|
Post by B on Oct 6, 2014 8:33:25 GMT -5
roscoe wrote: " The title was taken from The Tibetan book of the Dead." ----------------- en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomorrow_Never_Knows"In an interview Lennon revealed that, like "A Hard Day's Night", it was taken from one of Ringo Starr's malapropisms. Interviewer: "Now, Ringo, I hear you were manhandled at the Embassy Ball. Is this right?" Ringo: "Not really. Someone just cut a bit of my hair, you see." Interviewer: "Let's have a look. You seem to have got plenty left." Ringo: (turns head) "Can you see the difference? It's longer, this side." Interviewer: "What happened exactly?" Ringo: "I don't know. I was just talking, having an interview (exaggerated voice). Just like I am NOW!" (John and Paul begin lifting locks of his hair, pretending to cut it) Ringo: "I was talking away and I looked 'round, and there was about 400 people just smiling. So, you know — what can you say?" John: "What can you say?" Ringo: "Tomorrow never knows." (John laughs) "
|
|
|
Post by roscoe on Oct 6, 2014 23:47:59 GMT -5
roscoe wrote: " The title was taken from The Tibetan book of the Dead." ----------------- en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomorrow_Never_Knows"In an interview Lennon revealed that, like "A Hard Day's Night", it was taken from one of Ringo Starr's malapropisms. Interviewer: "Now, Ringo, I hear you were manhandled at the Embassy Ball. Is this right?" Ringo: "Not really. Someone just cut a bit of my hair, you see." Interviewer: "Let's have a look. You seem to have got plenty left." Ringo: (turns head) "Can you see the difference? It's longer, this side." Interviewer: "What happened exactly?" Ringo: "I don't know. I was just talking, having an interview (exaggerated voice). Just like I am NOW!" (John and Paul begin lifting locks of his hair, pretending to cut it) Ringo: "I was talking away and I looked 'round, and there was about 400 people just smiling. So, you know — what can you say?" John: "What can you say?" Ringo: "Tomorrow never knows." (John laughs) "I should have said that the first line was taken from the Tibetan Book of the Dead. However the phrase is from the hippie subculture. They had both (Lennon and Starr) read Leary's The Psychedelic Experience.
|
|
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 Oct 13, 2014 18:46:35 GMT -5
Paul is very dead & Beatle Bill is still around. Many assume admissive statements are a joke & denials the truth. They fit both hypotheses, & since the case that Paul died is the broader & stronger, people become wrong, for example, about Ringo's meaning, when he said he is the last remaining Beatle (of the Fab 4 configuation, of course he'd mean, no matter whether as a joke or not, so Pete Best or Stu Sutcliffe were not the issue). Many people just don't get it, about Paul. Of course a hoax possibly happened, if there were no other information to support the existence of items called clues: that people only read into things. & Even then, if there were no other considerations, one could stop at the idea of how it was done as a hoax (metaphor of transformation being one form of hoax, too, since it's not literal death). But once one looks at the putative clue items -- or most of them, anyway -- as clues (just in case), one finds not only consistency, detail & reason for their being there as mostly normal expressions of grief, but support in photos, John's private drawing, history (gaps as much as events we know), reasons for killing Paul and, even if there was no murder, reasons for starting the putative ruse & people who would help, as well as testimony now of & an early text mention of the problem of a Paul death rumour. -- So: we all need to learn what we know now, on the side which gets whitewashed: For those ignorant as yet that there was an early rumour and the Beatles were involved in it, even if Paul did not die: THERE WAS A TEXT ITEM PLANTED AS EARLY AS FEB 1967 IN BEATLES BOOK. For whatever reason, it's there. And Emilio Lari, photographer for 1965 film "Help!" is now on record saying he heard it (not necessarily from Beatles) even earlier, in London 1966. ------ Even if Paul did not die, these things are the case. --- Beatles Book: s1050.photobucket.com/user/beaconfilms2011/media/paulcrashnews1_zps5e78413e.jpg.html - Lari: youtu.be/3QtRk1OUYuU?t=1m19s He needn't have died for you to get these points. & John drew Paul very accurately dead. invanddis.proboards.com/thread/7714/clare-kuehn-research-paul-dead?page=1&scrollTo=110490Many people (even who are studying the case for Paul's death) forget one of the main looks Paul had, which "he" suddenly "lost" entirely ("gaining" others). This allows most people to conclude he had only Bill (Sir Paul/ Faul)'s looks -- or, for some in PID research, that he was replaced multiple times (an unnecessary but of course an hypothesis, for which people have amassed material as evidence). ... Yes I really said that. You are remembering only how Paul sometimes gave an impression of a longer face, not how he often does not. You forget how Paul often looked much more boyish or sweet-faced without being extremely young, which Faul (Bill/ Sir Paul) never does because of face shape & features, even at extreme. i366.photobucket.com/albums/oo110/faulconandsnowjob/Puzzle_PID_mccartney.jpg - i366.photobucket.com/albums/oo110/faulconandsnowjob/1966_comp.jpg - 4.bp.blogspot.com/-kP9XMx1_LuE/UwYmQ80k7zI/AAAAAAAABPI/H6qSlu2Yquk/s1600/PAUL+McCARTNEY+PIANO+SHEET+MUSIC.jpg - marinasanches2005.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/paul-em-rain-2-1966.jpg - marinasanches2005.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/paaaabcwp0mb-x3svomxhjfi6kwj4cns4t0-_0sutjqp_3zcc7xoenkehrto_tetgesujrblrebgkhxmzoij4kd6ftqam1t1ugeubpydlxz9uaqo-mktbrntii6t.jpg - marinasanches2005.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/paul-em-rain-1.jpg <-- this one is longer b/c of expression but same overall face/ head. Here, get it? www.thebtls.co.uk/tbyesterdayandtoday45-booklet.jpg ----- Can you see the consistent look in them? Faul never achieves this look. How did they try? The Sgt P gatefold over-round doctored face of Faul, the White Album wide-angle closeup of Faul (distortion). Etc. -- Get it? -- You have to ask, what general look does each have, what outlying examples, where the overlap is & where not. Paul died long ago. RIP Paul, 48 years, Sept. 11 just past.
|
|
|
Post by maxedison on Oct 13, 2014 22:27:25 GMT -5
Good to know someone is still around. I cannot say that I just started believing all of this but I just now joined this forum. I've been trying to figure out the truth in the matter and even on this board after 9 years or more of this forum all you get is riddles from people who think they know what is going on. A riddle that leads to a riddle that leads to another riddle. Something happened to Paul. Someon(s) took his place. The others knew about it. They did not tell. Even Faul himself has been replaced once or twice since the initial replacement. One thing that bugged me is the fact that you can find pictures and stories about the OFFICIAL doubles of John, George and Ringo the ones who led the packs of groupies and such away from the others. Never an OFFICIAL double of Paul for the same job. Who really cares if this Faul guy is a transvestite or something which the CLUES and RIDDLES point to. That is irrelevent. What happened to Paul and WHY is relevent.
|
|
|
Post by LOVELYRITA on Oct 15, 2014 16:56:08 GMT -5
I remember a long time ago there was a poster named Total Information who claimed it was masons who killed Paul. That person posted some interesting information. I don't know if you can still find that person's posts. They even had a site of their own that showed alot of information, but I haven't looked, or even thought about them for a long time.
I know the 60IF document had changed over the years, and it's not a reliable source of information.
But I remember discussions going on about Paul not being complying to their agenda of what they wanted to do with the Beatles, so they killed him off and had him replaced.
But further study into this replacement thing,and there were clues before 1966 and there was a double used during their final 1966 tour. You can google interviews and see the comparisons are clear...there were at least two Pauls used during that final tour.
There also has been discussions that Faul was an offspring of Aliestar Crowley....which led to many interesting posts, not so much on this site, but on other PID sites that are now ghost towns. Even if you could find those old forums online anymore, like Revolution 9, etc.
I suspect that the real Paul may have been mind controlled, or they attempted to mind control him and it wasn't working to their liking...I know that from testimonies of former mind control victims, when you get close to 30, you are just about washed up in their mind control games. It's sickening to think about it, but most of the celebrities, politicians and other famous figures have been the victim of mind control.
|
|
|
Post by maxedison on Oct 15, 2014 18:08:10 GMT -5
I haven't read the 60If document for a while and can't remember if it was taken from "The last testament of George Harrison". That was supposedly a tape that George made before he passed. I discounted the tape the first time I listened to it. It was not Georges voice on the tape, realising that discounted any information in it. I agree that the manipulation thing is going on in the music/hollywood industry and there are lots of funny things going on. All of the Pyrimids and sybolism that show up all the time have to be planned by someone other than the artist. There are NO SUPRISES at award shows..."We were not aware that Janet Jacksons nipple would be exposed". "We were not informed that Lady GAGA would be wearing Meat"..."We were not aware that Madonna would be performing a ritual marriage of Christina and Brittney"........... I try to stay awy from those things but it has gotten worse with out and out Pagan worship ceremonies.
|
|
|
Post by LOVELYRITA on Oct 15, 2014 20:44:26 GMT -5
Indeed the Grammy awards is also a place of bizarre rituals, the last one was Katy Perry's ritual this past season, though I did not see it live, I saw footage. There are no "accidents" these things are well staged, and another bizarre place for strange rituals and New World Order, are the opening and closing ceremonies of the Olympic Games.
I agree, the strange so called recording of George sounded more like a bad Arnold Schwarzeneggar impersonation.
When I had first seen the 60 If document, I thought there may be something to it, but when I had returned to it on occasion, the story changed and different names came up to the imposter. IF it were an actual document, the facts would not change. If it were factual, it could be that hackers put in disinfo to discredit the material.
But the Italian forensic team that tried to dismiss the Paul is dead being replaced to find out he really was replaced put it out there internationally.
I find the Imaphoney material interesting, the Winged Beatle 2012 was quite a video. I'm of the opinion that someone with inside info as well as enough money to produce a quality video put that together. I heard that this person was friends with Bill. Don't know. But seeing the clip of "Bill" on David Letterman and the replacement story, and his answer pointing his finger to his nose, as a gesture..a purposeful hand signal...tells me that he speaks...but the multitude just brush it off as a colossal joke. It's like in your face, but most people accept it as a joke.
The joke is on us.
|
|
|
Post by maxedison on Oct 16, 2014 10:29:32 GMT -5
The Lads were jokesters, at least in the beginning. It is not hard to believe that John would say "Thanks Paul, That was just like him" on national TV just as a joke. Not hard to believe that George would say "You've only met 2 of us? You haven't met the other 8?" Just as a joke. Not even hard to believe When asked about a replacement or being a double that Paul would jokingly say "Well, This is Him". In P(f)auls case it was the look that gave him away. It is almost as if he was thinking "Oh S@#T, Now I've done it!" I can also understand a Musician or Actor talking about themselves as someone else when refering to when they are performing. I have been a musician and while on stage or in a club while performing you have a different attitude and personality. When you are home away from the music(or performance) your thoughts are different. You have a different purpose. George said in an interview "Something happened in 66 that made a change"(not the exact words). People keep jumping to the conclusion that it was Pauls death but that was not the only thing that would have changed the beatles so drastically. John made that statement about being more popular than Jesus that was taken out of context. Most of the USA burned their Beatles Albums. Something Happened in the Phillipines that also made a whole country mad at them. Their quick wit and flippent attitude were getting them in trouble. They started to realise that their words could get them in trouble or be taken the wrong way. People were starting to take their words seriously even when they were JUST JOKING. That sure can kill a fun loving attitude. All of these would show why the band drastically changed between 66 and 67. Anyone who does not believe Paul was replaced can use these as a reason for the change in personality and appearence of both Paul himself and the Band in general. Of course for us it does not explain the fact that Pauls entire FACE changed.
|
|
|
Post by delysid on Oct 16, 2014 14:54:37 GMT -5
But don't use the Bible and the God of the Bible and say it's a woman and the devil is a man. That is unscriptural. If you want to talk about a goddess, then just say goddess, don't mix the two. I haven't followed the babblings of Faul Mc Cartney, as the very sight of him makes me sick to my stomach, and I pay no mind to his music or watch his performances. He's not Paul and I'm sick of him continuing this masquerade and ruining what's left of the global image of Paul Mc Cartney being this withered old fool on the hill. These younger generations have this idea of Paul Mc Cartney as an old fart. It's quite tragic. These younger generations also seem to have the impression, mooted by Lennon in 1966, that what's wrong with Christianity is its followers, particularly toward the right wing of Phelps. Concepts such as justice, peace, charity and goodwill from the jewish longhair Maestro seem to have been perverted by this 'elite' into hatred against any threat to the Christian right to get really fat in an SUV and die. 'Is it because I won't eat the lamb of God?' -Faul McCartney
|
|
|
Post by delysid on Oct 16, 2014 15:03:50 GMT -5
But seeing the clip of "Bill" on David Letterman and the replacement story, and his answer pointing his finger to his nose, as a gesture..a purposeful hand signal...tells me that he speaks...but the multitude just brush it off as a colossal joke. It's like in your face, but most people accept it as a joke. The joke is on us. You should see the rehearsal
|
|
|
Post by LOVELYRITA on Oct 20, 2014 16:41:04 GMT -5
I'm sure "Bill" has plenty more "hand signals" to signify a message to the masses. You may have to research footage of his performances...you never know what you may dig up.
|
|
|
Post by astro4 on Nov 23, 2014 15:23:17 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by astro4 on Dec 7, 2014 15:35:02 GMT -5
The suggestion here is, that she was given that drawing, from some private source, and allowed to use it provided she does not say where it came from. Be nice if she could clarify this.
|
|
|
Post by B on Apr 7, 2015 18:52:10 GMT -5
The Real Deal hosted by James H Fetzer livestream.com/accounts/4937810/events/3629901I believe this aired yesterday. Don't be confused by some of the dates shown around the video. Clare's description of the show: "1st hour objections met, case overview, some evidence. 2nd hour flashier evidence."
|
|
|
Post by cherilyn7 on Apr 8, 2015 14:30:27 GMT -5
The Lads were jokesters, at least in the beginning. It is not hard to believe that John would say "Thanks Paul, That was just like him" on national TV just as a joke. Not hard to believe that George would say "You've only met 2 of us? You haven't met the other 8?" Just as a joke. Not even hard to believe When asked about a replacement or being a double that Paul would jokingly say "Well, This is Him". In P(f)auls case it was the look that gave him away. It is almost as if he was thinking "Oh S@#T, Now I've done it!" I can also understand a Musician or Actor talking about themselves as someone else when refering to when they are performing. I have been a musician and while on stage or in a club while performing you have a different attitude and personality. When you are home away from the music(or performance) your thoughts are different. You have a different purpose. George said in an interview "Something happened in 66 that made a change"(not the exact words). People keep jumping to the conclusion that it was Pauls death but that was not the only thing that would have changed the beatles so drastically. John made that statement about being more popular than Jesus that was taken out of context. Most of the USA burned their Beatles Albums. Something Happened in the Phillipines that also made a whole country mad at them. Their quick wit and flippent attitude were getting them in trouble. They started to realise that their words could get them in trouble or be taken the wrong way. People were starting to take their words seriously even when they were JUST JOKING. That sure can kill a fun loving attitude. All of these would show why the band drastically changed between 66 and 67. Anyone who does not believe Paul was replaced can use these as a reason for the change in personality and appearence of both Paul himself and the Band in general. Of course for us it does not explain the fact that Pauls entire FACE changed. Yes, they had great sense of humour and were very natural; why did this suddenly change by the end of November 1966? Something happened and that was clearly illustrated in the promo films for "Strawberry Fields" and "Hello, Goodbye" - different body language/onstage presence and styles of just about everything from clothing, hair, music. Go into the fantastic and come up with the answer.
|
|
|
Post by beatlas231 on Apr 8, 2015 18:04:03 GMT -5
The Lads were jokesters, at least in the beginning. It is not hard to believe that John would say "Thanks Paul, That was just like him" on national TV just as a joke. Not hard to believe that George would say "You've only met 2 of us? You haven't met the other 8?" Just as a joke. Not even hard to believe When asked about a replacement or being a double that Paul would jokingly say "Well, This is Him". In P(f)auls case it was the look that gave him away. It is almost as if he was thinking "Oh S@#T, Now I've done it!" I can also understand a Musician or Actor talking about themselves as someone else when refering to when they are performing. I have been a musician and while on stage or in a club while performing you have a different attitude and personality. When you are home away from the music(or performance) your thoughts are different. You have a different purpose. George said in an interview "Something happened in 66 that made a change"(not the exact words). People keep jumping to the conclusion that it was Pauls death but that was not the only thing that would have changed the beatles so drastically. John made that statement about being more popular than Jesus that was taken out of context. Most of the USA burned their Beatles Albums. Something Happened in the Phillipines that also made a whole country mad at them. Their quick wit and flippent attitude were getting them in trouble. They started to realise that their words could get them in trouble or be taken the wrong way. People were starting to take their words seriously even when they were JUST JOKING. That sure can kill a fun loving attitude. All of these would show why the band drastically changed between 66 and 67. Anyone who does not believe Paul was replaced can use these as a reason for the change in personality and appearence of both Paul himself and the Band in general. Of course for us it does not explain the fact that Pauls entire FACE changed. Yes, they had great sense of humour and were very natural; why did this suddenly change by the end of November 1966? Something happened and that was clearly illustrated in the promo films for "Strawberry Fields" and "Hello, Goodbye" - different body language/onstage presence and styles of just about everything from clothing, hair, music. Go into the fantastic and come up with the answer. John Lennon said the Beatles were bigger than Jesus. Everyone became outraged, touring was almost impossible. What would you do in that situation?
|
|
|
Post by cherilyn7 on Apr 18, 2015 18:59:20 GMT -5
The suggestion here is, that she was given that drawing, from some private source, and allowed to use it provided she does not say where it came from. Be nice if she could clarify this. ************************************************************************************************************* If we can't know the source of the drawing, then it could be disinformation.
|
|
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 Oct 27, 2015 19:36:14 GMT -5
He wrote TOMORROW NEVER KNOWS after his third LSD trip in January 1966. This track was the first to be recorded for the Revolver Album in April 1966 at Abbey Road 3. The title was taken from The Tibetan book of the Dead. The original title of the album REVOLVER was to have been ABRACADADABRA. "That's the first record with backwards music on it; before Hendrix, before The Who, before any f**ker."JOHN LENNON SPEAKING ABOUT REVOLVER. Actually it was on the recording for RAIN which (along with Paperback Writer) was done in the same session as the Revolver tracks but never made it onto the album. Notice how the image of John has Joan of Arc sitting on his ear (the only one shaded in). She heard voices too. Well, his mind wasn't replaced; he was in grief and messing with drugs. That's not mind replacement, not worth saying it that way. If we speak of him as modified by his experience, sure. Now regarding Joan of Arc: I don't know that it is Joan on John's ear on the Revolver album cover drawing/collage. Everything else is the Beatles themselves and they are drawn with tall collars next to that. If it is Joan of Arc, so what? She was mystical, listened to her inner voice or heard voices mediumistically. John was kind of mystical in his "visionary" qualities and it suits him in that way.
|
|
|
Post by delysid on Nov 2, 2015 18:37:29 GMT -5
I haven't read the 60If document for a while and can't remember if it was taken from "The last testament of George Harrison". That was supposedly a tape that George made before he passed. I discounted the tape the first time I listened to it. It was not Georges voice on the tape, realising that discounted any information in it. I agree that the manipulation thing is going on in the music/hollywood industry and there are lots of funny things going on. All of the Pyrimids and sybolism that show up all the time have to be planned by someone other than the artist. There are NO SUPRISES at award shows..."We were not aware that Janet Jacksons nipple would be exposed". "We were not informed that Lady GAGA would be wearing Meat"..."We were not aware that Madonna would be performing a ritual marriage of Christina and Brittney"........... I try to stay awy from those things but it has gotten worse with out and out Pagan worship ceremonies. Yes it will be so much better when all of this pagan idolatry ceases and we can go back to buying Billy Graham albums.
|
|
|
Post by delysid on Nov 2, 2015 18:41:07 GMT -5
Yes, they had great sense of humour and were very natural; why did this suddenly change by the end of November 1966? Something happened and that was clearly illustrated in the promo films for "Strawberry Fields" and "Hello, Goodbye" - different body language/onstage presence and styles of just about everything from clothing, hair, music. Go into the fantastic and come up with the answer. I know I'm being heretical again but an epiphany came to me the other night while I was reading the Book of Revelations, obsessively studying Crowley (in order to defend myself against Crowleyites) and preparing for The Rapture and I'd like to share it with you. "They fancied a change"
|
|
|
Post by superman on Nov 5, 2015 5:20:28 GMT -5
Bet you didn't find The Rapture in the Book of Revelation. Or anywhere else in the Bible for that matter.
|
|
|
Post by delysid on Nov 5, 2015 5:27:06 GMT -5
Hey this is a PID forum not a Bible class and the 'Book of RevelationS' is by Redwel Trabant.
You can go now.
|
|
|
Post by superman on Nov 5, 2015 13:56:45 GMT -5
Hey this is a PID forum not a Bible class and the 'Book of RevelationS' is by Redwel Trabant. You can go now. weak
|
|
|
Post by B on Nov 29, 2015 13:42:21 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by billwhyman on Nov 29, 2015 14:19:45 GMT -5
Stan had a weird home
|
|