It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Paul McCartney died in 1966 - replaced by Billy Shepherd

page: 11
33
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 12:27 AM
link   
Thanks for the input from your daughter, Layla. She hasn't been "trained" to see the 2 men as the same, so she can spot the difference.

This is only "unbelievable" for people who don't know how the Illuminati uses doubles to deceive the public in the furtherance of their agenda.

The Illuminati replaces people with doubles. For many years, they've recruited lookalikes who would serve their ends. One of the purposes of a double is to take over [for ex, in case of death] so that the person’s powerful influence won’t be interrupted. It's important to understand that the entertainment industry is used to condition the public to accept the NWO. Celebrities are part of the mind conditioning of the masses b/c of their influence.

The Illuminati's ability to fool the public is the absolutely accepted "absurdity" of such a possibility and people's lack of attention. Most people accept whatever is presented to them in the media as the truth w/out questioning it. A lot of people figured out something had happened to Paul back in 1969, but when LIFE magazine trotted out someone representing himself to be Paul, everyone breathed a sigh of relief. But was this person really Paul? Just b/c the media says something, doesn't make it true...



paul is dead - the rotten apple 31 g
www.youtube.com...

paul is dead - the rotten apple 34 d
www.youtube.com...



[edit on 3-6-2009 by faulconandsnowjob]




posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 01:06 AM
link   
Red album v. Blue album:



paul is dead - the rotten apple 55
www.youtube.com...

The guy on the right is supposed to be Paul in disguise on the White Album?



His mouth is wider.

[edit on 3-6-2009 by faulconandsnowjob]



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 01:59 AM
link   
LOL. I never heard that before that is pretty cool. Kudos to the thread starter



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 02:38 AM
link   
If this theory did turn out true (I'm still really debating it, trying to piece all this together as opposed to my other way of thinking of the Beatles
) I think the most interesting aspect of it would be the question of WHY would the Illuminati (or any party) have such an interest?

The Beatles aren't just any other band. For one thing, they were massively successful, and for another, they became very deeply esoteric in their late albums, though in a positive respect ("love & peace"). Esoteric knowledge and massive commercial success are the infamous hallmarks of TPTB.



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 12:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by faulconandsnowjob
All of the picture comps have been chosen b/c they are from the same angle, or as close as possible. The pictures speak for themselves. They're obviously not the same person.



Except:

1) None of them are from the same angle (one of the pics in the post I am quoting is evidence of that because in one you can see one whole ear in the other the angle would show parts of both.

2) You talk about foreheads with a pic with the moptop over his forehead and then a pic with long hair parted to show his forehead.

This reminds me of the people who claim we never went to the moon, then ignore any logic or questions that they can't answer and post "facts" and pics that clearly prove nothing while claiming they do.

Perhaps this Paul id dead stuff is true, but you have brought nothing close to proof to the table.



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 01:45 PM
link   

WHY would the Illuminati (or any party) have such an interest?


It's all about control & pushing their agenda. Maybe Paul wasn't a team player, wouldn't get w/ the program. At that point, in the mid 1960's, the Illuminati were trying to use '___' for mind control as part of MKULTRA. Read "The Search for the Manchurian Candidate" by John Marks for more info. Anyway, Faul started talking about taking '___' in 1967. Don't you think that the Beatles' dropping acid set an example for other people? John Lennon was assassinated in 1980 right after giving an interview to Playboy in which he said (paraphrasing) they tried to control us w/ '___', but ended up setting us free.

Paul McCartney: ITN Interview - '___' and Journalism 19.06.67
www.youtube.com...

Another person promoting '___' use was Timothy Leary, who was, apparently, a CIA asset.


WR: Yeah, in '53 "Operation Artichoke" used subjects who were suspected of being double agents and individuals of "dubious loyalty" in mind control experiments and that went on for ten years. And years later the Congressional investigation revealed that it was satisfied with six drugs it had developed for use in a variety of operations. So in the same year, 1953, the CIA rented adjacent apartments in Greenwich village where they photographed unsuspecting civilian guinea pigs as they reacted to drugs as they were slipped surreptitiously into their drinks. The agency claimed that only 53 subjects were drugged in this field experiment and in the same year CIA funded National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) grants which found their way to the University of California, Berkeley, where Timothy Leary was hard at work studying how to diagnose personality. There he was introduced to the cryptocracy by his drinking buddy, Frank Baron. In 1954, CIA secret grants flowed to Harvard where Ph.D. Timothy Leary was conducting a study of how to change behavior by giving prisoners '___' in the Concord Corrections Facility. Leary's boss at Harvard was David McClellan Former OSS employee. In 1955 to '59 MKUltra Mind Control Research was conducted at forty-four US colleges and universities in the United States and Canada.

www.theforbiddenknowledge.com...


Are you guys starting to see how public figures & celebrities are used to manipulate the masses into doing what the Illuminati wants them to do?


[edit on 3-6-2009 by faulconandsnowjob]



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 02:59 PM
link   
I was asked to post this as a rebuttal


to the guy using the "Angle/Shadow/Haircut" argument.

Such a weak rebuttal and they don't even realise it. You aren't going to find two identical pictures from two different time periods unless set up to do so, the best you can do is greyscale pictures from the front/side perspective.

Surely people can use common sense and differentiate the main focal point, which is the face (or some cases, the height).





posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 04:38 PM
link   
Bettina Krischbin alleged that "Paul" had sent a double to give blood when her mother (Erika Huebers) commenced a paternity suit against him in Germany. (1983) He looked different, & had a different signature (comparing the one in the paternity case file to the one in the Hamburg Beatles museum).

Paul's handwriting:





Faul's:





Signatures:





posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 05:00 PM
link   
Hey Dude,

You guys are just so Yesterday.

Everyone knows the real Paul was Here There and Everywhere until he was replaced by a Nowhere Man called Rocky Racoon who had dyed auburn hair (or was it 'died' auburn hair) famous for singing Silly Love Songs down Penny Lane.

It's just so Fabbing obvious when you think about it, Yeah Yeah Yeah!

Or is it Yawn Yawn Yawn? This theme died along with the joke that spawned it in about 1968.

I think in all honesty you should just Let It Be


[edit on 3-6-2009 by templar777]



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 05:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by templar777
Hey Dude,
[edit on 3-6-2009 by templar777]


Shouldnt that be Hey Jude??

lol

Maybe we should all....come together on this one....

Its been a hard days night....




posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 06:48 PM
link   
reply to post by faulconandsnowjob
 


Love his handwriting--unique, creative, intelligent! Just wow~
I had forgotten all about that. Haven't seen it for awhile.



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 07:52 PM
link   
I don't really see why people think this is a "joke." Obviously, something happened to Paul, b/c he is not to be seen after 1966. What happened to him? Where'd he go? Also, people are being influenced & manipulated by the use of doubles, & they don't even have a clue about it. I guess I fail to see the humor in this.




posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 09:53 PM
link   
Excellent example of pictures that can't be compared because of the variances in the facial expressions, hair, shadows, etc. You are doing an excellent job proving my point...while going into ignore mode like I described in my comparison of you and the moon landing deniers.



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 11:50 PM
link   
An example of how the truth has been obscured: a picture of Paul from 1966 that was doctored & used in 1967 to keep the illusion alive.




posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 10:26 AM
link   
reply to post by whodunit
 


Yeah, if we could only go back in time and have Paul pose in the exact same manner with the exact same expression, in the exact same angle in early 1966 and then in early 1967.

Your addition to the thread only seems to be that it is just not good enough. There is no such thing as absolute proof. Within reasonable doubt is the standard.

Maybe you could provide a picture that gives closer angles and expressions that proves the op wrong. At least make a specific comment on features.



posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 12:24 PM
link   
Originally posted by faulconandsnowjob



I don't really see why people think this is a "joke."


The joke is that you're actually taking the 'Paul is Dead' hoax seriously.




Obviously, something happened to Paul, b/c he is not to be seen after 1966. What happened to him? Where'd he go?


What on earth are you talking about? Who do you think wrote and performed Hey Jude, Get Back, Let It Be, Oh Darling? Do you honestly believe there is anyobody else in the entire universe could have sung 'Oh Darling' like that?




Also, people are being influenced & manipulated by the use of doubles, & they don't even have a clue about it.


It's not just about what the guy looks like. Check out his vocals. They're awesome. Song-writing ability. Awesome. One of the most uniquely talented sonwriters and uniquely awesome singers in the history of everything. Do you honestly believe some 'illuminati double' could have written 'Hey Jude' or sung 'Oh Darling'?




I guess I fail to see the humor in this.



..........................................


[edit on 4-6-2009 by templar777]

[edit on 4-6-2009 by templar777]



posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 06:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by whodunit
 


Yeah, if we could only go back in time and have Paul pose in the exact same manner with the exact same expression, in the exact same angle in early 1966 and then in early 1967.

Your addition to the thread only seems to be that it is just not good enough. There is no such thing as absolute proof. Within reasonable doubt is the standard.

Maybe you could provide a picture that gives closer angles and expressions that proves the op wrong. At least make a specific comment on features.


Kind of funny how you decide to go after me instead of the person posting these pics and claiming they are definitive proof, the guy who is ignoring any comments or questions that are too tough. Kind of like the guys who defend the people who claim we never landed on the moon.

Now what are you contributing to this thread?



posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 06:59 PM
link   
Doctoring photos and film is key to hiding the truth. Tampering has been possible since around the 1940's by using layering methods in a darkroom. Pictures of Paul have been stretched to make him resemble Faul more.







Some pictures of Faul & Paul seem to have been blended to improve the resemblance.




[edit on 4-6-2009 by faulconandsnowjob]



posted on Jun, 5 2009 @ 12:20 PM
link   
reply to post by whodunit
 


Definitive proof is not going to be found unless you have some level of authority behind your investigation and the resources to conduct it. Just because you refuse to see what everyone else sees, but can't come to believe it could be pulled off, doesn't mean the evidence isn't there. Most people who have posted here also come to a conclusion that he looks different.

It just gets old hearing someone make the same accusation over and over, especially when they have nothing to back it up on but their opinion, and demand of definitive proof which can not be gotten.

Do you think Oswald acted alone also?

[edit on 5-6-2009 by poet1b]



posted on Jun, 5 2009 @ 12:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by poet1b


Definitive proof is not going to be found unless you have some level of authority behind your investigation and the resources to conduct it. Just because you refuse to see what everyone else sees, but can't come to believe it could be pulled off, doesn't mean the evidence isn't there. Most people who have posted here also come to a conclusion that he looks different.


1) What everyone else sees? Most of the people in this thread think faul is a joke. Apparently you are the one refusing to see things.

2) It's funny how I can't ask for real proof but it's ok for you and a couple of other to claim it is fact without proof. A bit hypocritical eh.


It just gets old hearing someone make the same accusation over and over, especially when they have nothing to back it up on but their opinion, and demand of definitive proof which can not be gotten.


It also gets old hearing people like faulcon and you shout something as a fact when they have nothing but opinion...and then try to rip people who ask for actual proof. Once again...hypocrisy.


Do you think Oswald acted alone also?

[edit on 5-6-2009 by poet1b]


In response to that I will ask a question that has as much to do with this discussion as that does:

Do you have mental problems?



new topics

top topics



 
33
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join