audience will decide “... on the basis of the evidence whether the Defendant is innocent or guilty of the charges made”. All the items were issued from their Mayfair H.Q. and advertise the coffee lounge. Very well timed for the summer of 1969. But you also have Ed Butler, who was hanging out with Lee Harvey Oswald in New Orleans, being practically the first to say the Manson murders were a hate crime, and blamed the Black Panthers. Before even a motive had been established by police. "Did Hate Kill Tate". |
|
|
|
Post by vOOdOOgurU on Jan 30, 2013 5:14:33 GMT -5
What If these aren't just human beings re-telling stories cuz we're in a creative rut, or have a new way of telling the same old story. I don't know what that movie is either, BUT I'M GOING TO FIND OUT!!!! |
|
|
|
Post by vOOdOOgurU on Jan 30, 2013 5:23:05 GMT -5
The idea that the same story is being told over and over is what came to me when I saw this.At 5:52 we see three members of a music group searching for a 4th member. A stranger emerges "out of the wilderness" and the three enlist him to take the place of the 4th member they'd recently lost. The stranger's name is Bill and he does indeed take the place of the missing 4th member. I have no idea what movie this is. I don't even recognize the actors, though "Bill" looks somewhat familiar. I don't know what that movie is either, BUT I'M GOING TO FIND OUT!!!! And I do recognise at least three of those actors, and one of them I believe is actually a white actor in blackface. Bill in fact. I just can't remember his name, but he's a famous character actor. You know, actors never top billed, but are in the supporting cast and stand out. Dammit! Trying to think of other movies he's been in. |
|
|
|
Post by vOOdOOgurU on Jan 30, 2013 5:36:16 GMT -5
If the multiverses, parallel worlds theory of Michio Kaku is correct (he's only wrong on the inaccessibility part), then when Derek Taylor said, "Paul isn't dead" he was telling the truth. Somewhere in an alternate universe, in a parallel world, Paul didn't die. So that makes Derek Taylor right. But in this world we are in now, Taylor was lying. Paul died. The world we are in now is the world where in one song Paul tells the story of the deaths of 3 individuals, and in the next song in sequence, promises to do someone no harm. That's the world we are in |
|
|
|
Post by vOOdOOgurU on Jan 30, 2013 6:18:57 GMT -5
And when I think of that actor, who may be Bill in blackface, I think of a character actor you may see in film, but more likely to see on television in the late 60's early 70's. Gruff voice, ALWAYS wore a moustache, never covered his baldness. Always wore somewhat bushy/over long hair and sideburns. I recognise him more with gray hair than with darker hair.
Arrrghhhh - whenever I think of this character actor, or who I think comes to mind, is a person in a cop show. Or a detective show. I always see this guy in a suit, barking orders ---- arrgghhh! I'm thinking cop show, legal show and this guy's loud voice was always used in a "superior to underling" capacity. Always telling off his workforce.
|
|
|
|
Post by beacon on Jan 30, 2013 9:19:40 GMT -5
Or introduces Paul to the Process Church of the Final Judgement, like Peter Asher did. Voodooguru, this is an interesting statement, do you have any evidence that Peter Asher introduced Paul to the Process Church? I have read that the Process mob may have visited the Indica Bookshop but do you have anything else? |
|
|
|
Post by vOOdOOgurU on Jan 30, 2013 13:32:26 GMT -5
Or introduces Paul to the Process Church of the Final Judgement, like Peter Asher did. Voodooguru, this is an interesting statement, do you have any evidence that Peter Asher introduced Paul to the Process Church? I have read that the Process mob may have visited the Indica Bookshop but do you have anything else? I'll see what I can find out about it Beacon. I know I definitely read it, and I definitely know I'm not the only one saying it. "Marc Cheyne 1 year ago What else would it refer to? Islam wasn't widely known then, neither was atheism really. It can only refer to (ye olde) paganism - Satanism. Besides, isn't it a little odd that the new producer identifies him and them as anti-Christian, within months of his employment. Add to that the back-masked lyrics and Satanic imagery hidden in their work. Peter Asher introduced McCartney to The Process Church while they lived together. That was what the whole Indica Gallery scene was all about." Now I know I didn't get it from Marc! LOL -- I'm just saying, it's been said before about Peter Asher and The Process. Fortean Times mentions The Process and the Indica Gallery, and we all know that was run by MAD Ltd. That does not necessarily mean McCartney was introduced to them by Asher though does it. I'll see what I can find out. I just know I'm not the only one stating it.  |
|
|
|
Post by vOOdOOgurU on Jan 30, 2013 13:57:30 GMT -5
Or introduces Paul to the Process Church of the Final Judgement, like Peter Asher did. Voodooguru, this is an interesting statement, do you have any evidence that Peter Asher introduced Paul to the Process Church? I have read that the Process mob may have visited the Indica Bookshop but do you have anything else? And in all I've read since the time I first came across mention that it was Asher that introduced McCartney to the Process, I believe it's far more likely it would be John Dunbar that would've done such a thing. Faithfull's association alone with Kenneth Anger, suggests something like The Process would feel far more at home with the likes of Dunbar/Faithfull. EVEN THOUGH, Jane Asher's association with the underground (at the time) periodical PRIVATE EYE, and its contributions from a pseudonym using Tom Driberg (Crowley's favourite candidate for Beast 666 poster boy) suggests a possibility. But I don't know when Asher became a shareholder, and Driberg's contributions do not make him an all out occultist. At the same time you can find Driberg's name on the petition to legalise marijuana with Paul McCartney's (and the other Beatles) in 1967. I would go with Dunbar/Faithfull truly and The Process and any meeting with McCartney. Speculative of course. |
|
|
|
Post by multiverser on Jan 30, 2013 20:46:54 GMT -5
From what I've seen trying to research Process, I would agree with vOOdOOgurU --- Dunbar/Faithfull/"McCartney".
Just a very unrelated side note, I read somewhere that "Lennon" suggested that he and "McCartney" get their skulls trepanned in order to reach a higher state of consciousness (or to relieve a devastating phase of depression). John (or Fohn) was ready to do it, but Faul refused, according to Faul. Of course, the story could be a fib. I guess the reason I brought that up is that maybe John/Fohn became interested in the Process Church, as well, being open to strange malarky.
|
|
|
|
Post by goneforaburton on Jan 30, 2013 23:05:19 GMT -5
And when I think of that actor, who may be Bill in blackface, I think of a character actor you may see in film, but more likely to see on television in the late 60's early 70's. Gruff voice, ALWAYS wore a moustache, never covered his baldness. Always wore somewhat bushy/over long hair and sideburns. I recognise him more with gray hair than with darker hair. Arrrghhhh - whenever I think of this character actor, or who I think comes to mind, is a person in a cop show. Or a detective show. I always see this guy in a suit, barking orders ---- arrgghhh! I'm thinking cop show, legal show and this guy's loud voice was always used in a "superior to underling" capacity. Always telling off his workforce. |
|
|
|
Post by goneforaburton on Jan 30, 2013 23:06:48 GMT -5
I'm betting it's Keenan Wynn; the clip is from Finian's Rainbow (1968).
|
|
|
|
Post by JeremyHBoob on Jan 30, 2013 23:14:51 GMT -5
From what I've seen trying to research Process, I would agree with vOOdOOgurU --- Dunbar/Faithfull/"McCartney". Just a very unrelated side note, I read somewhere that "Lennon" suggested that he and "McCartney" get their skulls trepanned in order to reach a higher state of consciousness (or to relieve a devastating phase of depression). John (or Fohn) was ready to do it, but Faul refused, according to Faul. Of course, the story could be a fib. I guess the reason I brought that up is that maybe John/Fohn became interested in the Process Church, as well, being open to strange malarky.  And speaking of alternate universes thebeatlesneverbrokeup.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1&Itemid=53 |
|
|
|
Post by vOOdOOgurU on Jan 31, 2013 2:38:27 GMT -5
I'm betting it's Keenan Wynn; the clip is from Finian's Rainbow (1968). That's what I think as well. I arrived at that with some help! Attachments:
|
|
|
|
Post by vOOdOOgurU on Jan 31, 2013 2:48:37 GMT -5
From what I've seen trying to research Process, I would agree with vOOdOOgurU --- Dunbar/Faithfull/"McCartney". Just a very unrelated side note, I read somewhere that "Lennon" suggested that he and "McCartney" get their skulls trepanned in order to reach a higher state of consciousness (or to relieve a devastating phase of depression). John (or Fohn) was ready to do it, but Faul refused, according to Faul. Of course, the story could be a fib. I guess the reason I brought that up is that maybe John/Fohn became interested in the Process Church, as well, being open to strange malarky. And I believe it's Dunbar that informed Lennon of the Ono Exhibition coming up. The one they all insist he went to on the 9th November, 1966. A night before it opened. Which was actually on the 8th, and they were still setting it up on that date. Dunbar, the the son of a cultural attache in Moscow during WWII. |
|
|
|
Post by beacon on Jan 31, 2013 7:21:06 GMT -5
From what I've seen trying to research Process, I would agree with vOOdOOgurU --- Dunbar/Faithfull/"McCartney". Just a very unrelated side note, I read somewhere that "Lennon" suggested that he and "McCartney" get their skulls trepanned in order to reach a higher state of consciousness (or to relieve a devastating phase of depression). John (or Fohn) was ready to do it, but Faul refused, according to Faul. Of course, the story could be a fib. I guess the reason I brought that up is that maybe John/Fohn became interested in the Process Church, as well, being open to strange malarky. And I believe it's Dunbar that informed Lennon of the Ono Exhibition coming up. The one they all insist he went to on the 9th November, 1966. A night before it opened. Which was actually on the 8th, and they were still setting it up on that date. Dunbar, the the son of a cultural attache in Moscow during WWII. Many thanks vOOdOOgurU and multiverser. I am currently very interested in this aspect of the mystery and I think a lot of the truth of PID can be gleaned from McCartney’s relationship with MAD and the events of that time. The Unfinished Paintings and Objects exhibition is a classic example of all this. I believe the whole event was stage managed simply so Ono could meet Lennon, however, as with all things in the world of the Beatles events seem strange and the dates don’t match. I am attaching a photo of an article from the International Times advertising the event. I include a link to the original as well in case you can’t read it. Incidentally, there is a curious article above about the CIA disappearing from London at exactly this time! (click the link for this) Strange – they probably thought once Ono was attached to Lennon their job was done!!  www.internationaltimes.it/archive/index.php?year=1966&volume=IT-Volume-1&issue=1&item=IT_1966-10-14_B-IT-Volume-1_Iss-1_003The date of their meeting, as legend has it, was November 9, 1966 – the same date that Paul dies! – however, as usual we can be sure of nothing. In the International Times article dated October 14-27 the exhibition has a totally different name, concept and funding mechanism. Oh, and its dates are from Nov, 9 – 22. However, by the time this later advertisement appears the dates, and title; of the exhibition have changed.  If we assume that Lennon did visit the evening before it opened this would make it Monday November 7. This would be just one day after he arrived back from Spain, after filming How I Won The War, and opens up the question of how he knew about the exhibition? In interviews he later claimed he received a telegram whilst still in Spain. So, who sent the fateful telegram and why did Lennon deem it important enough to return home for? John Dunbar would be my guess as its author, though quite what induced Lennon’s return is still open to speculation? If we look at an International Times article from issue No: 3 dated November 14, 1966 things become even more confusing.  The exhibition doesn’t open until the 9th it appears and we also learn about the attendance of old friend Roman Polanski the evening before, November 8th. Now, this is amazing enough but, had the two been present on the same day, this would surely have been recalled and remarked upon. What is also interesting is the revelation that Ono has been in London all summer. She later claims that the she didn’t know who Lennon or the Beatles were when she met John; however, I would imagine it would have been impossible to have spent the summer of ‘66 in London and not know about the biggest band in the world! I have written before about the inconsistencies in the tales of their meeting; this merely adds another layer of intrigue. It does all leads us back to the actual date of their meeting being November 9th. This, then, would be after the exhibition opened and would lead one to question why Ono need still be there, late at night, once all the preparation is complete? It also begs the question, why, if McCartney had perished just hours earlier – 5.00 am that morning – how Lennon could have brought himself to attend? Even if they hated each other by now, standard legend insists that Lennon, and the other Beatles, would have been in full replacement and cover up mode by now! This is a momentous time for the Beatles whatever way you choose to look at it. They had just finished touring and the power struggle for control of the band was already in full flow, even before Brian Epstein’s death. The Sunday Telegraph of November 13, 1966 had stated that that two of the Beatles had approached Allen Klein for management representation. This story probably originated in the Klein camp; however, the vultures were certainly circling. I would include MAD and Robert Fraser in this group of vultures. It is interesting that originally Ono’s exhibition invites individuals and cartels to help fund the show in return for shares, however, it would be friend Fraser that would eventually sponsor the show. I also find the following comment from a John Lennon interview with Jann Wenner to be very telling “….And she came up and handed me a card which said 'breathe' on it, one of her instructions, so I just went [pant]. This was our meeting.” One of her instructions! The more I read the more I become convinced that she was his handler. The whole concept and structure of this exhibition was changed and moulded specifically so that Lennon would be caught and snared. So what of Brother McCartney during all this? We know he couldn’t have died in a car crash on November 9, 1966, not in London anyway as he was in France on that day. On the 12th he meets Mal Evans in Bordeaux and they drive on to Spain, apparently, to look for John. Why wouldn’t he already know that John was back in London? McCartney went to France on the 6th the same day Lennon arrives back in London. If McCartney was unaware surely Mal Evans would have known? According to the Beatles Bible: The pair drove from Bordeaux to Spain, making films on their journey. They had hoped to meet John Lennon in Almería, but filming for How I Won The War had ended and he had returned to England.
Instead they decided on a safari holiday and flew to Kenya. McCartney arranged to meet his girlfriend Jane Asher there, and in Seville had someone drive his Aston Martin DB5 back to London.
McCartney and Evans flew from Seville to Madrid, and from there to Nairobi. They had a 10-hour stopover in Rome, during which they did some sightseeing.
Upon their arrival in Kenya they toured Ambosali Park, overlooked by Mount Kilimanjaro, and stayed at the Treetop Hotel, the royal family's Kenyan base. The holiday came to a close on 19 November, when McCartney, Asher and Evans flew from Nairobi back to London.I am reminded of il ras’s recent post concerning the DB5 and claims of a separate accident that happened in this car. Who is the mysterious someone who arranges for the DB5 to get home and why is it so important that McCartney is out the country at this time? I am sure the MAD axis plays a huge role in all this and if there is a clear link to the Process Church then it would be great to find out. I am not familiar with this Marc Cheyne that you quote, though it is interesting that he immediately connects paganism to Satanism. These are two totally different religious concepts. |
|
|
|
Post by vOOdOOgurU on Jan 31, 2013 9:04:31 GMT -5
Marc was just found when searching for "did Peter Asher introduce Paul McCartney to the Process Church" - totally random. I just wanted to see what came up first when that search query was entered. So I know I'm not the only one that has said this. Maybe it was in Winged Beatle??? Did I hear it, or read it. From my blog: drtomoculus.blogspot.co.uk/2012/11/mad-ltd.htmlMAD Ltd."When John Lennon was invited by friend, John Dunbar, to an exhibit at Dunbar’s Indica Gallery in London on November 9, 1966, the intellectually hungry, emotionally restless 26-year-old Beatle reportedly thought the avant-garde show might involve drugs, an orgy, or any of the things that made swingin' London swing. In fact, what was happening at the Indica was a conceptual-art show called Unfinished Paintings and Objects, exhibiting the work of Yoko Ono, a 33-year-old Japanese artist who created things like transparent homes, imaginary music, and "underwear to make you high." articles.absoluteelsewhere.net/Articles/john_met_yoko.html |
|
|
|
Post by beacon on Jan 31, 2013 9:48:56 GMT -5
Marc was just found when searching for "did Peter Asher introduce Paul McCartney to the Process Church" - totally random. I just wanted to see what came up first when that search query was entered. So I know I'm not the only one that has said this. Maybe it was in Winged Beatle??? Did I hear it, or read it. From my blog: drtomoculus.blogspot.co.uk/2012/11/mad-ltd.htmlMAD Ltd."When John Lennon was invited by friend, John Dunbar, to an exhibit at Dunbar’s Indica Gallery in London on November 9, 1966, the intellectually hungry, emotionally restless 26-year-old Beatle reportedly thought the avant-garde show might involve drugs, an orgy, or any of the things that made swingin' London swing. In fact, what was happening at the Indica was a conceptual-art show called Unfinished Paintings and Objects, exhibiting the work of Yoko Ono, a 33-year-old Japanese artist who created things like transparent homes, imaginary music, and "underwear to make you high." articles.absoluteelsewhere.net/Articles/john_met_yoko.htmlMany thanks again, great blog by the way! From memory, what you get from The Winged Beatle was; His name was Ian Iachimoe apparently a Polish filmmaker. The same Ian Iachimoe who ran this ad in the next issue. The same Ian Iachimoe who contributed to the Church of the Final Judgement and their magazine, The Process. The same Ian Iachimoe who engaged his friend Yoko Ono to perform an exhibition at his own Indica Gallery. The same Ian Iachimoe who wrote Paperback Writer. Or words to that effect. Some of this comes from Miles' book, Many years from now, which says this; In March 1966 Paul ran a competition in a little underground magazine called the Global Moon Edition of the Long Hair Times, the direct forerunner of International Times, edited by Miles and produced by John Hopkins on his own hand-cranked offset-litho machine. Paul, using his pseudonym Ian Iachimoe, offered twenty guineas for a film script:
Ian Iachimoe, the Polish 'new wave' film director, is offering a prize of 20 guineas to anyone who can supply the missing link in the following script. The dialogue is not needed, just the idea. Here is the outline of the story:
A woman (age 35-45) is fanatical about cleanliness. She is amazingly houseproud and obsessional about getting rid of dirt. This carries over in her dress, looks, and so on.
Something happens to make her have to crawl through a great load of dirt, old dustbins and so on. Good old honest dirt. What is this something?
The story continues with the woman's mind being snapped by her experiences with dirt. She goes mad and her obsession gets even worse.
What is needed is the idea. What could have caused her to become involved with filth. (She is not forced to do it, but chooses to do it herself.)
Send all answers, as many as you like, to Ian Iachimoe, c/o Indica Books & Gallery. 6 Mason's Yard, Duke St, St James's. London SWi. WHI 1424
This competition is for real - it seems strange but it is real.
PAUL: The thing about cleanliness could be my mother, who was a nurse and was very hygienic. She was amazingly house proud, she was almost obsessive about getting rid of dirt. So if I was analysing it, that would be the first thing I'd go to.No mention of the Process, but I guess there wouldn't be by the time this book was published, however, the traumatic situation he creates for the female character, his mother, reminds me of the kind of situation Monarch slaves are subjected to as part of their training. This in turn reminds me of the account that McCartney gave of how Yesterday came to him in a dream, fully formed, and that for weeks he was convinced it was somebody elses song. He was living at the Ashers house then and I wonder if the song may have been written by Mrs Asher - George Martins old music teacher - and implanted into McCartney's head through some form of hypnotic suggestion technique? As we know, old man Asher may have been Tavistock and therefore well schooled in the dark arts of brainwashing. The same dark arts that Tavistock shared with the CIA and that the CIA shared with Scientology. The Process was an offshoot of Scientology and used the same 'auditing' techniques, so, if we can connect Peter Asher with the Process in any way then that would almost certainly confirm a link with brainwashing and, possibly, a far larger conspiracy. Anyway, food for thought. |
|
We are visitors, and can only see a few rooms. It does not mean that we CAN'T see what's there. It just means our perception is biased simply because lack of information prevents comprehension. On a subconscious level we can perceive SOMETHING has happened. And pick up on those supposedly synchronious events, which in truth may be just the chronological order of the events as they transpired, beyond our information threshold. Something happened for sure. And it's told pictorially, musically, by people who are also picking up on those events seen and unseen. The vibes. The energies. The personas and psyches of the key components to the act.
