|
Post by B on May 2, 2019 18:23:32 GMT -5
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelle_RemembersOne of the things I remember reading in the book was that Michelle claimed that some satanists would show their commitment to the evil one by having their middle finger amputated. This had to do with what the fingers represent in palmistry. The index finger, for example, relates to intellect. The pinkie finger pertains to sex and sex drive. The middle finger represented will, determination, self-motivation, and so forth, and so those who had it removed were demonstrating their willingness to be led by satan, letting him call the shots, as it were (according to the book). If such an individual were asked about his / her missing finger, they would say something like they lost it at the saw mill, or some such thing. So, the finger(s) that remain(s) signify the 'powers' one retains? Why Japan? Who or what is 'the fly'? And who is 'we'? 'The Nazz', eh?… Blue Meanies? Recurring Paul-As-Fool-On-The-Hill theme. "Hold you in his armchair / You can feel his disease" Who is the 'I' of this statement? I want to respond, but I am too blind today.
|
|
|
Post by ekauqodielak on May 3, 2019 0:59:28 GMT -5
No worries. Give those peepers a break.
|
|
|
Post by timmyb52 on May 4, 2019 10:50:03 GMT -5
The black and white pic of George Harrison playing the acoustic guitar with a super extended finger appears to be a finger slide attachment IMHO. I don't recall any mention of an instance of George Harrison playing bottleneck slide guitar in 1962 during televised appearances in which the band played their Rock N Roll radio hits. As a devoted blues fan, that woulda snagged in my mind. I, also, don't see anything about the hands in these insets that could be construed as finger slides of any kind. Are cameras somehow allowing us to catch glimpses of these familiar spirit attachments much like tape recorders catch the voices of disembodied voices not heard by the human ear? I think it's the opposite. I think cameras (depending on who is wielding them...) can allow us to overcome the incantation of personality and cultivated distractions to see what's really there. In other words: that the potency of the emotional fixation fans have to the objects of their admiration is hypnagogic, blinding, somewhat metaphysical in its power, and only in the absence of those charms is truth visible. The lens must be degreased and the fog machine turned off. Also: I've been running some facial recognition software on batches of 'Beatles' but 1) it unfortunately does not include hand recognition and 2) the rampant photo-doctoring by dezo (and others...), the quantity of plastic surgery two of the Pauls have had, and the frequency with which those same two employed facial prosthetics from the mid-60s through the mid-80s has complicated being able to construct linear timeline. Additionally....I'm floating at about 75% convinced, at this point, that one of the Johns became a Paul, that Tara Browne was an early George and that, not only were there two Pete Bests (check the noses), but that one of them was a Ringo pinch hitter. So, for veracity, I'm relying mostly on cross-checking undoctored fan snapshots from Meet The Beatles For Real (a blog of fan encounters with the Beatles that has been gathering images since 2009), although, as I mentioned to you previously, later uploads include many officially sanctioned/PR/dezo/bullshitgarbage shots. I have to admit that my finger slide explanation is very weak...and George is not known to have ever used the technique until the end of The Beatles. But why use doubles who have deformities? Was it hard to find lookalikes without deformities? And what are the chances of finding doubles with the same type of deformities? I almost feel that these pics are purposely being manipulated before release to the public or either later by fans trying to muddy up the PID punchbowl even more. And if they were manipulated by EMI/Apple...the question is...why? What is the message being transmitted? It is all very,very odd IMHO. To be honest, without the original negatives to these photos it is very hard for myself personally to determine whether this is real or a fraud of some kind. This is what I hate about photo comparisons and analysis. In this modern digital world it is very easy to manipulate images and fool people. I'm at a total loss as to what to believe in regards to this issue of disfigurement in the pictures. In all fairness to K and all of his hard work and research...for now...I remain on the fence...but still open minded enough to consider the possibility that the pics are genuine as shown. Please K...keep sharing more of what you find and uncover on these boards..it is very interesting and thought provoking. I will in turn share more of the occult connections I have found.
|
|
|
Post by ekauqodielak on May 5, 2019 2:46:57 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by ekauqodielak on May 5, 2019 14:29:44 GMT -5
Here are some drawings from John Lennon's In His Own Write & one gouache painting. Notice anything?.......... PERHAPS LIFE'S KARMIC WHEEL HAD BENT HIS SPOKES UNTITLED ILLUSTRATION OF A BOY WITH SIX BIRDS UNTITLED ILLUSTRATION OF A FOUR-EYED GUITAR PLAYER UNTITLED ILLUSTRATION OF TWO MEN WITH TWO CREATURES ON LEADS UNTITLED ILLUSTRATION OF A SEATED MAN CONFRONTED BY A FLOATING CREATURE UNTITLED ILLUSTRATION OF A FOUR-HANDED CREATURE
|
|
|
Post by timmyb52 on May 9, 2019 19:08:27 GMT -5
Yes K...I have plans to share more soon as my research is completed. Right now I am investigating missing limbs and fingers in connection with the music industry. Here is a small example. Black Sabbath’s Tony Iommi Chopped Fingers And Plastic Fingertips www.feelnumb.com/2009/10/16/black-sabbaths-tony-iommi-plastic-fingertips/Just a quick comment on this photo. George is to be sacrificed...for he has SINNED (DENNIS).
|
|
|
Post by ekauqodielak on May 9, 2019 19:31:33 GMT -5
Wait, shit, now we have to be able to READ BACKWARDS to unravel this‽
I'm impressed by Iommi making his own fingers.
|
|
|
Post by timmyb52 on May 9, 2019 19:36:33 GMT -5
Wait, shit, now we have to be able to READ BACKWARDS to unravel this‽ I'm impressed by Iommi making his own fingers. Yes...an interesting story. But did he really lose his fingers due to an accident as claimed? Or did something else happen to them? Maybe...maybe not?
|
|
|
Post by timmyb52 on May 9, 2019 19:42:00 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by timmyb52 on May 9, 2019 19:52:30 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by ekauqodielak on May 9, 2019 19:59:02 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by timmyb52 on May 9, 2019 20:07:38 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by ekauqodielak on May 9, 2019 20:36:43 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by ekauqodielak on May 9, 2019 22:07:01 GMT -5
Some of you have probably seen this photo before. I don't know if it's a fucking snuff pic or just eerily coincidental, but this is supposedly a photo Brian Epstein sent of himself to a friend in NY, seemingly taken one week before his official date of death. I post it here because of the peculiar creepy hand in the lower right quadrant of the frame.
|
|
|
Post by hotman637 on May 11, 2019 11:41:49 GMT -5
It is interesting about the hands! But here is an article in GQ with a picture of Fauls hands and they look perfect! So either there is another Faul or pictures are faked or some other trickery! It seem suspicious that almost all the pictures of injured hands are blurry! www.gq.com/story/the-untold-stories-of-paul-mccartney
|
|
|
Post by ekauqodielak on May 11, 2019 12:01:32 GMT -5
It is interesting about the hands! But here is an article in GQ with a picture of Fauls hands and they look perfect! So either there is another Faul or pictures are faked or some other trickery! It seem suspicious that almost all the pictures of injured hands are blurry! www.gq.com/story/the-untold-stories-of-paul-mccartneyImages like that from GQ are all retouched as a matter of course. So, those wouldn't even be useful in the differentiation of Pauls by face. No one looks like what they look like in magazines. In general, old photographs tend to be kinda blurry, whether there are Beatles in them or not. The below is a screen grab from CBS News' 60 Minutes, S51E01, which aired on September 30th, 2018. I'm sure you could dig up that episode and watch it in 4k fidelity, if you think these images are too 'blurry'. His hands are in motion. AND he's missing the tips of fingers on his right hand (and the index of the left looks iffy).
|
|
|
Post by hotman637 on May 11, 2019 12:32:17 GMT -5
So how do we know that the video on 60 Minutes is not doctored?
|
|
|
Post by ekauqodielak on May 11, 2019 12:52:21 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by ekauqodielak on May 11, 2019 12:53:43 GMT -5
So how do we know that the video on 60 Minutes is not doctored? You think they digitally removed the tips of Paul's fingers in post for 60 Minutes?
|
|
|
Post by hotman637 on May 11, 2019 14:07:05 GMT -5
So how do we know that the video on 60 Minutes is not doctored? You think they digitally removed the tips of Paul's fingers in post for 60 Minutes? Whoever is behind all this bullshit is obviously crazy so why not?
|
|
|
Post by ekauqodielak on May 11, 2019 18:44:47 GMT -5
The George from this gig in '58: & this '66 Tara Browne, in Paris, with a lug jawed "Paul" have the exact same syndactyly: It doesn't mean they're the same person, though the facial recognition software I've been playing with frequently pings early Georges as matching Tara. That specific footage of "Tara" & "Paul" is, additionally, interesting in that the cameraman very deliberately begins the shot by lingering on Paul's hand, which appears to have at minimum a prosthetic pinky on it, & then panning directly to Tara's webbed fingers.
|
|
|
Post by ekauqodielak on May 11, 2019 18:54:47 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by ekauqodielak on May 11, 2019 18:58:19 GMT -5
[ Whoever is behind all this bullshit is obviously crazy so why not? I think we got enrolled in Proboards experiment on how to create a new hoax. Got privacy disclosure from Proboards stating they own us. They control my internet feed. Maybe Proboards are not a start up. I wonder how legal this is. Seriously?
|
|
|
Post by hotman637 on May 11, 2019 19:27:14 GMT -5
So they ALL have deformed hands! Does this not contradict the theory that there are a dozen different "Pauls" and multiples of everyone else too! In other words ONE conspiracy theory contradicts ANOTHER conspiracy theory! If they are going to have a million multiples at least SOME of them would come out OK! Speaking of that how do we know that all these fakes are not just faked pictures just like the GQ article! Sooner or later we just have to say "what a big pile of BULLSHIT by retards!" Here listen to REAL rock and roll by people who have all their fingers! www.youtube.com/watch?v=IVFGn5hkAyg
|
|
|
Post by hotman637 on May 11, 2019 19:34:53 GMT -5
The George from this gig in '58: & this '66 Tara Browne, in Paris, with a lug jawed "Paul" have the exact same syndactyly: It doesn't mean they're the same person, though the facial recognition software I've been playing with frequently pings early Georges as matching Tara. That specific footage of "Tara" & "Paul" is, additionally, interesting in that the cameraman very deliberately begins the shot by lingering on Paul's hand, which appears to have at minimum a prosthetic pinky on it, & then panning directly to Tara's webbed fingers. I saw a post a long time ago where "Tara" EXACTLY matched the "Keith Richards" that now is in the Stones! It is amazing!
|
|