About those photos …

Waxy face

The above photo has been sitting here on my computer for maybe two years. It comes from the days when I was deceiving myself into thinking that twins were all about us. But it still bugs me. It is said to be Taylor Swift with her parents. The problem is that Swift looks like a mannequin. Below the fold is another photo of Swift.

Swift for finger comparisonFingersI grabbed that one because her left hand is visible. In addition to the waxy quality of her face and unusual positioning of the left arm (as if in a store window), the fingers on that hand look unusually long. You can judge for yourself, but looking just at the length of the upper phalanx on the ring finger, the one from the mannequin shot above looks grotesquely long. In the photo to the left it looks normal.

There are other photos of Swift with these two people, said to be her parents, that look more real. But set that aside. Why the need for an elaborate fake?

Floating hand

The above photo is said to be of Barack Obama with his mother grandparents. I call it the “floating hand” photo, as the hand on Obama’s right shoulder cannot be connected to the man on his right unless he, like Swift, has an unusually long appendages.

This blog post is not about the people above. It is about two other matters, the potential for self-deception, and the wonderment about us as we find that so many famous people have fake photos in their background.

Self-deception: I have written one more installment of the Eva Perón series, the final one. I am holding off publishing it as Richard has more work to do and wants to do the writing himself. Dealing with two-dimensional images, poring over them, resizing them and straightening them and then superimposing them on one another is hard work. I don’t do a lot of that anymore as I had such a grand time with twins, and so much of it turned out to be self-fulfilling. That both disheartened and scared me. I am constantly aware of that trap. That does not mean I won’t fall into it again. It does mean that there has to be other evidence beyond photos, otherwise there is no case to be made.

Critics of the Perón work instantly jumped on the photos, not seeing what Richard and I saw and quickly assuming I was delusional. I have to entertain that possibility. After all, It’s happened before. Consequently, I asked every critic to address the whole body of evidence. None did. They only wanted to discuss the photos.

The other evidence was as follows:

  • Eva Perón‘s death was suspicious. She supposedly had a fake birth certificate and tried to make herself three years older. The result was her being 33 instead of 30. We all know about that number. We were told that she had a miracle worker for an undertaker, a doctor who filled her body with glycerine, making her lifelike in death. We discovered there were wax images of her. Her body disappeared for 17 years, rediscovered in a grave in Italy, and said to have had a lobotomy. Hmmm.
  • Madonna, the singer, has one of those voices that cannot sell without considerable enhancement. She had some nice tunes to her credit (or written for her), but without studio enhancement and production values, she was not much. Yet she rose to international fame on those attributes. That can be no accident. People of real talent are waiting tables. Why does one so mediocre become so famous?
  • The image and music of Madonna was part of a much larger project in which women’s morals were loosened, and sex became an object in itself. Madonna appeared nude in a photo book in Penthouse fashion. Speaking of Penthouse, its counterpart, Playboy, was used to introduce pornography into mainstream culture*. Madonna, one of many, was used in this larger project to get women to have more sex with more partners, to openly cohabitate, and forsake long-term commitment. If there were a name for this project, it would be this: “Have more sex and fewer children!”**
  • There proved to be no real photos of the Ciccone family. There were two mothers shown. Silvio Ciccone’s face consisted of one photograph pasted in several places. The kids were moved in from other photos in grand paste-ups that looked absurd on close examination. The photos shown are from the late 1950s and early 60s, a time when cameras and film were in use in just about every home. There was even a home movie of Madonna Fortin Ciccone, but we were given only a two-second glimpse in 2010. Only a few photos of the “Ciccone’s” exist.
  • Speaking of 2010, Madonna chose that year to commemorate her mother in a short and self-adulatory video, even as her mother had supposedly died 47 years earlier.
  • Eva Perón was made the subject of a Broadway production by Andrew Lloyd Weber and Tim Rice, complete with delightful tunes so typical of Weber, sweet and unforgettable to the point of annoyance. He used Patty LaPone, a truly gifted singer, to carry the Broadway role, but when Evita was made into a movie, he inexplicably chose Madonna and her weak voice. She even had to take singing lessons, we are told, to carry the part. With so much real talent available, the choice of Madonna made no sense. In addition to her weak voice, the woman cannot act.

With all of that to bolster our case, Richard and I asserted that Eva Perón bore a very strong resemblance to Madonna Fortin Ciccone. We did not pick this woman out of a phone book. It was photographic evidence that was supported by everything above. Richard, in seeing the resemblance, had found but a small part of a much larger story.

Of course I am capable of self-deception. I am aware of it too. I am embarrassed when it happens. The mind is a complex tool. But in the matter of Eva Perón, the photo journey started with other evidence. I was finished with the work when I wrote the first post demonstrating that her death had been faked. I had no idea who she was, for real, and imagined I would never find out.

Why the fake photos? They tell a much bigger story, and this might well be a part of why people instantly reject them, or honestly cannot see things that are so obvious to me. I asked Richard what spurred him to connect Eva Perón with Madonna, the singer. He said something profound, in my view: “There’s that thing I think I’ve mentioned before, about associative coherence and the need to have a non-self-contradictory world view: The boundaries have been redrawn, yet again.”

That’s a good way to put it – to have a “non-self-contradictory world view,” that is, to avoid just passively accepting everything we see and hear as natural and real. I strive to have a coherent world view, and to do so requires that I discount every public figure and event until I see evidence that they are real.

That in mind, I started above with a photo of Taylor Swift, and then of Barack Obama. The photos are fake. What does it tell us? It says that Swift and Obama are fake. If they were real, they would not need fake photos scattered about on the Internet to tell their story. They can be discounted, she, like Madonna, of little talent and both of fake origins.

Fake photos are all around us. Who is doing this work? It is a huge project, and there are many technicians involved. It goes far back in time – while the first photo ever taken was real, I would bet the second one was fake. The photos are not meant to be exposed as fake. However, those who do the work know that at best, they will get a cursory glance, so that sloppiness does not matter. That is why those of us with non-self-contradictory world views so easily spot them.

To us, people like Richard and I, they jump out at us and scream in our ears … fake, fake, fake!

* I suspect, without evidence and only based on vibes, that Hugh Hefner was gay.

** I am concerned about overpopulation and the effects of there being so many of us on our planet. Every day 300,000+ are born against 190,000 dying. It cannot go on forever. I have mixed feelings about the project, which also includes advancement of homosexuality into mainstream acceptance, and now gender confusion. Is there a more honest and straightforward way, short of genocide, to go about achieving the goal of population control without subversive programming of the population?

43 thoughts on “About those photos …

  1. Nice!…..What can I say, ” Thank you Thing ” ? No doubt Taylor sure looks fake as well. And you are so right about Madonna. 5 bucks says that is not her real name. She has a tad more talent than Taylor, I guess. But Tay is better looking, ( well, at least from the waist up). Both of their voices might be useful for removing paint or something. And, I would guess that they are all gay. I wonder what is the over and under of them being twins or adopted by a stepfather? Probably better than the standard odds I should think. IMHO….Fake is the correct term. ( Props )!


  2. “The above photo is said to be of Barack Obama with his mother. “

    That picture is of Obama and his alleged grandparents.

    Here are his alleged parents …

    … Barack Obama Sr and Paul McCartney. 🙂

    Liked by 3 people

      1. “Oh well, but if the photo is fake, they are not his grandparents, right?”

        It seems likely that they are not and that’s why I wrote “alleged.”

        I’ve studied a number of photos of young Obama and most appear to be fake paste-ups.

        I suspect that the whole “birther controversy” was just a distraction from the reality that Obama is a complete fake in all respects. That is, the birther issue focused on his place of birth when probably nothing about his claimed background is true.

        Liked by 1 person

    1. “Is the picture here of young Bill Clinton meeting JFK fake?”

      Here is a more complete version of that JFK/Clinton photo:

      It does not appear to be paste-up to me. There are a few oddities but not enough to make me think it is a fake.

      Getting back to Obama, here is an example of what I feel is a fake paste-up of him intended to create a false background for him:

      This is supposed to show Obama with some of his Hawaiian associates.

      Notice the shadows under Obama’s nose and chin. None of the others have similar shadows. Also notice the odd chopped look of his hair on the left side (our left) of his head. It seems clear that Obama was pasted into this photo.


      1. Note: You may need to click on the above photos to see a a larger version which shows the details I mentioned more clearly.


        1. Here is a closer look at what I mean. Note the definite shadows under chin and nose:

          (you may need to click on the image to make it larger)


          1. You’re right … I think I can see it now. JFK has been pasted in totally, and the shirt on his left arm is misdirection to hide the addition of the forearm (and tiny hand) shaking hands with Bill. The shirt itself looks odd, as if itself added, as it is not well defined, like the hand underneath. Bill is looking past JFK and visa versa. I would like to draw arrows from all of the sets of eyes, as many of them are looking off in odd directions. If you are meeting POTUS, all eyes are going to be on him. It is a once-in-a-lifetime event, so much have we elevated the office above the schmucks who occupy it.

            By the way, this photo is very well done. Fooled me in total. Kudos.


      2. Clinton’s wrist seems very slightly off and I wonder if the handshake was more Masonic than it is in retouch. JFK is hiding his other hand with, presumably, an American Legion gift shirt, another Masonic clue. Given that these guys are groomed from the get go, this image may have been designed to show a succession far ahead of time. (These “lizard’s” like ritual, cycles, reruns, carbon copies, mirror images, yadda yadda…)
        PS- A flash bulb was used but is it flashing the same on JFK? Has he been pasted in?


        1. “A flash bulb was used but is it flashing the same on JFK? Has he been pasted in?”

          Click on the photo. Then click on it again and it should bring a large version of the photo. Look closely at the edges of JFK’s hair. You can see fine hair detail including individual hairs. No way they could paste in that kind of detail in the era of this photo (though it can be done today).

          Besides, it’s no big deal that JFK and Clinton once shook hands. They’re birds of a feather in more ways than one.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. Do we know for sure that is JFK? Side view where his face isn’t clearly visible. I was in DC once during the Clinton “reign” and saw a guy walking around that looked more like Clinton than the real one. He looked like a walking caricature of Clinton. Just minding his own business at a trade show.

            Liked by 1 person

          2. My opinion, in no particular order of importance:
            The eyeglasses on the guy to Clinton’s right has a different resolution to the rest of the picture.
            There is discoloration on both hems of JFK’s jacket sleeves.
            JFK’s right arm has been inserted; the arm and hand appear too small in proportion.
            The clasped hands belong to another time, possibly other actors.
            JFK’s left hand is a blob with the shirt pasted over it.
            The one eyed guy at the far right is in different light and resolution. (Single eye symbol, yadda..)
            JFK’s hair at the top and down the back where it’s oddly combed is blurred despite the individual strands which were possible to paint in back then- That is, if this picture was from that time and not just Slick’s pimply face being inserted later- Which begs the question: When did this photo first surface? 1990’s?
            The mass of whited out shirts hides the seams of JFK’s insertion and the guys in the background are fuzzed enough to blend with the soft focus trees.
            There is a white glow on the side of the face of the guy in glasses looking straight forward. This glow coincides with the overlap of Clinton’s face and this dour Four Eyes. (The glow is from the sun, but how convenient?)
            Truthfully, I’m not married to any of this, but it’s what I am scrutinizing. The picture is staged. The guys to Bill’s right are stationed by design. The handshake is the point. Mathis has it that they are both queer, but that runs in the bloodlines.
            Early on during the Clinton administration, there was a great effort to align Bubba with the JFK mystique. Sharon Stone, of all people, was chosen to allude to the Monroe rumors by hanging around for Clinton’s photo-ops. This picture may have been created to further that allusion.
            Better eyes than mine can sell me a different story if they care to.

            Liked by 1 person

        2. Just a thought Tyrone, but were ‘these lizards’ thought of before the sci-fi series V (1984) or after?


        1. There is a feeble attempt to pencil in lines on JFK’s collar in the back to match the cuff lines. But along the line of the collar and JFK’s neck is another gray pencil line, suggesting very strongly that JFK’s head was all he contributed to this photo collage.
          The quest begins to find the photo where this JFK head originated…


          1. why faking stripes on a white shirt? It would be much easier to erase them. I’m sometimes wondering what you guys are up to?


    1. No, they don’t look alike at all. Your bias here is authoritative in nature. You’ve written too much about it to admit that you might be wrong, now. And I agree with Ladonna – so what? I feel like you’re trying to “out” someone (or in this case, two people) that is of almost no consequence. Eva or Madonna – they aren’t very important people, not in any way that helps us decipher what TPTB are doing or decide how to address it down the road.

      Your theory here is very threadbare. For example, the paste-ups of Madonna’s family. Yes, those are very crappy paste-ups. But that has nothing to do with Eva. It also in no way supports your premise that Eva may be Mrs. Madonna. It’s fine to point out picture screw-ups, and I’m with you there – but it doesn’t make Mrs. M look more like Eva in any way.

      I just don’t understand why you’d spend so much time on two (or three, if you count Nonni) insignificant people.


  3. as I wrote before, a fake picture contains no valuable information. That is a very simple logic. If you fake a picture of your grandparents, will this make them disappear? The white people on the picture probably have nothing in common with the so called Barack Obama but only probably. This is no proof they are and no proof they aren’t. All you can do Mark, is to forget the entire Grandparents angle until you’ll find a real proof for a “yes” or “no”. You probably could take the entire background story of Barack Obama piece by piece apart. Would this improve anything or bring any progress? Hardly. We know those people are only actors playing by the script somebody else has written. I at least have no doubt about it. We don’t know the big plan. We can only guess what their next steps could be and try to make the best out of it for ourselves. I see them deceiving me into investing in Bitcoins, selling my Diesel, buying food marked as “organic”, etc. and sometimes I decide to do otherwise. If all people would do like me their plan could never succeed but would that be a good thing? We don’t know this. I don’t assume, they want to harm me. My life experience shows different. I’m having a better life my parents had but they also had a better life their parents had as far as I can tell. Despite the war times. I can’t go back farther than that lacking reliable information. My kids will most probably have a better life than I’m having. At least everything is pointing in that direction. So there is no reason for me to think TPTB are bad and want to destroy us.


    1. I disagree … a fake photo tells us far more than the mere intent to deceive. It begins to unravel fakery and unveil reality. That the fakery is vast might be discouraging information, but it is still information we need to process.

      I have no illusions of changing the word and no insight into the true objectives of the ruling classes. I have seen much evidence that they only pretend to be vicious killers, and are not. I have seen other evidence, AIDS and AZT for example, that they really do commit murder. It’s an ongoing process of discovery, and uncovering what is fake, small (Taylor Swift), medium (Eva Peron), and large (nuclear weapons) is just the road We travel. It matters.

      You thought I was going to say Barack Obama was large? He’s a small fry.


      1. “I have no illusions of changing the word and no insight into the true objectives of the ruling classes.”

        I think their objective is simply to remain the ruling class, as such, wealth naturally and readily flows to them as a consequence. Dumbing down the population via miseducation, misinformation, and including third-world immigration into first-world countries and miscegenation, assists them in this objective.

        I think there was a time when the ruling classes were more sane and rational, and behaved more as stewards, as opposed to corruptors, of civilization compared to today. There is no way the Western world could have gone through the Renaissance, the Industrial Revolution, etc., when humanity had real art and science, if they were using the same methods that they use today. It’s quite tragic really. Where will humanity be 500 years from now?

        Liked by 2 people

        1. Wallace, I believe they had to build the infrastructure first before they could behave this way. Actually they had to properly colonize the world before they even started the infrastructure. This was the period when the Europeans were very useful. Also the 2nd amendment was useful ( as John Adams mentioned in a few podcasts). When they reach important milestones, the propaganda can chance in a very drastic manner. But I believed that the plan has a long history (at least 300 years). In the Book of Revelation the New Jerusalem is a cube, similar to the Borg starship from Star Trek. Emblem 21 from Atalanta Fugiens is also interesting since it refers to squaring the circle, but inside the circle you have a man and a woman. The circle can be the eye and the square/cube can be the TV, theater, books and other propaganda materials. To see more proof you can look at the drawings made by the architect Claude Nicholas Ledoux . In one drawing you see the reflection of a theater inside an eye http://architecturalwatercolors.blogspot.com/2012/03/ledoux-all-seeing-eye.html


    2. B. Müller
      April 9, 2018 at 4:20 am

      as I wrote before, a fake picture contains no valuable information.

      On the contrary, fake pictures tell us a lot. For example if all or nearly all the “family photos” of a particular person are paste-ups then we know something is massively amiss with what we are being told about that person’s family and his/her place in it. The simple logic is: If the family is as we are told then there should be real photos. What real family doesn’t have real family photos?

      Liked by 1 person

  4. fear is maybe the most powerful control mechanism. If you want your kids to follow you, you tell them fairy tales like that from the Grimm brothers. This creates fear and then the kids look up to their parents for protection and do what they are told. That’s how the world is being run. AIDS does not really exists, the fear from AIDS does. The very bad medicine like the AZT is also very expensive. Nobody is really forced to take it. It works like a filter. Those stupid enough to still take the poison will get extinct over the time. What makes a lie big or small is the impact it has on our life, right? Barack Obama influenced more people than Eva Peron IMO. Not only in the USA, but in every developed country called “the first world”. He is (or was) a great actor. Very convincing, no?


    1. You may well be right about that. I just regard him as one of a long string of presidents who are given a script to read and who are either artificially propped up or left to languish, depending on the requirements of the script. He is being propped up. Right now Democrats in this country are very close to canonizing him a saint. He’s a very ordinary man whose college transcripts are still hidden from view. That concealment tells me he is a fake.

      Trump withholds his income tax returns, most likely, in my view, because they will tell us he lives on inherited, or legacy wealth, and an acting salary. He is as big a fake.

      AIDS, by the way, is real, and HIV is the con. Immune systems are worn down by various means. AZT will be forever proscribed because not one doctor will ever step forward, no matter the evidence, and admit, even if unwittingly, that he had been part of a murderous enterprise.

      Liked by 1 person

  5. If Trump withholds his tax return or not is as important as if in China a sack of rice fell over. Tax returns are for you and me not for all the Trumps out there. They don’t belong to the working class. They are being paid from our taxes. Which doesn’t mean, they don’t work. They are simply another part of the system. We go to work every day to earn our salaries, they act according to a script in front of cameras every day for a living. It may be hard to understand from a perspective of somebody who is not content with his job or has none and wishes to simply make more money. The system uses this entity called money which constantly changes hand to make people work for a living. If you work from Monday to Friday that means you’re doing something others tell you to do and you do that because you expect to be paid which you think is necessary to buy things you consider needful. Trump gets all for free except he has no choice and has to use what the script writers contrive for him. If one day he decides not to play along anymore but to make his own choices, he will “die”. The character Trump will disappear from the screen and the person with the fake hair will start a new life somewhere else probably working like we do. Except in Trumps age, he can simply retire and does not have to “die”.


    1. I spent a good portion of my life working for this wealthy class, people of the peerage, though I did not comprehend such a thing then. This began in the era when the maximum tax rate on “passive” income was 70%. I was part of the staff that prepared the tax returns, and these folks crapped and complained but paid the tax, which one boss, Philip N. Fortin, called “confiscatory.” I carried the checks to the post office.

      I don’t know that Trump has to file returns, or if there are levels of nobility and I was working for those lower down. I just know they filed returns that were honestly prepared and paid the tax.

      So if Trump’s returns exist they are being withheld for a reason, and I suspect that reason would be that he doesn’t own anything except some inherited stocks and a small pile of cash, and that during the years in question earned a salary as an actor. What they are hiding then is not what is on the returns, but what isn’t.


  6. maybe you didn’t get me right here. What I meant was, there are people symbolically paying taxes who themselves are paid from tax money. Its like a mobster paying himself protection money. This makes no sense and is only done to hide the fact, there is another class of people. The tax rate is a method to keep a part of the money in circulation. It’s never totally taken from you because you’re always getting something for it. It doesn’t matter if you want it or not. The money itself is also only a method to keep people busy. At least it is today where there is overproduction of everything everywhere. That’s where Bitcoin comes into game. Now it is only an idea spread widely in the media so people get used to it. You probably don’t know much about what Bitcoin really is and what makes it different to regular money, do you? The description changed many times in the last years. Now it goes like: it cannot be generated any more, but the transactions have to be generated. Miners generate transactions and not bitcoins. If you change some real money into bitcoin, you will never know for sure the value you own because if you try to buy something you will have to pay transaction costs and those are unknown and depend on the transactions generated by miners. You’ll have to decide how much you are willing to pay for the transaction. If you pay not enough your transaction may never get done and you cannot delete a transaction or overwrite it with a new transaction. Etc. Sounds complicated but it doesn’t matter because it is not real yet. It’s a project and you cannot really buy bitcoins. I work in banking and don’t know anybody who ever did something with bitcoins. It’s conditioning only so we get slowly used to the idea. In future, maybe for our children’s children, there won’t be any real money any more. People will still work not knowing how much they earn and they will buy things not knowing how much they cost. Its the old “communist” dream called “expecting from everybody according to his potential and giving everybody according to his needs”. It sounds absurd now because we all are still captured in the old prewar thinking of financial bottlenecks and limited resources. So if you could you would probably try to have seven cars, one for every day of the week but it of course makes no sense. It would make more sense if you didn’t have your own car at all but could always use one if needed. Of course you wouldn’t use a car unnecessary then and things like color or model of the car wouldn’t matter also. This will be the thinking of the future generations and that’s why projects like UBER are being installed everywhere. In Frankfurt and many other cities in Germany you can use a “city bike” for a coin. Those are good quality bicycles regularly destroyed because nobody cares, yet still the city is constantly pumping fresh money into it and replacing those in bad shape with new models. Such bicycle will never return the money it costed but it is not about making money.


      1. Ann, there even is more in this. Why prices has to be always like 0.99. Without such prices the penny won’t be needed. It only creates chaos and unnecessary work for shop owners and for their clients. We will be told, 0.99 looks psychologically cheaper than 1.0 but it is not really true if not the counterpart. On the other side they no longer print the 500 Eur banknote in Europe. We will be told, it was not popular and inconvenient for shop owners but I’m not convinced either. Money is an ongoing project since the invention of central banks.


    1. I get that money is just confidence, that is, I accept it as payment because I know when I turn around and spend it someone else will accept it too. I don’t get Bitcoin, however, in that as I understood it they were in essence trying to create a gold standard by limiting the number of units created. That it or something like it will eventfully replace what are now essentially computer binary digits is not that surprising.

      Ann, do you agree with me that they should get rid of the penny, like Canada did? I usually have some in my pocket and use them for one purpose only, to prevent receiving even more pennies in change. I used to throw them away.


      1. that was a part of the first description of Bitcoin. The other part was, that it is independent. Both is no longer true. Now it is all about the unknown transaction costs. If you buy stocks, you won’t get them physically anymore. Its only a number on an account. If you sell them it becomes another number on another account, one you consider as money you can spend. Its all thinking and this will change in future.


        1. Ann, Bitcoin is not really a scam but more something like a hoax at least for now and there are supposedly hundreds of other crypto currencies (Ethereum, etc.) already but I don’t think a normal person will be able to “invest” into this crypto currencies yet. If you buy stocks, the bank system guarantees you that you can sell them again. There is no such thing for Bitcoin yet. We will be told, its because its independent but it’s not true either. Governments are already allowed to regulate the crypto market, so drug dealers cannot laundry their money, etc. Yet they still do according to some news. All hoax stories of course but taken very seriously by the media. IMO, they simply launched the idea a few years ago and now watch what happens. In between the story gets rewritten, new ideas are included. In a few decades our children’s children will learn that in schools and then there will be no real money anymore, only the digital representation of it with completely different meaning. And completely different understanding of it.


          1. just think of the times where people exchanged their goods directly. Then people slowly started to accept vouchers from others who they trusted and it took long time to establish a bank note market but it somehow happened. I don’t trust the official history dates much but what we know for sure is: people first exchanged only goods, then exchanged goods for printed paper and now they exchange numbers in computers, goods and bank notes being almost irrelevant. It’s all an ongoing project.


  7. I do not care if you choose to be argumentative. You simply need to understand that I reply in kind. If you can stand the heat, fine. This is not a nursery school. Gaia violated a blog commenting rule by using the word “Goldbug,” and did it to insult me, so he is gone, not for being argumentative, but for being an asshole.

    You continually say the two women do not look like each other. But they do. It’s not just a matter of staring at them, but of lining up faces, and the two are a perfect match. Of course that happens in a world of 7 billion, but we are not dealing with that. We are dealing with at most several thousand people, maybe at the extreme, 100,000 of the various lines of nobility who run this planet. In that small a universe, two people who look exactly alike are probably related, or if one faked her death, maybe even the same person. (I had to rule out twins, and did so in my last post.)

    Intuition plays a large role in everything from scientific discoveries to pursuits like this, where we go into things like the Eva Peron saga understanding that most public events like that are fake. Richard understood that. I had turned off my brain at that point, after I concluded she faked her death, but he pursued the matter further. You would have to ask him how he connected Eva and Madonna, but I instantly knew he was on to something because I knew the story about how Madonna the singer was chosen to play Evita, and it made no sense. They don’t give singing parts in major musicals to people who then have to undergo voice training. You have to arrive with the necessary chops.

    So we went looking for other evidence, and found that the Ciccone family was fake. We found there were two mothers, and so I constructed a timeline, and found that Eva and Madonna jived perfectly.

    You look at all of the evidence presented, and say it is all disconnected. But you are wrong. Post facto I can sit here and pretend we did it all orderly and stuff, but we depended on new evidence, continually given us by commenters, and intuition. We cannot be 100% sure, but we are certainly above 50%, and that was enough to pursue this matter. You also have to factor in the rule of coincidence, that it is “co” incidents, and the likelihood that they are unrelated diminishes when any two are found to be connected. A facial ID, a daughter playing her, two mothers, one identical to Evita, the other identical to Isabel Peron, fake photos, fake families, timeline, a rise to fame of a person of little talent … taken individually mean little. Taken together, they cannot be separated.


  8. “I have seen much evidence that they only pretend to be vicious killers, and are not.”
    They are vicious killers, just not of their own kind.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s