|
Post by timmyb52 on Apr 10, 2019 15:14:49 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by ekauqodielak on Apr 10, 2019 15:16:34 GMT -5
I didn't want to rile additional homophobic tendencies on this site, but have wanted to say for a while that it's a bit naive to think Brian picked 'The Beatles' of all the middling Merseyside bands just because he saw exceptional promise in them. Really look at some of those pix of post-Hurricane, early-Beatle pocket twink Fingo... K...I agree...I think all of The Beatles were quite open about sex and sexuality and that this component had a lot to do with Epstein's (and other elites) intetest in the band. That makes me wonder if sending the boys to play German strip clubs, assuming that actually happened, was part of a next-level test, of sorts.
|
|
|
Post by hotman637 on Apr 10, 2019 16:46:03 GMT -5
If you don't believe in the phrase "fabricate intentions out of silences" then what are you doing here! That is the entire PURPOSE of a "conspiracy theory"! Confabulation is NOT how you get to the bottom of *anything* factual. One gathers data and asks questions. You don't invent answers to questions that aren't posed by the data and you don't ignore the data in favor of fantasy. That's just jerking off. Why are you here? Are you interesting in the TRUTH or in amplifying your confirmation biases? The ugly, paranoid fixations of unmedicated schizophrenics vlogging from empty tanked hatchbacks in the Walmart parking lots that they live in are not "Valid Source Material". These people have invented charts of illuminutty color coding for different levels of supposed sleeper agent sex slaves based upon...absolutely fucking nothing, the shapes of the clouds, the number of people they spotted in one afternoon all wearing Adidas, secret code only they can discern from the weather reports. And the abject lack of critical thinking applied to the supposed revelations of lunatics does nothing but drive the discourse away from Truth…or strands Reason in the metaphorical equivalent of the parking lot of a big box superstore. Who needs CoIntelPro when people are feeding themselves shit sandwiches willingly? WHEN ALL ELSE HAS FAILED that is EXACTLY what you have to do! I have been on these PID sights since 2002 and read about a million "clues" and theories and ideas and they are MORE CONFUSED than ever! There used to be ONE Paul and ONE Faul now there are a DOZEN Pauls and at least two Fauls and many are interchangeable! In other words they are in the middle of NOWHERE! They are FURTHER from an answer then ever! I was in the same boat with the JFK killing till I happen to see a video on FB showing JACKIE did it! So we have to FIND the "simple" answer that is WAY outside the box that may sound CRAZY!
|
|
|
Post by ekauqodielak on Apr 10, 2019 17:25:32 GMT -5
I told you I see Jackie shoot him, too. No one wants to see it. Or if they see it they insist it must be doctored. And I show them look these frames were censored from the original Zapruder, you can look at it all frame by frame here...And they still can't believe it. I still prefer the idea that Joan Crawford killed Kennedy because it's funnier, but there's no denying that Jackie is the one who pulls the trigger in that footage. Oh...unless it was Joan Crawford dressed up as Jackie O! I don't even know if I'm kidding at this point.
But the entire story of there only being two Pauls was the official cover story from go. Who do you think planted the rumor? They did. Somebody finally spoke up and said uh people are noticing the differences let's gaslight & discredit them with a 'conspiracy theory'. And I can understand why people with a very casual curiosity might buy that there were only two Pauls. But it's bullshit for anyone claiming to be a PID/PWR researcher, anyone who has spent hours of their life staring at pictures of those faces to continue to pretend there were only two Pauls. And that they never explore pre-Beatlemania Pauls should make it obvious that they're part of the machine and not just stupid.
|
|
|
Post by hotman637 on Apr 10, 2019 18:22:54 GMT -5
I told you I see Jackie shoot him, too. No one wants to see it. Or if they see it they insist it must be doctored. And I show them look these frames were censored from the original Zapruder, you can look at it all frame by frame here...And they still can't believe it. I still prefer the idea that Joan Crawford killed Kennedy because it's funnier, but there's no denying that Jackie is the one who pulls the trigger in that footage. Oh...unless it was Joan Crawford dressed up as Jackie O! I don't even know if I'm kidding at this point. But the entire story of their only being two Pauls was the official cover story from go. Who do you think planted the rumor? They did. Somebody finally spoke up and said uh people are noticing the differences let's gaslight & discredit them with a 'conspiracy theory'. And I can understand why people with a very casual curiosity might buy that there were only two Pauls. But it's bullshit for anyone claiming to be a PID/PWR researcher, anyone who has spent hours of their life staring at pictures of those faces to continue to pretend there were only two Pauls. And that they never explore pre-Beatlemania Pauls should make it obvious that they're part of the machine and not just stupid. Saying there are a bunch of Pauls is just like saying there are a bunch of Oswalds (and they do say that)! It does not prove anything as far as I can see! Finding more suspects does not help anything it only makes it worse!
|
|
|
Post by timmyb52 on Apr 10, 2019 18:43:06 GMT -5
K...I agree...I think all of The Beatles were quite open about sex and sexuality and that this component had a lot to do with Epstein's (and other elites) intetest in the band. That makes me wonder if sending the boys to play German strip clubs, assuming that actually happened, was part of a next-level test, of sorts. In interviews the members of The Beatles always say this period is what shaped them and defined their sound and image. A "test" and maybe more? An audition! "On behalf of myself and the rest of the band we hoped we passed the audition" -John Lennon
|
|
|
Post by timmyb52 on Apr 10, 2019 19:18:05 GMT -5
I told you I see Jackie shoot him, too. No one wants to see it. Or if they see it they insist it must be doctored. And I show them look these frames were censored from the original Zapruder, you can look at it all frame by frame here...And they still can't believe it. I still prefer the idea that Joan Crawford killed Kennedy because it's funnier, but there's no denying that Jackie is the one who pulls the trigger in that footage. Oh...unless it was Joan Crawford dressed up as Jackie O! I don't even know if I'm kidding at this point. But the entire story of their only being two Pauls was the official cover story from go. Who do you think planted the rumor? They did. Somebody finally spoke up and said uh people are noticing the differences let's gaslight & discredit them with a 'conspiracy theory'. And I can understand why people with a very casual curiosity might buy that there were only two Pauls. But it's bullshit for anyone claiming to be a PID/PWR researcher, anyone who has spent hours of their life staring at pictures of those faces to continue to pretend there were only two Pauls. And that they never explore pre-Beatlemania Pauls should make it obvious that they're part of the machine and not just stupid. Saying there are a bunch of Pauls is just like saying there are a bunch of Oswalds (and they do say that)! It does not prove anything as far as I can see! Finding more suspects does not help anything it only makes it worse! The facts are The Beatles used doubles...that is undeniable. The question is...how many...and why? They used doubles on tour many,many times...that is a fact. And if they used them on tour...why would they stop using them after the touring ended? Especially since the doubles proved to be so successful? I agree hotman, too many doubles is unlikely...but, a primary doubles Beatle unit was used and utilized by the group and their manager IMHO. This was the contractual job of the unit...to pose as doubles for the band...and they were contracted and obligated to play this part for many reasons. But the main reason for me was to give the real Beatles time to enjoy themselves and their families. Remember...many of The Beatles were married early on. It is my belief that Billy was the primary Paul double used...that is...until JPM decided to leave IMHO. Then Billy got a new contract to play Paul full time while the other Beatle doubles kept their part-time contracts. This new contractual agreement made with Billy was envisioned to be permanent...but was made difficult when the real JPM later returned as suggested by Apollo. The Beatles were more than just a musical group...they were a machine,made up of many seen and unseen parts that was responsible for the livlihoods of many people...not just the Beatles themselves. The same still holds true today! The machine cannot be allowed to die...it makes too much money!
|
|
|
Post by ekauqodielak on Apr 11, 2019 6:09:41 GMT -5
Saying there are a bunch of Pauls is just like saying there are a bunch of Oswalds (and they do say that)! It does not prove anything as far as I can see! Finding more suspects does not help anything it only makes it worse! There were two Oswalds. One of them lived in NYC until 1994. There are countless witness interactions with two different men known as Oswald at the same time in different places -- even on that day in Dallas. It's unproductive, at best, to reject reality because it's confusing or complicated or ridiculous. These scenarios are all of those things and they also happened. And you're not going to solve anything by willfully excluding facts you would prefer to be untrue. But really it doesn't sound like you're very interested in finding out the truth of what happened. It sounds like you want a clean, linear narrative, one which has little resemblance to what actually occurred, and you're intent upon excluding any data that discredits your desires. That's fine, you can do that. Lots of people do that. But don't pretend to be interested in the truth while buckling blinders to your head. Look, if you have evidence that supports your stance, by all means, share it. I'm sure everyone here would love for there to be a clearcut answer that solves this whole thing. But, the data as it appears today, without a viable alternate explanation, leaves one who has looked unable to deny that there were not only multiple Pauls, but multiples of all the Beatles. The earlier ones were closer matches and the later ones did a decent job hiding behind costumes and cosmetics but they are simply not the same people. These two sites do a good job of laying out preliminary evidence for multiples: The Fab 4 DozenThis site has been 'hidden' by its owner so...don't pass it around.
|
|
|
Post by hotman637 on Apr 11, 2019 11:35:14 GMT -5
You guys seem to miss my point!
You can have a HUNDRED Pauls or a HUNDRED Oswalds it DOES NOT MATTER they are only ment to be a DISTRACTION!
JACKIE KENNEDY killed JFK!
We may NEVER find out what happened to "Paul" because how can we EVER build a NARRATIVE that makes ANY SENSE?
|
|
|
Post by ekauqodielak on Apr 11, 2019 15:33:38 GMT -5
OK. But the sun MAY NOT come up tomorrow, either. And I MAY get hit by a bus this afternoon. And it COULD BE that we're all figments of someone else's imagination. Why are any of those reasons to stop trying to find answers to questions of interest? Why should any of the possible infinite outcomes be dissuasive? There being no concrete answer to the unknowable hasn't stopped humans from probing the nature of god/reality since the inception of sentience.
|
|
|
Post by ramone on Apr 11, 2019 16:44:10 GMT -5
Saying there are a bunch of Pauls is just like saying there are a bunch of Oswalds (and they do say that)! It does not prove anything as far as I can see! Finding more suspects does not help anything it only makes it worse! There were two Oswalds. One of them lived in NYC until 1994. There are countless witness interactions with two different men known as Oswald at the same time in different places -- even on that day in Dallas. Thought I read some years back 'Oswald' was at a liquor store early in the day and at the same time Oswald was working at the book D bldg.
|
|
|
Post by ekauqodielak on Apr 11, 2019 16:56:20 GMT -5
And both were seen entering the movie theater about 30 minutes apart. One went out the door behind the screen. The other was arrested.
|
|
|
Post by hotman637 on Apr 12, 2019 11:55:16 GMT -5
OK. But the sun MAY NOT come up tomorrow, either. And I MAY get hit by a bus this afternoon. And it COULD BE that we're all figments of someone else's imagination. Why are any of those reasons to stop trying to find answers to questions of interest? Why should any of the possible infinite outcomes be dissuasive? There being no concrete answer to the unknowable hasn't stopped humans from probing the nature of god/reality since the inception of sentience. What is the nature of God/ reality? God is a vain and jealous woman and the Devil is a man and they fight about sex money and kids! The ONLY story that there is!
|
|
|
Post by ekauqodielak on Apr 12, 2019 15:18:56 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by timmyb52 on Apr 12, 2019 16:33:06 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by timmyb52 on Apr 12, 2019 16:34:25 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by B on Apr 17, 2019 20:31:39 GMT -5
Sage of Quay™ - Mike Williams w/Mark Devlin - The Disclosure of Beatle Bill “McCartney” (Apr 2019)www.youtube.com/watch?v=L2sGXk9fuH4Mike Williams' Paul Is Dead Channel Published on Apr 10, 2019 "Mike Williams, aka Sage of Quay, rejoins me to discuss various aspects of the Paul McCartney replacement, many of which have not been discussed in these contexts before. "
|
|
|
Post by ekauqodielak on Apr 18, 2019 0:59:59 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by ekauqodielak on Apr 18, 2019 2:01:41 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by joseph on Apr 18, 2019 9:59:53 GMT -5
He's got a lie to sell and he's not going to let facts get in the way of that.
|
|
|
Post by hotman637 on Apr 18, 2019 11:54:50 GMT -5
All "Satanism" means is that you worship God as a man!
Since virtually ALL religions (nowadays) worship God as a man virtually ALL religion is "Satanic"!
So when they say something is "Satanic" that does not mean it is "fake" it just means it is invented by men!
It USED to be that God was worshipped as a woman and that makes perfect sense because God is a vain and jealous
woman and the Devil is a man and they fight about sex money and kids!
The sooner we realize this the quicker all the bullshit will at least be reduced!
|
|
|
Post by ekauqodielak on Apr 18, 2019 14:23:33 GMT -5
All "Satanism" means is that you worship God as a man! Since virtually ALL religions (nowadays) worship God as a man virtually ALL religion is "Satanic"! So when they say something is "Satanic" that does not mean it is "fake" it just means it is invented by men! It USED to be that God was worshipped as a woman and that makes perfect sense because God is a vain and jealous woman and the Devil is a man and they fight about sex money and kids! The sooner we realize this the quicker all the bullshit will at least be reduced! The entire story is imaginary. It's a faerie tale invented to explain lightning and perpetuated to keep the underclasses docile. We know how lightning works now. But it turns out dogme is stronger than any chemical compound, so the fables continue to be recited. Reality is: chaos within the confines of entropy. There's no point; there's no grand plan; there's no deeper meaning, other than that with which we choose to imbue our experience. A person who needs the threat of hell to behave with decency would never be granted entry into the imaginary party called heaven. The absence of wisdom in the wind makes it no less wondrous. Theism is a distraction from The Point, which was the entire point of my post. Gettin' meta up in this bitch.
|
|
|
Post by hotman637 on Apr 18, 2019 16:08:38 GMT -5
All "Satanism" means is that you worship God as a man! Since virtually ALL religions (nowadays) worship God as a man virtually ALL religion is "Satanic"! So when they say something is "Satanic" that does not mean it is "fake" it just means it is invented by men! It USED to be that God was worshipped as a woman and that makes perfect sense because God is a vain and jealous woman and the Devil is a man and they fight about sex money and kids! The sooner we realize this the quicker all the bullshit will at least be reduced! The entire story is imaginary. It's a faerie tale invented to explain lightning and perpetuated to keep the underclasses docile. We know how lightning works now. But it turns out dogme is stronger than any chemical compound, so the fables continue to be recited. Reality is: chaos within the confines of entropy. There's no point; there's no grand plan; there's no deeper meaning, other than that with which we choose to imbue our experience. A person who needs the threat of hell to behave with decency would never be granted entry into the imaginary party called heaven. The absence of wisdom in the wind makes it no less wondrous. Theism is a distraction from The Point, which was the entire point of my post. Gettin' meta up in this bitch. Here listen to this video and you will feel MUCH BETTER! www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xk1nw2xj1B8
|
|
|
Post by ekauqodielak on Apr 18, 2019 19:09:29 GMT -5
I feel fine.
|
|
|
Post by B on Apr 18, 2019 20:15:43 GMT -5
Paul on stilts!
|
|