Paul McCartney died in 1966 - replaced by Billy Shepherd

Here is something on lens distortion.





I did measurments on the three photos. The distance on the 200mm lens picture from the jawline to the corner of the mouth is 5mm. On the next photo it is 4mm, and the last is a little over 3mm. Same guy. Same expression. Same lighting. Taken seconds apart. Yet there are differences in the measurments of the features of the face.

On the first, you can easily see the ears on the side of the head, whereas in the third, the ears are just about completely hidden. The shape of the nose changes. The shape of the entire head changes. All due to lens type.

This shows the complete foolishness of basing things soley on measurments of features on photos. Especially when they come from biased sources and you have no idea if they have been manipulated in any way.

[edit on 10-9-2009 by edmond dantes]

Originally posted by Getsmart

Originally posted by seaofgreen
... if only it were that easy to explain faulcon's behaviour. Her consistent selectivity in presenting her "evidence" can only be interpreted as a deliberate attempt to deceive.

... does faulcon even attempt to do any real research? No, all we get is the result of a few hasty clicks round the internet, filtered to fit with her story...

* NOTE: Dear Mods and Admins,

What does the quoted post have to do with PID ?

Nothing. It's just a typical disinfo tactic to derail the thread. It should be deleted as off-topic.

I've spent over a year researching PID pretty extensively. Some people have trouble connecting the dots b/c they don't have enough background info on intell, Illuminati, mind control programs, use of doubles, etc. I think I/we must be hitting a nerve if so many people are working so hard to derail this thread...

It appears that Paul took on the Satanists, a Christian combat if there ever was one. Alternative interpretations of the "butcher album" would be entertaining, but those who know the score (i.e. have witnessed such sacrificial rituals) will be able to see how the cover illustrates it eloquently (yes, to my misfortune I have).

What a horrible, horrible experience. I can't even imagine. I'm truly sorry to hear that. I've only read about such things from people like Svali, Leo Zagami, & Arizona Wilder.


[edit on 10-9-2009 by faulconandsnowjob]

Originally posted by Getsmart

Such as this picture of John disguised next to a sign saying:

The best way to go is by M&D C



Could it be in ritualistic punishment for this accusatory message that 13 years to the day of the release of this album a man with the initials M.D.C was presented to us as his assassin? These guys sure don't kid around.

Now that is a very interesting connection. That seems like something they would do - putting their "stamp" on it, knowing that most people would never make the connection.

Regarding The Beatles and this sixties cultural revolution, you will note certain similarities with the objectives of satanists, on the next link you can read the 9 Satanic Statements of the Church of Satan,] which was also closely associated with the Rat Pack as per Sammy Davis Jr.'s confession (just for the sex) which reads like a sixties counter-culture credo:

Satan represents indulgence instead of abstinence!

books.google.com...

No detective could discover the truth without first following numerous false leads, incorrect hunches and erroneously constructed scenarios.

I've followed & dismissed several theories, such as Paul is still alive, his death was an accident, his death was caused by KKK, etc. It's interesting how quickly some of the ATS members have zeroed in on my basic theory of Illuminati/intell involvement. It seems that some of them have a lot of background knowledge in those areas & can put the pieces together faster than others (it took me a while to get there).

Making it known to the world would be an extremely dangerous game played against the most violent and ruthless characters walking the face of the Earth or haunting the depths of Hades. It is already almost reckless to have left as many clues as they did.

Those "people" are capable of anything & will destroy anyone who gets in their way.

[edit on 10-9-2009 by faulconandsnowjob]

This is a question to faulcon:

If your allegations are true, do you feel people who try to expose the alleged conspiracy would be "getting in the way"? This is assuming the PID thories, or a combination of them, were true.

Regarding Faul

If indeed Paul is deceased and replaced by another person, folks will tend to feel betrayed, and justifiably so. They will have been fooled, and manipulated.

However, this probably is NOT Faul's fault. I think it is important to consider to what extent a double is one of the most innocent victims of all.

Some will say:
Look! He benefits from fame and wealth to which he is not entitled.
To which I would reply that this fame which is not their own must be quite a heavy cross to bear, and wealth is no solace when you are at odds with your own life and identity.

Others may say:
He deceived us and takes us for fools. He lied and made a mockery of our sincere admiration and devotion: he betrayed us!
But did he really take us for fools, or does he only too well realize that he was taken for a fool in a really big way? Did he betray us or did those who betrayed everybody by organizing this masquerade?


Faul is innocent.

I believe we can make this statement for several reasons. The first and most striking one is that he was an active participant in most of the clues left behind pointing to Paul's death. He was part of a group that knew he was Faul and none of them were any where near comfortable with this. As a group they denounced the situation, revealing many details.

The Abbey Road album, for example shows the four of them crossing the road in single file. Some analyse the image as John dressed like Christ (in white), Ringo dressed in black like a 'Paul bearer' or mortician, Faul barefoot as ready for burial (in the UK don't they bury you with your shoes off?) and George following in jeans dressed as his grave digger. This can seem far fetched or not, as you choose.



What is also interesting to note is that without shoes Faul seems as tall or taller than the others, some of whom wore thick heels on their fashionable booties. Can we be so sure that Paul was that tall? Somebody here no doubt has registered all of their official body dimensions, save some hopefully.

This is one more time where Faul was either utterly foolish and unaware of what was going on about him, or was consciously complicit in revealing to us in secret ways that PID. Other occasions are innumerable even if I don't want to get Faul in trouble with Our Masters. :eek:


So we should really have some respect for Faul who has had one of the most difficult and trying lives if this is found to be accurate. I wouldn't wish such a destiny on my worst enemy. Those who know the pressures of fame and fortune will realize that a gilded prison is a prison nonetheless.


In awaiting Faul's coming out and the full rehabilitation of his name and that credit be due him for what he has himself done since 1966.


Who knows with all the disinfo about PID whether Faul is one of the Paul's in this boating along the Thames photo from The Beatles Book August 1968 Issue 61?



Which is Faul and which is Paul, the fellow in the double breasted jacket to starboard (to our left as the photo was taken from the bow) of the boat? Is he left-handed or was the photo flipped? The fellow speaking with him is also holding his bottle in the left hand, but he is eating with his right hand showing him to be right handed). But then who is the lad sitting down at the center of the photo and smiling away?

Some claim it is the only photo of Paul and Faul together, others say there was another one in the Magical Mystery Tour album (haven't seen it yet), but this photo could have been tinkered with in the darkroom back in the sixties, although for unknown and inexplicable reasons?

Your guess is the best you'll get.

[edit on 10-9-2009 by Getsmart]

Originally posted by Ethera
This is a question to faulcon:

If your allegations are true, do you feel people who try to expose the alleged conspiracy would be "getting in the way"? This is assuming the PID thories, or a combination of them, were true.

Yes, I suspect Mal Evans' death had something to do w/ his tell-all book he was about to publish, "Living the Beatles Legend." Parts of that book have been subsequently published, but not all of it. I also suspect Heather Mills was targeted by a campaign to threaten & discredit her just in case she decided to spill the beans.

9/9/09 - not one, but two!

Paul McCartney was permanently replaced.

Originally posted by Getsmart
Regarding Faul

Sorry, but I don't have a really good opinion of him. By assuming Paul's identity, he has been complicit in what I think was a crime. Paul deserves better than that.

Who knows with all the disinfo about PID whether Faul is one of the Paul's in this boating along the Thames photo from The Beatles Book August 1968 Issue 61?

Which is Faul and which is Paul, the fellow in the double breasted jacket to the port side of the boat or the lad sitting down at the center of the photo?

I don't think this is a legit picture. Notice that the pixilation pattern is not consistent throughout. I think it was photoshopped together, even if it is from 1968. Some comments other people have made:

"Noticeably, the white area between "Paul" and the sailor, "Paul's" head & legs & the sailor, are not pixilated. The guy that they are speculating to be "Brian Jones" on NIR is not pixilated, nor is the white area to the right of him. "Bill's" head & most of the man with the bald head next to him, are not. The man with the mustache sitting next to the person with the long hair is not. The two men standing next to the mast, one of which is a black silhouette, are not either."

"'JPM' is standing at the edge of the boat and his hair doesn't appear to be a strand out of place"

"it looks really weird. as if the bridge behind, was somehow fixed into the picture of the boat."

" If that is Paul, it would be Paul from 1964. Paul did not look like that in 1966. The Faul's head that they are using is Faul from 1967/68.
The earlist photos that we have of Faul are from the trip he took to Kenya with Mal Evans in November 1966. He did NOT look like he looks in this photo.
In other words, it took botox shots & surgery to make Faul look like that. He didn't look like that in 1964. He did not look like that until 1967 the earliest. Therefore, the photo must be bogus."

(comments at
only1rad.proboards.com...)

Originally posted by Uncle Benny
9/9/09 - not one, but two!

""More talent than the first one?" I hope that guy in the video was joking, b/c Faul is most definitely NOT more talented than Paul was.

[edit on 10-9-2009 by faulconandsnowjob]

I've been looking at the Beatles Rock Band clips and getting a sickening feeling about what they've done to distort the personalities in the group. In trying to make them seem "cool", they've succeeded in taking the "cool" out of them. And the producers seem to just drool over the profiteering...

www.wbur.org...

They've Faul-ized the looks of the "Paul" character in the Rock Band game (faulcon and others will know what I mean), so that's but one travesty.

The cartoon film YELLOW SUBMARINE made unfaithful caricatures of the real Beatles and used imposters for their voices. It reinforced myths and stereotypes.

Now, they're doing it again with this horrid Beatles Rock Band game. The band look like zombie slaves with no souls. They've lost their individualities and unique, individual coolnesses.

They've all been Fauled in this bizarre video game. In the game clips, it looks like their minds have been not only controlled but neutralized, pacified as if loaded with Prozac.

Does anyone else get this from watching the clips of Beatles Rock Band? There's something evil in it, like the dumbing down of young people and Prozac-ing everyone.

Bizarre!

Originally posted by switching yard
They've Faul-ized the looks of the "Paul" character in the Rock Band game (faulcon and others will know what I mean), so that's but one travesty.

Oh, definitely. They faithfully represented the shape of Faul's head in the 1967-era songs - at 0:43 in the video.





You can't tell me that the people who actually sit down to draw Paul & Faul don't notice little differences like head shape.

The 999 release date is also obviously significant. I'll let the people who know more about numerology comment on that.

[edit on 10-9-2009 by faulconandsnowjob]

Originally posted by faulconandsnowjob

Originally posted by Getsmart
Regarding Faul

Sorry, but I don't have a really good opinion of him. By assuming Paul's identity, he has been complicit in what I think was a crime. Paul deserves better than that.

I can see why those trapped in impostor roles refrain from revealing their real identity, the wrath would be upon them and they would serve as lightning rods after being used as a fuse.

I mean no disrespect for Paul. We are not saying that Faul robbed him of his life, only of his death.

I don't think this is a legit picture.,, Some comments other people have made:
"Noticeably, the white area between "Paul" and the sailor, "Paul's" head & legs & the sailor, are not pixilated. The guy that they are speculating to be "Brian Jones" on NIR is not pixilated, nor is the white area to the right of him. "Bill's" head & most of the man with the bald head next to him, are not. The man with the mustache sitting next to the person with the long hair is not. The two men standing next to the mast, one of which is a black silhouette, are not either."

I don't know image editing technology enough to rebut, but it is maybe possible that this is due to 2 reasons: the absence of pixellization in that photo is in areas of either high light or low light. It could very well be pixellated (which it invariably is in bitmap format) in one shade of dark grey or black, or one shade of light grey or white. The river behind the Paul to the left seems to be reflecting the light through the mist. This is admittedly unlikely, and I don't know digital photo edition, which presumably existed already in 1968?

"If that is Paul, it would be Paul from 1964. Paul did not look like that in 1966. The Faul's head that they are using is Faul from 1967/68.
The earlist photos that we have of Faul are from the trip he took to Kenya with Mal Evans in November 1966. He did NOT look like he looks in this photo. In other words, it took botox shots & surgery to make Faul look like that. He didn't look like that in 1964. He did not look like that until 1967 the earliest. Therefore, the photo must be bogus."

This leaves us with one question, which seems to highlight my comments in my last post: Faul would have been active as a member (impostor) of the Beatles in 1968. He would most likely have been aware of this, and would have had a choice of either reporting it to the higher ups, accepting it in a sporting manner from the others, or participated actively in leaving clues. This photo seems to serve no other purpose at that early date than to give a clue that there were 2 Pauls, one being the real PID to the left, and the other being Faul in his 1968 vintage apprearance to the center.

Complicit he was, but not only to those who eliminated Paul and produced Faul, but also complicit to the Beatles wanting the world to know they'd lost their Paul. Is Faul a heartless traitor with only betrayal as a response to all situations, betraying the public, betraying The Beatles and then betraying his masters, or is he an intelligence agent sworn in and duty bound to do a dirty job having the trying task of wrestling with his conscience while meeting everyone's expectations. It's your call.

Originally posted by Getsmart

I mean no disrespect for Paul. We are not saying that Faul robbed him of his life, only of his death.

No, I know. Sorry if came across as snappy.

I don't know image editing technology enough to rebut, but it is maybe possible that this is due to 2 reasons: the absence of pixellization in that photo is in areas of either high light or low light. It could very well be pixellated (which it invariably is in bitmap format) in one shade of dark grey or black, or one shade of light grey or white. The river behind the Paul to the left seems to be reflecting the light through the mist. This is admittedly unlikely, and I don't know digital photo edition, which presumably existed already in 1968?

Maybe... Just something about the photos screams "hack job" to me.

This photo seems to serve no other purpose at that early date than to give a clue that there were 2 Pauls, one being the real PID to the left, and the other being Faul in his 1968 vintage apprearance to the center.

That is a really good point.

or is he an intelligence agent sworn in and duty bound to do a dirty job having the trying task of wrestling with his conscience while meeting everyone's expectations.

Ok, I do think he has intell links. I'm not sure that he's "wrestling with his conscience," though. Do those people even have consciences? Seriously. But I think he knows in his heart that he has not lived up to people's expectations. As George *supposedly* said in the 60IF document:

he became a very small McCartney or perhaps slightly better than small.

digilander.libero.it...

[Disclaimer: That quote has only been posted for the sentiment expressed. I am not representing that it is a real quote from George Harrison.]

I suppose, in a way, Bill (or whatever his name is) ought to be pitied...

You can catch a few Beatles Rock Band clips on this VH-1 site...

www.vh1.com...

They've made The Beatles too clean, too feminine, too carefree and too like, on Prozac.

They've made them seem gay like they could just kiss each other (no offense, gay readers but The Beatles were not).

What does it have to do with PID?

With PID happening in 1966, an artificiality and myth-making sealed it. The lore and legend stories arose and have been repeated incessantly. The true history of the band has been distorted over the years, in a way sugar-coated.

What's wrong with silly love songs, Faul replies to John calling it muzak. What's wrong is that the empty, banal, silly, trivial, feminine, lightweight music put out by Faul smothered the real legacy with a reinvention or distortion of reality, damaging Paul's true songwriting history. Now we have further distortion of the band with this new video game portraying them not as they were but as sweet robots.

I seriously believe that if alive, John and George would have blocked the development of the Rock Band Beatles video game and of course, Paul would not have allowed it!

Faul, however, is totally on board because it helps legitimize him and sweeten the various deals and charades afoot.

Originally posted by switching yard
You can catch a few Beatles Rock Band clips on this VH-1 site...

www.vh1.com...

They've made The Beatles too clean, too feminine, too carefree and too like, on Prozac.

They've made them seem gay like they could just kiss each other (no offense, gay readers but The Beatles were not).

What does it have to do with PID?

Oh come off it! The 'pid' agenda has truly plummeted to new depths.

Now you're purporting the sale of a video game as being somehow relevant!

Also that 'gay' remark is just unbelievable, what are you talking about?

You clearly don't very much about the Beatles early days and how they were marketed in the early 1960's. You didn't see the Fab four stopping themselves being marketed as the clean cut mop headed lads from Liverpool did you?
''Further distortion'' of the band? Are you kidding me?
They have just released the entire back catalogue with original mono recordings? How more real would you like.

And unless you and your fellow 'pid' believers can show some proof of the existence of this person you call 'Faul' who you believe is not Paul McCartney
then please desist from referring to him as if he is a real person.




[edit on 10-9-2009 by pmexplorer]

Paul + haircut + moustache = "Faul"



Sorry folks, but that's all there is to it.

Originally posted by switching yard

What's wrong is that the empty, banal, silly, trivial, feminine, lightweight music put out by Faul smothered the real legacy with a reinvention or distortion of reality, damaging Paul's true songwriting history.

This is something I have trouble forgiving Faul for. People actually make fun of Paul, thinking he's responsible for some of those goofy songs. It's so sad.

Faul, however, is totally on board because it helps legitimize him and sweeten the various deals and charades afoot.

It is also more training of the masses to see him as "Paul McCartney."

Interesting how the PIA folk put forward these dissolves from one face to another and call it proof. A dissolve will morph one face into the other whether they match or not, so it doesn't prove anything.

And yes, Beatles Rock Band distorts and makes massive myth of the truth. It's a tremendous distortion of reality that further brainwashes young people who did not live through the sixties and buy the game thinking it portrays the "look and feel" of the sixties and portrays the real attitudes of The Beatles, which it does not.

But distortion is what this thread is about, really. When the replacement happened, distortion happened. If we are right in saying this was a mind control project perpetrated by the Illuminati by way of Tavistock controllers, then brainwashing was administered to the replacement, the others, the affected inner circle, and in the public.

A multi-layered brainwashing experiment! The layers of myths on top of myths just keep coming as evidenced in the misrepresentations of John and George that you can plainly see in the Rock Band Beatles propaganda they're putting out and promoting.

Sorry if I offended anyone by saying Rock Band Beatles make The Beatles look gay. That's just my opinion from watching some of the Rock Band clips.

Look, I don't think this Rock Band Beatles game is harmless fun. I think it's another distortion of what The Beatles were like as real people. Young people will buy the game and think they're seeing what The Beatles were like. It's a kind of Big Brother propaganda. Philip Norman said "Paul rewrites history every day." Well, there's something wrong with rewriting history. Read Orwell's 1984.

By the way, the phrase Yellow Submarine was London street slang for a large marijuana joint. It was not an innocent children's fairy tale that "Paul" dreamed one night, as the lore and legend would have you believe.

Lore and legend, the rewriting of history. A travesty.


[edit on 10-9-2009 by switching yard]

Originally posted by switching yard
Interesting how the PIA folk put forward these dissolves from one face to another and call it proof. A dissolve will morph one face into the other whether they match or not, so it doesn't prove anything.

Not only that, but they will also do comps using doctored photos. I've even caught them using comps of Paul-Paul (pre Nov 1966). Of course, they're the same. lol Fades like this don't work for them so well:

And yes, Beatles Rock Band distorts and makes massive myth of the truth. It's a tremendous distortion of reality that further brainwashes young people who did not live through the sixties and buy the game thinking it portrays the "look and feel" of the sixties and portrays the real attitudes of The Beatles, which it does not.

I didn't even live thru the 60's, & I've caught on to that :-P

Sorry if I offended anyone by saying Rock Band Beatles make The Beatles look gay. That's just my opinion from watching some of the Rock Band clips.

I think I've said more than once that Faul is effeminate where Paul was not. It's just a fact.

Look, I don't think this Rock Band Beatles game is harmless fun.

I have to agree propaganda & brain-washing aren't "harmless fun." Plus, it's sad what the lads have been turned into & how they've been exploited.

By the way, the phrase Yellow Submarine was London street slang for an illegal drug, speed I think. It was not an innocent children's fairy tale that "Paul" dreamed one night, as the lore and legend would have you believe.

... McCartney was living in Jane Asher's parents' house when he found the inspiration for the song:[3] ...

en.wikipedia.org...(song)

That would be the home of the psychiatrist, Dr. Richard Asher. The article goes on to quote Paul or Faul (who knows?), but this part is interesting:

... McCartney also said: "It's a happy place, that's all. You know, it was just... We were trying to write a children's song. That was the basic idea. And there's nothing more to be read into it than there is in the lyrics of any children's song."[4]...

en.wikipedia.org...(song)

Uh-huh.

[edit on 10-9-2009 by faulconandsnowjob]

Interesting stuff here guys and gals!

You've got my undivided attention as this thread has heightened my awareness of things gone amiss in this world leading to the event of Paul's death. Beyond his death, undoubtedly horrid as he had all to live for and was courageously taking a stand for right versus wrong, what is amazing is that he was indeed robbed of his death.


In seeking information about what actually happened it seems that one stumbles across a train load of useful insight and interesting analyses. To name one, here is a link to audio letters from the late 70's which sure must have seemed wacky and utterly unbelievable back then. He claims for example that Kissinger died in a plane crash on February 5th, 1979. With our growing awareness of consistent use of doubles and with today's hindsight and access to information technology, his revelations make one's hair stand on end:

www.peterdavidbeter.com...

Given that the content of his reports is staunchly politicized, which might understandably repel more than one, I will extract some of his more general statements, those most relevant to PID research. PIA die-hards will themselves find it interesting to explore this link as, of course, this would not in any way bring you of so much as consider a single instant that PID.

Since medieval times "doubles" have been used as an instrument of intrigue. History is replete with the exploits of impostors who have taken the place of the rich and the powerful, and often they have been remarkably successful. If all of this is new to you, I urge you to do your own library research.

For example, one of the latest books on the whole area of hoaxes was published in 1977 by Reader's Digest--it's called "The Pleasures of Deception" by Norman Moss. Chapter 4 of the book deals with a topic that is specially relevant here--that is, hoaxes perpetrated by means of the mass media.

It begins: "With the creation of the mass media, a whole new area of deception was opened up. This provided the means of fooling the whole public at the same time in the same way. Anything told through the mass media carries credibility; it is more solid than rumor, more respectable than gossip, more believable than hearsay." A few lines further on the author points out that people tend to just swallow what they read, saying "The newspapers say so and so." He might have added, "I saw it on television."

The psychological key to all this is explained in the words: "This authority stems partly from the fact that the media, and particularly the news media, deal with public issues that are beyond the experience of most of its audience." In other words, if we don't know any better, we just believe what we are told. Still you may say, "Surely the great major media of the United States are not used for really serious distortions. It just couldn't happen here." Well, my friends, it began happening here over 80 years ago.

[edit on 10-9-2009 by Getsmart]