|
Post by cherilyn7 on Jul 13, 2014 18:13:40 GMT -5
In brief:
1) Paul (early one) was playing piano as Stu Sutcliffe played bass.
2) Paul (replacement) invariably was sat behind grand piano (hands hidden, camera front facing), this was before Wings, when of course "Linda played keyboards".
3) Where did Paul get his horsemanship skills? Some people have said they thought "doubles" where used on "Help".
4) Other researchers on this forum have stated that there were other Pauls going back as far as at least 1958. vOOdOOgUrU for one. This is obvious when you study the photographic evidence.
5) Paulbearer stated that Denny Laine was first choice to replace Paul. He may have been shorter than Paul, but then so was the Paul circa 1962. If the others were 5'11" and this was stated in all the fan mags at the time, then if suddenly Paul is taller by about 3" looking at the photographs/Sgt Pepper cover, then he must have been approx 6'2"; whatever, he was taller than the others and on many photos this was the case and broader on the shoulders too. There are also photos of him wearing clothes that look too tight and trousers too short; this may sound comical but I have seen on another forum that he was given Paul's clothes to wear that were too small.
6) Why did Faul need to sit in on drums when Ringo was the drummer?
|
|
|
Post by hotman637 on Jul 14, 2014 11:45:04 GMT -5
In brief: 1) Paul (early one) was playing piano as Stu Sutcliffe played bass. 2) Paul (replacement) invariably was sat behind grand piano (hands hidden, camera front facing), this was before Wings, when of course "Linda played keyboards". 3) Where did Paul get his horsemanship skills? Some people have said they thought "doubles" where used on "Help". 4) Other researchers on this forum have stated that there were other Pauls going back as far as at least 1958. vOOdOOgUrU for one. This is obvious when you study the photographic evidence. 5) Paulbearer stated that Denny Laine was first choice to replace Paul. He may have been shorter than Paul, but then so was the Paul circa 1962. If the others were 5'11" and this was stated in all the fan mags at the time, then if suddenly Paul is taller by about 3" looking at the photographs/Sgt Pepper cover, then he must have been approx 6'2"; whatever, he was taller than the others and on many photos this was the case and broader on the shoulders too. There are also photos of him wearing clothes that look too tight and trousers too short; this may sound comical but I have seen on another forum that he was given Paul's clothes to wear that were too small. 6) Why did Faul need to sit in on drums when Ringo was the drummer? I have no problem saying there are many "Pauls" and many "Fauls" the problem comes when they are INTERCHANGABLE! In other words if it can been shown (and I have not seen it, yet) that some of the "Pauls" became some of the "Fauls" (or visa-versa) then the ENTIRE PID/PWR is OUT THE WINDOW! The evidence just becomes to confusing to ever make sense of any of it.
|
|
|
Post by cherilyn7 on Jul 14, 2014 14:27:53 GMT -5
Quote hotman637:
I have no problem saying there are many "Pauls" and many "Fauls" the problem comes when they are INTERCHANGABLE! In other words if it can been shown (and I have not seen it, yet) that some of the "Pauls" became some of the "Fauls" (or visa-versa) then the ENTIRE PID/PWR is OUT THE WINDOW! The evidence just becomes to confusing to ever make sense of any of it.
************************************************************************************************* I have never bought into the theory that Paul "retired" then came back later to help out on various projects. I'm not sure where the interchangeable part comes in; people are muddying the waters somewhat. It is looking obvious that there WERE other Pauls going back to the early days in Hamburg (or even beyond that, but that is going down another road so let us not complicate things any more, for the time being). Even looking at those photos above (posted by Linus) playing piano and drums are not all of the same person (in my opinion, anyway); but I'm sure others will agree. The last pic has Paul with his face turned away from the camera and wearing shades so difficult to tell who that is. On early pics with Stu Sutcliffe playing bass, Paul tinkled on the ivories, but after Stu's death in (I think it was) March 1962 he reverted to left hand bass.
It is obvious that something VERY strange indeed was going on.
It needs to be examined on a timeline. There is a very good one on TKIN actually.
|
|
|
Post by hotman637 on Jul 14, 2014 14:53:56 GMT -5
I think PID as in any conspiracy a very simple thing happened (Paul was replaced or died) and the powers that be made it LOOK complicated OR a very complicated thing happened (who knows what) and we will probably never figure it out. The thing is we will never know if something is simple or not till WE KNOW WHAT IT WAS! I myself thing something simple happened and the trick is find out what it was. They don't want us to find out because then the game would end I guess.
|
|
clarekuehn
Hard Day's Night
Yes he died. Yes 1 man replaced him. Yes that was it. Yes wasn't so well done. Yes big implications.
Posts: 46
|
Post by clarekuehn on Jul 15, 2014 13:25:20 GMT -5
Thanks, Paulbearer, that really did make a lot of sense and ties in with what I've been looking at lately re the Penny Lane/Strawberry Fields/Hello, Goodbye promo films (not called videos then, of course). That does explain why Denny Laine (not his real name) left the Moody Blues when he did and the guy in Kenya with Mal really does look like Denny, not Bill. The moustache was sort of long and thin, like Denny Laine's. Also, it explains Denny being included in Wings as a kind of runner up prize and for him to do the songwriting; whilst being paid £50 a week, no wonder he was bitter. Re Bill, who as you said did the 1966 American press conference where he did all the talking; in the Jensen Rufe short film it states that Bill died in 1977. Recommended, if you haven't seen it. This would be when another Faul took over. It is obvious, when you think about it, that Lennon/McCartney could not have written all the songs attributed to them (the real Lennon/McCartney not Faul/Fennon). Considering all the material they were supposed to be writing; they did a tremendous amount of "covers" including Smokey Robinson and Holland/Dozier/Holland and others; whilst supposedly writing hits for artistes in the Epstein "stable" and others. That fits that people like Elton John and Donovan and Denny Laine or even Burt Bacharach would write songs that were attributed to Northern Songs. As for the drawing, it cannot have been done by John as by that time he, also, had been replaced. There is no Fennon. 3/4 views and emaciation do not prove the replacement of John, and his inimitable mannerisms and bursts of energy are still in evidence after 1966 until death in 1980. Denny bears only passing resemblance to either Paul or Sir Paul. Impressions without deep thought on what the impression does to one's perception are not an argument; it is the kind of sloppy thinking which also infects deniers of Paul's having died. Songwriting itself is a partly unanswerable question. If others contributed to Sir Paul's published works, we cannot know exactly. What can be shown is a general and some specific differences between a Paul trajectory of style and emotion and Sir Paul's tendencies. Sir Paul is very much with us today, though recently sick. Same man: mannerisms, poseur moments, face, voice.
|
|
clarekuehn
Hard Day's Night
Yes he died. Yes 1 man replaced him. Yes that was it. Yes wasn't so well done. Yes big implications.
Posts: 46
|
Post by clarekuehn on Jul 15, 2014 13:32:16 GMT -5
McCartney has been paying piano on stage and in the studio since his teen years. We even see him playing piano in AHDN and Help. He didn't play piano during live concerts during the Beatlemania years, because the compositions didn't call for it. Not pictured is the scene during You’re Going To Lose That Girl where it cuts to Paul suddenly playing piano when he was previously playing bass. The Paul in AHDN has detached earlobes, and during the concert footage he has a large pock-mark on his left jaw that is not seen any other time. no pock-mark. Also, during the outro to the Strawberry Fields Forever promo film, they are walking at normal speed. vimeo.com/11042052This is a psychedelic video, hence the sped-up and backwards footage. Besides, why would they speed up the walking to disguise the impostor, but have multiple close-ups of his face? And what of all the other times he's not sped up? Penny Lane promo, MMT film, etc. The line (what you call a pock mark) is in evidence in these photos though fainter in some, except last one, where angle of lighting is different. The Denny Laine pics are so different than Paul, where your personal impression is off, that I omit them for brevity. As to having close-ups of Sir Paul (the new Paul): it was necessary to dare to show him. Speeding up footage is also clever, not just concealment. Ears which are semidetached show as one or the other, depending on angle. What is consistent is that a certain angle will show the lobe more strongly than other angles. Sir Paul has very detached lobe and fake ears on at various times; the fake ears are sometimes good copies of Paul's ears, so in those cases where we can tell fakes, it is due to consistent SHADOWLINE along cheek near ear, and through tragus at cheek join, no matter the lighting angle (the ear sits over the head). Some fakes have flaps (squared blocks) along cheekline. Some fakes do not.
|
|
clarekuehn
Hard Day's Night
Yes he died. Yes 1 man replaced him. Yes that was it. Yes wasn't so well done. Yes big implications.
Posts: 46
|
Post by clarekuehn on Jul 15, 2014 13:51:06 GMT -5
I think PID as in any conspiracy a very simple thing happened (Paul was replaced or died) and the powers that be made it LOOK complicated OR a very complicated thing happened (who knows what) and we will probably never figure it out. The thing is we will never know if something is simple or not till WE KNOW WHAT IT WAS! I myself thing something simple happened and the trick is find out what it was. They don't want us to find out because then the game would end I guess. We can know quite a bit. The main loose ends are: burial place (good, informed argument is that he originally -- even if moved now -- was on the hill immortalized in his famous song "Eleanor Rigby", for her grave is at the top, at St Peter's Church; but it would be likely that he not be buried at the church, for how would insiders visit the grave? Instead, he might well have been buriend, at least originally, inside pro-royal, pro-patriotic Salvation Army private backlot at Strawberry Field orphanage -- several lines of argument support this: "Strawberry Field" song by Lennon, though alone this could be argued to be merely childhood reminiscences mixed with Cranberry Sauce -- i.e., blood -- and grief about Paul; hill references to Paul in Fool on the hill drawing from Magical Mystery Tour booklet showing 4-fingered, no-head -- damage to head -- hand on figure with cracked skull in figure; hill reference to "living there still" linked to Fool and to Paul in "Glass Onion" mentioning Paul and Walrus as clues, with "living" meaning metaphorical "residing dead", if interpreting from PID argument; Strawberry Fields orphanage is partway up a hill at which the top houses the St Peter church and a major gravity-release watertower; Strawberry Fields is visited by pilgrims for Beatles, so the grave would be somewhat, metaphorically honoured; insiders could visit and not be bothered). murder or not (likely murder, possibly on street by luring him somewhere for rendez-vous: quick replacement, date of death gangland-intel "illuminist" type of date, motives for infiltration and compromising Beatles' circle, Paul's own close friendship with Mark Lane of JFK research fame, drawing by Lennon suggesting head and ankle injuries very typical of impact by being run over, hit personally, and pics by Lennon suggesting body was in front of car) song compositions and recordings (likely some Paul songs reworked, some new compositions by Sir Paul -- we know at least two were with Mal Evans, as well -- and maybe others' contributions, such as Denny Laine, and recordings could include a subtle form of Paul's actual voice at times, underlying or interspersed with Sir Paul -- which would need further and replicable tests) who knew how much and when (some would know immediately, some know generally then more and more, some never know re. probable murder, even the Beatles themselves possibly) Epstein's death as murder (likely murder, since all pill bottles full and caps on, no vomit mentioned by witness to scene, only 1/2 bottle wine drunk -- for Epstein was embezzling money and by vacationing at Portmeireion seems to have met many influential people, also sending to offshore accounts through Lord Goodman, connected to Cambridge 5 and Rockefellers & blackmailer o sexual "perverts" such as Epstein was, as a gay man, and also paedophiles such as Saville and others) Tara Browne's death as possibly 1st casualty of coverup (sideswiped and no definite alcohol/ drug intoxication, for he was big enjoyer of Indica/ Swinging sixties spook-infiltrated scene and might well have gabbed/complained) Mal Evans lost-book putative page in "The Winged Beatle" film (stylistically his, though handwriting analysis could be done) Mal Evans' diary unpublished (only tiny excerpts were published -- need to clamour for its full reproduction, page by page) ================ **And most important for adding further direct proof of replacement: VOICEPRINT FORENSIC ANALYSIS OF SPOKEN RECORDINGS FROM THE TWO TIME PERIODS IN QUESTION. ONLY SPOKEN VOICE IS ACCEPTABLE PROTOCOL FOR VOICE PRINT ANALYSIS. COST IS 15-25 K $US, AND IF CROWDSOURCED, COULD BE ARRANGED WITH SEVERAL INDEPENDENT FIRMS. A WIDE SELECTION OF MATERIALS OVERALL AND ALSO BEST-CASE COMPARISONS WOULD NEED TO BE DONE, BECAUSE OVERALL TESTS WOULD SHOW GENERAL TENDENCIES WHICH WOULD BOLSTER THE IDEA THAT RESULTS FOUND ROM BEST-CASE EXAMPLES ARE NOT CHERRY-PICKED OR WRONGLY CLEANED UP. Hope these points help clarify the kinds of places we could hope for more information about.
|
|
clarekuehn
Hard Day's Night
Yes he died. Yes 1 man replaced him. Yes that was it. Yes wasn't so well done. Yes big implications.
Posts: 46
|
Post by clarekuehn on Jul 15, 2014 14:32:27 GMT -5
Hallo Clare, it's wonderful that a person with your expertise is posting on these boards.
I am a recent member but some years ago I noted that Paul McCartney's nose was longer, the nostrils more pinched, and the side of his nose more indented in photos after the Sergeant Pepper album came out as well as observing the bigger build and height. The height can be explained by lifts in the shoes but there is no logical reason why Paul McCartney post Melody Maker Awards in 1966 would have his nose cosmetically altered.
The apparent moped accident with the chipped tooth on display was before the Sergeant Pepper album came out and that unusual moustachied McCartney turned up in the dark to give a few brief words before going into the studio. There was no mention of broken or bent noses as the result of that accident and no thinner, more pinched nostrils on the Paul at the awards.
I believe John Lennon's nose became more bent as the result of physical altercations as John was more of a brawler than people realised. But there is nothing to explain the different nose on Paul McCartney post Melody Maker awards.
Looking at many photos taken in the period before and after the White album was completed, it is clear that Paul McCartney hasn't just put on weight - his build has altered. This Paul is a bigger man full stop. The original Paul was slight and would have looked different with a weight increase.
Last year in Japan I bought a fan magazine from the Penny Lane period for Japanese fans and it had stills of the Penny Lane video shoot. However, the majority of the photos were of the pre Penny Lane/Strawberry Fields Beatles. I was struck by how different the Paul MCartney on the horse still was by contrast with the usual Paul photos in the mag. Had I not known that was from the Penny Lane shoot, I might have thought it was an extra with dark Paul-like hair who was riding on the horse.
I look forward to more of your posts.
Hi, there. Yes, Sir Paul is not Paul. We got that far. A general thickened and lengthened proportion is present in replacement (not one image alone, but general sense of him). Nose, face, all consistently different but impression makes some similarities. We do have an image of Paul with Mal and Sir Paul with Mal; even shoes do not account for proportions differences, nor the fisheye lens in Mal and Paul, for the general proportional smallness of Paul is consistent if you account for the fisheye effect in the one. The one with Mal and Sir Paul also has some fisheye eect, but because they are nearly side to side, and the lens is centred on them, the proportions are closer to real ones. John became emaciated and aged quickly, but not suddenly (as per a replacement). He was very disturbed, scared, curtailed by marital and superstitious worries in LA and especially later in NYC with Yoko. Did she know of the death to him? Maybe yes. Was she a protector (agent, in an asset sense?), maybe. But likely also suiting her own love interests. The question of how she got separated from John at the scene of the crime is interesting: we don't know. Did she want to divorce him? Yes. Maybe she could do nothing to stop the assassination or was prevented from knowing. She MAY not have been in on it. -- Sir Paul knew: his behaviour after suggests at least that. Would he want John dead? Maybe only to protect himself, but an agent/ asset such as he has to be (from many lines of reasoning), he would likely accept the decision by others, even if it was his friend. This has happened in many instances. Paul was sometimes calm, not always buoyant. He simply tended to be buoyant suddenly if the occasion arose. I think the moped accident was an attempt to kill Paul before the main hit. However, it could be just an accident. The Sept hit and death itself is no longer in question to anyone familiar with this case and having compared it to the Paul is Alive arguments fully.
|
|
|
Post by hotman637 on Jul 15, 2014 14:56:39 GMT -5
There is plenty of evidence that John was replaced at least once.His style and voice DID change a huge amount. Look at website like TKIN and Paul is Dead Miss Him Miss Him and you see post after post talking about it. And there was some good pictures (although I cannopt find them) that seemed to show that Tara Brown did not die but became Keith Richards!
|
|
|
Post by cherilyn7 on Jul 15, 2014 17:42:54 GMT -5
There is plenty of evidence that John was replaced at least once.His style and voice DID change a huge amount. Look at website like TKIN and Paul is Dead Miss Him Miss Him and you see post after post talking about it. And there was some good pictures (although I cannopt find them) that seemed to show that Tara Brown did not die but became Keith Richards! ************************************************************************************************ quote from Clarekheun: There is no Fennon. 3/4 views and emaciation do not prove the replacement of John, and his inimitable mannerisms and bursts of energy are still in evidence after 1966 until death in 1980. Denny bears only passing resemblance to either Paul or Sir Paul. Impressions without deep thought on what the impression does to one's perception are not an argument; it is the kind of sloppy thinking which also infects deniers of Paul's having died. Songwriting itself is a partly unanswerable question. If others contributed to Sir Paul's published works, we cannot know exactly. What can be shown is a general and some specific differences between a Paul trajectory of style and emotion and Sir Paul's tendencies. Sir Paul is very much with us today, though recently sick. Same man: mannerisms, poseur moments, face, voice. *********************************************************************************************** Thankyou, hotman637: I'm sorry Clare but you can stick to your research about Paul and those of us who believe John was also replaced will not be convinced by you negating that as you only have to look at photographs from 1965/66 when the real John was last seen and compare with those arriving at Abbey Road studios, for example in November 1966, with the newly moustached "Paul" being closely guarded by Mal Evans (looking eerily similar to MDC fourteen years later!) and noticing that "our" John now had a Zapata style moustache and bouffant layered hairdo and glasses. Ringo, almost brusque with reporters asking if the Beatles are splitting up, just had one word to say to every question, "No". "I'm having a great time", but didn't look like it and certainly could not have been happy after recent events.
|
|
|
Post by cherilyn7 on Jul 15, 2014 18:06:51 GMT -5
Re Denny Laine: I would also aver that Sir Faul only bears a passing resemblance to Paul....the mention of Denny Laine being the individual in Kenya with Mal came from Paulbearer who appeared to definitively state that was the case. Denny Laine certainly does seem to have a key role in these events; starting with The Pepperpots until having a fall out with Faul/Bill in the 'seventies whilst with Wings.
The part about where Paul is buried I found the most fascinating part of Clare's testimony. However, I think the moped accident was a red herring. As I have said in a recent post (and others) that it would be most unusual, even then, in the UK at Christmas (Boxing Day) for anyone to be out riding on a moped on the dark, icy, cold streets of the suburbs. People in the UK in the festive season, particularly in 1965 would be with their families indoors or maybe visiting a pantomime. There would not be anything open then, e.g. places to eat. A person of that calibre would not choose such cheap transport, let alone at Christmas!
The part about the hill, would this refer to "The Fool on the Hill"? What was the motive though for Paul's death at the age of 24? The Paul imposter made an appearance at the 1966 American press conference as Paulbearer stated. Was this a practice run to see if it would be found out or was the real Paul indisposed in some way and could not appear?
To say Sir Paul is and always has been with us, I do not buy into either (and neither would many others on this forum and other forums) as there has clearly been more than one person masquerading as Paul McCartney before and after the replacement scenario.
|
|
clarekuehn
Hard Day's Night
Yes he died. Yes 1 man replaced him. Yes that was it. Yes wasn't so well done. Yes big implications.
Posts: 46
|
Post by clarekuehn on Jul 15, 2014 18:51:03 GMT -5
If you want to see the difference in the originals and later watch "A Hard Day's Night" as I did last week and the on stage presence is magnetic even now after fifty years. Paul had, as well as a beautiful singing voice, CHARM and PERSONALITY.
Agreed entirely. Not always were these present (sometimes he was calm), but when he did exude, it was large and full. The moments of a short burst of friendliness from Sir Paul are nice, but not the same. You also talked of John's nose: John's nose always had times it looked pinched but by 67 he was 26; some moments his distress pinched it more, and age, drugs, bulimia (eventually also) began slowly to transform his nose and general health. His energy and manner remain the same in the most telling emotional moments, bursts of energy, etc., though also he began to distance himself from direct emotions a bit more.
|
|
clarekuehn
Hard Day's Night
Yes he died. Yes 1 man replaced him. Yes that was it. Yes wasn't so well done. Yes big implications.
Posts: 46
|
Post by clarekuehn on Jul 15, 2014 18:52:26 GMT -5
There is plenty of evidence that John was replaced at least once.His style and voice DID change a huge amount. Look at website like TKIN and Paul is Dead Miss Him Miss Him and you see post after post talking about it. And there was some good pictures (although I cannopt find them) that seemed to show that Tara Brown did not die but became Keith Richards! Not at all. John's were maturation changes and depression, but when he exudes, it is the same flow, sudden aliveness, etc. Impressions of the general public are off for Paul but beware the same sort of mistake the other way re. others.
|
|
clarekuehn
Hard Day's Night
Yes he died. Yes 1 man replaced him. Yes that was it. Yes wasn't so well done. Yes big implications.
Posts: 46
|
Post by clarekuehn on Jul 15, 2014 19:05:31 GMT -5
Re Denny Laine: I would also aver that Sir Faul only bears a passing resemblance to Paul....the mention of Denny Laine being the individual in Kenya with Mal came from Paulbearer who appeared to definitively state that was the case. Denny Laine certainly does seem to have a key role in these events; starting with The Pepperpots until having a fall out with Faul/Bill in the 'seventies whilst with Wings. The part about where Paul is buried I found the most fascinating part of Clare's testimony. However, I think the moped accident was a red herring. As I have said in a recent post (and others) that it would be most unusual, even then, in the UK at Christmas (Boxing Day) for anyone to be out riding on a moped on the dark, icy, cold streets of the suburbs. People in the UK in the festive season, particularly in 1965 would be with their families indoors or maybe visiting a pantomime. There would not be anything open then, e.g. places to eat. A person of that calibre would not choose such cheap transport, let alone at Christmas! The part about the hill, would this refer to "The Fool on the Hill"? What was the motive though for Paul's death at the age of 24? The Paul imposter made an appearance at the 1966 American press conference as Paulbearer stated. Was this a practice run to see if it would be found out or was the real Paul indisposed in some way and could not appear? To say Sir Paul is and always has been with us, I do not buy into either (and neither would many others on this forum and other forums) as there has clearly been more than one person masquerading as Paul McCartney before and after the replacement scenario. It may be he was attacked or had some other mishap than a moped accident. The hill is the physical hill on which the St Peter church (Eleanor Rigby grave location), Strawberry Fields orphanage, gravity-release watertower are, if I am correct, and is also the "Fool on the Hill" and "residing there still" expressions as references, if I am correct. That does not even mean the song "F ot H" was all about Paul; it is also a lovely metaphor of the wise man ideal and the weirdo no-one pays attention to -- as we PID-aware people seem to be treated as, quite often. Motive for death is likely from the typical groups of interest M.O.: Paul was becoming close to Mark Lane (and a fully aware Beatle might well try to make ripples about JFK death); Paul was easiest to kill and infiltrate: as a "pretty sex symbol" with less obvious personality (as quirks), people projected a lot onto him and yet was one of the two big names in the band, so for intel work (such as getting LSD at Monterey, etc.), he'd have more clout, and maybe the consideration was also that the man who wanted to replace him was closest in look to Paul; and though John was a wildcard, he was sort of deflectable through drugs (it was likely thought) and was inimitable in the public mind. Though some think John was replaced, he could not have been without having ONLY the things "Fennon" believers think differed in older John's personality; some things were inimitable and rather obvious with John. Paul had his inimitabilities, but a bit of head-bobbing and most people would be fooled, though the real energy is inimitable. It's easier to pretend head-bobs (a noticed feature of Paul's energy) than John's sudden energy exuberance with reaching-out body language, and his energetic wit in those moments. As to one or more Sir Pauls: no, it is slight mental impression change you are falling for, over time. The man had some adjustments in plastic surgery but the basic man is there. It can be as hard to pull back from seeing differences as to see differences in the first place. One has to see the similarities post 1966 but also get the major difference before 1966. Simple (one) switch was hard enough and has all the support of the contextual case.
|
|
clarekuehn
Hard Day's Night
Yes he died. Yes 1 man replaced him. Yes that was it. Yes wasn't so well done. Yes big implications.
Posts: 46
|
Post by clarekuehn on Jul 15, 2014 19:10:04 GMT -5
Looky here. Another false ear, and on Letterman Show itself, during 2009 blooper interview. The images are larger than showing here when I uploaded them - they show tiny. The shadowline is NOT just along lobe, but stretches up and away from ear in flap along cheek. Click each image to open tab in which full size shows.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Bearer on Jul 15, 2014 21:19:43 GMT -5
There is plenty of evidence that John was replaced at least once.His style and voice DID change a huge amount. Look at website like TKIN and Paul is Dead Miss Him Miss Him and you see post after post talking about it. And there was some good pictures (although I cannopt find them) that seemed to show that Tara Brown did not die but became Keith Richards! Don't you mean Ringo? There is a theory that Tara replaced Ringo (pics look convincing) and it was Brian Jones who died in the car, so Brian was replaced until made to disappear. What is the significance of "A Day In The Life" unless it ties in strongly with PID? Also, at the start of "Dig It", it beings "Like a ROLLING STONE", implying a Rolling Stone was replaced. But whether this is true or not is a side-issue.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Bearer on Jul 15, 2014 21:49:21 GMT -5
Re Denny Laine: I would also aver that Sir Faul only bears a passing resemblance to Paul....the mention of Denny Laine being the individual in Kenya with Mal came from Paulbearer who appeared to definitively state that was the case. Denny Laine certainly does seem to have a key role in these events; starting with The Pepperpots until having a fall out with Faul/Bill in the 'seventies whilst with Wings. I didn't mean to sound definitive. It is a recent theory I've developed. What I AM convinced of is that it is not Billy in "Strawberry Fields" or "Penny Lane" but Denny Laine. I also think the "is in m years and in my eyes" lyrical clue is too big to ignore. But it may still have been Billy in Kenya, I haven't studied it enough. It doesn't sound or look like Billy to me at the Dec 20th press conference. I believe they were considering more than one candidate in the first few months, but had settled on Billy by maybe March 1967. The supposed Fennon thing, I believe John had doubles for security purposes or for convenience. There are photos that seem to show a double, but John never had a permanent replacement. My understanding is that when Paul's body was found, John and George were called back from wherever they were. This may have disrupted John's film schedule and it's possible a double was used for the opening sequence of "How I Won The War".
|
|
|
Post by hotman637 on Jul 15, 2014 22:00:37 GMT -5
There is plenty of evidence that John was replaced at least once.His style and voice DID change a huge amount. Look at website like TKIN and Paul is Dead Miss Him Miss Him and you see post after post talking about it. And there was some good pictures (although I cannopt find them) that seemed to show that Tara Brown did not die but became Keith Richards! Don't you mean Ringo? There is a theory that Tara replaced Ringo (pics look convincing) and it was Brian Jones who died in the car, so Brian was replaced until made to disappear. What is the significance of "A Day In The Life" unless it ties in strongly with PID? Also, at the start of "Dig It", it beings "Like a ROLLING STONE", implying a Rolling Stone was replaced. But whether this is true or not is a side-issue. Yes I have seen the pics of "Fingo" that some people say was Tara Brown but to me he did not look like Ringo OR Tara but that is just my opinion. I wish I could find the post that compared Keith Richards of nowadays with Tara Brown. They were a PERFECT MATCH as far as I could see. Maybe some who is good at pictures can find pics for comparison. That is maybe the ONLY time I have ever really seen anyone invovled with PID that "came back from the dead".
|
|
|
Post by ticket2ride on Jul 15, 2014 22:35:32 GMT -5
I respectfully disagree with the John and others were replaced too. And I do mean this respectfully as this is a great site on which people can present their differing views, even the complete skeptics as long as we can all have a basic respect for others no matter if we agree or don't agree with other opinions.
I think it is easy to dismiss the effect of John's relatively heavy LSD use for a period of time. He once claimed in an interview that he 'used to eat it all the time' (the interview was after the Beatles' break-up) and that he and George took it the most as those two were the 'most cracked'. I think John's changes can be explained to a significant extent on his drug use and it shouldn't be forgotten that he was a troubled soul from long before. His young life was characterised by absence and death of those he loved the most.
Freddy Lennon departed, his mother Julia departed but came to visit and seemed more like somebody not related to him, like an attractive free spirit. She died tragically not far from John's home. His Uncle George died when he was away at a relative's home in Scotland. This was all when John was a teenager. Then his best friend Stuart died in Hamburg. John Lennon had suffered more personal losses of those dear to him by young adulthood than most people in normal peacetime circumstances.
John also took heroin for a period and that explains his emaciated look. Trippers and heroin users do not look for food in the throes of their addiction - it's not like marijuana. You cannot take psychotropic drugs like LSD and heavy downers like heroin without it doing damage in some ways, which explains some of John's added weirdness and diminished physical condition at various times.
As for Denny Laine in the Penny Lane promotional video - sorry, I can't scan it but the fan mag for Japanese fans at the time of Penny Lane/Strawberry Fields that I bought has the four Beatles on the cover in their video garb and the Paul there is definitely not Denny Laine but certainly looks like the older man we have come to know as Paul McCartney's Sergeant Pepper and beyond manifestation.
|
|
clarekuehn
Hard Day's Night
Yes he died. Yes 1 man replaced him. Yes that was it. Yes wasn't so well done. Yes big implications.
Posts: 46
|
Post by clarekuehn on Jul 16, 2014 13:58:10 GMT -5
There is plenty of evidence that John was replaced at least once.His style and voice DID change a huge amount. Look at website like TKIN and Paul is Dead Miss Him Miss Him and you see post after post talking about it. And there was some good pictures (although I cannopt find them) that seemed to show that Tara Brown did not die but became Keith Richards! Don't you mean Ringo? There is a theory that Tara replaced Ringo (pics look convincing) and it was Brian Jones who died in the car, so Brian was replaced until made to disappear. What is the significance of "A Day In The Life" unless it ties in strongly with PID? Also, at the start of "Dig It", it beings "Like a ROLLING STONE", implying a Rolling Stone was replaced. But whether this is true or not is a side-issue. Nobody but Paul was replaced. However: the Rolling Stone and FBI, CIA, BBC are linked in how intel contribute to secret lies (Rolling Stone mag and band). But BB King, Doris Day and Matt Busby were all in serious car crashes or linked to them. OF COURSE "Day in the Life" is about Paul, not really Tara, who was also a friend. -- BUT I think Tara was the first casualty of PID after Paul: Tara (unbeknownst to John, maybe, especially at the time), was into Swinging Sixties fun and scene and might have complained or gabbed and been sideswiped for it, esp. since we know the toxicology was "inconclusive" (not in the range of strong intoxication, for such things are testable), so it was more likely either a freak accident or planned.
|
|
clarekuehn
Hard Day's Night
Yes he died. Yes 1 man replaced him. Yes that was it. Yes wasn't so well done. Yes big implications.
Posts: 46
|
Post by clarekuehn on Jul 16, 2014 17:14:25 GMT -5
In brief: 1) Paul (early one) was playing piano as Stu Sutcliffe played bass. 2) Paul (replacement) invariably was sat behind grand piano (hands hidden, camera front facing), this was before Wings, when of course "Linda played keyboards". 3) Where did Paul get his horsemanship skills? Some people have said they thought "doubles" where used on "Help". 4) Other researchers on this forum have stated that there were other Pauls going back as far as at least 1958. vOOdOOgUrU for one. This is obvious when you study the photographic evidence. 5) Paulbearer stated that Denny Laine was first choice to replace Paul. He may have been shorter than Paul, but then so was the Paul circa 1962. If the others were 5'11" and this was stated in all the fan mags at the time, then if suddenly Paul is taller by about 3" looking at the photographs/Sgt Pepper cover, then he must have been approx 6'2"; whatever, he was taller than the others and on many photos this was the case and broader on the shoulders too. There are also photos of him wearing clothes that look too tight and trousers too short; this may sound comical but I have seen on another forum that he was given Paul's clothes to wear that were too small. 6) Why did Faul need to sit in on drums when Ringo was the drummer? Some people are fairly quick learners for horses and this is not complex horsemanship. They could well have had some lessons on very tame horses. Denny Laine does not match Paul or Sir Paul at all closely, though as "1st choice", we can't know. Sir Paul does prefer piano, it seems. Paul McCartney learned piano at home and used it throughout his short life, partly to compose and partly to enjoy banging out a song. Evidence marshalled for anything before 1966 as replacement falls apart quickly. Sir Paul was always controlling about getting things done his way; so he likes over-instructing. Paul had some of this, too. There you go.
|
|
|
Post by cherilyn7 on Jul 16, 2014 17:28:17 GMT -5
Quote hotman637 yesterday: There is plenty of evidence that John was replaced at least once.His style and voice DID change a huge amount. Look at website like TKIN and Paul is Dead Miss Him Miss Him and you see post after post talking about it. And there was some good pictures (although I cannopt find them) that seemed to show that Tara Brown did not die but became Keith Richards! ***********************************************************************************************
I will not be changing my mind about the replacement of John: many other researchers have come to the same conclusion. You seem to be a Sir Faul fan, Clare. I also do not think it has been the same individual all the way through. The guy in Wings looked different and there is a theory that he died in 1977.
Re Keith Richard (s), apparently, he was replaced and that is when the "s" was added, but I don't think by Tara Browne as Keith (replacement) has stick out ears but Tara Browne's were not. Apparently, Paul and Tara were close but NONE of the Beatles went to his funeral. I thought the picture on the cover of "Oldies but Goldies" was meant to represent Tara Browne. Tara's business partner in his clothing boutique took over Apple tailoring and there is an interesting photo of a gold brocade jacket made for "Paul McCartney" in 1967 by them.
Regarding John being called back from filming in Spain; that would have meant that the Bill replacement had already been chosen/trained and was on his way to Kenya with Mal (handler) via Paris and Vatican City. Why that route? They were supposed to meet up with John in Paris but he had already returned to London by 8 November, if my memory is correct. This means if Paul died in September, the timings are out.
|
|
|
Post by cherilyn7 on Jul 16, 2014 17:39:15 GMT -5
You need to look at the photos assembled by vOOdOOgUrU circa 1962 where there is a short guy with bandy legs, plain looking compared to real Paul. Our colleague has assembled some excellent photo comparisons showing different Pauls. Also the "effeminate" Paul in Hamburg...
However, your description of the burial nr St Peter's Church is fascinating. Yes, I see that "Fool on the Hill" is also a metaphor....is the body still there? There was a story that it was taken on a boat to an island; the island the Beatles supposedly bought and donated to a group of hippies living in a commune....
|
|
|
Post by cherilyn7 on Jul 16, 2014 17:49:34 GMT -5
Also, if as you are saying that Sir Faul is the one and only replacement throughout, that means he is now 78 years old; as Bill/Faul was reputedly 31 at the time and certainly LOOKED older than Paul.
|
|
clarekuehn
Hard Day's Night
Yes he died. Yes 1 man replaced him. Yes that was it. Yes wasn't so well done. Yes big implications.
Posts: 46
|
Post by clarekuehn on Jul 16, 2014 18:38:54 GMT -5
Also, if as you are saying that Sir Faul is the one and only replacement throughout, that means he is now 78 years old; as Bill/Faul was reputedly 31 at the time and certainly LOOKED older than Paul. He said he was 30 in Magical Mystery Tour film. Unless he was born at the end of the year, it means he was born in 1937. He'd turn (or has turned) 77 this year, yes, and to me, his voice and mannerisms and face (in spite of plastic surgery) show it. -- He was not likely 31 in 66. He'd have been 29 at the time of replacement if his moment of getting real historical truth into the record was in MMT film. He looks older, yes, than John and even Ringo then, but sometimes has a youthful appearance. 29-31 has that quality in some people.
|
|