"People don't want to know the truth, they could never ever handle it."
But she never says what the truth is. She just says she was betrayed beyond belief, but she does not talk about what the betrayal was.
This is just another case of using vague soundbites to "prove" a biased view is absolutely and irrefutably correct even though there is no concrete proof. Would you like to be on trial for your life if the prosecution used such tactics against you to prove your guilt even if you were completely innocent? Until we have factual and demonstrable evidence, everything is just hearsay.
That's just one thing, and it's quite a statement, one of several that she's made.
It's the preponderance of evidence, the totality, not just a few isolated things here and there.
People are found guilty all the time by a preponderance of circumstantial evidence.
>Until we have factual and demonstrable evidence, everything is just hearsay.
There is. Sound analysis, DNA evidence, height difference, etc. Otherwise I'm a gullible idiot (which is what my wife calls me). It takes two things to find the truth. Interest, and time.
You might be interested but not the time, and you may have the time but you're not interested.
I thought initially it was the most insane thing I'd ever heard. But I researched it and I'm convinced.
This is long (below), it's three videos combined. IF you're interested. But to lambast people who have actually delved into it, and you haven't, that's not very fair.
Because, after all, it's impossible (so you think).
I don't care about the Beatles. The reason it's important is because it's all about mind control and Tavistock and social engineering. It's pretty dark (and that's the last thing people want to think about the Beatles, the occult being involved).
Read the book "The Memoirs of Billy Shears."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3I6B1nJexOA
But whatever floats your boat.
It's the preponderance of evidence, the totality, not just a few isolated things here and there.
Paul McCartney didn't die and was replaced and there is literally zero evidence of that. Just a lot of people making some shekels and getting some thrills making absurd shit up and seeing how many people believe it.
There is. Sound analysis, DNA evidence, height difference, etc. Otherwise I'm a gullible idiot (which is what my wife calls me). It takes two things to find the truth. Interest, and time.
No, there is not. Shall I post another video of sound analysis that disproves this nonsense? I have seen a lot of this "evidence" that "proves" Paul was replaced and it is half baked bullshit like the Ancient Aliens shows.
Hell, you'd know better if you were into the music scene and ever tried to find a bass player for a band! lol
Something tells me you don't believe this conspiracy.
It's the preponderance of evidence, the totality, not just a few isolated things here and there.
Yes, just like the holohoax preponderance of evidence.
People are found guilty all the time by a preponderance of circumstantial evidence.
The Nuremberg Trials.
The reason it's important is because it's all about mind control and Tavistock and social engineering.
I don't give a shit about the (((beatles))). Mind control didn't work on me with the (((beatles))) for that very reason.
We've all been 'mind-controlled' to an extent, you can't live and exist in this world without being affected to a degree by Satan and his machinations.
You're missing my points but let's drop it, we can agree on the most important things.
It's just interesting to me to see some of you guys here believe some conspiracy theories to be true but others are just too outlandish, too impossible to be true.
(post is archived)