Is Paul really dead? [Archive] - Page 17 - David Icke's Official Forums

howie

28-04-2009, 03:39 AM

I found this in McCartney (2001) torrent I downloaded last week :eek:

ON THE ALBUM COVER & 'PAUL IS DEAD' CLUES

PAUL 1974: "I had just turned up at a photo session, and it was a hot day in London, a really nice hot day... and I think I wore sandals. I only had to walk around the corner to the crossing because I lived pretty nearby. And for the photo session I thought, 'I´ll take my sandals off.' You know, so what? Barefoot, nice warm day-- I didn't feel like wearing shoes. So I went around to the photo session and showed me bare feet. Of course, when that comes out and people start looking at it they say, 'Why has he got no shoes on? He´s never done that before.' Okay, you´ve never seen me do it before, but in actual fact it´s just me with my shoes off. Turns out to be some old Mafia sign of death or something."

http://home.att.net/~chuckayoub/Abbey_Road_Lyrics.html

http://img528.imageshack.us/img528/6793/faulsandals1.jpg

http://img528.imageshack.us/img528/3402/faulsandals2.jpg

McCartney On McCartney (documentary)

A television documentary produced by Ardent Productions and originally screened on the Biography Channel. It was to receive a larger audience when it was screened on Channel 5 on 28 May 2002.

It basically revolved around Paul, sitting by a piano and discussing the history of the Beatles, covering mainly the years 1957 to 1970. It featured interviews with various people who knew Paul, including Pete Best, Bill Harry, Bob Wooler, Brian Wilson, Julia Baird, Klaus Voormann, Tony Barrow, George Martin, Alistair Taylor, Donovan, Steve Miller and Peter Asher.

Brian Wilson recalled the 'Vegetables' recording session and Miller said that the Beatles' songs were the most important body of work ever recorded.

At the end of the programme, Paul admitted that he'd secretly wished that the Beatles had got together again at the end of the 1970s.

at the end he says

"I daren't imagine I'm him cos it'd just blow my head off"

download video clip here
http://www.supload.com/vid/McCartney%202001/864367834/avi/

fireman

28-04-2009, 07:29 AM

^ Start researching the Illuminati.

But here's my brief synopsis:

Paul McCartney was replaced with a double circa Sept. 1966. The Beatles may have been under the control of the Illuminati's Tavistock Institute, which used celebrities to push a drug agenda (LSD) on the public to control minds. It is possible that Paul refused to go along with the agenda and was eliminated. Because he was popular, the Illuminati found a replacement who would be more amenable to their control. Not long after, Faul did an interview talking about taking LSD.

Faul controls an immense amount of wealth. It is unlikely that the Illuminati would want a loose cannon out there who was very popular & very rich. Paul's murder may have served as a warning to friends & family to not step out of line. The Illuminati-controlled media has been complicit in furthering the deception that Faul is Paul for over 40 years.

^funny and purely fictional, IMHO.

You don't have ANY proove, for any of the statements above.
You just made that up!
That amount of wealth you are talking about, is what Paul worked for from 1960 over 1970s, 1980, until today!
He had to push the LSD agenda, but stopped taking LSD by 1968?? (as did all the other Beatles..) The illuminati must have been disapointed!:D
Paul has ALWAYS been the most rational and family-friendly one of them... Your little sicience-fiction story makes absolutely no sense

faulconandsnowjob

28-04-2009, 05:52 PM

^ You just have to put the pieces together. It's not that hard if you do a little research.

You don't have ANY proove (sic), for any of the statements above.
You can research it for yourself. I would start researching the Illuminati.

That amount of wealth you are talking about, (sic) is what Paul worked for from 1960 over 1970s, 1980, until today!
Faul has made a ton of money off of Paul's back.

He had to push the LSD agenda, but stopped taking LSD by 1968?? (as did all the other Beatles..) The illuminati must have been disapointed!
Faul definitely pushed the LSD agenda. There are interviews of him in which he talked about taking LSD. They've been posted on this thread. Maybe you missed them?

Your little sicience-fiction (sic) story makes absolutely no sense
It does if you do the research. You can't even tell that Paul was replaced - you are stuck at step one. Your opinion counts for very little, imo.

ar20

28-04-2009, 06:04 PM

^ You just have to put the pieces together. It's not that hard if you do a little research.

You can research it for yourself. I would start researching the Illuminati.

Faul has made a ton of money off of Paul's back.

Faul definitely pushed the LSD agenda. There are interviews of him in which he talked about taking LSD. They've been posted on this thread. Maybe you missed them?

It does if you do the research. You can't even tell that Paul was replaced - you are stuck at step one. Your opinion counts for very little, imo.

I also happen to believe that the 3 J's of rock dying at 27 years old...

Jim Morrison, Janis Joplin, Jimi Hendrix....

Have some occult/illuminati influence to it, and don't be fooled that the Beatles couldn't have been co-opted to be used as a vehicle for youth rebellion/change. The Illuminati managed to get everyone thinking it was cool to "Tune in, Turn on, Drop Out" and rebel against society and their parents.

It's in their interests to play everyone off against each other.

John Lennon - "Only 100 people in the world truly understand our music"

Kurt Cobain could be included... Anyone who has a great level of influence over a mass of people other than them is considered a threat. Lennon is a prime example of how threatening he could be to the establishment.

faulconandsnowjob

28-04-2009, 06:43 PM

^ I think the Illuminati's influence in the entertainment industry is pretty extensive.

fireman

28-04-2009, 08:19 PM

^As i recall from your postings from the PID MISS HIM board, you also believe that George was replaced with SEVERAL lookalikes (which you call "MMT Feorge", "White Album Feorge")

Then why all the alleged Paul is dead clues?

And could you name a celebrity who has not been replaced?

Because i think you have a serious case of replacement-paranoia! :D

orbandsceptre27

28-04-2009, 09:31 PM

I also happen to believe that the 3 J's of rock dying at 27 years old...

Jim Morrison, Janis Joplin, Jimi Hendrix....

Have some occult/illuminati influence to it, and don't be fooled that the Beatles couldn't have been co-opted to be used as a vehicle for youth rebellion/change. The Illuminati managed to get everyone thinking it was cool to "Tune in, Turn on, Drop Out" and rebel against society and their parents.

You can add Kurt Cobain, Brian Jones and Robert Johnson to the 27 list. What is it with the orbandsceptre eh! :)

orbandsceptre27

28-04-2009, 09:35 PM

hey_dude

28-04-2009, 11:34 PM

faulconandsnowjob

28-04-2009, 11:59 PM

^ The Illuminati always drop clues about what they're up to. I think you need to research the Illuminati some more.

Ar20, have you see the Laurel Canyon series about dead rockstars by Dave McGowan?
http://davesweb.cnchost.com/

orbandsceptre27

29-04-2009, 12:35 AM

Why would Faul agree to involve himself in these alleged album clues? Why would he want people to know about how he allegedly replaced Paul Mccartney? Or did the other Beatles force him at gunpoint to walk out of step and without shoes on to let their fanbase know that something is amiss.

The theory just doesn't stand up to any scrutiny whatsoever.

Forget about motives and theories Hey Dude.

Begin looking in depth at old interviews and vids - Once you see that Paul McCartney was replaced, then you can start talking about theories.

You won`t allow the thought that maybe this was possible.

faulconandsnowjob

29-04-2009, 12:41 AM

^ I don't really understand why some people have such difficulty accepting that some people might have been replaced. I can only imagine it's lack of knowledge about how the Illuminati operate. Frankly, I was expecting people on the David Icke Forum to be a little more educated about the Illuminati.

orbandsceptre27

29-04-2009, 01:02 AM

I agree Faulcon - though I think more and more people are seeing there was much symbolism involved with The Beatles and other groups (as there is today).

People have to ask why were four working class lads from Liverpool (without an arse in their trousers lol... as we say) made global superstars in such a short space of time by the powers that be in the music industry?

Some will say talent..... But there were plenty of talented charismatic musicians and singers about (as there are today). Were The Beatles some sort of blueprint for something greater?

Who are the powers that be in the music industry and in the entertainment industry? What is the real purpose of such an industry for those who started it/could it be to manipulate and control what we see and hear on a global level?

The Beatles had millions of fans - That`s massive power for those who (for starters) wanted to make big bucks... but those with the largest pockets have always wanted more power and control. Could it be that The Beatles were one of the greatest social engineering projects of the 60`s. It`s not unlikely!

faulconandsnowjob

29-04-2009, 04:43 AM

^ It's always about control w/ the Illuminati (imo).

The Beatles were probably picked b/c of their looks & talent. Maybe they even had Illuminati ties. Who knows for sure?

orbandsceptre27

29-04-2009, 06:40 AM

^ It's always about control w/ the Illuminati (imo).

No doubt Faulcon an unseen hand is at work in the world.

The Beatles were probably picked b/c of their looks & talent. Maybe they even had Illuminati ties. Who knows for sure?

They had the looks and the talent to appeal to a mass audience. McCartney and Lennon were very talented songwriters/performers (George too). They were given the red carpet treatment throughout the US and vast exposure in the media so the masses would lap them up...... Beatlemania this and that! And one of the greatest stunts ever pulled that we know of lol, was the permanent replacement of Paul McCartney by a phoney. Who he is, we can only speculate!

El Doble.... - YouTube

Vivian Stanshall como Faul - YouTube

faulconandsnowjob

29-04-2009, 07:32 AM

^ Who is Faul? I wouldn't be surprised if he were some sort of intell asset.

toty1994

29-04-2009, 10:45 AM

I imagine this album cover irritates people who think Paul is Faul. Does it show he has a sense of humour about pid or is it more sinister? No prizes for guessing what I think but I'd be interested to hear other views.

http://www.coverbrowser.com/image/abbey-road-hommage-covers/24-3.jpg
Paul Is Live is a live album by Paul McCartney released in 1993 during his New World Tour in support of Off the Ground.

The album's title and cover parody the infamous "Paul Is Dead" rumours that arose in 1969 after the release of The Beatles' last recorded album, Abbey Road: the infamous "281F" on the cover plate (purportedly saying that Paul would have been 28 had he lived) was changed to "51 IS" (indicating his current age).

Here's a few more Abbey Road homages. The captions do not necessarily reflect the views of the author.;)

http://www.coverbrowser.com/image/abbey-road-hommage-covers/21-6.jpg
There's the theory that all four of them were replaced - could this be a clue?

http://www.coverbrowser.com/image/abbey-road-hommage-covers/41-7.jpg
Clones?

http://www.coverbrowser.com/image/abbey-road-hommage-covers/5-6.jpg
Did Benny know something? His death was a bit mysterious...

orbandsceptre27

29-04-2009, 11:52 AM

I imagine this album cover irritates people who think Paul is Faul.

Good for you Toty1994.

Does it show he has a sense of humour about pid or is it more sinister?

To me it shows certain people will always be in denial of what`s in front of their eyes - an imposter.

fireman

29-04-2009, 02:33 PM

Good for you Toty1994.

To me it shows certain people will always be in denial of what`s in front of their eyes - an imposter.

So ´the Illuminati replaced Paul and George, is that right? And both were replaced with several different lookalikes right? They look, play, sound, speak, behave, nearly the same, right? And nobody of hundreds of people involved (family, friends, sound engineers, etc) never came clear about it? And all that was planned because they wanted to promote LSD? Which the Beatles stopped taking a year after 1967? And why all the Paul is dead clues? And why didn't the illuminati stop the break-up of the Beatles? (They were all replacements by then, according to Faulcon)

Even your left/right brain hemisphere argument can't cope with THAT story.
:)

toty1994

29-04-2009, 05:48 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by toty1994
I imagine this album cover irritates people who think Paul is Faul.

Good for you Toty1994.

My powers of deduction are great, arn't they.:)

Does it show he has a sense of humour about pid or is it more sinister?

To me it shows certain people will always be in denial of what`s in front of their eyes - an imposter.

So you think 'Faul' was having a laugh at the expense of the vast majority (deniers) and, in a different way, at those who knew 'the truth'?

orbandsceptre27

29-04-2009, 08:48 PM

So ´the Illuminati replaced Paul and George, is that right? And both were replaced with several different lookalikes right? They look, play, sound, speak, behave, nearly the same, right?

Can you point out where I mentioned any of these things Fireman... assumptions, assumptions, assumptions lol.

My powers of deduction are great, arn't they.

If that`s what you want to believe Toty1994.

So you think 'Faul' was having a laugh at the expense of the vast majority (deniers) and, in a different way, at those who knew 'the truth'?

This is what you say - I haven`t said anything resembling this.

fireman

29-04-2009, 09:56 PM

Can you point out where I mentioned any of these things Fireman... assumptions, assumptions, assumptions lol.

Not you specifically. But since you're in a boat with truthseeker and Faulcon, is that not what you believe?
Maybe you PIDers should get the details of your story straight! lol

orbandsceptre27

29-04-2009, 10:06 PM

Not you specifically. But since you're in a boat with truthseeker and Faulcon, is that not what you believe?

I`m not in a boat Fireman - This thread specifically relates to Paul McCartney. I don`t have any idea if George was replaced as I haven`t looked at it. It would not surprise me if he had had a body double at some point - Even Britney Spears has at least one.

toty1994

29-04-2009, 11:08 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by toty1994
My powers of deduction are great, arn't they.

If that`s what you want to believe Toty1994.

...and I thought I was being dry. Seriously though - yes, I do believe it.:D

Quote:
So you think 'Faul' was having a laugh at the expense of the vast majority (deniers) and, in a different way, at those who knew 'the truth'?

This is what you say - I haven`t said anything resembling this.

No, it was simply a follow-up question re the 'Paul is live' album cover. I only asked it as your first response seemed a bit obtuse. It doesn't matter though, I suppose 'I haven't said anything resembling this' answers it.

faulconandsnowjob

30-04-2009, 04:31 AM

^ I'm certainly not the 1st person to have mentioned the Illuminati's ongoing program to find doubles for prominent people. I believe Fritz Springmeier & others have written about this pretty extensively.

Why do the Illuminati replace people? So that they can use them to control people. Why else? It's all about control w/ the Illuminati.

If Paul was replaced, doesn't it stand to reason that *maybe* other people have been replaced? Paul's case is interesting b/c it's one of the rare times when the usually asleep sheeple actually noticed something was wrong & *almost* figured it out back in 1969. Of course, when LIFE magazine trotted out someone claiming to be Paul, most people happily went back to sleep. Of course, we all know the media would never, ever tell a lie, right? :rolleyes:

toty1994

30-04-2009, 05:12 PM

Originally posted by faulconandsnowjob
I'm certainly not the 1st person to have mentioned the Illuminati's ongoing program to find doubles for prominent people. I believe Fritz Springmeier & others have written about this pretty extensively.

You mean this Fritz Springmeier?

A list of possible terror targets compiled by an ultra-right wing group, including government buildings and other facilities were made public Thursday as a federal judge sentenced a Portland area man for his part in a 1997 bank robbery.

After the sentencing of Fritz Springmeier, a self-described religious author, Clackamas County Sheriff deputies revealed a loose-leaf binder seized in 2001 as a part of the case.

Springmeier, a white separatist known for his anti-government writings will serve 9 years in federal prison. Federal Judge James Redden characterized the robbery that included the detonation of a pipe bomb as a diversion as "vicious."

Among the locations handwritten in the binder entitled "Army of God, Yahweh's Warriors, were the federal building, FBI offices, and KATU studios in Portland.

Floor plans to the FBI offices were also a part of the evidence seized in a raid on property near Corbett on Feb. 9, 2001.

In the raid, federal agents also seized a cache of military-style assault weapons, including an AK-47, hand grenades, C-4 explosives, and bomb-making ingredients that included ammonium nitrate and fuel oil.

"We take it (the target lists) very seriously," says Steve Thoroughman, a detective with Clackamas County, and the lead investigator of the US government's case against Springmeier and his accomplice Forrest Bateman, who was convicted and sentenced earlier this year in connection with the bank robbery.

Thoroughman says agents of the FBI and ATF have reviewed the hand-written notes and have followed up on those leads.

"They had the means to do almost anything they wanted to," said Thoroughman. They had fully automatic AK-47's, they had night vision, they had ceramic body armor, anything they needed to carry out an assault."

Federal prosecutors say the handwritten notes were a clue to the workings of the group, but without additional overt acts they did not provide enough evidence to prove a conspiracy.

"We had to have more to make that kind of a case," said Frank Noonan, the US attorney who prosecuted Springmeier.

Springmeier's wife Patricia says her husband first met Bateman at a bible study in 1995.

"He knew the bible forward and backward, and that's why they first got together," says Patricia Springmeier.

Patricia also says her husband was framed by the federal government for his writings that she believes exposed corruption at high levels of the government.

Just before sentencing Springmeier told the judge that the government had destroyed his life. As he had during his trial, Springmeier proclaimed his innocence and referred the sentence as a "divine blessing."

I personally wouldn't trust the scholarship of an ultra right-wing white separatist religious author. Not to mention one who indulges in bank robbery in his spare time! I'd never heard of him before but this was one of the first things I came across - it kind of put me off looking further. I will, though. Is the above article a pack of lies then?

faulconandsnowjob

30-04-2009, 06:31 PM

I don't know what happened w/ Springmeier, of course, but check this out:

Patricia also says her husband was framed by the federal government for his writings that she believes exposed corruption at high levels of the government.

Just before sentencing Springmeier told the judge that the government had destroyed his life. As he had during his trial, Springmeier proclaimed his innocence ...

Anyway, his information has been corroborated by other sources.

aonghus36

30-04-2009, 07:29 PM

aonghus36

30-04-2009, 07:36 PM

Why would Faul agree to involve himself in these alleged album clues? Why would he want people to know about how he allegedly replaced Paul Mccartney? Or did the other Beatles force him at gunpoint to walk out of step and without shoes on to let their fanbase know that something is amiss.

The theory just doesn't stand up to any scrutiny whatsoever.

Of course it is possible that Paul walking out of step with the rest of the Beatles has something to do with the fact he is left-handed, and the rest of The Beatles were right-handed. Being left or right handed effects which foot one leads with, while walking.

faulconandsnowjob

01-05-2009, 01:40 AM

My view is if the Illuminati wanted to replace one of The Beatles, Paul would probably be amongst the last ones they would kill off. John was far more of a trouble-maker than Paul ever was. Yet, he was only gotten rid of in 1980. Paul was, for the most part, 'love love me do, you know I love you' and 'Michelle my belle'. Every now and then he did a rocker, but he just isn't an upheaval kind of guy, never, neither before or after 1966.
Paul didn't exist after 1966, so we can't speak to what he would have been like. Anyway, Paul not being a trouble maker is just the image that was created for him - the lovable mop-top or whatever. He got into trouble in Hamburg, for ex. Anyway, Paul said in a 1965 interview that they wouldn't encourage people not to drink, so I doubt he'd want anything to do w/ encouraging people to take drugs.

The Illuminati certainly wouldn't want to advocate LSD, because it has mind expansion qualities.
Au contraire. The Illuminati/CIA was very interested in using LSD as a mind-control weapon - check out "In Search of the Manchurian Candidate" by John Marks if you don't believe me. That LSD ultimately failed as a mind-control tool doesn't mean that the CIA wasn't interested in distributing it to the masses in 1966.

aonghus36

01-05-2009, 07:16 AM

Paul didn't exist after 1966, so we can't speak to what he would have been like. Anyway, Paul not being a trouble maker is just the image that was created for him - the lovable mop-top or whatever. He got into trouble in Hamburg, for ex. Anyway, Paul said in a 1965 interview that they wouldn't encourage people not to drink, so I doubt he'd want anything to do w/ encouraging people to take drugs.

Paul was not a trouble maker in any time period. He did advocate for marijuana legalization in 1967 though. So, he got in trouble in Hamburg when he was a kid. Many people do when they are kids. I think he still lives. I really doubt that they had that kind of ability to make such a close double of someone in 1966.

Au contraire. The Illuminati/CIA was very interested in using LSD as a mind-control weapon - check out "In Search of the Manchurian Candidate" by John Marks if you don't believe me. That LSD ultimately failed as a mind-control tool doesn't mean that the CIA wasn't interested in distributing it to the masses in 1966.

After they saw what LSD did in the fifties and early sixties, maybe, they certainly didn't want the masses to have LSD. Brainwashing people is the last thing acid can do. I believe the illuminati was already disenchanted by LSD before 1966. Harvard had already fired Timothy Leary in 1963, although Leary was allowed to give prisoners psilocybin at Concord State Prison earlier on.

aonghus36

01-05-2009, 07:22 AM

[QUOTE=faulconandsnowjob;962974]Paul didn't exist after 1966, so we can't speak to what he would have been like. Anyway, Paul not being a trouble maker is just the image that was created for him - the lovable mop-top or whatever. He got into trouble in Hamburg, for ex. Anyway, Paul said in a 1965 interview that they wouldn't encourage people not to drink, so I doubt he'd want anything to do w/ encouraging people to take drugs.

He still lives. So, he got in trouble in Hamburg, so you say. He was a kid. Many people got in trouble as kids. Anyways, what does refusing to encourage people not to drink have to do with encouraging people to take drugs? He advocated marijuana legalization as early as 1967, but some say this was Faul, who was suppose to be more conservative than Paul? I don't think so.

faulconandsnowjob

01-05-2009, 06:08 PM

aonghus36

01-05-2009, 07:10 PM

^ If it was 1967, it wasn't Paul. Paul is not to be seen after Sept 1966. Anything he supposedly said or did after 1966 was done by the imposter. It's important to make that distinction.

The fact that Paul wouldn't encourage people not to drink shows that had a mind of his own & wasn't a "yes" man. If he didn't want to do it, he wouldn't do it.

We know that the Illuminati has used/tried to use/uses drugs to control people. I can well imagine that Paul would not encourage drug use - especially not something like LSD. Maybe he would have even spoken out against drug use, if he'd had the chance. Who knows?

All of The Beatles, during their filming of the movie Help, were known to take quicky reefer breaks. He wasn't against pot, which is very different than LSD.
Help was done in 1965. It would just be a matter of time before he tried it. I am still not convinced that Paul was killed in Sept. 1966. I don't believe we had that kind of technology, with plastic surgery, or otherwise. If it were done, more than likely it would have been done either by the "Visitors" described by Marshall Vian Summers, author of the books, "The Allies of Humanity", or something similar. I do not say that Mr. Summers has embraced the doppelgaenger conspiracy theory. This would just be my edition to it, if it is true.

faulconandsnowjob

01-05-2009, 07:27 PM

hunter77

01-05-2009, 10:06 PM

I'm certain the technology to replace Paul existed back in 1966. The state of existing technology is many years ahead of what most people think. Anyway, it seems to me that Faul just had some plastic surgery done, some fillers, & wore color contact lenses. I don't, personally, see that he was a twin or a clone or anything like that. I know stuff like that exists, I just don't happen to think that's the case w/ Paul's double. Anyway, there have been doubles program for a long time - esp for espionage, political decoys, celebrity impersonators, etc. I'm sure you're aware that the Illuminati kill people they don't like. If that person was popular, they'll replace them w/ a look-alike they can control. They will then use that person to promote their agenda.

it a bit weird though, that the supposed switch was also lefthanded and played and moved with the bass guitar in exactly the same way?

faulconandsnowjob

01-05-2009, 11:03 PM

^ It is definitely not settled that the double was left-handed. He has been caught on film playing guitar right-handed & showing other right-handed tendencies. Anyway, doubles are trained to emulate the "target" as much as possible. There was plenty of film available to "study" how Paul moved & acted. Of course, he was never able to copy Paul's sense of style, sparkling personality, or song-writing talent (imo) :)

socrates

01-05-2009, 11:30 PM

hunter77

01-05-2009, 11:38 PM

hunter77

01-05-2009, 11:41 PM

I'm certain the technology to replace Paul existed back in 1966. The state of existing technology is many years ahead of what most people think. Anyway, it seems to me that Faul just had some plastic surgery done, some fillers, & wore color contact lenses. I don't, personally, see that he was a twin or a clone or anything like that. I know stuff like that exists, I just don't happen to think that's the case w/ Paul's double. Anyway, there have been doubles program for a long time - esp for espionage, political decoys, celebrity impersonators, etc. I'm sure you're aware that the Illuminati kill people they don't like. If that person was popular, they'll replace them w/ a look-alike they can control. They will then use that person to promote their agenda.

in the year they had to rely on pickles the dog to find the stolen world cup trophy, the technolgy existed:confused::rolleyes:
http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn166/bluegoddess777/pickles_002_jpg_display.jpg PICKLES OR FICKLES http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn166/bluegoddess777/fat_dog.jpg

a picture of pickles before he was tragically hung with his own lead( now theres a real conspracy

socrates

01-05-2009, 11:57 PM

in the year they had to rely on pickles the dog to find the stolen world cup trophy, the technolgy existed:confused::rolleyes:
http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn166/bluegoddess777/pickles_002_jpg_display.jpg

a picture of pickles before he was tragically hung with his own lead( now theres a real conspracy)

Pickles didn't really die - it was just his replacement.

The REAL Pickles:

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/45585000/jpg/_45585112_dog_getty_706.jpg

:D

hunter77

02-05-2009, 12:27 AM

pickles didn't really die - it was just his replacement.

The real pickles:

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/45585000/jpg/_45585112_dog_getty_706.jpg

:d

no this is is the real pickles or is it fickes. You will notice how his eyes and ears are slightly different:d

faulconandsnowjob

02-05-2009, 12:48 AM

well ive seen him play live, and he was very much left handed
Like I said, the double would have been trained to emulate the target. Maybe he learned to play left-handed, maybe he wasn't really playing.

hunter77

02-05-2009, 12:52 AM

Like I said, the double would have been trained to emulate the target. Maybe he learned to play left-handed, maybe he wasn't really playing.

its diffiult to wank with the wrong hand nevermind play a musicical instrument:eek:;)

faulconandsnowjob

02-05-2009, 12:58 AM

^ I don't know, but there are definitely clues that Faul is right-handed.

http://i366.photobucket.com/albums/oo110/faulconandsnowjob/right_handed_faul.jpg

howie

02-05-2009, 02:23 AM

unless there is a third:confused:

There are 2 Fauls

faulconandsnowjob

02-05-2009, 05:42 AM

Bear in mind: there are quite often look-alike contests, and these contests are often sponsored and used by those forces seeking to find doubles to play the parts for public figures. There was a Paul McCartney look-alike contest in 1965, then he was replaced in 1966. Coincidence?

toty1994

02-05-2009, 09:33 AM

He advocated marijuana legalization as early as 1967, but some say this was Faul, who was suppose to be more conservative than Paul? I don't think so.

Originally posted by faulconandsnowwjob
If it was 1967, it wasn't Paul. Paul is not to be seen after Sept 1966. Anything he supposedly said or did after 1966 was done by the imposter. It's important to make that distinction.

Once again, utter certainty based entirely on (to most) unconvincing heavily disputed evidence, speculation and guesswork.

A couple more typical quotes from recent days...

Paul didn't exist after 1966, so we can't speak to what he would have been like.
Well, we can if we happen to think you might be wrong...if that's ok with you.

I'm certain the technology to replace Paul existed back in 1966.

Fine, but you've been unable to come anywhere near proving it. A few weeks ago someone scoffed 'Proof, evidence blah di blah' as if it was somehow unimportant when it comes to pid. I still can't get my head round that one.

However...

Of course, he was never able to copy Paul's sense of style, sparkling personality, or song-writing talent (imo)

Hallelujah!!

aonghus36

02-05-2009, 04:47 PM

I'm certain the technology to replace Paul existed back in 1966. The state of existing technology is many years ahead of what most people think. Anyway, it seems to me that Faul just had some plastic surgery done, some fillers, & wore color contact lenses. I don't, personally, see that he was a twin or a clone or anything like that. I know stuff like that exists, I just don't happen to think that's the case w/ Paul's double. Anyway, there have been doubles program for a long time - esp for espionage, political decoys, celebrity impersonators, etc. I'm sure you're aware that the Illuminati kill people they don't like. If that person was popular, they'll replace them w/ a look-alike they can control. They will then use that person to promote their agenda.

One would think this would have been done with the Kennedy brothers here in the USA. But, they had to be killed outright, as was John Lennon in 1980. on what would have been Jim Morrison's birthday.

faulconandsnowjob

02-05-2009, 07:57 PM

^ That's a good point about the Kennedys. With respect to JFK, I'm thinking LBJ probably wanted to be president, & that's why there wasn't a JFK replacement.

dream9

02-05-2009, 08:13 PM

LBJ was higher up on the Illuminati also.

faulconandsnowjob

02-05-2009, 08:18 PM

^ There are also factions w/in the Illuminati that vie for power, supposedly.

howie

02-05-2009, 08:25 PM

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-1176628/Revealed-How-George-Harrison-forged-Beatles-signatures-dying-fan.html

George Harrison is believed to have forged all the signatures of the Beatles to make a dying fan’s wish come true.

The report emerged after an autographed picture of the band was sold at Keys auctioneers in Aylsham, Norfolk on Friday.

It was donated by Harry Bartlett, of Rickinghall, Suffolk, whose daughter Ann received the photograph shortly before her death in the late 1960s at the age of 16.

Andrew Bullock of Keys said it was thought Harrison had copied the signatures of his fellow band members - Paul McCartney, Ringo Starr and John Lennon.

'We've sent it to a handwriting expert and it's just about 100 per cent certain that they were done by George,' he said.

'There are quite a few photographs in existence with autographs that were all signed by George. He got quite good at doing it.

astrochicken

02-05-2009, 08:40 PM

its diffiult to wank with the wrong hand nevermind play a musicical instrument:eek:;)

We are talking the BASS here.

Dunno if you're a musician or not.. i could play bass left-handed in about 10 minutes. Further look at any PAUL video footage when he's playing live and compare that to FAUL footage playing live. You might spot the very obvious fact that paul knew the instrument inside out and KNEW where his finger are and thus never looks at the neck *to find the dots* . FAUL looks at his hand even when playing the simplest stuff.

Go watch.

astrochicken

02-05-2009, 08:43 PM

http://i171.photobucket.com/albums/u292/rustyintegrale/FlyingPigs.gif

Avian Flu + Swine full = Flying Pig Flu

You probaby missed that one too eh?

A flying pig is a symbol of an impossible event coming to pass. The popular saying "[it will happen] when pigs fly" (or when pigs have wings) is traditionally used to mean that the specified event will never occur.

Meaning

"When pigs fly" is an idiomatic way of saying that something will never happen. Pigs are heavy animals, without wings, and cannot possibly fly. So "when pigs fly" is a time that will never come. The phrase is used for humorous effect to scoff at someone's intentions to achieve or carry out something which is beyond their previous efforts and accomplishments, especially in politics. There are numerous variations on the theme; when someone with a reputation for failure finally succeeds, onlookers may claim sarcastically to see a flying pig. ("Hey look! A flying pig!")

Swine flu... LOL... you've got to appreciate the way they leave their calling card... swine flu, 7.7.7, 911 etc, make poverty history etc. etc.

socrates

02-05-2009, 10:43 PM

Paul knew the instrument inside out and KNEW where his finger are and thus never looks at the neck *to find the dots* Go watch.

What a load of absolute nonsense...

http://img60.imageshack.us/img60/4049/74334882.jpg

http://img60.imageshack.us/img60/6206/85400408.jpg

http://img19.imageshack.us/img19/6018/88767583.jpg

http://img19.imageshack.us/img19/8646/26838118.jpg

http://img19.imageshack.us/img19/7585/40460282.jpg

http://img515.imageshack.us/img515/9761/84490115.jpg

http://img515.imageshack.us/img515/9316/35762653.jpg

http://img515.imageshack.us/img515/5420/84077273.jpg

http://img9.imageshack.us/img9/8498/52237445.jpg

http://img9.imageshack.us/img9/3761/c10kwt.jpg

Continued....

socrates

02-05-2009, 10:46 PM

......

http://img9.imageshack.us/img9/2444/c11apr.jpg

http://img50.imageshack.us/img50/534/c12c.jpg

http://img50.imageshack.us/img50/8927/c13l.jpg

http://img80.imageshack.us/img80/132/c14z.jpg

http://img80.imageshack.us/img80/5042/c15.jpg

http://img80.imageshack.us/img80/3559/c16h.jpg

http://img15.imageshack.us/img15/9738/c17y.jpg

http://img15.imageshack.us/img15/4030/c18luy.jpg

deesee

02-05-2009, 10:48 PM

Those comparison pictures across the two PID sites are incredible; its not him post 66.

There is another one in the middle as well; a temporary dopplganger.

socrates

02-05-2009, 10:49 PM

Paul....never looks at the neck

http://i171.photobucket.com/albums/u292/rustyintegrale/FlyingPigs.gif

:D

Once again, when objective PID 'evidence' can be scrutinized, it turns out to be absolute, delusional fantasy. :mad:

Few more to finish off....

http://img159.imageshack.us/img159/9003/45348415.jpg

http://img159.imageshack.us/img159/9131/82442560.jpg

http://img515.imageshack.us/img515/9475/34880612.jpg

http://img515.imageshack.us/img515/3278/27520082.jpg

Paul....never looks at the neck

PID claims = DISINFO! FACT! :mad: :mad: :mad:

socrates

02-05-2009, 10:56 PM

Those comparison pictures across the two PID sites are incredible; its not him post 66.

So what are the differences between these 2 pairs of eyes then?

http://img6.imageshack.us/img6/3931/eyes5.jpg

merlincove

03-05-2009, 01:25 AM

in the year they had to rely on pickles the dog to find the stolen world cup trophy, the technolgy existed:confused::rolleyes:
http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn166/bluegoddess777/pickles_002_jpg_display.jpg PICKLES OR FICKLES http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn166/bluegoddess777/fat_dog.jpg

a picture of pickles before he was tragically hung with his own lead( now theres a real conspracy

Do they even know that we are posting on the pid thread? Are all those none pid posts invisable?

Hunter for mod, we could have loads of fun then :eek:

EDIT thread title. Paul is not dead, get over it, move on, Let It Be....

coco

03-05-2009, 01:28 AM

Lol!

jojo

03-05-2009, 01:32 AM

Do they even know that we are posting on the pid thread? Are all those none pid posts invisable?

Hunter for mod, we could have loads of fun then :eek:

EDIT thread title. Paul is not dead, get over it, move on, Let It Be....

lol. hunter for mod!:eek::o:eek: oookkkkkey.

paul is dead. no hes not. yes he is.no hes not. yes he is.no hes not. yes he is.no hes not. yes he is.no hes not. yes he is.no hes not. yes he is.no hes not. yes he is.no hes not. yes he is.no hes not. yes he is.no hes not. yes he is.no hes not. yes he is.no hes not. yes he is.no hes not. yes he is.no hes not. yes he is.no hes not. yes he is.no hes not. yes he is.no hes not. yes he is.no hes not. yes he is.no hes not. yes he is.no hes not. yes he is.no hes not. yes he is.no hes not. yes he is.no hes not. yes he is.no hes not. yes he is......... add-infinitum

merlincove

03-05-2009, 01:37 AM

hunter77

03-05-2009, 01:46 AM

metacomet

03-05-2009, 01:53 AM

^ I don't know, but there are definitely clues that Faul is right-handed.

http://i366.photobucket.com/albums/oo110/faulconandsnowjob/right_handed_faul.jpg

...

Now this is interesting.

There is no reason to switch hands like that unless you're messing around, showing off etc.

Very very interesting...

faulconandsnowjob

03-05-2009, 02:09 AM

Those comparison pictures across the two PID sites are incredible; its not him post 66.
Sure isn't.

There is another one in the middle as well; a temporary dopplganger.
Which one do you mean?

hunter77

03-05-2009, 02:24 AM

Sure isn't.

Which one do you mean?

is the temperary dopple ganger called fauline?:eek:

orbandsceptre27

03-05-2009, 02:38 AM

*** insult removed ***

PID claims = DISINFO! FACT! :mad: :mad: :mad:

"The pot calling the kettle black"... Socky/Lightman/K....head and whatever else you`re calling yourself today.

orbandsceptre27

03-05-2009, 03:20 AM

paul is dead. no hes not. yes he is.no hes not. yes he is.no hes not. yes he is.no hes not. yes he is.no hes not. yes he is.no hes not. yes he is.no hes not. yes he is.no hes not. yes he is.no hes not. yes he is.no hes not. yes he is.no hes not. yes he is...............

Yeah reminds me of this re-edited clip from "Unforgiven." Just change the name Ned to Paul (Socrates being Clint Eastwoods character - refuses to accept the truth lol). :)

Nobody Killed Ned - YouTube

aonghus36

03-05-2009, 06:56 AM

Yeah reminds me of this re-edited clip from "Unforgiven." Just change the name Ned to Paul (Socrates being Clint Eastwoods character - refuses to accept the truth lol). :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fezcuhv0qBI&feature=channel_page

Yes, the truth, like the way you can see Paul's features in some of his kids eyes, especially his daughters. Plastic surgery's benefits can't be inherited.
It would have had to have been cloning, which I seriously doubt in the sixties, ET technology or not. I doubt the "Visitors" would have been insane enough to give us, The Three Stooges of the Milky Way galaxy, that kind of technology.

faulconandsnowjob

03-05-2009, 07:06 AM

^ I don't think Faul is a clone, but the technology has, supposedly, been around for quite a while.

According to Stewart Swerdlow, the 1st cloned human was in Germany in 1927. The 1st clone in the USA was at MIT in 1967.

These "genetic/holographic" DNA/RNA replicas [clones] have been in the perfecting for well over four decades.
http://www.fourwinds10.com/siterun_data/science_technology/cloning/

orbandsceptre27

03-05-2009, 08:34 AM

Yes, the truth, like the way you can see Paul's features in some of his kids eyes, especially his daughters. Plastic surgery's benefits can't be inherited.
It would have had to have been cloning, which I seriously doubt in the sixties, ET technology or not. I doubt the "Visitors" would have been insane enough to give us, The Three Stooges of the Milky Way galaxy, that kind of technology.

Do you think....

To me she looks nothing like Paul. Look at her hair and eyes and examine the men underneath (Faul on the left/Paul on the right).

Faul has lighter eyes just like Stella - Pauls eyes were much darker.

http://www.elleuk.com/var/elleuk/storage/images/fashion/news/stella-mccartney-to-expand-her-eco-fashion-collection/2039463-1-eng-GB/stella_mccartney_to_expand_her_eco_fashion_collect ion_imagesNewsHome.jpg
http://deceiver.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/stella_mccartney_silk_dress.jpg
She doesn`t look

http://i366.photobucket.com/albums/oo110/faulconandsnowjob/blueeyes3.jpg

orbandsceptre27

03-05-2009, 08:41 AM

Vivian Stanshall como Faul - YouTube

merlincove

03-05-2009, 08:49 AM

http://i667.photobucket.com/albums/vv35/merlincove/Lassie_1997_TV_show.jpg

http://i667.photobucket.com/albums/vv35/merlincove/beautybeast.jpg

Linda hamilton is a little bit older in the second picture, and lassie looks the same! How can that be?

After 'the grown up' Linda Hamilton came into Lassie, and they had to change the name of the program, they also tried to tell us that Lassies dad was a man, here's a pic of his supposed dad...

http://i667.photobucket.com/albums/vv35/merlincove/roy203-2004.jpg

There is a likeness, especially in the eyes and he is almost as hairy as Lassie...

http://i667.photobucket.com/albums/vv35/merlincove/zbeast.jpg

But if he is Lassie's dad, there is something very messed up in his choice of bed mates :eek:

faulconandsnowjob

03-05-2009, 09:07 AM

To me she looks nothing like Paul.
The kids are Faul's. Paul had brown eyes. It's pretty unlikely that his kids would have green eyes. It wouldn't be so unusual for green-eyed Faul to have green-eyed kids, though.

orbandsceptre27

03-05-2009, 09:13 AM

What do you make of the whole Vivian Stanshall deal Faulcon - Probably a load of disinfo?

i_am

03-05-2009, 10:50 AM

OK I have been browsing this thread and there seems to be a lot of uncalled for pisstaking.

There is no need for this. If you think it is a piece of shit, walk away. Simple!!!

If you wish to discuss, then discuss. If you wish to dispute, dispute, but posting irrelevant comments and pics is trolling.

OK?

Thanks guys.

accuracy

03-05-2009, 11:38 AM

Heh, the truth is always there.........................:D

socrates

03-05-2009, 01:47 PM

"The pot calling the kettle black"... Socky/Lightman/K....head and whatever else you`re calling yourself today.

Careful - you may get suspended again. :) NO TROLLING.

You haven't been able to rebutt any of my points ie. Same iris, same chin markings etc, etc.

I rebutted and blew your fake ear claim right out of the water and showed it up for what it was - complete nonsense. You had no answer. :rolleyes:

And I've completely PROVED the 'Paul never looks at his fret' claim is yet another piece of absolute delusional fantasy too.

So, lay off the lame 'pot and kettle' jibe unless you can back it up with some actual evidence.

socrates

03-05-2009, 02:15 PM

Faul has lighter eyes just like Stella - Pauls eyes were much darker.

Nonsense. It depends on the lighting conditions and background - as I've said so many times before. Why do PIDers refuse to accept provable facts and insists on propogating absolute nonsense?

PROOF:

http://i366.photobucket.com/albums/oo110/faulconandsnowjob/fool_hill_comp.jpg
PAUL's eyes - lighter.............. Faul's eyes - darker

Faul has lighter eyes just like Stella - Pauls eyes were much darker.

Back to the drawing board....

socrates

03-05-2009, 02:20 PM

Paul had brown eyes.

This disinfo has been exposed previously, yet you still brazenly peddle it as fact.

It's clearly not:

http://img90.imageshack.us/img90/3824/1paulbookhx8.jpghttp://img242.imageshack.us/img242/9052/2paulbook1vu6.jpg

Paul has HAZEL eyes - FACT.

orbandsceptre27

03-05-2009, 02:30 PM

Careful - you may get suspended again. NO TROLLING.

This is what I`ve openly said about you on numerous occasions - You spread disinformation at every given opportunity. I`ve been studying for exams and I made my account inactive. I will do so again soon as my exams aren`t far away.

Also I`m sure you`re aware, I wrote the OP on this thread.

You haven't been able to rebutt any of my points ie. Same iris, same chin markings etc, etc.

You`re points have been consistently rebutted time and time again.

I rebutted and blew your fake ear claim right out of the water and showed it up for what it was - complete nonsense. You had no answer.

The only thing you`ve proven is you can`t tell an ear from a piece of hair. :)

So, lay off the lame 'pot and kettle' jibe unless you can back it up with some actual evidence.

You`re a fraud and a charlatan and you`re being found out - Go live in someone elses ear... lmao.

nessa felagund

03-05-2009, 03:03 PM

This thread is nothing but rants. If it continues, that's where you will find it--in the rant room.

deesee

03-05-2009, 04:18 PM

Nonsense. It depends on the lighting conditions and background - as I've said so many times before. Why do PIDers refuse to accept provable facts and insists on propogating absolute nonsense?

PROOF:

http://i366.photobucket.com/albums/oo110/faulconandsnowjob/fool_hill_comp.jpg
PAUL's eyes - lighter.............. Faul's eyes - darker

Back to the drawing board....

THIS picture; That's who I think is the temporary "middle" stand-in.

Not the long-term Faul.

Thanks for posting, I couldn't find it through the pic list.

socrates

03-05-2009, 04:43 PM

THIS picture; That's who I think is the temporary "middle" stand-in.

Not the long-term Faul.

Thanks for posting, I couldn't find it through the pic list.

Two Faul's?

Why would they need more than one?

faulconandsnowjob

03-05-2009, 05:34 PM

What do you make of the whole Vivian Stanshall deal Faulcon - Probably a load of disinfo?
Yes, that's what I suspect.

THIS picture; That's who I think is the temporary "middle" stand-in.

Not the long-term Faul.
Here's a thread on the 2 Fauls:
http://only1rad.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=plastic&action=display&thread=612&page=1

More evidence of photo tampering: Paul on left, a likely composite of Paul & Bill on right.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/ImageFakingofJPMandBill.jpg

socrates

03-05-2009, 06:14 PM

PID Deceptions...

Paul McCartney Is Dead? Oh YEA?? Part 2 - YouTube

astrochicken

03-05-2009, 06:39 PM

And I've completely PROVED the 'Paul never looks at his fret' claim is yet another piece of absolute delusional fantasy too.

Big deal. Ok, i'll stand corrected.. paul seldom looks at the neck as some songs do have fiddly bits especially when they move up to the middle-eight and they're no longer playing something as simple as the fourth or the fifth.. IF he looks then it'll probably be the lead in or the lead out to the middle-eight..

Listen to those songs and take note of when he looks at the neck.

Compare to Faul footage whom you'll almost allways looking at his hands even when doing the simplest of runs, i'm talking about when playing a song in say, C, that he'll be looking what he's doing when going up to the fourth (f) or the fifth(g) such as a simple run up from from c to f via d & e.

I really don't know what you were trying to prove by spamming the thread other than you have way to much time on your hands. Good for you.
Get out more.. meet people. Have fun! Enjoy life! Don't get hung up on a PID thread and make wee angry smilies.. all very childish. I'm loving it though.. it's nice to see people getting all worked about things.. like mars attacks.. "ack-ack ack-ack" *splat*.

Ok, so paul does look at the neck of the bass OCCASIONALY... but when compared to Faul's attempts i can see why they'd stop touring.. too many musicians out there that are not easily decieved.

faulconandsnowjob

03-05-2009, 06:43 PM

Some weird things to ponder...

Mal Evans: Beatles roadie wrote an unpublished autobiography that went missing when he was shot and killed by police on 5 January 1976. Before his death Evans was working on a book of memoirs called “Living The Beatles' Legend,” which he was supposed to deliver to publishers Grosset and Dunlap on 12 January 1976... On the night of Evans' death, he told his collaborator on the book, John Hoernie, to make sure that he finished "Living The Beatles' Legend." Evans was cremated on 7 January 1976 in Los Angeles. His ashes were sent by post back to England, but were lost in the postal system... A suitcase that Evans was carrying at the time of his death, which was supposed to contain unreleased recordings, photos and other memorabilia, was lost by the police during the investigation. Portions of the book have been published, but not all.

Terry Knight’s 1969 single, "Saint Paul” came out in May 1969 - five months before the first article on PID appeared. "Saint Paul" is the only Knight composition administered by Maclen Music - McCartney and Lennon's exclusive publishing company.

Bettina Krischbin alleged that "Paul" had sent a double to give blood when her mother (Erika Huebers) commenced a paternity suit against him in Germany. (1983) He looked different, & had difft signature (comparing the signature in the paternity case file vs a signature in the Hamburg Beatles museum)

Heather Mills interview during divorce: “you know why I’ve left you. Protect me & I will say nothing.” Something so awful happened - beyond belief. Someone she had loved betrayed her immensely, & not infidelity. Says people don’t want to know what the truth is b/c they could never handle it. They would be too devastated.

A 1969 TV special with host F. Lee Bailey addressed whether Paul had died/been replaced. The video vanished.

faulconandsnowjob

03-05-2009, 06:49 PM

Two Faul's?

Why would they need more than one?

Why not?

[T]here were at least three Saddam Hussein lookalikes in rotation, making public appearances...

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/10/06/weekinreview/the-world-will-the-real-saddam-hussein-please-step-down.html

A North Korean agent told Shigemura in 1995 that he had met one of Kim's doubles - there have been as many as four...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2699670/Kim-Jong-Il-died-in-2003-says-Japanese-professor.html

socrates

03-05-2009, 07:10 PM

Big deal. Ok, i'll stand corrected.. paul seldom looks at the neck as some songs do have fiddly bits especially when they move up to the middle-eight and they're no longer playing something as simple as the fourth or the fifth.

Listen to those songs and take note of when he looks at the neck.

Compare to Faul footage whom you'll almost allways see looking at his hands when he does a simple run up from (when playing in the key of c) from c via d&e to f.

Ok, so you've gone from claiming "Paul never looked at the neck" to:

'Well Paul looks at the neck but only when he has to play some "fiddly bits"'.

But you originally claimed that Paul knew the instrument "inside out", and therefore didn't need to look at the neck at any time:

You might spot the very obvious fact that paul knew the instrument inside out and KNEW where his finger are and thus never looks at the neck to find the dots.

:confused: :confused: :confused:

Really, you're mental gymnastics deserve an award. You can't even get your claims straight.

One of the greatest bass players in the world, who "knew the instrument inside out", has to look at the neck when he plays "fiddly bits"? LOL!!! :D

Just give it up will you? Your claim has been proven to be completely ridiculous.

Paul playing a "fiddly bit"...

http://img60.imageshack.us/img60/6206/85400408.jpg

Incidentally, Paul looked at the neck more than 18 times during that song. That's a lot of "fiddly bits" for a simple song. :D

faulconandsnowjob

03-05-2009, 07:39 PM

Paul McCartney is Dead- Yesterday 1966 & 1976 - YouTube

brainfreeze

03-05-2009, 07:49 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uL1qCO04dpg

Is one an outdoor and one an indoor recording?

socrates

03-05-2009, 08:36 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uL1qCO04dpg

The Beatles - Yesterday [Live] - YouTube

http://img26.imageshack.us/img26/3918/71297155.jpg

http://img26.imageshack.us/img26/2503/65549179.jpg

fireman

03-05-2009, 09:11 PM

always the same guy!

http://i40.tinypic.com/9gm0t0.gif

PID is dead!

dream9

03-05-2009, 10:28 PM

faulconandsnowjob

04-05-2009, 04:52 AM

Go to about 1/3 of the way thru - talks about doubles & Paul McCartney.
http://www.ghostlytalk.com/archives/32k/20090503-barbaralamb32k.mp3

orbandsceptre27

04-05-2009, 09:57 AM

http://img26.imageshack.us/img26/3918/71297155.jpg

http://img26.imageshack.us/img26/2503/65549179.jpg

Paul was playing an electric accoustic here, not a bass.

orbandsceptre27

04-05-2009, 09:58 AM

Go to about 1/3 of the way thru - talks about doubles & Paul McCartney.
http://www.ghostlytalk.com/archives/32k/20090503-barbaralamb32k.mp3

Thanks Faulcon, I`ll have a listen to that.

orbandsceptre27

04-05-2009, 10:00 AM

accuracy

04-05-2009, 12:00 PM

orbandsceptre27

05-05-2009, 09:38 AM

What happened??

Just the mods putting manners a few trolls Accuracy.

Go to about 1/3 of the way thru - talks about doubles & Paul McCartney.
http://www.ghostlytalk.com/archives/32k/20090503-barbaralamb32k.mp3

That`s a very interesting interview Faulcon - some of what she mentioned is covered on the threads here. I like how she portrayed the advent of rock n`roll as a controlled revolution. If you can make people believe they`re going against the system (when actually all they`re doing is playing the game and furthering Intel agendas) then you have the supposed rebels under control. Another box has been created for people to get out of... similar to religion, entertainment, sport - All forms of conditioning keeping the mind occupied and focused on the external.

Timothy Leary was also mentioned... an interesting character to say the least. Here`s a piece from one of his essays entitled, "Thank God for the Beatles" (of all things :)) -

"The Sgt. Pepper album... compresses the evolutionary development of musicology and much of the history of Eastern and Western sound in a new tympanic complexity. Then add psychedelic drugs. Millions of kids turned-on pharmacologically, listening to stoned-out electronic music designed specifically for the suggestible, psychedelecized nervous system by stoned-out, long-haired minstrels. This... is the most powerful brainwashing device our planet has ever known. Indeed, if you were an observer from a more highly evolved planet wondering how to change human psychology and human cultural development (in other words if you were a divine messenger), would you not inevitably combine electrical energies from outside with biochemical catalysts inside to accomplish your mutation?"
- Dr. Timothy Leary, from his "Thank God For the Beatles" essay.

As I`ve said recently, The Beatles were much more than just a rock n`roll band involving four young lads from Liverpool. There was a much deeper agenda at stake being feed to the masses (who willingly lapped it up). Why the massive media hype and drive behind the band when they entered the US.... this Beatlemania?

Timothy Leary was very much involved in pushing the new drug culture on the 1960`s youth of America. This mixture of rock n`roll, drugs and free love would become the new paradigm for an emerging youth culture. As Leary later admitted he was working for the CIA, either as an agent or an asset... He himself stated he had been an agent.

Segments from the Leary/Bowarts Interview -

I told Leary that, based on some of the documents I'd read, it seemed that he could have been just one of many scientist who'd been used without his knowledge by the CIA to conduct their mind control experiments.

"I've known this for ten years," Leary said.

"You were witting of it?" I asked in surprise.

"Of course," Leary said, leaning back in his chair with confidence.

I couldn't believe my ears. The CIA had created the "Psychedelic Sixties" with Timothy Leary's help?

"You were wittingly used by the CIA?" I asked again. "...During the sixties? You knew you were being used by the CIA?......"

"I knew I was being used by the intelligence agents of this country."

"I'm asking you what was the CIA's motive? What were you used for?" I said again.

"The CIA recognized what you probably haven't recognized yet, that I'm a very important national asset...
"What can I say,?" Leary said.

He lit his half-smoked joint and continued. "Yeah. I saw in nineteen sixty-two or three, that there was a world struggle for the control of minds. That's a crude way to say it...
"I saw, after Hiroshima, there would never be a big world war. World war would be at the neurological level, not at the level of tanks and planes and bombs...

"I proceeded as an intelligence agent since 1962, understanding that the next war for control of this planet and beyond, had to do with the control of consciousness. So I had to think very carefully about that...

"I wanted my side to win the war...
"There's no winning or losing... but I wanted my side to stake out enough territory....

"I'm talking about time territory, not space territory....
"Of course, you need enough space territory to get your time to make sure that the particular version of the territory of consciousness I would be represented in... I believed, after studying all the other versions, that my philosophy of the future... skip philosophy... my Clausewitz tactics and strategy, or my natural chauvinistic consciousness commitments were very fierce and strong...

"I wanted my species to be recognized, understood and have a strong single voice in creating the reality of the future...
"I wanted to create a segment of the future which I felt I would be the spokesman for..."

I let him talk. When he paused to catch his thought which had drifted away on a puff of muggles, I repeated the question: "Did you ever wittingly work for the CIA?"

"Yes," he answered strongly. "I was a witting agent of the CIA."

From W.H Bowarts, "Timothy Leary and the CIA."

faulconandsnowjob

05-05-2009, 07:11 PM

the advent of rock n`roll as a controlled revolution. If you can make people believe they`re going against the system ... then you have the supposed rebels under control.
Right. Reading the Dave McGowan Laurel Canyon series http://davesweb.cnchost.com/ was very eye-opening for me. When you consider how many rockstars had military or intelligence ties, then it seems that the anti-war movement was hi-jacked.

dream9

05-05-2009, 10:06 PM

It's interesting because during the Beatle years it was George and John who wanted to talk about the Vietnam war before coming back to America, not Paul. I think Paul was the Illuminati's sacrificial victim so to speak and his death was a warning to the other Beatles to get in line.

orbandsceptre27

06-05-2009, 09:02 AM

^ Good point Dream9.

orbandsceptre27

06-05-2009, 09:27 AM

Those comparison pictures across the two PID sites are incredible; its not him post 66.

There is another one in the middle as well; a temporary dopplganger.

There are 2 Fauls

I agree there was more than one Faul. The present Faul (Bill) is not the same man who was interviewed by ITN in June 1967 to talk about lsd. This guy is very different to Bill, and he sure aint Paul.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/Magical7.jpghttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/Magical5.jpghttp://digilander.libero.it/p_truth/the_truth/faul_ver_3.jpg
Lsd Faul 1967.

- ITN lsd interview - YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

- Here`s an early interview with Bill - YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.
1.15 min in - "see any mistakes we`ve made, straighten them out.... <laughs>"

Watch and listen carefully to both interviews - the above two men are not who they claim to be.

http://i366.photobucket.com/albums/oo110/faulconandsnowjob/memphis_66_comp.jpg
Paul McCartney on the left / Bill (Faul) on the right posing as Paul McCartney.

dream9

07-05-2009, 07:13 PM

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v506/DarkHorse1/PaulFaulbass.jpg

faulconandsnowjob

07-05-2009, 07:16 PM

^ The bass looks smaller compared to Faul b/c he's bigger & taller than Paul was. Bill, we're on to you ;)

People should start looking for other cases of celebrity & political replacements, b/c we know they're out there.

socrates

07-05-2009, 08:37 PM

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v506/DarkHorse1/PaulFaulbass.jpg

LOL!

Funny - if you reduce the image size on the second photo, his height, eyes etc all then 'magically' line up....

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v506/DarkHorse1/PaulFaulbass.jpghttp://img266.imageshack.us/img266/2952/86511922.jpg

Why do PIDers think that obviously mis-matched photos are evidence of an imposter? :eek:

They aren't even standing in the same position FFS! Posture will affect your height, y'know.

Were Paul and Faul exactly the same distance from the camera in BOTH photos? Were BOTH photos taken at the EXACT same angle? If they weren't, then of course there are going to be differences!

What focal length did the cameras use? Again, if they weren't the same then of course things won't line up exactly.

You obviously know nothing of focal length and perspective:

http://www.photozone.de/images/3Technology/demos/p50mm.jpghttp://www.photozone.de/images/3Technology/demos/p35mm.jpg

Same lampost. Same church. BOTH photos are taken from exactly the same spot.

But....

The height of the church has changed in the second photo. :eek:

If we follow PID logic, then this is evidence that the church has been replaced. :eek: :eek:

It is very sad that PIDers can't understand the simple, well-known concept that camera angles, focal length, perspective etc. can cause people to appear taller when they aren't.

dream9

07-05-2009, 08:43 PM

Funny - if you reduce the image size on the second photo, his height, eyes etc all then 'magically' line up....

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v506/DarkHorse1/PaulFaulbass.jpghttp://img266.imageshack.us/img266/2952/86511922.jpg

LMAO. Notice that the bass gets smaller in the pic on the right. The original pic I posted was matched so the bass was the same size! You didn't know that because I didn't say anything.

socrates

07-05-2009, 08:50 PM

LMAO. Notice that the bass gets smaller in the pic on the right. The original pic I posted was matched so the bass was the same size! You didn't know that because I didn't say anything.

You aren't an Einstein are you?

Are you for real?

Of course the bass will get smaller than it was in the original photo if the photo is reduced!

Ok, then genius... If you have matched them so they are exactly the same size you must know the specific dimensions of each bass.

So, please give the exact size of the bass and tell us what method you used to size them EXACTLY.

faulconandsnowjob

07-05-2009, 08:54 PM

The bass is a good reference point. That is one reason I like height comps using Ringo or Jane Asher. Faul/Bill is noticeably bigger & taller than Paul.

BTW, the Stepford Wives thread talks about other celebs that may have been replaced. Paul wasn't the only victim of the Illuminati doubles program.

socrates

07-05-2009, 09:01 PM

The bass is a good reference point. That is one reason I like height comps using Ringo or Jane Asher. Faul/Bill is noticeably bigger & taller than Paul.

"Height comps" are flawed unless the photos are taken EXACTLY the same way with the same focal length and perspective.

Your PID height comps aren't. They are similar to this:

http://www.photozone.de/images/3Technology/demos/p50mm.jpghttp://www.photozone.de/images/3Technology/demos/p35mm.jpg

socrates

07-05-2009, 09:02 PM

Still waiting for dream to inform us how they measured those bass guitars EXACTLY....

*Taps fingers*

orbandsceptre27

07-05-2009, 09:03 PM

Are you for real?

Ok, then genius... If you have matched them so they are exactly the same size you must know the specific dimensions of each bass.

So, please give the exact size of the bass and tell us what method you used to size them EXACTLY.

^ Take note the troll is back, like a bull in a china shop lol - back to examining lamp-posts.

faulconandsnowjob

07-05-2009, 09:22 PM

^ Take note the troll is back, like a bull in a china shop lol - back to examining lamp-posts.
Oh, give him a break. He's just doing his job - lol :D

We know Jane Asher was 5'5". That's a pretty stable reference point. Faul towers over her.

socrates

07-05-2009, 09:34 PM

We know Jane Asher was 5'5". That's a pretty stable reference point. Faul towers over her.

Does he indeed? LOL.

http://www.paulisnotdead.com/media/blogs/pind/height/9asher2.jpg

Again, it is all about PERSPECTIVE. Something PIDers just don't want to accept because it spoils the PID illusion.

faulconandsnowjob

07-05-2009, 09:51 PM

^ A matter of perspective? Straight on shots showing both feet on the ground? You PIA people just don't want to believe that Paul might have been replaced.

orbandsceptre27

07-05-2009, 09:53 PM

It is just a stray hair from Paul's sideburn.
Simple!

Ehh... FAIL! :cool:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/Faullamb2.jpg

Paul McCartney and Wings- Mary had a little lamb - YouTube

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/BillEarKintyre.jpg

YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/floplamb.jpg

http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g134/antiKitano/PDVD_003.jpg
http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g134/antiKitano/PDVD_005.jpg
http://blog.makezine.com/284855868_daef7bc8e2.jpg

socrates

07-05-2009, 10:09 PM

http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g134/antiKitano/PDVD_003.jpg
http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g134/antiKitano/PDVD_005.jpg

Your false ear seems to have disappeared.

Look...

http://img218.imageshack.us/img218/8840/61044004.jpg

:eek: :eek: :eek:

socrates

07-05-2009, 10:11 PM

^ A matter of perspective? Straight on shots showing both feet on the ground?

You still don't know what perspective means, do you? *SIGH*

You PIA people just don't want to believe that Paul might have been replaced.

Show me some real evidence and I'll consider it.

socrates

07-05-2009, 10:15 PM

Oh, well. Looks like dream9 has bottled out of telling us how they - supposedly - exactly and precisely measured those two bass guitars.

Can't say I'm surprised. :)

orbandsceptre27

07-05-2009, 10:20 PM

Your false ear seems to have disappeared.

Just because you don`t want to see it, doesn`t mean it`s not there. :)

http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g134/antiKitano/PDVD_003.jpg
http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g134/antiKitano/PDVD_005.jpg

socrates

07-05-2009, 10:26 PM

Just because you don`t want to see it, doesn`t mean it`s not there. :)

Just because you want to see it, doesn't mean it is there. :)

http://img218.imageshack.us/img218/8840/61044004.jpg

faulconandsnowjob

07-05-2009, 10:54 PM

You still don't know what perspective means, do you? *SIGH*
Of course, I do. I can tell when one person is taller than another, at least, unlike *some* people.

Quote:
You PIA people just don't want to believe that Paul might have been replaced.
Show me some real evidence and I'll consider it.
No, you won't. You have made it clear you won't consider any evidence we post on here. We've shown:

Faul's head is larger than JPM's
Bill has a larger chin and forehead
Paul's hair grows from left to right and his bangs are very thick
Bill's hair grows from right to left, and his bangs are thin
Bill has a cowlick
Bill's natural ears are much smaller than Paul's
Paul's earlobes are attached and his ears stick out far from his head
Bill's natural ears, and even many of his fakes ears have unattached earlobes, and are set closer to his head
Bill's ears vary because he wears prosthetic ears
Faul was caught on film wearing an obviously fake ear, with a wedge missing. Ears are unique identifiers for a person, and it is necessary for a doppleganger to hide or disguise his or her ears in some way. Look at video for “Mary Had a Little Lamb” on YT
Paul had high arching eyebrows
Bill had thick eyebrows with little arch. Fillers are used to pump up his eyebrows, and therefore they've varied over the years
Paul had Bell's Palsy in the left side of his face, which caused it to droop in some pictures
Bill never had this condition and no pictures show signs of Bell's Palsy
Paul always stayed clean shaven and wore short sideburns
Bill has had three moustaches (1966-67, 1974 & early 1976), beards (1969, 1970-72), and various long sideburns
Paul was a legendary bassist and seldom looked down at his fingers while playing
Bill has always needed to look at his fingers while playing guitar, even on simple chord changes. Ditto for bass
Paul was left handed
Bill is right handed and had to learn to play guitar left handed
Paul had more body hair than Faul
Paul rarely stared directly into video cameras while performing
Bill often gazes into video cameras for long periods while performing
Paul was masculine
Bill's portrayal of Paul has been very effeminate
Bill is around 2.5 inches taller than Paul, and has a larger frame
Plastic surgery is most noticeable from 1967-1969
Cheek fillers most noticeable in 1970
Paul: brown eyes
Faul: green eyes
Paul’s eyes were set farther apart than Faul's
Paul had thick eyelashes
Faul’s feet are longer & are shaped differently from Paul’s. For ex: hammer toes
Photo doctoring and retouching has taken place to make Faul look more like Paul and vice versa.
Paul's voice was lower register, deeper, and had more resonance and vibrato than Faul's voice
Faul's singing voice is higher and thinner than JPM's, and his Liverpudlian accent is noticeably less thick and consistent than JPM's

But none of that was apparently enough to even open the door to the possibility that Paul might have been replaced for you. *SIGH*

dream9

07-05-2009, 10:55 PM

Of course the bass will get smaller than it was in the original photo if the photo is reduced!

no, it gets smaller than the bass in the pic on the left in comparison.

Ok, then genius... If you have matched them so they are exactly the same size you must know the specific dimensions of each bass.

So, please give the exact size of the bass and tell us what method you used to size them EXACTLY.

These photos were created by someone other than me. What they did was first overlay the pics and match up the bass guitars that way. He admitted he even made the pic with Paul in it is slightly bigger and still Faul towers over Paul in comparison.

orbandsceptre27

07-05-2009, 10:58 PM

We`ll just allow people to see what`s there.

Socrates, It is just a stray hair from Paul's sideburn.

http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g134/antiKitano/PDVD_003.jpg
http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g134/antiKitano/PDVD_005.jpg

socrates

08-05-2009, 12:07 AM

Of course, I do. I can tell when one person is taller than another, at least, unlike *some* people.

No, you won't. You have made it clear you won't consider any evidence we post on here. We've shown:

Faul's head is larger than JPM's
Bill has a larger chin and forehead
Paul's hair grows from left to right and his bangs are very thick
Bill's hair grows from right to left, and his bangs are thin
Bill has a cowlick
Bill's natural ears are much smaller than Paul's
Paul's earlobes are attached and his ears stick out far from his head
Bill's natural ears, and even many of his fakes ears have unattached earlobes, and are set closer to his head
Bill's ears vary because he wears prosthetic ears
Faul was caught on film wearing an obviously fake ear, with a wedge missing. Ears are unique identifiers for a person, and it is necessary for a doppleganger to hide or disguise his or her ears in some way. Look at video for “Mary Had a Little Lamb” on YT
Paul had high arching eyebrows
Bill had thick eyebrows with little arch. Fillers are used to pump up his eyebrows, and therefore they've varied over the years
Paul had Bell's Palsy in the left side of his face, which caused it to droop in some pictures
Bill never had this condition and no pictures show signs of Bell's Palsy
Paul always stayed clean shaven and wore short sideburns
Bill has had three moustaches (1966-67, 1974 & early 1976), beards (1969, 1970-72), and various long sideburns
Paul was a legendary bassist and seldom looked down at his fingers while playing
Bill has always needed to look at his fingers while playing guitar, even on simple chord changes. Ditto for bass
Paul was left handed
Bill is right handed and had to learn to play guitar left handed
Paul had more body hair than Faul
Paul rarely stared directly into video cameras while performing
Bill often gazes into video cameras for long periods while performing
Paul was masculine
Bill's portrayal of Paul has been very effeminate
Bill is around 2.5 inches taller than Paul, and has a larger frame
Plastic surgery is most noticeable from 1967-1969
Cheek fillers most noticeable in 1970
Paul: brown eyes
Faul: green eyes
Paul’s eyes were set farther apart than Faul's
Paul had thick eyelashes
Faul’s feet are longer & are shaped differently from Paul’s. For ex: hammer toes
Photo doctoring and retouching has taken place to make Faul look more like Paul and vice versa.
Paul's voice was lower register, deeper, and had more resonance and vibrato than Faul's voice
Faul's singing voice is higher and thinner than JPM's, and his Liverpudlian accent is noticeably less thick and consistent than JPM's

But none of that was apparently enough to even open the door to the possibility that Paul might have been replaced for you. *SIGH*

Because it is all nothing but OPINION and SPECULATION. You cannot prove any of it! *SIGH*

Let's just take your first claim as an example:

Faul's head is larger than JPM's

Ok, then. Please provide Paul McCartney's exact head measurement and his alleged replacement's exact head measurement. Then provide us with the precise scientific methodology you used to arrive at these measurements purely from photographs.

We can then analyse and check whether your methodology satisfies correct scientific procedure in such matters and thus conclude whether your conclusion is correct.

However....

I predict you will not supply any of this information because you have not adopted any objective, scientific procedure whatsoever to compare the two heads.

You have just looked at a few photos and GUESSED! :mad:

And you wonder why PIA's don't take your so-called 'evidence' seriously?

Like I said - give me some credible OBJECTIVE evidence - not guesswork and biased opinion masquerading as evidence.

faulconandsnowjob

08-05-2009, 12:34 AM

Because it is all nothing but OPINION and SPECULATION.
No, it isn't. The fact that someone is taller or has difft colored eyes isn't an "opinion" or "speculation." It's a FACT. We have posted countless photos & videos to back up our assertions.

You cannot prove any of it!
Au contraire. We have proven pretty much all on that list. Maybe if there were 2-3 anomalies btw Paul & Faul one could *reasonably* say that it's the same Paul then & now, but not when faced w/ that big, long list of differences. That's just stubborn refusal to accept the truth, imo.

socrates

08-05-2009, 12:56 AM

Of course the bass will get smaller than it was in the original photo if the photo is reduced!

no, it gets smaller than the bass in the pic on the left in comparison.

Maybe because it's a different model?

Which guitar is shown in the first photo? Is it Paul's 1962/63 Hofner Bass or his 1961 Hofner Cavern Bass?

Ok, then genius... If you have matched them so they are exactly the same size you must know the specific dimensions of each bass.

So, please give the exact size of the bass and tell us what method you used to size them EXACTLY.

These photos were created by someone other than me.

LOL. So you just take their word for it and then go off posting it as some kind of proof?

Okaaay...

What they did was first overlay the pics and match up the bass guitars that way.

Eh? How can you match up the guitars by overlaying them? Firstly, they are not at the same angles, so you would have to twist the whole photo around to do it. So how could you then compare the eyes, height etc when one of the photos has been moved completely around so you could overlay the guitars?

:confused: :confused:

In short, you have not used any credible method of assessing the exact size of the guitars. You are just GUESSING!

Your evidence is therefore not acceptable. Only a fool would use and accept such unscientific and rank amateurish methods and then use them as evidence for a claim.

socrates

08-05-2009, 01:14 AM

No, it isn't. The fact that someone is taller or has difft colored eyes isn't an "opinion" or "speculation." It's a FACT. We have posted countless photos & videos to back up our assertions.

So have PIAers!

If it is a "FACT" - PROVE it!

I'll ask you again:

Please provide Paul McCartney's exact head measurement and his alleged replacement's exact head measurement. Then provide us with the precise scientific methodology you used to arrive at these measurements purely from photographs.

We can then analyse and check whether your methodology satisfies correct scientific procedure in such matters and thus decide whether your conclusion is correct.

If you cannot provide this information, kindly tell us how the hell you have come to a credible conclusion as to the differing head sizes without having a damn clue as to what the exact head sizes are?!!! :confused:

Photos can lie! They cannot provide an accurate guide to height unless BOTH photos were taken EXACTLY the same in every way.

See:

http://www.photozone.de/images/3Technology/demos/p50mm.jpghttp://www.photozone.de/images/3Technology/demos/p35mm.jpg

The above photos PROVE what I'm saying.

Why do you keep denying the reality of the effects of focal length in photographs? It is an irrefutable FACT!

Your photos don't prove a damn thing. They are flawed. They are misleading.

See:

http://img245.imageshack.us/img245/3928/34601613.jpghttp://img245.imageshack.us/img245/6232/85725131.jpg

According to YOUR logic, one of the above Paul's must be an imposter because he is not the same height compared to George in both photos!!!

Do you see how silly and hopelessly naive that argument is????

Photo evidence isn't credible because various factors can influence the apparent height of an individual at any given time. ie. posture, perspective, angles, focal length etc.

THIS proves my point:

http://img245.imageshack.us/img245/3928/34601613.jpghttp://img245.imageshack.us/img245/6232/85725131.jpg
Paul is taller than George............................. But - this Paul isn't! He must be an imposter!!!! :eek: :eek:

That's just stubborn refusal to accept the truth, imo.

Oh, the irony! :eek:

PIDers torture truth until it screams....

faulconandsnowjob

08-05-2009, 01:24 AM

^ I guess I'm just one of those people who doesn't believe everything the Illuminati tells me. I can look at Paul & Faul & tell they're not the same guy. I don't really care what the Illuminati-controlled media says about it. Seems like some of us are hip to the Illuminati's ways & aren't as easily fooled.

Obviously NOT the same guy:

http://i366.photobucket.com/albums/oo110/faulconandsnowjob/fool_hill_comp.jpg

But go ahead & believe whatever the Illuminati tells you, if you want. We are not posting for your benefit, Socrates. Some of us are trying to reach people who are actually interested in figuring out the level of control the Illuminati has, not the ones who just want to shut their eyes to it, or who try to keep others from seeing it.

socrates

08-05-2009, 01:42 AM

^ I guess I'm just one of those people who doesn't believe everything the Illuminati tells me.

Neither do I.

I can look at Paul & Faul & tell they're not the same guy.

I can look at Paul and Faul and tell they are the same guy.

You see - when it comes down to it your 'evidence' always comes down to your opinion. Nothing more.

No scientific analysis. No logical and objective data... No proof. Simply an opinion.

Sorry - your opinion isn't credible evidence.

That's what I asked for - credible evidence. You came back with a long list - yet it ALL amounts to nothing but an opinion.

You have come to a conclusion - a mere guess - as to the differing head sizes without having a damn clue as to what the exact head sizes are! :eek: :confused:

And I'm supposed to take that 'evidence' seriously?

I don't really care what the Illuminati-controlled media says about it. Seems like some of us are hip to the Illuminati's ways & aren't as easily fooled.

Ah, yes.. The old PIDers are 'special' because we can see they're two different people line. That may impress the naive and gullible...

But go ahead & believe whatever the Illuminati tells you,

I don't. Just because I can debunk all the PID nonsense doesn't mean I fall for the real illuminati agenda.

Some of us are trying to reach people who are actually interested in figuring out the level of control the Illuminati has, not the ones who just want to shut their eyes to it.

Then stay away from PID. It is nothing but a 40 year old joke that the Beatles maybe played along with for a laugh.

faulconandsnowjob

08-05-2009, 01:53 AM

Just because I can debunk all the PID nonsense doesn't mean I fall for the real illuminati agenda.
But you can't/haven't/never will b/c they are 2 different guys. Go ahead & try, tho. Good luck w/ that.

Apparently, you are missing a big piece of the Illuminati agenda. You are completely oblivious to the fact that they replace people they don't like w/ someone who will further their agenda. You have been fooled. Shame on you for not being able to see it after it's been pointed out to you about a billion times.

socrates

08-05-2009, 02:07 AM

But you can't/haven't/never will b/c they are 2 different guys.

In your opinion. *SIGH* I don't try and change the mind of a fanatic. I let objective readers assess my points and decide for themselves.

You are completely oblivious to the fact that they replace people they don't like w/ someone who will further their agenda.

Merely your opinion. You haven't a shred of credible proof for any of it. Just a load of photos you give your opinion on. Why should anyone give your opinion any more credibility over any one else's? You seem obssessed with the idea of replacements behind every corner - without a speck of independent, credible, objective evidence to back it up.

You have been fooled. Shame on you for not being able to see it after it's been pointed out to you about a billion times.

I should believe it because "it's been pointed out to you about a billion times"?

But it is just your opinion. Doesn't matter how many times you say it - it's still nonsense.

Like I said - show me some credible evidence and I'll look at it.

Half baked, naive, gullible guesswork doesn't count.

faulconandsnowjob

08-05-2009, 02:19 AM

^ You know that long list of differences btw Paul & Faul I posted? Go ahead & *try* to refute each & every one of them. Good luck.

Who's naive? You're the one who seemingly believes everything the Illuminati tells you. Of course, we all know the Illuminati would NEVER lie. lol

faulconandsnowjob

08-05-2009, 02:24 AM

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/paul_1963_1967.jpg

faulconandsnowjob

08-05-2009, 02:31 AM

So this is the same guy? Ok. Wow.

http://i366.photobucket.com/albums/oo110/faulconandsnowjob/memphis_66_paul.jpghttp://i366.photobucket.com/albums/oo110/faulconandsnowjob/Faul_eyebrow.jpg

And I guess some people really believe that. The Illuminati is right about most people, I'm afraid.

orbandsceptre27

08-05-2009, 02:38 AM

Because it is all nothing but OPINION and SPECULATION. You cannot prove any of it.

Prove to whom?

Ok, then. Please provide Paul McCartney's exact head measurement and his alleged replacement's exact head measurement. Then provide us with the precise scientific methodology you used to arrive at these measurements purely from photographs.

Exact head measurements are not required to tell two people apart.

We can then analyse and check whether your methodology satisfies correct scientific procedure in such matters and thus conclude whether your conclusion is correct.

I predict you will not supply any of this information because you have not adopted any objective, scientific procedure whatsoever to compare the two heads.

Show me a law which states it a prerequisite that the scientific procedure you have just outlined is required?

faulconandsnowjob

08-05-2009, 03:24 AM

I hate to tell Socrates this, but photographs are used to identify people. That's why they're on ID's. I don't know of any ID's w/ head measurements. lol

astrochicken

08-05-2009, 11:03 AM

Apparently, you are missing a big piece of the Illuminati agenda. You are completely oblivious to the fact that they replace people they don't like w/ someone who will further their agenda. You have been fooled.

That is, sadly, the bottom line in the 2 fundamentally opposed views on this thread.

If your premise is "people aren't that evil!" which is akin to "governments don't lie" or "i'm not being manipulated" then no amount of *annoying* discrepancies will ever shift your way of thinking.

socrates

08-05-2009, 12:30 PM

^ You know that long list of differences btw Paul & Faul I posted? Go ahead & *try* to refute each & every one of them. Good luck.

Your list largely contains claims that are mere opinion - they do not contain any credible proof whatsoever to back them up.

Example: "Bill's portrayal of Paul has been very effeminate".

You cherry pic a couple of carefully selected, isolated photos - out of hundreds - and use them as evidence.

I could do similar:

"Bill" the tough guy...

http://www.babble.com/CS/blogs/famecrawler/2009/02/paul-mccartney-coachella.jpghttp://3.bp.blogspot.com/_pNJFZtinpKY/RmasZy0DIgI/AAAAAAAABEw/7o38EqVh-KM/s400/paul+mccartney.jpg

Biased, cherry picking photos to suit your agenda is not credible evidence.

But a few of your claims have already been completely debunked and shown to be absolute nonsense. The fact that you still insist of proffering such ridiculous evidence demonstrates that your mind is not free; you are completely brainwashed by PID and cannot see reality.

For example:

Paul was a legendary bassist and seldom looked down at his fingers while playing

Complete and utter fantasy. Hang your head in shame faulcon:

http://img60.imageshack.us/img60/4049/74334882.jpg

http://img60.imageshack.us/img60/6206/85400408.jpg

http://img19.imageshack.us/img19/6018/88767583.jpg

http://img19.imageshack.us/img19/8646/26838118.jpg

http://img19.imageshack.us/img19/7585/40460282.jpg

http://img515.imageshack.us/img515/9761/84490115.jpg

http://img515.imageshack.us/img515/9316/35762653.jpg

http://img515.imageshack.us/img515/5420/84077273.jpg

Continued....

socrates

08-05-2009, 12:31 PM

http://img9.imageshack.us/img9/8498/52237445.jpg

http://img9.imageshack.us/img9/3761/c10kwt.jpg

http://img9.imageshack.us/img9/2444/c11apr.jpg

http://img50.imageshack.us/img50/534/c12c.jpg

http://img50.imageshack.us/img50/8927/c13l.jpg

http://img80.imageshack.us/img80/132/c14z.jpg

http://img80.imageshack.us/img80/5042/c15.jpg

http://img80.imageshack.us/img80/3559/c16h.jpg

http://img15.imageshack.us/img15/9738/c17y.jpg

http://img15.imageshack.us/img15/4030/c18luy.jpg

socrates

08-05-2009, 12:34 PM

http://img159.imageshack.us/img159/9003/45348415.jpg

http://img159.imageshack.us/img159/9131/82442560.jpg

http://img515.imageshack.us/img515/9475/34880612.jpg

http://img515.imageshack.us/img515/3278/27520082.jpg

Paul was a legendary bassist and seldom looked down at his fingers while playing

DEBUNKED!

orbandsceptre27

08-05-2009, 01:18 PM

Paul seldom looks at the neck as some songs do have fiddly bits especially when they move up to the middle-eight and they're no longer playing something as simple as the fourth or the fifth.. IF he looks then it'll probably be the lead in or the lead out to the middle-eight..

And as a musician you would realise this - I value your opinion. Socrates shows a few snaps of Paul looking at his hands and all of a sudden he thinks he`s Colombo. :D

Listen to those songs and take note of when he looks at the neck.

No point arguing this with our left-brained, robot friend here because he doesn`t know what you`re talking about. I`ve played the guitar since I was 12 and I see exactly what you`re saying.

I really don't know what you were trying to prove by spamming the thread other than you have way to much time on your hands. Good for you.

Socrates spams the thread because of a morbid fascination for keeping the truth hidden.

He ignores any serious posts put up by you, me or anyone else and clings to any perceived mistake. As we all know you were making a very valid point Astrochicken (one of many I might add).

socrates

08-05-2009, 01:27 PM

Faul was caught on film wearing an obviously fake ear, with a wedge missing. Ears are unique identifiers for a person, and it is necessary for a doppleganger to hide.

Why would anyone want to wear a fake ear over a normal ear when it would make more sense and look more realistic to surgically reshape an ear, especially if the person had already had extensive surgery to look more like someone else?

Modifying an ear would be a piece of cake in comparison to facial reconstruction.

You are saying Paul had facial surgery but they never bothered with his ears. Why? :confused: It doesn't make any sense.

The fake ear claim is blatent nonsense. You cannot explain why it has mysteriously disappeared here:

http://img218.imageshack.us/img218/8840/61044004.jpg

pipsicle

08-05-2009, 01:30 PM

No point arguing this with our left-brained, robot friend here because he doesn`t know what you`re talking about. I`ve played the guitar since I was 12 and I see exactly what you`re saying.

Socrates spams the thread because of a morbid fascination for keeping the truth hidden.

He ignores any serious posts put up by you, me or anyone else and clings to any perceived mistake. As we all know you were making a very valid point Astrochicken (one of many I might add).

+1

pipsicle

08-05-2009, 01:33 PM

http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g134/antiKitano/PDVD_003.jpg

boots

08-05-2009, 01:38 PM

The fake ear analogy is crap.

It is NOT a fake ear.

If that was a fake ear then I would have killed the makeup artist for doing such a crap job.

FFS

.Oh yeah I play guitar too, not to well really.

When I look at Richie Blackmore, Jimmy Paige, Alex Lifeson and others they are always looking down at the fretboard. More often than not.

socrates

08-05-2009, 01:42 PM

Exact head measurements are not required to tell two people apart.

They are if you claim the heads are not the right size - which PIDers claim. If you don't know the head measurements, how the hell can you state with any authority that they are different sizes?

You are just GUESSING!

That's not credible evidence - at least not to most people who haven't been brainwashed by PID.

Show me a law which states it a prerequisite that the scientific procedure you have just outlined is required?

What has the law in the US got to do with it?

If you want to play that game, I'll point out this:

Admissibility or otherwise of a witness’s opinion in criminal cases.

THE GENERAL RULE

The general rule is that the opinions of witnesses are not admissible.

Therefore all your evidence is not admissible because it is nothing but a lay opinion.

If you are going to make claims about different head sizes, then you will need to provide scientific, objective analysis done by a qualified expert in such matters. Their judgement would be taken seriously.

Your half-baked, layman's guesswork is not credible. End of story.

socrates

08-05-2009, 01:48 PM

I hate to tell Socrates this, but photographs are used to identify people. That's why they're on ID's.

Yes, and the fact that Paul uses a Paul McCartney passport photo to identify himself as Paul MCartney proves he's Paul! :)

Thanks for the support, faulcon. :D

I don't know of any ID's w/ head measurements. lol

You don't need them if the photo shows you are clearly the same man. :D

socrates

08-05-2009, 01:50 PM

http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g134/antiKitano/PDVD_003.jpg

Explain where his fake ear has suddenly gone...

http://img218.imageshack.us/img218/8840/61044004.jpg

:eek: :eek: :eek:

orbandsceptre27

08-05-2009, 01:52 PM

The fake ear analogy is crap.

In your opinion it`s crap Boots.

Here`s the original footage - Examine at 1.20 minute in, and especially 1.23 and 1.24. It`s clearly visible. :)
YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

It is NOT a fake ear.

I don`t care if you call it a door handle - There is an appendage fixed to Fauls left ear (facing the camera).

If that was a fake ear then I would have killed the makeup artist for doing such a crap job.

I agree.

orbandsceptre27

08-05-2009, 01:57 PM

Yes, and the fact that Paul uses a Paul McCartney passport photo to identify himself as Paul MCartney proves he's Paul!

You`re easily persuaded lol!

socrates

08-05-2009, 01:59 PM

There is an appendage fixed to Fauls left ear (facing the camera).

Kindly explain why it has suddenly disappeared a few seconds later:

http://img218.imageshack.us/img218/8840/61044004.jpg

How can a fake "appendage" suddenly disappear right before our eyes in a matter of a few seconds? :confused: :confused:

sunsoflight

08-05-2009, 06:48 PM

This is just for the sake of information which even when first published doesn't necessarily make it true. I am not taking any particular side in the discussion but only adding to the conversation. It is ultimately going to come down to a personal choice in what to believe, as it is with each person on a myriad of subjects. There is no two of us exactly alike.

The very first publication of "Beatles Monthly" magazine, August 1963, the Paul McCartney bio states Paul has hazel eyes, that he appears taller than John but they are actually the same height.

Let us say just for open discussion, the eyes are hazel, as mine are...sometimes they appear brown or green according to the lighting conditions. Let us not forget retouching photos even in those days especially for glossy magazines.

The second statement of height is a rather odd thing to say. Why would it have been worded the way that it is in the bio?

Now, let's talk about vocals and voices, singing. The early Beatles recordings as well as most latter recordings had one or more singing together in unison as well as vocal harmonies. This is a blending together of several voices along with the new stereo and studio tricks at the time make any voice analysis impossible beyond a reasonable doubt.

Next, as a lot of men age, the voice changes a bit and naturally gets lower and/or gravelly. This is even more true for smokers, cigarettes and marijuana. The best vocal analysis is just spoken words, interviews. The voice prints should match then.

Even with what I have said above, even the most die-hard skeptic has to admit something is amiss with the overwhelming amount of odd circumstances and clues regarding the rumors of death or replacement many years ago. It didn't end there either but continues on to this day and will in the years to come.

ph0neyprophet

08-05-2009, 06:57 PM

What some people tend to forget about James Paul is that he had a moped crash in 1965 and he needed face surgery.

faulconandsnowjob

08-05-2009, 07:10 PM

If your premise is "people aren't that evil!" which is akin to "governments don't lie" or "i'm not being manipulated" then no amount of *annoying* discrepancies will ever shift your way of thinking.
Yeah, even that big, long list of differences isn't enough for people who choose to believe the lie. When would critical mass be reached? Never. The only way they would be able to see if it is Faul actually came out & admitted the truth. The funny thing is, he is constantly dropping hints about the truth. He frequently talks about his other self, like "he's" the famous one, is he really "that guy." No, of course, we know he isn't really that guy. He's making a fortune off of Paul's talent. He's just a pretender.

The very first publication of "Beatles Monthly" magazine, August 1963, the Paul McCartney bio states Paul has hazel eyes, that he appears taller than John but they are actually the same height.
In 99 out of 100 pics, Paul's eyes look brown. There are a couple of pics of him w/ light brown eyes, but they're still not green like Faul's. Paul doesn't usually appear taller than John, not in the many pics I've seen, anyway. The Beatles Monthly has been known to alter photos, so it's not like it's never been known to lie.

Next, as a lot of men age, the voice changes a bit and naturally gets lower and/or gravelly. This is even more true for smokers, cigarettes and marijuana. The best vocal analysis is just spoken words, interviews. The voice prints should match then.
Yeah, except Faul's voice is higher pitched than Paul's voice was. Voice prints should definitely match. According to Dr. Truby, they didn't on "Yesterday," "Hello, Goodbye," & "Hey Jude." I wonder why these "debunkers" don't take some interviews & compare them?

Even with what I have said above, even the most die-hard skeptic has to admit something is amiss with the overwhelming amount of odd circumstances and clues regarding the rumors of death or replacement many years ago.
We haven't even really discussed all the song clues & stuff on this thread. We've mainly been focused on the physical differences.

This thread has been very eye-opening to me. I can see how much people's eyes can be clouded to see what they're told to see. It's like some Jedi mind-trick or something. Paul & Faul are so obviously not the same person, but people who really believe the Illuminati lies can't see it. Well, I hope they don't believe all the other Illuminati lies :eek:

faulconandsnowjob

08-05-2009, 07:12 PM

What some people tend to forget about James Paul is that he had a moped crash in 1965 and he needed face surgery.
I don't think that's true. He had a chipped tooth, that is all. Please cite some source to back up your claim.

Paul looks difft after Aug/Sept 1966 - after the moped crash.

ph0neyprophet

08-05-2009, 07:15 PM

Did you ever think he fell for a girl so much, he wanted to try his best to look like her?

"I know this love of mine, will never die, and I love her."

socrates

08-05-2009, 08:15 PM

I don't think that's true. He had a chipped tooth, that is all. Please cite some source to back up your claim.

LOL!!! How ironic and brazzenly hypocritical that you ask for a "source to back up your claim". :eek:

That's rich!

How about citing a "source" that backs up your claim that Faul had plastic surgery to look more like Paul?

This just illustrates your double standards as regards quality of PID and PIA evidence.

Incredible...

socrates

08-05-2009, 08:22 PM

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/scan0fade_cut.gif

Boy - that plastic surgeon must have been good! :)

And yet they had poor old Faul wandering around wearing two fake ears that kept falling off during videos??? :eek:

Er... I don't think so....

sunsoflight

08-05-2009, 09:11 PM

They should actually take the Beatles' 1964 first arrival in New York press conference and the LSD interview and do voice analysis. There is a ton of interview audio from the beginning until now.

Socrates, what is the source for the gif photos and the exact manipulation process you used?

Faulcon, you are one hundred percent right people believe what they are told to believe even when they think it was a freewill choice of their own working imagination. There is no one safe in this day and age with information overload. The brain picks up on things our waking conscious misses entirely.

The August '63 Beatles Monthly was strange the way it was worded for that time, at the very beginning of popularity for the band.

There is a noticeable difference in the McCartney look from the "Rain" & "Paperback Writer" and the trip to the trips with Mal. The only difference is one is a home video and the other is professionally shot.

After touring days, both Paul and John lost weight and the band grew mustaches. At least that is how it appears.

Paperback Writer/Rain

YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

I have the entire footage of the trip with Mal but don't have the time to track it down. I'm sure it is on the internet.

Across Spain in 1966 (home video) just because someone may find it slightly interesting.

YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

fireman

08-05-2009, 09:20 PM

People experiencing the Capgras delusion claim that others, usually those quite close emotionally, have been replaced by near-identical impostors.

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1688551

You should really consider that possibility:(

faulconandsnowjob

08-05-2009, 10:10 PM

Boy - that plastic surgeon must have been good!
Good enough to fool you! Not good enough to fool everyone, tho :D

Some of the people on here apparently suffer from face blindness.

orbandsceptre27

08-05-2009, 10:42 PM

What has the law in the US got to do with it?

You tell me, you brought it up.

faulconandsnowjob

08-05-2009, 10:51 PM

Faul's ears are so fake. Good grief.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/EarsMarch76_4.jpg

orbandsceptre27

08-05-2009, 11:01 PM

http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g134/antiKitano/PDVD_003.jpg
http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g134/antiKitano/PDVD_005.jpg

Socrates, regarding the false ear/appendage, you`ve just gone from stating this -

socrates - It is just a stray hair from Paul's sideburn.

to this -

Kindly explain why it has suddenly disappeared a few seconds later:

You have admitted by implication that you recognise a false ear.

That`ll be all for now M`lud. :) :)

socrates

08-05-2009, 11:45 PM

http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g134/antiKitano/PDVD_003.jpg
http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g134/antiKitano/PDVD_005.jpg

Socrates, regarding the false ear/appendage, you`ve just gone from stating this -

to this -

You have admitted by implication that you recognise a false ear.

That`ll be all for now M`lud. :) :)

Actually, I was riding along on the train of your argument and then showing where it completely de-rails itself and falls into the abys of absurdity.

And it is noted that you have completely avoided answering the question at hand...

You claim this video cap shows a fake ear.

http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g134/antiKitano/PDVD_003.jpg

Well, it certainly looks a bit odd with that line going across towards his sideburn. But if your claim is true, it should also appear in the following video cap taken a few seconds later- but it doesn't:

http://img218.imageshack.us/img218/8840/61044004.jpg

It now looks like a perfectly normal ear. The line going towards his sideburn - which was so clear in the other photo - has suddenly disappeared. Yet the contour of the rest of his ear is just the same :eek:

This second photo completely disproves your false appendage claim. Unless you can account for the disappearance of the line from his sideburn to his ear - which you allege is part of some false ear - your claim is disproved.

So, where has his 'false ear' suddenly gone? :eek:

The alternative explanation for the 'fake ear', is that it is simply a stray hair from his sideburn touching his ear. It's disappearance in the second photo is easily explained by it moving as Paul turns his head and it being less visible because of the change in camera angle. After all, it is just a very thin hair - not something as substantial as a false appendage like you claim is there.

Further, can you show us why that line isn't a stray hair? How do you know it isn't? Why do you believe it is a false ear rather than a stray hair causing an illusion of a false ear?

The second photo backs up my contention that it is just a stray hair and refutes the false ear claim.

What evidence have you to produce to refute the stray hair contention?

Which is the most believable and likely explanation?

A false appendage suddenly vanishes right before our eyes - with no explanation as to how this mysteriously occurs from the PID camp.

Or:

It's just a hair from Paul's sideburn which is less visible at a different camera angle.

Hmmmm.... that's a tough one! :D

faulconandsnowjob

08-05-2009, 11:52 PM

It's funny how people refuse to see what's right in front of them. All of the pics showing fake ears are just "stray hairs"? I don't think so.

Here's Paul's ear:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/JamesPaulEar1.jpg

It doesn't look like a Mr. Potato Head stuck-on ear.

sunsoflight

08-05-2009, 11:54 PM

Maybe he is a shape-shifting reptilian demon from Hell. We need a devil Smiley face.

socrates

08-05-2009, 11:55 PM

Faul's ears are so fake. Good grief.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/EarsMarch76_4.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/EarsMarch76_4.jpghttp://plus.maths.org/issue41/features/parker/istock_ears.jpg

Can't see the similiaity myself. :D

sunsoflight

08-05-2009, 11:56 PM

My reply was all just in good fun, of course.

sunsoflight

08-05-2009, 11:57 PM

So socrates, back up a few posts and address my question to you.

faulconandsnowjob

09-05-2009, 12:01 AM

It's all about Menschenkenntnis...

http://digilander.libero.it/jamespaul/faking/help_genuine.jpghttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/EarlyFaul-1.jpg

faulconandsnowjob

09-05-2009, 12:02 AM

Maybe he is a shape-shifting reptilian demon from Hell.
Are you saying Faul is Illuminati? If so, then I totally agree.

Just b/c the Illuminati media says it's true, doesn't make it so.

http://www.andylangager.net/Life.jpg

socrates

09-05-2009, 12:12 AM

It's funny how people refuse to see what's right in front of them. All of the pics showing fake ears are just "stray hairs"? I don't think so.

You don't want to think so, you mean.

Yeah, it really is stupid to think it possible that a stray hair might just move onto Paul's ear.

A false ear is a far more likely scenario.

:eek:

Here's Paul's ear:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/JamesPaulEar1.jpg

It doesn't look like a Mr. Potato Head stuck-on ear.

Neither does this - which disproves your argument:

http://img21.imageshack.us/img21/6973/59791083.jpg

faulconandsnowjob

09-05-2009, 01:59 AM

false ear is a far more likely scenario.
Yes, it is considering that we're dealing w/ a double here. Oh, wait, I forgot. You don't believe in doubles... The Illuminati brain-washing program at work, Folks. Doesn't even notice that the ears on his own comp don't match up. lol

http://img21.imageshack.us/img21/6973/59791083.jpg

ph0neyprophet

09-05-2009, 03:42 AM

GOODNIGHT TONIGHT - Paul McCartney & Wings - 1979 - YouTube

Look who decides to pop in after the halfway point.

Paul possibly "disappeared"?

faulconandsnowjob

09-05-2009, 04:09 AM

^ That's a good example of how Faul makes lots of references to doubles. Here is another:

Paul McCartney - Ever Present Past - YouTube

And this is supposed to be the same genius who wrote this one? Ok...

YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

I suppose they have a bridge in Brooklyn they're trying to sell, too.

ph0neyprophet

09-05-2009, 04:18 AM

paul is dead - the rotten apple 71 O - YouTube

Makes you wonder who the profit is.

ph0neyprophet

09-05-2009, 04:21 AM

paul is dead - the rotten apple 73 - YouTube

Really!

faulconandsnowjob

09-05-2009, 04:33 AM

^ IAAP is trying to tell us how much the Illuminati was involved in the Beatles. I'm pretty certain Faul is Illum or an Illum tool.

ph0neyprophet

09-05-2009, 04:45 AM

Oh, Faul, fall. .

lol, i get it. :rolleyes:

faulconandsnowjob

09-05-2009, 05:02 AM

^ Do you get it? I hope so. After 4000 posts w/ countless photo & video comps, some people are bound to get it. The Truth is coming out.

Paul's proper ears vs Faul's fake ears

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/MichelleVintage.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/FakingIt.jpg

ph0neyprophet

09-05-2009, 05:40 AM

I wonder who's incharge of that.

Oh, hey doesn't 13 represent the number of disciples of the last supper?

Thought so. .

faulconandsnowjob

09-05-2009, 08:10 AM

Are there any videos of Faul singing "The Night Before"?

toty1994

09-05-2009, 08:17 AM

You claim this video cap shows a fake ear.

http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g134/antiKitano/PDVD_003.jpg

Well, it certainly looks a bit odd with that line going across towards his sideburn. But if your claim is true, it should also appear in the following video cap taken a few seconds later- but it doesn't:

http://img218.imageshack.us/img218/8840/61044004.jpg

It now looks like a perfectly normal ear. The line going towards his sideburn - which was so clear in the other photo - has suddenly disappeared. Yet the contour of the rest of his ear is just the same :eek:

This second photo completely disproves your false appendage claim. Unless you can account for the disappearance of the line from his sideburn to his ear - which you allege is part of some false ear - your claim is disproved.

So, where has his 'false ear' suddenly gone? :eek:

The alternative explanation for the 'fake ear', is that it is simply a stray hair from his sideburn touching his ear. It's disappearance in the second photo is easily explained by it moving as Paul turns his head and it being less visible because of the change in camera angle. After all, it is just a very thin hair - not something as substantial as a false appendage like you claim is there.

Further, can you show us why that line isn't a stray hair? How do you know it isn't? Why do you believe it is a false ear rather than a stray hair causing an illusion of a false ear?

The second photo backs up my contention that it is just a stray hair and refutes the false ear claim.

What evidence have you to produce to refute the stray hair contention?

Which is the most believable and likely explanation?

A false appendage suddenly vanishes right before our eyes - with no explanation as to how this mysteriously occurs from the PID camp.

Or:

It's just a hair from Paul's sideburn which is less visible at a different camera angle.

Come on guys, it's a strong point - not acknowledging it at all just makes it look like you have no answer. If so what's the problem with just saying "I don't know"? Certainly, it'd be much better than ignoring it - can't you see how bad that must look to anyone reading this thread? Maybe you don't care, I dunno.

ph0neyprophet

09-05-2009, 08:19 AM

YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

Well, clearly his hairs parted to the right.

And we all know Paul's hair is to the left.

So it must be a replacement. :rolleyes:

faulconandsnowjob

09-05-2009, 08:20 AM

^ That's Paul. I would like to know if there's a video of Faul singing it.

ph0neyprophet

09-05-2009, 08:29 AM

Are you sure?

I mean, he clearly resembles Faul there.

Afterall, since when did JPM have a hairline?

faulconandsnowjob

09-05-2009, 08:39 AM

^ Just FYI, Paul was replaced circa Sept 1966. If it's before that, it's Paul.

And I'm guessing there aren't any videos of Faul singing "The Night Before."

ph0neyprophet

09-05-2009, 08:45 AM

Not the case.

It was rumored he was replaced.

It doesn't mean that before 1966 he wasn't using a body double for certain shots.

fireman

09-05-2009, 10:30 AM

Not the case.

It was rumored he was replaced.

It doesn't mean that before 1966 he wasn't using a body double for certain shots.

No matter what you will say, Faulcon believes she is right. Based on? nothing.

Faulcon believes that the shadows from the stage-light indicate fake ears. Faulcon believes that "the real JPM never wore a mustache and sideburns", thus, he must have been replaced from 1967 on.
Faulcon also believes that also John, George and Ringo were replaced by the illuminati.
So actually everybody was dead and replaced by the Beatles break up! :o

That is called capgras delusion. People experiencing the Capgras delusion claim that others have been replaced by near-identical impostors.

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/art...?artid=1688551

I'm sorry, but it's all soooo far out and illogical even within the borders of a PID theory, that i think its the only possible explanation why the hardore-PID believers are seeing things that aren't there...

socrates

09-05-2009, 12:59 PM

false ear is a far more likely scenario.

Yes, it is considering that we're dealing w/ a double here.

You have yet to establish that fact with independent, objective evidence - mere opinion doesn't count.

Your logic is confused. Let's assume it is an impostor. How likely is it that:

A. He'd wear fake ears? (If they did facial surgery on his face, ear reconstruction would be a piece of cake)

B. His false ear would start to fall off - not just once, but in various filming shoots as the PIDers claim?

On the other hand, how likely is it that it's just a stray hair from either Paul's or the impostor's sideburn?

faulcon is adamant that this 'evidence' is proof of a fake ear because it is a "double".

But even if it were an impostor, it is far more likely to be just a stray hair causing the illusion of a fake ear rather than an actual fake ear - see A. and B. above.

The above statement is also supported by the screen cap which is reproduced below, which shows that the line from Paul's sideburn to his ear - and which the PIDers maintain is part of a false ear - has mysteriously disappeared. PIDERs have yet to furnish us with an adequate explanation for this.

Faulcon dismisses the possibility of a stray hair or any other perfectly innocent explanation. Why? She seems so desperate to cling onto any 'evidence' that supports PID that she completely abandons objectivety and logical reasoning.

'It must be a fake ear because it is a double'.

Er no... not nessesarily.

There are three possibilities:

1. It is Paul McCartney with a stray hair or something causing his ear to look strange.

2. It is an impostor with a fake ear.

3. It is an impostor with a stray hair or something causing his ear to look strange.

Until faulcon can rebutt 1. and 2. with supporting evidence, this PID claim has no credibility whatsoever.

Faulcon also fails to address the problem of where her false ear has gone in this screen cap:

http://img218.imageshack.us/img218/8840/61044004.jpg

The above screen cap completely rebutts 2. and provides supporting evidence for 1. and 3's. stray hair explanation.

What is the explanation faulcon? How can a 'false ear' disappear before our very eyes, in a matter of a couple of seconds? Are you going to explain it, or ignore uncomfortable questions like you usually do?

Until this question has been satisfactorily explained to support 2. and disprove 1. and 3., we are left with 1. and 3. as the possible explanations.

Therefore - and this is a very important point - the 'fake ear' screen caps are NOT evidence of an impostor in themselves - because PIDers have not disproved the explanation of a stray hair (or any other innocent explanation) - belonging to either Paul McCartney or an impostor.

:) :) :)

Faulcon - you really need to learn more about how to weigh up evidence in an objective, rational and unbiased way, instead of jumping to wild and unsubstantiated conclusions based purely on your personal prejudices and beliefs.

You claim you are studying to be a lawyer. Hmm... Well, you should therefore be aware that under the Federal Rules of Evidence (Rule 401): "Relevant evidence" means evidence having any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence.

Your 'fake ear' screen caps - clearly - do not qualify. This further establishes the fact that they are not credible evidence for an impostor.

ar20

09-05-2009, 05:42 PM

You have yet to establish that fact with independent, objective evidence - mere opinion doesn't count.

Your logic is confused. Let's assume it is an impostor. How likely is it that:

A. He'd wear fake ears? (If they did facial surgery on his face, ear reconstruction would be a piece of cake)

B. His false ear would start to fall off - not just once, but in various filming shoots as the PIDers claim?

On the other hand, how likely is it that it's just a stray hair from either Paul's or the impostor's sideburn?

faulcon is adamant that this 'evidence' is proof of a fake ear because it is a "double".

But even if it were an impostor, it is far more likely to be just a stray hair causing the illusion of a fake ear rather than an actual fake ear - see A. and B. above.

The above statement is also supported by the screen cap which is reproduced below, which shows that the line from Paul's sideburn to his ear - and which the PIDers maintain is part of a false ear - has mysteriously disappeared. PIDERs have yet to furnish us with an adequate explanation for this.

Faulcon dismisses the possibility of a stray hair or any other perfectly innocent explanation. Why? She seems so desperate to cling onto any 'evidence' that supports PID that she completely abandons objectivety and logical reasoning.

'It must be a fake ear because it is a double'.

Er no... not nessesarily.

There are three possibilities:

1. It is Paul McCartney with a stray hair or something causing his ear to look strange.

2. It is an impostor with a fake ear.

3. It is an impostor with a stray hair or something causing his ear to look strange.

Until faulcon can rebutt 1. and 2. with supporting evidence, this PID claim has no credibility whatsoever.

Faulcon also fails to address the problem of where her false ear has gone in this screen cap:

http://img218.imageshack.us/img218/8840/61044004.jpg

The above screen cap completely rebutts 2. and provides supporting evidence for 1. and 3's. stray hair explanation.

What is the explanation faulcon? How can a 'false ear' disappear before our very eyes, in a matter of a couple of seconds? Are you going to explain it, or ignore uncomfortable questions like you usually do?

Until this question has been satisfactorily explained to support 2. and disprove 1. and 3., we are left with 1. and 3. as the possible explanations.

Therefore - and this is a very important point - the 'fake ear' screen caps are NOT evidence of an impostor in themselves - because PIDers have not disproved the explanation of a stray hair (or any other innocent explanation) - belonging to either Paul McCartney or an impostor.

:) :) :)

Faulcon - you really need to learn more about how to weigh up evidence in an objective, rational and unbiased way, instead of jumping to wild and unsubstantiated conclusions based purely on your personal prejudices and beliefs.

You claim you are studying to be a lawyer. Hmm... Well, you should therefore be aware that under the Federal Rules of Evidence (Rule 401): "Relevant evidence" means evidence having any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence.

Your 'fake ear' screen caps - clearly - do not qualify. This further establishes the fact that they are not credible evidence for an impostor.

Could you post a picture of the lamp-posts again, I'm too stupid to work out perspective between pictures. :confused:

faulconandsnowjob

09-05-2009, 06:34 PM

Socrates, I don't claim to be "studying to be a lawyer." I am a lawyer. I have 2 law degrees: a JD and an LLM. What is your profession? Disinfo agent? It's just that you try so hard to bury the truth & prevent people from seeing that Paul was replaced.

Twenty-Five Ways To Suppress Truth: The Rules of Disinformation
http://www.opposingdigits.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1222

ph0neyprophet

09-05-2009, 06:37 PM

I think we're missing the bigger picture.

paul is dead - the rotten apple 71 O - YouTube

John Lennon hinted that he would be Jesus.

So he must have known something about this whole thing.

Consider Sgt. Pepper, everyone was a free mason.

Note how the cover, it's surrounded by dead stars.

Then, Magickal Mystery Tour. Same scenario, but the stars have changed.

Get it
?

ph0neyprophet

09-05-2009, 06:39 PM

The only question is, will there

Be Beatles in 2012, or BeATLAS.

paul is dead - the rotten apple 54 9 - YouTube

I think everyone here knows about the 50 year cycle of life by now.

faulconandsnowjob

09-05-2009, 06:41 PM

John Lennon hinted that he would be Jesus.

So he must have known something about this whole thing.
Yes, of course, he knew. He dedicated "How Do You Sleep" to Faul.

YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

Why would Sgt Pepper take Paul by surprise?

John didn't have a high opinion of Faul's silly songs, did he?

faulconandsnowjob

09-05-2009, 06:43 PM

Consider Sgt. Pepper, everyone was a free mason.

Note how the cover, it's surrounded by dead stars.

Then, Magickal Mystery Tour. Same scenario, but the stars have changed.

Get it
?
Yes, the Illuminati is at the heart of it.

ph0neyprophet

09-05-2009, 06:44 PM

Those freaks was right when they said you was dead.

I'm pretty sure that was sarcasm.

faulconandsnowjob

09-05-2009, 06:45 PM

^ I'm pretty sure he's saying they were right that Paul was dead. It's not like he could just come out & say what the truth was. The Illuminati does kill (& replace) people, you know.

Paraphrasing a quote I came across that I think is quite apropos in this situation:

The [Illuminati's] whole ability to fool the public is the absolutely accepted "absurdity" of such a possibility and your lack of attention.

ph0neyprophet

09-05-2009, 06:51 PM

Well, reverse that.

They're making you look like a fool for actually believing he was killed.

Think about it. ;)

faulconandsnowjob

09-05-2009, 06:58 PM

^ Actually, they're making themselves & you look like a fool for not being able to see it. I guess some people are just more easily controlled & brain-washed. Maybe you should try cutting down on TV.

Socrates (a person w/ absolutely no legal education, experience, degrees, or credentials) said:
Well, you should therefore be aware that under the Federal Rules of Evidence (Rule 401): "Relevant evidence" means evidence having any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence.

Your 'fake ear' screen caps - clearly - do not qualify. This further establishes the fact that they are not credible evidence for an impostor.
Apparently, he missed the "any tendency" part of the definition. Of course, the existence of fake ears is relevant. The real Paul wouldn't need ear prosthetics to make his ears look more like his own. Duh.

Socrates, you're really starting to slip. Your handlers should consider replacing you.

ph0neyprophet

09-05-2009, 07:00 PM

Did you ever think he might like people believing he was killed and replaced?

He likes making extra. .

YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

socrates

09-05-2009, 07:02 PM

Socrates, I don't claim to be "studying to be a lawyer." I am a lawyer. I have 2 law degrees: a JD and an LLM. What is your profession? Disinfo agent? It's just that you try so hard to bury the truth & prevent people from seeing that Paul was replaced.

You have provided no credible evidence to substantiate your case. All I do is show where the gaping holes in your poor quality 'evidence' is.

If you claim to be a lawyer, then are you asserting that this 'fake ear' evidence' would meet Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 401?

If so, kindly explain why.

And why don't you show us how your laywer skills have disproved that it could not be a stray hair from either Paul's or an impostor's sideburn in your screen cap 'evidence'?

In fact, why haven't you answered ANY of the points and questions I made, including:

Faulcon also fails to address the problem of where her false ear has gone in this screen cap:

http://img218.imageshack.us/img218/8840/61044004.jpg

What is the explanation faulcon? How can a 'false ear' disappear before our very eyes, in a matter of a couple of seconds? Are you going to explain it, or ignore uncomfortable questions like you usually do?

If I'm spreading "disinfo", then show why? Rebutt it.

But you have rebutted NOTHING. All you can do is sit there and accuse me of spreading disinfo - while providing no information to back up this claim and to disprove any of my points.

Er..... okaaay.... :eek: :eek: :eek:

Your words are hollow Faulcon.

You can't rebutt, disprove or dispute any of my points. You demonstrate that to everyone reading this thread by completely ignoring them.

"Disinfo"? Then show us.......

faulconandsnowjob

09-05-2009, 07:08 PM

It's a different person.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/HelpAuthenticJamesPaul.gifhttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/BillSheppardHeyJude.gif

ph0neyprophet

09-05-2009, 07:09 PM

You have provided no credible evidence to substantiate your case. All I do is show where the gaping holes in your poor quality 'evidence' is.

If you claim to be a lawyer, then are you asserting that this 'fake ear' evidence' would meet Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 401?

If so, kindly explain why.

And why don't you show us how your laywer skills have disproved that it could not be a stray hair from either Paul's or an impostor's sideburn in your screen cap 'evidence'?

In fact, why haven't you answered ANY of the points and questions I made, including:

If I'm spreading "disinfo", then show why? Rebutt it.

But you have rebutted NOTHING. All you can do is sit there and accuse me of spreading disinfo - while providing no information to back up this claim and to disprove any of my points.

Er..... okaaay.... :eek: :eek: :eek:

Your words are hollow Faulcon.

You can't rebutt, disprove or dispute any of my points. You demonstrate that to everyone reading this thread by completely ignoring them.

"Disinfo"? Then show us.......

I love this guy.

He doesn't fall for the illuminati b.s.

faulconandsnowjob

09-05-2009, 07:11 PM

Love Faul's fake ears. They look so... fake.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/LuckEars2.jpg

Socrates, I know you'd love to make this thread about me, but it's about Paul & Faul. Therefore, I will continue my policy of ignoring your posts. They don't add anything, anyway. They just try to distract from the truth. I know you're just doing your job.

ph0neyprophet

09-05-2009, 07:12 PM

http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/1913/paulfaulconcerts.jpg

If Faul exsisted, he exsisted before 1966.

ph0neyprophet

09-05-2009, 07:17 PM

http://img26.imageshack.us/img26/562/johnwithpaulsfeatureswb4.jpg

You'll be shocked who resembles Sgt. Pepper Paul.

socrates

09-05-2009, 07:24 PM

Socrates (a person w/ absolutely no legal education, experience, degrees, or credentials)

And how do you know that? :rolleyes:

Typical PID logic; just come to conclusions without any supporting, independent evidence.

Of course, the existence of fake ears is relevant.

Are you for real? Let me explain again, miss 'alleged' lawyer, since you so clearly do not understand this at all:

The screen cap photos you allege provide evidence for a double are not relevant in this case since they do not establish if they are even fake ears!

the 'fake ear' screen caps are NOT evidence of an impostor in themselves - because PIDers have not disproved the explanation of a stray hair (or any other innocent explanation) - belonging to either Paul McCartney or an impostor.

The real Paul wouldn't need ear prosthetics to make his ears look more like his own. Duh.

You have yet to show exactly why it is a fake ear and NOT a stray hair.

You have yet to explain why his 'false ear' suddenly disappears.

Once again, you talk as if things are facts without providing any credible explanations and/or supporting evidence to back up your claim and disprove alternative explanations.

(If you were in a courtroom with this, you'd last 5 minutes max!)

socrates

09-05-2009, 07:31 PM

Socrates, I know you'd love to make this thread about me, but it's about Paul & Faul. Therefore, I will continue my policy of ignoring your posts.

Faulcon - we can all see you have no answers to my points. You cannot rebut them so you just say you are ignoring me because I spread disinfo.

LOL! Who you trying to kid?

You are only fooling yourself.

Any objective, rational person can see my points are valid. So are my questions; such as why the ear suddenly disappears. But you refuse to address them - like you ALWAYS do.

Your refusal to debate only highlights the gaping holes in your so called 'evidence'.

You have no answers.

PID is dead.

orbandsceptre27

09-05-2009, 08:17 PM

Faulcon - we can all see you have no answers to my points. You cannot rebut them so you just say you are ignoring me because I spread disinfo.

LOL! Who you trying to kid?

You are only fooling yourself.

Any objective, rational person can see my points are valid. So are my questions; such as why the ear suddenly disappears. But you refuse to address them - like you ALWAYS do.

Your refusal to debate only highlights the gaping holes in your so called 'evidence'.

You have no answers.

PID is dead.

And you`re still here Socrates, every day! :D :D :D

faulconandsnowjob

09-05-2009, 10:02 PM

And you`re still here Socrates, every day!
Yes, b/c it's his job. Not bad work if you can get it.

Meanwhile, some people are still living under the delusion that Fake Faul w/ the fake ears & fake mustache is Paul McCartney. Geeze - some people are slow to catch on. Hello - anyone at home? lol :D

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/McCartneyReplacedBySheppard.jpg

^ Difft eyes, noses, mouth, eyebrows, ears, facial structure... what more do you people want?

Think for yourself - don't just believe what you've been taught. I hate to break it to you, but the Illuminati LIES. I know this may be shocking & upsetting, but it's a truth you're just going to have to accept. The sooner you see it, the sooner you'll stop playing into their hands. Or maybe some people like being a tool.

sunsoflight

10-05-2009, 02:57 AM

Unless Socrates explains in detail his own manipulations of photos to prove a point, anything else he says has zero credibility. Regardless, one can not prove what one does not know as an absolute truth and show indisputable evidence to back up the facts. The list of people with firsthand evidence is shrinking.

This person is no paid disinfo agent, just a pretender who has no knowledge of any actual events and also likes to try and show self-importance or belittle the ideas of other people to boost one's ego.

However, if this is what somebody needs in life, more power to them. I believe in freedom as long as it does not infringe on the rights of others. At the end of the day, it is like the song goes..."Que Sera, Sera (Whatever Will Be, Will Be)".

With this said, it is only the viewpoint of one individual and I expect there to be has many takes on my view of things as there is human beings. If you aren't human, ignore this post completely.

faulconandsnowjob

10-05-2009, 03:13 AM

Unless Socrates explains in detail his own manipulations of photos to prove a point, anything else he says has zero credibility...
+1

This person [Socrates] is no paid disinfo agent, ...
You're probably right. He doesn't meet a professional standard.

And what have we here?
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/TheWalrus.jpg
Difft shaped faces & Faul's nose is noticeably longer than Paul's.

sunsoflight

10-05-2009, 03:21 AM

The black and white photo is most likely a photoshop job but not a good one.

Something I want to say, I enjoy a good debate as long as it is civil and honest. I wish I had kept up but reading well over 400 pages of posts is quite a lot.

One thing is true, Paul, Faul, Bill, whatever you want to call him, real or imposter, is in on the whole thing and the hints and clues carry on to this day. It is good marketing as well.

brainfreeze

10-05-2009, 03:43 AM

I know some peeps here don't believe anything they read in the media, but....

http://entertainment.uk.msn.com/music/galleries/gallery.aspx?cp-documentid=16607837&imageindex=2

I'm sure he would have been caught out by now if the rumours were true. But that is simply my view, and some of Socrates posts resonated as true to me too, especially proof he showed with the iris.

faulconandsnowjob

10-05-2009, 03:59 AM

The black and white photo is most likely a photoshop job but not a good one.
It's a screen capture & not photoshopped, as far as I know.

These are screen caps that show the same basic features:

http://i366.photobucket.com/albums/oo110/faulconandsnowjob/1966_comp.jpg
Paul: rounder face; Faul: longer nose

I'm sure he would have been caught out by now if the rumours were true.
People did figure it out back in 1969, but what are you going to do in the face of the Illuminati-controlled media that perpetuates the lie?

For those of you who think this is a joke, someone was murdered & that fact was covered up by a replacement. Yeah, that's really funny. Ha ha.

ph0neyprophet

10-05-2009, 04:25 AM

^ Same Paul.

brainfreeze

10-05-2009, 04:33 AM

It's a screen capture & not photoshopped, as far as I know.

These are screen caps that show the same basic features:

http://i366.photobucket.com/albums/oo110/faulconandsnowjob/1966_comp.jpg
Paul: rounder face; Faul: longer nose

People did figure it out back in 1969, but what are you going to do in the face of the Illuminati-controlled media that perpetuates the lie?

For those of you who think this is a joke, someone was murdered & that fact was covered up by a replacement. Yeah, that's really funny. Ha ha.

Who is laughing?

We're questioning, yes.

And just to clarify no, I don't believe there was a murder, so if I (or anyone else) did choose to laugh it would be at the PID'ers and NOT at a murder cover up. Well, that's how my logic works at least.

measle_weasel

10-05-2009, 04:44 AM

Is Paul really dead?

Yes.

sunsoflight

10-05-2009, 05:09 AM

Faulcon,

Look at the black and white photo again. As you are aware as much as I am, video is easy to manipulate too. I can explain that photo, at least partially. Since I didn't create it or have the source, it is hard to say exactly what steps were taken in the process.

The photo, looking from our perspective, is a little more than half of the right side of of Paul's face (our left) and the left side of John's face (our right). There is further tampering with the Paul right eye (our left) but exactly what was retouched is unknown and hard to decipher.

Take anything to split or even a mirror to each half the face, like unto the drum head on the Sgt. Pepper cover. Remember, the Lennon side of the face is not a complete half. The shading of grey isn't quite right which is also a key to revealing the fake photo video still.

sunsoflight

10-05-2009, 05:24 AM

Another thought, it actually looks like a combination of three different faces and the bright lighting of the hair is faked. Someone went to a lot of trouble to make this video, in my opinion. The upper left quadrant (our right) is John.

The middle is from another photo with most likely Paul, right quadrant (our left) as possibly the original along with the rest of the photo, the opposite could be true as well with the middle section of the face as the original.

Which video is it taken from?

faulconandsnowjob

10-05-2009, 06:30 AM

^ Are you talking about these?

http://i366.photobucket.com/albums/oo110/faulconandsnowjob/1966_comp.jpg

The one of Paul is from the Aug 19, 1966 Memphis interview. The one of Faul is from the Dec 20, 1966 interview in front of EMI. I did the screenshots myself & didn't tamper w/ them, so unless the orig video was tampered w/, they should be accurate representations of the 2 men.

Here are gifs of the 2 interviews trj on PID MH made:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/FinalInterview.gifhttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/Dec201966.gif

if I (or anyone else) did choose to laugh it would be at the PID'ers and NOT at a murder cover up.
I'm sure the Illuminati is laughing at all those people who can't see it, even after it's been pointed out to them in great detail.

dream9

10-05-2009, 06:33 AM

Hopefully those gifs help those that are undecided on this thread realize the difference in the two men.

faulconandsnowjob

10-05-2009, 06:38 AM

^ Yes, hopefully...

Anyway, sunsoflight, I know photos & videos can be manipulated. We have run across pics of "Paul" that are composites of Paul & Faul. Here is my absolute favorite ex:

http://i366.photobucket.com/albums/oo110/faulconandsnowjob/paul_faul_66.jpg

orbandsceptre27

10-05-2009, 06:50 AM

I'm sure he would have been caught out by now if the rumours were true. But that is simply my view, and some of Socrates posts resonated as true to me too, especially proof he showed with the iris.

Anyone with an ounce of intelligence could see that the iris "evidence" concocted by Socrates was completely bogus. He was using Fauls eyes and added "brown" or "green" to the frames which were labeled Paul and Faul respectively. Socrates is a complete fraud and posted on this thread as Lightman pre-Christmas most days every week. We had Redman as the resident shill before that.

Some ask why is it a big deal if Bill/Faul is unmasked as an imposter? Here`s one answer - If people find out about a switch, the next question is how many more of our public figures are paid actors and simply following orders? As was stated in a recent radio interview put out on this thread a few days back, a doppleganger when placed in an important position is fully under the control and scrutiny of those who placed him/her there in the first place. I`m not saying there are many out there, but if a 60`s music icon can be removed in front of peoples noses, then it`s easier to carry out than most people think. Luckily the technology of the 60`s was relatively poor and Faul is distinguishable. How could we make out other dopplegangers today? - it is most difficult!

sunsoflight

10-05-2009, 08:08 AM

I was talking about the one you posted before that one.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/TheWalrus.jpg

orbandsceptre27

10-05-2009, 09:00 AM

YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

I agree there was more than one Faul. The present Faul (Bill) is not the same man who was interviewed by ITN in June 1967 to talk about lsd. This guy is very different to Bill, and he sure aint Paul.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/Magical7.jpghttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/Magical5.jpghttp://digilander.libero.it/p_truth/the_truth/faul_ver_3.jpg
Lsd Faul 1967.

- ITN lsd interview - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tMC1AlPSOtg

- Here`s an early interview with Bill - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxnCngmi8gg
1.15 min in - "see any mistakes we`ve made, straighten them out.... <laughs>"

Watch and listen carefully to both interviews - the above two men are not who they claim to be.

http://i366.photobucket.com/albums/oo110/faulconandsnowjob/memphis_66_comp.jpg
Paul McCartney on the left / Bill (Faul) on the right posing as Paul McCartney.

toty1994

10-05-2009, 09:04 AM

sunsoflight..

The photo, looking from our perspective, is a little more than half of the right side of of Paul's face (our left) and the left side of John's face (our right). There is further tampering with the Paul right eye (our left) but exactly what was retouched is unknown and hard to decipher.
So the above photo of McCartney (the I Am A Walrus one) is an amalgam of him and Lennon? Firstly, how did you come to this conclusion? Secondly, why do you think tptb would do this if their aim was to convince the masses that Paul was still Paul and hadn't changed?

orbandsceptre27...

Socrates is a complete fraud and posted on this thread as Lightman pre-Christmas most days every week.

I've noticed you keep asserting this so I had a quick look on the members list. Lightman & Socrates posted at almost the same time on 6/3/09 - 3.29pm & 3.30pm. Do you still think it's more likely they're one and the same rather than two different people?

orbandsceptre27

10-05-2009, 09:40 AM

I've noticed you keep asserting this so I had a quick look on the members list. Lightman & Socrates posted at almost the same time on 6/3/09 - 3.29pm & 3.30pm. Do you still think it's more likely they're one and the same rather than two different people?

Lightman posted on this thread consistantly for a number of months -

He "left" abruptly and hasn`t made a single post here since (strong likelihood this id will be used again soon, as I`ve brought it to attention).

There was a period of two/three weeks of a break, when Socrates appeared on the scene. Socrates is now the resident debunker as Lightman once was. Both have remarkably similar techniques of posting, the same high levels of computer competency and both have spent an inordinate amount of time as debunkers on this thread and Accuracys.

There has been a resident shill/debunker on this thread right the way through. As quickly as Lightman made his exit and hasn`t returned, the first major debunker Redman (you couldn`t make this shit up if you tried) left the thread and has not posted even once since, paving the way for Lightman.

We`ve had Redman, Lightman, and now Fireman and Socrates all debunkers - All bar Redman, are extremely computer literate and all have spent vast amounts of time on this, and on Accuracys thread.

Fireman has posted 253 times on the David Icke forum. Every one of these posts have been on the PID threads (this thread and Accuracys, and all as a debunker).

I would love nothing more than to see an ip check run on these posters.

toty1994

10-05-2009, 10:28 AM

Ok, you still think they're all the same - thought so. Even if you were right that shouldn't stop you answering the content of their posts. It's easy to label someone a 'shill', 'disinfo agent' etc. It's clearly not easy to address the numerous elephants in the room that continue to be ignored and litter this thread. Otherwise you and others would do it.

Your speculation about posters like socrates is irrelevant if you can't/won't answer the points they raise.

orbandsceptre27

10-05-2009, 11:06 AM

Ok, you still think they're all the same - thought so. Even if you were right that shouldn't stop you answering the content of their posts.

Have a think about that ...

You have a resident shill(s) who change their id`s time and again; give the appearance of being logical (only to back up their own points), knowingly use tampered photos, make up ridiculous tests/standards which have no basis in law or science, look for loopholes at every given opportunity in PID posts...

...and you want me to answer all their ridiculous questions while valuable time goes abegging and page upon page of thread is wasted... please.

It's easy to label someone a 'shill', 'disinfo agent' etc. It's clearly not easy to address the numerous elephants in the room that continue to be ignored and litter this thread. Otherwise you and others would do it.

Like what - name them.

Your speculation about posters like socrates is irrelevant if you can't/won't answer the points they raise.

Socrates is either an obsessed nutter, or a shill - probably a bit of both, as we are seeing time and time again.

astrochicken

10-05-2009, 11:19 AM

Something I want to say, I enjoy a good debate as long as it is civil and honest. I wish I had kept up but reading well over 400 pages of posts is quite a lot.

One thing is true, Paul, Faul, Bill, whatever you want to call him, real or imposter, is in on the whole thing and the hints and clues carry on to this day. It is good marketing as well.

Sorry about that.. it would a much more compact and easier read is it wasn't for redman/fireman/lightman/socrates posts which are basically just pages upon pages

"show me credible proof",
i am not being manipulated
"you have no evidence",
TPTB can't possibly be *evil*
"that's just your opinion"

They should make their own "what's admissable in court", "what constitutes proof" or "Why don't all people think the same?" threads or even their own *legal* forum.

The bottom line is: governments LIE and they MANIPULATE you.
If you can't get your head around that then all you can do (until it is SELF-EVIDENT) is:

a. ridicule it
b. vehemently oppose it.

toty1994

10-05-2009, 11:49 AM

You have a resident shill(s) who change their id`s time and again; give the appearance of being logical (only to back up their own points), knowingly use tampered photos, make up ridiculous tests/standards which have no basis in law or science, look for loopholes at every given opportunity in PID posts...

http://www.makemoneyhowto.com/ebiz%20tutor/Images/HeadBang.gif

...and you want me to answer all their ridiculous questions
Yes please, that would be good.

Quote:
It's easy to label someone a 'shill', 'disinfo agent' etc. It's clearly not easy to address the numerous elephants in the room that continue to be ignored and litter this thread. Otherwise you and others would do it.

Like what - name them.

Actually, that's a good idea - perhaps a compilation the most ignored elephants (maybe like a 'top ten countdown') in one post. Thanks.

orbandsceptre27

10-05-2009, 12:34 PM

Even if you were right that shouldn't stop you answering the content of their posts.

Have a think about that ...

You have a resident shill(s) who change their id`s time and again; give the appearance of being logical (only to back up their own points), knowingly use tampered photos, make up ridiculous tests/standards which have no basis in law or science, look for loopholes at every given opportunity in PID posts...

...and you want me to answer all their ridiculous questions while valuable time goes abegging and page upon page of thread is wasted... please.

Toty1994 - Yes please, that would be good.

I don`t know if you read my above statement Toty - Why would somebody waste time answering a shills questions?

Toty1994 - Actually, that's a good idea. I'll compile all the best ignored points and put 'em in one post. Thanks.

Great, we can call it the Toty list. I had you on a list before Toty1994, do you remember it?

socrates

10-05-2009, 01:46 PM

Let me correct you, and rebut your gibbering nonsense.

Falsity Number 1: Anyone with an ounce of intelligence could see that the iris "evidence" concocted by Socrates was completely bogus.

I never 'concocted' it. The iris comp comes from this site:

http://www.paulisnotdead.com/blog1.php/2008/07/29/puppy-dog-brown-eyes?page=4

Falsity Number 2He was using Fauls eyes

PAUL's eye was CLEARLY used. The photo came from a 1964 printed magazine:

http://img17.imageshack.us/img17/4083/19558081.jpg

Falsity Number 3: and added "brown" or "green" to the frames which were labeled Paul and Faul respectively.

No "brown" was "added", whatsoever.

The mid tones - in BOTH photos - in the green and red channels were simply increased. Note, "increased" - NOT "added". Big difference.

By increasing the mid tones and highlights in the green and red channels, we see a dark area near the bottom of his iris.

If we look at the whole thing again, we can see that orbandsceptre's stupid claims are irrefutably exposed as a complete fabrication.

Paul has Hazel eyes. This is a combination of greens and browns. Using color filter, I have increased the luminosity of some of the green and brown areas. I have found an area in one of Paul's eyes that is difficult to see without computer enhancements.

Below I will demonstrate this. The images immediately below are a side by side comparison of Paul's right eye from the Fool On The Hill video (Left) and a 1964 printed magazine (right). Although the Fool on the Hill image seems clear, keep in mind that there does appear to be a slight gaussian blur. You can tell by looking at how soft the shadows surrounding his eye appears. This blur has diminished the contrast in some of the details we might have otherwise seen in his iris.

By increasing the mid tones and highlights in the green and red channels, we see a dark area near the bottom of his iris. Is this the smoking gun PIA needs to destroy PID rumors? Maybe?

http://img237.imageshack.us/img237/1189/34933657.jpg

Socrates is a complete fraud

I've just proven who the fraud actually is.

and posted on this thread as Lightman pre-Christmas most days every week. We had Redman as the resident shill before that.

LOL. Every time you can see you are losing the argument you endevour to change the topic of the discussion to irrelevant nonsense and start your childish name calling.

You are sooo predictable.

It's immature, it's off topic and it's irrelevant.

Let's get back to the iris, and highlight more evidence that Paul is alive and that the PIDers have never been able to refute.

Something Plastic Surgery Cannot Change

Aparently there are certain people who will assert that plastic surgery can be used to cause a person to resemble another certain individual. This has YET to be proven, however, but even if it could, there are certain things which plastic surgery can NEVER change in order to create a match...and that would be the iris of a man's eyes. Below are some comparisons of Paul's iris which span the pre-1967 era through the post-1967 era right through to the 1990's.

http://www.tlcgraphic.com/images/eyecomp12pe.gif

The above illustration utilizes Paul's right eye for comparison as the iris appears to have a very undenyable and unique feature which is consistant throughout these three photographs. From the lower portion of the pupil and out to the iris, there is a distinctive shape created by the coloration in his iris.

The images below are enlargements of the inset images with added notation in the form of a red outline. This outline was NOT drawn on EACH image, however it was drawn on ONE of the images and then overlaid on the other two. There is no denying this shape remains constant, and so does the contour of his lower eyelid.

http://www.tlcgraphic.com/images/eye01an1yu.gifhttp://www.tlcgraphic.com/images/eye02an0rz.gifhttp://www.tlcgraphic.com/images/eye03an3mw.gif

http://www.tlcgraphic.com/paul6.html

Another one:

http://img366.imageshack.us/img366/6250/51872673.jpg

The above evidence for Paul having the same iris pattern post PID is far more credible than any PID evidence.

The PIDers have yet to rebut it. Instead, they either ignore it, or as we have seen, "concoct" completely ficticious nonsense in order to try and discredit it.

toty1994

10-05-2009, 01:51 PM

I don`t know if you read my above statement Toty - Why would somebody waste time answering a shills questions?
I can only refer you to the 'head banging' gif again, sir. Think.

Great, we can call it the Toty list. I had you on a list before Toty1994, do you remember it?
Indeed, I'm on your list of shills and disinformation agents. Lovely. I will do that elephant chart. It will still be ignored (double, nay triple irony) but it'll be fun and at least all readers of this thread will be reminded of them. That'll do.:)

brainfreeze

10-05-2009, 05:36 PM

^ Are you talking about these?

http://i366.photobucket.com/albums/oo110/faulconandsnowjob/1966_comp.jpg

The one of Paul is from the Aug 19, 1966 Memphis interview. The one of Faul is from the Dec 20, 1966 interview in front of EMI. I did the screenshots myself & didn't tamper w/ them, so unless the orig video was tampered w/, they should be accurate representations of the 2 men.

Here are gifs of the 2 interviews trj on PID MH made:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/FinalInterview.gifhttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/Dec201966.gif

I'm sure the Illuminati is laughing at all those people who can't see it, even after it's been pointed out to them in great detail.

Apparently I'm pretty close to one of the elite (his name is on a list on this very forum). Tell ya what, it was a giggle reading that nonsense. So yeah, you're right, the illuminati/elite are laughing.

This forum reminds me, don't believe everything you read.

faulconandsnowjob

10-05-2009, 07:16 PM

Sunsoflight - do you think the one on the right is a composite? It's quite possible. The White Album pic of "Paul" seems to have been a composite of Paul & Faul...

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/TheWalrus.jpg

Lightman posted on this thread consistantly for a number of months -

He "left" abruptly and hasn`t made a single post here since ...
He left right after posting that heavily tampered pic of Dr. Moreau Faul I posted a few posts back. Ooops... we really nailed him on that one. lol

The bottom line is: governments LIE and they MANIPULATE you.
+1

This forum reminds me, don't believe everything you read.
Don't believe everything the Illuminati-controlled media tells you, either. Maybe that is smth you have yet to fully realize.

dream9

10-05-2009, 07:32 PM

Don't believe everything the Illuminati-controlled media tells you, either. Maybe that is smth you have yet to fully realize.

Most definitely so.

I must say that I am quite disappointed at some of the responses in this thread from people who can't seem to grasp this. It just goes to show you the power of celebrity is so strong that people that believe that the world is run by reptiles won't consider a simple celebrity having a double.:rolleyes:

astrochicken

10-05-2009, 07:37 PM

Lest anyone forget Paul was bowlegged (bandy) and Faul is not.

Of course the PIA *debunkers* will claim that paul had leg correction procedures (alongside shifting the parting of his hair,making his face longer, shortening his eyelashes and changing his eye colour) etc. etc. etc.

BANDY LEGS that is the topic of this post... don't ignore this or start refuting bits such as eyelashes... bow-legged!!!

http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g146/lilis456/niceheightcomparison.jpghttp://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d196/Beatlesphotos/Faulpink-1.jpg

orbandsceptre27

10-05-2009, 10:12 PM

I never 'concocted' it. The iris comp comes from this site.

So the iris comp was put together on some PID debunker site, that goes someway towards explaining the levels of incompetence involved.

What gets me is how you lifted this straight from a site without so much as questioning its validity.

http://www.paulisnotdead.com/blog1.php/2008/07/29/puppy-dog-brown-eyes?page=4

PAUL's eye was CLEARLY used. The photo came from a 1964 printed magazine:

http://img17.imageshack.us/img17/4083/19558081.jpg

Examine this picture above - Where is this unusual iris pattern that shows up in the comparative pics below??

http://www.tlcgraphic.com/images/eye01an1yu.gifhttp://www.tlcgraphic.com/images/eye02an0rz.gifhttp://www.tlcgraphic.com/images/eye03an3mw.gif

The pattern isn`t there because it`s not the same picture!

1. LOOK AT THE EYELID IN THE TOP PICTURE IT`S MORE CLOSED THAN IN THE THREE PICTURES BENEATH. :eek:

2. EXAMINE THE PUPIL OF THE EYE IN PAUL`S PICTURE - IT`S MUCH NARROWER THAN IN THE BOTTOM THREE. :eek:

3. LOOK AT THE EYELASHES - AGAIN DIFFERENT IN THE TOP PICTURE (PAUL) COMPARED TO THE BOTTOM THREE. :eek:

Socrates, don`t go away there`s alot more!