unforum

[Greystone]

WOW!!! 52 pages of pure speculative garbage for a game that has yet to fully start. You have only been teased up to this point with a single poster. The stuff on the server may all be a ruse or something else that they work with. My point is all we have in truth is the trailhead for a future date. speculation is one thing but 52 pages!?! Let's get real, cut the crap and just wait for the start date of the game that some will not even like and may implode like so many have in the past.

[yep]

greystone, don't be an asshole. people are having fun and exercising their brains, so if you don't have anything to contribute despite all the clues that have been given, just stfu. what if this IS the game? and who cares if it isn't, apart from you?

and arion I really like that idea!! but why the twin references? and the stars? maybe the star references are to point towards the star of david...

the question that intrigues me at the moment on fromspring is the "I liked constellations too. "

I LIKED constellations too.

wtf?

[Arion]

[momentsbeforethewind]

questions

[yep]

sorry i just meant the 'nature - nurture' and binary star references.

nature nurture debate was really just whether intelligence was a result of genes or upbringing, but was studied via twins. this clue might not even be about twins and may be referencing something else... eugenics, iq, genes, the nature of evil etc

i just jumped to conclusions with the binary stars and i think it just stuck. unsticking it now....

"1) if it's not a game, what is it? i mean, it has to be fake, whatever it is, right? "

If its not a game, ts... not a game. Warning? A revealing of information? A viral marketing campaign? A social experiment? A Final Year Project? (Find Your Place - Foxtrot Yankee Papa)

Why does it have to be fake? A fake what? It is what it is, so it isn't fake. If you mean there may not be an actual solution or answer... then possibly not, of course. But reaching that conclusion and being right would mean you have a solution and would render your argument a paradox.

I read the Washington Post article. I believe it is a reference to a Bulgarian who was assasinated (WW2?) by a spy via a poisoned umbrella tip (ricin poison).

The date for the article is August 2-3, 2004.

I believe very early on in formspring they said "It has to be this date (or now or something along these lines)" which leads me to believe the numbers 8311 were integral, possibly because it spells out BELL. So if there is something to do with a BELL you would want to do it on 8311. I think it is important also that um8r311a is viable.

In all three BELL and 8311 are used, this is one of the foundation clues I believe.

Has anyone followed up the THX 1138 line of thought yet?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/THX_1138

peace!

oh also I can't remember if I posted this:

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread620292/pg3

They are discussing a possible German 'Nazi Bell', a top secret weapon from WW2, with a commenter by the name of 8311-XHT in the discussion (but his name is referencing the THX-1138 movie in reverse)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Glocke
"Witkowski speculated that Die Glocke ended up in a "Nazi-friendly South American country". Cook speculated that it was moved to the United States as part of a deal made with SS General Hans Kammler."

My apologies if I had already posted it. this one ticks three boxes, 8311/bell/germany.

[woahman]

no one thinks this is important?:

woah, found some letters (?) in her weird hairline:
http://cl.ly/23270h1R1L2E0K021T0k
looks like lower case i, lowercase x, uppercase C or G, lower case n or r or m?
(i upped the contrast to make it more obvious but if you don't believe me try it yourself with the original)

[Plume]

Arion wrote:

yep wrote: Or knowledge about a jewish something? Thanks for bringing that up, because I now have another theory based on that. The first image was about John 8:3-11, telling us "don't. Throw Stone", in other words, not to throw stones at others if we ourselves have commited sins. Jews have been haunted since a long time and in some countries, this is still the case. According to a question on Formspring, Belle was 6 when the image was taken and is now 83/2(?) years old, meaning that the image is at least 77 years old. In other words, it was taken during the WWII, back when jews were haunted by the Nazis and mass-murdered. Belle could be a jewish girl whose family was murdered in a "Konzentrationslager" (KZ) and because she survived these horrific events (and is probably still scared of being haunted by someone), she has now changed her name (according to a question on formspring, the girls name was "Belle" when she was younger, but now she has another name). The meaning of all this is, according to my theory, that we should not make the same mistake as our ancestors and haunt jews, religious groups in general/activists/etc. for what they believe in, because we ourselves are not perfect either, in other words, we are sinners aswell. None of us are therefore allowed to throw stones at those people.

Hello. I've been watching this forum for a week now, but I never registered cause I saw no reason to. But I just wanted to say that I completely agree with this post, Arion, as this is one of the theories that I myself have come up with, as well.

I think that the truth about whatever their "message" is about does not have to be unlocked by decoding glyphs and so on - those are just distractions, meant to make it more fun. I think the photo of Belle is what we should be concentrating on (for the moment at least). Here are a few ideas I have:

Theory no. 1:

The girl was Jewish and shortly after this picture was taken she was taken to a concentration camp. She survived; but indeed the message that they're trying to convey is that nobody is clean and moral enough to have the right to cast stones at someone else - and especially not for something they were born in, like a religion or nationality. Belle would make a believable Jew, what with the very dark eyes and hair... The problem with this theory is that they said that Belle is "American". However, they could've just said that because she settled in the US after the war, meanwhile gotten her green card and slowly become a citizen of the US (frankly I have no idea how those "citizenship" things work so excuse my ignorance if what I said is impossible). Although they said that she's American (somewhere on Formspring - I'm not gonna go there and search through all 446 questions to find that one, sorry), I still can't help imagining her as German. The time-frame of her birth and the moment this picture was taken fit sooo damn well with WW2 Germany.

Theory no. 2:

The girl suffered abuse from her family when she was young. You know... the kind of childhood gone wrong by the fact that every little mistake had to be corrected via brute force. That would explain the scar-like markings on her "face", and probably why the picture is so heavily edited. I suspect that the left side of her face (right for us) bears something like a huge bruise, a bigger scar, burn-marks - anything that suggests a really violent family-life. They made this edited version for us, to show people what a beautiful girl she would've been - and they're gonna show us the unedited photo sooner or later, in an attempt to shock/disgust us. And thus everything becomes an anti-violence / anti-child-abuse campaign. Again: don't throw stones - in this case, against your children's mistakes.

Theory no. 3:

Belle has had this skin disease for a very long time (perhaps even in the time the original photo was taken) - or if not the disease, then some other type of face-deformity. And during her life, she's had many missed opportunities, because people have been looking down at her; or have been scared of her, or have treated her differently from everyone else. I'm thinking this might also be a campaign against the mistreatment of people with physical deformities. And again, in this case, the edited photo is meant to show us that she could've been pretty, she could've been been "normal", and that it's not her fault that she doesn't fit our standards of "beauty" - but when the unedited version comes out, we're all going to see what everyone around her saw (and thus rejected her or mistreated her). And again: don't throw stones. This theory sounds like a modern take on the old "Beauty and the Beast" myth, where beauty is in the eye of the beholder and true beauty "is to be found within" - some people look nice but are monsters on the inside; other looks monstrous but have hearts of gold. But we, as a society, choose to outcast those who don't live up to our expectations physically, we "throw stones at them", which ironically, only goes to show that we're just as hideous on the inside, as they are on the outside. Could be something along those lines...

Other theories that have crossed my mind:

Theory no. 4: Belle had something to do with Hitler

Theory no. 5: Belle is somehow connected to Charles Manson since they seem to share a birth-year. Of course this is a bit odd, unlikely and over-the-edge; but I'm just writing down every option I've thought about... Also, since 8-3-11 seem to be religious and use a Biblical passage to express their dislike for judging other people and condemning their actions... I can see a sort of connection to Manson. A pathetic little abstract connection - but hey! It's there!
EDIT: Scrap that. I have no idea why, but I took the year the photo was made as her birth year. Manson was born in '34, the year the photo was taken. Doesn't really make that much of a difference, since the idea wasn't going anywhere, anyhow



Now... a few questions and things I noticed before deciding to post here:

1) When I first started looking into 8-3-11, I came across an image of an iron maiden (a human-shaped torture device with spikes on the inside) that was supposedly part of the images released by the group running the site. Was that photo really related or did I just come across a troll having his way? And if it was from 8-3-11... has nobody around here ever considered the option that maybe the mannequin-looking figure in the "stone-casting" photo is actually an iron maiden? Or a metaphor of an iron maiden? I've seen suggestions that it might be something covered with bags, to make it seem human... Now that I'm typing this, I realize that I actually might've read this same thing on here, since in one of these diagrams people were assuming that the underground "tubes" depicted in the photo where supposed to carry blood. I'm sorry, I have skimmed through all past pages, but I can't read everything from cover to cover now, to verify - too much text, and too much of it is irrelevant. In any case, I think the iron maiden (IF the image of it was released by the guys at 8-3-11) is related to that plan thingy.

2) Starting from the assumption that the left side of her face is deformed / burned / bruised / etc... I am thinking that the photo they got the cover-up from (the right side of the photo, the one that's just a little bit lighter, and where the hair is completely different) is also a photo of her, a few years older. BUT they used the right side of her face, mirrored it, and put it over this image of her in her younger years. What we see as the left part of her face is actually the right, mirrored and photoshopped into merging with the rest. Also, the light reflected in her left eye is either: taken from her right eye and pasted in there as well OR is from her left eye in the original photo - which would mean that the left side is not ENTIRELY from somewhere else...

I'm pretty good at Photoshop myself, so I played with the image for a few minutes (like so many have done before me), and I tried to see what this person could have looked like in her later teens - at the moment that the right-side photo was presumably taken. The result is a hairdo that I've seen many women wear at the time, so I think that another theory I've seen online, that Belle might've been a boy, is false. Also, bear in mind that if my theory about her having half of her face burned, scarred or deformed is right, those signs would still be there on this "older" face.

Also... here's a thing that people should know about faces: when the image of a face is PERFECTLY symmetrical, it gives people a certain sense of discomfort. This is especially true of images composed from a half-face, mirrored and then stuck to the other half. If you look at the poster for "Orphan", you'll notice that the artists in charge of it did just that, to make the little girl look even spookier. I know this was unnecessary rant from me, but I just wanted to explain to you guys why all of these "mirrored" compositions of Belle's face are DAMN CREEPY In any case, here is the one I came up with:



The photo they used on the right side of the image is not taken from exactly the same angle as the one containing the curls - which is why it looks a bit out of place, and why it was easier to form a "mirrored" face with it: it's closer to central.

Well... That's my two cents for now. Hope I didn't repeat too much of what was said already, and that you guys might find something useful in all this rant of mine.

[18001]

Re: questions

[Arion]

[yep]

i thinks it's pareidolia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareidolia

but if its not i'd go with ixcm. try [url]mcxi.net[/url] (backwards in roman numerals 1111)

strange no? german site... but what's it mean? it seems to fit in with this craziness lol

tried googling the text one at a time... the 3rd from the top gives me this

http://micx.com/

but it says the computer is offline...

[18001]

Original Belle is cracked

[Arion]

[yep]

no, the damage or mark on the top of the head is terrible terrible repairing of a photo and surely cannot have been overlooked if it had been a damaged photo. Wasn't there also a formspring answer regarding that?

[Guest]

Hey, lurker here.

I've seen a couple of times that 1934 is given as Belle's birthyear, but if she's 83 as it's been said, wouldn't she had been born in 1928 or 1927?

Sorry if it's been explained somewhere else as I follow just this forum, but it's been bugging me.

[Plume]

@ Arion:

Thanks, I'm glad you find the post useful

And yes, my first theory is almost identical to yours - that's why I posted in the first place, because I agreed with you. When I later said that Belle might've had something to do with Hitler I was thinking of her possibly being an illegitimate daughter. But yes, that's just as sci-fi as the Charles Manson connection (and especially if we believe rumors about Hitler having syphillis).

And I just remembered the twins-theory that I've noticed is quite popular: that Belle has/had a twin and this is what the whole project is about. This would work nicely with her being Jewish and living in WW2 Germany, because: Hitler had a doctor in his "crew", called Josef Mengele. This guy was obsessed with twin couples, and he rounded up all the twins he could find among the peoples incarcerated in concentration camps (Jews but also Gypsies, who were his favorites). I think he mainly worked in Auschwitz. But anyway, what he did was... conduct horrible, disgusting experiments on these children, like chopping off limbs and sewing them back on (in the wrong place), sewing twins together, torturing one to see how the other would respond - all in all, some pretty messed-up $**t. Naturally, most of his victims died on the operating table or soon after the "operations" because of infection. He left behind very few survivors. Once the war ended, Mengele ran away to Latin America and lived a normal life, free from any consequence of his past atrocities... If there's any "truth" to that twin-theory, maybe (just maybe) it's got something to do with him.

I'm not trying to teach you your own country's history, don't get me wrong. I'm just putting out everything I know and if there's anything that I got wrong, be my guest to correct me.

@ 18001,

I like that idea, too! It's simple and quite likely, too. But I don't think their Formspring replies help much in that direction. I remember them saying something along the lines of "doesn't everyone have more faces?" when asked if there were more people merged into that photo... But I personally doubt that there are different people in the image (And if there are, I would assume they're twins, or in any case, blood-related. Someone who couldn't edit a photo correctly enough as to hide signs of photoshopping would not be able to merge faces with completely different features so nicely)...