|
Post by hotman637 on Apr 19, 2022 14:14:49 GMT -5
Brian Epstein had two newphews Jeffrey “Beatle Ed” Epstein & mark lawrence epstein One was Paul’s godson, the other Johns Wow I had no idea Brian Epstein's nephews were Paul and John's Godsons! That shows three interesting things about Paul and John! One they were family men (I mentioned that before) and two that they had a much closer relationship to Brian Epstein then I knew and three they were more religious then anyone mentioned before because usually people are God parents because they believe in God!
|
|
|
Post by hotman637 on Apr 19, 2022 14:04:42 GMT -5
My point is that to list everyone who has been replaced and when would take more time and resources then I have so that is why I just assume everyone was replaced and instead look for the few exceptions! Of course I am lazy lol and you are not and I thank you for your research! You know who Joseph is right No I have no idea who Joseph is! Who is he?
|
|
|
Post by hotman637 on Apr 18, 2022 15:28:31 GMT -5
As I have posted before we should START with the fact almost EVERYONE has been replaced and work backwards, lol! I think that about the only people not replaced either died or had their careers short circuited or both! Well if you know "everyone" tell me the ones I haven't discovered yet so I don't have to do this anymore. Y'know if anyone wants me to stop doing this, all you have to do is send me a private message with all the people who have been replaced and the year that they were replaced. It would be like looking at the answers in the back of a crossword puzzle book - it would be game over for me. This is not an opinion, it's a realisation that the people that need to know what's going on, don't have the ears for it, the eyes for it, or the understanding for it. And the sad thing is they are brainwashed by the culture itself. My point is that to list everyone who has been replaced and when would take more time and resources then I have so that is why I just assume everyone was replaced and instead look for the few exceptions! Of course I am lazy lol and you are not and I thank you for your research!
|
|
|
Post by hotman637 on Apr 17, 2022 15:26:55 GMT -5
Looking at the avatar for his youtube channel and seeing him peering back at me with one eye thru a hand gesture is problematic. Then one of his videos is him singing Imagine for Global Citizen Initiative Stand Up For Ukraine or whatever just tells me he's a cultist puppet pushing their agendas. He was born April 1963 - just over a year before John Lennon was replaced. I've not looked into Cynthia yet, but if Jane Asher is anything to go by it's not beyond the realms of possibility that she was replaced too. Which leads us to the question, did a couple of imposters adopt the real John Lennon's child? It wouldn't have been the first time. Debbie Reynolds was replaced with an imposter after she had given birth to Carrie Fisher. Carrie was raised by the imposter until she herself was replaced between Star Wars and The Empire Strikes Back along with co-star Mark Hammil, which begs another question, was Julian also imposter replaced at some point? As I have posted before we should START with the fact almost EVERYONE has been replaced and work backwards, lol! I think that about the only people not replaced either died or had their careers short circuited or both!
|
|
|
Post by hotman637 on Apr 12, 2022 23:44:20 GMT -5
It is NOT the platforms that are bad it is LACK of the platform! Facebook does not care what you post it is GOVERNMENT that fucks everything up! The government blocks people and blames FB! I say all sorts of crazy shit on FB and have only been blocked a few days! On the other hand I have been blocked on Slowtwitch and many conspiracy forums (permanently)! Slowtwitch and many conspiracy forums are run by know-it-alls that don't like to hear anything but their own bullshit! I was banned on flat earth forums even though I agree the earth is flat! I was banned from a JFK forum because I told them who did it (Jackie Kennedy)! Ultimately, it's not FB/TW, it's not government, it's not the CIA, it's not Klaus Schwab & his WEF goons, it's not Blackrock/Vanguard, it's not even the banking cabal: the problem is human cowardice. Too many people will not stand up for what is right, if they have to risk putting themselves on the line in any way. Good point! If everyone had just said FUCK YOU to the morons problem solved!
|
|
|
Post by hotman637 on Apr 11, 2022 13:41:25 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by hotman637 on Apr 11, 2022 13:34:17 GMT -5
Why complain about YouTube Twitter etc.? EVERYONE can get on those platforms and say what they want! IMO that is GREAT! No they can't. People are routinely banned for expressing any though that veers from the party line, myself and many friends, included. Go on there right now and type: "Transwomen are men." And see how long it takes for your account to be locked for "hate speech". It is NOT the platforms that are bad it is LACK of the platform! Facebook does not care what you post it is GOVERNMENT that fucks everything up! The government blocks people and blames FB! I say all sorts of crazy shit on FB and have only been blocked a few days! On the other hand I have been blocked on Slowtwitch and many conspiracy forums (permanently)! Slowtwitch and many conspiracy forums are run by know-it-alls that don't like to hear anything but their own bullshit! I was banned on flat earth forums even though I agree the earth is flat! I was banned from a JFK forum because I told them who did it (Jackie Kennedy)!
|
|
|
Post by hotman637 on Apr 10, 2022 15:42:38 GMT -5
Perfect! A still from my favorite Twilight Zone episode is the picture on my desktop. So that every time I power up my computer, I am reminded that I am now entering the Twilight Zone. Why complain about YouTube Twitter etc.? EVERYONE can get on those platforms and say what they want! IMO that is GREAT!
|
|
|
Post by hotman637 on Apr 7, 2022 19:33:47 GMT -5
That interview in Hamburg 1966 looks like the Beatles to me and they look fed up burned out and exhausted! It is easy to see why they retired later that year the new guys took over!
|
|
|
Post by hotman637 on Mar 30, 2022 21:40:11 GMT -5
I have posted before that the Beatles were "family men" and good fathers and so not everything about the Beatles was fake! I also understand that there were a number of "Pauls" and "Fauls" and "Johns" and "Yokos" etc. but the question is which of these possibilities was fake? Were the "family men" fake or were the "wild men" fake? IMO it is far harder to fake being a good family man then fake being a wild man! I have had a family and if you raise them right they turn out right and the Beatle kids have turned out well with good careers and no major drug problems! The movie "Get Back" shows every one getting along fine with kids in the recording studio something rarely seen with rock stars! Heather (Linda's eldest) and James both had notable drug problems. The friend of mine who runs in the same circles as Sean is the second biggest cokehead I've ever known, though, that doesn't necessarily mean he's out of his gourd, too. Interesting that Heather was Linda's and James was Paul's (put a wig on James and he looks far more like Paul then Faul)! So the problems with Heather and James were not directly connected to Faul who by every account was a great father! Sean has produced very good music IMO so maybe drugs helped, lol!
|
|
|
Post by hotman637 on Mar 30, 2022 13:56:07 GMT -5
The Beatle Wives Documentary Englishwww.youtube.com/watch?v=2ItbV2_q6SsTopazthecat Jun 19, 2021 "Here is a very good 1999 E! True Hollywood Story,The Beatles Wives which has interviews with people close to them and explains how truly sexually wild The Beatles were,especially the early Beatles during their touring years with their totally fake cleaned up image wearing the suits and ties many of these were young women groupies,many who were just teen girls who were screaming in their concerts..... "(more at link) It seems that "Topazthecat" buys into all of the Beatle lore presented in the "True Hollywood Story". I've no doubts about the promiscuity angle. But with so many faces presented as "Beatles", stories about their relationships do not ring true for me. For instance, different Pauls were presented with different Janes. Different persons presented as the adult Julian Lennon. Different Johns with different Yokos. I've seen all of this covered here on this board, and elsewhere across the Internet. The official bio stories of their relationships seem falsified to me. Yes, I know there must be registered documentation of marriages and divorces, but those could also have been falsely created. I am beginning to believe they were. This also applies to Beatle associates. I note that JoJo once went looking for news reports evidencing Tara Browne's marriage and the birth of his children but found little to nothing. Interesting...... I have posted before that the Beatles were "family men" and good fathers and so not everything about the Beatles was fake! I also understand that there were a number of "Pauls" and "Fauls" and "Johns" and "Yokos" etc. but the question is which of these possibilities was fake? Were the "family men" fake or were the "wild men" fake? IMO it is far harder to fake being a good family man then fake being a wild man! I have had a family and if you raise them right they turn out right and the Beatle kids have turned out well with good careers and no major drug problems! The movie "Get Back" shows every one getting along fine with kids in the recording studio something rarely seen with rock stars!
|
|
|
Post by hotman637 on Mar 27, 2022 13:00:34 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by hotman637 on Mar 15, 2022 13:46:46 GMT -5
Fake Sting (Fting? Don't like that one) singing help Ukraine? We should send all the imposters to do a benefit gig in Chernobyl and nuke the place, once more.. again. The problem with that plan is there is no nuclear power and if we sent all the imposters just about the entire entertainment industry would go! Not that that is a bad thing!
|
|
|
Post by hotman637 on Mar 6, 2022 15:56:23 GMT -5
OK but how much of that is "magic" (manipulated and deceptive photos or videos) and how much is "real"? I think most of it is manipulation! The media want the whole thing to appear more complicated then it is IMO! It is a lot like COVID! The media builds everything into hysteria but if you look at what actually happen you will see NOTHING actually happened! Instead of saying "Nothing is Real" say "Nothing Happened", lol! The majority of the people I see leaning on these ideas of "photo manipulation" (1) refuse to admit there were more than 2 Paul; (2) refuse to look at images pre-65; (3) refuse to explain how printed materials, including printed film from the time, could have been created to resemble "Billy" (who they believe formed out of thin air in 66) a full decade earlier. As such, I reject that theory on the basis that the people who use it are simply grasping for confirmation bias and refuse to critically address the problems with their pet theory. I do agree some images were retroactively doctored and there's some weird shit going on in a lot of Dezo's contributions (but not face merging of Pauls) and Get Back very well could be 90% AI generated; however, I find the suggestion that that early copies of Beatles Monthly or whatever and press conferences were manipulated, years and years before Billy was brought back into the fold, laughable on their face. Magicians can do time travel! Watch Penn and Teller "fool us" videos and if they can fool Penn and Teller they can fool you and I! www.youtube.com/watch?v=MsqZP4blAGs
|
|
|
Post by hotman637 on Mar 5, 2022 22:24:16 GMT -5
OK but how much of that is "magic" (manipulated and deceptive photos or videos) and how much is "real"? I think most of it is manipulation! The media want the whole thing to appear more complicated then it is IMO! It is a lot like COVID! The media builds everything into hysteria but if you look at what actually happen you will see NOTHING actually happened! Instead of saying "Nothing is Real" say "Nothing Happened", lol! Here's the thing (as I see it). If the early photos made prior to the Beatles becoming a worldwide success were manipulated, why do the early Pauls have chin shapes and jaw lines that look nothing like the Bealtemania Pauls? If photo manipulation was going on, one would think that the early photos available to us on the Internet would have been manipulated to make ALL pre-1967 Pauls appear consistent. But they don't. Among the very early Pauls, you see such features as short, square chins and weak jaw lines. These features are, for the most part, inconsistent with the Beatlemania Paul look. For instance, look at the Paul in the 1966 Memphis interview. He has a long oval chin. Early Pauls have short square chins. Also, at least to me, some of the early Pauls look notably older, and some are notably taller, than the typical bio-markers we see among Beatlemania Pauls. Watch this video of Shin Lim! If you can explain how he does these AMAZING TRICKS (Penn and Teller can't) then you can maybe understand how they pull off all these "Pauls" and "Fauls"! Its MAGIC! www.youtube.com/watch?v=EAN-PwRfJcA
|
|
|
Post by hotman637 on Mar 5, 2022 20:33:56 GMT -5
I think that "Faul" has been around SO LONG (FAR longer then "Paul") that it is more accurate that there are TWO Characters that have very little to do with each other! They don't look like each other they don't sound like each other etc.! Paul was more of a playboy! "Faul" was a family guy that had kids and wives! Sure there were doubles but the doubles of "Paul" looked like Paul and the doubles of "Faul" looked like Faul! If we say that they were interchangeable then we might as well forget the whole thing! Ok, but if you go back to the Hamburg days, other than heights, Billy, “Paul III” & “Paul II” all did somewhat resemble one another. The Paul shown in Liverpool before Hamburg with the low, short sharp brows resembled the Beatlemania era Pauls more than Hamburg or Wings Pauls or, for that matter, the 67-70 Pauls. One of my biggest questions is why that early Liverpool Paul was excluded from or quit during Beatlemania. There are a few shots of him in 63 looking really unhappy…and then he never seems to be a Public Paul again, but can be see in images at least into the 70s. OK but how much of that is "magic" (manipulated and deceptive photos or videos) and how much is "real"? I think most of it is manipulation! The media want the whole thing to appear more complicated then it is IMO! It is a lot like COVID! The media builds everything into hysteria but if you look at what actually happen you will see NOTHING actually happened! Instead of saying "Nothing is Real" say "Nothing Happened", lol!
|
|
|
Post by hotman637 on Mar 5, 2022 14:23:20 GMT -5
Hey, it would mean so much to me seeing as we are all invested in the truth about James Paul McCartney dying in 1966 that I can have a copy of The Memoirs Of Billy Shears. It would mean so much to me, this generosity from you kind souls. I mean it. When I found out McCartney died and was replaced by FAUL, I became chronically depressed and found out more celebs were replaced. I want to see if this book will tell me why, tell me the truth, the horrible truth behind the replacement. Please, I'm in a extremely low paying job and I do not have a bank account so if anyone have the PDF or audiobook, I will be eternally grateful. That's not what happened. "Paul McCartney" is a public character who has been performed by at least a half dozen different guys since 1957. I think that "Faul" has been around SO LONG (FAR longer then "Paul") that it is more accurate that there are TWO Characters that have very little to do with each other! They don't look like each other they don't sound like each other etc.! Paul was more of a playboy! "Faul" was a family guy that had kids and wives! Sure there were doubles but the doubles of "Paul" looked like Paul and the doubles of "Faul" looked like Faul! If we say that they were interchangeable then we might as well forget the whole thing!
|
|
|
Post by hotman637 on Mar 2, 2022 23:41:33 GMT -5
I came across this person's work on YouTube this past weekend, and I have to say it has me still shaking somewhat. Colin Unwin, John Halliday, The Beatleswww.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4S4Dh6AlfMThere's nothing like learning new things. Colin ('John Lennon') John ('Paul McCartney') Terry ('George Harrison') Mark ('Ringo Starr') All I wish here is that others might be open to new information, and that this new info isn't just dismissed because it goes against a person's long held beliefs. Hopefully, we won't make up our minds too quickly that this is all bullsh*t. It's said that intelligence is sometimes displayed in a person by their not making up their mind quickly, that they might be able to hold two opposing beliefs or ideas at the same time, without strongly believing one way or the other. Ha. 'George Harrison' saying "my son looks more like George Harrison than I do'. Ha. Wow. This 'fresh eyes' approach is just incredible. Worth the time to watch the video. Thanks for starting this thread Bandi, and calling our attention to this video. In terms of multiples being in play, it doesn't go against my beliefs. And I especially buy into the theory that John, Paul, George, and Ringo were fabricated identities, the parts being played by various persons over time. Though the channel owner seems to think there were original biologics. I have doubts about that part. I believe I recall quotes from Jagger asking "who are the Beatles?" and calling them a "cartoon band". Think he was trying to tell us something? I appreciate the channel owner pointing out the conflicting versions of how and when John and Paul met. I note that in the printed version, Paul says he was a fat kid, 12 years old at the time. Right. There are some photos on this site of a chunky young Paul, but then there are others that show a handsome thin young Paul. I am wondering if it was right about that time, when they were still boys, that some entity began "auditioning" young boys to play the parts of John, Paul, George, and Ringo. Think: "The Mickey Mouse Club". And if this is the case, where did the boys come from? The video contains the statement, "The most recognized faces of the 60s, yet we don't even know what they look like". An excellent summation for all of this. I have to comment on this again because IMO the Beatles are like an episode of the TV show "Fool Us" where magicians try to fool Penn and Teller! The Beatles even made the movie "Magical Mystery Tour" where they are trying to "fool us"! The thing is behind the magic there WERE real people IMO! I say this because the Beatles were FAMILY MEN and they had REAL WIVES and REAL CHILDREN and they GOT ALONG! Just watch this last movie "Get Back" and Yoko and Linda got along fine and kids were in the studio! "Yoko broke up the Beatles" and "George got mad" were SCRIPTS! Faul had three wives and one of them died! Faul had three kids and one step kid from Linda! Ringo only had TWO wives and three kids all with his first wife! John had TWO children one with each wife! George had only ONE son with his second wife! That was IT! So if there MANY replacements like Mick Jagger (he has EIGHT KIDS with FIVE wives) then there might be a case for a lot of multiples but as I say it is mostly "magic"! Faul was ALWAYS with his kids and John was even a "house husband" for a while and Ringo and George seem to be good fathers too! They were all good fathers except John was a lousy father to his first son from Cynthia!
|
|
|
Post by hotman637 on Feb 13, 2022 23:29:01 GMT -5
My point is that it is NOT A PUZZLE! I have been looking at these forums for over twenty years and they FURTHER THEN EVER from "solving" it! Put all the information into a computer the computer would BLOW UP! Black magic is not something we can solve! Yeah, you've been on these forums for over twenty years. You've not produced anything in those years. Why are you here? What is your purpose? To me you are one of a class of people whose job it is to make sure no one comes to any conclusions. This is the purpose of PID - to get anyone investigating it trapped in a mystery or if they do solve the mystery, dismiss them as "conspiracy theorists." I have seen your Paul is Dead and raised it. All The Beatles are dead. They all got disappeared and were never seen again. D'you know what I call black magic? Lies. That's all it is - lies, deception, dishonesty, impostures etc etc. The rest of your class come up with all manner of stupidness, "Oh, Paul never existed." "There were innumerable Pauls." You all give the game away simply by looking in the other direction and pretending not to see or hear. All the evidence to say with certainty The Beatles were all replaced is out there in the public domain. People simply cannot be that stupid or ignorant that they will not watch two videos and say, "Yep, that's different guys." Every tap on your keyboard; every time you hit "Create Post" you out yourselves as people who know The Beatles were replaced with imposters. This forum is more the Faul McFetal fan club than it is an investigation into the replacement of Paul McCartney. Y'all have to stick to the same tired old conspiracy theory of him dying in a car crash in 1966 and the rest of The Beatles took the imposter replacement into the band. It's laughable, but at the same time it's pretty sick. What have I contributed? I have been on MANY forums and some of those are dead because they fell into the billion "Pauls" and a billion "Fauls" pit of hell and never recovered! I figured out who killed Kennedy! It was his WIFE Jackie! When I saw she had killed JFK I realized God is a woman! Magic is not "true" and it is not a "lie" it is part misdirection and part manipulation!
|
|
|
Post by hotman637 on Feb 12, 2022 16:15:17 GMT -5
What you cannot seem to see is that "Paul is Dead" is BLACK MAGIC! Just like COVID! The more you look the more you see and it leads to a BLACK HOLE that NEVER ENDS! I have seen this happen to other forums where there are a BILLION "Pauls" and a billion "Fauls"! You can spend the rest of your life chasing this maze of confusion! Don't end up in a straight jacket in a mental ward! Good luck! I for one say there is a "Paul" and a "Faul" and they are NOTHING LIKE EACH OTHER! Of course there may be more then one of each but so what? I promise not to end up in a straight jacket. It's just an interesting intrigue. A puzzle to assemble. And I was right there with you on the one real Paul then one Faul thought process for the longest time. I bought into the notion that all Beatlemania era Paul photos that didn't match up exactly to the one main Beatlemania Paul image, were doctored to confuse people as to what "real Paul" looked like. But at that time, I'd neglected to look back, way back, in Beatle history. When I finally did, I found the older looking early Paul, leaning up against a building, pictured earlier in this thread. His face didn't look at all like the young, exuberant doe-eyed template. I had to ask myself: Why wasn't his face doctored to match to some degree, the Beatlemania wide-eyed, rounded chin Paul image? His mug couldn't confuse anybody into thinking he is the doe-eyed Beatlemania Paul. He looked utterly different from the Beatlemania Paul image I'd always had in my head. And he's not the only early Paul I found that didn't match up to the Beatlemania Paul image. Check the photo of the Paul that appears on the September 1962 Mersey Beat cover with the accompanying article titled "A Little Bare". It's on the Fireman thread in the General Forum. If there was only ever one Paul before 1967, then who are these very early guys presented as Paul? And that's just Paul. The same things seem to have occurred with the other three Beatles. How could they have been so many places and accomplished so much from 1963 through 1966, unless there was a whole battalion of them? A whole Sargent Peppers Loney Hearts Club MARCHING BAND of these guys. My point is that it is NOT A PUZZLE! I have been looking at these forums for over twenty years and they FURTHER THEN EVER from "solving" it! Put all the information into a computer the computer would BLOW UP! Black magic is not something we can solve!
|
|
|
Post by hotman637 on Feb 12, 2022 14:51:45 GMT -5
WHAT is "debunked"? They are OBVIOUSLY two different guys a "Paul" and a Faul"! That is the premise of this forum! If that premise is false why does this forum exist?
|
|
|
Post by hotman637 on Feb 12, 2022 14:45:02 GMT -5
Ruby Tuesday She would never say where she came from Yesterday don't matter if it's gone While the sun is bright Or in the darkest night No one knows She comes and goes Goodbye, Ruby Tuesday Who could hang a name on you? When you change with every new day Still I'm gonna miss you Consider these lyrics by the Stones. Ruby Tuesday. People have pointed out that the title obviously refers to the myth of the car accident where Paul was supposedly killed early on a Wednesday morning. Ruby referring to blood, of course. Referencing a "she", but probably meaning "he". Why does he come and go, while no one knows? Different Pauls inserted in and out of the picture all along up to the point Ruby Tuesday was recorded? A revolving door of Pauls? Why does he change with every new day? Because it was different Pauls all along? Why could nobody hang a name on him and he would never say where he came from? Because no one knew the true identities of this revolving door of Pauls? Why are the Stones going to miss him? Ruby Tuesday was recorded by the Stones in December 1966. The Revolver album came out that year. The door was revolving, Beatlemania Pauls exiting (at least temporarily, except Beatle Billy, I think). Other pre-Beatlemania Pauls re-entering the scene here, there, and everywhere. That's what I see at this point in looking over photo evidence. I was a 66er, too. Till suddenly, last summer, I spotted the photo of the very early Paul leaning up against the house which I commented on up thread. I explained why that photo turned my thinking around completely. Some people believe in PID/PWR/PIA. Others, including myself, see a fourth theory (or reality) when going back and looking at very early Paul photos that do not match up to the Beatlemania Paul doe-eyed image. What you cannot seem to see is that "Paul is Dead" is BLACK MAGIC! Just like COVID! The more you look the more you see and it leads to a BLACK HOLE that NEVER ENDS! I have seen this happen to other forums where there are a BILLION "Pauls" and a billion "Fauls"! You can spend the rest of your life chasing this maze of confusion! Don't end up in a straight jacket in a mental ward! Good luck! I for one say there is a "Paul" and a "Faul" and they are NOTHING LIKE EACH OTHER! Of course there may be more then one of each but so what?
|
|
|
Post by hotman637 on Feb 11, 2022 19:02:33 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by hotman637 on Feb 11, 2022 18:39:30 GMT -5
________________________ #3: Paul of Blank Eyed GloomSame guy or different guys? …any plausible explanation for the bend of that left knee-?… Nice job grouping photos of this sad-eyed man. Same guy. He is heavily made up in all photos, though the Wings era photo is a different kind of paint altogether. "They have to paint your face red before they chop. I think it's a different religion from ours". The line from the film Help went something like that, I think. I don't believe we ever saw this guy perform in the U.S. Maybe, he never performed at all as it looks as though he may be missing a left leg or the leg may be too short. Either way, they did a bad edit job trying to make it look as though the leg is just bent back naturally in the stool photo, as the knee looks HUGE. What is the strange chair he is seated in for one photo? Does it look like a sort of footrest, as in a wheelchair? It could be a fake (or too short) left leg propped on the footrest, with the normal right leg dangling down off the footrest. Another early appearance of a square chinned Paul who doesn't match up to Beatlemania Pauls with rounder chins, such as the Paul in the I Feel Fine YouTube video. I still think the I Feel Fine Paul is a match to the Coming Up video Paul who seemed to be playing the part of Ozzy Osbourne. This sets back the whole "Paul is Replaced" 20 years! You show a number of lousy pictures that don't really show anything! The color picture is the only one than has any value! They have been showing pictures of "Paul" vs. "Faul" for decades and I have NEVER seen a "Faul" that was the same as a "Paul"! "Faul" was TALLER and different color eyes and six toes and longer face and different voice etc. etc.! This is what happens when people start seeing a million "Pauls" they FORGET what "Paul" looks like AND they forget what "Faul" looks like!
|
|
|
Post by hotman637 on Jan 29, 2022 0:12:14 GMT -5
Very Interesting!
|
|