+ Reply to Thread
Page 8 of 16 FirstFirst 1 8 16 LastLast
Results 141 to 160 of 313

Thread: Paul McCartney really is Dead

  1. Link to Post #141
    Scotland Avalon Member aranuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    23rd March 2011
    Location
    Edinburgh
    Age
    73
    Posts
    2,277
    Thanks
    17,648
    Thanked 8,356 times in 1,940 posts

    Default Re: Paul McCartney really is Dead

    Maybe if Bob or Jenci can answer my few questions here please?
    When was the PID rumour first heard of? The date and year?
    Where was it reported? In the UK press? USA press? Which newspapers wrote about it?
    Was this video in OP the first to mention it?
    My wife and I don't remember anything at all in the past about this.

    Stan
    If you don't follow your spirit without hesitation, you end up following your hesitation without spirit.

  2. Link to Post #142
    United States Avalon Member baddbob's Avatar
    Join Date
    13th November 2011
    Location
    Bennington,Vermont USA
    Age
    59
    Posts
    482
    Thanks
    1,940
    Thanked 1,711 times in 388 posts

    Default Re: Paul McCartney really is Dead

    No disrecpect here aranuk why should i do your research.If you notice OP i wanted your opnion on the issue I have never said that i believe hes dead or not.
    Ok the jokes over bring back the constitution

  3. Link to Post #143
    UK Deactivated
    Join Date
    15th November 2011
    Age
    51
    Posts
    924
    Thanks
    10,099
    Thanked 5,969 times in 881 posts

    Default Re: Paul McCartney really is Dead

    Quote Posted by aranuk (here)
    Maybe if Bob or Jenci can answer my few questions here please?
    When was the PID rumour first heard of? The date and year?
    Where was it reported? In the UK press? USA press? Which newspapers wrote about it?
    Was this video in OP the first to mention it?
    My wife and I don't remember anything at all in the past about this.

    Stan

    Here's the man himself, Stan.

    I think he is talking about 1969 but I am sure that I did see a long time ago a cutting from a newspaper in 1966 the day after it supposedly happened. I can't find it at the moment.

    And yes, your theory about Paul himself putting out the story. Why not? who knows. I suppose the question to ask is who benefits?
    Jeanette


  4. The Following User Says Thank You to Jenci For This Post:

    aranuk (24th December 2011)

  5. Link to Post #144
    United States Unsubscribed
    Join Date
    16th March 2010
    Location
    Florida
    Age
    54
    Posts
    2,944
    Thanks
    5,907
    Thanked 12,350 times in 2,555 posts

    Default Re: Paul McCartney really is Dead

    Quote The video in the OP was a good example of how disinfo works. For those who have stuck through the discussion it may have opened up new areas of questioning for them. All of showbiz - music, film is illuminati controlled. From the research I have done - if Paul was replaced - he may just be the tip of the iceberg. Do other people have doubles? Do they have clones? - now that's a wild idea....but is it really?
    I think that aspect of being able to fool the masses might be the most important aspect if it is true. As for what it really means, well I have started to delve into that on the Musical chairs thread. I think we are inundated today with psy ops programming and manipulation in the form of mass NLP, agent provacateurs and charlitans designed to put out the 10% of lies with the 90% of truth in our super duper top secret research into ancient history, hidden archeology, black ops programs and such. I also think they know we will catch on and thus start to tune out as we see people leaving the forums for various reasons. It's classic disinfo goals to frustrate the seekers and turn away the newbies.

    I hope we can keep our nose to the grind stone and continue to work it out.... snickers.


  6. Link to Post #145
    Scotland Avalon Member aranuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    23rd March 2011
    Location
    Edinburgh
    Age
    73
    Posts
    2,277
    Thanks
    17,648
    Thanked 8,356 times in 1,940 posts

    Default Re: Paul McCartney really is Dead

    Quote Posted by baddbob (here)
    No disrecpect here aranuk why should i do your research.If you notice OP i wanted your opnion on the issue I have never said that i believe hes dead or not.
    Hi Bob, It's Christmas Eve. No need for you to say that at all. I did give my opinion a few times. I said it's rubbish. I still feel the same. I was continuing on as Jenci pointed out that it is a healthy thing for us to do here and a good excercise for times to come. That's All. I went to Wikipedia and read about it there. A good and fair summary there. And as I suspected it was not the UK press but a student rag in Iowa University. It was also on lots of Radio stations in USA. Have a merry xmas.

    Stan
    If you don't follow your spirit without hesitation, you end up following your hesitation without spirit.

  7. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to aranuk For This Post:

    baddbob (25th December 2011), Jenci (24th December 2011), Mare (24th December 2011)

  8. Link to Post #146
    Scotland Avalon Member aranuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    23rd March 2011
    Location
    Edinburgh
    Age
    73
    Posts
    2,277
    Thanks
    17,648
    Thanked 8,356 times in 1,940 posts

    Default Re: Paul McCartney really is Dead

    Quote Posted by Jenci (here)
    Quote Posted by aranuk (here)
    Maybe if Bob or Jenci can answer my few questions here please?
    When was the PID rumour first heard of? The date and year?
    Where was it reported? In the UK press? USA press? Which newspapers wrote about it?
    Was this video in OP the first to mention it?
    My wife and I don't remember anything at all in the past about this.

    Stan

    Here's the man himself, Stan.

    I think he is talking about 1969 but I am sure that I did see a long time ago a cutting from a newspaper in 1966 the day after it supposedly happened. I can't find it at the moment.

    And yes, your theory about Paul himself putting out the story. Why not? who knows. I suppose the question to ask is who benefits?
    Jeanette

    Exactly Jen, Paul stands to benefit the most. If rumours were that I was dead and there was a StanDIN I would be, to say the least horrified. I would do and pay for a video like that too.

    Stan
    If you don't follow your spirit without hesitation, you end up following your hesitation without spirit.

  9. The Following User Says Thank You to aranuk For This Post:

    Jenci (27th December 2011)

  10. Link to Post #147
    England Avalon Member Mare's Avatar
    Join Date
    19th November 2010
    Age
    51
    Posts
    153
    Thanks
    990
    Thanked 508 times in 131 posts

    Default Re: Paul McCartney really is Dead

    Quote Posted by baddbob (here)
    November 9th, 1966, James Paul McCartney, a former Beatle, was killed
    Ok let's have a look at what his 'double' was up to in Abbey Road studios after this date.

    On the 24th and the 28th/29th November 1966 he was recording Mellotron, bass and bongos on 'Strawberry Fields Forever'. On the 6th/8th/21st December and the 29th/30th December 1966 respectively he began recording his own songs 'When I'm 64' and 'Penny Lane'. Pretty good for a double. Where the staff at Abbey Road fooled or in on it? Cleaners, cooks, press office, designers, runners, technicians etc. etc.? All because the PTB were worried that young girls would commit suicide in droves? Doesn't make any sense to me I'm afraid but 9/11 does.

  11. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Mare For This Post:

    aranuk (25th December 2011), baddbob (25th December 2011)

  12. Link to Post #148
    Scotland Avalon Member aranuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    23rd March 2011
    Location
    Edinburgh
    Age
    73
    Posts
    2,277
    Thanks
    17,648
    Thanked 8,356 times in 1,940 posts

    Default Re: Paul McCartney really is Dead

    Hi Mare, I resonate with you. But eh.... I thought when I'm sixty four was the effort of Ringo. No?


    Stan
    If you don't follow your spirit without hesitation, you end up following your hesitation without spirit.

  13. Link to Post #149
    England Avalon Member Mare's Avatar
    Join Date
    19th November 2010
    Age
    51
    Posts
    153
    Thanks
    990
    Thanked 508 times in 131 posts

    Default Re: Paul McCartney really is Dead

    No Stan,

    they just got him to sing it! Paul apparently wrote the song when he was 14.

  14. The Following User Says Thank You to Mare For This Post:

    aranuk (25th December 2011)

  15. Link to Post #150
    England Avalon Member Garry Irwin's Avatar
    Join Date
    12th January 2011
    Location
    NW England
    Age
    60
    Posts
    58
    Thanks
    368
    Thanked 141 times in 42 posts

    Default Re: Paul McCartney really is Dead

    I think you will find it was McCartney who sang "When I'm Sixty-Four". It was his song - despite being credited as a Lennon/McCartney composition.
    In keeping with the thread... whether you believe it was Paul or Faul, is completely your own opinion.
    Regards :-)

  16. The Following User Says Thank You to Garry Irwin For This Post:

    aranuk (25th December 2011)

  17. Link to Post #151
    Scotland Avalon Member aranuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    23rd March 2011
    Location
    Edinburgh
    Age
    73
    Posts
    2,277
    Thanks
    17,648
    Thanked 8,356 times in 1,940 posts

    Default Re: Paul McCartney really is Dead

    Quote Posted by Mare (here)
    No Stan,

    they just got him to sing it! Paul apparently wrote the song when he was 14.
    Good on ya man! You are the same age as my daughter how marvelous. I wish you were my son. My daughter hardly knows anything of the Beatles, she takes off her Dad methinks!

    Stan
    If you don't follow your spirit without hesitation, you end up following your hesitation without spirit.

  18. Link to Post #152
    United States Avalon Member baddbob's Avatar
    Join Date
    13th November 2011
    Location
    Bennington,Vermont USA
    Age
    59
    Posts
    482
    Thanks
    1,940
    Thanked 1,711 times in 388 posts

    Default Re: Paul McCartney really is Dead

    Paul McCartney Interview for `Life' magazine (1969, November 7)
    November 7th 1969 Life Magazine published an article on the recent "Paul Is Dead" fiasco. The article contained the now famous clues, select album cover photos, and Paul's own brief comments on the death rumors. Life magazine's London correspondent waded through a Scotland bog to find Paul and Linda at their secluded farm, hoping to be granted a photo or a brief interview. By this time The Beatles had privately broken up. While the breakup was still a secret and would not be announced for months, Paul states "The Beatle thing is over." The public and press missed the importance of this passing comment.

    Life Magazine spoke briefly with Paul about the various "death clues" including the OPD badge on his Pepper suit (which fans took to mean "Officially Pronounced Dead"), his black flower in Magical Mystery Tour, and his barefooted appearance on the Abbey Road album cover.



    Paul: "It is all bloody stupid. I picked up that OPD badge in Canada. It was a police badge. Perhaps it means Ontario Police Department or something. I was wearing a black flower because they ran out of red ones. It is John, not me, dressed in black on the cover and inside of Magical Mystery Tour. On Abbey Road we were wearing our ordinary clothes. I was walking barefoot because it was a hot day. The Volkswagon just happened to be parked there."

    "Perhaps the rumor started because I haven't been much in the press lately. I have done enough press for a lifetime, and I don't have anything to say these days. I am happy to be with my family and I will work when I work. I was switched on for ten years and I never switched off. Now I am switching off whenever I can. I would rather be a little less famous these days."

    "I would rather do what I began by doing, which is making music. We make good music and we want to go on making good music. But the Beatle thing is over. It has been exploded, partly by what we have done, and partly by other people. We are individuals - all different. John married Yoko, I married Linda. We didn't marry the same girl."

    "The people who are making up these rumors should look to themselves a little more. There is not enough time in life. They should worry about themselves instead of worrying whether I am dead or not."

    "What I have to say is all in the music. If I want to say anything I write a song. Can you spread it around that I am just an ordinary person and want to live in peace? We have to go now. We have two children at home."

    http://www.dmbeatles.com/interviews.php?interview=68
    Ok the jokes over bring back the constitution

  19. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to baddbob For This Post:

    aranuk (25th December 2011), Jenci (27th December 2011), Midnight Rambler (26th December 2011)

  20. Link to Post #153
    Scotland Avalon Member aranuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    23rd March 2011
    Location
    Edinburgh
    Age
    73
    Posts
    2,277
    Thanks
    17,648
    Thanked 8,356 times in 1,940 posts

    Default Re: Paul McCartney really is Dead

    Quote Posted by Upanatom (here)
    I think you will find it was McCartney who sang "When I'm Sixty-Four". It was his song - despite being credited as a Lennon/McCartney composition.
    In keeping with the thread... whether you believe it was Paul or Faul, is completely your own opinion.
    Regards :-)
    Hi Ups, Now you are older than Mare, but you are awful young to know a lot about the Beatles. Let me say I believe both of you. Just imagine I am 16 and my testorone levels very high and the Beatles hit the scene! What a wonderful treat to have growing up. I am ever thankful for the Beatles, they gave me so much pleasure to ease a hard working youth.

    Stan

    Stan
    Last edited by aranuk; 25th December 2011 at 03:12.
    If you don't follow your spirit without hesitation, you end up following your hesitation without spirit.

  21. Link to Post #154
    United States Avalon Member baddbob's Avatar
    Join Date
    13th November 2011
    Location
    Bennington,Vermont USA
    Age
    59
    Posts
    482
    Thanks
    1,940
    Thanked 1,711 times in 388 posts

    Default Re: Paul McCartney really is Dead

    Iam sorry I didnt mean it to be offending in anyway just thats theres so much info hear on it heres a nice site with a lot of the conspiracy talk through out those years

    paul is dead conspiracy paul is dead rumors

    http://www.kewego.com/search/?q=paul...s+dead+rumors+
    Last edited by baddbob; 25th December 2011 at 03:29.
    Ok the jokes over bring back the constitution

  22. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to baddbob For This Post:

    aranuk (25th December 2011), Jenci (27th December 2011)

  23. Link to Post #155
    England Avalon Member Mare's Avatar
    Join Date
    19th November 2010
    Age
    51
    Posts
    153
    Thanks
    990
    Thanked 508 times in 131 posts

    Default Re: Paul McCartney really is Dead

    Quote Posted by Upanatom (here)
    I think you will find it was McCartney who sang "When I'm Sixty-Four". It was his song - despite being credited as a Lennon/McCartney composition.
    In keeping with the thread... whether you believe it was Paul or Faul, is completely your own opinion.
    Regards :-)
    Of course, my mistake I was thinking of 'A little help from my friends', but as I said Paul wrote the song when he was 14. In keeping with the thread Upanatom I believe it was/is Paul and yes, that is completely my opinion.

  24. Link to Post #156
    UK Deactivated
    Join Date
    15th November 2011
    Age
    51
    Posts
    924
    Thanks
    10,099
    Thanked 5,969 times in 881 posts

    Default Re: Paul McCartney really is Dead

    Quote Posted by Mare (here)
    All because the PTB were worried that young girls would commit suicide in droves? Doesn't make any sense to me I'm afraid but 9/11 does.
    Hi Mare
    If he was replaced, I don't think it had anything to do with young girls committing suicide.

    Sept 11th is another date which was suggested in the links I posted a few posts ago.
    Jeanette
    Last edited by Jenci; 25th December 2011 at 12:11. Reason: quote tags

  25. Link to Post #157
    England Avalon Member Mare's Avatar
    Join Date
    19th November 2010
    Age
    51
    Posts
    153
    Thanks
    990
    Thanked 508 times in 131 posts

    Default Re: Paul McCartney really is Dead

    Hi Jeanette,

    Merry Christmas by the way! What do you think then?

  26. The Following User Says Thank You to Mare For This Post:

    Jenci (27th December 2011)

  27. Link to Post #158
    UK Deactivated
    Join Date
    15th November 2011
    Age
    51
    Posts
    924
    Thanks
    10,099
    Thanked 5,969 times in 881 posts

    Default Re: Paul McCartney really is Dead

    Quote Posted by Mare (here)
    Hi Jeanette,

    Merry Christmas by the way! What do you think then?
    Merry Christmas to you too.

    I don't think "they" would have any concern about young girls getting upset and suicidal - they just don't feel like this.

    If something did happen to Paul - if he died, was killed, or just quit - then I think their motive for Paul to continue in the Beatles would be more like they had an agenda planned and they were going to carry it out, whatever happened. There could also be a motive to see exactly how far they can push things and what they could get away with. They are always planning a long term in the future. Perhaps they had some other deception planned ahead and this was a good tester. The agenda with drugs and LSD was important to them at the time - it was the following year Paul spoke out on this.

    Of course, these are just hypothetical musings and Paul may be exactly who he says he is.
    Jeanette

  28. Link to Post #159
    UK Deactivated
    Join Date
    15th November 2011
    Age
    51
    Posts
    924
    Thanks
    10,099
    Thanked 5,969 times in 881 posts

    Default Re: Paul McCartney really is Dead

    There's a video posted earlier in this thread, I can't remember if it was George or Ringo but he said they tried to get Paul to take drugs but he wouldn't and then 18 months later they were suprised when he came out and talked about it.

    Paul talked about taking drugs/lsd in 1967. This video shows the interview and also has clips of a press conference the year earlier - made on the assumption that he was replaced between the two.

    Although I see similiar mannerisms and speech patterns (like 'you know') between the two, something is missing in the second video. In the first video Paul is confident but there is also a shyness and humilty about him. His mouth twitches a lot, he looks awkward. There's a cuteness about him which is really endearing - as a woman I find it very attractive (eg 6.30 & 7.40).

    I don't see this in the Paul a year later.I know that those who claim he was replaced talk about spirit of Paul missing in the post 66 Paul.

    Having said that the second interview was in a different environment on a one-to-one basis and it may explain his extra confidence.



    Jeanette

  29. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Jenci For This Post:

    aranuk (25th December 2011), noxon medem (27th December 2011), ponda (25th December 2011), syrwong (25th December 2011)

  30. Link to Post #160
    Hong Kong Avalon Member syrwong's Avatar
    Join Date
    5th January 2011
    Age
    63
    Posts
    522
    Thanks
    1,275
    Thanked 2,107 times in 443 posts

    Default Re: Paul McCartney really is Dead

    Quote Posted by Jenci (here)
    There's a video posted earlier in this thread, I can't remember if it was George or Ringo but he said they tried to get Paul to take drugs but he wouldn't and then 18 months later they were suprised when he came out and talked about it.

    Paul talked about taking drugs/lsd in 1967. This video shows the interview and also has clips of a press conference the year earlier - made on the assumption that he was replaced between the two.

    Although I see similiar mannerisms and speech patterns (like 'you know') between the two, something is missing in the second video. In the first video Paul is confident but there is also a shyness and humilty about him. His mouth twitches a lot, he looks awkward. There's a cuteness about him which is really endearing - as a woman I find it very attractive (eg 6.30 & 7.40).

    I don't see this in the Paul a year later.I know that those who claim he was replaced talk about spirit of Paul missing in the post 66 Paul.

    Having said that the second interview was in a different environment on a one-to-one basis and it may explain his extra confidence.



    Jeanette
    I think you have done enough research to prove the case for PID. I am pretty convinced, when piles of evidence to see the inconsistencies, like in 911, this is an inescapble conclusion. I even think that in this video, both the voices and personalities are different.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 8 of 16 FirstFirst 1 8 16 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts