It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by switching yard
I viewed the DVD of the PBS show LENNON NYC.
May Pang is right. It's a load of propaganda mainly from control freak Yoko's perspective. I'm guessing she had final approval over every visual and every word of narration. Some of the friends of "Lennon" seem like, in interviews, CIA undercover agents trying their best to make the story sound plausible, to reinforce the "legend" (a word that has special meaning in the intelligence commuity).
Originally posted by switching yard
The official stories of every "Beatle," from 1967 to now, present more questions than answers. Some parts of the story lines seem to be illogical and not easily explained except that we're always conditioned to think, "Oh well, they were and are artists and artists lead strange lives." That's what we're supposed to think.
John Lennon:
"I mean, you can read into it what you like. It's just a little old statement. I was not very serious about it."
John Lennon:
"Oh, I don't know..."
Originally posted by switching yard
The guy in the documentary film LENNON NYC has a voice that sounds like the original, but physically, he doesn't look like original John. Maybe it's possible, with many hours of practice, to imitate someone else's voice.
Originally posted by switching yard
Also, I think the original was a bit more macho, had a fuller face, not so beaky and caved in on the sides nose, and had a somewhat more stocky build. As we've noted before, the original was into anglo or French blondes, not Asian women. The whole thing about the so-called "house husband" period is weird, too. Like, he just wanted to bake bread and watch TV while Yoko's job was handling all the finances and making all the big decisions. I just don't buy it. Something smells fishy about the "true" stories in LENNON NYC. May Pang has already spoken out that the show is full of disinformation.
Originally posted by switching yard
The filmmakers have the big graphic at the end: "John Lennon 1940 -- 1980" as if to burn that into your brain. If Lennon was replaced at the end of 1966, as I suspect, then that graphic is a lie. But you see, they want everyone to believe the official story. Sometime in the future when Sir passes away, there will be no end to the TV documentaries emphasizing that "Paul" lived a long, successful life touring right until the end, etc.
Originally posted by switching yard
Something is rotten about all the official stories regarding The Beatles. So much of it seems like cover stories to mask what really happened.
Originally posted by switching yard
The guy in the documentary film LENNON NYC has a voice that sounds like the original, but physically, he doesn't look like original John. Maybe it's possible, with many hours of practice, to imitate someone else's voice.
Originally posted by switching yard
Also, I think the original was a bit more macho, had a fuller face, not so beaky and caved in on the sides nose, and had a somewhat more stocky build. As we've noted before, the original was into anglo or French blondes, not Asian women. The whole thing about the so-called "house husband" period is weird, too. Like, he just wanted to bake bread and watch TV while Yoko's job was handling all the finances and making all the big decisions. I just don't buy it. Something smells fishy about the "true" stories in LENNON NYC. May Pang has already spoken out that the show is full of disinformation.
Originally posted by switching yard
The filmmakers have the big graphic at the end: "John Lennon 1940 -- 1980" as if to burn that into your brain. If Lennon was replaced at the end of 1966, as I suspect, then that graphic is a lie. But you see, they want everyone to believe the official story. Sometime in the future when Sir passes away, there will be no end to the TV documentaries emphasizing that "Paul" lived a long, successful life touring right until the end, etc.
Something is rotten about all the official stories regarding The Beatles. So much of it seems like cover stories to mask what really happened.
Originally posted by switching yard
Piers Morgan's lifetime ban of "gold digger" Heather Mills...
www.dailymail.co.uk...
You know, here they go again smearing Heather Mills. It wouldn't surprise me if Piers Morgan is an intelligence agent of some sort.
Originally posted by switching yard
The real reason they won't allow Mills on Morgan's CNN talk show is that she might say something that isn't, shall we say 'politically correct,' like the time she said the world can't handle the truth about her former husband. So no, she won't be allowed on CNN because she might spill the beans about what she knows and that wouldn't be kosher.
The charade about Piers Morgan and Sir, with Sir joking that Morgan cost him $50 million by setting him up with Mills in the first place --- it's all just very contrived and made up lies.
Originally posted by Getsmart
Paul took a very hard stand against satanist ritual abuse, as can be noted by the Butcher Album Cover which cannot be explained away any other way. It showed life sized dolls of babies, mangled and dismembered and mixed in with hunk of raw bleeding meat, with themselves dressed in butchers' smocks.
Blood Sacrifice as practiced by the British Royals
In case you hadn't understood, they made sure the back cover explained that a woman seen from the back, illustrating that her identity was kept hidden, officiating as a high priestess in such rituals with a string of sausages especially chosen to look like human intestines presented before her. Today we note that it is hardly credible that a militantly opposed Paul would side with the enemy and turn practicing Satanist, making his replacement a closed case.
On June 15, 1966, Capitol Records released a Beatles’ album without the Beatles’ consent entitled Yesterday and Today. This featured an image that has become known as the Butcher Cover and has become the most infamous picture of the Beatles.
On 25 March 1966, The Beatles went to Whitaker’s Chelsea studio for a photo session, intending to take photos for the cover of (and/or to promote) their forthcoming single, "Rain"/"Paperback Writer". The band and their photographer were determined to create something more than the run-of-the-mill publicity shots, and among the resulting images was one which has since become known as the "butcher" photo, in which The Beatles are depicted wearing white coats, draped with dismembered doll parts, slabs of meat and false teeth.
This now-legendary image, probably the single most famous image of the group, was originally conceived as one of a triptych of photographs, and intended as a surreal, satirical pop art observation on The Beatles’ fame. Whitaker’s inspirations for the images included the work of German surrealist Hans Bellmer, notably his 1937 book Die Puppe (La Poupée). Bellmer’s images of dismembered doll and mannequin parts were first published in the French Surrealist journal Minotaure in 1934.
t has often been claimed that The Beatles intended the "butcher cover" as a protest at the way their music was being "butchered" by their American label, Capitol Records. In a Nov. 15 1991 interview with Goldmine magazine, Whitaker discussed the butcher cover at length, and unequivocally put the protest claims to rest:
"How did that photo, featuring the Beatles among slabs of meat and decapitated dolls, come about? Was it your idea or the Beatles'?
"It was mine. Absolutely. It was part of three pictures that should have gone into an icon. And it was a rough. If you could imagine, the background of that picture should have been all gold. Around the heads would have gone silver halos, jewelled. Then there are two other pictures that are in the book [The Unseen Beatles], but not in colour.
"How did you prepare for the shoot?
"It was hard work. I had to go to the local butcher and get pork. I had to go to a doll factory and find the dolls. I had to go to an eye factory and find the eyes. False teeth. There's a lot in that photograph. I think John's almost-last written words were about that particular cover; that was pointed out to me by Martin Harrison, who wrote the text to my book. I didn't even know that, but I'm learning a lot.
"Why meat and dolls? There's been a lot of conjecture over the years about what that photo meant. The most popular theory is that it was a protest by the Beatles against Capitol Records for supposedly "butchering" their records in the States.
"Rubbish, absolute nonsense. If the trilogy or triptych of the three photographs had ever come together, it would have made sense. There is another set of photos in the book which is the Beatles with a girl with her back toward you, hanging on to sausages. Those sausages were meant to be an umbilical cord. Does this start to open a few chapters?
"Were you aware when you shot it that Capitol Records was going to use it as a record cover?"
"No."
"Were you upset when they did and then when they pulled it and replaced it with another photo?"
"Well, I shot that photo too, of them sitting on a trunk, the one that they pasted over it. I fairly remember being bewildered by the whole thing. I had no reason to be bewildered by it, purely and simply, because it could certainly be construed as a fairly shocking collection of bits and pieces to stick on a group of people and represent that in this country.
Quoted in 1966 in the British music magazine Disc and Music Echo, Whitaker said:
"I wanted to do a real experiment - people will jump to wrong conclusions about it being sick, but the whole thing is based on simplicity -- linking four very real people with something real. I got George to knock some nails into John’s head, and took some sausages along to get some other pictures, dressed them up in white smocks as butchers, and this is the result -- the use of the camera as a means of creating situations."
Whitaker was later quoted as saying that the basic motivation for making A Somnambulant Adventure came from the fact that he and The Beatles were "really fed up at taking what one had hoped would be designer-friendly publicity pictures". In the interview conducted just before his death in 1980 (referred to by Bob), John Lennon confirmed this.
John Lennon - "It was inspired by our boredom and resentment at having to do another photo session and another Beatles thing. We were sick to death of it. Bob was into Dali and making surreal pictures."
Whitaker had intended the triptych to be his "personal comment on the mass adulation of the group and the illusory nature of stardom … I had toured quite a lot of the world with them by then, and I was continually amused by the public adulation of four people".
The images in the triptych were actually intended as the foundation of a much more elaborate work. He had planned to retouch the photos to give them the appearance of a religious icon. The background was to be painted gold like a Russian icon and to have the Fab Four’s heads surrounded by jewelled halos, with the photos bordered in rainbow colours. This decoration, contrasted with the bizarre situations of the photos themselves, was evidently intended to create a surreal juxtaposition between the band's image and celebrity, and the underlying fact that they were just as real and human as everyone else.
"John played with all sorts of bits and pieces before we actually did the picture. I did a few outtake pictures which were of them actually playing with a box full of dolls which they pulled out and stuck all over themselves. There was an enormous amount of laughter. There was even George Harrison banging nails into John's head with a hammer. The actual conception of what is termed the ‘Butcher's Sleeve’ is a reasonably diverse piece of thinking ..."
" ... the [butcher] cover was an unfinished concept. It was just one of a series of photographs that would have made up a gate-fold cover. Behind the head of each Beatle would have been a golden halo and in the halo would have been placed a semi-precious stone. Then the background would have contained more gold, so it was rather like a Russian icon. It was just after John Lennon had said that the Beatles were more popular than Jesus Christ. In a material world that was an extremely true statement."
The first photo shows The Beatles facing a woman who stands with her back to the camera, her hands raised as if in surprise (or worship) while The Beatles hold a string of sausages. This was meant to represent the 'birth' of the Beatles, with the sausages serving as an umbilical cord. Whitaker explained: "My own thought was how the hell do you show that they've been born out of a woman the same as anybody else? An umbilical cord was one way of doing it."
The centre panel of the triptych is the image nowadays referred to as the "butcher" photo. It shows the (obviously stoned) Beatles dressed in butchers’ coats, draped with slabs of red meat, false teeth, glass eyes and dismembered doll parts. This picture was actually titled "A Somnambulant Adventure" and Bob’s intention was to add other elements to it which would create a jarring juxtaposition between idolisation of The Beatles' as gods of the pop world and their flesh and blood reality as ordinary human beings, but he was never able to realise this.
The photograph that would have been used for the right-hand panel of the triptych is one of George Harrison standing behind a seated John Lennon, hammer in hand, apparently driving nails into John's head. Whitaker explained that this picture was intended to demonstrate that the Beatles were not an illusion, not something to be worshipped, but people as real and substantial as "a piece of wood".
A fourth picture taken at the same session, but apparently not intended to be part of the triptych, is also included in Whitaker’s book The Unseen Beatles. It shows John framing Ringo's head with a cardboard box, on one of the flaps of which is written "2,000,000".
"I wanted to illustrate that, in a way, there was nothing more amazing about Ringo than anyone else on this earth. In this life he was just one of two million members of the human race. The idolization of fans reminded me of the story of the worship of the golden calf."
Like the famous 1963 nude photo of Christine Keeler taken by his contemporary Lewis Morley, Whitaker's "butcher" photo soon passed out of his control and took on a life of its own. The Beatles themselves seem to have been behind the use of the photo in British trade advertisements and then on the cover of the Capitol album Yesterday and Today. The prime mover seems to have been Paul McCartney. In his book Shout, Beatles biographer Philip Norman claims that Brian Epstein had misgivings about the picture and felt it would disrupt the band’s meticulously managed image, which had taken a hammering in the wake of the recent "bigger than Jesus" controversy. But according to Norman, the band overruled him.
Interestingly, the butcher photo made three appearances in print in the UK before it was released in the USA on the cover of Yesterday And Today. It was first published on page 2 of New Musical Express on 3 June 1966' in an EMI advertisement promoting the forthcoming single. The same ad was published in Disc and Music Echo the next day, June 4. Both these versions were in B&W. Its third appearance (and its first in colour) was on the front page of Disc and Music Echo on 11 June 1966 under the headline, "BEATLES: WHAT A CARVE-UP!"
It can also reportedly be glimpsed in photos taken during the making of the "Rain" and "Paperback Writer" film-clips, filmed on 19 May, in which Paul McCartney can be seen inspecting transparencies from the 25 March photo session. None of these appearances seem to have caused any appreciable comment in the UK, even though they were published only days before Capitol’s promotional release of Yesterday And Today in th U.S.
It should be noted that, up to and including Revolver, all The Beatles' American LPs (released by Capitol Records) differed markedly from their original EMI UK releases. The Capitol LPs were collections of material culled from the Beatles' previously-released British albums and singles, selected and packaged by Capitol especially for the American market. Yesterday and Today included songs from the earlier Help! and Rubber Soul LPs plus, unusually, four songs from Revolver, which would not be released in Britain for another three weeks. It was Capitol’s habit of cherry-picking album tracks and singles to compiled their own albums that was the origin of the urban myth (referred to above) about the butcher cover being some kind of protest against the American label.
Capitol printed the cover in early June, using the "butcher" photo, and the release was scheduled for 15 June 1966. Estimates of how many copies of the album were printed and/or distributed vary considerably. Whitaker put the number at 250,000, but other sources range from as high as 750,000 to 400,000 to as low as 60,000. According to another estimate, about 25,000 copies were sold prior to the recall. Mojo magazine reported that 60,000 copies were distributed to radio, media and Capitol branch offices, who showed it to retailers.
"Having finished that particular picture, it was snatched away from me and sent off to America. It was reproduced as a record cover without ever having the artwork completed by me. The cover layout was somebody else's conception. It was a good idea to ban it at the time, because it made no sense at all. It was just this rather horrific image of four Beatles, whom everybody loved, covered in raw meat, the arms, legs and torsos of dolls, and false teeth. But they are only objects placed on the Beatles, rather like making a movie. I mean what you want to read into it is entirely up to you. I was trying to show that the Beatles were flesh and blood."
It has been suggested that Lennon was the main impetus behind the photo being used, but according to Alan Livingstone, Capitol’s former president, (quoted in Mojo magazine in 2002), the decision to use the photo Yesterday And Today was mainly at the insistence of Paul McCartney:
Alan Livingston - "The reaction came back that the dealers refused to handle them. I called London and we went back and forth. My contact was mainly with Paul McCartney. He was adamant and felt very strongly that we should go forward. He said 'It's our comment on the war'. I don’t know why it was a comment on the war or if it would be interpreted that way."
Capitol were understandably touchy and could ill afford another Beatles-related controversy -- they were still reeling from the public-relations disaster of John Lennon’s notorious "bigger than Jesus" comment in March that year, which had sparked a wave of protests and record burnings in conservative areas of the U.S. The company reacted swiftly, issuing letters of apology, and on Tuesday 14 June PR manager Ron Tepper issued an official letter of recall in which he quoted a statement from Capitol’s President Alan W. Livingston:
"The original cover, created in England, was intended as a ‘pop art' satire. However a sampling of public opinion in the United States indicates that the cover design is subject to misinterpretation. For this reason, and to avoid any possible controversy or undeserved harm to the Beatles' image or reputation, Capitol has chosen to withdraw the LP and substitute a more generally acceptable design."
991.com...
Originally posted by Getsmart
Back side of Butcher album offering Human bowels to a High Priestess
Originally posted by Getsmart
Hi Switching Yard,
I'm glad you're contributing your precious research to this topic
Thanks to your hard work we are moving ahead
We are helped by the active harassment of trolls whose hysterical efforts to cover up Paul's murder and impede our investigation is flagrantly visible to anyone reading this thread, so that should spur us on instead of impede our participation.
Originally posted by Wally Hope
What's the PIDers response to their nonsense being ripped to shreds?
Just repeat it all again, rinse and repeat...
Originally posted by Getsmart
Like they say:
TRUTH HURTS
Originally posted by Getsmart
Like they say:
TRUTH HURTS
...the guilty and their hirelings.
Originally posted by switching yard
Like I've mentioned before, perhaps on a different but related thread, one reason I buy into PID is that I spent years studying the JFK hit. There were handlers and controllers in that operation, so I know that's a real SOP. The fellow who was gunned down by Jack Rubenstein --- in my opinion, his real identity is still in question. I was never convinced that the "patsy" was in fact "Lee Harvey Oswald." The true identities of all the actors in the JFK hit "drama" remain a mystery, but that whole stage play was performed by agents playing essentially scripted roles. So, in my estimation, the JFK hit scenario is proof of manufactured or stolen identities being used in black ops...
...Not sure what black ops wanted to gain from all this, but it sure played out like a successful operation. The whole 'planted clues' thing was a major component of this operation.
...What were they trying to accomplish with the imprinted message? Further research may reveal it.
Lennon was to return to Scotland many years later bringing his wife Yoko Ono and his young children, six-year-old Julian and five-year-old Kyoko, back to Durness for a holiday in the summer of 1969. By this time, of course, Lennon was one of the wealthiest and most famous men in the world and yet he took his Scottish break with very little ceremony. . . .
Just as he had done years before Lennon and family stayed with the Parkes' in Edinburgh before heading north in an Austin Maxi, a far cry from the psychedelic Rolls Royce more commonly associated with rock stars in the late 1960's!
However, the trip was to culminate in Lennon's second cataclysmic experience on the roads of Scotland. Just as the Beatles' 1960's had begun with a Scottish car crash, so they were to end when Lennon, who had notoriously poor eyesight and who rarely drove himself, crashed the Austin Maxi on a tight Highland road.
It was a serious smash, writing off the car and leaving Lennon requiring 17 stitches for facial injuries and Yoko needing 14 in her forehead. Lennon was rushed to Lawson Memorial Hospital in Golspie, Sutherland where he was to spend five days convalescing. Ironically the peace and tranquillity of the hospital provided Lennon with a welcome break from the hectic life he was leading in 1969 the height of his celebrity and notoriety when he and Yoko were regularly front-page news with their famous 'bed-in' peace protests.
While a media frenzy was being whipped up in London around the release of Lennon's new single Give Peace A Chance, the singer himself was enjoying fresh fruit scones, home-made marmalade and line-caught salmon while reading the newspapers quietly in the secluded grounds of a Scottish hospital! On returning to London Lennon told reporters, "If you're going to have a car crash, try and arrange for it to happen in the Highlands. The hospital there was just great!"
Around the same time as Lennon's accident, over on the other side of Scotland, on the west coast, his former songwriting partner was also beginning to fall for the charms of life north of the border.
Sir Paul McCartney originally bought High Park Farm near Campbeltown in 1968 as a tax break, but he soon grew to love the atmosphere of the property with its westerly views over the Kintyre peninsula and has credited the place with helping him recover from the depression he suffered in the wake of the Beatles split. "It's like a little hideaway," McCartney said. "I love it. I love the people there. I can sort of breathe when I get up there. Breathe pure air."
SOURCE: The Beatles and Scotland
"Rudolf Hess was Hitler’s Deputy Fuhrer. In theory, he was the one man who could act on behalf of Adolf Hitler, should the Fuhrer be unable to act for himself." ..."Had he, in his seemingly boundless devotion to Adolf Hitler, acted on behalf of the Fuhrer and then spent the rest of his life hiding his dead leader’s secrets?" ..."He asked to be escorted to the Duke of Hamilton’s home, which was nearby. He also asked his captors if they were friends with the Duke. He said, “I have an important message for him.” ..."Churchill’s actions after the odd capture of the Deputy Fuhrer suggest that he may have had some hand in the situation as well." ..."Some conspiracy theorists say that his memories were erased."
SOURCE: Why Did Rudolf Hess Fly to Scotland?
..."in 1899 Crowley acquired Boleskine House, in Foyers on the shore of Loch Ness in Scotland. He subsequently developed a love of Scottish culture, describing himself as the "Laird of Boleskine" and took to wearing traditional highland dress, even during visits back to London.
..."During World War II, Ian Fleming and others proposed a disinformation plot in which Crowley would have helped an MI5 agent supply Nazi official Rudolf Hess with faked horoscopes. They could then pass along false information about an alleged pro-German circle in Britain. The government abandoned this plan when Hess flew to Scotland, crashing his plane on the moors near Eaglesham, and was captured. Fleming then suggested using Crowley as an interrogator to determine the influence of astrology on other Nazi leaders, but his superiors rejected this plan. At some point, Fleming also suggested that Britain could use Enochian as a code in order to plant evidence."
Wikipedia: Aleister Crowley
Originally posted by Getsmart
This brings to mind the book "Was Hitler a British Agent" given that we know that the man behind The Beatles who presumably even chose their name, Aleister Crowley, was closely tied to Adolf Hitler.
Originally posted by Getsmart
We also note that Hitler spent the better part of a year from 1912 to 1913 in Liverpool where his brother Alois lived from which he was most often absent according to his sister-in law.
Originally posted by edmond dantes
And, LOL, like Dakudo, I would like to hear how a guy who died in 1947 managed to help put together the Beatles more than a decade later.
Originally posted by Dakudo
Aleister Crowley died in 1947. The Beatles were formed in 1960. So, Einstein, how the hell could Crowley be "behind The Beatles" when he had been dead for 13 years!?
Originally posted by Getsmart
We also note that Hitler spent the better part of a year from 1912 to 1913 in Liverpool where his brother Alois lived from which he was most often absent according to his sister-in law.
Originally posted by Dakudo
LOL. You take an old, unproven myth as gospel?
Originally posted by Dakudo
Perhaps the most exhaustively researched book on Hitler's years is Brigitte Hamann's Hitlers Wien: Lehrjahre eines Diktators, published in English as Hitler's Vienna: A Dictator's Apprenticeship by the Oxford University Press. Much of the book is historiographical, as Dr. Hamann debunks many myths concerning Hitler's early life. Her work has received rave reviews (Hans Mommsen said that it made all other studies of Hitler's youth "redundant") and is highly recommended.
In her book, Hamann writes of Hitler's sister-in-law's story about the purported Liverpool visit - November 1912, to April 1913 (certainly not the "better part of a year" as you foolishly claim.
Hamann states that Hitler in fact stayed at a particular men's hostel in Vienna from February 1910 until May 1913. Hamann reached this conclusion by conducting research at several Austrian archives and locating the registration forms that under Habsburg law each city resident had to fill out when changing address or leaving the country (in fact, one of Hitler's registration forms is actually reproduced in the book). In this way, she was able to find precise dates of Hitler's comings and goings before he finally moved to Germany on 25 May 1913.
Originally posted by Dakudo
Instead of coming on here to post half-baked, ill-informed and patently untrue nonsense, try doing some research first.
You are a total embarrassment.
Originally posted by Getsmart
Originally posted by Dakudo
Aleister Crowley died in 1947. The Beatles were formed in 1960. So, Einstein, how the hell could Crowley be "behind The Beatles" when he had been dead for 13 years!?
As the satanic 'spiritual father' of Tavistock having aided this Institute in furthering its experiments in creating demonic Alters for British Military Intelligence Mind Control operations performed on its secret agents infiltrating Nazi Germany, Crowley was well positioned as a key persona in this community with an oversight role. Call it rubbish as you will deny anything anyone says who doesn't agree with you that your lame Impostor is not the person he impersonates.
Crowley had an obsession with the Mystical powers of the Egyptian Sacred Scarab. The BEETLE was one of the most powerful propagators ... using DUNG just like today's Movie and Music Industries propagate mental oblivion using pseudo-cultural garbage. It is my contention that Crowley laid the groundwork for such a group of
propagators to take on the Occult Role of Sacred BEATLES who were glorified accordingly.
After the assassination of the originals, it was in my own humble artistic estimation, indeed DUNG which was used to propagate the occult Mind Control message to warp people's view of our world and leading to the ultimate goal of Aleister Crowley, the UNLEASHING OF LEGIONS OF DEMONS by opening portals of Hell in HELTER SKELTER, something which the perverse impersonator you so revere - Sir FAUL - promoted by propagating such DUNG in his recording HELTER SKELTER.
Originally posted by Getsmart
This brings to mind the book "Was Hitler a British Agent" given that we know that the man behind The Beatles who presumably even chose their name, Aleister Crowley, was closely tied to Adolf Hitler.
Originally posted by Getsmart
We also note that Hitler spent the better part of a year from 1912 to 1913 in Liverpool where his brother Alois lived from which he was most often absent according to his sister-in law.
Originally posted by Dakudo
LOL. You take an old, unproven myth as gospel?
Originally posted by GetsmartI am entitled to believe Hitler's own sister-in-law's account of his visit. I see no reason why she would have lied about this. Stating otherwise goes against logic.
Originally posted by Dakudo
Perhaps the most exhaustively researched book on Hitler's years is Brigitte Hamann's Hitlers Wien: Lehrjahre eines Diktators, published in English as Hitler's Vienna: A Dictator's Apprenticeship by the Oxford University Press. Much of the book is historiographical, as Dr. Hamann debunks many myths concerning Hitler's early life. Her work has received rave reviews (Hans Mommsen said that it made all other studies of Hitler's youth "redundant") and is highly recommended.
In her book, Hamann writes of Hitler's sister-in-law's story about the purported Liverpool visit - November 1912, to April 1913 (certainly not the "better part of a year" as you foolishly claim.
Hamann states that Hitler in fact stayed at a particular men's hostel in Vienna from February 1910 until May 1913. Hamann reached this conclusion by conducting research at several Austrian archives and locating the registration forms that under Habsburg law each city resident had to fill out when changing address or leaving the country (in fact, one of Hitler's registration forms is actually reproduced in the book). In this way, she was able to find precise dates of Hitler's comings and goings before he finally moved to Germany on 25 May 1913.
Didn't you know that Hitler, once he moved into Austria, sought out and methodically destroyed any evidence of his past and his childhood which might be found anywhere ?
This is allegedly one reason why his former friend he used to frequent and paint small pictures with for sale to tourists met with an untimely end, to silence him.
I have done quite a lot of research about many topics you couldn't blow a fart at, so verify your statements before you wind up 'embarrassing yourself'.
Originally posted by Getsmart
As the satanic 'spiritual father' of Tavistock having aided this Institute in furthering its experiments in creating demonic Alters for British Military Intelligence Mind Control operations performed on its secret agents infiltrating Nazi Germany, Crowley was well positioned as a key persona in this community with an oversight role. Call it rubbish as you will deny anything anyone says who doesn't agree with you that your lame Impostor is not the person he impersonates.
Crowley had an obsession with the Mystical powers of the Egyptian Sacred Scarab. The BEETLE was one of the most powerful propagators ... using DUNG just like today's Movie and Music Industries propagate mental oblivion using pseudo-cultural garbage. It is my contention that Crowley laid the groundwork for such a group of
propagators to take on the Occult Role of Sacred BEATLES who were glorified accordingly.
After the assassination of the originals, it was in my own humble artistic estimation, indeed DUNG which was used to propagate the occult Mind Control message to warp people's view of our world and leading to the ultimate goal of Aleister Crowley, the UNLEASHING OF LEGIONS OF DEMONS by opening portals of Hell in HELTER SKELTER, something which the perverse impersonator you so revere - Sir FAUL - promoted by propagating such DUNG in his recording HELTER SKELTER.