Just stumbling around the other day I came across the following photos:
They are of Karen Carpenter, and are, in my humble opinion, fake. They are selling the idea that she was emaciated prior to her death.
On the left the caption says she is at 83 pounds. The problem is that her head does not show signs of anorexia, as supposedly seen on the right. She looks like a bobblehead. It is a good photo, but I suspect fake, as her skin tone and color is different between head and body. She is posing for an award of some kind, probably having to do with athletics, as her attire looks oddly like a sports jersey. That would explain the cardboard “1,” as the owner of that body obviously placed first in a sporting event. It sure looks like track and field, where women are often thinned down by grueling training. Notice also that the woman presenting the trophy is looking past her, as if Karen is not there, which may be the case.
The second photo has been stretched out and compressed, the object to give her a gaunt and wasted look about the mouth. The eyes are sunken like a corpse. That is easily shown to be fake by putting it next to the real living Karen Carpenter to the left here. Pupil distance is the same on both sides of that photo. They obviously monkeyed with her image, stretching it out like a plastic sheet.
There are a few other photos like that on the Internet, but on the whole, of the hundreds available, they show a healthy young woman. Karen’s death was probably fake, like so many others. However, she has not, to my knowledge, reappeared in any form. She might have been told to go off and live on royalties from her body of work. She had a beautiful voice, and she and her brother were a throwback to older, more melodic and harmonic tunes.
Karen Carpenter is not terribly important in the big picture. This blog has been devoted these past weeks to exposure of “Zombies,” or walking dead. These are prominent people who fake their death and reappear as another person. There is purpose to such reassignment, most often having to do with placement of talent to manage opinion and culture. For instance, Bobby Fuller became Bill O’Reilly, Brandon DeWilde Thom Hartmann. Each has a vital, even if small, role to play.
The music business is too influential to be left to chance talent taking it places where our leaders do not want us to go. Music is a gateway to the brain and soul. Churches use it to keep the congregations in line, and nation-states have songs that bring people instantly to their feet, hats off. A subversive song might incite people to doubt the necessity of a war or reality of a fake event. So music is under control of Intelligence. This explains in part the Laurel Canyon scene of the 60s and 70s, where so many mediocre musicians, children of military and intelligence families, invaded, formed groups that achieved instant unearned fame. They then died off, many reappearing in news and opinion culture.
Karen Carpenter never threatened any state or religion. She merely sang, beautifully, about love and loss of love mostly. But she was moved out of the business, and I can only speculate that it was done because our cultural commissars had other ideas for the direction music was to take. We saw it with heavy metal, rap and hip-hop. Girl singers these days all sound alike to me, and sing about nothing. One song I heard that became a big hit was merely about the bass line. Adele had a huge hit with Hello. Hello? Music is devoid of substance now. Rappers, who can indeed speak to their followers in an incendiary manner, routinely die off. That might be real, but who can tell?
This has been the direction that Intelligence obviously wants to take us with music. In the 1960s they invaded the art world and gutted it, replacing real talent with people like Andy Warhol (Stu Stucliffe) and Jackson Pollack. Art is no longer a vehicle for expression of true beauty or ideas. Like our music, it is shallow and pointless.
The revolution, if it ever goes forward, will have to do so without anthems*.
Anyway, if Karen Carpenter is still alive, she is 66. I wish her well, and still enjoy her music. She was removed from the scene at age 33, that number often an indicator of monkey business, as are her fake photos above.
___________
*The only supposed anti-war anthem to come out of the 60s, For What It’s Worth, written by Stephen Stills and performed by (the Wrecking Crew and) Buffalo Springfield, was about closure of a popular nightclub, and not about the Vietnam war or protests of the day. Stills claimed to be an ex-Green Beret. His cohorts claimed that was a drug-induced fantasy. I tend to think not.
This first one is odd, his original “mug shot.” Keep in mind, there are important pieces of information that prison officials want from a mug shot – height, scars, facial features, date of arrest, prisoner number. For that reason, mug shots are taken with bright lights in front of a camera that slides up and down so as to shoot straight at the face. When the photo is taken, the top of the skull is precisely even with the correct height line. Notice on this mug shot there is no height scale, and that Chapman’s face and neck are shadowed. That is because this is not a mug shot (even as someone is holding up a NYPD prisoner number in the lower left, not seen here). This is a portrait shot of Chapman, not taken in jail. We were easy to fool in 1981, so it worked.
Next we have what I call “Chapman 72,” a man six feet tall. I have scrolled the number 72 on each side of his forehead for reasons that will be clear later. Make no mistake, this man and the young man up above line up nicely, and are very close in appearance. In fact, I would say they match up perfectly, even as the one on the right is in his middle years, while the one above is in his twenties.
Next we have “Chapman 70.” He is two inches shorter than the one above. You might think it trivial that there is a two-inch difference in height between these two, and indeed that could be the case. Even though prisons try to do their best work, they cannot always be perfect, so it could be that camera angles were not working properly, and that these are the same man. But I doubt it. This man also has a narrower face. But I will do side-by-side comparisons down below.
Finally, we have old Chapman. Again, trust me on this, as this man, Mark David Chapman 72, is the same man as seen above with the numbers “72” on his forehead, and the same man as the young man showing at the beginning of this piece.
I was certain that all photos with “72” were the same man, as you can see at the left … we get perfect alignment of features.
And again, the young man and the old man, perfect alignment.
Now it begins to get a little murkier. This is Chapman 72 and Chapman 70. If it were a mere matter of camera angles, they would match up after the pupil distance is adjusted. And at first glance, they do line up. But look closer … 72 has a much lower ear, and the eye is lower. However, the mouth and nose align perfectly. I would guess here that we are dealing with identical twins, neither of whom is in jail.
Here I have done my best to align the features of Chapman 70 and young Chapman, but they are off just slightly, as with 72 and 70 immediately above. While I can get nose and eyes (mostly), the mouths are off, and the chins and ears do not match up.
Note: As with everything I write here, it is only my studied opinion that follows. It is my view that we currently have the technology to get us off oil, but it is withheld from us. If indeed global warming were real, technology would not be withheld. Even oligarchs have to live on this planet with us.
Piece of Mindful 