|
|
Post by sabrina on Dec 11, 2010 14:35:46 GMT -5
I agree that Ken's stuff has been off for a while. Not sure what that's about. However, are we allowed to explore the idea that some of the entities masquerading as celebs, politicians, etc. might be reptilians? And that some are synthetics, some human/ET hybrids, some clones, some simple lookalike/hired replacements? Or are we not allowed to talk about the reptilian idea here at all? Just looking for what the baseline ground rules are here. Were you guys objecting to discussing the idea of reptilians, or were you objecting to John quoting a reference from ken Adachi's site which happened to talk about people like Emma Thompson and Tom Cruise being reptilians? Is it the IDEA itself -- or the source being quoted that you gals are pissed off about? If that source pisses you off, fine, but you jumped down John's throat like he's an assh*le or an idiot and I've enjoyed his other posts. Please don't chase people away just because they post something that pisses you off. It gets really, really annoying and then we're back to board with just Artemis posting 24/7 and nobody else. I for one welcome other voices here. I am one of the one's who think reptilian possession, or outright aliens/hybrids etc. can explain some of this. I know I'm in the minority here. |
|
|
|
Post by artemis on Dec 11, 2010 16:57:44 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by msmoonlite on Dec 11, 2010 20:30:33 GMT -5
This is a tough call. His jaw does seem different, more squared than in earlier photos. His nose longer, maybe? I would vote replaced. IMO.
|
|
|
|
Post by sherlok on Dec 11, 2010 21:20:44 GMT -5
I am one of the one's who think reptilian possession, or outright aliens/hybrids etc. can explain some of this. Me too. And alter-switching as well. |
|
|
|
Post by sherlok on Dec 11, 2010 21:23:45 GMT -5
Getting back to something very valuable that got missed the other day, one of John's posts, he mentioned a quote from another site about how the negative beings start to get a "dead" eye after a while -- which kind of amazed me since so MANY of these creatures we analyze here have wonky eyes. Paris Hilton, Sarah Palin with her lazy eye, and many of the others -- mostly replacements, maybe? What is up with that. Interesting. Good point. I suspect it may be a side effect of MK programming. |
|
|
|
Post by The Mask on Dec 11, 2010 21:53:19 GMT -5
This is a tough call. His jaw does seem different, more squared than in earlier photos. His nose longer, maybe? I would vote replaced. IMO. Me too. Specifically-cloned.  |
|
|
|
Post by lucy on Dec 11, 2010 22:28:17 GMT -5
Regarding the "dead eye" thing, I've also noticed a very dark eye, like most of it is dark, hardly any white is shown. Makes me think if there is a reptillian spirit in these people, they lose the soul in their eyes, and many are always wearing dark shades as they can't take bright lights. Bono of U2 comes to mind, and FIngo is always wearing shades...as though they don't want to see the light.
There is also the deadness that there is no sparkle to it. Whether it's part reptillian, part mind control or if they are a clone...the eyes are key into figuring out if they are still human, or this strange entity.
I think Corey may have been replaced as well. I just don't get that sense of it being the same person. I know that some people get plastic surgery, and you can still tell it's them because of their eyes, but I 'm not getting this as being the same person.
|
|
John
Research Assisstant
Posts: 57
|
Post by John on Dec 15, 2010 16:59:57 GMT -5
Regarding the "dead eye" thing, I've also noticed a very dark eye, like most of it is dark, hardly any white is shown. Makes me think if there is a reptillian spirit in these people, they lose the soul in their eyes, and many are always wearing dark shades as they can't take bright lights. Bono of U2 comes to mind, and FIngo is always wearing shades...as though they don't want to see the light. There is also the deadness that there is no sparkle to it. Whether it's part reptillian, part mind control or if they are a clone...the eyes are key into figuring out if they are still human, or this strange entity. I think Corey may have been replaced as well. I just don't get that sense of it being the same person. I know that some people get plastic surgery, and you can still tell it's them because of their eyes, but I 'm not getting this as being the same person. Interesting the eye thing. When they start doing those satanic signs it suggest to me reptilian possession over cloning, although I wonder if some of the clones have reptilian souls in them, over some that obviously don't, the stepford looking ones. Eg Pacino, Gore, although not sure if they are clones? Streep is another. This is a weird look  She looks like a rep clone, or just possessed, or what? Different to the standard stepford look:  So if they are both clones, what is the difference, as they have a completely different enitity inside IMO her left eye could be bigger as DB mentions: "You can see the energy animating a person, by the love radiating out from their RIGHT eye. Left eye is WILL power. Now, look at the pics of daddy bush and all these leaders. Always a lazy or dead right eye, and an unusually larger left eye. That solar plexus and Sacral center energies dictating terms. Now, get any pics of people you KNOW to have good and loving hearts. Balanced eyes, very warm, and a very tight - not sagging - fluidity in their face. If they are being overshadowed - either good or ill - the overshadowing being's visage will show in their face. If it is heart center and higher, you'll see it instantly. A warm light about them. You know the rest..." Not sure what is bugging Artemis but I think she is, to use Don Harkins terminology, in a different veil to me whale.to/b/sl.html . If I mention that sort of stuff she gets fearful, and that brings out the agression, which she hopes will get me to go away, I am guessing. Reminds me of when I just casually mentioned to me son (25) about so and so being a satanist and he bit my head off! I have never been on Ickes's site until this week to look at a cloning thread btw, which i found while googling and it is all very well logging all these freaks but who or what is going to stop them? "A cloned animal for example, has no soul. At least it doesn't have a soul like other animals, a soul which has been planted into the animals by the group animal. The human, in fact the human who cloned the animals, has to give them souls. A cloned animal shares the soul with the animal from which it's been cloned. In the process the human being makes himself guilty. But he is not advanced enough to be able to give an animal a soul. " whale.to/b/holstein.htmltalking of scary looks, michelle obama gives me the creeps, has she been done? |
|
John
Research Assisstant
Posts: 57
|
Post by John on Dec 15, 2010 18:21:18 GMT -5
Some of these stars are not necessarily "replaced" but they seem to be "plastic" like stepford wives. They have no wrinkles, no blemishes, they seem to be just "perfect". I'm thinking Katie may be one of the stepford wives...types. Some celebrities have a normal look for a time, and then you see them and they just seem to look like there's not one mole, wrinkle, freckle... There must be purely MK ones as I though Spears was having been through Disney. Eg like Brice Taylor. Katie looks a Stepford, but what is a Stepford, is it a clone, or a MK one? And do they need to MK the clones like they do the MKs? Don Bradley was being interviewed by Opra, and when the break came he was looking to have a chat but a handler came and put her in park mode. that new Cruise looks like a clone to me, but how do we know that is the only Cruise about, and is the original isn't somewhere else? |
|
|
|
Post by lucy on Dec 15, 2010 19:53:42 GMT -5
I think that a Stepford is part clone and part mind control. Since a clone has no soul, perhaps programming the mind to do what they want can bring about a sex slave, but don't have to worry about switching alters because only humans dissociate from painful experiences and an alter is developed to take that part of the abuse.
That's just my take on it. I am not going on scientific information, because most of what they tell us as information is disinfo.
|
|
John
Research Assisstant
Posts: 57
|
Post by John on Dec 16, 2010 7:19:17 GMT -5
Regarding the "dead eye" thing, I've also noticed a very dark eye, like most of it is dark, hardly any white is shown. Makes me think if there is a reptillian spirit in these people, they lose the soul in their eyes, and many are always wearing dark shades as they can't take bright lights. Bono of U2 comes to mind, and FIngo is always wearing shades...as though they don't want to see the light. There is a bit about on black eyes, this is a criminal with some, in this photo anyway  www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1218898/Downfall-man-called-Cocky-Europes-wanted-criminal-taste-killing-300m-drugs-fortune.htmlwearing shades all the time. I can guess why jack Nickolson doesn't want anyone to see his eyes, scary. Bono, enough said. Did someone say clones like to wear glasses? I know vampires can't take the light, if u see Bill Shoebeleins (spelling) Interview with a Vampire. he had to stay inside during the day. So could be the entity inside |
|
|
|
Post by artemis on Dec 16, 2010 9:46:52 GMT -5
Thats giving me headaches. How much a child/a child's neck, for instance, can grow in a few months? Or is it the photographic angle? And the chin, the ears, the eyes, the lips? What has happened to this child and since when? omg.yahoo.com/blogs/crush/willow-whips-up-a-new-hairdo/524June 2010  July  September  |
|
|
|
Post by The Mask on Dec 16, 2010 10:56:45 GMT -5
^The June pic seems completely different than the other two.
|
|
|
|
Post by artemis on Dec 16, 2010 11:05:21 GMT -5
True, it does. OMG!!! Any idea whats all about this poor girl?
|
|
|
|
Post by msmoonlite on Dec 16, 2010 12:35:33 GMT -5
Any way you look at her you still see pixie ears, pixie eyes. Is this a new one pixie programming? Or tinker bell programming. She looks like a pixie.
|
|
