Is Paul really dead?

[faulconandsnowjob]

I find it sad that "Paul" was recently voted the most annoying celebrity ever, or something to that effect. Paul was not annoying! Paul was charming & witty. Faul... not so much. I hate that people think dorky Faul is Paul :-( But the interesting thing is they are willing to cut Faul a lot of slack b/c of how much they love Paul.

[faulconandsnowjob]

Listen to "I Will" on the Anthology compared to "I Will" on the White Album.

YouTube - Broadcast Yourself. Anthology

YouTube - Broadcast Yourself. White Album

I think "I Will" from the Anthology is Paul. The voice is deeper & has a lot of vibrato. The White Album version does not have that vibrato - it is "flatter."

[orbandsceptre27]

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=vgtdOOD6iN8

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=m1TOPORe99M

[indigowarrior]

http://www.total411.info/labels/beatles.html


Faux-BEATLE wife threatens to spill beans

Heather Mills, the Muslim Brotherhood-connected callgirl who handled ably her husband, BEATLE doppelganger Sir Paul, now finds herself on the outs with The System. In a recent interview on British television, she detailed steps she has taken to potect herself.

From GMTV via Sunday Metro October 31, 2007:

"Heather Mills McCartney: "I have protected my husband. I know everything and I know the truth. [...]

I have protected Paul for this long and I am trying to protect him but I am being pushed to the edge [...]

I'm £1.5 million in debt in lawyers' fees, and that's as much as I can say or I go to jail, for telling the truth. "So I'm gagged at the moment because I'm not allowed to say a word...

[...]

"I would live in America in two seconds but I live here to keep my daughter close to her father. "I compromise everything - you have no idea how much I have done to compromise.

"I have a box of evidence that's going to a certain person should anything happen to me, so if you top me off, it's still going to that person, and the truth will come out.

"There is so much fear from a certain party of the truth coming out that lots of things have been put out and done, so the police came round and said 'you have had serious death threats from an underground movement'.
-----


watch the interview where she says this.



YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.




people just cannot open their minds to the possibility, they are 100% PROGRAMMED
its their culture , their life , their ego , arguing about the intricacies of the actual music is irrelevant it was made by the tavistock institute.

heather mills mind controlled slave waking up.

[allure]

Half those quotes aren't in that interview. And the ones that are, are completely unrelated to what you are purporting them to be related to.

She saying she knows the truth about the trials, she's saying the media are printing lies but there's still a lot she can't mention about the trials because things in the courts are ongoing.

[orbandsceptre27]

Half those quotes aren't in that interview. And the ones that are, are completely unrelated to what you are purporting them to be related to.

She saying she knows the truth about the trials, she's saying the media are printing lies but there's still a lot she can't mention about the trials because things in the courts are ongoing.


Did you ever hear the one about the three wells.............? Well well well allure, you are either quite stupid or quite vindictive!

ALL THE QUOTES YOU MENTION ARE IN THAT INTERVIEW! You waited until Indigowarrior went off line before you put in your tuppence worth but you`re not nearly as smart as you think are you.....?

The man who was too "embarrassed" to stick around this thread is back again and now he`s lying!

You presume she`s talking about the trials, or are you again making unfounded presumptions and half-baked remarks eh.......? The reality is you don`t know the truth behind those statements because she never mentioned the trials when she made them! If you researched this area long enough though you`d know exactly what she was talking about!

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=stvMTXr3tc4&feature=related

Maybe you should go back to your, "jibbing" for world peace thread allure - you could at least satisfy yourself there! :D

[allure]

Did you ever hear the one about the three wells.............? Well well well allure, you are either quite stupid or quite vindictive!

ALL THE QUOTES YOU MENTION ARE IN THAT INTERVIEW! You waited until Indigowarrior went off line before you put in your tuppence worth but you`re not nearly as smart as you think are you.....?

The man who was too "embarrassed" to stick around this thread is back again and now he`s lying!

You presume she`s talking about the trials, or are you again making unfounded presumptions and half-baked remarks eh.......? The reality is you don`t know the truth behind those statements because she never mentioned the trials when she made them! If you researched this area long enough though you`d know exactly what she was talking about!

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=stvMTXr3tc4&feature=related

Maybe you should go back to your, "jibbing" for world peace thread allure - you could at least satisfy yourself there! :D
I waited until he went offline? Mate I made my response as soon as I read his.

Ok I didn't realise the interview was in two parts. I just seen the 2nd part now.

I'm stupid or vindictive? Not as smart as I think I am? I'm lying?

I'm not in any way trying to be smart. I'm not here to play games, mate!

As I said before, every remark you have made towards me in this thread has been personal attacks and name calling. I am giving my opinion on the subject, you are attacking me with insults.

Yes, I presumed she was referring to the trials.

Here's a quote from an article:

“When you say certain party, do you mean someone from Paul McCartney’s camp?” BBC reporter Maxine Mawhinney asked.

“I’m not allowed to talk about Paul and the court case and all that kind of stuff, because we are in court,” Mills McCartney said.

“But it is, by clear implication, that’s what you’re saying,” BBC reporter Jon Sopel said.

“I can’t say, because I’d be in contempt of court. But you’re not stupid, that’s all I can say.”

Source = http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21563393/

Now. Any more insults to throw at me?

[orbandsceptre27]

http://www.total411.info/labels/beatles.html


Faux-BEATLE wife threatens to spill beans

Heather Mills, the Muslim Brotherhood-connected callgirl who handled ably her husband, BEATLE doppelganger Sir Paul, now finds herself on the outs with The System. In a recent interview on British television, she detailed steps she has taken to potect herself.

From GMTV via Sunday Metro October 31, 2007:

"Heather Mills McCartney: "I have protected my husband. I know everything and I know the truth. [...]

I have protected Paul for this long and I am trying to protect him but I am being pushed to the edge [...]

I'm £1.5 million in debt in lawyers' fees, and that's as much as I can say or I go to jail, for telling the truth. "So I'm gagged at the moment because I'm not allowed to say a word...

[...]

"I would live in America in two seconds but I live here to keep my daughter close to her father. "I compromise everything - you have no idea how much I have done to compromise.

"I have a box of evidence that's going to a certain person should anything happen to me, so if you top me off, it's still going to that person, and the truth will come out.

"There is so much fear from a certain party of the truth coming out that lots of things have been put out and done, so the police came round and said 'you have had serious death threats from an underground movement'.
-----


watch the interview where she says this.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CGXQB3o_gnc




people just cannot open their minds to the possibility, they are 100% PROGRAMMED
its their culture , their life , their ego , arguing about the intricacies of the actual music is irrelevant it was made by the tavistock institute.

heather mills mind controlled slave waking up.


Hi Indigowarrior, indeed she has been very badly treated by the media! Of course the first thing thrown at her is the tag of "moneygrabber." She`s been labelled a bitch but what woman hasn`t been at one point or another :p and what man hasn`t been a pain in the butt at some stage - nobodies perfect!

But the media (esp. the "gutter press") have put her through hell. I read today however, in our own national newspaper here in Ireland "The Irish Independent," that she is now very much at peace in the US. She suggested in an interview for "Hello" magazine, that she prefers being in the US to the UK - "I`m in a really a good place at the moment. I`m at peace. I`ve spent alot of time healing.......it`s been a very very difficult time - the hardest ever." She said, "I love England and I always will. But you know, it seems like I can really get a lot done in America on the causes I really care about." She has given away over half a million of her 24.3 million Sterling divorce settlement to one of the most impoverished NY neighbourhoods and sais of the settlement, "Alot of it has gone to charity, and I kept some to invest in projects and causes that will make the world a better place."

Everything aside, she had (and still has) to keep her mouth shut about Faul`s "little secret". She must have received some shock when she realised she was "living a lie" with a man who was "living a lie"!

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=dCQtP4AjVg8

[allure]

She also mentioned in that video you posted that '300 of her friends' are also keeping their mouths shut about the same thing she was. Now, do you suppose those 300 friends are all aware PID/PWR?

[faulconandsnowjob]

How about this Heather Mills interview?

paul is dead - the rotten apple 63 u - YouTube

"People don't want to know what the truth is b/c they could never, ever handle it."

She is not talking about infidelity. She is not talking about domestic violence (if so, why would she ask him to protect her?)

arguing about the intricacies of the actual music is irrelevant it was made by the tavistock institute.

I suppose it's a minor point, but it's just evidence that there are different "Pauls" singing. It's akin to all the photo comparisons.

And about TI, I agree the Beatles were mixed up w/ them, but I don't agree TI wrote all their music. Paul was, imo, quite talented & creative :-) Maybe that was one reason TI used the Beatles...?

[orbandsceptre27]

I waited until he went offline? Mate I made my response as soon as I read his.

Ok I didn't realise the interview was in two parts. I just seen the 2nd part now.

I'm stupid or vindictive? Not as smart as I think I am? I'm lying?

I'm not in any way trying to be smart. I'm not here to play games, mate!

As I said before, every remark you have made towards me in this thread has been personal attacks and name calling. I am giving my opinion on the subject, you are attacking me with insults.

Yes, I presumed she was referring to the trials.

Here's a quote from an article:


Source = http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21563393/

Now. Any more insults to throw at me?


There`s nothing personal about any of this! However you`ve previously come onto this thread asking for it to be closed without giving a single reason why. Also you expressed your embarrassment and again you failed to back up your opinion. This is judgmentalism at it`s most pernicious.

Now I`ll give you the benefit of the doubt, you made a mistake on the interview, or so you`ve said. What does this say about you and your previous one-line comments. It`s judgmental in the extreme, where are your observational skills - you`re not using them are you!

You make off the cuff remarks about closing the thread (without a reason) now you`ve made a sweeping statement saying only half the quotes were contained in the interview, when they were all there! WHAT SORT OF RESEARCH ARE YOU INTO? You`re not concerned with truth, you`re concerned about being right and a fool like that shouldn`t be posting comments on material he has`nt even researched!

So no it isn`t personal, but it`s a ridiculous situation isn`t it?

[faulconandsnowjob]

fool like that shouldn`t be posting comments on material he has`nt even researched!

I totally agree. When I first started researching PID, I didn't join the discussion until I felt I had a decent handle on it & could contribute something useful to the discussion.

However, I don't want to discourage neophytes from asking questions, b/c I know I had plenty - & still have! It's just the dismissive, know-it-all attitude of people who haven't spent 10 minutes looking into it that grows tiresome.

[orbandsceptre27]

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=fVGk5qm6Mac

"Two Pauls"

Note - where Faul sings for the first time, "The time that has gone so fast, the time that I thought would last, my ever present past" - a second Paul appears (an obvious reference to the man he replaced)!

Enter second verse - "I`ve got too much on my plate, I THINK OF EVERYTHING TO BE DISCOVERED...........!"

Leading into the chorus for the first time - as he sings the words, "my ever present past," the second Paul walks straight by the camera clicking his fingers!

[orbandsceptre27]

I totally agree. When I first started researching PID, I didn't join the discussion until I felt I had a decent handle on it & could contribute something useful to the discussion.

However, I don't want to discourage neophytes from asking questions, b/c I know I had plenty - & still have! It's just the dismissive, know-it-all attitude of people who haven't spent 10 minutes looking into it that grows tiresome.

Exactly I`ve no problem with people asking questions and also those who completely disagree but who have done some research. Krakhead is a good example - He knew what he was talking about and even though he`d disagree so what.......... he made relevant points and was fair-minded!

But blatant judgmentalism, I can`t understand someone coming onto a thread and being like that - it shows a lack of integrity but also a complete lack of foresight! Nothing stays the same, and "a crazy theory" today can make an awful lot more sense down the road. When you judge something straight off you`re putting yourself in a box and limiting your own ability, that`s my take on it anyhow! There could be much truth to what you`re after dismissing, but how do you know unless you really look?

[allure]

You presume she`s talking about the trials, or are you again making unfounded presumptions and half-baked remarks eh.......? The reality is you don`t know the truth behind those statements because she never mentioned the trials when she made them! If you researched this area long enough though you`d know exactly what she was talking about!
Ok, so what do you think now I posted that link: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21563393/

Would you say that on this occasion at least, my presumption that she was referring to the trials was right, and your presumption was wrong?

[redman]

Believe me redman, he`d break his bollox laughing at you.

You don`t see any innuendo in this interview - Ringo can`t stand him!

- Larry King - "You couldn`t drum with him on that hah....?"
- Ringo - "I couldn`t drum with him on that cause he was in another country!" Wink wink......

1.12 Larry King - "You would have used him though," Faul replies "Oh yeah, I`d use him........... all the time!" Nod nod.......

- The best piece though ........ (Watch Fauls expression here :D) Larry King asked Ringo how life was treating him ....... Ringo - "Life is great........ the wife is great...........the wife is gorgeous AND SHES GREAT!"

- Larry King - "and Paul how are you adjusting to.............." (the wife was suing him). "I`m ok Larry, thank you for asking" - Look at Ringo, he`s about to have a fit! :D

- 2.08 Faul`s infamous - "and with friends like these, who needs life?"

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=TUUpXxHXSzI

The younger imposter - (present day Faul)

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=zxnCngmi8gg

("see any mistakes we`ve made......straighten them out.....haha!")

The original Paul McCartney (interview and vid - "The Night Before")

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?vf1CidMWUfbw

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=NTb3uifuKDc




I think he would be laughing at you mate.


Seriously deluded individual, with a lot of time on his hands. LMAO

I mean you are taking things from that interview and making them sound like they are referring to him being replaced. LMAO And they don't even make any sense when they are even put in to that context. LMAO





I mean, he made a joke saying "and with friends like these, who needs life?" So how does that tie in with this theory exactly ??


You are looking at things that are simply not fucking there. I really do suggest you get ya head out of the clouds and wake the fuck up. This is the worst conspiracy theory ever, and was laughed off as a joke when it first started to circulate back in 66... LMAO The Beatles sat there laughing their tits off at it, and now there is a new generation of saddo's that have taken the theory on. Fucking unbelievable.

Seriously fucked in the head you lot. :D

[faulconandsnowjob]

a second Paul appears (an obvious reference to the man he replaced)!

Other double references:

http://www.audiobasics.com/acatalog/Product_TwinFreaks.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2230/2364819877_40dac8d204.jpg

http://www.fafos.com/cdfoto/beatles/paul/paulpz/thelostmccartneyalbumclubsandwich.jpg

http://sp1.yt-thm-a01.yimg.com/image/25/m7/3798678323

http://m-music.ru/uploads/post-1-1133533764.jpg

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1047/534789493_7049fb434d.jpg

http://sp1.yt-thm-a01.yimg.com/image/25/m8/4156593946

"a crazy theory" today

Right. A lot of people think it's "crazy" to believe 9/11 was an inside job, or that JFK was assassinated by TPTB. Well, a wee bit of research into either of those areas will find plenty of evidence to support both theories - as will research into PID/PWR.

This is the worst conspiracy theory ever, and was laughed off as a joke when it first started to circulate back in 66...

Ah, redman. You betray your lack of knowledge yet again. There was a "rumor" in England in 1967 that Paul had died in a car accident. In 1969, there was a fairly widespread "rumor" that PID in the US. When LIFE trotted out someone claiming to be Paul, the "rumor" was "dispelled." A lot of people happily took the blue pill & went back to sleep - but not everyone. Some of us, believe it or not, have chosen the red pill.

[redman]

Ok, so what do you think now I posted that link: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21563393/

Would you say that on this occasion at least, my presumption that she was referring to the trials was right, and your presumption was wrong?

Prepare for your post to be ignored.

Any time I have brought up something that proves these people wrong they just ignore it and go back to posting pics.

I posted the clip that showed were the video they were posting had been edited on purpose to make it sound like George was saying Beatle Bill when in fact he was talking to Phil Spector at the time and said Beatle Phil. ( And considering they were sat there having something to eat and he was looking at Phil Spector eating and made a comment about him eating ).

They ignored that and just went back to posting those pathetic pics.


And then when I said that the theory consists of Faul being found in a look a like competition, they tried to make out I was talking shit but this theory does have that element in it, and it's on many of the sites that actually support this shit.

They ignored those links I sent too.


I think they are just Paul Mccartney stalkers that want to believe this shit, wouldn't surprise me if one of these fucking loons ended up killing the cunt... LMAO

[orbandsceptre27]

Ok, so what do you think now I posted that link: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21563393/

Would you say that on this occasion at least, my presumption that she was referring to the trials was right, and your presumption was wrong?


What is the strength of "a presumption"? Are you attempting to square a circle with leading questions??

Read the article again, but read it from an OBJECTIVE perspective, not from a substantive viewpoint.

The interviewer/reporter is leading her on a merry dance and you`re dancing along behind. She wasn`t in court, she was being interviewed and unfortunately what counts for journalism in much of the United Kingdom is court style questioning - in other words "lets pin her."

Now you`re next move may be to bring me through question by question until "you pin me" (am I being presumptuous?) and show your presumption to be right. Black and white, "I am right you are wrong from rock logic....." to rock logic - balony right?

Well I`ll save you the trouble councillor. From this article she states that she,

- feared for her life.

- Paul McCartney was not protecting her or her daughter.

- She had to take precautions because of death threats.

- She had appeared on an ITV show that morning, "saying she had taken precautions because of death threats."

- She had a box of evidence that was "going to a certain person" should something happen to her.

- She was afraid of being "topped off" and the truth would still come out if she was killed, as the evidence would still g to this person.

- "THERE IS SO MUCH A FEAR FROM A CERTAIN PARTY OF THE TRUTH COMING OUT THAT LOTS OF THINGS HAVE BEEN PUT OUT AND DONE."

- The POLICE TOLD HER she was under threat from a certain underground movement (not named).

- She claimed the tabloids and "a certain party" were to blame, when asked if the tabloids were at fault.

- She stated she couldn`t talk about Paul and the case (and all that kind of stuff).

Now you can draw all the presumptons you like out of that - I see a very fearful woman, a woman with much to tell and in fear of her life from "an underground movement."

I see the facts "councillor" - not what I presume or would like to see, you`re examining presumptions.......?? You struck me as more "the factual type."

May I step down?

[orbandsceptre27]

Prepare for your post to be ignored.

Any time I have brought up something that proves these people wrong they just ignore it and go back to posting pics.

I posted the clip that showed were the video they were posting had been edited on purpose to make it sound like George was saying Beatle Bill when in fact he was talking to Phil Spector at the time and said Beatle Phil. ( And considering they were sat there having something to eat and he was looking at Phil Spector eating and made a comment about him eating ).

They ignored that and just went back to posting those pathetic pics.


And then when I said that the theory consists of Faul being found in a look a like competition, they tried to make out I was talking shit but this theory does have that element in it, and it's on many of the sites that actually support this shit.

They ignored those links I sent too.


I think they are just Paul Mccartney stalkers that want to believe this shit, wouldn't surprise me if one of these fucking loons ended up killing the cunt... LMAO


You have long since proven you are an idiot of the highest callibre! (but I think you`re great)

[redman]

What is the strength of "a presumption"? Are you attempting to square a circle with leading questions??

Read the article again, but read it from an OBJECTIVE perspective, not from a substantive viewpoint.

The interviewer/reporter is leading her on a merry dance and you`re dancing along behind. She wasn`t in court, she was being interviewed and unfortunately what counts for journalism in much of the United Kingdom is court style questioning - in other words "lets pin her."

Now you`re next move may be to bring me through question by question until "you pin me" (am I being presumptuous?) and show your presumption to be right. Black and white, "I am right you are wrong from rock logic....." to rock logic - balony right?

Well I`ll save you the trouble councillor. From this article she states that she,

- feared for her life.

- Paul McCartney was not protecting her or her daughter.

- She had take precautions because of death threats.

- She had appeared on an ITV show that morning, "saying she had taken precautions because of death threats."

- She had a box of evidence that was "going to a certain person" should something happen to her.

- She was afraid of being "topped off" and the truth would still come out if she was killed, as the evidence would still g to this person.

- "THERE IS SO MUCH A FEAR FROM A CERTAIN PARTY OF THE TRUTH COMING OUT THAT LOTS OF THINGS HAVE BEEN PUT OUT AND DONE."

- The POLICE TOLD HER she was under threat from a certain underground movement (not named).

- She claimed the tabloids and "a certain party" were to blame, when asked if the tabloids were at fault.

- She stated she couldn`t talk about Paul and the case (and all that kind of stuff).

Now you can draw all the presumptons you like out of that - I see a very fearful woman, a woman with much to tell and in fear of her life from "an underground movement."

I see the facts "councillor" - not what I presume or would like to see, you`re examining presumptions.......?? You struck me as more "the factual type."

May I step down?



And how does this have anything to do with Paul Mccartney dying and being replaced by a man who they found in a look a like competition in 1966. LMAO


Also she definitley didn't look like a woman in fear for her life when she was in every tabloid dishing the dirt about her relationship with Macca. Also The Beatles have millions of fans, so it wouldn't surprise me she was getting death threats.


You are talking like she is totally innocent, the woman is fucking poison and you can see it a mile off. But your probably rapped in this shit to even notice that this woman is obviously a gold digger. I suggest you do some research on her before you start falling for her act.

[orbandsceptre27]

I have to get me tea - of course she`s a gold digger, a gold digger that dug too deep!

[redman]

You have long since proven you are an idiot of the highest callibre! (but I think you`re great)

I agree with the last part. Best thing you've said on this thead. LMAO.

[supertzar]

They ignored the very telling video 'Pattern Recognition' also. It is so clearly the same person and the video shows it perfectly.

[redman]

I have to get me tea - of course she`s a gold digger, a gold digger that dug too deep!



OK, well you come up with some credible evidence and I will start treating this seriously. Deal ??

[allure]

In your opinion, what do you think it is that '300 of her friends' know, but through their loyalty to Heather, are not prepared to talk about. (From the ITV interview)

[redman]

They ignored the very telling video 'Pattern Recognition' also. It is so clearly the same person and the video shows it perfectly.

What video was that ??

[faulconandsnowjob]

Orb, I totally agree w/ you about HM. I think she was afraid, too. I'm sure she knows exactly what kind of people she's dealing w/, & what they're capable of.

Any time I have brought up something that proves these people wrong they just ignore it and go back to posting pics.

I am unaware of anything you have posted that "proves" us wrong. Please, if you have something, provide it.

I posted the clip that showed were the video they were posting had been edited on purpose to make it sound like George was saying Beatle Bill when in fact he was talking to Phil Spector at the time and said Beatle Phil.

George clearly said "Beatle Bill." & why would they mock Phil Spector for having a #5 in Sweden?

And then when I said that the theory consists of Faul being found in a look a like competition, they tried to make out I was talking shit but this theory does have that element in it, and it's on many of the sites that actually support this shit.

Who knows where TPTB find their talent? Maybe it was from a look-a-like contest, maybe not.

They ignored that and just went back to posting those pathetic pics.
Oh, we have definitely not ignored you. You keep the thread alive. It's great! Thanks for your participation.

And here are some more pics. Thanks for reminding me to post them :-P

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/Lennon_McCartney-1.jpg Paul

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/1973X_Lagos.jpg Faul

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/64hdn.jpg Paul

http://www.wwnorton.com/mccartney/images/paul1.jpg Faul

[orbandsceptre27]

I agree with the last part. Best thing you've said on this thead. LMAO.

Innuendo redman, innuendo!

Supertzar - are you still going on about that piece of crap, we threw that in the garbage long ago - please tell me you`ve come back with something...... anything?

Allure - Jesus Christ look at these questions, are you working for Mi3 and 1/2? There so fawking leading I`m meeting myself coming back around!

[supertzar]

What video was that ??

This one. The forum member named 'toty1994' I think posted it.

Pattern Recognition (20 years later) - YouTube

[redman]

Other double references:

http://www.audiobasics.com/acatalog/Product_TwinFreaks.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2230/2364819877_40dac8d204.jpg

http://www.fafos.com/cdfoto/beatles/paul/paulpz/thelostmccartneyalbumclubsandwich.jpg

http://sp1.yt-thm-a01.yimg.com/image/25/m7/3798678323

http://m-music.ru/uploads/post-1-1133533764.jpg

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1047/534789493_7049fb434d.jpg

http://sp1.yt-thm-a01.yimg.com/image/25/m8/4156593946



Right. A lot of people think it's "crazy" to believe 9/11 was an inside job, or that JFK was assassinated by TPTB. Well, a wee bit of research into either of those areas will find plenty of evidence to support both theories - as will research into PID/PWR.


.




You say this, but look at the evidence you are posting. I mean, album covers that don't mean anything. That is not credible evidence that makes me think that Paul Mccartney died and was replaced by someone who was found in a look a like competition.

Can you see why I can look at the mountain of evidence for in the likes of JFK being popped off and 911 being a inside job.

But album covers that don't prove nothing is pathetic. Simply fucking pathetic.

[redman]

This one. The forum member named 'toty1994' I think posted it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNjpxr2_sGg




Alls I can say is, can anyone seriously watch that video and still come to conclusion that Paul Mccartney died in 66 and was replaced.


I mean come on people, what are you fucking thinking. LMAO

[supertzar]

Supertzar - are you still going on about that piece of crap, we threw that in the garbage long ago - please tell me you`ve come back with something...... anything?

You just pretended it didn't exist. It is so obvious it is the same person. This is either the biggest case of mistaken belief ever or you are perpetrating a fraud on the forum. I suspect the latter.

[redman]

You just pretended it didn't exist. It is so obvious it is the same person. This is either the biggest case of mistaken belief ever or you are perpetrating a fraud on the forum. I suspect the latter.



Was this the response to it ??

" Supertzar - are you still going on about that piece of crap, we threw that in the garbage long ago - please tell me you`ve come back with something...... anything "


Why would someone say " that peice of crap " in reference to that clip.


Rather they just want to believe this to give themselves something to do, or as you say there are other motives. I mean that clip clearly shows that it's the same person.

[allure]

orbandsceptre27 - Leading?

A video was posted with Heather Mills interviewed on GMTV.

Quotes from the video were being highlighted, one being that she was "gagged and not allowed to say a word".

I responded saying she was referring to the ongoing court case, so that has nothing to do with PID.

You said that was an "unfounded presumption and half baked remark". You then said that if I researched this area long enough, I would know what she was talking about.

I posted a link that proved she had indeed said, “I’m not allowed to talk about Paul and the court case and all that kind of stuff, because we are in court,”

In this GMTV interview where Heathers statement that she was "unable to talk about certain things"; being used here as some kind of PID evidence, she also remarked that "300 of her friends" were also keeping quiet out of loyalty to Heather.


I just asked; if you believed that remark was in relation to keeping quiet about a PID conspiracy, do you believe thats what her "300 friends" are also keeping quiet about?

[supertzar]

Yeah, what is so crappy about that video? It's like "It's just crap, that's all!" No, it's not. That video shows the same person twenty years later, there is no doubt. I have a general policy of being totally open to any possibility, but there is virtually no possibility in my opinion that the video shows two human beings with different genetics.

[faulconandsnowjob]

And how does this [referring to Heather Mills interview]have anything to do with Paul Mccartney dying and being replaced by a man who they found in a look a like competition in 1966.

Are you kidding me? There are some people who have a lot invested in keeping the truth from coming out about Paul. You don't think they would take out some pesky ex-wife they were afraid might spill the beans? Now that is just naive.

Oh, shoot, I almost forgot to post more pics clearly showing the difference between Paul & Faul.

http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d196/Beatlesphotos/DGR004_BEATLES_6.jpg Paul

http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d196/Beatlesphotos/Billcheckoutprofile.jpg Faul

http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g146/lilis456/1stVisitDVD08-1.jpg Paul

http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g146/lilis456/75nashvl.jpg Faul

[allure]

Here's a few pics of pre and post '66.

http://i33.tinypic.com/1zme4p5.jpg

Now reverse them...

http://i33.tinypic.com/1zsygy.jpg

Identically shaped faces.

[faulconandsnowjob]

You honestly think they look the same? Fair enough if you do. At least you have contributed something useful to the discussion.

Do these people look the same, too?

http://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j178/lilis678/DR1001_Paul_McCARTNEY_6.jpg Paul

http://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j178/lilis678/ID1001_Paul_McCARTNEY_6.jpg Faul

http://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j178/lilis678/DB1005_BEATLES_6.jpg Paul

http://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j178/lilis678/CUM003_Paul_McCARTNEY_6.jpg Faul

[supertzar]

I don't know why they should be reversed, but look at how you could overlay the faces pre and post '66 and it is the exact same face. Would someone with photoshop overlay these images?

[faulconandsnowjob]

exact same face.

Yeah, except for the eyes, the nose, the chin, the forehead, & the ears, it is clearly the "exact same face." :-P

http://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j178/lilis678/help07.jpg Paul

http://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j178/lilis678/grammy.jpg Faul (notice the weak chin this guy has)

http://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j178/lilis678/beauty2.jpg Paul

http://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j178/lilis678/beatles-rr.jpg Faul

[allure]

They are reversed because nobody had a totally symmetrical face, there are usually discrepancies like one eye a tiny bit higher, cheek bone or jaw bone more pronounced on one side.

Paul McCartneys face has the same visible discrepancies both before and after 66. Meaning the shape of his face, his bone structure, didn't change.

[supertzar]

Whoever you are, whatever your deal is, faulcon, I wish you well. I hope you stop pushing this nonsense around here, though.

[supertzar]

They are reversed because nobody had a totally symmetrical face, there are usually discrepancies like one eye a tiny bit higher, cheek bone or jaw bone more pronounced on one side.

Paul McCartneys face has the same visible discrepancies both before and after 66. Meaning the shape of his face, his bone structure, didn't change.

Yeah, those distinctive features are clear throughout his career, that is for sure. What is the deal with these people? They are insisting that the sky is purple.

[ennui]

You honestly think they look the same? Fair enough if you do. At least you have contributed something useful to the discussion.


Yes they look the same

http://img515.imageshack.us/img515/7725/animation4dd1.gif

[supertzar]

Nice gif, ennui. Can you superimpose these in one image, too please?

Are these actually two different original photos, by the way? Or is it the same one photoshopped with different hair? Because those are so close it's hard to believe they were taken at different times.

[ennui]

Nice gif, ennui. Can you superimpose these in one image, too please?

Superimpose what?

The only difference I can see is age and hair style.

[faulconandsnowjob]

Oh, well, I suppose I will have to accept that not everyone can see the difference. I guess they have no eye for detail. But for those who can see the difference, I offer more comparisons:

http://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j178/lilis678/1stVisitDVD23.jpg Paul

http://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j178/lilis678/68lace.jpg Faul

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a386/Beatlesagain/ruthandpaul.jpg Paul

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a386/Beatlesagain/paultros-1.jpg Faul (Bill)

& this is supposed to be Paul???

http://i2.iofferphoto.com/img/item/426/399/16/o_Playgirl_Paul_McCartney.jpg

[ennui]

What's the difference? Apart from the fact he's lost his puppy fat in the later photos so his face jaw line looks a bit sharper. His eyes, nose, cheeks are all the same.

[supertzar]

Superimpose what?



uhhhh...the two photos?

[faulconandsnowjob]

And since someone asked what I'm trying to accomplish w/ all of this, I am trying to do a couple of things:

1 - shed light on this TPTB tactic. It seems TPTB take out & replace people as they see fit. I do not think Paul is the only person this has happened to. He just happens to be the one I've chosen to use to educate people about this.

2 - right a wrong. What happened to Paul has offended my sense of justice. I would love for the truth to come out about PID/PWR.

Anyway, if one additional person on this forum can see the difference between Paul & Faul b/c of what I've posted, then it will be worth it. I'm actually surprised that more people on this forum can't see it. I had expected people on the David Icke forum to be like, yeah, people are replaced all the time. So, what's new?

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

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v455/JPM/sweetprince.jpg Paul

http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b375/Cavern61/Bill4.jpg Faul

[redman]

And since someone asked what I'm trying to accomplish w/ all of this, I am trying to do a couple of things:

1 - shed light on this TPTB tactic. It seems TPTB take out & replace people as they see fit. I do not think Paul is the only person this has happened to. He just happens to be the one I've chosen to use to educate people about this.

2 - right a wrong. What happened to Paul has offended my sense of justice. I would love for the truth to come out about PID/PWR.

Anyway, if one additional person on this forum can see the difference between Paul & Faul b/c of what I've posted, then it will be worth it. I'm actually surprised that more people on this forum can't see it. I had expected people on the David Icke forum to be like, yeah, people are replaced all the time. So, what's new?

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

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v455/JPM/sweetprince.jpg Paul

http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b375/Cavern61/Bill4.jpg Faul



If you really want the truth to come out then spend less time posting pics that most of us can't see any different except for age and may be some plastic surgery later on in his life, and start looking at ways to get both voices tested to see if they are the same.


Because that video supertzar posted proves that both voices sounded exactly the same to me.


What would you do Faulconjobandsnowjob if it came out that you was wrong and you had been totally wasting your time ?? serious question. If you managed to do a test on the voices and it came back that they were from the same person, would you take note and actually stop with this shit, or would you just ignore the evidence like you have been doing on this thread and just carry on waffleing copious amounts of shit on a conspiracy theory that ain't there.

Just wondering.

[gordonfreeman]

Me: Who is Paul? *Too lazy to read the whole thread right now*

Cat: Murr?

[graflok]

I had expected people on the David Icke forum to be like, yeah, people are replaced all the time. So, what's new?


There are lots of people here with open minds and awareness of the scams
that are perpetrated on the public. But, there are also some "debunker" types
who only seem to be able to say 3 things: "get a life," "everything isn't a
conspiracy," and "shut up." :cool:

[faulconandsnowjob]

Because that video supertzar posted proves that both voices sounded exactly the same to me.

You can't hear the difference in the voices in the 2 versions of "I Will" I posted?

YouTube - Broadcast Yourself. (Anthology)

YouTube - Broadcast Yourself. (White Album)

Methinks Orbandsceptre is right about your musical ability. Even I, who do not claim to be a musician, can hear the difference. In fact, it's pretty obvious.

And apart from what I've already posted about Dr. Truby's analysis, there is this:

http://digilander.libero.it/p_truth/audio.html

They conclude Paul's voice has more vibrato - which is exactly what I heard in the Anthology version of "I Will."

And I don't know why a vocal analysis would be dispositive. Photographic evidence is just as valid. (Please see my post about immutable features being means of identification).

Anyway, I know I am not wrong about this. I can see the difference & hear the difference between Paul & the Fauls. That is why I am so confident & persistent.

You have made it clear that you can't tell the difference, but in hopes that some photo comparison will make a light bulb go off for someone, I will keep posting them (I know that irks you to no end - hee :-P)

http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b375/Cavern61/truePaul.jpg Paul

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a386/Beatlesagain/allyouneedislove.jpg Faul

http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b375/Cavern61/WA889901.jpg Paul

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a386/Beatlesagain/PaulMcCartney7521.jpg Faul

But, there are also some "debunker" types
who only seem to be able to say 3 things: "get a life," "everything isn't a
conspiracy," and "shut up."
How right you are - & they rarely provide anything to support their position. Oh, well, they don't bother me, though, b/c they keep the threads alive. Active threads draw in more people...

[redman]

There are lots of people here with open minds and awareness of the scams
that are perpetrated on the public. But, there are also some "debunker" types
who only seem to be able to say 3 things: "get a life," "everything isn't a
conspiracy," and "shut up." :cool:

Well it's not a crime to ask someone to come up with some credible evidence.


And I am still waiting on that.

[redman]

You can't hear the difference in the voices in the 2 versions of "I Will" I posted?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9V8eyCRQ6hQ (Anthology)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=go2wjF7f-zw (White Album)

Methinks Orbandsceptre is right about your musical ability. Even I, who do not claim to be a musician, can hear the difference. In fact, it's pretty obvious.

And apart from what I've already posted about Dr. Truby's analysis, there is this:

http://digilander.libero.it/p_truth/audio.html

They conclude Paul's voice has more vibrato - which is exactly what I heard in the Anthology version of "I Will."

And I don't know why a vocal analysis would be dispositive. Photographic evidence is just as valid. (Please see my post about immutable features being means of identification).

Anyway, I know I am not wrong about this. I can see the difference & hear the difference between Paul & the Fauls. That is why I am so confident & persistent.

You have made it clear that you can't tell the difference, but in hopes that some photo comparison will make a light bulb go off for someone, I will keep posting them (I know that irks you to no end - hee :-P)

http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b375/Cavern61/truePaul.jpg Paul

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a386/Beatlesagain/allyouneedislove.jpg Faul

http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b375/Cavern61/WA889901.jpg Paul

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a386/Beatlesagain/PaulMcCartney7521.jpg Faul


How right you are - & they rarely provide anything to support their position. Oh, well, they don't bother me, though, b/c they keep the threads alive. Active threads draw in more people...



Well this is were you lose the plot, one is off the anthologies and one is off the album thats been produced in the studio. You could do this with nigh on every artist who records because once the effects and the producers do their magic with the effects then it's not going to sound like what the rough demo sounded like.

And once again I will say this, if they are two different voices then this theory would be proven already.

The fact that no one can come up with conclusive proof that they are two different voices spells to me that it's the same person, because it's not like it's a difficult exercise for someone to do.

So why don't you PID believers get ya heads together and do something that proves this theory beyond any doubt that it's two different people. Instead of posting pics that no one can see the difference.

[faulconandsnowjob]

Well it's not a crime to ask someone to come up with some credible evidence.

LOL! Ok, since you obviously have no clue what constitutes evidence, here you go - from Ballentine's Law Dictionary:

admissible evidence: Evidence which a court or other tribunal exercising judicial functions may properly receive and consider in a cause or matter which has been submitted to it.

best evidence: The best proof obtainable under existing circumstances; the most superior, as contrasted with any other form of, proof that the party can offer.

best evidence rule: The rule of evidence that the best evidence of which the case in its nature is susceptible and which is within the power of the party to produce, or is capable of being produced, must be adduced in proof of every disputed fact.

And since I have already shown that photographs can be evidence - proof of identity - then they can also be admissible evidence. Whether or not they are admissible in court depends on the circumstances.

[T]he term "record" means any item, collection, or grouping of information about an individual that is maintained by an agency, including, but not limited to, ... other identifying particular assigned to the individual, such as a finger or voice print or a photograph;

5 USCS § 552a(4).

...[T]he district court found that duty titles were not comparable to captured immutable characteristics such as finger or voice prints or photographs.

Pierce v. Dep't of the United States Air Force, 512 F.3d 184, 188 (5th Cir. Miss. 2007).

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/compare66.jpg

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

[howie]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/compare66.jpg?rand=299684199

The nose & jaw are different & Fauls left eyebrow is much longer & his eyes are bigger than Pauls.

[faulconandsnowjob]

The nose & jaw are different & Fauls left eyebrow is much longer & his eyes are bigger than Pauls.

Excellent. Faul's eyes do look rather bulgy, don't they? And Faul's nose is a lot longer. The overall impression is that Paul has refined features, while Faul looks rather coarse.

[clint web]

faulconandsnowjob

If anything, these photos you keep posting seem to suggest it's the same man.

[faulconandsnowjob]

If anything, these photos you keep posting seem to suggest it's the same man.
It's ok, keep trying to see the difference. I know you can do it :-)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/comparison6667copy.jpg

http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a187/sarahnett/new/5555.jpg Faul

http://i265.photobucket.com/albums/ii220/truecolors112/67.jpg Paul

[redman]

LOL! Ok, since you obviously have no clue what constitutes evidence, here you go - from Ballentine's Law Dictionary:

admissible evidence: Evidence which a court or other tribunal exercising judicial functions may properly receive and consider in a cause or matter which has been submitted to it.

best evidence: The best proof obtainable under existing circumstances; the most superior, as contrasted with any other form of, proof that the party can offer.

best evidence rule: The rule of evidence that the best evidence of which the case in its nature is susceptible and which is within the power of the party to produce, or is capable of being produced, must be adduced in proof of every disputed fact.

And since I have already shown that photographs can be evidence - proof of identity - then they can also be admissible evidence. Whether or not they are admissible in court depends on the circumstances.

[T]he term "record" means any item, collection, or grouping of information about an individual that is maintained by an agency, including, but not limited to, ... other identifying particular assigned to the individual, such as a finger or voice print or a photograph;

5 USCS § 552a(4).

...[T]he district court found that duty titles were not comparable to captured immutable characteristics such as finger or voice prints or photographs.

Pierce v. Dep't of the United States Air Force, 512 F.3d 184, 188 (5th Cir. Miss. 2007).

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/compare66.jpg

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



I said CREDIBLE evidence, I didn't say what you are producing is not evidence I said in my opinion it's not credible for what you are saying happened.

[faulconandsnowjob]

I said CREDIBLE evidence, I didn't say what you are producing is not evidence I said in my opinion it's not credible for what you are saying happened.

Ok, it's not credible in your opinion. Fair enough. Some of us, however, find it to be credible. Luckily, juries are not made up of one person :-)

[redman]

Ok, it's not credible in your opinion. Fair enough. Some of us, however, find it to be credible. Luckily, juries are not made up of one person :-)



But it's just not me that thinks that the evidence is not credible. :cool:

[faulconandsnowjob]

But it's just not me that thinks that the evidence is not credible.
And it's not just me who thinks it is. Point?

[peachped]

faulconandsnowjob

If anything, these photos you keep posting seem to suggest it's the same man.

Laugh out loud, I totally agree! :D

[faulconandsnowjob]

Well, I suppose I will have to keep posting photos, then.

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a386/Beatlesagain/2007-11-16T04_58_43-08_00.jpg Paul

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a386/Beatlesagain/photoal5.jpg Faul

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a386/Beatlesagain/Billsigpgm4.jpg Faul (does anyone really think Paul would be caught dead in that get-up?)

http://digilander.libero.it/jamespaul/uk_images/pepperfaulcomp2.gif Faul

http://digilander.libero.it/jamespaul/uk_images/youngoldcomp.gif Faul

http://digilander.libero.it/jamespaul/uk_images/peppertobutcher3.gif Paul/Faul

http://digilander.libero.it/jamespaul/images/paul_butcher_66_1.jpg Paul

http://digilander.libero.it/jamespaul/images/faul_all_you_need.jpg Faul

http://digilander.libero.it/jamespaul/images/james_paul_mccartney_right_profile.jpg Paul

http://digilander.libero.it/jamespaul/images/faul_true_profile.jpg Faul

[redman]

And it's not just me who thinks it is. Point?



Well my point was that the evidence was not credible... then you made out I said there was no evidence, which I never. I said no credible evidence.

Then you made the the point about juries not being made up of one person, which I replied that it wasn't just me that thought the evidence was not credible.


So what the fuck is your point you balloon. LMAO

[faulconandsnowjob]

Well my point was that the evidence was not credible
I will make a note of that & be sure to strike you from my PID jury, then
:-)

And my point was that your opinion does not outweigh my opinion as to what constitutes "credible."

[redman]

I will make a note of that & be sure to strike you from my PID jury, then
:-)

And my point was that your opinion does not outweigh my opinion as to what constitutes "credible."

No your point was that you thought I was saying there was no evidence, thats why you posted that stupid fucking thing quoting what evidence is. I have always asked for credible evidence, and got none.


You know what would be credible, someone showing themselves comparing the voices and showing how the vocal patterns are totally different.


And I will keep on asking for this until someone does, and I put money on it, that evidence will never ever ever ever appear. You know why ?? Cos this theory is bollox. LOL

[helloperator]

geez faul...why don't you assemble a few more photo comparisons where the photos are years apart, in different light conditions, from different angles with different expressions, different facial hair patterns and expressions....and call it proof.

Coz really despite all those trivial anomolies, the photographic proof is irrefutable

;)

[redman]

geez faul...why don't you assemble a few more photo comparisons where the photos are years apart, in different light conditions, from different angles with different expressions, different facial hair patterns and expressions....and call it proof.

Coz really despite all those trivial anomolies, the photographic proof is irrefutable

;)



lmao.

[hunger]

This thread just goes round in circles... :rolleyes:

[faulconandsnowjob]

No your point was that you thought I was saying there was no evidence, thats why you posted that stupid fucking thing quoting what evidence is. I have always asked for credible evidence, and got none.
I do recall at some point you claiming that we weren't providing any evidence, but it's not really worth it for me to go find it. Obviously, we are providing evidence. Whether or not you find it to be "credible" is another matter. If I were selecting a jury in this matter, I would strike you for cause. I would argue that you have preconceived notions that prevent you from judging the evidence objectively.

I had to post "that stupid fucking thing quoting what evidence is" b/c you obviously had no clue what evidence is. I understand you do not have the benefit of a legal education. I was merely trying to educate you on the matter.

And yes, this thread does go in circles b/c people can't open their eyes & see what's in front of them. Sigh...

http://digilander.libero.it/jamespaul/uk_images/paulfaulbassheight2.jpg

[helloperator]

There is no spoon faul

[faulconandsnowjob]

There is no spoon

True

[allure]

This will probably be my last post in this thread. Its had enough front page time and I think its now stale. Please PID folk, we don't need to see any more picture comparisons showing the differences, there are already hundreds in this thread for people to study. I'll bow out with a few morphs or pre post '66 Paul.

http://i33.tinypic.com/fem2ye.gif




http://i33.tinypic.com/5lt4r9.gif




http://i38.tinypic.com/bk2gg.gif




http://i37.tinypic.com/2qbx3rp.gif





http://i34.tinypic.com/1238t9x.gif

[faulconandsnowjob]

Thanks for posting those fades. They're great for showing the difference, especially this one:

http://i38.tinypic.com/bk2gg.gif

Oh, & here are a few more pic comparisons b/c I know how much you like them - hee :-P

http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d196/Beatlesphotos/Paulcolor.jpg Paul

http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d196/Beatlesphotos/bill4.jpg Faul

http://i265.photobucket.com/albums/ii220/truecolors112/part%202/PDVD_003PM_1stVISIT7.jpg Paul

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/Magical7.jpg Faul

[graflok]

Well it's not a crime to ask someone to come up with some credible evidence.

And I am still waiting on that.

Why should anyone care what you believe or what you think is credible?
I know I don't.

[the seeker]

Listen to "I Will" on the Anthology compared to "I Will" on the White Album.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9V8eyCRQ6hQ Anthology

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=go2wjF7f-zw White Album

I think "I Will" from the Anthology is Paul. The voice is deeper & has a lot of vibrato. The White Album version does not have that vibrato - it is "flatter."

Again, clearly the same guy.

I can only conclude that you are so in love with your image of "the original Paul" that you can not tolerate the idea that he would age and become the guy he is. I loved the Beatles, too, but you know, everyone changes. They were practically kids at the time, and I don't blame you for being disappointed in "older Paul/Faul," but that is life. People change and Paul McCartney is not an ageless image, he is a human being.

[faulconandsnowjob]

Apparently, I have not posted enough photo comparisons if people are still suffering from the misapprehension that it is "clearly the same guy."

BTW, I think the attempt to psychoanalyze me to be quite humorous. Are you a professional? :-P LMAO

http://i265.photobucket.com/albums/ii220/truecolors112/part%202/1964xxxx_endless-touring.jpg Paul

http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c315/polythene_pam1969/The%20Sixties/324ld8.jpg Faul

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v455/JPM/paulnakedtorsopossiblyaltered.jpg Paul

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/Billinbathingsuittheone.jpg Faul

http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g146/lilis456/28a.jpg Paul

http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b375/Cavern61/pid_on_magazine_p05aaa.jpg Faul

[orbandsceptre27]

Prepare for your post to be ignored.

Any time I have brought up something that proves these people wrong they just ignore it and go back to posting pics.

I posted the clip that showed were the video they were posting had been edited on purpose to make it sound like George was saying Beatle Bill when in fact he was talking to Phil Spector at the time and said Beatle Phil. ( And considering they were sat there having something to eat and he was looking at Phil Spector eating and made a comment about him eating ).

They ignored that and just went back to posting those pathetic pics.


And then when I said that the theory consists of Faul being found in a look a like competition, they tried to make out I was talking shit but this theory does have that element in it, and it's on many of the sites that actually support this shit.

They ignored those links I sent too.


I think they are just Paul Mccartney stalkers that want to believe this shit, wouldn't surprise me if one of these fucking loons ended up killing the cunt... LMAO

See this is the kind of crap you come out with ALL THE TIME - presumptuous, indulgent bullshit. It wouldn`t matter what "evidence" was put in front of your nose you would shape it to fit your paradigm as you always do!

And you said previously that I have too much time on my hands :D - what about you? You spend all your time on a thread you think promotes a crap hypothesis, but here you are still talking the same talk!

Would you not think people would be better served making their own minds up on the information in front of them - what do your motives serve? If the "theory" is as rubbish as you believe it too be, it`ll speak for itself and people will see through it!

Yet here you are still, a man with plenty ot time to do nothing but splurge your hollow insults for half the day - It`s all about you redman isn`t it, it`s all about you!

[orbandsceptre27]

Yes, & Faul's face is so much narrower.

Some photo comparisons of Jane w/ Paul:

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y60/Trueclues/jane_with_paul.jpg

http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c250/ladygamer/paul_jane.jpg

Jane w/ Faul (Bill):

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a386/Beatlesagain/MoreFaulandJaneyaaa.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/jane_with_faul.jpg


Look at the difference in height between Paul and Jane, and then examine the bottom pictures of Faul and Jane - Faul was a lot taller!

[orbandsceptre27]

Anna, I agree. It is big what happened to Paul b/c it exposes this whole new angle on how TPTB operate. If they can do it to Paul, they can do it to pretty much anybody.

Oh, another opportunity for photo comparisons. I love this :-)

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a386/Beatlesagain/Paul296-1.jpg Paul (wow - he was stunning)

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a386/Beatlesagain/FPaul_Jane-1.jpg Faul

Fauls longer face and jawline!

[orbandsceptre27]

And how does this have anything to do with Paul Mccartney dying and being replaced by a man who they found in a look a like competition in 1966. LMAO


Also she definitley didn't look like a woman in fear for her life when she was in every tabloid dishing the dirt about her relationship with Macca. Also The Beatles have millions of fans, so it wouldn't surprise me she was getting death threats.


You are talking like she is totally innocent, the woman is fucking poison and you can see it a mile off. But your probably rapped in this shit to even notice that this woman is obviously a gold digger. I suggest you do some research on her before you start falling for her act.


It`s answering the question that was put to me you imbecile - it does`nt explain climate change - it`s merely answering a poorly worded question!

I don`t read much from the tabloids redman, I read the broadsheets - If you were serious about research (or reading anything of relevance) you`d stay clear of the tabloids, but then you`re showing exactly where you`re coming from are`nt you - a tabloid mouth with a tabloid mind! :rolleyes: You want those colourful headlines, not the truth - I`ve said it before you`re a lazy researcher!

[orbandsceptre27]

FOR ALL YOU DEBUNKERS get your teeth into this page -

- truthseeker49`s photos of Paul beside Ringo - and Faul (Bill) beside Ringo. You can clearly see their feet - big difference in height isn`t there or do you see something that isn`t there?? :rolleyes:

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=34097&page=13

[orbandsceptre27]

This will probably be my last post in this thread. Its had enough front page time and I think its now stale. Please PID folk, we don't need to see any more picture comparisons showing the differences, there are already hundreds in this thread for people to study. I'll bow out with a few morphs or pre post '66 Paul.

http://i33.tinypic.com/fem2ye.gif




http://i33.tinypic.com/5lt4r9.gif




http://i38.tinypic.com/bk2gg.gif




http://i37.tinypic.com/2qbx3rp.gif





http://i34.tinypic.com/1238t9x.gif


Allure overlapping flash-comparisons is a very poor way of comparing details in photography. For example the observer does not get long enough to examine each separate photo. We`re talking detail, detail, detail -

Faul is a "double" of Paul, (and quite a good one since he`s fooled most Beatles fans) they`re supposed to look almost identical lol.

Also there is a significant time difference between some of these shots (the last two in particular). Comparing a very young Paul to a much older Faul lol.

Look at the difference in height I`ve posted in the last post - pictures from truthseeker49!

Thank you for your photo posts by the way.

[orbandsceptre27]

Paul McCartney had dark brown eyes - so how do you explain this,

Video "Fool on the Hill" - Freeze at 1.04, Gray/green eyed Faul - left the dark contacts out did we?

Again at 2.34 the camera focuses on both eyes.

Interesting, why put "Paul" in this vid, why is always the question?
2.17 - "And he never listens to them, he knows that they`re the fools!" (The fools believe he is somebody he`s not)

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=zDJ-015ojec

[peachped]

Paul McCartney had dark brown eyes - so how do you explain this,

Video "Fool on the Hill" - Freeze at 1.04, Gray/green eyed Faul - left the dark contacts out did we?

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=zDJ-015ojec

They are brown eyes.

Keep the laughs coming. : - p

[toty1994]

Not the same man? Note the vein in his neck particularly.

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


Maybe with a bit more practice and a little plastic surgery this guy could have been 'Faul'!
YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

[orbandsceptre27]

They are brown eyes.

Keep the laughs coming. : - p

Lmao........... this is a point that has been dealt with earlier in the thread. The best the debunkers could come up with was, "eyes can change colour." I put up info showing it is highly improbable eye colour changes from dark brown to gray/green. You`re the first to imply that you`re colour blind but knock yourself out :D .......... are you redman in disguise ?

[orbandsceptre27]

Not the same man? Note the vein in his neck particularly.

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


Maybe with a bit more practice and a little plastic surgery this guy could have been 'Faul'!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K07QYwNKr6M

Thanks for posting this toty1994 -

Just in case you weren`t aware we all have veins in our necks! But look more closely (since you put it up) -

Note how with Paul the vein is going straight up towards his ear - with Faul the vein is bent towards the left! (away from the ear) ;)

[clint web]

There are two camps of thought here, neither one will ever change their minds.

It's time for me to quit this Paul thing.

Lets move on and talk about UFOs or Elvis on the moon - anything that doesn't involve Faul/Paul.

[truthseeker49]

Clint, I like your avatar of John.
There are many threads & posts on this & many other forums about all the things that you just mentioned. These threads were created because certain people ( like myself ) are rather passionate about this subject.
Someone created this comparison. I wish I knew who they were, as it is very well done:

Paul http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e87/im_mikamavvers_new_account/Paul%20McCartney/paulpaul.jpg Sir Paul

Paul's face & head are noticeably smaller than Sir Paul's. I have never heard of this happening to the average person after the age of 24. Paul is built like his dad, so that rules out him having some kind of growth disorder.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v204/WlarusGirl/pjmAA.jpg Paul, Jim & Mike McCartney

http://only1rad.proboards62.com/index.cgi?board=faker&action=display&thread=154

[faulconandsnowjob]

It wouldn`t matter what "evidence" was put in front of your nose you would shape it to fit your paradigm as you always do!

And... there are two camps who will never change their minds

At least they admit that they won't change their minds, no matter what evidence is presented. I have to credit them for their candor, at least.

Anyway, for those of us who would rather discuss Paul on a PID thread than UFO's, 9/11, or Sasquatch, I just want to say that here are some more photo comparisons :-P

http://www.bopped.com/copyright/bopped_Beatles_James_Paul_McCartney_1964_bigger_pi cture.jpg

http://homepage.mac.com/paul_mccartney/meet_paul/95PNL.JPG

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

Weird that people can't see Faul has a weak chin.

[supertzar]

I hope you guys are disinfo agents for your own sake, because this is the stupidest fucking shit I have ever seen. Please tell me you are trying to discredit the forum by posting this nonsense. It's starting to get spammy with all the different threads, regardless of your intentions, so I am asking you to not start any new threads about it.

[faulconandsnowjob]

I hope you guys are disinfo agents for your own sake, because this is the stupidest fucking shit I have ever seen. Please tell me you are trying to discredit the forum by posting this nonsense. It's starting to get spammy with all the different threads, regardless of your intentions, so I am asking you to not start any new threads about it.

I'm thinking about starting a thread comparing the different Fauls. Please be sure to contribute your well-considered opinion if/when I do. Your posts have always added so much depth & insight to the discussion. :D

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/comparison6667copy.jpg

http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d196/Beatlesphotos/Paulcolor.jpg

http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d196/Beatlesphotos/bill4.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/Magical7.jpg
Weak-chinned Faul :-P

For reference, here is Paul's profile:

http://i265.photobucket.com/albums/ii220/truecolors112/part%202/PDVD_003PM_1stVISIT7.jpg

And I really can't understand why some people are so threatened by us discussing PID...

[supertzar]

Don't do it. You are spamming this forum by having so many threads about it. I, for one, would consider it a hostile act if you start another one.

[graflok]

I do agree that more threads on this subject are not necessary and probably
wouldn't be welcome.

[faulconandsnowjob]

I, for one, would consider it a hostile act if you start another one.
Oh, that's funny. I didn't realize this was a "war." Geeze, you try to discuss a simple conspiracy theory on a conspiracy theory forum... Egad! What was I thinking? :-P

Graflok, never fear. I was just teasing them about starting another thread. I know that would piss them off to no end. However, I am not adverse to pissing them off in principal :D

ANYWAY, getting back to Paul (the topic of this thread, btw, for those who wish to discuss UFOs or whatnot) ... I would really like to know where the disconnect is - why people can't see that Paul was replaced. What is the stumbling block? Is it

1) a belief that it would be impossible to replace a public figure;
2) a belief that TPTB would never do such a thing;
3) a belief that it would be too hard to find someone who could replace Paul; or
4) some other reason?

I am genuinely curious & welcome feedback from those who don't think there is a Faul. Thanks :-)

[krakhead]

Oh, that's funny. I didn't realize this was a "war."

Graflok, never fear. I was just teasing them about starting another thread. I know that would piss them off to no end. However, I am not adverse to pissing them off in principal :D

ANYWAY, getting back to Paul (the topic of this thread, btw, for those who wish to discuss UFOs or whatnot) ... I would really like to know where the disconnect is - why people can't see that Paul was replaced. What is the stumbling block? Is it

1) a belief that it would be impossible to replace a public figure;
2) a belief that TPTB would never do such a thing;
3) a belief that it would be too hard to find someone who could replace Paul; or
4) some other reason?

I am genuinely curious & welcome feedback from those who don't think there is a Faul. Thanks :-)

Because he has repeatedly been shown, using photographic evidence etc, to still be the same person.

That's done it for me anyway! :D

[faulconandsnowjob]

Because he has repeatedly been shown, using photographic evidence etc, to still be the same person.
Ok, thanks for that. So, then, you agree that 1-3 are all possible? And how do you account for the fact that a significant number of people do see a difference between Paul/Faul in the photographic comparisons?

These people really do not look the same to me:

http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b375/Cavern61/Bill1.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v455/JPM/shades2.jpg

At a glance, it appears that the first person's face is longer than the 2nd one.

[krakhead]

Ok, thanks for that. So, then, you agree that 1-3 are all possible? And how do you account for the fact that a significant number of people do see a difference between Paul/Faul in the photographic comparisons?

I'd think that they were possible. Just unlikely.

As for how many people see Faul? This might explain it -

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=37496

[faulconandsnowjob]

Well, that's an interesting anecdote about the turtle (based on Hindu mythology, I might add), but it doesn't really apply to those who can see Paul v. Faul. People have been conditioned to see that both are the same (I know I fell for it for ages). Those who can see the difference have broken free of the conditioning. It really is, in a sense, like we have taken the red pill, at least w/ respect to this particular topic.

[krakhead]

Well, that's an interesting anecdote about the turtle (based on Hindu mythology, I might add), but it doesn't really apply to those who can see Paul v. Faul. People have been conditioned to see that both are the same (I know I fell for it for ages). Those who can see the difference have broken free of the conditioning. It really is, in a sense, like we have taken the red pill, at least w/ respect to this particular topic.

So says YOUR thinker/prover...........

[faulconandsnowjob]

Well, at least I have a thinker :-) Besides, it's not about thinking. It's about seeing, hearing, & just being observant.

[krakhead]

Well, at least I have a thinker :-) Besides, it's not about thinking. It's about seeing, hearing, & just being observant.

No, it's about taking your observations and making cast iron beliefs out of them. You appear to have absolute confidence that you are 100% right about this.

That makes you foolish IMHO.

[mindatrisk]

What about aliens? They could have technical and strategic capabilities beyond our comprehension... they could be involved in this. It could be some sort of subtle psy-ops type thing. Nothing major or overtly relevant, but then aliens a billion years more evolved than us don't need to be bashing us on our heads. If we took this as a possibility then what would be the reasoning behind the aliens maneoveres?

[krakhead]

What about aliens? They could have technical and strategic capabilities beyond our comprehension... they could be involved in this. It could be some sort of subtle psy-ops type thing. Nothing major or overtly relevant, but then aliens a billion years more evolved than us don't need to be bashing us on our heads. If we took this as a possibility then what would be the reasoning behind the aliens maneoveres?

Yeah why not, it's as believable as the rest of the 'Faul' theory! :p

Not really, your idea makes me think you need to read less sci-fi and and eat more vegetables......

;)

[mindatrisk]

I'm vegetarian and i don't like sci-fi. I do feel like i have another home planet though. But anyway, seriously, for those who dig the whole alien thing and who are reading this thread with borderline curious eyes - could there be a connection? Could earth and humanity be being played like some massively complex billion year advanced chess game? And not just this, but other conspiracies, including aliens. I mean, i read over the first half of this thread and there was nothing convincing argument or evidence wise but people are convinced... or are they? Maybe they are aliens. I think it is more believable. Oh, except the ear lobe thing. That was a real thinker.

[faulconandsnowjob]

You appear to have absolute confidence that you are 100% right about this.

Excellent observation. I am indeed convinced that I am 100% right about this. If I were not, I would not be so persistent :-) Mind you, when I started looking into PID, I was pretty sure it probably wasn't true. But I looked into it w/ an open mind. After looking at a bunch of photos & videos, something clicked & I saw it. I "recognized" Paul.

BTW, mindatrisk, although I'm not sure about an alien connection, I would say that the intell agencies have pretty advanced technology. I do not believe replacing a rockstar would be beyond their scope at all.

[orbandsceptre27]

Clint, I like your avatar of John.
There are many threads & posts on this & many other forums about all the things that you just mentioned. These threads were created because certain people ( like myself ) are rather passionate about this subject.
Someone created this comparison. I wish I knew who they were, as it is very well done:

Paul http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e87/im_mikamavvers_new_account/Paul%20McCartney/paulpaul.jpg Sir Paul

Paul's face & head are noticeably smaller than Sir Paul's. I have never heard of this happening to the average person after the age of 24. Paul is built like his dad, so that rules out him having some kind of growth disorder.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v204/WlarusGirl/pjmAA.jpg Paul, Jim & Mike McCartney

http://only1rad.proboards62.com/index.cgi?board=faker&action=display&thread=154

Another great comparison you`ve put together Truthseeker - Faul indeed has a longer jawline and is about four inches taller than Paul.

Second picture, Paul`s Dad -

Note in this video of Faul with "friends and family" - 2.26 Watch Faul saying hello to "his Dad" (original Pauls Dad) smirking, half hiding behind his glass.

And observe "his fathers" reaction. HE DOES`NT RESPOND - No "Hi Paul......hi son...... nothing! He turns away, looks up and says hello to someone else close by.

Note the intro Faul gives at the beginning of this video clip about Liverpool - his "home town."

"I was born and bred there.........Liverpool that is" - you don`t sound so sure there mate. "It`s a city of ships... streets... pubs... people...relatives" - He could be talking about any harbour city in the world - vague or what!

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=1mIaBJ5ds4Q

[peachped]

Another nice comparison you put together truthseeker - Faul indeed has a longer jawline and is about four inches taller than Paul.



"I was born and bred there.........Liverpool that is" - you don`t sound so sure there mate. "It`s a city of ships... streets... pubs... people...relatives" - He could be talking about any harbour city in the world - vague or what!

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=1mIaBJ5ds4Q




They replaced Paul with a guy 4 inches taller with different coloured eyes. :D



No wonder his dad didn't recognise him! : - o

[orbandsceptre27]

They replaced Paul with a guy 4 inches taller with different coloured eyes. :D

So you can see the colour green now? :p

[faulconandsnowjob]

On that PM TV special Orb posted, did Faul really take money from Paul's dad (at 2:50)? Tacky, tacky, tacky :-P

BTW, listen to the Anthology "Blackbird" & "Fool on the Hill (Take 4)" & compare them to the White Album/MMT version. Do I not detect a difference in the voices?

[orbandsceptre27]

On that PM TV special Orb posted, did Faul really take money from Paul's dad (at 2:50)? Tacky, tacky, tacky :-P

Yeah, you`d think he could have at least bought the old man a drink........ looks like he needed it :D

[faulconandsnowjob]

I would like to disabuse anyone of the notion that Paul had green or hazel eyes...

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v455/JPM/proper-paula.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v455/JPM/paulringoear.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v455/JPM/cheers2.jpg

http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g146/lilis456/oohyummy.jpg

http://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j178/lilis678/DB1005_BEATLES_6.jpg

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y60/Trueclues/paul_bravo_magazine_nr_37_1966.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a386/Beatlesagain/Beatle_Paul_cover.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a386/Beatlesagain/Beatle_Paul_3.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a386/Beatlesagain/Beatle_Paul_6.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a386/Beatlesagain/Paul296-1.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a386/Beatlesagain/pf01.jpg

Faul was the one w/ green/hazel eyes:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/greeneyesStrawberryFields.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/Faul-smileaway.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v462/OnlyBeatles/paul_faul.jpg

[orbandsceptre27]

I'd think that they were possible. Just unlikely.

As for how many people see Faul? This might explain it -

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=37496


Great article Krakhead - very true, beliefs are powerful and you can shape almost any idea to fit them. How can anyone be truely objective about anything? Impossible really, all you can do is examine something until you see what`s there, or what`s not!

The scenario on this thread involves a simple question - is the person living the life of Paul McCartney actually who he claims to be?

I`ve been examining this for quite a while before I came to a firm belief. Beliefs are very powerful, as you`ve pointed out and it`s fundamental to have truth at the core. I can understand many peoples frustrations` in relation to this whole area. I was swaying over and back for quite a while before I fully realised this person is not Paul McCartney. It was a painful realisation in itself, but there he was all these years - the great Faul!

As I`ve said before if you want to hide something from people - put it in front of them, call it something else and they`ll never see it! However if you look hard enough (really observe) you`ll see what`s really there.

What was the piece of the puzzle that put it beyond doubt for me, I can`t remember.........does it matter? Of course it does you may think! However, does everything you see look the same to everyone else? - In general it should, we all see "relatively" the same things right? But does that mean we all see what is real - Are we not living a five sense illusiary existence?

Supposedly when someone is close to enlightenment, one delicate statement can be enough to breach the barrier of the illusion. It doesn`t matter what the statement is to someone else, it hasn`t the same meaning. Yet to a student this one statement (piece of evidence specific to the individual) can be enough. If someone asks how do you become "enlightened" - you just see what`s in front of you all the time. I`m not a fully enlightened individual and would never claim to be, but I can see that Paul McCartney is being "played" by an imposter.

For anyone who is frustrated with the PWR area then leave it alone or dig deeper.

I`ve previously said I began this thread to bring awareness to the replacement of Paul. Nobody is responsible to prove anything to anyone else. This whole idea of - "prove it to me, where`s my proof?" This is a "get out" clause placing power and responsibility outside of oneself and into anothers hands. I`m not here to create beliefs for people but to bring awareness to the area. Bit by bit the illusion may fall away for some and for many others, things may stay quite intact - this is up to the individual!

[orbandsceptre27]

I would like to disabuse anyone of the notion that Paul had green or hazel eyes...

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v455/JPM/proper-paula.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v455/JPM/paulringoear.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v455/JPM/cheers2.jpg

http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g146/lilis456/oohyummy.jpg

http://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j178/lilis678/DB1005_BEATLES_6.jpg

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y60/Trueclues/paul_bravo_magazine_nr_37_1966.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a386/Beatlesagain/Beatle_Paul_cover.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a386/Beatlesagain/Beatle_Paul_3.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a386/Beatlesagain/Beatle_Paul_6.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a386/Beatlesagain/Paul296-1.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a386/Beatlesagain/pf01.jpg

Faul's was the one w/ green/hazel eyes:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/greeneyesStrawberryFields.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/Faul-smileaway.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v462/OnlyBeatles/paul_faul.jpg


Those are some fantastic comparative close-ups of Pauls and Fauls eyes` Faulcon! Paul had dark brown eyes as is clearly visible here. Faul wore dark contacts but left them out in "Fool on the Hill" and also in "Hey Jude." As I`ve said before there is a message in "Fool on the Hill" if you are open to seeing it. Bill is basically saying "here I am", do you see me - Why weren`t one of the other three Beatles picked for the role.........?

Fool on the Hill - FREEZE AT 1.04 and you`ll see it very clearly (he actually widens his eyes so the camera gets a proper close up) - gray/green eyes not dark brown as Paul had!

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=zDJ-015ojec

[faulconandsnowjob]

As I`ve said before if you want to hide something from people - put it in front of them, call it something else and they`ll never see it!
Darren Brown is good at exposing that sort of thing, is he not?

But does that mean we all see what is real - Are we not living a five sense illusiary existence?
6 senses - & it is an illusion :-)

I`ve previously said I began this thread to bring awareness to the replacement of Paul. Nobody is responsible to prove anything to anyone else. This whole idea of - "prove it to me, where`s my proof?" This is a get out clause placing power and responsibility outside of oneself and into anothers hands. I`m not here to create beliefs for people but to bring awareness to the area. Bit by bit the illusion may fall away for some and for many others, things may stay quite intact - this is up to the individual!
Excellent. It is disempowering to give the responsibility of proving something to somebody else. For those who are truly interested in this particular aspect of how TPTB operate, they will investigate it. We can only open the door; they have to walk thru. The others who keep insisting on having something being proven to them are not really interested, don't contribute much, & just bog the discussion down (but they keep the threads active, so that's good :D). I don't know why they keep hanging around these threads, but I guess they have their own reasons. Anyway, once we get past the 1st step that PWR, then we can branch out into other areas. This is a deep rabbit hole. But 1st things 1st...

[orbandsceptre27]

Hey Jude - Gray/green eyes, the great Faul -

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=YXG83p2nkHw

Now Paul - from the Help movie "You`ve Got to Hide Your Love Away." see 1.40 - 1.42 in particular. You`ll also notice Pauls mannerisms and general demeanor are at odds with his later replacement who looked more "sheepish" (lol) and doozy. Paul had more fizz!

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=aNMhPQoEbJE

Another good colour video of Paul is "The Night Before." Note his dark eyes and general demeanour -

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=NTb3uifuKDc

[orbandsceptre27]

Darren Brown is good at exposing that sort of thing, is he not?


6 senses - & it is an illusion :-)


Excellent. It is disempowering to give the responsibility of proving something to somebody else. For those who are truly interested in this particular aspect of how TPTB operate, they will investigate it. We can only open the door; they have to walk thru. The others who keep insisting on having something being proven to them are not really interested, don't contribute much, & just bog the discussion down (but they keep the threads active, so that's good :D). I don't know why they keep hanging around these threads, but I guess they have their own reasons. Anyway, once we get past the 1st step that PWR, then we can branch out into other areas. This is a deep rabbit hole. But 1st things 1st...


I agree Faulcon - there are too many people debunking and not enough researching. It`s extremely easy to debunk anything if you put your mind to it, it can be an entirely different ballgame waking up though!

[faulconandsnowjob]

too many people debunking

"Debunk" can be defined as exposing the falseness of a belief or idea. No one has done any such thing w/ respect to PWR/PID. To debunk requires more than just relying on the fact that TPTB have presented someone as being Paul for 40+ years, so it must be true. I also think it requires more than just saying, oh, I can't tell the difference between those photos, so they must be the same person. Obviously, some of us can see a difference, so how do they account for that? I haven't seen anything that even comes close to "debunking" our position.

[orbandsceptre27]

"Debunk" can be defined as exposing the falseness of a belief or idea. No one has done any such thing w/ respect to PWR/PID. To debunk requires more than just relying on the fact that TPTB have presented someone as being Paul for 40+ years, so it must be true. I also think it requires more than just saying, oh, I can't tell the difference between those photos, so they must be the same person. Obviously, some of us can see a difference, so how do they account for that? I haven't seen anything that even comes close to "debunking" our position.

I agree with what you`ve said about debunking, v good points!

In relation to seeing the differences in the photos - most people (whether they are aware of it or not) have strong beliefs regarding this whole scene. Even though many mightn`t say it, to begin with they believe this "theory" (putting it plainly) is a crock of shite (or "ratshit" as Redman has often refered to it :D). The differences however are there in number yet they are very subtle! This is a double, not a "lookalike." A "double" (doppleganger) has to "become the individual" in every way. A lookalike just has the physical demeanour. A "double" has to take on all the mannerisms and live as the indivdual they are doubling for.

I`ve always favoured reviewing good quality, old video footage of interviews and songs (in colour if possible). You can "see" much more from the vids. Body language, mannerisms, voice tone and pitch, humour etc. can all be examined in detail, including the physical differences.

Photos are lifeless in this regard, but they can still be a good help.

[faulconandsnowjob]

to begin with they believe this "theory" (putting it plainly) is a crock of shite (or "ratshit" as Redman has refered to it ).

Oh, I forgot to mention that those sorts have contributed plenty of curse words to the discussion :D At least, they have spiced up the discussion :D a bit. I'm used to people discussing things rationally, civilly, & logically. How dull! :D

And what you say about doubles, from what I know about intell agencies, someone assuming an identity would do everything possible to be convincing. That would mean practicing signatures, wearing contacts & ear prosthesis, even learning to play guitar & bass left-handed!

[hunger]

Post reply,
we were just 3 guys yi kno & a clone...

I used to enjoy reading this thread /Ya know wadda mean
thumbs aloft whacky! Ooogh Ooh!)

What I wanna know now is this, very imported queeestioon

Has this thread been replaced? by the real thread? I thunk the text size was bigger! & it was a different font Mother Ffff OK

Er well I jist tauight ad bring sun reliefe to the grief! I still avin put me werd in burrrits grate ti lissen ti yoo lads! Oh one more thing! Feeling right dizzin mean you R 1 or the other!

Peace
My Beatlenuts I ouy ssim I
Harry secombe
































Spike:cool:



SHit! if it has blame ch

Seriously! Imagine a new person, Well I gues I am talkinging about KID! nDid you forget how it was to be 1 or 14 & inquisitive?

Would you want 6to wade through all this bull mother fucking shit?!

OK If I may join in. I'm a 39 year old male guitarist Singer/songwriter

[faulconandsnowjob]

Er well I jist tauight ad bring sun reliefe to the grief!

Comic relief is indeed welcome :-)

[toty1994]

Darren Brown is good at exposing that sort of thing, is he not?


That's a good point about Derren Brown. It's funny though, some people suspect the iamaphoney thing may actually be part of a clever (if slightly underhand) media experiment on the psychology of how/why people believe conspiracy theories. I don't believe this myself (viral marketing for iaap's music seems more likely to me) but a while back I thought it smacked of a Derren Brown project.

[hunger]

Comic relief is indeed welcome :-)

Hee hee, sorry!

!Knurd tib a saw I :cool::D

Keep up the good work :)

I watched all the Iamaphoney vids a while ago & have to admit I was shocked, then seeing the heather mills "if the world knew the truth about macca" interview really made me let go of those "heroes" of mine

I still haven't made up me mind, not because I can't let go of the fab four like others on here..but simply because I know I will never know for sure & there are more important things happening right now

Did you post the george harrison "brainwashed" song on here yet?

Peace & everythink ;)

[faulconandsnowjob]

Did you post the george harrison "brainwashed" song on here yet?

Excellent suggestion.
"Brainwashed" - George Harrison - YouTube

And about IAAP, that is an interesting idea that Darren Brown might be behind it... It's possible, but I personally suspect it's an insider (& maybe even Faul/Bill). As others have pointed out, his (or her) video footage seems to be of rather high quality...

[clint web]

BTW, listen to the Anthology "Blackbird" & "Fool on the Hill (Take 4)" & compare them to the White Album/MMT version. Do I not detect a difference in the voices?

This doesn't make sense. Are you suggesting that the original paul did Blackbird" & "Fool on the Hill (Take 4) back in 1965 and that the so called Faul character did the version on the white album?

They're just different takes, that's all.

[onourwayto2012]

"I still haven't made up me mind, not because I can't let go of the fab four like others on here..but simply because I know I will never know for sure & there are more important things happening right now"................. well I'm an original 1964 Ed Sullivan 8 yr old Beatlemaniac but I happen to think that if Paul was indeed replaced and fooled 99.99997 percent of the entire world for 49 yrs that that is kind of a big deal....not the least of which are the implications for all sorts of other shit........... btw ....I always wondered why i didn't care for the Fab Four as much after 66.......

[orbandsceptre27]

Post reply,
we were just 3 guys yi kno & a clone...

I used to enjoy reading this thread /Ya know wadda mean
thumbs aloft whacky! Ooogh Ooh!)

What I wanna know now is this, very imported queeestioon

Has this thread been replaced? by the real thread? I thunk the text size was bigger! & it was a different font Mother Ffff OK

Er well I jist tauight ad bring sun reliefe to the grief! I still avin put me werd in burrrits grate ti lissen ti yoo lads! Oh one more thing! Feeling right dizzin mean you R 1 or the other!

Peace
My Beatlenuts I ouy ssim I
Harry secombe
































Spike:cool:



SHit! if it has blame ch

Seriously! Imagine a new person, Well I gues I am talkinging about KID! nDid you forget how it was to be 1 or 14 & inquisitive?

Would you want 6to wade through all this bull mother fucking shit?!

OK If I may join in. I'm a 39 year old male guitarist Singer/songwriter


:D Humour is always welcome here - and I agree, parts of this thread can read like an episode of Twin Peaks at times!

One good reason for starting a thread like this on a D.I forum is there`s a great cross-section of intelligent, open minded people who may not have heard of this story before. If they want to research it in more detail they can go to any of the interent forums - "Paul is Dead - Miss Him, N.I.R, T.K.I.N" etc.

On these forums there are people who have researched this area for years and there`s a much higher percentage who believe McCartney was replaced (or are at least more open to it). Here though the P.I.Ders (for want of a better phrase) are in a much greater minority, so threads will be more disjointed and consistently disrupted - that`s natural lol. It`s only human nature to laugh at something which appears ridiculous, next attack it and then.......who knows!

You`re a singer/musician Hunger - do you notice any minor differences in McCartneys vocals pre-`67 and after? - You`d have the ear for it. That`s also an interesting song by George Harrison, "Brainwashed" - Sounds like he wanted to let people know how conditioned we all are.

[orbandsceptre27]

"I still haven't made up me mind, not because I can't let go of the fab four like others on here..but simply because I know I will never know for sure & there are more important things happening right now"................. well I'm an original 1964 Ed Sullivan 8 yr old Beatlemaniac but I happen to think that if Paul was indeed replaced and fooled 99.99997 percent of the entire world for 49 yrs that that is kind of a big deal....not the least of which are the implications for all sorts of other shit........... btw ....I always wondered why i didn't care for the Fab Four as much after 66.......

Well said Onourwayto2012 - This is just a piece in a much larger jigsaw. If it`s proven McCartney was permanently replaced, then what does this say about those behind the music industry (esp if you make it to the top as the Beatles did)? How many others may have been manipulated, "bumped off," replaced etc who didn`t fit into TBTB`s plans? I`ve said it before, control is crucial to TPTB - politics, law, the media, economics, religion...... why would the music industry (control and influence of the youth) be any different?

I love rock n`roll but the scene has, for too long carried the illusion of revolution against the establishment - It seems to be a controlled revolution in most cases.

Paul McCartney was an ordinary guy who happened to live an extraordinary life. He was no better or worse than anyone else, I completely agree - but he was someones son/brother/fiance - If he was your brother would`nt it matter!

[orbandsceptre27]

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=3K8D2v3S9N0

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=Jkh6Spmd0xU

The death of the Beatles and the death of a Beatle.

"One and one and one is three, got to be goodlooking cause he`s so hard to see."

[faulconandsnowjob]

Are you suggesting that the original paul did Blackbird" & "Fool on the Hill (Take 4) back in 1965

I don't know why that doesn't make sense. Is it so hard to imagine that Paul might have written songs & laid down vocals in '66, & that Faul sang them on the final versions? I'm not saying that IS the case, I'm just saying that one version sounds like Paul, the other sounds life someone else (& maybe some are a composite)... Personally, I think Paul's songs were sung by Faul while he was a Beatle. I doubt Faul contributed anything original to the Beatles' oevre. I can't prove it, of course. It's just that Paul's/Faul's Beatle songs were strong, but Faul's solo work (w/ some exceptions) has been somewhat disappointing, at least, imo...

Anyway, Orb, you are absolutely right that PID/PWR may blow the lid off of this TPTB tactic. Faul now controls an enormous amount of wealth. I could imagine that TPTB would be nervous having someone not playing their game to be in such a position. I've thought that Paul was taken out b/c of the drug agenda, but it could have been about the Vietnam War, or maybe some other social or political issue. For ex, John started coming out against the Vietnam war in '66, did he not? Maybe the Beatles' were too popular & influential to allow a pesky member who wouldn't get w/ the program to remain...?

[supertzar]

I would just like to say that I, personally, am not biased against the idea that Paul McCartney was replaced. I read the digilander page last year and was totally open to it. I thought it might be true. Then, after reading the page that correctly debunks every aspect of that page, I realized it was not true.

The photographic evidence in this very thread that is supposed to support the PID hypothesis actually shows that it is the same person every time. How can it honestly be said that the two films in the Pattern Recognition video show two different people? It is obviously one person with the exact same genetics. Only a fool or a liar would say otherwise. That is my opinion. Others are welcome to their own.

[orbandsceptre27]

I would just like to say that I, personally, am not biased against the idea that Paul McCartney was replaced. I read the digilander page last year and was totally open to it. I thought it might be true. Then, after reading the page that correctly debunks every aspect of that page, I realized it was not true.

The photographic evidence in this very thread that is supposed to support the PID hypothesis actually shows that it is the same person every time. How can it honestly be said that the two films in the Pattern Recognition video show two different people? It is obviously one person with the exact same genetics. Only a fool or a liar would say otherwise. That is my opinion. Others are welcome to their own.

Can you put up those pages or a link to them Supertzar?

[supertzar]

http://digilander.libero.it/p_truth/

http://www.tlcgraphic.com/paul.html

[orbandsceptre27]

http://digilander.libero.it/p_truth/

http://www.tlcgraphic.com/paul.html


Right Supertzar, in the link below compare the heights of Ringo and Paul standing side by side in the first photograph. Then go to the photo below and compare the heights of (supposedly) the same two men.

Note, in the two pictures (put together by truthseeker49) we can see both men are standing side by side, and we can see their legs and feet on the ground.

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=34097&page=13

Now go to the Sir James Paul McCartney thread you posted and down to the bottom picture of the Beatles dressed in white with the red-lined box around them. Again was Paul that much taller than Ringo............???

See what I`m getting at, I`m just asking people to look at what`s in front of them - that means using good quality photos where we can see feet on the floor. I`ve never put up the animated St. Pepper cover and does`nt show the legs. Examine also the old video footage - interviews and songs.

[supertzar]

You look at what's in front of you. Krakhead's photos on the same page show that he was (is) that much taller than Ringo. You can fool yourself with photos that you think show something, but they don't.

[orbandsceptre27]

You look at what's in front of you. Krakhead's photos on the same page show that he was (is) that much taller than Ringo. You can fool yourself with photos that you think show something, but they don't.

On page 22 you have my explanation for Krakheads pics which were poor quality - he did`nt disagree with what I had to say about them (#219).

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=30205&page=22

Now sticking with size -

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=8100&page=16

Here are photos Howie previously posted - Go the the centre pic (#152) of John and Ringo on the beach - who is the giant standing beside them, is that Paul.......... can you see that one....?? ;) Look at the size of Faul to Ringo (nevermind John lol) - No wonder they stopped touring!

Maybe instead they replaced John and Ringo with two smaller doubles :)

[orbandsceptre27]

You look at what's in front of you. Krakhead's photos on the same page show that he was (is) that much taller than Ringo. You can fool yourself with photos that you think show something, but they don't.


http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=8100&page=16

Staying with Howie`s pics, go to the bottom of the page to post #160. Now see how Paul, John and George were roughly the same height - Interview 1963.

Now look at "Paul" and John 1968 - see how much taller Faul is than John! Where are the legs you say.....?

Lets go back again to this page to pst #123 -

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=34097&page=13

Faul is at roughly four inches taller than John, dwarfing Ringo lol! Are you sure you`ve actually done any research on this area at all?

- Change in eye colour

- Height

- Size and shape of head (longer jaw)

- Voice becomes higher

- Band stops touring

- Engagement broken off with fiance Jane Asher, who never again speaks of this part of her life publically.

- Orientation of the Beatles music changes drastically.

- "Paul" has a very mediocre solo career judging by past standards.

This is a basic list - doesn`t include roughly over 100 references to Pauls replacement in Beatles songs and album covers.

Yep....... I can safely say you may have missed a few things there Supertzar :rolleyes:

[supertzar]

Sorry, you are deluded. What this is is a fascinating study in the power of belief.

[orbandsceptre27]

You can find excellent refutations of the PID theory if you look. I don't have time to link it right now, but I will put some links up later if I get around to it.

This was written by you on the first page of the thread in early July. You set your stall out early, and since then you`ve thrown a little tantrum now and again and that`s about as good as it gets.

For somebody who claims to be open-minded, you`re either not interested in seeing what`s in front of your face, or you`re stuck in a paradigm and find it hard to accept you might be wrong.

Either way your opinion is your opinion, and I respect that. It would only be wise and proper to allow others to have their own!

[supertzar]

It has always been a challenge for me to deal with stupidity. Now I am learning to let go of caring. I am in a great mood and I guess I'll stay that way for a while. I hope you are doing well, whoever you are, "orbandsceptre27."

[faulconandsnowjob]

It has always been a challenge for me to deal with stupidity.

Oh, is it ever a challenge! Yet Orb & I, as well as others, keep patiently trying :-)

http://members.cruzio.com/~bbarrow/jpsigs.gif Paul's signature

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/graphics/packageart/paul/mccartney2.gif Faul's signature

Notice Paul had hair on his hands
http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b375/Cavern61/hair.jpg
http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b375/Cavern61/1963-10-0909GreenStLondon.jpg

Notice Faul does not have hair on his hands
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/pl_chest.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/lapdog.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/posinginwhite.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/Billinbathingsuittheone.jpg

Paul's feet
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v455/JPM/paul_coconut.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a386/Beatlesagain/hide.jpg

Faul's feet
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/Faulinshorts.jpg
http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a386/Beatlesagain/paul_mccartney.jpg

I hope you are doing well, whoever you are, "orbandsceptre27."
BTW, I hope the same thing! Orb always has such good posts :-)

[supertzar]

You are like a superhero. You can just make things true because you want them to be. Like Neo and shit!

Who else could look at this photo and think "He doesn't have hair on his hands."

http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b375/Cavern61/1963-10-0909GreenStLondon.jpg

[faulconandsnowjob]

You are like a superhero. You can just make things true because you want them to be. Like Neo and shit!

Oh, Supertzar, that's really not convincing at all. Surely, you can do better than that! Can't you at least post a photo of Faul's hands where it looks like he has hair on them? Seriously, I'm disappointed :-P

Paul had hairy hands :-)

http://i265.photobucket.com/albums/ii220/truecolors112/74283326_10.jpg
http://www.jamespaulmccartney.org/album64/album/Album3/cheers2.jpg
http://www.jamespaulmccartney.org/album64/album/Album7/speaknoevilaa.jpg
http://www.jamespaulmccartney.org/album64/album/JPM_C/HelpSceneAnthBook.jpg
http://www.jamespaulmccartney.org/album64/album/JPM_C/1964takingadrag.jpg
http://www.jamespaulmccartney.org/album64/album/JPM_C/Paul01.jpg

And I think you misunderstood the Matrix. Neo wasn't making things true. Once he overcame the false belief that the Matrix was real, he could manipulate things inside of it.

And what about Paul's feet? Did they suddenly become all deformed-looking around 1967? I mean, bunions can make one's feet look funky, but that is ridiculous!

BTW, here is a pic of Paul w/ a beard & mustache, compared to Faul:

http://www.jamespaulmccartney.org/album64/album/JPM_C/Private_View1.jpg Paul (disguise from AHDN)

http://beatlesnumber9.com/beard.jpg
http://star103fm.com/images/paul_mccartney_beard.jpg
Faul

[orbandsceptre27]

It has always been a challenge for me to deal with stupidity. Now I am learning to let go of caring. I am in a great mood and I guess I'll stay that way for a while. I hope you are doing well, whoever you are, "orbandsceptre27."


Yeah that`s a bit of a challenge you have there Supertzar.......best of luck with it! :p

Being serious, I don`t think you or anyone else here is stupid. It`s like what you`ve said before about beliefs - we have to be careful what we believe in. No doubt preconceived beliefs can be quite harmful.

[faulconandsnowjob]

Yeah, I don't think this topic really has anything to do w/ being "stupid" (lacking intelligence or common sense). It's really more about being unable or unwilling to make a paradigm shift. According to Thomas Kuhn (philosopher who came up w/ the paradigm paradigm), people will stick w/ a paradigm (world view), until there are so many anomalies, they are forced to adopt a new paradigm, one that resolves the anomalies better than the old one.

What we are dealing w/ here is a paradigm that Paul now is the same Paul then, & has always been. However, there are lots of anomalies, such as looking different, acting different, sounding different, etc. So, what we are proposing is a new paradigm: "Paul" now is not the same person as Paul then (pre 1967). Now, we have provided lots of evidence to support this theory. Many people have already made the shift b/c it does resolve those anomalies we have pointed out better than Paul = Paul. However, some people are very happy w/ the old paradigm, regardless of the number of anomalies we point out. I feel at some point, a critical mass will be reached (difft people have difft thresholds), & that person will make the shift. I will keep posting anomalies until then :-)

[toty1994]

Yeah, I don't think this topic really has anything to do w/ being "stupid" (lacking intelligence or common sense). It's really more about being unable or unwilling to make a paradigm shift. According to Thomas Kuhn (philosopher who came up w/ the paradigm paradigm), people will stick w/ a paradigm (world view), until there are so many anomalies, they are forced to adopt a new paradigm, one that resolves the anomalies better than the old one.

What we are dealing w/ here is a paradigm that Paul now is the same Paul then, & has always been. However, there are lots of anomalies, such as looking different, acting different, sounding different, etc. So, what we are proposing is a new paradigm: "Paul" now is not the same person as Paul then (pre 1967). Now, we have provided lots of evidence to support this theory. Many people have already made the shift b/c it does resolve those anomalies we have pointed out better than Paul = Paul. However, some people are very happy w/ the old paradigm, regardless of the number of anomalies we point out. I feel at some point, a critical mass will be reached (difft people have difft thresholds), & that person will make the shift. I will keep posting anomalies until then :-)

Regardless of Thomas Kuhn and his paradigms I still think all the evidence you keep presenting is, to put it mildly, weak. That you are personally convinced that Paul was replaced is fine but that does not make it a fact - yet you continue to insist that it is a fact rather than just your personal opinion.

Here's a short interview with Fred LaBour from 2004. He's the student largely responsible for starting all this back in 1969, including many of the so called 'clues' that have since become part of the gospel of PID.


Riders' Too Slim made music history with Beatles 'clues'

By Bill DeYoung entertainment editor
April 22, 2004


In the fall of 1969, a rumor spread the world that Paul McCartney had died, his death was covered up, and the surviving Beatles were planting mysterious "clues" in their music and on their album covers.

It started in Detroit.

Fred LaBour, aka Riders in the Sky's Too Slim, was a junior at the University of Michigan. He was planning his review of the brand-new "Abbey Road" album, for the campus newspaper, when he happened to tune in to a local disc jockey.

"A guy called in and said 'There's something weird going on with these Beatle records,'" LaBour recalls. "He said 'Something's happened to Paul.' It was really spooky. He had three or four of what we now call clues."

The caller pointed to an eerie voice at the end of "Strawberry Fields Forever," apparently intoning the words "I buried Paul."

In an instant, LaBour -- who had written term papers on the music of Bob Dylan and the Beach Boys -- knew what he was going to do.

"I talked it over with a friend of mine," he says, "and said 'I'm just going to kill him. I'm just going to make the whole thing up.'
"So the next morning, I lined up all my Beatles albums on my desk and made up this story. I wanted to take what he said and make a story out of it."

The Oct. 14 issue of the Michigan Daily was headlined "McCartney Dead; New Evidence Brought to Light."

And so Fred LaBour -- still 20 years away from his chaps and handlebar moustache -- entered history, for the first time.

He alleged, among other things, that McCartney had been killed in a 1966 auto accident, and that the others had replaced him with William Campbell, a Scottish kid who'd won a McCartney look-alike contest.

LaBour scrutinized his "Sgt. Pepper" album cover. The photos, he said, were laden with "clues." McCartney has his back turned to the camera in one picture; in another, he's wearing a badge that reads O.P.D. "O.P.D., Officially Pronounced Dead," LaBour says with a laugh. "There's a bunch of them that crack me up."

(In truth, McCartney had been given the badge during a Canadian tour; it stood for Ontario Police Department).

"It was supposed to be a satire of the school of criticism where you ascribe a lot of qualities to an artist's work that he probably had no idea he was doing," LaBour says. "Like over-analyzing."

"Paul was always doing something different in the pictures, so you could say 'Great! This is a metaphor for that,'" He explains. "He's barefoot on the cover of 'Abbey Road'? Well, dead men don't wear shoes. I didn't research that, but it sounded good. He's in a box on this one? That's obviously a coffin."

In many photos, a raised hand appeared over McCartney's head. Obviously, LaBour wrote, a Mafia sign of death.

Regarding "I Am the Walrus," LaBour told his readers that "walrus" was a Greek word meaning corpse.

"When this all hit the fan and they were trying to verify the clues, they called the great Greek classics professor at Columbia University: 'Walrus, is it true that it means corpse?'

"And he said 'Walrus? We have no word, walrus. What is that?"

The Beatles, who had quietly broken up the month before, remained mum on the subject (in all honesty, it wasn't hurting record sales). The real McCartney was very much alive and in seclusion at his Scottish farm.

Others discovered new "clues," and the rumor got bigger and bigger; soon it was all over the national news. "I thought people's interest would be piqued, and their imagination and stuff, but I never thought people would believe it," LaBour says. "The phone was ringing all the time. I got scared. It was too weird."

In November, attorney F. Lee Bailey filmed a TV show, staged in a mock courtroom. Several of the principals, including the Michigan disc jockey and Fred LaBour, along with Beatles manager Allen Klein, were flown to Los Angeles to "give testimony."

LaBour was terrified, and at his first meeting with Bailey, he confessed that he'd made the whole thing up.

"There was this great pause," LaBour recalls. "And he said 'We have an hour of television to do. You're going to have to play along.'"

[faulconandsnowjob]

I am familiar w/ LaBour, of course. I agree that much of the PID story has been fabricated w/ respect to what happened to Paul. I do not believe he died in a simple car accident for one second, for example. However, that Paul was replaced at some point is beyond dispute, to my mind. Funny that people noticed in '69 that Paul was replaced, but were lulled back to sleep, unfortunately. I guess not as many people were mesmerized by the TV back then...

Anyway, I would like to remind everyone that photographs are "records" that capture "immutable characteristics." (5 USCS § 552a(4); Pierce v. Dep't of the United States Air Force, 512 F.3d 184, 188 (5th Cir. Miss. 2007). They are used to identify individuals. When the characteristics/identifying features of people don't match in photos, then they are not & cannot be the same person. I & others have shown many photos that show characteristics that don't match. It is really a matter of not wanting to see the difference that prevents people from seeing, at this point.

And, by the way, we have hardly even mentioned the clues in songs or on album covers. There is a plethora of hints about what happened to Paul dropped by John, Faul, George & Ringo. Although I think they are interesting & support the PID/PWR theory, I prefer to use more substantial evidence, such as photographs.

More anomalies: Height Differences

http://digilander.libero.it/jamespaul/jim_mccartney_comparison/james_paul_mccartney_and_jim.jpg

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y178/michelle66/pjm.jpg
Paul

http://digilander.libero.it/jamespaul/jim_mccartney_comparison/bill_and_jim_pauls_dad.jpg Faul

http://digilander.libero.it/jamespaul/jim_mccartney_comparison/jim_mccartney_comparison.gif

http://digilander.libero.it/jamespaul/groups/the_beatles_group.jpg

http://digilander.libero.it/jamespaul/groups/sgt_pepper_group.jpg

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y178/michelle66/photoal6.jpg

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y60/Trueclues/jane_with_paul.jpg Paul w/ Jane Asher

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/jane_with_faul.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/FaulJaneRingoMaureen.jpg
Faul w/ Jane Asher

http://img78.photobucket.com/albums/v354/beatlepaulmccartney/45rpm_covers/beatles_jp_1529.jpg

http://img78.photobucket.com/albums/v354/beatlepaulmccartney/45rpm_covers/beatles_jp_1838.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v462/OnlyBeatles/lennon-mccartney-salute.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v462/OnlyBeatles/paul_john_neil_george_george_martin.jpg

http://usera.imagecave.com/Moped/ymskan21kp_corrected.gif

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v145/Kissmekatie/John_on_floor.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v145/Kissmekatie/dreamer_2.jpg

http://usera.imagecave.com/Moped/m67-4.jpg

Please notice that Faul/Bill is taller & has a larger build than Paul did. Are we nearing critical mass yet?

[clint web]

He's shrunk again - same height as John.

http://img381.imageshack.us/img381/2066/maccath2.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
By salvadormarley (http://profile.imageshack.us/user/salvadormarley)

Possibly one of the shorter Fauls.

Not sure about Georges choice of clothes in this photo.

[faulconandsnowjob]

Possibly one of the shorter Fauls.
Yes, possibly. Too bad we can't see his face in that picture above.

[the seeker]

He's shrunk again - same height as John.

http://img381.imageshack.us/img381/2066/maccath2.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
By salvadormarley (http://profile.imageshack.us/user/salvadormarley)

Possibly one of the shorter Fauls.

Not sure about Georges choice of clothes in this photo.

Those clothes rock!

[astrochicken]

Those clothes rock!


That pisses me off too. I'd run around like that too, but your only chance of
wearing clothes like that nowadays is if you're a kid. They have all the good
clothes.

[clint web]

Yes, possibly. Too bad we can't see his face in that picture above.


:D:rolleyes:

[truthseeker49]

Faul http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/posinginwhite.jpg
http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b375/Cavern61/1963-10-0909GreenStLondon.jpg Paul
Paul http://i265.photobucket.com/albums/ii220/truecolors112/74283326_10.jpg

[faulconandsnowjob]

I can't imagine Paul wearing a white jumpsuit w/ black socks :-P

And notice the hands! Paul's were hairy; Faul's are not.

[clint web]

http://img368.imageshack.us/img368/4364/maccashandscv0.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
By salvadormarley (http://profile.imageshack.us/user/salvadormarley)


And notice the hands! Paul's were hairy; Faul's are not.

Well, I'll give you that one.

He's very vain though, he probably uses that cream that women put on their legs to get rid of the hairs.

[orbandsceptre27]

That is a great spot with the hairless hands people! And I`ve never met a bloke who shaved or waxed the backs of his hands lol. I have hair on the back of my hands (not a lot) but if a guy has this when he is younger he doesn`t suddenly "grow out of it".

[faulconandsnowjob]

Paul didn't seem to be too concerned about having hairy hands.

Maybe Faul tweezes the backs of his hands :-P

[orbandsceptre27]

Faul http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/posinginwhite.jpg
http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b375/Cavern61/1963-10-0909GreenStLondon.jpg Paul
Paul http://i265.photobucket.com/albums/ii220/truecolors112/74283326_10.jpg

That is a very feminine looking pose from Faul (top pic) Truthseeker. There are so many differences between both men it is just not funny!

[truthseeker49]

Faul, 1969 http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/pid_on_magazine_p3.jpghttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/paul-smokin.jpg Faul, much older
Paul, 1965 http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b375/Cavern61/hair.jpg

As far as Paul being vain. Wel, he was very self-conscious about his height. I think this was because his younger brother Michael was so much taller than him. He also didn't like to wear his glasses for public appearances, because he felt that they spoiled his looks.
Contacts at that time were in their infancy. They were the hard ones & quite uncomfortable. I'm sure that there was a reason for him only wearing them sparingly. ;)

Take a look at how much larger Faul's feet are than Paul's :

Faul http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/Faulinshorts.jpghttp://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a386/Beatlesagain/hide.jpg Paul
Faul http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a386/Beatlesagain/paul_mccartney.jpghttp://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a386/Beatlesagain/hide.jpg Paul

Here are Faul's feet. Notice that he has hammertoe:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/Faulinshorts.jpg

Here is a picture of Paul's feet. Notice too how much smaller they are than Faul's.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v455/JPM/paul_coconut.jpg

I can come up with alot more comparisons if necessary. These are just a few that were already done. Since these were made, many more photos of Paul have been posted to my forum.

http://only1rad.proboards62.com/index.cgi

[faulconandsnowjob]

Yes, I've also noticed that Faul is rather effeminate.

http://www.stevesbeatles.com/pictures/images/paul/paul_all_you_need_is_love.jpg

http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b375/Cavern61/pid_on_magazine_p05aaa.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/69chain2.jpg

http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d196/Beatlesphotos/Billtwistedaaa.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/69chain3.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/billlighteyesbamboo.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/chains25.jpg

I don't think Paul seemed effeminate at all.

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y60/Trueclues/Paulunusual.jpg

http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b375/Cavern61/beatq51.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v455/JPM/tryingonshirt.jpg

Take a look at how much larger Faul's feet are than Paul's
Yes, they look like they'd be good for skiing :-)

[truthseeker49]

Orb posted:That is a very feminine looking pose from Faul (top pic) Truthseeker. There are so many differences between both men it is just not funny!

I had an entire thread devoted to just that subject on my forum. However, a dear friend of mine felt that I was being unfair to Faul. So, I deleted alot of the photos. I have MANY photos of Faul in feminine postures.
He was a married man with 4 children. I can't imagine why he felt the need to pose that way. The only thing I can think of is that he misinterpreted Paul's playing the "cute card" as a sign that Paul was "light in the sneakers".
I however, have no doubt in my mind that Paul was totally "straight".
He wasn't nicknamed Paul "The Bull " McCartney for nothing. His escapades with the ladies are "legendary". :cool:

[truthseeker49]

Faul appears to be "straight". Although, one can never know what really goes on behind closed doors. This is coming from someone who was married to a gay man for three years ! And, one of my sons is gay. So, I have nothing against that lifestyle choice. I am simply making an observation here.


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/paul-linda-hug-s.jpghttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/paul-linda-76.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/paul-linda-1.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/paul-linda-kiss.jpghttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/morehugging.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/layingonhim.jpghttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/huggingLinda.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/hugging72.jpghttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/holdinghands.jpg

[faulconandsnowjob]

I was being unfair to Faul

I'm not sure he's really in a position to complain about something not being "fair." I think it's a valid point that he's more effeminate than Paul.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/ontheramp.jpg

Need I say more? :)

[truthseeker49]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/paul-guitar-10-97-1.jpghttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/ontheramp.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/interesting.jpghttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/MaccaLindaGoofy.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/nothappyFaulLinda.jpg Believe, me I know how she felt !

I understand how you feel, Faulcon. However, I felt that I should try to be fair in deference to my friend's feelings.

[truthseeker49]

More "tootsie" shots:

Paul http://i265.photobucket.com/albums/ii220/truecolors112/Paul533-1.jpghttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/Faulinshorts.jpg Faul
http://i265.photobucket.com/albums/ii220/truecolors112/KK_214231_BEATLES_6.jpg

[the seeker]

That pisses me off too. I'd run around like that too, but your only chance of
wearing clothes like that nowadays is if you're a kid. They have all the good
clothes.

You can buy them cheap at vintage stores and wear them wherever you like. People will love you.

[astrochicken]

People will love you.

They allready do.

[toty1994]

What's all this Paul looking 'effeminate' about? I'm beginning to wonder if you people are satirists. Anyway, just to balance things out here are a few images I've found that suggest that the 'Truth' (why always capitalised?) could be that Mr McCartney is not an imposter.


Are those spreading the PID theory concerned about what is true? The photo below was on a PID site indicating that 'Faul' is too tall - if this was Paul he would be shorter than John.

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/2258925022_eab41b6b09_.jpg

But...in the original uncropped photo John is standing in a ditch!

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/2258925022_eab41b6b09_o.jpg


A fade showing 'Faul's' remarkable resemblance to Paul's father.

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


Pre and post '66. Not the same man?

http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n20/khanmfh/comps/flash.gif


Comparison to a more recent pic. Again, not the same man?

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/Paul1966mag12_2.gif

Not the same teeth?

http://img513.imageshack.us/img513/9654/teethcomparisonko8.gif

[truthseeker49]

Fades like yours can be deceiving. As far as John standing in a ditch, so what ? I have many side by side comparisons on my forum that show the differences between Paul & his replacement(s). Paul looked like his dad. If Faul looks anything like Jim McCartney today, it's because of all of the surgery that he had over the years to better resemble Paul.
Faul purposely acts effeminate. I am in no way disparaging his manhood. :(

http://only1rad.proboards62.com/

[faulconandsnowjob]

Those aren't so much "fades" as "blinks." Anyway, I've seen enough photos & videos to know that Faul couldn't possibly be Paul & vice versa. Sorry if I seemed to disparage Faul. I actually don't think he's a bad guy. It must be a tough situation for him, too.

Are those spreading the PID theory concerned about what is true?
That is all I'm concerned about. This is about Truth & Justice for me. And yes, I mean "capital T" & "capital J" Truth & Justice...

Well, it's also about helping people overcome some of their mental programming & uncovering this particular TPTB practice. People apparently don't believe it's possible to replace a famous person, but it is. People apparently don't believe TPTB would do such a thing. They would. People apparently don't believe that people wouldn't notice such a change. They don't. Wakey, wakey, People. TPTB have been mind-f*cking you!

[krakhead]

What's all this Paul looking 'effeminate' about? I'm beginning to wonder if you people are satirists. Anyway, just to balance things out here are a few images I've found that suggest that the 'Truth' (why always capitalised?) could be that Mr McCartney is not an imposter.


Good post, shame it'll be completely disregarded by the 'Faul'-ers! :rolleyes:

Those aren't so much "fades" as "blinks." Anyway, I've seen enough photos & videos to know that Faul couldn't possibly be Paul & vice versa.

Wakey, wakey, People. TPTB have been mind-f*cking you!

So this post, showing that he hasn't changed all that much, looks like his dad, still has the same teeth etc. is to be discounted then? You only consider pictures that you feel back up your 'Faul' theory are the correct ones?

As for the final line - absolutely! But what the fuck has that got to do with Paul?

And as a little addendum - I was looking through old family photos with some friends recently and came across loads of them where everyone looking at them went - Is that you?! Certain photo's of people look nothing like them - I think you should keep that in mind.

[faulconandsnowjob]

OK, I will comment on this blinking tooth photo.

http://img513.imageshack.us/img513/9654/teethcomparisonko8.gif

Notice that the teeth are not the same.

[krakhead]

Notice that the teeth are not the same.

They look the same to me

[pheony]

The feet look the same.

[orbandsceptre27]

What prevents many people from seeing the differences is that they want to see "big" differences. There have been so many subtle physical differences pointed out on these threads, but most people who don`t want to examine these differences in detail point to the teeth!

How come the teeth are the same with both men? It is actually much easier to create the same dental patterns than many people think!

A few of todays top dental surgeons specialize in recreating the exact dental structures of famous Hollywood movie stars and celebrities. There are many "cosmetic" dental surgeons in the US (NY and LA in particular) who specialize in this practice. So if you want to have the Brad Pitt or Angelina Jolie smile - for about thirty thousand dollars you can have it. People who haven`t heard of this may find it absurd but it is becoming much more common. There was an article in "The Irish Independent" (our national paper) about two years ago detailing one Irish girls experience in going to NY and getting Sarah Michelle Gellers (Buffy) smile. The results were staggering - she didn`t look like the same girl. She stated that complete strangers she met acted as if they recognised her from somewhere, or asked her if she was famous.

When creating a "double" the teeth is one of the first and most important physical characteristics to get right. If someone can walk in off the street and get this type of cosmetic oral surgery today do you think it wasn`t possible back in the 60`s to TPTB.....? Of course it was! And no, you don`t have to go around wearing "train-tracks" or any other type of braces for a year or two, once the operation is complete then that`s it.

[toty1994]

What prevents many people from seeing the differences is that they want to see "big" differences. There have been so many subtle physical differences pointed out on these threads, but most people who don`t want to examine these differences in detail point to the teeth!


Everyone can see the 'subtle physical differences' but it's obvious that similar differences could be pointed out in photos of just about anyone. If I posted a few different shots of me on here and applied your logic I would have to conclude that I myself must have been replaced by an imposter!

I had a little bet with myself when I came back on here. I bet that someone would have claimed that 'Faul' had had some kind of surgery to make him look more like Paul's father and that the reason the teeth are the same is that they too are imposters. Bingo!

[hunger]

Bingo!

No, It was Ringo :D

[orbandsceptre27]

Everyone can see the 'subtle physical differences' but it's obvious that similar differences could be pointed out in photos of just about anyone. If I posted a few different shots of me on here and applied your logic I would have to conclude that I myself must have been replaced by an imposter!

I had a little bet with myself when I came back on here. I bet that someone would have claimed that 'Faul' had had some kind of surgery to make him look more like Paul's father and that the reason the teeth are the same is that they too are imposters. Bingo!


Two questions for you - Are "you" and "your self" two separate entities? and - how much did you pay your self?

And you`re talking about logic - go sell crazy somewhere else would you :p

Logic is only a small part of what`s required here, but if your use of logic is flawed then quit using it. Making false assumptions seems to play a big part on these threads lol.

[faulconandsnowjob]

What prevents many people from seeing the differences is that they want to see "big" differences.
That would not be a very convincing double, now would it?

There have been so many subtle physical differences pointed out on these threads, but most people who don`t want to examine these differences in detail point to the teeth!
Yes, all the subtle differences add up to making Faul look completely different from Paul. It's the subtle differences + the overall picture that people have to have an eye for.

How come the teeth are the same with both men? It is actually much easier to create the same dental patterns than many people think!
In that blinking teeth picture previously posted, one set of teeth is longer than the other. They don't match. However, I don't put a lot of stock in teeth matching or not. For the reasons Orb stated, they are easy to fix w/ cosmetic surgery. It's funny that some people on this board seem to think that TPTB wouldn't use surgery to make a double look more convincing. Have these people ever researched intelligence agencies before & the stuff they do? Come on.

And someone said the feet looked the same...??? How do you reckon that one out?

[strt]

They look the same to me

Hmm, left looks the same, right looks different :D

[humito]

Twas all lsd induced change using lookalikes was all part of the fun at the time........paulis alive and dabbles in magick a bit I think....now and then.I think pauls look also changed because of this, he might have been doing crowley stlye rituals and doing allsorts of drugs ,as were they all.they all altered dramatically with their lsd taking,spiritually,in there philosophy,musicly and were in to subliminals and in jokes,tounge in cheek and reality meddling too.Lsd appears to have luciferic properties although not inherentlly evil ,more of dionysis and it doesnt surprise me that there appear to be satanic messages in beatles songs.we live in a universe made up of languge and sychronicity and irony and life imitating art...when you start playing with reality( like the trippy masterpieces on sgt pepper and abbey road did when you were tripping and like on songs from pink floyd /barrets piper at the gates of dawn ( which i think were being recorded at the same time in abbey road studios))...listening on acid ,recording on acid and listening on acid en masse and with deliberate subliminals from the band ...........these messages and proof that paul was replaced and the myth perpetuating have to exist and be there because if you look closely at any aspect of our human and spiritual lives and use occult forces(lsd demonc force) conciously or unconciously or mind controlled these synchronicities and meaningless meanings appear everywhere in any subject this.....seems to be how the universe and our minds and art and reality are linked and work.Thats why every conspiracy theory has truth and the lines between truth an fiction and reality willallways be blured as something becomes more true the more people become convinced it is so ...........lol...........Paul probably isnt him when enough people believe, the clues and syhncronicities will increase also but the truth willnever avtually come out because at the same time it didnt actually happen and also enough people will ever believe,so there will always be convincing data from both sides of the arguements and nothing will ever be resolved as we can see with ghosts,ufos reptillians etc ...they will always have a shady fringe existance appearing more real to some than others .............i think ...any commments lol?????????

[faulconandsnowjob]

Yes, I have a comment. As I've stated before, photos capture immutable characteristics (meaning they don't change), & are used by courts of law as means of identification. When the features/characteristics captured on different photographs do not match, then they are not photographs of the same person.

Some people always want to focus on superficialities, such as hair length or whatever. Obviously, we know that a different hairstyle can change a person's appearance - that's why we get our hair styled, right? Anyway, a seemingly obvious point is that people's facial features do not change b/c they get a haircut.

Take, for instance, this picture of John Lennon. His hair is totally different, yet, by golly, his face looks the same!

http://digilander.libero.it/jamespaul/uk_images/john_comparison.jpg

Now compare these pictures of "Paul." Notice that the difference? I know, I've made it all complicated by throwing in a couple w/ a mustache :-P

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v455/JPM/proper-paula.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/67y_coat.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a386/Beatlesagain/DR1020_Paul_McCARTNEY_6.jpg

http://digilander.libero.it/jamespaul/images/faul_all_you_need.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/Faul-smileaway.jpg

[humito]

personally I Think the 2nd pic down is a lookalike they used in a contrived way around the s/fields sgt pepper time for pics n footage .he does look odd around here but i think is allpart of the nothing is real.....sgt pepper fake band/band member/ whos's the walrus/paul is dead/yellow submarine pepperland imposters/actors voices/ caper! lol....I think the other pic with tash is also stooge but pic has been elongated and scanned from a cd cover and thats what makes it weird.......all other pics inc 70s one are realpaul mcartney........I think they were all together again and takin the pee on white album through abbey road though........even more acid soaked than sgt peppers and quite demonic(conciously or not) more reality twisting.........I think egos.different artistic directions less acid different agendas after that girlfriend n wives split them up after they were all together again and the real paul mcartney was becomming an asshole anyway is why they split.......at no time do i think the faul actually recorded any music or voice on the records.his pics match right up again from this time........I think paul can still be really creative without all the drugs as I think he does use magick still.......not really satanic though........no such thing as that ,all demons or whatever are just aspects of subconcious personified....and controlled by will........he can trance us out with catchy riffs and melodies and make loads of monies........and always sings about love so think hes not so hectic these days.........hesnot squeeky tho...hes a blackbird singing in the dead of night..............or something...........he didnt die but strange things were surly afoot.

[faulconandsnowjob]

The only one that was Paul McCartney in the above photos was the top one.

That is very unfair to say Paul was a jerk & that's why they split. Paul was, most likely, dead by the end of 1966.

This is perhaps the last interview w/ Paul. He doesn't seem like a jerk at all.
http://only1rad.proboards62.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=frontman&thread=47&page=1

[humito]

think is all the reality i want to add to the whole mcartney thing...he gets enough attention as is rich enough.........without me adding my energy....dont think he is dangerous,,,,,not like brittney lol.........
leave ya too it
.

[the seeker]

No, It was Ringo :D

Holy crap, Ringo became Bingo! No wonder the percussion went to hell!

[toty1994]

Two questions for you - Are "you" and "your self" two separate entities? and - how much did you pay your self?

And you`re talking about logic - go sell crazy somewhere else would you :p

Logic is only a small part of what`s required here, but if your use of logic is flawed then quit using it. Making false assumptions seems to play a big part on these threads lol.

I was trying to make a point using the medium of humour. Admittedly it was hardly side-splitting but I can't tell whether you thought I was being serious or not with the above comment.

The point was, there really are photos of me taken weeks/months apart in which my features appear different - to the extent that one would think (and people have) that they are photos of different people. There is really nothing strange or unusual about this though; the explainations for such (apparent) photographic anomalies have already been pointed out several times re McCartney on these threads.

[truthseeker49]

They don't explain how a person's ears can stick out one day & be close to the head the next, and then stick out again. I can see someone having their ears pinned back, but to have them UNPINNED AGAIN ???
Come on... :rolleyes:
Not to mention the fact that Faul has a noticeabley larger forehead than Paul did. In all of paul's photos, his forehead appears to be about the same size...
It's the photos post late 1966, that appear to show a different man.

[faulconandsnowjob]

The only logical explanation is that Paul spontaneously morphed into a taller, less handsome body :-P

Anyway, a person's facial features don't change (remember "immutable characteristics"?) And what about the feet? And the hair on the hands? Come on. I know people are trying to rationalize so that they can stay in the old paradigm, but this is getting ridiculous :-)

[orbandsceptre27]

I was trying to make a point using the medium of humour. Admittedly it was hardly side-splitting but I can't tell whether you thought I was being serious or not with the above comment.

The point was, there really are photos of me taken weeks/months apart in which my features appear different - to the extent that one would think (and people have) that they are photos of different people. There is really nothing strange or unusual about this though; the explainations for such (apparent) photographic anomalies have already been pointed out several times re McCartney on these threads.

Totty1994 I don`t care whether you thought I thought you were being humourous or not - The thing is I appreciate humour as much as anyone else but this is a topic I take seriously, otherwise I wouldn`t still be here after 67 pages - same as everyone else who knows Paul McCartney should not be forgotten!

[faulconandsnowjob]

the explainations (sic) for such (apparent) photographic anomalies have already been pointed out several times re McCartney on these threads.

I am unaware of any satisfactory explanations for these anomalies other than that Paul was replaced.

[toty1994]

Paul looked like his dad. If Faul looks anything like Jim McCartney today, it's because of all of the surgery that he had over the years to better resemble Paul.


PID proponents often say that it's obvious 'Faul' looks nothing like Paul if you look properly. It's funny though, the older 'Faul' gets the more he looks like Jim McCartney as demonstrated in the images below. Do you PID believers think the 'real' Paul, had he lived, would have resembled his father this closely? Could 'they' have made an obvious mistake in their on-going 'McCartney-ing' of 'Faul' by making him look too much like Jim rather than how the real JPM would have looked in old age?



http://img152.imageshack.us/img152/5769/fatheryv1.gif

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/IMG.jpg

[supertzar]

toty, I now believe faulcon and company are on to something. I have found evidence of another Faul - FAUL STANLEY!

How can anyone believe this is the same person? They are totally different in every way. Even with the makeup it's obvious he was replaced. This could be big - it appears the Faul conspiracy extends much farther than any of us could have imagined. Should we start investigating other celebrities named Paul? Faul Anka? Faul Revere and the Raiders?? Les Faul?!

http://www.foxnews.com/images/302365/0_61_stanley_paul.jpg

http://i.realone.com/assets/rn/img/5/0/4/3/15723405-15723409-slarge.jpg

[faulconandsnowjob]

To me, the difference between Paul & Faul is about as stark as that between Paul Stanley w/ & w/o make-up. It's amazing other people can't see it/don't want to see it.

[clint web]

Take, for instance, this picture of John Lennon. His hair is totally different, yet, by golly, his face looks the same!

faulconandsnowjob

No, his eyes look different and so does his mouth. If there had been a rumour at the end of the sixties that john had been replaced, it would be these photos of john you would be showing to convince us of the fact.

[psychedelia]

I only heard of the Paul/Faul conspiracy recently & I've looked at loads of photos to make my own decision & I definately believe the "Paul McCartney" that is in the limelight now, is definately a different person from when The Beatles first appeared!!

[faulconandsnowjob]

Clintweb:
Well, whatever your theory is about John, I am focusing on Paul. And Paul's eyes look different - especially the color!

psychedelia:
Awesome! I'm so happy you have seen it :-)

[orbandsceptre27]

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=MVroE98hoHk

[orbandsceptre27]

I only heard of the Paul/Faul conspiracy recently & I've looked at loads of photos to make my own decision & I definately believe the "Paul McCartney" that is in the limelight now, is definately a different person from when The Beatles first appeared!!

Can you tell us why you believe this psychedelia - it`s just there are alot of stupid fawkers here lol!

[faulconandsnowjob]

Orb, what do you think is the deal w/ the suitcase being in Berlin?

[orbandsceptre27]

Orb, what do you think is the deal w/ the suitcase being in Berlin?

Hard to know Faulcon isn`t it? He`s not far away from one of his last stops - Cern, Switzerland. Of course the Beatles really started to make their mark in Germany (Berlin if I`m not mistaken) before they broke onto the world stage in the early 60`s.

[faulconandsnowjob]

Well, the Beatles played in Hamburg early on, but Berlin is certainly on the world stage...

[toty1994]

To me Iamaphoney's ludicrous hide and seek pantomime with suitcases suggests his work is almost done. There are a handful of hardcore believers still following him, but I've noticed that with each new video there are less and less views and fewer comments. Many of those who previously supported him have lost patience and seem to have realised that the whole thing just might be an elaborate joke at their expense. The silly suitcase saga is iamaphoney saying "Look, this has gone on long enough - I'm taking the piss, surely you can see it now?!?" That's my take on it anyway, I dare say others will disagree!

[faulconandsnowjob]

I can see how people would get irritated w/ IIAP. Personally, I think he's an insider who can't just come out & say what the deal is, but he's still putting the info out there. It seems he's using a "language" of signs & symbols, which is difficult to discern, unfortunately. It seems that something is happening in Berlin... Well, this is my take, at least.

[fortysixandtwo]

Yes the faces look the same and no Paul is not dead.

Case closed.

Haven't people more useful things to do than be researching this? I mean, who cares? What are you trying to prove by this so-called conspiracy?

[faulconandsnowjob]

Yes the faces look the same and no Paul is not dead.
No, the faces do not look the same. Neither do the eyes, the noses, the foreheads, the chins, the body build, the hair on the hands, etc. Oh, & BTW, the voices sound different. The mannerisms are also different.

Case closed.
I don't think so, but I like how you tried to come in w/ your 1st post & dictate that. Nice try. Where's your evidence to support your claim?

We could just as easily pronounce that Paul was replaced - case closed.

Haven't people more useful things to do than be researching this? I mean, who cares? What are you trying to prove by this so-called conspiracy?
Well, you obviously fail to see the broader implications, & I'm sorry for you that you lack that insight. But as I & others have mentioned, this goes beyond any one person, even one as special as Paul McCartney. It is important to expose his replacement, b/c it exposes a TPTB strategy that not a lot of people have paid much attention to.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v41/CorporateA/PaulFaul6667.jpg

http://www.geocities.com/tony-alicea/beat67.jpg

http://i265.photobucket.com/albums/ii220/truecolors112/part%203/00001h39.jpg

[psychedelia]

Can you tell us why you believe this psychedelia - it`s just there are alot of stupid fawkers here lol!

I have looked at loads of comparison photos over the past few weeks. Unless Paul McCartney had cosmetic surgery to change the shape of his face & ears then there is definately a Faul.

I dont let anyone elses opinions influence my decision making on certain subjects. I make my own mind up after looking at evidence such as photos.

[faulconandsnowjob]

I dont let anyone elses opinions influence my decision making on certain subjects. I make my own mind up after looking at evidence such as photos.

psychedelia: Excellent! Thank you for your posts. Your comments are greatly appreciated :-)

[orbandsceptre27]

I have looked at loads of comparison photos over the past few weeks. Unless Paul McCartney had cosmetic surgery to change the shape of his face & ears then there is definately a Faul.

I dont let anyone elses opinions influence my decision making on certain subjects. I make my own mind up after looking at evidence such as photos.

Well done Psychedelia, it`s a pity there aren`t a few more like you. :)

[hunger]

Thought this might interest you (sorry if it's already been posted)

Sir Paul McCartney has landed in Israel and told reporters it was really him after a newspaper speculated that the former Beatle would send an imposter.

Fans were eager to catch a glimpse of Sir Paul ahead of his first concert in the country.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7633910.stm

(...Waits for Iamaphoney to slow down the "IT IS ME!" bit, add some backwards music & throw a suitcase full of money over my garden fence:cool:)

namdaed no em nruT ;)

[faulconandsnowjob]

Thank you, Hunger! The Jerusalem Post article mentioned above:

Is it McCartney or is it an imposter?
By DAVID BRINN
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1222017374278&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

[truthseeker49]

http://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j178/lilis678/DB1005_BEATLES_6.jpghttp://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j178/lilis678/Faulagain-1.jpg
http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a386/Beatlesagain/paul_mccartney_faux_paul_comparison.jpg

Paul vs Faul, circa 1970's then circa 1980's.

In both comparisons, it's obvious that it's NOT the same man ! Faul's face ( head ) is much longer than Paul's was. In the bottom comparison, Faul's forehead is noticeably larger than Paul's was. These are points that I make over & over again on my forum.

http://only1rad.proboards62.com/index.cgi

[hunger]

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=OsA6-1Low8M

:D;)

[faulconandsnowjob]

^ That video was great! :-)

[humito]

only paul could write a corker like mr bellamy....... he still has moments of genius .

[lyrag]

i've never heard about paul being dead and being replaced or anything, could someone please send me a link or something, thanks :)

[faulconandsnowjob]

Sure - there are some great resources on the PID/PWR topic.

http://digilander.libero.it/jamespaul/
http://homepages.tesco.net/harbfamily/opd/other.html

PAUL IS DEAD! MISS HIM MISS HIM MISS HIM! Forum
http://only1rad.proboards62.com/index.cgi

> photo comparisons
http://only1rad.proboards62.com/index.cgi?board=faker&action=display&thread=1073

Nothing is Real: Paul was Replaced Forum
http://invanddis.proboards29.com/index.cgi

> info about Bettina Krischbin (claims to be Paul's daughter)
http://invanddis.proboards29.com/index.cgi?board=TAR&action=display&thread=4958

Iamaphoney has tons of PID videos
http://www.youtube.com/user/iamaphoney

My youtube page has some links & videos
http://www.youtube.com/user/faulconandsnowjob

Paul McCartney Interviewed By David Frost - YouTube

YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

paul is dead - the rotten apple 56 L - YouTube

paul is dead - the rotten apple 63 u - YouTube

YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

paul is dead - nothing is real 4 - YouTube

A set up affair - YouTube (The Beatles were not a "set up affair"- Paul was a founding member w/ John & George)

That should give you a good start!

[hunger]

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/theampersand/archive/2008/11/17/carnival-of-light-paul-mccartney-wants-to-bring-you-a-new-off-piste-beatles-song-why.aspx

[graflok]

Paul & Faul(s) look like different people to me too.

And, I see similar anomalies with some other celebs.

[faulconandsnowjob]

Very pretty Paul song from 1966. "Love in the Open Air" from the soundtrack for the movie, "The Family Way."

the family way - YouTube

It makes me wonder how people could think brilliant genius Paul wrote such mediocre solo stuff :P

Anyway, there is definitely something weird going on w/ other celebrities. Take for, instance, Angelina Jolie:

http://img2.timeinc.net/ew/dynamic/imgs/030709/165215__06angie_l.jpg

http://futuristicwebsites.com/AngelinaJolie/Images/Movies/Hackers06.jpg
(Hackers)

http://img355.imageshack.us/img355/8285/997hkcangelinajolie010ns3.jpg
(Hell's Kitchen)

These are supposed to be Angelina, too:

http://www.popdarts.com/Images/Female_Celebrities/Angelina_Jolie/images/Angelina_Jolie_062.jpg

http://www.popdarts.com/Images/Female_Celebrities/Angelina_Jolie/images/Angelina_Jolie_072.jpg

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/11/10/article-0-026A9693000005DC-302_468x599.jpg

http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/1310/angelinajolie70cz0.jpg

I have no theory about what happened or why, only that these do not appear to be the same people. Methinks this "celebrity replacement program" needs further study.

[talulah]

Very pretty Paul song from 1966. "Love in the Open Air" from the soundtrack for the movie, "The Family Way."

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

It makes me wonder how people could think brilliant genius Paul wrote such mediocre solo stuff :P

Anyway, there is definitely something weird going on w/ other celebrities. Take for, instance, Angelina Jolie:

http://img2.timeinc.net/ew/dynamic/imgs/030709/165215__06angie_l.jpg

http://futuristicwebsites.com/AngelinaJolie/Images/Movies/Hackers06.jpg
(Hackers)

http://img355.imageshack.us/img355/8285/997hkcangelinajolie010ns3.jpg
(Hell's Kitchen)

These are supposed to be Angelina, too:

http://www.popdarts.com/Images/Female_Celebrities/Angelina_Jolie/images/Angelina_Jolie_062.jpg

http://www.popdarts.com/Images/Female_Celebrities/Angelina_Jolie/images/Angelina_Jolie_072.jpg

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/11/10/article-0-026A9693000005DC-302_468x599.jpg

http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/1310/angelinajolie70cz0.jpg

I have no theory about what happened or why, only that these do not appear to be the same people. Methinks this "celebrity replacement program" needs further study.

Is it plastic surgery?

[faulconandsnowjob]

Maybe plastic surgery, but check out the chin... And what about Nicole Kidman?

http://img516.imageshack.us/img516/6425/nicolekidmanwa0.jpghttp://img516.imageshack.us/img516/3110/kidmancruisems1611468x3gz2.jpghttp://img145.imageshack.us/img145/3382/kidmangm2.jpg

http://img227.imageshack.us/img227/3743/cannes2003hz7.jpghttp://img125.imageshack.us/img125/7046/kidman23ix7.jpg

http://img510.imageshack.us/img510/6850/stepfordswiveskd4.jpghttp://img88.imageshack.us/img88/8656/nicolekidmanbj9.jpghttp://img58.imageshack.us/img58/2954/1101990705400tu3.jpg

A little bit of weirdness....

[talulah]

Maybe plastic surgery, but check out the chin... And what about Nicole Kidman?

http://img516.imageshack.us/img516/6425/nicolekidmanwa0.jpghttp://img516.imageshack.us/img516/3110/kidmancruisems1611468x3gz2.jpghttp://img145.imageshack.us/img145/3382/kidmangm2.jpg

http://img227.imageshack.us/img227/3743/cannes2003hz7.jpghttp://img125.imageshack.us/img125/7046/kidman23ix7.jpg

http://img510.imageshack.us/img510/6850/stepfordswiveskd4.jpghttp://img88.imageshack.us/img88/8656/nicolekidmanbj9.jpghttp://img58.imageshack.us/img58/2954/1101990705400tu3.jpg

A little bit of weirdness....

yeah i see what you mean.It wouldnt surprise me about nicole kidman she was married and had kids to the king of reptiles tom cruise!But do you not think with Paul mccartney hes just aged?

[faulconandsnowjob]

But do you not think with Paul mccartney hes just aged?
I really don't. He looks very different from 1966 to 1967 (totally lost his looks, imo).

Paul circa 1966:

http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d196/Beatlesphotos/mccartney_large.jpg

http://www.jamespaulmccartney.org/album64/album/Album_A/paperbackwritera1.jpg

YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

Faul circa 1967:

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

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v419/TheFaker/67y_coat.jpg

YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

Besides, they just seem so different, even when the age difference wasn't that great.

http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g146/lilis456/28a.jpghttp://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b375/Cavern61/pid_on_magazine_p05aaa.jpg

[bicycle]

SIR Paul McCartney last night revealed the Beatles were churning out drug induced bollocks at least 18 months before John Lennon got together with Yoko Ono.


Confirming the existence of the improvised track Carnival of Light, Sir Paul said it was inspired by the modernist composers John Cage and Karlheinz Stockhausen, as well as a Tupperware box filled with 'grade-A Jamaican bongo'.

"It's basically 14 minutes of John hitting Ringo with a soup ladle. He managed to produce this lovely warm tone by striking him directly on the top of his head.

"We then mixed it with George chanting a refrain about some fat bird that used to work in a cake shop near the Liver Building. It's really an early version of Pipes of Peace."

The song was recorded at Abbey Road in 1967, but was soon confiscated by prime minister Harold Wilson who would wake up Tory firebrand Enoch Powell in the middle of the night and play it to him down the phone.

Sir Paul said the Beatles performed the song live just once, at a festival in Barcelona, when John Lennon introduced it while doing his tiresome impersonation of Carry On star Sid James.

Beatles experts say the track probably inspired Lennon and Ono to produce the experimental 1968 album Two Virgins, better known by its alternative title, Twelve Rackets.

[hunger]

Hats off to Bicycle! a poster I would've hung on me wall.

Just got this E-mail from the fab 4, I haven't even read it yet, but here it is:

The Fireman - Paul McCartney

19th November 2008

The Fireman - Electric Arguments. Visit http://beatles.chtah.com/a/tBJJDN4AekWpmB7XSZUAymwTYHd/fmansite-1 to preview
the new album.

PaulMcCartney.com Launches New Official Fireman Website

The Fireman (Paul McCartney and Youth) are back after a ten year break
with their brand new studio album 'Electric Arguments'. To coincide with
the release, The Fireman have launched their official website
at http://beatles.chtah.com/a/tBJJDN4AekWpmB7XSZUAymwTYHd/fmansite-1

Visit http://beatles.chtah.com/a/tBJJDN4AekWpmB7XSZUAymwTYHd/fmansite-1 where you can
hear the new tracks 'Nothing Too Much Just Out Of Sight' and 'Sing The
Changes' in full and watch previously unreleased video footage of Paul &
Youth recording the album and designing the artwork for the project.

Subscribers to the new official website will be kept up to date with all
the latest news and information as it happens in the official Fireman newsletters. All subscribers to http://beatles.chtah.com/a/tBJJDN4AekWpmB7XSZUAymwTYHd/fmansite-1 will
also receive all of the official Paul McCartney newsletters.

We are presently refreshing all of our Paul McCartney mailing lists and
would recommend that you subscribe to the new site at the link below
even if you are a current subscriber to one of Paul's sites. This will
ensure that you don't miss out on any communication from Paul in the
future.

:) bah..never goose me any other way...nemrepus eerht era ew ;)

[lilavati]

i wonder if brad pitt would have fallen for the pre plastic surgery,ugly angelina?:p

[graflok]

Which Brad Pitt? :)

[faulconandsnowjob]

Which Brad Pitt?
LOL! :)

Brad Pitt was thrown out by a security guard at the premiere of his new movie ("The Curious Case of Benjamin Button"). The guard apparently didn't recognize him - thought he was paparazzo :P

http://img233.imageshack.us/img233/6471/brad50qb1.jpg

http://omg.yahoo.com/photos/week-in-photos-november-9-15-2008/2457?nc#id=3

http://i259.photobucket.com/albums/hh310/PrincessKitty_2008/Pitt.jpghttp://i259.photobucket.com/albums/hh310/PrincessKitty_2008/brad-pitt142.jpg

[graflok]

here's the robert redford brad pitt:
http://blog.daylife.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/brad-pitt-and-angelina-jolie.jpg

here's the paul newman brad pitt:
http://www.topnews.in/uploads/brad-pitt67.jpg

and, here's the tom cruise/tom skerritt brad pitt:
http://z.about.com/d/movies/1/0/m/v/Q/sag2008pic22.jpg

[faulconandsnowjob]

^ Wow, a difft Brad for every occasion. Collect the whole set!

From http://plasticsurgeryphotos.blogspot.com/2007/08/nicole-kidman-and-plastic-surgery.html

Nicole Kidman and Plastic Surgery

There's a lot of buzz around the internet when Nicole Kidman appears on TV or some Awards function. The reason? Plastic Surgery and Kidman have a strong bond between each other. Some of the things Nicole loves dowing are rhinoplasty, brow lift, cheek implants, lip collagen, and lots of botox. People don't find Nicole unattractive; rather they are simply baffled by how different she looks now compared to when she started. Aging is allowable, but looking like a different person is odd.

http://img237.imageshack.us/img237/6175/nicolekidmanxo2.jpg

[fireman]

Hi everybody.

I registered for two reasons:

1) bringing this thread back to topic ;-)

2) to proof once and for all that Paul is alive and never was replaced


The basic assumption is that Paul was replaced by a lookalike. Then people like "Faulconsnowjob" (is that right?, hi there!) start posting pictures of a very young Paul and compare them either with pictures where he is older or just making a totally different or stupid face (i think we all know that from our selfs :-)


I am starting with some easy photographic evidence, showing that he looked the same in basically all periods of his life.

Lets start with ca 1964 / 1967

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

same guy!

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/pp12_fade_still.gif

same guy!

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

same guy

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/scan0fade_edit.gif


this is supossed to be a few month after the switch.. plastic surgery? yeah right!


more to come!!:)

[fireman]

Here we go again!


1961 (?) / 1968


http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/new2.jpg


same guy!

[fireman]

Still the same guy!!


1964 / 1968


both pictures taken from a PID homepage ;-)


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

[fireman]

Hi everybody.

I registered for two reasons:

1) bringing this thread back to topic ;-)

2) to proof once and for all that Paul is alive and never was replaced


The basic assumption is that Paul was replaced by a lookalike. Then people like "Faulconsnowjob" (is that right?, hi there!) start posting pictures of a very young Paul and compare them either with pictures where he is older or just making a totally different or stupid face (i think we all know that from our selfs :-)


I am starting with some easy photographic evidence, showing that he looked the same in basically all periods of his life.

Lets start with ca 1964 / 1967

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

same guy!

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/pp12_fade_still.gif

same guy!

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

same guy

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/scan0fade_edit.gif


this is supossed to be a few month after the switch.. plastic surgery? yeah right!


more to come!!:)



I would like to add one more to year 1967:



Both pictures are flipped. So did the surgeons make him a facial asymetry?

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/BEATLES_6_comp.jpg

[scotty99]

This theory is quite far fetched...but the more i think about it...lets look at the evidence

Since the Beatles split, he's come up with "The frog chorus" and "live and let die" (which Linda wrote really, on her triangle) I suppose the wings stuff was well accepted as good music.

For one of the most famous song writers in pop history, who wrote some inspirational iconic music, it's a bit strange that his talent for penning great songs has dried up totally?? In 20-30 odd years you think he would of come up with at least one great track?

[fireman]

This theory is quite far fetched...but the more i think about it...lets look at the evidence

Since the Beatles split, he's come up with "The frog chorus" and "live and let die" (which Linda wrote really, on her triangle) I suppose the wings stuff was well accepted as good music.

For one of the most famous song writers in pop history, who wrote some inspirational iconic music, it's a bit strange that his talent for penning great songs has dried up totally?? In 20-30 odd years you think he would of come up with at least one great track?


:-) Yeah. That is the only "clue" i would count. But seriously, i think "Let Me Roll It" and "Maybe I'm Amazed" are great! So is "band on the run" and "live and let die", "Here today" or "Jenny Wren". i would like to right such songs and play every instrument on earth! :-)

[faulconandsnowjob]

Sorry, but it's ridiculous to keep insisting that "Paul" today is the same Paul who wrote masterpieces like "Yesterday" & "For No One." Plus, JPM was much better looking than his replacement. There is just no way they are the same people. This picture submitted to "debunk" PID even shows they're not the same:

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/new2.jpg

Yes, of course they *look* similar (that wouldn't be much of a look-a-like if they didn't), but definitely not the same. Notice the one on the right has a wider mouth & a difft chin line, for starters.

[fireman]

Sorry, but it's ridiculous to keep insisting that "Paul" today is the same Paul who wrote masterpieces like "Yesterday" & "For No One." Plus, JPM was much better looking than his replacement. There is just no way they are the same people. This picture submitted to "debunk" PID even shows they're not the same:

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/new2.jpg

Yes, of course they *look* similar (that wouldn't be much of a look-a-like if they didn't), but definitely not the same. Notice the one on the right has a wider mouth & a difft chin line, for starters.


"The one" on the right looks exactly like "the one" on the left, only 7 years older.
It's ridiculous to keep insisting that "Paul" today is not the same Paul as before 1967.
Thats your argumentation, but i think it is much more "ridiculous" believing that this man got replaced, only because he grew out of his babyface.

[graflok]

"The one" on the right looks exactly like "the one" on the left, only 7 years older.

Not to me it doesn't. It looks like 2 different guys.

I mean, it's fine that you see it that way but I don't. I see a definite difference
and I agree with faulconandsnowjob that the pictures you posted to "debunk"
the difference only serve to illustrate it. :)

[fireman]

Not to me it doesn't. It looks like 2 different guys.

I mean, it's fine that you see it that way but I don't. I see a definite difference
and I agree with faulconandsnowjob that the pictures you posted to "debunk"
the difference only serve to illustrate it. :)


please remember that this is two different photos, taken years appart. How the hell do they make "the imposter" look like Paul SO MUCH?
I am not willing to believe it's just an imposter (there has never been one THAT good), nor plastic surgery (look at all the messed up celebrities nowerdays, and that where the sixties)

please look at the other pics i posted (for instance the flipped one).. how is that possible with surgery?

and:

how did they find a guy who looks that much like paul?
who happens to be a voice immitator and actor?
who happens to be a musician?
a left handed musician?
who could compose songs?
and fool the whole world?
while the beatles went with it?
while Pauls family went with it?
while all people who knew them personally went with it?

comme on, you don't really believe that, do you?

[faulconandsnowjob]

This picture that is supposed to be of Paul on the left looks like it's been doctored to me. It doesn't really look like Paul.

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/BEATLES_6_comp.jpg

This is Paul:
http://www.jamespaulmccartney.org/album64/album/Album2/TalkingPicsmag01.jpg

Anyway, some more weirdness w/ NK:

http://img165.imageshack.us/img165/3305/989dcmnicolekidman033bq5.jpghttp://img389.imageshack.us/img389/8381/80673466kb6.jpg

http://img141.imageshack.us/img141/8774/nk1996fa6.jpghttp://img49.imageshack.us/img49/9640/nicolekidman202uv5.jpg

[spock]

Here we go again!


1961 (?) / 1968


http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb77/diabolo123/new2.jpg


same guy!

i know paul forgot he supported everton and proclaimed he supported liverpool on radio 1.
a sure sign of a robot!! lol
but this theory is pure bollocks. Paul never died. he grew up.
he does look really stoned in a lot of those pics.

this is a needless distraction.