It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
PID - Motivations for the Murder of Paul McCartney
page: 48share:
UPDATE ON THE QUAIDS
They were retained in custody in Canada at least until Wednesday October 27th although on the previous Friday they had been officially released with $10 000 bail. This can only be explained as a discreet measure of "protective custody" so as not to directly accuse the US authorities of criminal misconduct and to avoid taking a political stand by granting them official refugee status. They must have advanced some seriously convincing arguments to get the Canadian justice system to refrain from obeying the imperative demands for their extradition.
It is interesting to note that he refers to at least 3 other celebrities being targeted by similar mechanisms whereby criminal lawyers use bogus corporations to seize assets and capture revenue streams. Added to that there is, according to Randy Quaid, a "monstruous and merciless plot to murder me".
Researchers into the wrongful death of Paul McCartney will not fail to observe this connection between managerial and legal appropriation of assets and revenues prior to the physical elimination of a celebrity. Whether they are replaced or not will possibly depend upon whether their position is to be leveraged for influence purposes in propaganda programs and/or for further revenue generation on false pretenses by the fraudulent use of a celebrity impostor sold to the public as the original McCoy.
This means that the judicial trail to follow should come from a FORENSIC ACCOUNTING analysis of the assets and revenues of The Beatles in the 1960's at which time their properties and income were probably illegally seized by corporate lawyers exploiting loopholes in the system and creating mechanisms of economic spoliation. Who ran Apple Records, what were exactly in the corporate texts and what was the fine print in the contracts? Because prior to a contract killing they apparently first ensure that the other contracts are in proper disorder.
That Randy Quaid slightly modified his original statement, making it more clearly targeted at the legal henchmen used by the Hollywood Mafia of CIA Mass Media Murderers, is probably not due to it being any less true that there is an organized widespread program of killing uncooperative Stars, but because it is easier to prove in court the misdeeds of specific individuals and their complicit role in aspects of the case than to prove a broader conspiracy. Theirs today is now a judicial battle which must follow the slow routine of plucking through trace elements of evidence without making the larger jump to hypothesizing about more extensive networks of corruption and criminal enterprise. After all, who could believe in the existence of organized crime in a place like Los Angeles, which never had even so much as a trace of gang warfare or drug trafficking? Who could imagine that anyone would want to use the Movies as a propaganda medium, after all, only the US Army would be so dumb!
Hollywood, The Pentagon And Washington: The Movies And National Security
GS
They were retained in custody in Canada at least until Wednesday October 27th although on the previous Friday they had been officially released with $10 000 bail. This can only be explained as a discreet measure of "protective custody" so as not to directly accuse the US authorities of criminal misconduct and to avoid taking a political stand by granting them official refugee status. They must have advanced some seriously convincing arguments to get the Canadian justice system to refrain from obeying the imperative demands for their extradition.
"He told a Vancouver news conference that there is a "bottom-feeding conspiracy" out to get him but, unlike previous vague accusations, this time he publicly named three Hollywood lawyers as the conspirators.
Quaid, 60, said the lawyers, who once worked for him, employed "fake loans," "bogus corporations" and a "phoney probate file" in their conspiracy.
"They conspired to steal my property and money by gaining access to my revenue streams," said Quaid, speaking in the calm, assured tones he has used in his distinguished film roles. "Assets and royalties were misappropriated."
Quaid said he has made $40 million in his acting career, but court records show he filed for bankruptcy in 2000. The file has since been closed.
He said there was a "monstrous" and "merciless" plot to "murder me."
Speaking for himself and his wife, Evi Quaid, who accompanied him into Canada last week, Quaid said: "We are not criminals or fugitives from justice. We're not crazy."
Quaid's new allegations included cross words for his actor-brother, Dennis Quaid, whom he said "made matters worse" by buying a property he once owned.
He also brought other famous names into his tale, claiming singer Britney Spears and actors Lindsay Lohan and Mel Gibson are also victims of attempts to get "at their money."
SOURCE: click this link
It is interesting to note that he refers to at least 3 other celebrities being targeted by similar mechanisms whereby criminal lawyers use bogus corporations to seize assets and capture revenue streams. Added to that there is, according to Randy Quaid, a "monstruous and merciless plot to murder me".
Researchers into the wrongful death of Paul McCartney will not fail to observe this connection between managerial and legal appropriation of assets and revenues prior to the physical elimination of a celebrity. Whether they are replaced or not will possibly depend upon whether their position is to be leveraged for influence purposes in propaganda programs and/or for further revenue generation on false pretenses by the fraudulent use of a celebrity impostor sold to the public as the original McCoy.
This means that the judicial trail to follow should come from a FORENSIC ACCOUNTING analysis of the assets and revenues of The Beatles in the 1960's at which time their properties and income were probably illegally seized by corporate lawyers exploiting loopholes in the system and creating mechanisms of economic spoliation. Who ran Apple Records, what were exactly in the corporate texts and what was the fine print in the contracts? Because prior to a contract killing they apparently first ensure that the other contracts are in proper disorder.
That Randy Quaid slightly modified his original statement, making it more clearly targeted at the legal henchmen used by the Hollywood Mafia of CIA Mass Media Murderers, is probably not due to it being any less true that there is an organized widespread program of killing uncooperative Stars, but because it is easier to prove in court the misdeeds of specific individuals and their complicit role in aspects of the case than to prove a broader conspiracy. Theirs today is now a judicial battle which must follow the slow routine of plucking through trace elements of evidence without making the larger jump to hypothesizing about more extensive networks of corruption and criminal enterprise. After all, who could believe in the existence of organized crime in a place like Los Angeles, which never had even so much as a trace of gang warfare or drug trafficking? Who could imagine that anyone would want to use the Movies as a propaganda medium, after all, only the US Army would be so dumb!
Hollywood, The Pentagon And Washington: The Movies And National Security
GS
Originally posted by Getsmart
We may therefore want to focus less on Seattle and more on the Hollywood hit squads when investigating the murder of James Paul McCartney in 1966... Did the same CIA henchmen also kill Paul, and are they today behind the murders of many Hollywood actors? Is the CIA the "Muscle" used by the Illuminati to enforce their hammerlock on the minds of the public, forcing everyone in the entertainment industries under their CONTENT CONTROL?
I have it on good authority that there are CIA hit squads operating in USA. I believe they are the "muscle" the Illuminati use to get rid of opponents. Of course, they are also the ones that find and train the doubles. I have it narrowed down to Seattle or LA for where it went down - in that Aug 25-28, 1966 time frame. I'm not ready to exclude Seattle at this point, since the roving jackals could have easily ventured north (where it was less populated) to do the deed.
I think the KKK threats in Memphis were misdirection. If people had figured out Paul was dead, they could have pinned it on the KKK. Of course, it's also possible that the KKK is a straight-up CIA front organization.
Originally posted by Getsmart
We have made the assumption that Paul was replaced and murdered, and we are ONLY investigating the motives and culprits of his MURDER.
An assumption is when someone takes something for granted as if it were true without any regard for facts or truth.
You have summed up your whole hypothesis.
And no I am not a shill, just someone with common sense. There are no motives or culprits, only wild imaginations that ignore, and misrepresent, facts. You can not tell people to not criticize this garbage hypothesis, if you want to not deal with common sense people start your own private website where you won't have to listen to sense, and be able continue your illusions without being disturbed by reality.
Originally posted by Getsmart
We have made the assumption that Paul was replaced and murdered, and we are ONLY investigating the motives and culprits of his MURDER.
Originally posted by Wally Hope
An assumption is when someone takes something for granted as if it were true without any regard for facts or truth.
You have summed up your whole hypothesis.
According to the free dictionary, here is the 4th definition of assumption:
"4. Something taken for granted or accepted as true without proof; a supposition: a valid assumption."
If we had PROOF of the Murder of Paul, this thread would not need to exist, and if we had proof of CONSPIRACIES then the entire ATS website would not need to exist. A Conspiracy Theory is based upon the "Assumption" that there is a Conspiracy! Take away the Assumption, then there is no theory.
ATS exists for the purpose of advancing research on "Assumptions" that Conspiracies might exist.
Therefore, I invite you to go into each and every other thread on this website and post the same debunking argument. Because, after all, they are only using conjecture based upon an assumption, which in your narrow little mind can only mean one thing: GARBAGE - to quote your above post:
Originally posted by Wally Hope
And no I am not a shill, just someone with common sense. There are no motives or culprits, only wild imaginations that ignore, and misrepresent, facts. You can not tell people to not criticize this garbage hypothesis, if you want to not deal with common sense people start your own private website where you won't have to listen to sense, and be able continue your illusions without being disturbed by reality.
Not only does your lame criticism refute our right to investigate anything which isn't officially established by self-proclaimed authorities as FACT, using many times the most questionable and manipulated elements of disputed evidence, it goes far further. You actually are rejecting the very basis of Abstract Theory - is your mind incapable of such reasoning?
Free Dictionary Definition of THEORY:
4. Abstract reasoning; speculation: a decision based on experience rather than theory.
5. A belief or principle that guides action or assists comprehension or judgment: staked out the house on the theory that criminals usually return to the scene of the crime.
6. An assumption based on limited information or knowledge; a conjecture.
Please note the following: wild imagination is what defines our own subjective knowledge of reality. What you call wild imagination is a factor of natural intelligence in humans. Intelligent minds use mental imaging, also called imagination, in most thought processes. Our freedom of thought is however confronted with a society seeking to control our mental images, channel or manipulate this perception and construction of reality by imposing beliefs and coaching us to accept many unverified premises.
Albert Einstein:
"The only thing that interferes with my learning is my education."
"Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one."
"Imagination is more important than knowledge."
Propaganda is widely utilized by devious power Elites to warp the minds of populations, using among their arsenal numerous falsehoods expounded as facts. Nothing prevents one from choosing to not obey that GROUP-THINK and nobody prevents people of like mind from communicating freely among themselves about a divergent common vision they hold. This is the purpose of the very existence of the ATS forums, and we can wonder what you're doing here as you are clearly vehemently opposed to this motivation to penetrate the layers of lies.
We are here investigating whether our vision we call our own perception of reality, namely "the Murder and Replacement of James Paul McCartney", may help uncover elements of factual TRUTH not only confirming this hypothesis but eventually leading to the arrest and prosecution of his assassins. This type intellectual exercise is the very basis of investigative research, and can be found in criminal investigations throughout the world.
Those who demand that people not think outside the box of established official versions of reality OPPOSE ANY RESEARCH which is not within the confines of officially established boundaries. These are the same people who would proclaim that "since the Earth is FLAT, and of course everybody knows that, you should LEAVE the ATS forum and go and start your own private website to indulge your wild imagination which can't handle being disturbed with reality... the version of reality DICTATED by one man: Wally Hope.
Albert Einstein:
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."
"Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocrities. The latter cannot understand it when a man does not thoughtlessly submit to hereditary prejudices but honestly and courageously uses his intelligence."
So thanks Wally for giving us the true measure of what honest and sincere ATS researchers are up against. You may not be a professional shill, but you surely do a very nasty hack job in fighting against our genuine efforts to investigate a gruesome crime and uncover the truth hidden behind deceptive cover stories enacted and promoted by Illuminati stooges and their Intelligence Agency hacks.
If you cannot handle our take on reality, which is the WORKING BASIS of our ongoing investigation, I warmly recommend that you cease from such attempts to Obstruct Justice which make you, knowingly or inadvertently, an accessory to the crimes YOU ASSUME were never committed.
Next are you going to post that the following videos should be barred from being shown in public? Why investigate the JFK Assassination? Everyone knows that the investigative committees concluded that a lone gunner shot him down. Stop those people whose wild imagination makes them lose grip on reality, and prompts them to make ASSUMPTIONS that Lee Harvey Oswald didn't kill United States President John F. Kennedy with a single bullet!
Wikipedia: The Single Bullet Theory
Can Wally Hope successfully prevent them from entertaining such delusions as the unacceptable imaginary speculation that there was a Conspiracy to Assassinate JFK? The very idea of an unorthodox scenario is, of course, preposterous - given that the Warren Commission officially concluded to the FACT was that JFK effectively died from wounds inflicted by a single "magic bullet" following multiple contradictory trajectories.
Assumptions called "Conspiracy Theories" can be found at Above Top Secret - Yikes!/b]
More crazy Assumptions for Wally Hope to debunk - enjoy your mammoth task at ATS
Skull & Bones George Herbert Walker Bush taking in some rays where JFK was killed
If an Illuminati Bloodline CIA Operative wacked JFK, did he Murder PAUL 3 years later?
I will even put my unorthodox imagination to another ASSUMPTION that given the overwhelming evidence of the Skull & Bones Bush Crime Family's implication in drug trafficking, murder and even genocide, that there is the distinct possibility that James Paul McCartney's skull is today joyfully displayed in the Tomb among many other famous skulls and bones for their members' enjoyment on the grounds of the Yale University campus. Of course we will not be able to find a Judge willing to issue a Search Warrant nor to compel their wholly owned State Police to seize skulls as evidence for DNA testing, because through their Russell Trust Skull & Bones practically owns the entire State of Connecticut within which their Tomb headquarters is located, as well as controlling much of the wealth of the United States, the NSA, CIA and countless other public and private organizations.
Secrets of the Tomb: Skull and Bones, the Ivy League and the Hidden Paths of Power
Did Paul know too much? We can be sure that if in the late sixties he had come forth during a concert or a live TV Show to point the finger at the Demonic Eugenics Agenda of the Illuminati, much of our planet's population would have suddenly woken up from a mindless trance and countless investigators would have marched on as an unstoppable army leaving no stone unturned until the truth was out.
R.I.P.
Getsmart
edit on 30-10-2010 by Getsmart because: of the unimpeachable desire to add a useless extra line of green text at the bottom of my
post
Originally posted by Getsmart
Originally posted by Getsmart
We have made the assumption that Paul was replaced and murdered, and we are ONLY investigating the motives and culprits of his MURDER.
Originally posted by Wally Hope
An assumption is when someone takes something for granted as if it were true without any regard for facts or truth.
You have summed up your whole hypothesis.
According to the free dictionary, here is the 4th definition of assumption:
"4. Something taken for granted or accepted as true without proof; a supposition: a valid assumption."
If we had PROOF of the Murder of Paul, this thread would not need to exist
Doesn't that tell you something, then?
If you have no proof for your assumptions - your assumptions have no credibility.
This thread only exists to allow about 3 raving PIDers to post their flawed, rambling, irrational theories which have nothing whatsoever to coroborate them.
Originally posted by Getsmart
and if we had proof of CONSPIRACIES then the entire ATS website would not need to exist.
So people wouldn't want to discuss conspiracies if there were proof of them?!
What a silly statement.
Originally posted by Getsmart
Please note the following: wild imagination is what defines our own subjective knowledge of reality.
Imagination and reality can be totally exclusive of one another. If I imagine there is a giant green donut orbiting the moon, does it mean their is?!
Originally posted by Getsmart
What you call wild imagination is a factor of natural intelligence in humans.
You are taking his terminology out of context. He is specifically refering to your wild imagination that Paul McCartney was replaced - not whether imagination is a sign of intelligence or not.
Originally posted by Getsmart
Intelligent minds use mental imaging, also called imagination, in most thought processes.
And your point is?
Originally posted by Getsmart
Our freedom of thought is however confronted with a society seeking to control our mental images, channel or manipulate this perception and construction of reality by imposing beliefs and coaching us to accept many unverified premises.
Such as a giant donut orbiting the moon?
Originally posted by Getsmart
Propaganda is widely utilized by devious power Elites to warp the minds of populations, using among their arsenal numerous falsehoods expounded as facts.
It is also used by people with obsessive assumptions to 'convert' others to their false belief system - such as PIDers. Just three Examples of PIDer "falsehoods expounded as facts":
1. Paul didn't have freckles but 'Faul' does.
2. 'Faul' is taller than Paul.
3. 'Faul's' nasal spine falls down his face. (See previous page)
Originally posted by Getsmart
We are here investigating whether our vision we call our own perception of reality, namely "the Murder and Replacement of James Paul McCartney", may help uncover elements of factual TRUTH not only confirming this hypothesis but eventually leading to the arrest and prosecution of his assassins.
But you haven't uncovered "any elements of factual TRUTH", have you? Not one. You're still stuck at the stage of "assumption".
Hmmmmm..... Doesn't this tell you something?
Obviously not!
You need to face reality: In over 40 years of PID 'research' you have not been able to uncover even one fact that has lead "to the arrest and prosecution of his assassins."
Ever heard the phrase, flogging a dead horse?
Originally posted by GetsmartThis type intellectual exercise is the very basis of investigative research, and can be found in criminal investigations throughout the world.
Criminal investigations are normally done by professionals who are trained in the thinking processes involved.
Detectives obtain their position by competitive examination covering such subjects as principles, practices and procedures of investigation; interviewing and interrogation; criminal law and procedures; applicable law governing arrests, search and seizures, warrants and evidence; police department records and reports; principles, practices and objectives of courtroom testimony; and police department methods and procedures.
What qualifications have you got?
Originally posted by Getsmart
So thanks Wally for giving us the true measure of what honest and sincere ATS researchers are up against. You may not be a professional shill, but you surely do a very nasty hack job in fighting against our genuine efforts to investigate an ASSUMED gruesome crime and uncover the ASSUMED truth hidden behind ASSUMED deceptive cover stories enacted and promoted by ASSUMED Illuminati stooges and their ASSUMED Intelligence Agency hacks.
^ The above quote has been edited for accuracy.
Originally posted by Getsmart
Why investigate the JFK Assassination?
Er, because it actually happened?
edit on 30-10-2010 by Dakudo because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Getsmart
According to the free dictionary, here is the 4th definition of assumption:
"4. Something taken for granted or accepted as true without proof; a supposition: a valid assumption."
Haha that is what I said.
Something taken for granted, or accepted as truth, without ANY proof. A supposition is also something taken for truth with very little evidence or facts.
Yours is not a valid assumption, none of your 'evidence' stands up to scrutiny, not valid.
The irony is you claim you have evidence, and if anyone points out your evidence is wrong you get all upset and start calling people shills.
As I wrote in an earlier post, John Lennon's half sister Julia Baird was "shocked" that he broke up with Cynthia to be with Yoko.
Later in her book THE PRIVATE JOHN LENNON, his sister again expresses shock (page 233 paperback edition)...
"In October, we saw on the news that John had left Yoko. I was shocked. John had turned whole worlds upside down to be with her, abandoning us all in the process, and now the Romeo and Juliet of rock and roll were fed up with each other, after just a few short years!
He was apparently in Los Angeles with a replacement love, who Yoko reportedly considered an ideal companion for his trip. May Pang was a young girl who had worked for the couple. I thought that John had now taken leave of any sense he had left."
She goes on to say...
"It has been reported that Yoko was in constant touch, during this 'away' time, in one way or another --- letter, telephone, telepathy? --- and that he was drawn back to her in some nefarious way. I have my own opinion about that."
+++++++++++++++
As I've said before, I think these passages in the bio books by people close to the original John are in some sort of veiled code to pass the censors. Lennon's sister could never get away with putting in her book something like "That wasn't the John Lennon I knew as a child. This was a different guy posing as John." She couldn't say that, so instead there is code like "shock"... "shocked"... "telepathy"... "nefarious" and perhaps most telling, the word "replacement."
In context with our theories about The Beatles being murdered and replaced, it is quite interesting to come across the word "replacement" in John's sister's book. Yes, at first glance the reader accepts that she's talking about May Pang being a "replacement love." But now just stop and think about it for a moment. What woman would ever use the phrase "replacement love?" Have you ever heard anyone say about a guy and a girl "oh, that's his replacement love." No, because it's a very awkward way to put it. But if you were trying to slip in some code for friends and family in the know, you might use the word "replacement" to let them know that you know what was going on.
Like, I think that if Heather Mills reads that same passage in John's sister's book and she sees that word "replacement," I think Heather would think to herself, "Ah, she knows."
I just think there are code words that get past the editors and CIA censors but are very telling for family and people close to the original Beatles who are suspicious or actually know The Beatles were replaced. Just a key word or two in a bio book says to those in the know that yes, here's another person who knows. It's like an underground thing. Something that can't be spoken to each other or to the media. If Heather Mills were to write a book (correct me if I'm wrong, but I think there's a non-disclosure agreement so that she can't write a book) but if she did write one, I'll bet somewhere in there would be a code word or code words just to let other family and insiders know that she knows.
Get what I'm saying?
Later in her book THE PRIVATE JOHN LENNON, his sister again expresses shock (page 233 paperback edition)...
"In October, we saw on the news that John had left Yoko. I was shocked. John had turned whole worlds upside down to be with her, abandoning us all in the process, and now the Romeo and Juliet of rock and roll were fed up with each other, after just a few short years!
He was apparently in Los Angeles with a replacement love, who Yoko reportedly considered an ideal companion for his trip. May Pang was a young girl who had worked for the couple. I thought that John had now taken leave of any sense he had left."
She goes on to say...
"It has been reported that Yoko was in constant touch, during this 'away' time, in one way or another --- letter, telephone, telepathy? --- and that he was drawn back to her in some nefarious way. I have my own opinion about that."
+++++++++++++++
As I've said before, I think these passages in the bio books by people close to the original John are in some sort of veiled code to pass the censors. Lennon's sister could never get away with putting in her book something like "That wasn't the John Lennon I knew as a child. This was a different guy posing as John." She couldn't say that, so instead there is code like "shock"... "shocked"... "telepathy"... "nefarious" and perhaps most telling, the word "replacement."
In context with our theories about The Beatles being murdered and replaced, it is quite interesting to come across the word "replacement" in John's sister's book. Yes, at first glance the reader accepts that she's talking about May Pang being a "replacement love." But now just stop and think about it for a moment. What woman would ever use the phrase "replacement love?" Have you ever heard anyone say about a guy and a girl "oh, that's his replacement love." No, because it's a very awkward way to put it. But if you were trying to slip in some code for friends and family in the know, you might use the word "replacement" to let them know that you know what was going on.
Like, I think that if Heather Mills reads that same passage in John's sister's book and she sees that word "replacement," I think Heather would think to herself, "Ah, she knows."
I just think there are code words that get past the editors and CIA censors but are very telling for family and people close to the original Beatles who are suspicious or actually know The Beatles were replaced. Just a key word or two in a bio book says to those in the know that yes, here's another person who knows. It's like an underground thing. Something that can't be spoken to each other or to the media. If Heather Mills were to write a book (correct me if I'm wrong, but I think there's a non-disclosure agreement so that she can't write a book) but if she did write one, I'll bet somewhere in there would be a code word or code words just to let other family and insiders know that she knows.
Get what I'm saying?
edit on 30-10-2010 by switching yard because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by switching yard
As I wrote in an earlier post, John Lennon's half sister Julia Baird was "shocked" that he broke up with Cynthia to be with Yoko......
^ Off topic. This thread is about the "motivations for the murder of Paul McCartney and his "assumed death".
Well, everyone but the rabid PIDers can rest easy. There were no "motivations" to kill him. For, Paul was never replaced. The evidence is overwhelming:
The Paul Head Turn:
Paul is alive!
edit on 30-10-2010 by Dakudo because: (no reason given)
FELLOW ATS MEMBERS: Note that those who attack this thread are in DENIAL, are aggressive, bitter and disrespectful of fellow ATS Members. Let this
enlighten your judgment of their words and behavior.
Originally posted by switching yard
As I wrote in an earlier post, John Lennon's half sister Julia Baird was "shocked" that he broke up with Cynthia to be with Yoko.
"He was apparently in Los Angeles with a replacement love, who Yoko reportedly considered an ideal companion for his trip. May Pang was a young girl who had worked for the couple. I thought that John had now taken leave of any sense he had left."
+++++++++++++++
As I've said before, I think these passages in the bio books by people close to the original John are in some sort of veiled code to pass the censors. Lennon's sister could never get away with putting in her book something like "That wasn't the John Lennon I knew as a child. This was a different guy posing as John." She couldn't say that, so instead there is code like "shock"... "shocked"... "telepathy"... "nefarious" and perhaps most telling, the word "replacement."
In context with our theories about The Beatles being murdered and replaced, it is quite interesting to come across the word "replacement" in John's sister's book. Yes, at first glance the reader accepts that she's talking about May Pang being a "replacement love." But now just stop and think about it for a moment. What woman would ever use the phrase "replacement love?" Have you ever heard anyone say about a guy and a girl "oh, that's his replacement love." No, because it's a very awkward way to put it. But if you were trying to slip in some code for friends and family in the know, you might use the word "replacement" to let them know that you know what was going on.
Like, I think that if Heather Mills reads that same passage in John's sister's book and she sees that word "replacement," I think Heather would think to herself, "Ah, she knows."
I just think there are code words that get past the editors and CIA censors but are very telling for family and people close to the original Beatles who are suspicious or actually know The Beatles were replaced. Just a key word or two in a bio book says to those in the know that yes, here's another person who knows. It's like an underground thing. Something that can't be spoken to each other or to the media. If Heather Mills were to write a book (correct me if I'm wrong, but I think there's a non-disclosure agreement so that she can't write a book) but if she did write one, I'll bet somewhere in there would be a code word or code words just to let other family and insiders know that she knows.
Hi Switching Yard,
GREAT POST. Thanks for pointing this out, there are a few in their entourage who were not eliminated and who despite the risk to their own life testify in a coded message. This is obviously the only way anyone can safely communicate when their life is threatened should they speak.
Also, pay no attention to the TROLLS in this thread who attack your posts, they are visibly irritated that we're on to some valid leads in our investigation and are actively polluting this thread to discourage us as well as to prevent others from peaceably learning about the Assassinations of Paul AND John by participating constructively in the discussion.
We are tying together many strands of truth, and while we are NOT YET making claims of evidence regarding HOW and by WHOM Paul was murdered, we have more than enough forensic and eyewitness evidence about Paul's replacement by FAUL to not need to further delve into that matter in this thread.
So, on the basis of what we consider to be steadfast evidence both of a coverup operation as well as the ridiculous replacement by a preposterous Carny Ham Imposter FAUL, that our efforts must only concentrate on elements of speculation which may lead to TANGIBLE EVIDENCE of Who Assassinated Paul and Why he was killed.
It is clear that the murder and replacement, roughly at the same time, of his best friend and fellow band member John Winston Lennon is not only ON TOPIC but Extremely Relevant to our investigation in what appears to be a DOUBLE MURDER by the same culprits, probably also perpetrated with the same motives.
So please post any further elements you may be able to contribute to John's assassination in the whereabouts of 1966 given that there is a strong probability that the man killed at the Dakota Building was NOT John Lennon.
Further protests against this line of inquiry, or against the very existence of this thread, shall be considered to be deliberate efforts to impede
our Murder Investigation. If it continues a formal request will be made that the ATS Administration take an official position regarding this matter,
and envisage banning those seeking to prevent the study of a Conspiracy Theory on their website.
Originally posted by Getsmart
Further protests against this line of inquiry, or against the very existence of this thread, shall be considered to be deliberate efforts to impede our Murder Investigation. If it continues a formal request will be made that the ATS Administration take an official position regarding this matter, and envisage banning those seeking to prevent the study of a Conspiracy Theory on their website.
Oooh - you're such a drama queen!
Every time your claims are analysed and refuted you go into a little hissy fit.
And how, precisely, is anyone who disagrees with your 'evidence', preventing "the study of a Conspiracy Theory on their website"?
Hmmmm?
Well?
You are free to post here, aren't you?
No one is stopping you.
Yet you start stamping your feet, jumping up and down and screaming for other members to be banned just because we disagree with you.
Other ATS members can clearly see how you wish to suppress any free speech of opposing views to your own in a public and OPEN forum.
Disgraceful!
If this really were a sensible investigation, you would be open to analysis and criticism of your conclusions and assumptions. You are clearly not. Which shows you aren't really interested in finding out the truth.
edit on 31-10-2010 by Dakudo because: (no reason given)
Despite aggressive thread debunking efforts we shall resume. Now back on topic as we methodically continue our investigation.
Here is a video of the August 28th, 1966 Los Angeles press conference in which some particularly interesting questions were asked.
After minute 5:00 John replies to the question:
"What was the song Eleanor Rigby based upon?"
It is important to realize that this is a song which we now know to have been written on the basis of names on tombstones in St Peters Cemetery where both Paul and John used to roam when they first met. Here is a post which clarifies that John must have known exactly what Eleanor Rigby was based upon, but an impostor couldn't possibly fathom what.
Source of The Beatles song Eleanor Rigby
John flippantly replies:
"Two queers."
He then seems to be rather bothered by the ensuring hilarity from the crowd. He goes on to interrupt a journalist to correct himself, looking at Paul for a cue, and then says something difficult to make out any better than "Two battle boys" or "Two babble boys", thanks if you can help in deciphering that phrase.
I think that he was referring insultingly to the REAL PAUL and the REAL JOHN whom they have already replaced as their doubles, adding insult to injury by calling them 'a couple of queers'.
This smacks of "army talk" and does not in any way correspond to the vernacular used by open-minded sixties rebels. Was it because of that giveaway comment that then tried to correct himself? Did he get a signal from a handler to repair his glaring mistake?
We have therefore been - and probably since this early date of August 28th, 1966 - in the presence of two impostors posing to the press and the public as the real John Lennon and the real Paul McCartney.
We are obviously not the only ones who noticed strange goings on insofar as The Beatles' identities were concerned, and because of this broad concern among many witnesses, the journalist was then brought to pointedly ask another question - note that this was way back in the summer of 1966:
John replies meekly "No... No..." and Paul meekly echoes an identical mimicked "No...No..." and then adds:
"We tried to get Brian Epstein to do it, he wouldn't do it."
This may well be revealing of why Brian Epstein was assassinated, unwilling he was to assist the murder and replacement of his band members.
In the same press conference video, at minute 6:38 a journalist asks Paul who does Beatles songs the best. Paul looks about as if 'obviously' The Beatles themselves would do Beatles songs the best, but then looks furtively at an equally silent John and embarrassed, he doesn't reply. Obviously they knew they were totally lame as replacement musicians and unable to "do Beatles songs properly", so they both chose to clam up.
At minute 9:41 FAUL gives us his first in a very long series of false identity confessions, with the following statement:
Upon the crowd's uproar he adds loudly:
"Forget it !"
Apparently we are not to remember what he says when he has an unconscious lapse. He also possibly thought he'd cleared up his unintentional leak by issuing a 'command' such as those used when coaching mind controlled impostors. Smiling at the crowd, he then looked furtively at someone in the public to his front left, at which time his smile suddenly turns to a frown and he says:
"What I meant to say..." followed by silence, hiding his eyes with his hand, not knowing how to get out of his predicament by another statement given that the initiative was not his own but probably commanded by a handler in the audience. John comes to his rescue with another flippant remarks that sounds something like "I like sticks or bricks" although I possibly inaccurately deciphered what John said at minute 10:00.
At minute 12:35 John uses a common impostor 'question avoidance' tactic by replying "No comment" to a simple question about a public statement he had recently made to a journalist and which had been published in the press. Faul, noticing that his response was unsatisfactory and maybe not wanting to be the only one looking like a looser in front of their 'agency impostor handlers' - taunted John saying "Come on, John, tell them what you mean". Thus pressured by his co-conspirator's prompting, John nevertheless was unable to reply to a clear question for any politically structured individual such as John Lennon was purported to be. Here is the question along with John's clueless answer:
QUESTION: "Show Business is an extension of the Jewish religion. Would you mind amplifying that?"
QUESTION: "And those words, how did you piece them together?"
Was John Lennon someone who lent himself to making trivial statements about fundamental political matters? Hardly. On this subject, here is what Texe Marrs confirms:
Do The Jews Own Hollywood And The Media?
Let us please remember that this is not the Jewish people nor the Jewish religion, but only a small group of fanatics who have infiltrated several nations among which Israel and the USA and who hide behind judaism to dissimulate their plans which have nothing to do with the welfare of anyone Jewish. They are Zionists, and as our current US Vice-President so eloquently puts it, this has nothing to do with being Jewish.
The Zionists are the Illuminati
We know that the Zionists were behind WWII and are fully enmeshed with the CIA and the Illuminati. As evidence, here is how Zionist Jacob Rothschild designed the Israeli Supreme Court filled with Illuminati symbolism, acting in mockery of the honest and honorable citizens of Israel, a Zionist movement that this video says is ANTISEMETIC.
The Zionists are Illuminati USURPERS of Judaism
John Lennon obviously knew about this, at least insofar as it extended to the music industry and show business at large. He was quoted by the press for such strong opposition and public statements, which explains why John was replaced, and Paul obviously along with him. John and Paul were rebellious enough for their Agency impostors to find it politically correct in those reactionary times to call them "Two queers". Pardon me if I don't share their sense of humor defiling the dignity of two honorable young men who served humanity with their duty to the TRUTH.
At the end of the Los Angeles video, at minute 14:00 John goes so far as to declare right before turning to Paul laughing:
GS
Here is a video of the August 28th, 1966 Los Angeles press conference in which some particularly interesting questions were asked.
After minute 5:00 John replies to the question:
"What was the song Eleanor Rigby based upon?"
It is important to realize that this is a song which we now know to have been written on the basis of names on tombstones in St Peters Cemetery where both Paul and John used to roam when they first met. Here is a post which clarifies that John must have known exactly what Eleanor Rigby was based upon, but an impostor couldn't possibly fathom what.
Source of The Beatles song Eleanor Rigby
John flippantly replies:
"Two queers."
He then seems to be rather bothered by the ensuring hilarity from the crowd. He goes on to interrupt a journalist to correct himself, looking at Paul for a cue, and then says something difficult to make out any better than "Two battle boys" or "Two babble boys", thanks if you can help in deciphering that phrase.
I think that he was referring insultingly to the REAL PAUL and the REAL JOHN whom they have already replaced as their doubles, adding insult to injury by calling them 'a couple of queers'.
This smacks of "army talk" and does not in any way correspond to the vernacular used by open-minded sixties rebels. Was it because of that giveaway comment that then tried to correct himself? Did he get a signal from a handler to repair his glaring mistake?
We have therefore been - and probably since this early date of August 28th, 1966 - in the presence of two impostors posing to the press and the public as the real John Lennon and the real Paul McCartney.
We are obviously not the only ones who noticed strange goings on insofar as The Beatles' identities were concerned, and because of this broad concern among many witnesses, the journalist was then brought to pointedly ask another question - note that this was way back in the summer of 1966:
"Have you ever trained or used Beatle Doubles as DECOYS?
John replies meekly "No... No..." and Paul meekly echoes an identical mimicked "No...No..." and then adds:
"We tried to get Brian Epstein to do it, he wouldn't do it."
This may well be revealing of why Brian Epstein was assassinated, unwilling he was to assist the murder and replacement of his band members.
In the same press conference video, at minute 6:38 a journalist asks Paul who does Beatles songs the best. Paul looks about as if 'obviously' The Beatles themselves would do Beatles songs the best, but then looks furtively at an equally silent John and embarrassed, he doesn't reply. Obviously they knew they were totally lame as replacement musicians and unable to "do Beatles songs properly", so they both chose to clam up.
At minute 9:41 FAUL gives us his first in a very long series of false identity confessions, with the following statement:
"We know our Real Image which is nothing like our image."
Upon the crowd's uproar he adds loudly:
"Forget it !"
Apparently we are not to remember what he says when he has an unconscious lapse. He also possibly thought he'd cleared up his unintentional leak by issuing a 'command' such as those used when coaching mind controlled impostors. Smiling at the crowd, he then looked furtively at someone in the public to his front left, at which time his smile suddenly turns to a frown and he says:
"What I meant to say..." followed by silence, hiding his eyes with his hand, not knowing how to get out of his predicament by another statement given that the initiative was not his own but probably commanded by a handler in the audience. John comes to his rescue with another flippant remarks that sounds something like "I like sticks or bricks" although I possibly inaccurately deciphered what John said at minute 10:00.
At minute 12:35 John uses a common impostor 'question avoidance' tactic by replying "No comment" to a simple question about a public statement he had recently made to a journalist and which had been published in the press. Faul, noticing that his response was unsatisfactory and maybe not wanting to be the only one looking like a looser in front of their 'agency impostor handlers' - taunted John saying "Come on, John, tell them what you mean". Thus pressured by his co-conspirator's prompting, John nevertheless was unable to reply to a clear question for any politically structured individual such as John Lennon was purported to be. Here is the question along with John's clueless answer:
QUESTION: "Show Business is an extension of the Jewish religion. Would you mind amplifying that?"
John Lennon:
"I mean, you can read into it what you like. It's just a little old statement. I was not very serious about it."
QUESTION: "And those words, how did you piece them together?"
John Lennon:
"Oh, I don't know..."
Was John Lennon someone who lent himself to making trivial statements about fundamental political matters? Hardly. On this subject, here is what Texe Marrs confirms:
Do The Jews Own Hollywood And The Media?
Let us please remember that this is not the Jewish people nor the Jewish religion, but only a small group of fanatics who have infiltrated several nations among which Israel and the USA and who hide behind judaism to dissimulate their plans which have nothing to do with the welfare of anyone Jewish. They are Zionists, and as our current US Vice-President so eloquently puts it, this has nothing to do with being Jewish.
The Zionists are the Illuminati
We know that the Zionists were behind WWII and are fully enmeshed with the CIA and the Illuminati. As evidence, here is how Zionist Jacob Rothschild designed the Israeli Supreme Court filled with Illuminati symbolism, acting in mockery of the honest and honorable citizens of Israel, a Zionist movement that this video says is ANTISEMETIC.
The Zionists are Illuminati USURPERS of Judaism
John Lennon obviously knew about this, at least insofar as it extended to the music industry and show business at large. He was quoted by the press for such strong opposition and public statements, which explains why John was replaced, and Paul obviously along with him. John and Paul were rebellious enough for their Agency impostors to find it politically correct in those reactionary times to call them "Two queers". Pardon me if I don't share their sense of humor defiling the dignity of two honorable young men who served humanity with their duty to the TRUTH.
At the end of the Los Angeles video, at minute 14:00 John goes so far as to declare right before turning to Paul laughing:
"You can't always tell the would be's from the real thing."
GS
Those who somehow stumbled into this thread without a genuine interest in investigating the Murder of Paul McCartney, you may wish to ask the David
Icke forum to restart a thread there more appropriately offering a venue to you to clamor loud and clear that none of this is real and that the man
you worship as Sir Paul isn't an impostor.
Go for it. Here's the link to that thread which only needs your prodding to restart. Enjoy what heck you can stir up over there, we'll appreciate the return to a civilized friendly atmosphere here at ATS.
www.davidicke.com...
Farewell.
GS
Go for it. Here's the link to that thread which only needs your prodding to restart. Enjoy what heck you can stir up over there, we'll appreciate the return to a civilized friendly atmosphere here at ATS.
www.davidicke.com...
Farewell.
GS
We have proof Paul was replaced. Of course, we are going to
theorize and speculate about what happened to him.
Switching Yard, that was a great post about what Julia said about a "replacement love." Wow!
Getsmart, that was a great analysis of the LA press conference. I posted it on the blog:
"You can't always tell the would be's from the real thing"
David Crosby was present at that conference. He has been linked to some serious Illuminati bloodlines. Just something to throw into the pot to let stew...
Switching Yard, that was a great post about what Julia said about a "replacement love." Wow!
Getsmart, that was a great analysis of the LA press conference. I posted it on the blog:
"You can't always tell the would be's from the real thing"
David Crosby was present at that conference. He has been linked to some serious Illuminati bloodlines. Just something to throw into the pot to let stew...
Originally posted by Getsmart
After minute 5:00 John replies to the question:
"What was the song Eleanor Rigby based upon?"
It is important to realize that this is a song which we now know to have been written on the basis of names on tombstones in St Peters Cemetery where both Paul and John used to roam when they first met.
Wrong. We do not "know" that at all. Here is another version of the origin:
By the time Paul presented the work-in-progress to the band a few weeks later at John's house in Kenwood, the title character had changed names again, to Eleanor Rigby -- "Eleanor" from actress Eleanor Bron, who had worked with the band in the film Help!, and "Rigby" from Rigby & Evens Ltd., a wine shop located at 22 King Street in Bristol, England. (Paul's girlfriend, actress Jane Asher, was appearing in the play "The Happiest Day Of Our Life" at the Theatre Royal, 35 King Street, and it was while waiting for her that he likely noticed the shop.)
In 1982, a gravestone for a real-life Eleanor Rigby was found in St. Peter's Parish Church in Woolton, Liverpool. This is significant because the Beatles grew up in Liverpool and often played in the graveyard; the Church itself is the site of many major community gatherings, including the one where John met Paul in 1957. Paul has denied any direct connection, but allows that the influence may have been subconscious; in any event, the gravesite is now a shrine for Beatles fans.
oldies.about.com...
Originally posted by Getsmart
We are obviously not the only ones who noticed strange goings on insofar as The Beatles' identities were concerned, and because of this broad concern among many witnesses, the journalist was then brought to pointedly ask another question - note that this was way back in the summer of 1966:
Complete fabrication. There was nobody who "noticed strange goings on insofar as The Beatles' identities were concerned" in 1966. If I'm wrong, post your evidence.
You won't - because you are just making things up!
Shame on you.
Originally posted by Getsmart
"Have you ever trained or used Beatle Doubles as DECOYS?
John replies meekly "No... No..." and Paul meekly echoes an identical mimicked "No...No..." and then adds:
"We tried to get Brian Epstein to do it, he wouldn't do it."
This may well be revealing of why Brian Epstein was assassinated, unwilling he was to assist the murder and replacement of his band members.
So, a joke about Brian not agreeing to be a decoy is evidence that he was assasinated?
C'mon!
Originally posted by Getsmart
Obviously they knew they were totally lame as replacement musicians and unable to "do Beatles songs properly", so they both chose to clam up.
LOL! Sargent Pepper is one of the greatest albums of all time! And you have the audacity to say they were "lame musicians".
Oh, dear!
Originally posted by Getsmart
At minute 9:41 FAUL gives us his first in a very long series of false identity confessions, with the following statement:
]"We know our Real Image which is nothing like our image."
Upon the crowd's uproar he adds loudly:
"Forget it !"
Complete hogwash. Any sensible person can deduce that he was trying to say that their real personalities weren't really like their public image. He just said it badly - then jokingly said "Forget it!" as he knew what he said didn't sound right.
All you are proving with your flawed analysis of that press conference is that anyone with a wild imagination can make all kinds of false assumptions and claims by merely interpreting things in the way YOU want.
This is NOT credible evidence. Nor a rational "investigation".
It is plain silly.
Originally posted by someotherguy
We have proof Paul was replaced.
No you don't.
Originally posted by someotherguy
Of course, we are going to theorize and speculate about what happened to him.
If you wish to waste your life on a hoax, you are quite free to do so.
Originally posted by someotherguy
He has been linked to some serious Illuminati bloodlines.
You obviously do not believe in the concept of Innocent Until Proven Guilty. And you are a lawyer?!
Piece of advice: Don't believe everything you read on the internet.
Originally posted by Getsmart
Further protests against this line of inquiry, or against the very existence of this thread, shall be considered to be deliberate efforts to impede our Murder Investigation. If it continues a formal request will be made that the ATS Administration take an official position regarding this matter, and envisage banning those seeking to prevent the study of a Conspiracy Theory on their website.
Haha yer funny. Go ahead make your formal request. Are threats not against t&c?
I am not preventing anything, you are on a public website and as long as I don't break t&c I can say anything I want in your thread. Like your hypothesis is a myth and absolute garbage.
You have NO proof, or even credible evidence, nothing but, as you already admitted, ASSUMPTIONS.
Assumptions based on your twisted analysis of events. Nothing wrong with discussing this historical myth but you guys just take it way too seriously. You should try getting out more. Don't you think if there were really any merit to your claims someone would have blown the impostors cover(s) by now? You are not the first to investigate this myth, what makes you so special?
Ah wait I know, teh internets (sic), too much information not enough analytical skill.
NOTE: Investigating isn't all about screeching nasty criticism about whatever others post here in this thread. Go and find some clues for
yourself, about WHO and WHY Paul was murdered, or release your pit bull jaw from our own investigation. Attack dogs don't find dead bodies, they just
try to maim people.
It appears that the link in my above post was not apparent enough for some to find it and click on?
Eleanor Rigby's tombstone in St Peters cemetery
That is the Tombstone of Eleanor Rigby. It is in the cemetery of the parish of St Peter's church in Liverpool where John used to sing in the choir, and where he used to hang out with Paul.
Liverpool's St Peters parish cemetery
Later Paul McCartney said that in writing the song they took the name Eleanor in homage to movie actress Eleanor Bron and Rigby as the name of a wine shop in Bristol. He called his heroin "Eleanor Rigby" because he throught it rang well. Lennon never disputed this, while he was presumably with Paul in those days when they used to hang out at St Peter's parish and stroll through the cemetery.
When, in 1980, someone noticed the tomb of Eleanor Rigby in this cemetery, Paul McCartney, George Harrison and Ringo Starr were the first to be surprised by this discovery. Yet the grave of John’s uncle George Toogood Smith was in that same cemetery, and John's Aunt Mimi was an active member of the congregation. George Toogood Smith gave John his first instrument, a harmonica. John was member the church's youth group and sang in the choir. He was no stranger to this cemetery and must have known the real origin of the song Eleanor Rigby, if he was really the real John Lennon.
With such a strong personal history tying an author to their song, would he quip: "Two queers"?
It is hard to believe that the "Beatles" knew nothing of this tomb, when they declared their surprise in 1980. It seems obvious that they had originally found these names by reading the tombstones. The Rigby tomb is conspicuously placed right next to another tomb, in the name of John McKenzie. In the song « Eleanor Rigby » there is father McKenzie, quite the coincidence.
Father McKenzie's tomb in St Peters cemetery
Do you still believe that the song Eleanor Rigby was based upon an actress and a wine shop, and how do you explain the presence next to Eleanor Rigby's tomb of that of father McKenzie in John's family cemetery?
Let us also clarify Paul's comment about Brian Epstein in the Los Angeles press conference. he was saying that they, the Beatles, had asked for Brian to coach and use fake Beatles as decoys, but that Brian wouldn't help with that. Listen to it again, and it will possibly become apparent?
QUESTION: "Have you ever trained or used Beatle Doubles as DECOYS?
John: "No... No..."
Paul: "No...No..."
Paul: "We tried to get Brian Epstein to do it, he wouldn't do it."
Paul was referring to getting Brian to create decoys FOR THE BEATLES. Who on Earth would want to make a decoy of an anonymous looking manager? Nobody even knew what Brian looked like back in those days, and even if they did recognize him there would have been no need for him to use a decoy of himself.
MORE IMPORTANTLY:
A question by a journalist about the possible use of Decoys to replace The Beatles could only be prompted by people noticing at various times that The Beatles didn't look, act, or sound like The Beatles, causing them to wonder if it wasn't due to the use of Beatles Decoys. This was a legitimate concern at the time which Journalists had a duty to address in a direct question to the interested parties.
It can only stem from a known phenomenon, that numerous people knew and had conferred together and agreed that whoever it was that they were meeting and talking to, listening to sing and play, looking at and examining, were NOT THE REAL BEATLES. So they assumed they must have been Decoys to fool crowds of fans, similarly to wooden ducks meant to deceive the flock. Confronted with proof of their false identity, by observation and comparison, they therefore made that assumption in an attempt to rationalize such a strange situation.
However, the journalist as well as the other witnesses of the practice of using FAKE BEATLES at that time probably erroneously concluded that this was done to prevent The Beatles from being mobbed by their fans, or to enable them to be in two places at once, for example at home with the flu or off on a romantic escapade without losing revenue from booked concerts. So at that early date most witnesses to the fact were concerned and curious, but probably figured it was just a deceptive ploy of a more innocent nature, at worst motivated by greed, and could not yet confront the morbid truth that prominent members of The Beatles had been murdered and replaced by permanent impostors.
It was only later, when the REAL BEATLES never reappeared, that the revelation that PAUL IS DEAD spread like wildfire and became irrepressible. They had known the REAL PAUL, and noticed that he was no longer to be seen or heard. John was a far better double, and public attention therefore focused on the glaringly obvious FAUL. The Beatles had vanished from public view and were never again heard playing live in Concert. It took some years for the impostors to train enough to go ahead with solo careers, but they retained noticeable inconsistencies respective to the originals in terms of musical talent and artistic character.
Paul and John were probably already dead on August 28th, 1966. R.I.P.
WHY were they killed? I think we are getting closer to our discovery of the motive. We can assume that there was a ZIONIST plot to shut up John Lennon, and it probably wasn't possible without taking out Paul McCartney also. John had probably been targeted for some time for replacement, making the search for his double more fortuitous, the facsimile surgery more closely adjusted and the impostor training more convincing. John was therefore switched out relatively unnoticed, except for by his close entourage and especially James Paul McCartney.
Paul was maybe not in as hot water with the Powers That Be, or else the planning to replace them was scheduled for later on, once a proper double had been sorted out for Paul. But the plans got precipitated. In 1966 John was going public and releasing increasingly accusing statements about who is running the world from behind the scenes and the sick agenda of the Zionist Illuminati. This had to be stopped, and the CIA was brought in to intervene. Paul and John were WACKED and John's impostor was put into action while substitutes for Paul were pulled out of their drawing boards as swiftly as possible, a number of them appearing in different places at different times causing researchers today to have a more difficult time identifying who was used as a substitute and exactly when Paul was taken out.
Getsmart
It appears that the link in my above post was not apparent enough for some to find it and click on?
Eleanor Rigby's tombstone in St Peters cemetery
That is the Tombstone of Eleanor Rigby. It is in the cemetery of the parish of St Peter's church in Liverpool where John used to sing in the choir, and where he used to hang out with Paul.
Liverpool's St Peters parish cemetery
Later Paul McCartney said that in writing the song they took the name Eleanor in homage to movie actress Eleanor Bron and Rigby as the name of a wine shop in Bristol. He called his heroin "Eleanor Rigby" because he throught it rang well. Lennon never disputed this, while he was presumably with Paul in those days when they used to hang out at St Peter's parish and stroll through the cemetery.
When, in 1980, someone noticed the tomb of Eleanor Rigby in this cemetery, Paul McCartney, George Harrison and Ringo Starr were the first to be surprised by this discovery. Yet the grave of John’s uncle George Toogood Smith was in that same cemetery, and John's Aunt Mimi was an active member of the congregation. George Toogood Smith gave John his first instrument, a harmonica. John was member the church's youth group and sang in the choir. He was no stranger to this cemetery and must have known the real origin of the song Eleanor Rigby, if he was really the real John Lennon.
With such a strong personal history tying an author to their song, would he quip: "Two queers"?
It is hard to believe that the "Beatles" knew nothing of this tomb, when they declared their surprise in 1980. It seems obvious that they had originally found these names by reading the tombstones. The Rigby tomb is conspicuously placed right next to another tomb, in the name of John McKenzie. In the song « Eleanor Rigby » there is father McKenzie, quite the coincidence.
Father McKenzie's tomb in St Peters cemetery
Do you still believe that the song Eleanor Rigby was based upon an actress and a wine shop, and how do you explain the presence next to Eleanor Rigby's tomb of that of father McKenzie in John's family cemetery?
Let us also clarify Paul's comment about Brian Epstein in the Los Angeles press conference. he was saying that they, the Beatles, had asked for Brian to coach and use fake Beatles as decoys, but that Brian wouldn't help with that. Listen to it again, and it will possibly become apparent?
QUESTION: "Have you ever trained or used Beatle Doubles as DECOYS?
John: "No... No..."
Paul: "No...No..."
Paul: "We tried to get Brian Epstein to do it, he wouldn't do it."
Paul was referring to getting Brian to create decoys FOR THE BEATLES. Who on Earth would want to make a decoy of an anonymous looking manager? Nobody even knew what Brian looked like back in those days, and even if they did recognize him there would have been no need for him to use a decoy of himself.
MORE IMPORTANTLY:
A question by a journalist about the possible use of Decoys to replace The Beatles could only be prompted by people noticing at various times that The Beatles didn't look, act, or sound like The Beatles, causing them to wonder if it wasn't due to the use of Beatles Decoys. This was a legitimate concern at the time which Journalists had a duty to address in a direct question to the interested parties.
It can only stem from a known phenomenon, that numerous people knew and had conferred together and agreed that whoever it was that they were meeting and talking to, listening to sing and play, looking at and examining, were NOT THE REAL BEATLES. So they assumed they must have been Decoys to fool crowds of fans, similarly to wooden ducks meant to deceive the flock. Confronted with proof of their false identity, by observation and comparison, they therefore made that assumption in an attempt to rationalize such a strange situation.
However, the journalist as well as the other witnesses of the practice of using FAKE BEATLES at that time probably erroneously concluded that this was done to prevent The Beatles from being mobbed by their fans, or to enable them to be in two places at once, for example at home with the flu or off on a romantic escapade without losing revenue from booked concerts. So at that early date most witnesses to the fact were concerned and curious, but probably figured it was just a deceptive ploy of a more innocent nature, at worst motivated by greed, and could not yet confront the morbid truth that prominent members of The Beatles had been murdered and replaced by permanent impostors.
It was only later, when the REAL BEATLES never reappeared, that the revelation that PAUL IS DEAD spread like wildfire and became irrepressible. They had known the REAL PAUL, and noticed that he was no longer to be seen or heard. John was a far better double, and public attention therefore focused on the glaringly obvious FAUL. The Beatles had vanished from public view and were never again heard playing live in Concert. It took some years for the impostors to train enough to go ahead with solo careers, but they retained noticeable inconsistencies respective to the originals in terms of musical talent and artistic character.
Paul and John were probably already dead on August 28th, 1966. R.I.P.
WHY were they killed? I think we are getting closer to our discovery of the motive. We can assume that there was a ZIONIST plot to shut up John Lennon, and it probably wasn't possible without taking out Paul McCartney also. John had probably been targeted for some time for replacement, making the search for his double more fortuitous, the facsimile surgery more closely adjusted and the impostor training more convincing. John was therefore switched out relatively unnoticed, except for by his close entourage and especially James Paul McCartney.
Paul was maybe not in as hot water with the Powers That Be, or else the planning to replace them was scheduled for later on, once a proper double had been sorted out for Paul. But the plans got precipitated. In 1966 John was going public and releasing increasingly accusing statements about who is running the world from behind the scenes and the sick agenda of the Zionist Illuminati. This had to be stopped, and the CIA was brought in to intervene. Paul and John were WACKED and John's impostor was put into action while substitutes for Paul were pulled out of their drawing boards as swiftly as possible, a number of them appearing in different places at different times causing researchers today to have a more difficult time identifying who was used as a substitute and exactly when Paul was taken out.
Getsmart
edit on 1-11-2010 by Getsmart because: my signature was getting lonely all alone down there...
Detractors here insult this thread as being ridiculous. More power to them to be comforted in the fact that they already know whatever is to be
known. However it is a shame that they need to try to prevent others from learning and discovering by disrupting our research.
While I can be blamed of countless things, some correct and others contrived, at least you can't say I am leaving many stones unturned in the quest for truth about what Paul and probably also John if not all The Beatles suffered at the hands of organized criminals.
In the latest of the avenues of inquiry explored, here is another element which may, or may not have bearing on the identity and motives of those who killed James Paul McCartney.
The lead is the identity of Brian Epstein. My attention was called to this by another poster here, who in criticizing me as being an idiot, had erroneously construed that Brian Epstein might have been himself replaced by a Decoy, or at least that Paul was suggesting that there had been a project to do so. This appeared utterly ridiculous given the nerdy geek accountant personality of Brian Epstein, who due to this also has seemed a very unlikely and improbable manager for The Beatles. Due to his effaced personality and relative absence of professional qualifications for such an important role, other researchers have even questioned in depth why he became the Manager of The Beatles, such a critical lever to influence global public opinion and aesthetic tastes.
This brought his identity to the forefront, as never before had I considered it. Remembering something interesting in a previous post here, I ventured to see if there might not be further links between Brian and the Fabulous Four.
We recall that there is an uncanny resemblance between The Beatles and ancient Roman Emperor Justinian and three of his closest friends, all represented in a mosaic more than a thousand years old.
The Fabulous Four above Justinian and Friends
LINK to the Original Post
While Paul (or Faul) resembles Justinian, we will note that George Harrison looks like Belisarius:
General Flavius Belisarius AD 500 – AD 565
This brought me to examine who was the Pope at that time. After all, Justinian is noted for having JAILED THE POPE FOR HERESY to force him to repudiate the teachings of Jesus about Reincarnation. Is this why maybe this Pope reincarnated in the 20th Century?
Pope Vigilius Arrested for Believing in Reincarnation
Here we can read about these Ravenna mosaics in the following academic study of...
Byzantine Art as Propaganda: Justinian and Theodora at Ravenna
This article identifies the two other officials pictured next to Justinian whom John Lennon and Ringo Starr look like, as possibly his financial backer, a banker named Julianus Argentarius, the other being Belisarius' rival General Narses, who happened to also be a eunuch. Narses became Justinian's High Chamberlain at what, in those trying times, was the ripe old age of 50 and reconquered Italy and Rome from the Goths.
Narses - his role in history
Regarding Justinian's reign, the article above quotes author David Talbot Rice:
We can thus note that Justinian is credited with the Fusion of Church and State, something rejected by many nations with the blatant exception of the Anglican Church of which the Monarch of England is both head of State and Church, just like Justinian. This may be no coincidence. We also note that the above article credits Justinian as using culture by the medium of Byzantine Art to promote propaganda. This is in itself similar to the Tavistock Institute's use of Rock n' Roll Music and The Beatles for Propaganda and Mass Mind Control purposes.
So there might be a relation between the British Crown's desire to further its power as Head of Church and State, its propaganda dedicated Tavistock 'Brainwashing' Institute's efforts to harness The Beatles to their social control agenda, and the plausible physical similarities between Justinian's CLAN and those involved in the band The Beatles. Was this why Peter Best was removed, because he didn't look the part? Is this why a drummer of relatively modest talent, Ringo Starr was recruited in his place? Was Brian Epstein, despite fledgling qualifications, made their manager against all odds, for a similar reason? Why not take a look?
Taking a closer look at Brian Epstein, beyond his genetic heritage and who he really was, let's see who he may resemble and what he really looked like - examining him under the magnifying glass, so to say. Fortunately many photographs exist, contrarily to personalities from the ancient days before cameras existed and when art was more evocative than exactingly representative. I wonder what type of statement he was trying to make here, was he secretly rebellious in the safety of his own home where nobody would take notice?
Brian Epstein wearing a "Stamp Out The Beatles" T-shirt
Brian Epstein and Pope Vigilius
Brian Epstein and an older bearded Vigilius
Whatever your conclusions, and these will surely be mitigated given the discrepancies between ancient artistic depictions and modern photographs in contemporary garb, there are quite a lot of coincidental parameters in The Mysterious Riddle of The Disappearance of The Beatles.
GS
While I can be blamed of countless things, some correct and others contrived, at least you can't say I am leaving many stones unturned in the quest for truth about what Paul and probably also John if not all The Beatles suffered at the hands of organized criminals.
In the latest of the avenues of inquiry explored, here is another element which may, or may not have bearing on the identity and motives of those who killed James Paul McCartney.
The lead is the identity of Brian Epstein. My attention was called to this by another poster here, who in criticizing me as being an idiot, had erroneously construed that Brian Epstein might have been himself replaced by a Decoy, or at least that Paul was suggesting that there had been a project to do so. This appeared utterly ridiculous given the nerdy geek accountant personality of Brian Epstein, who due to this also has seemed a very unlikely and improbable manager for The Beatles. Due to his effaced personality and relative absence of professional qualifications for such an important role, other researchers have even questioned in depth why he became the Manager of The Beatles, such a critical lever to influence global public opinion and aesthetic tastes.
This brought his identity to the forefront, as never before had I considered it. Remembering something interesting in a previous post here, I ventured to see if there might not be further links between Brian and the Fabulous Four.
We recall that there is an uncanny resemblance between The Beatles and ancient Roman Emperor Justinian and three of his closest friends, all represented in a mosaic more than a thousand years old.
The Fabulous Four above Justinian and Friends
LINK to the Original Post
While Paul (or Faul) resembles Justinian, we will note that George Harrison looks like Belisarius:
General Flavius Belisarius AD 500 – AD 565
This brought me to examine who was the Pope at that time. After all, Justinian is noted for having JAILED THE POPE FOR HERESY to force him to repudiate the teachings of Jesus about Reincarnation. Is this why maybe this Pope reincarnated in the 20th Century?
Pope Vigilius Arrested for Believing in Reincarnation
Here we can read about these Ravenna mosaics in the following academic study of...
Byzantine Art as Propaganda: Justinian and Theodora at Ravenna
This article identifies the two other officials pictured next to Justinian whom John Lennon and Ringo Starr look like, as possibly his financial backer, a banker named Julianus Argentarius, the other being Belisarius' rival General Narses, who happened to also be a eunuch. Narses became Justinian's High Chamberlain at what, in those trying times, was the ripe old age of 50 and reconquered Italy and Rome from the Goths.
Narses - his role in history
Regarding Justinian's reign, the article above quotes author David Talbot Rice:
"More than any other monarch in the history of Byzantium, he [Justinian] stamped the Empire with his own character; centuries were to pass before it emerged form his shadow." (2)." It is these premises followed here. The authority of the emperor to convene Ecumenical Councils of the Church (553 CE) and effectively hold the western Pope Vigilius between 545-553 mostly hostage against his will in or around Constantinople (although Rome was in hostile Goth hands anyway) are but two evidences of this fusion of political and religious power."
We can thus note that Justinian is credited with the Fusion of Church and State, something rejected by many nations with the blatant exception of the Anglican Church of which the Monarch of England is both head of State and Church, just like Justinian. This may be no coincidence. We also note that the above article credits Justinian as using culture by the medium of Byzantine Art to promote propaganda. This is in itself similar to the Tavistock Institute's use of Rock n' Roll Music and The Beatles for Propaganda and Mass Mind Control purposes.
So there might be a relation between the British Crown's desire to further its power as Head of Church and State, its propaganda dedicated Tavistock 'Brainwashing' Institute's efforts to harness The Beatles to their social control agenda, and the plausible physical similarities between Justinian's CLAN and those involved in the band The Beatles. Was this why Peter Best was removed, because he didn't look the part? Is this why a drummer of relatively modest talent, Ringo Starr was recruited in his place? Was Brian Epstein, despite fledgling qualifications, made their manager against all odds, for a similar reason? Why not take a look?
Taking a closer look at Brian Epstein, beyond his genetic heritage and who he really was, let's see who he may resemble and what he really looked like - examining him under the magnifying glass, so to say. Fortunately many photographs exist, contrarily to personalities from the ancient days before cameras existed and when art was more evocative than exactingly representative. I wonder what type of statement he was trying to make here, was he secretly rebellious in the safety of his own home where nobody would take notice?
Brian Epstein wearing a "Stamp Out The Beatles" T-shirt
Brian Epstein and Pope Vigilius
Brian Epstein and an older bearded Vigilius
Whatever your conclusions, and these will surely be mitigated given the discrepancies between ancient artistic depictions and modern photographs in contemporary garb, there are quite a lot of coincidental parameters in The Mysterious Riddle of The Disappearance of The Beatles.
GS
Very interesting theory, GS. As you know, I think the Beatles were of the Light. I believe that being such, they were incorruptible & uncontrollable.
IMO, not only did they refuse to willingly serve the Agenda, they outright opposed it.
I see the resemblance being more between Faul & Justinius than Paul & Justinius.
I see the resemblance being more between Faul & Justinius than Paul & Justinius.
Originally posted by Getsmart
NOTE: Investigating isn't all about screeching nasty criticism about whatever others post here in this thread. Go and find some clues for yourself, about WHO and WHY Paul was murdered, or release your pit bull jaw from our own investigation. Attack dogs don't find dead bodies, they just try to maim people.
Jeez get over yourself! You write stuff like this constantly and you have the nerve to call us nasty because we don't fall for this myth you're trying to perpetuate?
This is not an investigation. It's an exercise in wild imaginations. There are NO clues to be found. Paul wasn't murdered by anyone. It was a made up event in the first place.
A real investigator would have an open mind and be willing to listen to, and act, on any and all points regarding the subject. You guys grab stuff from out the air and make up claims about it, but refuse to listen to any other valid viewpoints. Do you really think this is how to investigate a murder? Are you even anywhere close to naming a culprit? Do you think doctored pics and ASSUMPTIONS are going to solve a 'crime' that happened 44 years ago?
Common sense should tell you that if he was really replaced someone would have noticed by now. It's not like he lived as a hermit, he had hundreds of friends and associates, was involved with tons of other musicians over the years. Do you really think you can tell he was replaced from internet pics, and those that actually lived and worked with him didn't? Really?
Please don't cry, it's OK, Paul is alive and your life will go on...
new topics
-
Turns out, they planned to go after P-nut.
US Political Madness: 2 hours ago -
Sick sick sick
Social Issues and Civil Unrest: 8 hours ago -
Comcast dumping MSNBC
Mainstream News: 11 hours ago
top topics
-
Comcast dumping MSNBC
Mainstream News: 11 hours ago, 18 flags -
President-elect TRUMP Picks MATT GAETZ for his ATTORNEY GENERAL - High Level PANIC Ensues.
2024 Elections: 15 hours ago, 16 flags -
Turns out, they planned to go after P-nut.
US Political Madness: 2 hours ago, 9 flags -
Sick sick sick
Social Issues and Civil Unrest: 8 hours ago, 5 flags
active topics
-
How can you defend yourself when the police will not tell you what you did?
Posse Comitatus • 76 • : Oldcarpy2 -
WATCH LIVE: US Congress hearing on UFOs, unidentified anomalous phenomena
Aliens and UFOs • 42 • : putnam6 -
Turns out, they planned to go after P-nut.
US Political Madness • 12 • : PorkChop96 -
Sick sick sick
Social Issues and Civil Unrest • 42 • : Oldcarpy2 -
Comcast dumping MSNBC
Mainstream News • 17 • : WeMustCare -
The Acronym Game .. Pt.4
General Chit Chat • 948 • : Encia22 -
President-elect TRUMP Picks MATT GAETZ for his ATTORNEY GENERAL - High Level PANIC Ensues.
2024 Elections • 53 • : WeMustCare -
Slap in the Face for Starmer - Trump Could / Should Block Chagos Islands Deal
Regional Politics • 5 • : gortex -
-@TH3WH17ERABB17- -Q- ---TIME TO SHOW THE WORLD--- -Part- --44--
Dissecting Disinformation • 3261 • : WeMustCare -
Alex Jones Reinstated on X
Education and Media • 84 • : WeMustCare