|
Post by vOOdOOgurU on Jul 26, 2013 2:31:23 GMT -5
Pre-1966 spotting.
Eyebrows (Arched or Straight) Earlobes (Attached or Detached) Nose ("Flat" or Hooked) Chin (Long or Short) Height (5ft 11 or taller.)
Watching for these things BEFORE 1966, and most definitely after (especially during 1970/1972) will give anyone the definite idea that there have always been more than one Paul, and that REAL and FAUX are errors. Very hard to have a real one, and a faux one, when there's more than one in operation, playing the same role. It gets more into is Paul McCartney REAL, or is he FAKED.
|
|
|
Post by Jai Guru Deva on Jul 26, 2013 13:08:00 GMT -5
The image Linus posted is stretched. ( Didn't you think anyone would notice? ) The true image of Paul is more like this: LittleNicola, let this be a lesson for you... Some people stretch images of Paul to make him look more like Faul, or compress images of Faul to make him look more like Paul. Also, Paul did not die in November, we've narrowed the date of Paul's death to on or around September 12, 1966. In the Free As A Bird video there is a headstone with the image of a lefthanded guitarist (presumably Paul) with the date Sept. 12, 1966 (a monday). The last known public appearance and photograph of Paul is at the Melody Maker Awards (as I understand, the date the photo was published was Sept. 13th, but we think the actual ceremony occured the week before). Melody Maker invanddis.proboards.com/thread/40/specific-date-death?page=4Gravestone invanddis.proboards.com/thread/4244
|
|
|
Post by linus on Jul 26, 2013 13:27:59 GMT -5
The image from the 1965 Ed Sullivan show that I posted are screengrabs from the video I saw on Youtube. I didn’t stretch them, (unlike the photo of ‘Faul’ had been at Digilander, that was used in the Wired article). But even if the video was stretched, the head is still proportionately large, the earlobes are still detached, the eyebrows still don’t match either of the ‘real Paul’s’ eyebrows in the Wired article, the attitude is still cocky and John still says, “Thank you Paul, that was just like him.” One can watch the original Sullivan film compressed or uncompressed, and nothing I’ve stated changes. I don’t even subscribe to the Paul vs. Faul paradigm, I have no reason or desire to alter images. Quite the contrary. A large part of my research centers on calling out altered evidence. A lot of which has come from the PID community, (not from NIR members, though). In fact, if you read page 2 of this thread, you will see I already gave LittleNicola a lesson in stretched evidence. If anything I post has been altered feel free to let me know. Anyone, please show us some unaltered images of the real Paul to illustrate the point on what his true image is. Compressing the pic file isn’t helping much. There are several images in vintage Beatlemania mags and album covers (For Sale, Rubber Soul, backside of Help! and Revolver, etc.) of Pauls with heads matching the size of the one in the 65 Sullivan appearance, and of course, ones that don't. Not to mention eyebrows and ears of various kinds, some that match and some that don't, to these images. But you do bring up more contradictory ‘clues’ put in the Beatles work. Isn’t “Wedenesday morning at 5 o’ clock” supposed to be telling us when Paul died? And/or isn't the "11/9 he die" (future tense) telling us he died on Sept. 11th or Nov. 9th? And speaking of the Melody Taker Award ceremony. Notice Ringo's very fake-looking ears. Large mass of matter in front of the ear. And see the weird ear on Ringo during the And I Love Her interlude in the AHDN film. And here's the gravestone in question from the thread posted above. I see what appears to be 12 - 31st *** or 12 Rest, or 12 Best, or 127 - 3 Est. Like most Beatles messages, it is vague and open to interpretation. I wish this were all as simple as one guy being replaced by an impostor, or that nothing strange was happening at all. But there's just too much other fishy things going on, and on many levels. And the standard PID paradigms just aren't adding up.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 26, 2013 18:59:32 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by littlenicola on Jul 29, 2013 1:08:32 GMT -5
The image from the 1965 Ed Sullivan show that I posted are screengrabs from the video I saw on Youtube. I didn’t stretch them, (unlike the photo of ‘Faul’ had been at Digilander, that was used in the Wired article). But even if the video was stretched, the head is still proportionately large, the earlobes are still detached, the eyebrows still don’t match either of the ‘real Paul’s’ eyebrows in the Wired article, the attitude is still cocky and John still says, “Thank you Paul, that was just like him.” One can watch the original Sullivan film compressed or uncompressed, and nothing I’ve stated changes. I don’t even subscribe to the Paul vs. Faul paradigm, I have no reason or desire to alter images. Quite the contrary. A large part of my research centers on calling out altered evidence. A lot of which has come from the PID community, (not from NIR members, though). In fact, if you read page 2 of this thread, you will see I already gave LittleNicola a lesson in stretched evidence. If anything I post has been altered feel free to let me know. Anyone, please show us some unaltered images of the real Paul to illustrate the point on what his true image is. Compressing the pic file isn’t helping much. There are several images in vintage Beatlemania mags and album covers (For Sale, Rubber Soul, backside of Help! and Revolver, etc.) of Pauls with heads matching the size of the one in the 65 Sullivan appearance, and of course, ones that don't. Not to mention eyebrows and ears of various kinds, some that match and some that don't, to these images. But you do bring up more contradictory ‘clues’ put in the Beatles work. Isn’t “Wedenesday morning at 5 o’ clock” supposed to be telling us when Paul died? And/or isn't the "11/9 he die" (future tense) telling us he died on Sept. 11th or Nov. 9th? And speaking of the Melody Taker Award ceremony. Notice Ringo's very fake-looking ears. Large mass of matter in front of the ear. And see the weird ear on Ringo during the And I Love Her interlude in the AHDN film. And here's the gravestone in question from the thread posted above. I see what appears to be 12 - 31st *** or 12 Rest, or 12 Best, or 127 - 3 Est. Like most Beatles messages, it is vague and open to interpretation. I wish this were all as simple as one guy being replaced by an impostor, or that nothing strange was happening at all. But there's just too much other fishy things going on, and on many levels. And the standard PID paradigms just aren't adding up. I admit his ear does look a bit odd but only in the color photo, all the other photos his ear looks fine though. Also I don't think that the tombstone says anything at all, it just says what you want it to say which is a pretty good example of the PID myth as a whole. It's simply based on what you want to believe in not what actually is there. I've looked at more pictures lately and reanalyzed some of the clues and I still firmly believe that the PID theory is completely wrong. The clues contradict each other, no one can really even agree exactly when the impostor came into play and some folks here believe there is more than one which is just pure stupidity in my opinion. I respect all the research done in this forum and sometimes it is some intriguing stuff but lately I've come to the conclusion that most of this is what some forumers on here call "Idol Worship" Some people just really hate the physical and musical changes Paul and The Beatles in a whole made come Sgt Peppers so you use the PID rumor to try and twist history around so Paul was always the cute, mop topped boy he was in the early sixties and that some older, nastier man came to replace him come Peppers. That is my two cents anyways and I don't mean to offend anyone. Anyways I don't think this forum is right for me, I can see that we share two completely different views of The Beatles.
|
|
|
Post by decitfaul on Jul 29, 2013 16:17:30 GMT -5
I just purchased the DVD of all The Beatles performances on The Ed Sullivan Show.. and in my opinion the Paul that comes out in September 1965, the final performance, is not the real Paul. His mannerisms are different, and as pointed out before this is the same show where John says "Thank you Paul, that was just like him" after Faul sings Yesterday. I feel this MAYBE could be proof that Faul had been with The Beatles long before 1966. Perhaps The Beatles were telling us in their music from 1964-1966.. I always liked "Your Bird Can Sing" but when you listen to the lyrics and the way the song is sung.. "..and your bird can sing but you don't get me.." and several others. Just a theory.. never no though
|
|
|
Post by littlenicola on Jul 29, 2013 16:35:51 GMT -5
I just purchased the DVD of all The Beatles performances on The Ed Sullivan Show.. and in my opinion the Paul that comes out in September 1965, the final performance, is not the real Paul. His mannerisms are different, and as pointed out before this is the same show where John says "Thank you Paul, that was just like him" after Faul sings Yesterday. I feel this MAYBE could be proof that Faul had been with The Beatles long before 1966. Perhaps The Beatles were telling us in their music from 1964-1966.. I always liked "Your Bird Can Sing" but when you listen to the lyrics and the way the song is sung.. "..and your bird can sing but you don't get me.." and several others. Just a theory.. never no though So basically we're just writing the real Paul out of existence and putting Faul waaaaay back in 1964? Doesn't make any sense, you see differences because your mind wants you to see them, to me the guy singing Yesterday was the real Paul no doubt about it. Also aren't you forgetting all the hard work THIS forum put into showing that pre Pepper Paul was the real one? I'd say this forum loses a lot of credibility if people start putting the impostor before Pepper. You're looking at the wrong line in "And Your Bird Can Sing" by the way, here's an interesting excerpt. "The line "You say you've seen seven wonders" may refer to the night the Beatles smoked pot with Bob Dylan in New York in 1964. The experience caused a stoned McCartney to excitedly pronounce what he had just learned was the key to life: "There are seven levels."
|
|
|
Post by Jai Guru Deva on Jul 29, 2013 17:17:14 GMT -5
When we started our investigation on this board, we were all aware of the work of our predecessors. But we did not take as gospel fact any of the clues that college students and disc jockeys came up with in the late 1960's. We sure didn't think SunKing's ever-changing 60IF document was credible either. Rather, we went over all the clues with a fine tooth comb. In some instances, there were clues that had to be thrown out as clues like the infamous "OPP" patch which stands for Ontario Provincial Police, but back in the 60's some people thought it said "OPD" for "Officially Pronounced Dead". However, a lot of the other clues were good. What do you do with all the clues about Paul's death? I'm talking about things like Derek Taylor admitting the Sgt. Peppers album cover is a grave, the bloody head of Paul on the alternative white album where 5 Beatles are shown like Mt. Rushmore, the Beatles purposely adding paul is dead messages in the Yellow Submarine movie , Lovely Rita "He died", the John Lennon's infamous backward speech where he reveals "Paul is a dead man, miss him, miss him, miss him", the Pantomime album cover that has a dove and the words "Pantomime" look like a casket, the infamous photo where the drum reads "Paul" and Love" simultaneously and the pair of shoes, the illustration of the Fool On The Hill where Faul's left hand looks like a body buried under the grass... There are just tons of clues out there, I'm only scratching at the surface with a few examples... What do you do--toss them all aside because they don't fit neatly into your little theoretical box? When it comes to the date of Paul's death, we can only draw upon what the Beatles have given us. November is really too late, by that time they were floating trial balloons with replacement's trip to Africa and working with George Martin on "The Family Way" album, and (in October 14, 1966) the International Times launch party where "Paul" dressed up as an "Arab" and Yoko performed. Therefore, more than likely, the drum skin on Sgt. Pepper says September 11th. You can look at the Free As A Bird video: www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PAXDHd9gkY. I think the gravestone says "12 September"; it said it back in 2004 when JoJo posted it and it says it now. It could be Paul died on the 11th and he was buried on the 12th? If nothing else, at least the image of the left handed guitarist should be clear. I've seen hundreds and hundreds of photos of Paul McCartney. Every once in a while I may come across a photo that leaves me scratching my head, but I'd say about 99% of the time I can identify Paul. I believe the man screen capture on the Ed Sullivan show to be Paul www.youtube.com/watch?v=UjcHcEZedVY . The ears are attached, there is a small shadow behind the ear may give the appearance of an unattached earlobe, the right central incisor is longer than the left (unlike the replacement who left incisor is longer than the right), the eyebrows are normal for Paul, the jaw is slightly angular unlike the replacement which has a smooth, curved line to the chin... Ringo and his ears seem pretty normal in this video clip of the Melody Maker awards (and Paul is really Paul): www.youtube.com/watch?v=fEQysGn4EdU
|
|
|
Post by vOOdOOgurU on Jul 29, 2013 22:01:42 GMT -5
So basically we're just writing the real Paul out of existence and putting Faul waaaaay back in 1964? Doesn't make any sense, you see differences because your mind wants you to see them, to me the guy singing Yesterday was the real Paul no doubt about it. Also aren't you forgetting all the hard work THIS forum put into showing that pre Pepper Paul was the real one? I'd say this forum loses a lot of credibility if people start putting the impostor before Pepper. It's not a case of writing the real Paul out of existence. Everything that precedes 1966 pointing in that direction is there. WE didn't have to do anything. There is nothing that my mind is doing that can attach his earlobes, and then detach them depending on what image/video you see of him. And it happens BEFORE 1966. Is it possible that PID was put in place because people NOTICED there was more than one? Do you think with all the public appearances and promotional photo shoots that someone or a bunch of people actually started letting it slip there was more than one. That's very possible, because a lot of people close to McCartney and The Beatles started dying AFTER 1966, and out comes these rumours that he is dead, is not dead. Do you not think that maybe it was noticed that his height kept going up and down, and his earlobes kept attaching and detaching themselves, and that his facial shape kept changing, along with his wandering eyebrows. MAYBE people noticed. Or you can say it was planned all along, and I see evidence, or a damn good indication that Paul Is Dead was in the works for quite some time. So either people noticing was inconsequential and it was going to be done anyway, or people noticing made it all the more important to push the PID agenda. And they did an awful lot of work pushing that agenda. From having no involvement in Yellow Submarine, and STILL having PID all over it, to a Paul's Dead! at the end of the Death Cab for Cutie sequence in MMT. They went a long way to keep saying this. Maybe it just wasn't foreseen that people would have as much access to archival footage as they did back 4 decades ago. Evidence of two Pauls is before AND after 1966. The Paul that shows up in court to dissolve them is not the same Paul you see in 1962. Or in 1968. There is no real one and fake one, when both of them are doing the same job. It's just comforting to think that there's a real one, because to throw that notion out the door truly makes the world seem absolutely upside down. And everything you've had rammed down your mental tube as being "reality" is in fact ... FALSE.
|
|
|
Post by decitfaul on Jul 29, 2013 23:34:52 GMT -5
I just purchased the DVD of all The Beatles performances on The Ed Sullivan Show.. and in my opinion the Paul that comes out in September 1965, the final performance, is not the real Paul. His mannerisms are different, and as pointed out before this is the same show where John says "Thank you Paul, that was just like him" after Faul sings Yesterday. I feel this MAYBE could be proof that Faul had been with The Beatles long before 1966. Perhaps The Beatles were telling us in their music from 1964-1966.. I always liked "Your Bird Can Sing" but when you listen to the lyrics and the way the song is sung.. "..and your bird can sing but you don't get me.." and several others. Just a theory.. never no though So basically we're just writing the real Paul out of existence and putting Faul waaaaay back in 1964? Doesn't make any sense, you see differences because your mind wants you to see them, to me the guy singing Yesterday was the real Paul no doubt about it. Also aren't you forgetting all the hard work THIS forum put into showing that pre Pepper Paul was the real one? I'd say this forum loses a lot of credibility if people start putting the impostor before Pepper. You're looking at the wrong line in "And Your Bird Can Sing" by the way, here's an interesting excerpt. "The line "You say you've seen seven wonders" may refer to the night the Beatles smoked pot with Bob Dylan in New York in 1964. The experience caused a stoned McCartney to excitedly pronounce what he had just learned was the key to life: "There are seven levels." What I was meant was there was 2 Pauls by 1965, the real James Paul McCartney and another guy posing as him. I feel this theory doesn't loose creditability by saying the Faul or Billy, or whoever he is was around at the same tume as the real JPM, around 1965. I think its more plausible that he had been around The Beatles and Paul. Then something happened to the real JPM in 1966 and Faul took over without skipping a beat. This sounds more believable then saying JPM died and someone was found and trained and all the other stuff in a very short period of time. To me that theory turns people away from looking into PID.
|
|
|
Post by linus on Jul 29, 2013 23:45:59 GMT -5
“People generally see what they look for, and hear what they listen for.” ― Harper Lee, To Kill a MockingbirdIf the PID clues have come down to backmasked messages and Rorschach tests, the above quote is all too relevant. Make what one will of the gravestone, but I certainly don’t see a 1966 anywhere on there. What of the other ‘clues’, such as “Thank you Paul, that was just like him.” It is loud & clear and plain as day. Is one going to toss that aside, because it doesn’t fit the standard PID theoretical box? If the song “I’m Looking through you, where did you go?” had been released after 1966 PIDers would be touting that as a major clue. And that’s my biggest confusion with PID, the double standards, or, at least, arbitrary standards. They decide on an exit point (usually late-66) and everything odd before that is just a random song or a goofy photo idea, or physical discrepancies are just lighting . But after the replacement date, the slightest ink blot or shadow or sketch is a ‘smoking gun’ that Paul died whenever it is they decide he died. Eleanor Rigby, She Said She Said, Taxman and Tomorrow Never Knows are centered on the themes of death and graves, and are as creepy & discordant as anything (or more) that you’ll find in the rest of their catalog. btw, the Yellow Submarine song came out before Sept. 11th, 1966 Not to mention the murderous intent of Run For Your Life. And what of the ‘clues’ on Yesterday & Today alluding to death and Osiris legends, (and Paul's right-side hair part)? But most, if not all, PIDers write those off & toss them aside because they don’t fit into the standard PID paradigm. Speaking for myself, the ‘PID clues’ are definitely there and were planted intentionally, and of course should be taken into account. But whoever was trying to give them to the public didn’t do a very good job of telling us when, where, how, why and by who, or who replaced him. And why put death clues of an actual death in the music & artwork, sounds morbid. Why not put it in interviews or something? (by the way, in an interview, George said there were multiple Beatles, but of course everyone laughs that off). But most of all, there is so much more to them. Even just a brief study of Egyptian Mythology, Kabbalah and European Occult esotericism will shed much light on how embedded the PID motif is, and all the Beatles work is with them, going as far back as With the Beatles. Can people post photos of the real Paul? For every photo of ‘Faul’ with a round chin, there’s one that doesn’t have a round chin, and one for everything in between. About the front teeth, remember the chipped tooth from the moped accident (which also brings up many mysteries). Either way, for every photo of one tooth being longer, there’s another where it’s not, in both eras. Not to mention the upper molars. A shadow is causing the earlobe to seem detached? If that is the standard one is going to hold for pre-67 photos & videos, they have to hold the same standards for post-66. If one is going to extend a certain courtesy to pre-67 Paul, they have to extend the same to post-66. Besides, what of all the instances of attached earlobes after 1967? There's even some Pauls that had an attached left earlobe and a detached right earlobe, (gotta find the video). And the fake ears with detached earlobes... Why didn't they bother to even the the lobes 'right'? And if he had world-class surgeons working on him, why couldn't they figure out how to part his hair on the left like it usually was before 1967? For every ‘smoking gun’ found by PID, there’s another for PIA and yet another for the multiples-believers. It was the perfect set-up. Crowley wrote obsessively on the power of contradictions, and how they establish perfect balance and unity. Curiously enough, he saw the numbers 111 and 10 (X) as the best representations of unity. I believe it is in his book Gematria that he goes into this, also The Book of Thoth. It’s also interesting that the Hebrew word Aleph Pe Lamed (APL) means thick darkness, and has the Gematrical value of 111. Thick Darkness also being another name for the Egyptian Land of the Dead/Underworld/Duat. And of course, we have Apple Records. What is more interesting is his philosophy on the mythology of the death of the prince (Osiris/Christ/Vav of YHVH) so that the new king can live, which can be found in most of his works. Also see The Golden Bough and King Kill 33. And speaking of Rubber Soul, the song Nowhere Man alludes to Crowley’s "No-Man". When enters the Abyss, or Void (see Kabbalah Tree of Life) they become the No-Man. Also, his Prince of Swords Tarot card (which ties into the Paul persona, will have to get into later), has the quality of "making no real plans”. Also when Odysseus first encounters the Cyclops, he tells him that his name is No-Man, so when he starts killing him, and the other Cyclops’ hear the commotion and ask what’s going on, the Cyclops replies, “No-Man is in here, No-Man is killing me.” So they leave, thinking he’s fine. Interesting that Nowhere Man comes out before Tomorrow Never Knows and it’s Void surrendering. Perhaps Paul didn’t make it through The Void while he was alone taking a ride looking for another kind of mind. But I digress. LittleNicola hit the nail on the head with idol worship* and seeing what one wants to see. Though he could’ve been more tactful here: some folks here believe there is more than one which is just pure stupidity in my opinion. Yes, there are those that believe there was more than one Paul before 1966. It may sound like pure stupidity to new-comers, but after analyzing hundreds of photos for over two years, one starts to see the writing on the walls. It's not trying to put 'Faul' back in time, it's about the multiples co-existing. (Here come your eyerolls). What I’ve come to see is that PID is a form of mind control, or at least a form of putting on blinders. The admittedly subliminal messages are put in there. They get announced to the public. The observant fans that were susceptible to the subliminal messages do a bit of research and say, “yeah, he died and was replaced.” Though turn a blind eye to all the fishyness before their established exit date – all the while seeing messages in cracks in walls and Plato’s Cave shadows. *Those with things like this in their tagline may not exactly the most unbiased. Just saying. What's he like as a person?" "He's the most intelligent man I've ever met."--David Vaughan asking Tara Browne about Paul McCartney Not making a statement on ones affinities, it just poses a question at where one's allegiances are at. The problem with PIA vs. PID is that the only people willing to take the time & effort to analyze it are too big of fans to be completely unbiased, usually. In most cases they wouldn’t be able to be part of a jury of this ever went to court.
|
|
|
Post by ramone on Jul 29, 2013 23:54:17 GMT -5
Ramone The main problem with this, and other boards of the same ilk, is that the mystery has already been solved. Now, all they need to do is put the puzzle together. It's kind of like, putting the cart before the horse. Little do they know, but they are miles away from the original intention. To make matters worse, they drag others into the cunumdrum. Dylan replaced, Hitler replaced, God replaced. Bullocks! What I offer them does not fit with their preconceived ideas. Therefore, I am full of shite. Those who want to take this on seriously, need to purge everything they think they know out of the mix. Look with new eyes, listen with new ears. Therein lies the story waiting to unfold. Paul did not die. Part of him did. Replaced? Look at the clues. Every picture tells a story.
Apollo
|
|
|
Post by littlenicola on Jul 29, 2013 23:58:56 GMT -5
So basically we're just writing the real Paul out of existence and putting Faul waaaaay back in 1964? Doesn't make any sense, you see differences because your mind wants you to see them, to me the guy singing Yesterday was the real Paul no doubt about it. Also aren't you forgetting all the hard work THIS forum put into showing that pre Pepper Paul was the real one? I'd say this forum loses a lot of credibility if people start putting the impostor before Pepper. It's not a case of writing the real Paul out of existence. Everything that precedes 1966 pointing in that direction is there. WE didn't have to do anything. There is nothing that my mind is doing that can attach his earlobes, and then detach them depending on what image/video you see of him. And it happens BEFORE 1966. Is it possible that PID was put in place because people NOTICED there was more than one? Do you think with all the public appearances and promotional photo shoots that someone or a bunch of people actually started letting it slip there was more than one. That's very possible, because a lot of people close to McCartney and The Beatles started dying AFTER 1966, and out comes these rumours that he is dead, is not dead. Do you not think that maybe it was noticed that his height kept going up and down, and his earlobes kept attaching and detaching themselves, and that his facial shape kept changing, along with his wandering eyebrows. MAYBE people noticed. Or you can say it was planned all along, and I see evidence, or a damn good indication that Paul Is Dead was in the works for quite some time. So either people noticing was inconsequential and it was going to be done anyway, or people noticing made it all the more important to push the PID agenda. And they did an awful lot of work pushing that agenda. From having no involvement in Yellow Submarine, and STILL having PID all over it, to a Paul's Dead! at the end of the Death Cab for Cutie sequence in MMT. They went a long way to keep saying this. Maybe it just wasn't foreseen that people would have as much access to archival footage as they did back 4 decades ago. Evidence of two Pauls is before AND after 1966. The Paul that shows up in court to dissolve them is not the same Paul you see in 1962. Or in 1968. There is no real one and fake one, when both of them are doing the same job. It's just comforting to think that there's a real one, because to throw that notion out the door truly makes the world seem absolutely upside down. And everything you've had rammed down your mental tube as being "reality" is in fact ... FALSE. Why though? Why have Paul and Faul interchange at random? Why not just add Faul on as another god damn member? This in my opinion shows how the theory has devolved so very much. I can't see any rhyme or reason behind having a double for just Paul that would take his place at random, it just doesn't make sense. According to you the real Paul never died nor was incapacitated so why go to such lengths as KILLING people to cover this up? Why place clues pointing to his death when there was no death at all? It sounds like you're going with the "It was a joke" theory to me. I just think a lot of what is going on is people seeing what they want to see, they are twisting clues to fit their theories and sometimes even using doctored photos to prove their points and that is just insane. Also I'm pretty sure people never noticed any differences until the word got out that The Beatles hid clues and the real Paul was dead, I've never meant anyone that just naturally assumes Pepper Paul is not the same guy as the original Paul, they only begin to see differences after being subjected to the theory and viewing several untruthful comparisons. Also you believe that there was never a real Paul. Now please just think about that statement and how silly and insulting it sounds. At this point why don't we just say all of the Beatles never existed, that they were just portrayed by actors and were changed on a regular basis. I honestly think that many people in the PID/PWR crowd are willing to accept any insane theory that still proves their points than to just ante up and admit they were looking at things the wrong way.
|
|
|
Post by linus on Jul 30, 2013 0:09:27 GMT -5
Why have multiples? from about mid-1963 to 1967 they had to keep up with the demands of their grueling schedules of touring, performing, interviews, photo shoots, recording, filming, public speaking, writing, art shows, partying all night, etc.
On only one occasion do I know of, did any of them get take time off, when Ringo had tonsillitis during their Denmark & Australia dates in 1964. Other than that there was no taking any time off for sickness or fatigue, other than their holiday breaks.
Why use a PID campaign to cover up multiples? To explain away the descrepancies spotted by observant fans & acquaintences. Sure replacing a pop star with an impostor is a heinous crime and fraud, but using multiples all the while is even more so. Which, as we see, brings up the question of a 'real Paul' ever existing. Which is my point, whether it's PID or multiples, it's all going to be traced back to the same criminals. I just happen to think, after much research, that if PID happened it was loong before 1966.
btw, when I became a Beatles fan 19 years ago, I subconsciously noticed subtle differences amongst them every year, not just from Pepper onward. But wrote it off, until I started looking at PID more seriously and wanted to just find out what was really going on, no matter what it might be.
|
|
|
Post by littlenicola on Jul 30, 2013 0:17:04 GMT -5
“People generally see what they look for, and hear what they listen for.” ― Harper Lee, To Kill a MockingbirdIf the PID clues have come down to backmasked messages and Rorschach tests, the above quote is all too relevant. Make what one will of the gravestone, but I certainly don’t see a 1966 anywhere on there. What of the other ‘clues’, such as “Thank you Paul, that was just like him.” It is loud & clear and plain as day. Is one going to toss that aside, because it doesn’t fit the standard PID theoretical box? If the song “I’m Looking through you, where did you go?” had been released after 1966 PIDers would be touting that as a major clue. And that’s my biggest confusion with PID, the double standards, or, at least, arbitrary standards. They decide on an exit point (usually late-66) and everything odd before that is just a random song or a goofy photo idea, or physical discrepancies are just lighting . But after the replacement date, the slightest ink blot or shadow or sketch is a ‘smoking gun’ that Paul died whenever it is they decide he died. Eleanor Rigby, She Said She Said, Taxman and Tomorrow Never Knows are centered on the themes of death and graves, and are as creepy & discordant as anything (or more) that you’ll find in the rest of their catalog. btw, the Yellow Submarine song came out before Sept. 11th, 1966 Not to mention the murderous intent of Run For Your Life. And what of the ‘clues’ on Yesterday & Today alluding to death and Osiris legends, (and Paul's right-side hair part)? But most, if not all, PIDers write those off & toss them aside because they don’t fit into the standard PID paradigm. Speaking for myself, the ‘PID clues’ are definitely there and were planted intentionally, and of course should be taken into account. But whoever was trying to give them to the public didn’t do a very good job of telling us when, where, how, why and by who, or who replaced him. And why put death clues of an actual death in the music & artwork, sounds morbid. Why not put it in interviews or something? (by the way, in an interview, George said there were multiple Beatles, but of course everyone laughs that off). But most of all, there is so much more to them. Even just a brief study of Egyptian Mythology, Kabbalah and European Occult esotericism will shed much light on how embedded the PID motif is, and all the Beatles work is with them, going as far back as With the Beatles. Can people post photos of the real Paul? For every photo of ‘Faul’ with a round chin, there’s one that doesn’t have a round chin, and one for everything in between. About the front teeth, remember the chipped tooth from the moped accident (which also brings up many mysteries). Either way, for every photo of one tooth being longer, there’s another where it’s not, in both eras. Not to mention the upper molars. A shadow is causing the earlobe to seem detached? If that is the standard one is going to hold for pre-67 photos & videos, they have to hold the same standards for post-66. If one is going to extend a certain courtesy to pre-67 Paul, they have to extend the same to post-66. Besides, what of all the instances of attached earlobes after 1967? There's even some Pauls that had an attached left earlobe and a detached right earlobe, (gotta find the video). And the fake ears with detached earlobes... Why didn't they bother to even the the lobes 'right'? And if he had world-class surgeons working on him, why couldn't they figure out how to part his hair on the left like it usually was before 1967? For every ‘smoking gun’ found by PID, there’s another for PIA and yet another for the multiples-believers. It was the perfect set-up. Crowley wrote obsessively on the power of contradictions, and how they establish perfect balance and unity. Curiously enough, he saw the numbers 111 and 10 (X) as the best representations of unity. I believe it is in his book Gematria that he goes into this, also The Book of Thoth. It’s also interesting that the Hebrew word Aleph Pe Lamed (APL) means thick darkness, and has the Gematrical value of 111. Thick Darkness also being another name for the Egyptian Land of the Dead/Underworld/Duat. And of course, we have Apple Records. What is more interesting is his philosophy on the mythology of the death of the prince (Osiris/Christ/Vav of YHVH) so that the new king can live, which can be found in most of his works. Also see The Golden Bough and King Kill 33. And speaking of Rubber Soul, the song Nowhere Man alludes to Crowley’s "No-Man". When enters the Abyss, or Void (see Kabbalah Tree of Life) they become the No-Man. Also, his Prince of Swords Tarot card (which ties into the Paul persona, will have to get into later), has the quality of "making no real plans”. Also when Odysseus first encounters the Cyclops, he tells him that his name is No-Man, so when he starts killing him, and the other Cyclops’ hear the commotion and ask what’s going on, the Cyclops replies, “No-Man is in here, No-Man is killing me.” So they leave, thinking he’s fine. Interesting that Nowhere Man comes out before Tomorrow Never Knows and it’s Void surrendering. Perhaps Paul didn’t make it through The Void while he was alone taking a ride looking for another kind of mind. But I digress. LittleNicola hit the nail on the head with idol worship* and seeing what one wants to see. Though he could’ve been more tactful here: some folks here believe there is more than one which is just pure stupidity in my opinion. Yes, there are those that believe there was more than one Paul before 1966. It may sound like pure stupidity to new-comers, but after analyzing hundreds of photos for over two years, one starts to see the writing on the walls. It's not trying to put 'Faul' back in time, it's about the multiples co-existing. (Here come your eyerolls). What I’ve come to see is that PID is a form of mind control, or at least a form of putting on blinders. The admittedly subliminal messages are put in there. They get announced to the public. The observant fans that were susceptible to the subliminal messages do a bit of research and say, “yeah, he died and was replaced.” Though turn a blind eye to all the fishyness before their established exit date – all the while seeing messages in cracks in walls and Plato’s Cave shadows. *Those with things like this in their tagline may not exactly the most unbiased. Just saying. What's he like as a person?" "He's the most intelligent man I've ever met."--David Vaughan asking Tara Browne about Paul McCartney Not making a statement on ones affinities, it just poses a question at where one's allegiances are at. The problem with PIA vs. PID is that the only people willing to take the time & effort to analyze it are too big of fans to be completely unbiased, usually. In most cases they wouldn’t be able to be part of a jury of this ever went to court. Thank you Linus, even though I firmly believe that there was only ever one Paul I think you got everything else spot on. Your post is quite honestly the most logical post I've ever read on this forum and I have to applaud you for that. I never doubted The Beatles hid messages in their music, I knew it from the very first time I opened my mind and concentrated on what they were saying. In fact they are the exact reason why I've been studying the occult and ancient mythology, so I can fully appreciate how genius they truly were. Or I myself could be suffering from a case of idol worship where I refuse to believe The Beatles were just a band and not some of the most intelligent people that ever set foot in the music industry and were able to intertwine mythology and the occult into their songs which on the outside appeared to be normal pop songs but when analyzed would reveal their true meanings but I just feel accepting them as just a band would be an insult to them and all they did.
|
|
|
Post by littlenicola on Jul 30, 2013 0:34:36 GMT -5
Why have multiples? from about mid-1963 to 1967 they had to keep up with the demands of their grueling schedules of touring, performing, interviews, photo shoots, recording, filming, public speaking, writing, art shows, partying all night, etc. On only one occasion do I know of, did any of them get take time off, when Ringo had tonsillitis during their Denmark & Australia dates in 1964. Other than that there was no taking any time off for sickness or fatigue, other than their holiday breaks. Why use a PID campaign to cover up multiples? To explain away the descrepancies spotted by observant fans & acquaintences. Sure replacing a pop star with an impostor is a heinous crime and fraud, but using multiples all the while is even more so. Which, as we see, brings up the question of a 'real Paul' ever existing. Which is my point, whether it's PID or multiples, it's all going to be traced back to the same criminals. I just happen to think, after much research, that if PID happened it was loong before 1966. btw, when I became a Beatles fan 19 years ago, I subconsciously noticed subtle differences amongst them every year, not just from Pepper onward. But wrote it off, until I started looking at PID more seriously and wanted to just find out what was really going on, no matter what it might be. Ok I can see what you're saying here but if they did use doubles to replace them due to grueling schedules than why not replace Ringo by a look-alike during his sick leave? If it was so easy to use doubles to appear for The Beatles than why even bring up Ringo's sickness in the first place instead of just having a look-alike take his spot behind the drums. I know how rough they had it but it is never to the point where they are physically unable to attend and have to use doubles but for all we know it could be as simple as Paul (or any rock n roll musician in general) being lazy and not wanting to fulfill his obligations and instead he personally trained a look-alike to replace him on days he just didn't want to work. Of course this theory is not dramatic enough to fly so it's thrown out the window immediately and in it's place we get clones, car accidents, aliens, robots and other silly ideas as to why Paul looks different in that one photo than the other. Honestly Linus, you seem to be the most collected person here and I think you are on the right track and at least your theories sound more believable than the run of the mill stuff you'd get here and honestly considering the rock n roll culture of the 1960s it wouldn't surprise me at all if all major artists back than had personal doubles to take their places when they just could not perform.
|
|
|
Post by linus on Jul 30, 2013 1:26:31 GMT -5
if they did use doubles to replace them due to grueling schedules than why not replace Ringo by a look-alike during his sick leave? A few reasons: I would imagine if there was a serious issue such as tonsillitis, he would have to be checked into a hospital, thus many witnesses and medical records abound. Also, it’s one thing to pull off poor rhythm guitar or bass playing for a few gigs, poor lead-guitar work is more difficult. But pulling of live-drumming, particularly Ringo’s unique style, would be quite difficult. (Perhaps he didn't have doubles that performed live). And further on the multiples viewpoint, what a great way to maintain the non-multiples status quo. “Let’s have one of the lads take a sick leave. But if it’s Paul, John or George, the fans will riot. How about Ringo, not many will care much if Ringo sits out a few gigs.” Also, who knows, there could an esoteric meaning behind his tonsillitis episode. The throat chokra plays large in the grand scheme of things. Just throwing out possibilities. (granted each of the possibilities comes with it's set of factors to be weighed and questions raised).And I forgot to mention their nightly schedules in Hamburg. Didn’t they play 6-8 hours a night, 6 or 7 nights a week? Which begs the question, with their busy schedule from '60-66, where did they find the time to study all of this Gnosticism? The incredible amount that was so craftily put into their work at their young age, and busy lives, makes one wonder if they were receiving help from adepts.I could be wrong about multiples, in fact I hope I am. Nor do I expect people to believe it, and I don’t try to proselytize, just state my case, and call out bs when I see it. I hope they are just four guys that made music, and there was no foul play at any point. But as it currently seems, that hope is gone. I hate to be the guy with the whacky theory, but I don't know what else to say besides, truth is stranger than fiction. In fact they are the exact reason why I've been studying the occult and ancient mythology, so I can fully appreciate how genius they truly were… … able to intertwine mythology and the occult into their songs which on the outside appeared to be normal pop songs but when analyzed would reveal their true meanings. I am right there with you. I still see their music as just about the tightest, most awe-inspiring music of our time, throughout their entire catalog. Of all the pop groups of the last 60+ years, they really had their s*** together. (That aughtta make Iwill smile).With that being said, my allegiances are to the heart of the matter and not the pop stars. Just the fact that their name is The Beatles, invoking the scarab beetle Khepri sun god, says so much. Add to that the winged ram-headed beetle Atum-Ra, the portrayal of the supreme god overseeing the cycle of life and death, and it all starts to fall in line. (Forgot to mention in regards to Crowley's fascination with contradictions & opposites; life & death being the ultimate contradiction. Could 1one1X He Die mean, balance, unity, he live ?) Plus, the revered dung beetle, which was thought to roll the sun like a stone across the sky, and through the underworld each night, only to re-merge every morning. "Welcome the Rolling Stones" on the temple, surely.Mural depicting The Egyptian Book of Caverns: The sun god Ra as the scarab beetle Khepri, emerging every morning from the Cavern of Mystery as the re-born sun. The Beatles emerging from The Cavern Club in 1963 I could go on and on, and I have. Thanks though, for the compliments. I'm just trying to make sense of all this. When there's little to be found. If you like what you saw in this thread, read the Sgt. Pepper Drum thread: invanddis.proboards.com/thread/7288/sgt-pepper-drum?page=3
|
|
|
Post by beacon on Jul 30, 2013 4:00:18 GMT -5
What do you do--toss them all aside because they don't fit neatly into your little theoretical box? When it comes to the date of Paul's death, we can only draw upon what the Beatles have given us. November is really too late, by that time they were floating trial balloons with replacement's trip to Africa and working with George Martin on "The Family Way" album, and (in October 14, 1966) the International Times launch party where "Paul" dressed up as an "Arab" and Yoko performed. Therefore, more than likely, the drum skin on Sgt. Pepper says September 11th. You can look at the Free As A Bird video: www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PAXDHd9gkY. I think the gravestone says "12 September"; it said it back in 2004 when JoJo posted it and it says it now. It could be Paul died on the 11th and he was buried on the 12th? If nothing else, at least the image of the left handed guitarist should be clear. Jai Guru Deva you seem to be falling into your own trap here. You seem to be saying that the clues point to the date being September because certain facts preclude it being November and then that doesn't neatly fit into your 'little theoretical box'. Let's be honest, we are all guessing here, and we should encourage the alternate possibilities and theories that posters like linus, voodooguru and little nicola are proposing and not assume anything to be correct. P.S. for my money, whatever happened, it happened in November!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 30, 2013 7:53:56 GMT -5
#4 The Heart Chakra, in the Key of G.
You tell me that you've got everything you want And your bird can sing But you don't get me, you don't get me
You say you've seen seven wonders and your bird is green But you can't see me, you can't see me
When your prized possessions start to wear you down Look in my direction, I'll be round, I'll be round
When your bird is broken will it bring you down You may be awoken, I'll be round, I'll be round
You tell me that you've heard every sound there is And your bird can swing But you can't hear me, you can't hear me
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 30, 2013 8:24:55 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 30, 2013 8:44:33 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Jai Guru Deva on Jul 30, 2013 14:07:24 GMT -5
Again, with regard to the date of Paul's death, we can only go by what the Beatles have given us. I deduced the date to mid September through studying the Beatles' timeline of activities and the few clues they left behind about Paul's time of death. I really don't think November works, especially with the imposter collaborating with George and going to Africa, and the last published photo of Paul was taken at the Melody Maker awards in September. I don't think anyone here has ever advocated "clues" pre-dating 1966 , certainly I haven't. I would consider the song "I'm Looking Through You" to be a premonition (an subconscious sense of the future). There is also phenomena called "Swan Song" in which a person can have a burst of creative genius and experience prophetic visions before they pass away. There was a Christian singer Rich Mullins who died in a car crash in 1997. He released a demo of a song called Elijah in 1982, and in 1986 he recorded it (I believe the song was a premonition, but the accident was not something he purposely planned).RICH MULLINS - ELIJAH Chorus: When I leave I want to go out like Elijah With a whirlwind to fuel my chariot of fire And when I look back on the stars It'll be like a candlelight in central park And it won't break my heart to say goodbyeThere is a difference between backmasking and reverse speech. Backmasking is when reverse messages are purposely placed into songs. An example of backmasking can be found on Petra's song Judas Kiss where forward it sounds like gibberish, but backward it says " What are you looking for the devil for when you oughta be looking for the Lord." Reverse speech is communication from a person's subconconscious and gives insights into their innermost thoughts. It is not premeditated. John Lennon's " Paul is a dead man. Miss him, miss him, miss him." is an example of reverse speech, not backmasking. I think it's erroneous to conclude John Lennon's quote about " That was just like Paul" as proof that the man singing Yesterday on Ed Sullivan was a doppelganger--especially since the man really was Paul. Also, chipped tooth or not, Paul's right central incisor was a little longer the left; whereas, Faul's teeth is the opposite way. Complain or not, lighting and camera exposure can affect image quality. Ringo's ear may look funny in the photo, but the video of the Melody Maker event reveals his ears look normal. In regard to idol worship, R Gary Patterson has said the reason why we want to keep dead rock stars alive is because we do not want to see them die. We want to believe rock heroes like Jimi Hendrix, Elvis Presley, and Jim Morrison are immortal. When it comes to Paul McCartney, it is different because he is, in fact, dead. But there are a lot of people who cannot accept it, so they find ways to see what they want see and hear what they want to hear, because to accept otherwise is unthinkable. They want to believe Paul is alive and they look at the photos and listen to the songs, and believe Paul never died or at least was ever replaced. For those of us who have come to see and accept that Paul is dead, it makes no sense why would we wish Paul to be dead? It is the opposite of Patterson's psychology. Would it not make more sense that we try to find ways to keep Paul alive? Bias? I did not join this community with preconceived notions. If anything, I leaned toward thinking Paul had always been Paul. But after examining the evidence, I have since changed my view.
|
|
|
Post by vOOdOOgurU on Jul 30, 2013 21:24:59 GMT -5
Is it so hard to imagine why this may have been done. It can all be speculation, but I would imagine most of us here are somewhat agreed that the FBI/CIA/MI5/military intelligence agencies were up to no good. Especially when you start approaching the 1960's. Why would you bring in The Beatles as a counter-culture faction and allow them to continue on "destroying" everything you went through WWII to set up and divide amongst yourselves. Which is the control of nations and the mindsets of its populace. The whole reason for Cold War, McCarthyism, space races, atomic testings. How much more is needed to say that agendas are in place, and followed to the letter, using every known method (and unknown and to be tried) to do so.
By 1963 you've basically had a military coup of the American government. Before people can start truly getting to the bottom of what happened to the last president to fight the Federal Reserve, and whose relations with Castro were NOT as advertised, you bring in a distraction. The older generation is still Sinatra and good old fashioned entertainment, without the "coloureds" infiltrating, then along come these groups which are the anti-thesis of this. Divide and conquer. Create generation gaps. But the sweeping changes of the 1960's DID bring in a counter-culture. And people did start developing a movement against such agendas. THAT was the problem. The Beatles lyrically/musically weren't counter-culture whatsoever until AFTER Paul was Dead. In interview they were outspoken, but if you look at that whole counter-culture rock movement, what revolution do you know that was sponsored and funded by corporations??? It's Warner Bros, and RCA. EMI and Columbia. These aren't grass roots organisations. These are powerful corporate entities with the sole purpose of earning capital any way they can. By forcing bubble gum music, and supposedly darker things. Whatever it takes. So why do you think The Beatles were part of a counter-culture revolution? Because THEY want you to think that. It's set up to be that.
Gil Scott Heron said the revolution will not be televised. Well look around now. He was absolutely right. It will be edited, made into FOX propaganda, painted a different picture than what it actually is. Anyone who was truly counter-culture in the 1960's did not have a magazine talking about them. Or appeared on television. They were in coffee houses and crappy bars. The revolution seen was the one that was ADVERTISED. It was MARKETED. Not one of those rock musicians ever had to sign up for the draft or go to Vietnam. Do you not find that strange at all? Wouldn't that be the first defense by the powers that be to get rid of this very influential on the youth market force? Draft them. Arrest them. Get them off the record labels and stop this movement! But they didn't. Not at all. And that's not simply down to earning money. That's because THAT counter-culture was WORKING for the agenda. It had to be because any true revolution of thought and idealogy would have been squashed and obliterated. Because that's what history shows you what happens.
So the hippies were a viable force of revolution. But Helter Skelter killed that didn't it. Do you not think it convenient that The Beatles somehow wind up being involved in that? Even just by association? It wasn't Manson coming out straight away with the race war gambit. That was Ed Butler former colleague of Lee Harvey Oswald in his Cuba days coming out with the Black Panthers did it. Nevermind there's a band advertising somewhat openly in a very Christos/Osiris mythplay that one of its members is dead, but is somehow alive and performing constant miracles (to this day.)
Why a double? Why the hell not??? If you can do it, you'd do it. For what purpose? The only thing I can think of is to MESS WITH PEOPLE'S HEADS AND DISTRACT THEM FROM WHAT YOU'RE REALLY UP TO. You set up The Beatles as the pied pipers of the counter-culture, make them as good as gold, so that no one would ever think anything was wrong. And then you do some very strange things just to set up this disassociative mental state in the people who love them. You tie strong emotions to the band and its image, placing each personality within it to identify to psychological profiles within the populace. The outspoken, brash, unconventional, intellectual anti-hero. The charming, sociable, everyman's son, mother's favourite hero. The quiet, philosophical, wise underdog. The affable, sentimental, poorman's king. These 4 archetypes can reach in and grab the affections of a certain set of psychological subconscious human triggers. JUST LIKE EDWARD BERNAYS PROVED YOU COULD DO back in the early 20th century, based on Freud's work. And if these 4 archetypes don't reach the portions of the populace you want, no problem. You just create OTHER bands, other ways to reach them. THESIS = BEATLES. ANTI-THESIS = THE ROLLING STONES. Good cops/Bad cops. It's pretty simple really.
There's enough throughout history to tell you that a small portion of the populace is messing with the majority and keeping them on a tether. And using every possible method to hit every sense that human beings have. Sight, Sound, Smell, Touch ..... everything possible. Just to make sure you never ever suspect that the "love band" of the 1960's of being used to keep your mind closed and distracted. To stop you from looking back in time to when things were NOT this way. It's not foolproof. Some hippies escaped the 60's. Some people do look further into things and do open their minds. But a VAST majority DON'T. This is evident all around you. I don't even need to point out the instances of how dumbed down society has become in the past decade. But people ARE starting to become aware of deception and lies. And one of the biggest scams was Paul Is Dead. Why did they do it? I don't know. But that's what everyone should be asklng. Because having one person change so much in ways impossible genetically to do should tell you something is very very wrong. And then have that band go out of its way to keep bringing that message up of look at him, pay attention to him, something's different. There is something very very wrong with this, that no marketing ploy, or joke/hoax need be the reason for it. It doesn't even explain half of the decisions made to continue on with this for 4 decades. How funny is a joke 40 years later. How much marketing revenue does YouTube bring in. Is anyone buying TheRightAlbum, or are they just downloading it for free. Marketing/Joke is just disassociative again. It sets up this dual rationale in the "BeatleFan" trying to make sense of conflicting information. Of which there is a lot.
But the counter-culture revolution as brought to you by Capitol Records? Really? You believe that something that could possibly undermine a complete system of control and commerce would be allowed to continue and be supported by those that thrived and remained in power in that system? I guess no one learned anything from those early days of burning the palace of Alexandria and wiping out as much information as possible so that new powers could come to be. Because that's what you do. You set yourself up as the new Answer, and wipe out all the old ones. Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss.
|
|
|
Post by vOOdOOgurU on Jul 30, 2013 21:45:15 GMT -5
I mean I don't know what world you live in, but the one I live in has had artists/musicians/inventors and people who were trying to help the world somehow end up penniless and forgotten. Or discovered one hundred years after they were gone and finally hailed for what they did and how good it truly was. And how much better off we'd have been if they hadn't had their work ignored, or even hated. Or their ideas not stolen, and the patents hidden away only to emerge as some brand new weapon that could kill us all 40 times over. That's the world I'm presently in. Cuz Van Gogh did some amazing work, and other paintings look dull compared to his, but the paintings we got were the ones that were okayed by SOMEONE WHO WANTED TO MAKE SURE YOU SAW WHAT THEY SAW. And that things didn't get put in the Louvre that were not adhering to what was considered ART. All art and music we've seen has been sanctioned by a small portion of people. Whether they are in Church. Or State. Or Aristocracy. The "public" weren't allowed in to half of these things a century or so ago.
The world I live in shows me NICE PEOPLE DON'T BECOME BILLIONAIRES. It's not to say that the poor man does great things, and the wealthy man just takes. There are rich people who do good things. And there are poor people who do bad things. But since when is it that you've known someone nice who became a CEO of a major corporation. Or some musician who did not f... over someone else getting to where they got? Who? Do you think Paul McCartney, whomever or whatever he may be is a nice person? You must be joking. No one nice becomes incredibly rich. There is always someone whose back has just been stepped on in that scenario. Or does Mal Evans getting paid next to nothing for his years of indentured servitude not say how not nice The Beatles were. Who gets rich in this world? The people who take everything they can from everyone else. That's who. And feel they deserve it. The love you take is equal to the love you make. Well what did Mal Evans love equal? Where this guy comes from, how he entered the picture i don't know because he comes out of nowhere. And when he's about to say where he's at, he gets killed by the same dude who had investigated another dude who most definitely did not kill a Kennedy. This is all too convenient. Everybody's in the right place at the right time, to either live, become famous, or die.
|
|
|
Post by linus on Jul 31, 2013 16:06:24 GMT -5
To be more specific regarding Crowley’s philosophy on opposites and contradictions; It is paradox that establishes equilibrium. Earlier when I said, in Crowley-speak, 111 X could mean “Balance, Unity, he live”, I now wonder if it could mean, “Balance, unity, she live”, which ties perfectly into the final He in YHVH, the princess, being seated on the throne of the first He, the dead Queen, and restoring the eld of the Father/Yod – Spirit descending into matter, and matter reintegrating with spirit: a central aspect of The Great Work. Which also includes, in the European occult traditions, perfect emancipation of the Will (shepherd). www.youtube.com/watch?v=fEQysGn4EdUThe 1966 Melody Maker awards video is very grainy and low-contrast, making analysis difficult. Though it seems to me Paul’s earlobes are more attached than in the ’65 Sullivan show, and set higher up on his head. Though they both have big craniums. Some see Sept. 11th on a gravestone (with no year), I see something odd in front of Ringo’s ear here when coupled with the clearer photo, and the other photos I posted. The difference with me is I don’t want to, but that is in the retinal information passing through my eye, whether I like it or not. Paul’s ears also see the post after this onehow many different eyebrows does one see so far?I knew I should’ve been more precise when I used the word backmasking, I meant any vocalization that falls under the nature of either being spoken backwards, meant to be played backwards, or otherwise involving a reversal of the tape to be employed at some point in the recording or consumption process. Many of the PID clues involve both backmasking and reverse speech. Both of which, when heard, are like seeing shapes in clouds; open to interpretation. The point is, the intended message has been communicated, and it needed to be played backwards in order to be perceived consciously. Which is what I was getting at. Regarding the “miss him” vocalization, I have two questions: Why would John insert deliberate random mumblings onto a record at the end of a song (without knowing what may be subconsciously embedded in it). (One that just happens to be what some hear as “Paul is dead, miss him…”) (more subliminal clues telling the public how to react?). And how does one determine which are backmaskings and which are reversed speech? And with that question in mind, what major difference does it make, after the message has been heard and interpreted? My only point is that it’s backwards, it was deliberately placed, and it is a well-known PID message. "Any sound you hear on a Beatles record has been put there deliberately." I always saw rock stars dying young as the way that they stay immortal. There’s something to be said about not seeing young rebellious heroes remaining in a time capsule and not aging. Which is the affect one gets from having Paul be dead. As NittleNicola essentially pointed out, some Paul lovers would rather see him remain the cute, friendly, love balladeer, not the Crowley follower with a mustache and tacky clothes - and the PID motif is the tool which accomplishes this. Keeping cute Paullie immortal. * see quotes at bottom of this postMost of all, what I really want to add is that anyone should know better than to say, “Paul is in fact dead”. That is propaganda. At best, there's evidence to support that there’s at least two. #see appendix at bottomThough about 99% of the population only sees one. Most of those not having either heard of PID or researched it to any degree, so why would they look at photos and try to make it so Paul is alive, if they don’t know he’s supposed to be dead? And what of those that don’t want to investigate whether there may have been foul play before 1966, or that there may have been doubles before then? Are they too, looking at the photos & listening to the songs and interpreting it as they want, because their hero possibly being a fraud is too unthinkable? It works on both sides of the coin. I’ve said before; people’s beliefs aren’t shaped by facts, they’re shaped by what they can and can’t handle.It’s been stated thousands of times, but bears repeating, apparently. There’s no establishment on the how, when or why of Paul’s alleged death. Nobody knows who replaced him, or who killed him if he was killed. There’s no body, no substantial reports, no witnesses, no mention by acquaintances that Paul disappeared for awhile, then suddenly re-appeared and seemed noticeably different. All we have are macabre pop culture messages, and images that seem to display differing facial features, many of which that come and go throughout every era. The PID paradigm suggests that one not need search for anything before 1966, and that may be part of it’s intent. With all due respect, I don't understand how anyone can determine that the statement “Thanks Paul, that was just like him.” is not proof, or even a suggestion, of a doppelganger, but in the same breath state that “Paul is in fact dead”, based on messages open to interpretation and photos seemingly showing more than one McCartney – while dismissing blatant clues that occur prior to their established exit date. I don’t recall his death ever being confirmed as fact. If it’s a fact it shouldn’t still be up for debate. Anyone that states “Paul is in fact dead” and “I don't think anyone here has ever advocated "clues" pre-dating 1966” is holding this forum, their own personal decisions, and the standard PID paradigm as gospel. The point of this forum is to share ideas, old and new. And the point of an investigation is to remain open-minded until facts have been proven. One that states a theory as fact sounds a lot like someone that perhaps wants a particular outcome to be true. Say what one will about going from PIA to PID after looking at evidence (which seems to usually be too unthorough), but when the same person displays a wholesale brushing aside of everything that doesn’t fit into their box, others can’t help but see some bias, or being too set in one’s ways. imo. And what I'm saying isn't directed at any one person, it's for anyone & everyone. The precognition is an interesting take, but regarding the dates they’ve given us: The only dates I know of that aren’t basically 'Rorschach tests' is “Wednesday morning” and the Sgt. Pepper drum, which also does not include a year, btw. Though, as Pepper pointed out: If you simply transcribe IIIX from roman numerals, you get 1 1 1 10. but if you convert them to arabic, you get either 3/10 or 2/9. in reverse it's simply one number: XIII - 13. 11/9 or 9/11 would mean you're transcribing one part and converting another. She’s right. 11/9 would need to be XI IX, and 9/11 would need to be IX XI. It’s interesting that both Roman configurations are mirror images of each other. And that when IX XI is connected with the lines of the Xs extended, you get a triangle over an inverted triangle, thus the Star od David/Seal of Solomon The Kabbalah Tree of Life has an IX XI when tipped on it's side. Here's some more reading on the significance of the 9-11 sequence, 10, and mirrors illuminatusobservor.blogspot.com/2007/10/macroprosopus-reflections-and-isisian.html#axzz2ajwfGCIyilluminatusobservor.blogspot.com/2007/10/deciphering-tree-of-life.html#axzz2ajwfGCIy* [regarding the PID conspiracy] The appetite for such hidden meanings was proof of a need for mystery and revelation that modern secularism hadn’t been able to fulfill. Ignorant of the Holy Writ, which could bear deep textual analysis, a generation had trained its spiritual curiosity on pop culture, asking it to offer enlightenment and guidance as well as entertainment. From the book: The Gospel According to the Beatles by Steven Turner. An even larger question remained though as to why Paul became the subject of this conspiracy. “There was no Beatle whose combination of traits both real and perceived, personal and popular, positioned him better as designated corpse than Paul McCartney,” thought author of Magic Circles Devin McKinney. ”John was too loud, George too quiet, Ringo too human. Paul was perfect – perfectly beautiful, so beautiful he was unreal enough for it to function as pure myth and magic. Like his generation and its great social experiment, he was an infant in a grown body, both flesh an spirit, an ethereal presence circling the earth in a radiant membrane of evanescent purity. What had once made Paul a god among humans now place him squarely on his back upon the alter of myth.” Paul was also the cute Beatle. If Lennon represented the pleasure principle of the Beatles, McCartney was the group’s sole source of the possibilities offered by pleasure. He embraced the world around him and didn’t perceive it as suspiciously as Lennon or Harrison. But because of their skepticism, Lennon and Harrison also represented the reality principle of the Bealtes (which is perhaps why they became such likely targets of assassins). Paul had represented the Impossible Dream of what the Beatles could actually be. Unlike Lennon, his music had the expressed purpose of not questioning reality, but making reality somehow bearable, or perhaps a happier burden to carry. So he would never be a target of some deranged fan’s wrath. But when the Beatles’ dream had died after 1966, it made sense to some listeners that the impossible dreamer, Paul, should likely be gone as well. from the book: Artificial Paradise, the Dark Side of the Beatles Utopian Dream by Kevin Courrier # Unless one is referring to a ‘legally declared dead’ case. Which is only valid of one can prove that a person matching a particular criteria for identification hasn’t been seen or heard from for a certain amount of years. But then we get into the issue of multiples evidence having as much validity as PID evidence. In which case, it’s not so much Paul is dead, but rather Pauls are dead. (Even the non-matching fingerprints from Japan still only tell us that there's more than one). speaking of boxes
|
|