<br />I think the 'flat board' theory can also be laid to rest (hopefully). It is all about perception and angle.<br /><br />This pic clearly shows that what was loaded into the van was not 'flat'.<br /><br /><br /><br />There is either a dummy, a dead body, or a live body under that sheet.<br /><br />With L.O.V.E. always.<br />
<br /><br />That is flat. Definitely not the same one we saw before it was put into the helicopter. In the picture I posted, we see both of the bodies or dummies from the sky, from the same level. It's not about perception. Can you imagine how thick it would be if we see the one that was put into the helicopter from this angle of the pic you posted? It would look more thicker. <br /><br /><br />
<br /><br />In the picture I posted, it is CLEAR that 'it' is not flat. How can 'it' be flat when 'it' extends from the guy's wrist to above his elbow?<br /><br />The two pics you posted are both taken 'from the sky'....but the sky is a pretty vast space. The first pic is taken from more of a low(er), side angle....the second is taken from a higher (therefore further) side angle...at least at a far enough height/distance to cause loss of perception. IMO, because of that...it's difficult to get an accurate comparison....unless, you have another low, side angle shot (or better yet, an eye-level shot) of 'it', which is why I posted the pic I did.<br /><br />It's just my opinion of course but it makes 'sense' to me. I realize that some don't see it the way I do and I'm not gonna argue with what you see. PureLove, you quoted my post, so I only wanted to explain how I see it because I didn't explain it 'better' in my earlier post. You could be right...but I can only go with what I see....and what I see was not flat while 'it' was being wheeled to the helicopter and 'it' wasn't flat while 'it' was being loaded into the van. That in NO way means I know what 'it' is (but I do have a theory lol).<br /><br />As for the 911 call...has that been 'proven' to be real? Again, I could be wrong (nothing new there)...but based on what I have 'seen', I'm not basing any 'theories' on that call being real.<br /><br />With L.O.V.E. always.<br />
<br /><br />I respect your opinion and point of view hon. We are all speculating here. But I see definitely two different bodies or dummies out there. We don't have a picture of the first body/dummy which was taken from the ground level like the pic you posted of the second body/dummy. That's what I'm trying to say. The first one (before the helicopter) looks so thick even from the sky shooting and it would be looking thicker if it was shot from the ground level. But we have a picture of the second one (after helicopter) from the ground level only. That is the reason why I prefer to compare both of their pictures from the sky level. Gives better info and make the perspective mistake less. <br /><br />But the point is, we can not debunk ANY of the theories. So how are we going to find out which one is the right? I don't know but thank you for sharing your opinion.)
<br />@PureLove The 911 call as stated, was not proven to be real. So far we've had 2 911 call tape's that have been made public now, the one to BHPD and LAFD, one of which in my opinion, isn't 'real'. I agree with BeTheChange, you can't base a theory that involves a corpse on an unproven 911 call. Even if it is real, it doesn't prove a corpse was used.<br />
<br /><br />I think you misunderstood what I was trying to say Suzy7. ANY of us know what really happened and how really happened. We are all talking about possibilities here. I didn't give the corpse example because I believe a corpse was used. To me, it CAN be possible just how the 911 call CAN be real. IF the purpose was to make things look real and help people to make them tell the things they had done for real, these are all possible imo. These are all our opinions and we can not debunk any of the theories. Therefore, my aim was and is NOT to prove anything because I can not. No one can do that and this is the big magic of the illusionist.
TS said:<br /><br />"the minor details on the “how’s” are not very important (and may never been fully understood); however, for more than one reason, the major aspects of the “how’s” should be resolved."<br /><br />I am wondering to what extent minor vs major are? How are we supposed to know the difference......just wondering. If there are reasons for major aspects of the "how's" to be known, then I would think it has to do with the message as a whole. If this is all a rouse to show the world it can be fooled into its own history (the death of MJ is history), the major "how factor" would have to be known. The small details of how a shadow is cast...probably not so much. I say shadow, because I brought up shadows/timing of day very early on. The major detail of how an ambulance can be seen taking the King of Pop away....pretty major detail. <br /><br />-Perhaps, the entire thing was shot green-screened...ALL of it. <br />-Michael bought certain media outlets needed to produced the story....ex: TMZ/Hollywood TV. One or two tabloids can change the world. All that would be needed for the airways to start talking is video...shared to the world by them (TMZ/HollywoodTV). The news channels would clamor to get their hands on the video from them. <br /><br />What just happened to forum???? It blanked while while writing?<br />Blessings<br /><br />
I wanted to post that one quickly....something happened in the middle..."reached capacity" memo page....forum now closed? Anyways......lost my train of thought..but....I am thinking the most simple way to make the world believe Michael died on June 25th, is for Michael to have owned certain media outlets, green screen major aspects...or pre-film it before the house was known has his residence......send the video out to news channels. They would all have a field day, fighting for the "breaking news" videos of a dead MJ going places.....hospital/helicopter/morgue/memorial/funeral procession/funeral/final resting spot (that's 7 btw)<br /><br />Sorry for the blip TS......my thought train has left the station, lol. <br /><br />Got to run now.....I hope everyone has a great day!!! LOVE U!!!!<br /><br />Blessings Always<br />
I'm probably a little late in bringing this up but doesn't the "no body" theory conflict with the LAX airport evidence (ie: the escape theory)? The moving body on the stretcher (which looks to me like the body was being moved rather than moving on it's own) technically happened when Michael was already "at the airport". I'm still a proponent of the double died theory mostly because I see how extremely dedicated MJ's fans are (especially the impersonators). In fact, I'd say the double theory is much more simplistic than the no body theory (which would involve a lot more parties that would need to keep their mouths shut.) I don't think Michael directly killed the person (being optimistic at least) they were just willing to take MJ's place in the bed while Murray (and the other forces behind the death) did what they did. Michael was probably staying somewhere else that night and would later leave for the airport the next day. Murray probably recognized that the man he killed wasn't Michael Jackson and believed that could help him win the case (more or less). <br />The discrepancies in the testimonies are probably due to the double body AS WELL AS the a few of the people in the coroner's office and hospital being in the know (but not all of them). The dead body is needed for "everyone else". <br />I would argue that the "no body" theory is actually more diabolical than the real body theory. Michael controlling and influencing all of these people to pull off the hoax (no matter how "noble" the cause is) seems scary to me for the same reason I'm against the religion "Michael the Messiah" theories. That seem almost illuminati-esque (what better way for them to control us by planting a mole in the resistance) but I digress. <br /><br />As far as the numerology goes perhaps many of those pieces of evidence were intentionally faked to pull off the hoax the Doctor at UCLA was possibly in on it but not the rest. A few people at the coroners were probably in on it but not all of them.
the moving body on the stretcher (which looks to me like the body was being moved rather than moving on it's own) technically happened when Michael was already "at the airport"
<br /><br />I was thinking if anybody knows the exact hour when LAX was closed that day.<br />We know the helicopters were leaving UCLA at about 6 o'clock in the afternoon, but I am not sure about the hour.<br /><br />If LAX was closed at the same time there is no way Michael was in the helicopter himself, because he already had to be at the airport.
the moving body on the stretcher (which looks to me like the body was being moved rather than moving on it's own) technically happened when Michael was already "at the airport"
<br /><br />I was thinking if anybody knows the exact hour when LAX was closed that day.<br />We know the helicopters were leaving UCLA at about 6 o'clock in the afternoon, but I am not sure about the hour.<br /><br />If LAX was closed at the same time there is no way Michael was in the helicopter himself, because he already had to be at the airport.<br />
<br /><br />It was in the morning. Around 8 or 8:30 am if I recall correctly.
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."
The airport evidence could've been faked (like everything else) for the purpose of an escape theory.<br /><br />A dead body brings in far too many complications, in my opinion. If it's to fool the doctor - the doc wouldn't work on a dead body for so long. If it's to fool the coroner - the body would've been properly (scientifically) identified instead of using just a driver's license. Muray is in on it - a body double wouldn't fool him and his actions and words (and staged photo ops) since June 25th very much support that he is in on the hoax. The paramedic's contradicting testimonies of that day tell me they're in on it and the infamous ambulance photo (staged) also supports this. Helicopter crew could be undercover agents. All in all, it seems like a lot of people are involved but it's really not that many if you think about it. In order for Michael to pull something of this magnitude off, he would need help - he "can't do it by myself." The famous expression "loose lips sink ships" is true in many cases but if anyone did step forward to say it was a hoax, the family would've lashed out and chances are, most sheeple wouldn't believe that person anyways. And think about - most everyone immediately dismissed the coroner van video of Michael hopping out the back of it. The video was later "de-bunked", naturally, but it had already served its purpose.
the moving body on the stretcher (which looks to me like the body was being moved rather than moving on it's own) technically happened when Michael was already "at the airport"
<br /><br />I was thinking if anybody knows the exact hour when LAX was closed that day.<br />We know the helicopters were leaving UCLA at about 6 o'clock in the afternoon, but I am not sure about the hour.<br /><br />If LAX was closed at the same time there is no way Michael was in the helicopter himself, because he already had to be at the airport.<br />
<br /><br />It was in the morning. Around 8 or 8:30 am if I recall correctly.<br />
<br /><br />If it was in the mornning and Michael really left during that time then it couldn't be him later, when the ambulance arrived at Carlwood and so on. What am I missing?
<br />The airport evidence could've been faked (like everything else) for the purpose of an escape theory.<br /><br />A dead body brings in far too many complications, in my opinion. If it's to fool the doctor - the doc wouldn't work on a dead body for so long. If it's to fool the coroner - the body would've been properly (scientifically) identified instead of using just a driver's license. Muray is in on it - a body double wouldn't fool him and his actions and words (and staged photo ops) since June 25th very much support that he is in on the hoax. The paramedic's contradicting testimonies of that day tell me they're in on it and the infamous ambulance photo (staged) also supports this. Helicopter crew could be undercover agents. All in all, it seems like a lot of people are involved but it's really not that many if you think about it. In order for Michael to pull something of this magnitude off, he would need help - he "can't do it by myself." The famous expression "loose lips sink ships" is true in many cases but if anyone did step forward to say it was a hoax, the family would've lashed out and chances are, most sheeple wouldn't believe that person anyways. And think about - most everyone immediately dismissed the coroner van video of Michael hopping out the back of it. The video was later "de-bunked", naturally, but it had already served its purpose.<br />
<br /><br />The coroner must be in the hoax no matter what. But a dead body would work for the paramedics and even UCLA docs. After all, they all said the patient was dead when they arrived.
Warning: Long post but bear with me (or is it 'bare'? :?)<br /><br />Very good points WishingStar...especially the possibility that it may have ALL been green-screened (I was thinking about this while laying in bed last night cause God knows my bed isn't used much for sleeping ). I've been leaning (quite heavily) on there actually having been an ambulance at Carolwood and UCLA on June 25th....based on a lot of points already raised. And while I still think it does make 'sense' that this is what took place, the 'theory' of it ALL being an illusion plays on my mind as well (i.e. everything we THINK we've seen/know has been staged---"the eyes sometimes play tricks on us" <----a quote from Back).<br /><br />TS advised that we keep it 'simple'...going as far as to tell us to start from 0 people being 'in on it'. A lot of what we've been discussing centers around us trying to keep the # of people 'in on it' to a minimum. But, as with everything TS writes, his statements/advice are open to interpretation. Most of us (myself included) have been thinking about/formulating 'theories' that would have involved only a FEW people to be aware of the hoax. But as TS once pointed out, FEW is relative:<br /><br />
<br />Speaking of trying to debunk TS: one particular member kept dwelling on my statements about “few” in on the hoax—claiming that there were more than “few”, so this alone proves that TS is a fake {see Update 4d, http://http://michaeljacksonhoaxforum.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?f=72&t=7194}. However, this is just another of many examples of critics not carefully reading what I said. The word “few” is always relative; and in comparison to all the stars in the sky, one thousand is a “few” stars. Taken in context, the “few” that I mentioned was in relation to this statement: “the entire state of California is not in on the hoax. ... only a relatively few people would need to be ‘in on it’” (in 4-36 & 4-38).<br />
<br /><br />Depending on what MJ has planned....few can mean 3 people or 10 or 20...but it could also mean a lot more than that. Most of us believe that there is some sort of 'production' feel to all of this...like we're watching a movie in the making. IF that is the case, then we only SEE the 'cast' of the production (this could include Murray, the family, etc)...but, like with ANY 'production' or movie, we hardly ever see or even hear about the many people involved 'behind the scenes'.<br /><br />Case in point:<br />The movie The Blair Witch Project is one of the lowest-budgeted movies ever made...the budget for the movie was $35,000. This sort of budget is laughable when compared to the budget of some Hollywood movies (and when compared to the budget 'the greatest show on earth' would have, IF there is a movie/production going on---think of all the 'sponsors'/product placement we've seen over the past 2+ years making 'appearances' in the hoax).<br /><br />But EVEN with that low of a budget, this is the breakdown of cast and crew for The Blair Witch Project (as 'verified' by IMDB):<br /><br />- 10 cast members (who we actually SEE in the movie)<br />- 35 crew members (specifically credited for their work in the movie)<br />- 39 others who are listed as 'other' crew members<br />- 70 people who received 'special thanks' <br />http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0185937/fullcredits#cast<br /><br />Granted, some of the ones listed under 'special thanks' are previously listed in other sections of the credits (I don't have time to cross-check each name)...but not all of them are previously mentioned. Even without taking those people who've been 'thanked' into consideration...there was 84 people directly involved in making the movie (I would venture to guess the number is closer to 100/110 or more, when taking the 'special thanks' people into consideration).<br /><br />The point is...we have NO clue what 'few' means in relation to the hoax because we do not know the full magnitude of it all. Based on what we've 'studied', most of us would say that whatever 'it' is, it's HUGE. Yet, we keep getting 'hung up' on the word 'few'. For all we know, there could be 200 people 'in the know' who are directly involved in this 'production'....and that could still be considered to be 'few' when compared to the magnitude of it all...or when compared to a film that had $35,000 as its budget.<br /><br />In fact, TS further 'hinted' at this in the following quote:<br />
<br />I never gave any specific number other than “more than three”; but if you read all my posts, you will find that I myself did mention several specifically involved with the hoax: MJ, family, Conrad, Kenny Ortega, coroner, hospital, FBI, TMZ, etc. And there are many others (friends/celebrities) who may not have a direct role, and yet understand that it’s a hoax (much like us).<br />
<br /><br />Based on the first sentence alone, we can make a fairly decent 'guess' that we're talking about more than 20 people (if the whole Jackson family knows, then that # would increase---likewise, it would/could increase based on the # of people involved from the hospital, FBI, TMZ, etc). The second sentence further confirms that we may be underestimating just how many the 'few' actually are. Would it be 'risky' to have 200 people 'in on it'? Of course. But having ANYONE 'in on it' other than MJ himself is 'risky' since anyone can make mistakes, miss-speak, or turn against you. No matter how many people MJ has entrusted with this whole thing...whether it's 20 or 200...I tend to think that Mike chose very wisely who to trust...as well as very wisely choosing who we SEE in front of the camera.<br /><br />And finally (lol...sorry for the long post)...go back and re-read what TS wrote in the OP. He VERY directly 'supported' the theory that an ambulance was at Carolwood and UCLA on June 25th. He basically gave us the 'answer' to 7a. Now, was he helping us see the truth by giving us 'supporting' evidence? Or was he helping us see the truth by purposely throwing us off track?<br /><br />I haven't decided yet....but I'm aware of either possibility.<br /><br />With L.O.V.E. always.
<br />The airport evidence could've been faked (like everything else) for the purpose of an escape theory.<br /><br />A dead body brings in far too many complications, in my opinion. If it's to fool the doctor - the doc wouldn't work on a dead body for so long. If it's to fool the coroner - the body would've been properly (scientifically) identified instead of using just a driver's license. Muray is in on it - a body double wouldn't fool him and his actions and words (and staged photo ops) since June 25th very much support that he is in on the hoax. The paramedic's contradicting testimonies of that day tell me they're in on it and the infamous ambulance photo (staged) also supports this. Helicopter crew could be undercover agents. All in all, it seems like a lot of people are involved but it's really not that many if you think about it. In order for Michael to pull something of this magnitude off, he would need help - he "can't do it by myself." The famous expression "loose lips sink ships" is true in many cases but if anyone did step forward to say it was a hoax, the family would've lashed out and chances are, most sheeple wouldn't believe that person anyways. And think about - most everyone immediately dismissed the coroner van video of Michael hopping out the back of it. The video was later "de-bunked", naturally, but it had already served its purpose.<br />
<br /><br />I think the Airport is real mostly because I don't see any good in faking it (if he decided to stay). It's almost a nonfactor in the non-hoax community that all but forgotten (Jermaine's slip-up and the closing of LAX). I'll discuss my opinion of the body later (if you couldn't understand it from my last post). But in a nutshell a body is necessary for "keeping things simple".
<br />The airport evidence could've been faked (like everything else) for the purpose of an escape theory.<br /><br />A dead body brings in far too many complications, in my opinion. If it's to fool the doctor - the doc wouldn't work on a dead body for so long. If it's to fool the coroner - the body would've been properly (scientifically) identified instead of using just a driver's license. Muray is in on it - a body double wouldn't fool him and his actions and words (and staged photo ops) since June 25th very much support that he is in on the hoax. The paramedic's contradicting testimonies of that day tell me they're in on it and the infamous ambulance photo (staged) also supports this. Helicopter crew could be undercover agents. All in all, it seems like a lot of people are involved but it's really not that many if you think about it. In order for Michael to pull something of this magnitude off, he would need help - he "can't do it by myself." The famous expression "loose lips sink ships" is true in many cases but if anyone did step forward to say it was a hoax, the family would've lashed out and chances are, most sheeple wouldn't believe that person anyways. And think about - most everyone immediately dismissed the coroner van video of Michael hopping out the back of it. The video was later "de-bunked", naturally, but it had already served its purpose.<br />
<br /><br />I think the Airport is real mostly because I don't see any good in faking it (if he decided to stay). It's almost a nonfactor in the non-hoax community that all but forgotten (Jermaine's slip-up and the closing of LAX). I'll discuss my opinion of the body later (if you couldn't understand it from my last post). But in a nutshell a body is necessary for "keeping things simple".<br />
<br /><br />The airport detail adds yet another element of intrigue to the events of that day. Maybe Michael did fly off but I really don't think he would. It's in my opinion that Michael was there that day and actively involved in his hoax, from an on-the-scene perspective. If I end up being wrong, I'll own that but right now, it's what I truly believe. I'm digging in my heels, lol. I think I understood what you were saying about the body making it more simple but I think a body would just add un-needed "dead weight". And going with a movie theory on top of everything, the people involved can be considered the cast and crew, non-disclosure agreements in place.
<br />One of the points that TS is asking discredit is the ambulance, there is the idea that it used two ambulances and one of the reasons it was this video and the explanation was that in reality the end of the video is in fact the initiation.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />
<br /><br /><br />I see we're still divided on Dummy versus LIVE MJ<br /><br /><br />.....hung jury.... /judge/<br /><br /><br />TS.... /white flag/
<br />One of the points that TS is asking discredit is the ambulance, there is the idea that it used two ambulances and one of the reasons it was this video and the explanation was that in reality the end of the video is in fact the initiation.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />
<br /><br /><br />This video is very puzzling. I am not sure what I see there. I know I see Murray, Alvarez, the 3 paramedics - 2 white and one black, but do I see someone on the stretcher? It's like I see something but I am not sure it's not an optical illusion.<br /><br />I even tried to count how many pairs of legs are there but it's impossible for me to see /pull hair/
Look! He's right there sitting up on the stretcher. The hoax was deciphered by the end of 2009.<br /><br />But so much time... so many voices... so easy to doubt your instincts. Like all these new faces on the thread, anyone else notice how each tiai thread tends to bring unused avatars out of the woodwork? And for the most part they seemingly haven't read any of the information. Seemingly just wandered in and latched onto theories and ideas long long ago (pages and months) debunked and laid to rest. They dig these up, dust them off, prop them up and make camp under them again and again. <br /><br />2 years of trying to make sense of what we have known from the start, with the prime obstacle being distraction agents, inspires one to steal their reserve. What speaks true; your instincts? Or the whispers from the peanut gallery?<br /><br />He's sitting right there on the stretcher. 3 out of 7 original pics captured by Ben's crew. He's right there in front of everyone's eyes. Yet 2 years later "we" can't decide who or what went to UCLA that day. Ironic.
<br />One of the points that TS is asking discredit is the ambulance, there is the idea that it used two ambulances and one of the reasons it was this video and the explanation was that in reality the end of the video is in fact the initiation.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />
<br /><br /><br />This video is very puzzling. I am not sure what I see there. I know I see Murray, Alvarez, the 3 paramedics - 2 white and one black, but do I see someone on the stretcher? It's like I see something but I am not sure it's not an optical illusion.<br /><br />I even tried to count how many pairs of legs are there but it's impossible for me to see /pull hair/<br />
<br /><br />To me this piece of evidence is critical....<br /><br />The problem is pictures and video can be manipulated....<br /><br /><br />Is this actually happening or is it an illusion?<br /><br />If that is Michael on the gurney, why does he wait to lie down when they are half way through the doors?<br /><br />
If it is him on the stretcher, why is his head to the hospital and not to the ambulance? The patient is supposed to be with his legs to the ambulance's door and his head to the driver's way, isn't he?
<br />Look! He's right there sitting up on the stretcher. The hoax was deciphered by the end of 2009.<br /><br />But so much time... so many voices... so easy to doubt your instincts. Like all these new faces on the thread, anyone else notice how each tiai thread tends to bring unused avatars out of the woodwork? And for the most part they seemingly haven't read any of the information. Seemingly just wandered in and latched onto theories and ideas long long ago (pages and months) debunked and laid to rest. They dig these up, dust them off, prop them up and make camp under them again and again. <br /><br />2 years of trying to make sense of what we have known from the start, with the prime obstacle being distraction agents, inspires one to steal their reserve. What speaks true; your instincts? Or the whispers from the peanut gallery?<br /><br />He's sitting right there on the stretcher. 3 out of 7 original pics captured by Ben's crew. He's right there in front of everyone's eyes. Yet 2 years later "we" can't decide who or what went to UCLA that day. Ironic.<br />
<br /><br />I'm not new to the hoax (or to this website), and I've seen the stretcher video/picture but I'm not convinced by it. In the helicopter we don't know if the "body" moved by itself (and it doesn't look like it did in my humble opinion). In the second video/picture series I don't think we can say for sure that the "body" was really from the stretcher. I simply think the airport escape and the double body theory is more logical. I'm not wavering in my opinion. <br /><br />There are three sides to the double theory:<br /><br />Version 1: Planted corpse<br />** Random body taken in placed in MJ's place.<br /><br />Version 2: Convenient death <br />** Double's death is unrelated to hoax but was happened conveniently in time for the hoax.<br /><br />Version 3: Murdered double <br />** A living double died in MJ's place. Conrad Murray (or whatever other conspirators a la murder conspiracy theory) were successful, but got the wrong guy. One issue with this theory is that MJ allowed the double to die in his place, but I simply say that it was necessary for the other factors and the double was 100% behind MJ in the mission.<br /><br />** I believe version 3<br /><br />Even in the movie theory it takes away from the secrecy of the hoax. If this is "all just a movie where EVERYONE is just an actor" does that mean Hollywood is basically behind the hoax? Is this basically a test limited to us as viewers? I say there are some insiders within each organization (Hospital, Hollywood, Coroners) but not everyone (very few IMO).
Now, maybe Ben added MJ to these 3 pics that were held a few days before being released with the rest of the group.<br /><br />Maybe so.<br /><br />But did he do it to deceive people into believing a false hoax?<br /><br />Or did he do it on Michael's command in order to perpetuate rumors of the truth?<br /><br />Or was Michael really just there?<br /><br />We already know in the past that Michael was only photographed by the paps and the media when he WANTED to be. No accidental MJ caught on camera EVER.<br /><br />We know that it is Ben's crew who got these pics, and ONLY Ben's crew.<br /><br />We know Ben's crew (or at least Ben) is in on the hoax.<br /><br />So put 2 and 2 together and come up with the truth.
No question the coroner is in on it. I saved these pics off of Craig Harvey's FB account back in 09, taken at the annual coroners party. After questioning Craig he deleted the pics. He responded to several emails though, which is odd in itself, but it seemed his main goal was to make me believe MJ was dead. Of course I acted like I believed he was dead at first just to get answers. Will find the emails as well. But here are the pics. Each table honoured a celebrity that passed away that year. Take note of MJ's pic - pretty clear they knew the pic was not him. hmmm<br /><br />
Comments
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."