It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Paul McCartney actually did die in Nov 1966 & was replaced

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 01:06 PM
Anyone who thinks Paul McCartney was ever replaced by an imposter: time to change the batteries on the old hearing-aid.

posted on Jun, 20 2016 @ 01:27 PM
a reply to: Astyanax

Yeah, we can accept that looks alone can be copied and I often find myself very confused when I see Paul and George stood together when they both had beards and long hair, but singing... that’s another matter entirely. His voice is too unique, they had way too many fans to be able to con them all like that, even if half of them might’ve been on acid.

posted on Jun, 21 2016 @ 03:14 AM
This kind of crap spewed out by bogus info websites only serve to ridicule anything from the internet.

posted on Jun, 24 2016 @ 05:35 PM
a reply to: Skywatcher2011

Ok so it appears that I have been suckered, yet again in my haste to put something up.

But your 2nd video has me scratching my head again! Different accents and "voice" wow.

There is of course this to consider as well

From "The Committee of 300" by Dr. John Coleman: "An outstanding example of social conditioning to accept change - even when it is recognized as unwelcome change by a large population - in the sights of the Stanford Research Institute, was the advent of the Beatles. The Beatles were brought to the United States as part of a social experiment which would subject large population groups to brainwashing of which they were not even aware.

"When Tavistock brought the Beatles to the United States, nobody could imagine the cultural disaster that was to follow in their wake. The Beatles were an integral part of the Aquarian Conspiracy, a living organism which sprang from "The Changing Images of Man"... it was a carefully crafted plot by a conspiratorial body which could not be identified, a highly destructive and divisive element brought into a large population group targeted for change against its will. "New words were introduced by the Tavistock Institute.. words such as "rock", "teenagers", "cool", "discover", and "pop music" were a lexicon of disguised code words signifying the acceptance of drugs that arrived with and accompanied the Beatles wherever they went, to be "discovered" by teenagers."

I believe the Beatles were surreptitiously used as terrorists in a conspiracy. Their outer appearance was a cover and a false disguise ("false" and "fake" Beatles 'replacements' aren't a clue here?) so we would accept them and find them "cute". If we knew, really knew, who was behind the bombing or detonation of the twin towers, would it become okay to us if they were "cute" and sang some pretty songs along the way?

and then we have Lennons murder

The Invisible Assassins Bresler interviewed Arthur O'Connor, the lieutenant who was commanding officer of the twentieth precinct of the New York police that dealt with Lennon's murder. He quotes O'Connor as saying, "As far as you are trying to build up some kind of conspiracy, I would support you in that line. Like I said originally over the phone, if this gentleman [Chapman] wanted to get away with it, he could have got away with it. There was the subway across the road and no one around to stop him." Instead, once Chapman had accomplished his task, he calmly sat and waited for police to come. "Why one method rather than the other, the amateur as against the professional? Because that way you avoid any awkward questions. If Lennon had been gunned down by a professional killer, the whole world would have known: such swift expert assassinations carry their own individual hallmark. It would have been obvious what had happened and, with Lennon's history of anti-government radical political activity, there would have been [an in-depth investigation]." "But if you program an amateur to do the job, a so-called 'nut', very few questions are asked."

posted on Jun, 27 2016 @ 09:57 AM
a reply to: mysterioustranger

Why not as James and Stella about their dad?

Seriously? What Stella was sired by the real Paul and she would know???? That doesn't even make sense. She was born in 71, way after the car crash....I dont know why I even bothered looking it up.

posted on Jun, 27 2016 @ 09:59 AM
a reply to: mazzroth

bogus info websites only serve to ridicule anything from the internet.

Woe is us - the sky is falling, 1 bogus site will bring down the Internet! Quick run to the hills. hahahaha

posted on Jun, 27 2016 @ 10:18 PM
a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

Because what I said made you think. Paul is alive and well. Thanks

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in