I don’t quite understand why you are replying to me with this image?!
Don’t these photos prove your point……I haven’t followed this story particularly, but a friend sent me this photo yesterday. Make of it what you will.
My point? I had several in my analysis.
I still don't quite get it, do you really mean something like that: No one ever looks exactly the same as for instance we can see in this image comparing an impostor with the real Maxwell because of the nose?
If the above then, yes, you have not been following this story or analysis on this thread particularly, I agree.
Thank you. Yes. These discussions and interactions are very interesting and helpful in learning to understand things...
1 Like
@ThePrisoner What's funny?
I just believe it for many reasons might be better to in sover ways discuss and do some intelligent analyses of things, and not just take them at face value and for instance rely on confirmation bias.
But...ok, I will stop again with the discourse, crapping and diatribes if my words here are causing discomfort. I'm reachable via email.
1:13 Jesus said: Do not lie; and do not do what you hate, for all things are manifest before Heaven. For there is nothing hidden that shall not be revealed and there is nothing covered that shall remain without being uncovered. (source)
Perhaps, except in the case of Paul McCartney. That was the most elaborate switch on so many levels. Yet, even Ringo Starr finally admitted to it (Paul's replacement after Paul's death in 1966) in an article, but at that point it seemed like only a few cared. Replacing people is so incredibly deceptive, yet apparently not uncommon.
Here's one more reply even though I feel I'm being trolled here.
Please check your sources carefully before posting.
This story is nonsense. If you don't believe that please tell me more about "The Hollywood Inquirer" and see if you and find the original interview.
Original article on Internet Archive (slow loading) as the original site is gone now.
World News Daily Report. Does it look trustworthy?
Origin
Fabricated report initially published by the satirical website World News Daily Report (WNDR) in 2015. WNDR is a known "fake news" outlet specializing in sensationalist, fictional stories.
Core Claim
Ringo Starr allegedly gave an interview to the "Hollywood Inquirer" admitting Paul McCartney died in a car crash on November 9, 1966, and was replaced by "Billy Shears."
Fact Check
- Non-existent Source: The "Hollywood Inquirer" is a fictional publication created for the article.
- Absence of Record: No legitimate news outlet, biographer, or primary source has ever recorded such a statement from Ringo Starr.
- Internal Inconsistency: McCartney was active and photographed throughout late 1966 and 1967. The "Billy Shears" reference is a fictional character from the Sgt. Pepper album, introduced in the lyrics of the title track.
Cognitive Assessment
The article utilizes "confirmation bias" to exploit the long-standing "Paul is Dead" urban legend (originating in 1969). It repackages 50-year-old conspiracy tropes as "new" testimony to generate click-through traffic.
Conclusion
Total fabrication. Satirical content mistaken for journalism.
Yes, this particular Beatles articles is a good example. Satire article, someone started spreading it around as real for some reason, and it continues doing the rounds.
Also a thought experiment I give to you.
Simulate in your mind that some of my posts above were written by someone else, perhaps a new user. How would you respond?
Would you respond any differently than if it was cybe? And why? And what if it wasn't cybe, if cybe of yesterday is not the cybe of today? Do you judge cybe by your memory of him and filter him through past events that you may not have understood correctly and is there a possibility that "the self" is judging him wrongly for one reason or another? Should you be doing that?
Thank you.
The Internet Archive copies of World News Daily Report load very slow.
Here are screenshots of it.
Explanation what it was:-
World News Daily Report (WNDR) legally classified itself as a "satirical" website, but it functionally operated as a massive fake news and hoax factory. Unlike true satire that offers clever social commentary, WNDR relied purely on absurd, shocking, and often grotesque fabricated stories to grab attention. The site used a hidden disclaimer to shield itself from lawsuits while using real photos and names to trick social media users into believing the articles were factual. Its entire purpose was to exploit social media algorithms by triggering outrage and confusion, causing people to share outrageous headlines without reading the actual content. Ultimately, WNDR was a highly optimized business model designed to generate massive ad revenue by capitalizing on the public's lack of media literacy.
Might I add pedantic to dogmatic and diatribe. Please stop derailing the thread.
I’m starting my message with definitions, because to have a sane discussion, we must use words accurately and understand their weight. This, I believe is paramount. And everyone reading this might not know exactly what these words mean.
Definitions
dogma
a principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true.diatribe
a forceful and bitter verbal attack against someone or something.pedantic
excessively concerned with minor details or rules; overscrupulous.derail
obstruct (a process) by diverting it from its intended course.
I do not believe that you are correct.
I do not think that these matters are minor, or that I'm excessively concerned with them.
Identifying a WNDR hoax is not a minor detail; it is the identification of a falsehood and a lesson in media litteracy (It's actually called literacy but litteracy, from the word litter, or rubbish looks a bit funny). In the pursuit of Truth, there are no "minor" lies.
I strove not to communicate dogmatically, or act as what I said was incontrovertibly true, as can be seen in my messages above, where I included words like "I believe" or "probably". I then provided material as evidence of what I was saying.
I understand how and why you might you feel I am being forceful or attacking you. I am not.
If you perceive bitterness, I ask you to read again. I am communicating out of brotherly love, not hate. To see a brother or sister being deceived by a poor analysis (Maxwell) "hoax factory" and to say nothing would be an act of hate, not love.
This response addresses the "derail" accusation by reframing the purpose of the thread and the forum as a whole. It uses the "Prison Planet" logic from The Way home (TWH) and the site's official "Direction and Guidance" to show that focusing only on external "monsters" is a trap of the ego.
The Mirror of the "Monsters"
(under construction)
Regarding the accusation of "derailing" this thread:
The title of this thread is "MONSTERS WALK AMONG US." While it is easy—and even satisfying to the animal ego—to point the finger at high-profile "monsters" like Epstein or Maxwell, we must not let that spectacle distract us from a more uncomfortable Truth.
As established in the In-depth Direction and Guidance for this forum, our purpose here is not merely to gossip about the world's corruption, but to reinstate God’s Law and organize the "Elect." To do that, we must understand exactly who and where we are.
According to The Way home or face The Fire, we are not "innocent bystanders" watching a horror movie. We are convicted felons serving time on a Prison Planet. We were sent here because we rebelled against our Creator. If we focus solely on the "monsters" out there, we conveniently forget the monster within: the "Self" (the animal ego).
If we act with pride, bitterness, or deception, we are simply acting like the very monsters we claim to despise. We are "monsters" in training until we master the "Self" and bring it into subjection to the Being.
This forum is intended as a practice ground. It is a place where the "Chosen" must learn to communicate and cooperate with absolute honesty and unselfishness. If we cannot even handle a correction regarding a hoax article without resorting to ego-defensive labels like "pedantic" or "derailing," how can we ever hope to govern under God’s Law?
I am not "derailing" the thread. I am trying to keep it on the only track that matters: the one that leads us out of this prison.
Why focusing on "Self" is Vital (The Logic of the Prisoner)
- The Pharisee Trap: Focusing on the sins of others makes one feel "righteous" by comparison. This is a delusion. A prisoner who mocks a more famous prisoner is still a prisoner.
- The Course of the Website: The guidelines state clearly: "Defending-Gibraltar was not created for people to argue about irrelevant topics; it was created to help The Lord take over Gibraltar and build the Kingdom."
- The Communication Test: If we cannot distinguish between "rubbish" (satire) and "Truth," our communications are corrupted. We cannot cooperate if our "Signal" is full of "Noise."
Scriptural Scaffolding: The Internal Monster
1. On the "Felon" Status and Humility
- Luke 18:13-14: " And the taxman, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as [his] eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner.
18:14 I tell you, this man went down to his house justified [rather] than the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted." - The Point: We are all "felons." The moment we think we are better than the "monsters" we discuss, we lose our justification.
2. The Beam in Our Own Eye
- Matthew 7:3-5: "And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?... Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye."
- The Point: The "Self" is the beam. If we don't handle our own "monster" (the ego), we are blind to the reality of the world.
3. The Deceitfulness of the Human Heart (The Animal Self)
- Jeremiah 17:9: "The heart [is] deceitful above all [things], and desperately wicked: who can know it?"
- The Point: The "animal body" and its emotions are naturally "monstrous." Our task is to overcome them, not to feed them with sensationalism.
4. On Cooperation and the Body of Christ
- 1 Corinthians 12:25: "That there should be no schism in the body; but [that] the members should have the same care one for another."
- The Point: If we treat each other with "bitterness" or ignore corrections, we create a "schism." We fail the practice of the Kingdom.
5. The Warning to the Watchman
- Proverbs 10:17: "He [is in] the way of life that keepeth instruction: but he that refuseth reproof erreth."
- The Point: Refusing a correction (about the hoax) is the definition of "erring." Accepting it is the "way of life."
Peace be upon you,
Staffan
Understood.
Thank-you. Likewise.
Thank you
I really value this write-up; it’s helping me reflect on 'the monster within' without the urge to point fingers at anyone else. Just this morning, Father was teaching me how to see through His eyes, ears, and mind, rather than through the lens of blame. He began showing me the specific mistakes I made in the past and why I had to go through this 'training' the hard way.
He was very specific about how I used to criticize religious people simply because I felt privileged to recognize Christ in His second coming. Back then, I didn't realize the weight or the ripple effect of that pride—not until He sat me down and walked me through the details. He reminded me how His mercy is still molding me, and that every single one of us is carrying our own different burdens and sins."
To be clear ... "understood" was used as in heard what you said, but I do not agree with all of it.
On the topic of monsters, I can recall two books and one documentary that documented evidence that Paul McCartney died in 1966 and was replaced. Deception at that level, that was mostly successful, is a crime and led to it becoming commonplace (lying to the public). I read that it was the monster E2 that ordered that the fake Paul remain to cover-up the real Paul's death. I recall when the fake Paul performed on the telly after a rather long hiatus for the group. The recollection is as if I saw it only yesterday because it is that clear. At the time, switching people, was not considered, so, it was confusing; but, I KNEW it was not him. I rest my case, no matter what you have to say on the matter.
I was not feeling attacked, nor did I perceive bitterness re your reply about the Ringo Starr article. So, what exactly do you mean by "I (referring to you) understand"? Evidently, your understanding is lacking. Consider reading what 'you wrote' about ego, etc. and take your own advice.
The words pedantic, dogmatic, diatribe and derailing were directed at "self" behaviour. Perhaps, it is you who felt attacked. That was not my intention. Apologies, if that was the case.
Thank-you @Nam. It is often that I find your posts helpful and insightful. I have come to realize over time and through trials that I am not better (or less) than others. Balance is key. I hope that what is about to be said will not offend anyone reading this, but when the words "chosen" and "Elect" are used, I consider that no-one is saved yet. There is little that is more personal between a soul and Father than is salvation and ultimately redemption. We do not score our own report cards nor are we the Judge (Only Father and The Lord). "Love" is leaving this world slowly, but surely. That is not meant on a personal level, for surely without His Love the burden/s would be too great to bear, but as a whole humanity is in decline. And yet, there is so much to be thankful for. Wishing You and Others a Blessed Sabbath day.
Mathew 24:22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the Elect's sake those days shall be shortened.
You are welcome and thank you for appreciating.
Well people are motivated by selfish desires as written in 2 Timothy 3, this generation doesn't value love.
1 Like
