|
Post by BeatlePaul on Aug 13, 2004 21:48:23 GMT
I beg your pardon, but it was you who said you drank from buckets, not me. That quote was attibuted to you, not me. I don't drink Sun King's kool-aid. I read, learn, and think rather than live in an Oliver Stone world of paranoid delusions. From John Lennon interview: PLAYBOY: Did it trouble you when the interpretations of your songs were destructive, such as when Charles Manson claimed that your lyrics were messages to him? LENNON: No. It has nothing to do with me. It's like that guy, Son of Sam, who was having these talks with the dog. [glow=red,2,300]Manson was just an extreme version of the people who came up with the "Paul is dead" thing ... [/glow] No, I am not the one brainwashed, like Patricia Krenwinkle and Susan Atkins. It's the PIDDERS. .... about LIES on PID ... Faul Interview Life Magazine November 7, 1969Faul: " It is all bloody stupid....I was wearing a black flower because they ran out of red ones ."THE TRUTH: The reference at: www.geocities.com/~beatleboy1/dbmlife69.int.htmlFound here in this forum at: 60if.proboards21.com/index.cgi?board=faul&action=display&thread=1078442223.... I can say if that is not enough ... from the same interview Faul (alias Billy Shepherd) says: " On Abbey Road we were wearing our ordinary clothes. I was walking barefoot because it was a hot day. THE TRUTH: Actually Faul wanted to wear sandals to avoid burning his feet from the hot asphalt before the final shots. Sadly Beatles interviews were FULL OF LIES after September 1966 or, in the words of George Harrison : "What has been told about the Beatles is 99% false".
|
|
|
Post by BeatlePaul on Aug 13, 2004 22:06:53 GMT
.... by the way ... John was the one who published this song in 1968: .... ANOTHER clue for you all ... in 1968? .... John was the PID creator and main maker ...
|
|
|
Post by BeatlePaul on Aug 14, 2004 9:46:04 GMT
How many times was there a reference to the word "bill" or the name "Bill" in the Beatles' work after September 1966? Or about people called Bill? Or about people who changed their name from William to Paul?
|
|
|
Post by devilsadv on Aug 16, 2004 12:47:19 GMT
that quote was attributed to youAfter the Illuminati types framed their mind-controlled patsy Manson with the "Helter Skelter" op, the Apple crowd was paranoid about being found liable for implanting any hidden meanings in the music -- thus the ridiculous, over the top denials that followed. Manson framed? Who did the killings? You side with Charles Manson? Are you part of "The Family"? You are a defender of Charles Manson? Do you live in that big hole under Death Valley? Well, that explains a lot about what is going on here.
|
|
|
Post by TotalInformation on Aug 16, 2004 21:39:26 GMT
I "side with" truth.
You admittedly (if subconsciously) side with, and advocate for, devils.
What is going on here is that your devilish mind-control programming -- successfully implanted by Manson's own mind-masters -- is being threatened and you are responding by lashing out maniacally.
Wipe the spittle off your chin; and try not to get any on the keyboard.
|
|
|
Post by BeatlePaul on Aug 16, 2004 21:41:37 GMT
Well, that explains a lot about what is going on here. Yours devils-adv
|
|
|
Post by devilsadv on Aug 17, 2004 18:57:42 GMT
I "side with" truth. You admittedly (if subconsciously) side with, and advocate for, devils. What is going on here is that your devilish mind-control programming -- successfully implanted by Manson's own mind-masters -- is being threatened and you are responding by lashing out maniacally. Wipe the spittle off your chin; and try not to get any on the keyboard. Hey! This is fun. Interestingly, its the flat-earthers that believe in cover-ups and vast conspiracies by the governments of the world and the media. You have no idea who I am, what my background is even where I am from. Yet, you know I have mind-controlled programming from Manson's own mind-masters. I have no stake in Manson's guilt or innocence or in whether Paul is dead or not. I still have to go to work, take care of my family, eat, sleep and go to the bathroom either way. Enlighten me. Who killed Sharon Tate and the others? Have you read the book "Helter Skelter?" Do you believe Manson should be released from jail? If so, would you allow him to stay in your home? Who is programming my mind without my knowing it? I have been to pro-Manson websites and read writings of Manson and his followers that still believe in him. I have read many different stories in defense of Manson that contradict each other. Which one do you believe? I am the opposite of what you say. I do not simply accept what I am told, I demand hard evidence and reason. There is a great deal of hard evidence linking Manson with the killings. Where is the hard evidence showing his innocence? It is easy to speculate and write a story about what happened. I could write a book that Elvis killed Sharon Tate, but that doesn't make it true. There is hard evidence as to what happened to Sharon Tate. Fingerprints, murder weapons, testimony from Manson's followers. No hard evidence was presented to refute it even by Manson himself. The truth is I don't just believe what I am told. I look at both sides, then decide which makes more sense. My decision might be right, it might be wrong, but I decide based on the facts. If I am presented with evidence to the other side, then I will change my mind. But, it's going to take more that someone telling me I'm brainwashed and insulting me. My question is simple. Why should I believe you?
|
|
|
Post by TotalInformation on Aug 17, 2004 20:07:11 GMT
The flat-earthers believed the Earth was flat until their priesthood got around to telling them otherwise.
You have similarly revealed yourself to be incapable of serious complex thought; and unworthy of my respect or time.
So, ask away, but don't expect me to spoon-feed you.
Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by devilsadv on Aug 17, 2004 20:53:44 GMT
There are flat-earthers today who believe the earth to be flat and that governments and the media are involved in a massive cover-up to conceal that fact, bug wit. Of course, had I been alive back then, I would have studied those who said the world was round and made my own decision. I see. If I don't bow down and blindly accept what you say, then I am incapable of complex thought. Thus, it follows that to prove that I am capable of complex thought, I must mindlessly believe what you are telling me. In other words, I must believe that Manson was framed because...you say so. You need to provide no proof, no explanations. You are omnipotent. You are the priest, and I have to believe what you say until you tell me otherwise. Yes, I can now see how that is so much more complex than my reading books, researching both sides of the issue and drawing my own conclusions.
|
|
|
Post by LUCY on Aug 17, 2004 21:06:30 GMT
There are flat-earthers today who believe the earth to be flat and that governments and the media are involved in a massive cover-up to conceal that fact, bug wit. SAY WHAT? back off BUG ga loo.
|
|
|
Post by devilsadv on Aug 17, 2004 21:10:36 GMT
Hey, I liked that. That's a good one. I'm going to go home and listen to that song.
|
|
|
Post by LUCY on Aug 17, 2004 21:19:06 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Perplexed on Aug 18, 2004 3:57:04 GMT
When the sherical earth comes between the spherical sun and the sperical moon, the phenomenon of the eclipse is seen by all on the face of the moon. We see the moon go thru its cycles each month---we see the spherocity of most large heavenly bodies. As did the ancients. The idea of a ball shaped earth was not new to the time of Galileo or Columbus. The Greeks thought it, and older. The Catholic church, and other powers, wanted to retain this knowledge; it was a idea fostered for the power of propaganda. Newly discovered lands on a round earth for the "powers that be", NOT the common man.
The idea that up until then everyone assumed the earth was round is an idea fostered in our time. We mistakenly quote that old elementary school nonsense about that. It isn't so. Old writings by Pliny and Aristotle. others, ancient astronomers, KNEW the truth.
So, the real lie ISN'T that everyone before 1492 was in the dark; the real lie is that nowadays we BELIEVE that they were. They were not. Maybe we are.............
|
|
|
Post by TotalInformation on Aug 18, 2004 4:02:04 GMT
I don't bow down and blindly accept what you say
I would never counsel as such.
I am incapable of complex thought.
This is correct.
|
|
|
Post by TotalInformation on Aug 18, 2004 5:40:08 GMT
So, the real lie ISN'T that everyone before 1492 was in the dark; the real lie is that nowadays we BELIEVE that they were. They were not. Maybe we are.............
The elite, the educated were not in the dark, the masses were.
1492 - Spain beats back the Muslims. 1492 - Spain sends first "official" expedition to America "by accident"
Was the Western Hemisphere a reward from Rome to Spain? Now that Europe is secured for Rome, it's on to America?
Columbus' real name wasn't even Columbus, apparently -- the whole epsiode; just another fairy tale.
I haven't watched it on my TiVo yet, but there was a special about Columbus' real identity on History Channel a couple weeks ago.
|
|
|
Post by Perplexed on Aug 18, 2004 5:47:52 GMT
So, the real lie ISN'T that everyone before 1492 was in the dark; the real lie is that nowadays we BELIEVE that they were. They were not. Maybe we are.............The elite, the educated were not in the dark, the masses were. 1492 - Spain beats back the Muslims. 1492 - Spain sends first "official" expedition to America "by accident" Agreed. Cristofori Colon---or Colom-----or Columbo. There may be historical confusion with a man from the Catalan region of Spain who was a lifelong seaman from childhood, and a poor weaver from Genoa, Italy with a very similar name..............who went to sea at 20. Was the Western Hemisphere a reward from Rome to Spain? Now that Europe is secured for Rome, it's on to America? Columbus' real name wasn't even Columbus, apparently -- the whole epsiode; just another fairy tale. I haven't watched it on my TiVo yet, but there was a special about Columbus' real identity on History Channel a couple weeks ago.
|
|
|
Post by devilsadv on Aug 18, 2004 13:11:57 GMT
You have similarly revealed yourself to be incapable of serious complex thought; and unworthy of my respect or time. You talk like one of the evil characters in my kid's Power Ranger videos. Who writes your material? You admittedly (if subconsciously) side with, and advocate for, devils. Gee, you discovered that the word "devils" was in devilsadv. Boy that was clever! Yes, and if you play the theme to the "Mr. Ed Show" backwards, you can here satan and I yelling "Paul is alive." I am incapable of complex thought. This is correct. Taking my words out of context. Typical of someone of your ilk. Well, it's been entertaining, but I have to go warm up the black helicopters now. "I'm laughing at the superior intellect."
|
|
|
Post by Perplexed on Aug 19, 2004 6:42:24 GMT
Choice dialog from a choice film.......... Princess Leia: "Ah, Governor Tarkin. I should have recognised your foul stench when I was brought on board." Gov. Tarkin: "Aahh, charming to the LAST, I see." He proceeds to vaporise the planet Alderon. He remains outwardly detached, visibly cool. Later....when the rebel forces are making headway against the Death Star: An underling Lieutenant: "Governor, shall I have an escape pod ready for your departure?" (paraphrase) Gov. Tarkin: "WHAT!!!!!! Evacuate????In our moment of triumph? Absurd!" (paraphrase) The rebels proceed to blow up the Death Star. His visible remains? Outwardly detached. Cool. He should have remembered an earlier response in this epic 1977 film: "VADAR! RELEASE HIM!!!This bickering is pointless!!!" Loosen up, my friends,this was for a laugh. I am not picking on either of you---just trying to suggest (with comedy) that it might not be "selling your viewpoint out" to just lighten up a little.
|
|
|
Post by devilsadv on Aug 19, 2004 12:49:44 GMT
Just to set your mind at ease, I am loose. I was having fun, especially the back-off bug-a-loo bit.
I was just making a point, so it wasn't pointless unlike my pencil, which is pointless, so I'm going to go sharpen it to a fine point, but it will just break again so what's the point?
|
|
|
Post by SunKing on Aug 19, 2004 13:25:53 GMT
From devils-adv story I stopped posting because of the political attacks. I'm just a guy working everyday. Wife, kids, house. I got pretty sick of reading that people that believe as I do are right wing fanatics. You know, there are many left wing fanatics as well who will believe ANYTHING negative about Bush. They are as mindless and reactionary as sheep who blindly follow their President. Why don't we stick with the great subject that we are all here for?
|
|
|
Post by devilsadv on Aug 19, 2004 14:45:22 GMT
Good. Thanks for bringing that up again. There are sheep that blindly follow their leaders and never ask questions. Then there are others who are the opposite, who blindly reject the powers that be. The sheep, without thinking, say I believe it, while the others, without thinking, say I don't believe it. They are two sides of the same coin. Both react automatically and emotionally without taking time to analyze the facts.
I am a skeptic. I ask questions to get as much information as possible before I decide something.
I have been here for more than a year, now. I was intrigued when I first saw 60IF because it was not the same old jibberish of the old PID story. I was open to it, but I am a skeptic; I don't just buy into things easily. Therefore, even though I liked what I saw, I wanted to play devil's advocate, thus the name, and ask questions. My first question, which might have been on the old board, was answered to my satisfaction and I continued to ask questions as needed.
But things began to change. As tougher questions were asked, the answers became evasive or non-existent. The attitude displayed by TI in this thread became the norm. This is the attitude of "you don't accept what I say, so you are stupid and unworthy of any answers." Anyone who questioned what was said by the select few was put down and called a troll. They wanted us to be sheep and I ain't no sheep to be lead to slaughter.
To put the quote in context, I was reacting to something said by I don't remember who, who said the airliners that flew into the twin towers were not hijacked, but were flown by remote control by people in our government by orders of the President. Upon reading this, there were people readily agreeing with this and saying what an evil person the President was for doing this. Well, considering that there were pictures of the hijackers at the airport, and there were phone calls from the planes to relatives saying they were hijacked and that members of the flight crew had been murdered, there seemed to be reasonable doubt as to the remote control story. But if one dared to defend our government from such a charge, then that person was immediatley labeled a right-wing fanatic by some who were members back then. It was getting out of hand and thus the post above. As usually happens when religion or politics enters the picture, things get ugly. I don't believe Sun King or TI were involved in any of the ugliness. In fact, Sun King and the other moderators put a lid on it, got things back on course, and, I believe, purged the board of the unwanted exchanges. He is to be applauded for that.
|
|
|
Post by LUCY on Aug 19, 2004 15:28:13 GMT
".......and there were phone calls from the plane to relatives saying they were hijacked and that members of the flight crew had been murdered........" isn't it impossible to make a celphone call from that altitude (then/now) ?
|
|
|
Post by devilsadv on Aug 19, 2004 15:42:49 GMT
In my general statement above, I said "phone calls" on "planes". There were varying altitudes for the different planes at different times. In no way am I saying that every person who tried to make a call at any altitude was successful. On one of the planes that flew into the towers, a flight attendant was talking to her supervisor. The plane was flying at or below the height of the twin towers. She was on the phone as it flew into the building. And I really don't think the supervisor of the dead flight attendant would lie about it. At the very least, it should raise some doubt as to the validity of the remote-control story. answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=173057skepdic.com/illuminati.html
|
|
|
Post by beatled on Aug 19, 2004 19:15:32 GMT
The Google link was interesting, but the bottom line seems to that it's not allowed due to federal regulations. The reason being given was that a cell phone would try to connect with too many base stations due to the "cone like" dispersion of the cell phone's signal. It stops a hair short of explaining whether it's possible to make a phone call though, that's what the person was asking, and that question was NOT answered. What happens when a cell phone has too many towers to "choose from"? Is there a record other than the 911 calls of it being done? Also, there were more calls other than the one you cited allegedly made via cell phone and NOT by people at almost ground level like the flight attendant. Check this out; www.nypress.com/17/30/news&columns/AlanCabal.cfm
|
|
|
Post by devilsadv on Aug 19, 2004 20:22:33 GMT
Yes, that is the standard article that shows up on all of the conspiracy sites. In the site I referenced, it is said a couple of times that many credible sources indicate that they do work above 30,000 feet. Here is one source: "Brenda Raney, Verizon Wireless spokesperson, said that RF signals actually can broadcast fairly high. On Sept. 11, the planes were flying low when people started using their phones. And, each call lasted 60 seconds or less. 'They also were digital phones, and there's a little bit more leeway on those digital phones, so it worked,' she said. It helped that the planes were flying in areas with plenty of cell sites, too. Even United Airlines flight 93, which crashed in rural Pennsylvania, was supported by several nearby cell sites, Raney added." I also pulled up a site that had nothing to do with 9/11 or cell phones. It was a website for pilots and there was an article by a pilot discussing regulations. This pilot stated in the article that he has seen pilots talking on cell phones in violation of federal laws many times. Here is another site: www.risingup.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-154.htmlIt doesn't really matter, though, because the post I was talking about was dealing with the plane that flew into the trade center and when that call was made, the plane was very low. The point was, that you have to have a healthy skepticism and not just believe something because you want to believe it. It's important to reasearch sites other than the ones trying to sell you on their conspiracy theory. Those sites only tell you what they want you to hear. Verify independently!
|
|