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.

 

PID - Motivations for the Murder of Paul McCartney

page: 30
22
<< 27  28  29    31  32  33 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 14 2010 @ 09:09 AM
link   
O.K., fair enough.

Then, what do you think is the explanation for Lennon's note to George Martin? Do you think he meant that he wrote just the song "Please, Please Me"... "alone"? If so, what are the implications? Do you think it's possible that Lennon meant that he wrote the whole album "Please, Please Me" and if so, what are the implications of that?

What do you base your belief on that Original Paul wrote the tunes and Lennon just the lyrics?

I'm not being aggressive here, just asking because I'm curious. I've always believed that John and Paul wrote songs on a pretty equal basis and that George Harrison learned over time how to write great songs, but only had a few in him.

I just don't get the point of Lennon's note to George Martin. The note does seem to have Lennon's authentic handwriting. It doesn't look faked.

Opinions?




posted on Apr, 14 2010 @ 10:02 AM
link   
This is a transcript of the note in question...

Dear George Martin / Richard Williams,

I wrote Please, Please Me alone. It was recorded in the exact sequence in which I wrote it.

"Remember?"

love John & Yoko

winner

------------------------------------------------------------

He must be referring to this Richard Williams...

en.wikipedia.org...(journalist)
If the link only gives you a list, select "journalist" --- the correct Richard Williams was editor of Melody Maker magazine

Also, the note looks like it is a companion note to this letter auctioned through Christie's...

www.christies.com...

-------------------------------------------------------------

To research this further, we need to find a copy of the Williams interview with Martin that prompted the emotional or angry replies from Lennon.

O.K., I found it. Here it is...

beatlesnumber9.com...

[edit on 14-4-2010 by switching yard]

[edit on 14-4-2010 by switching yard]



posted on Apr, 14 2010 @ 10:41 AM
link   
O.K., I read the interview and it does seem like they're talking about a sequence within the song "Please, Please Me" and not the whole album as I had feared. My bad.

It is interesting however that Martin says "Please, Please Me" as a song was "undoubtedly a collaborative effort" involving both Lennon & McCartney. This is, I think, what prompted Lennon to write the note explaining that he (Lennon) wrote the song "Please, Please Me" alone and with no help from anyone else. That revelation, in itself, goes against pop history.

In the Christies letter, Lennon says George Martin overstates Martin's creative involvement, which Lennon cites as an "hallucination".

Very interesting. Lennon is basically calling George Martin a liar in so many words.



posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 11:44 AM
link   
About the letter... I don't think that was the real Lennon by that time (w/ Yoko). So, who knows why he said what? Maybe there was a glitch in his programming? lol

Anonymous sent what I though was a very original comp:




posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 11:19 AM
link   
This is our challenge - to put the pieces together.




posted on Apr, 17 2010 @ 10:22 PM
link   



posted on Apr, 18 2010 @ 03:05 PM
link   
From Anonymous:


The faces and ears nearly line up here, the head sizes are completely mismatched.
I subtracted enough for hair around tops & backs.
There is no doubt that these are separate heads with similar facial features.




What is also clear to see in this comp is that the back of Faul's head slopes & his nose looks rounded off.



posted on Apr, 18 2010 @ 11:32 PM
link   
From Anon:




posted on Apr, 19 2010 @ 12:50 AM
link   
Impressive comps. I no longer doubt that Original Paul was replaced and my hunch is that there may have been at least two or three different New Pauls over the years. Sir is just the latest incarnation. I'm still in awe of how brilliantly (a better word would be wickedly) "they" pulled this off.

There is still a glimmer of hope in my mind that John, George, and Ringo were somehow not replaced, but I do think a whole band of look-a-likes played Candlestick Park and fooled everyone there.

After examining all the photos and things discussed in this and the other big thread on ATS, hope is fading regarding the fate of all four of The Beatles. It's like thinking I knew some extended family members quite well and then come to find out they weren't what I thought (just using that as an example). Shocking, really.

What makes me tend to agree with the theory that all four were replaced is simply that it makes everything much more controllable. How could the other three go on working when Paul was replaced? In all the early years, these guys were closer than brothers.

I just think it's astounding, what was done. Seems to me we have touched on some elements related to the mystery, but I have a strong feeling that we are still not even close to knowing what really happened.

I've been re-reading the book Lennon Remembers, which was the lengthy Jan Wenner interview for Rolling Stone Magazine. The title of the book is so ironic, it's funny, because one of the main themes of the interview is that Lennon can't remember much, especially in detail. He asks Wenner "Was Pepper before or after Brian died?" Wenner tells him it was before. We've all seen the photos of the Sgt Pepper release party at Brian's home. Pretty strange that Lennon wouldn't remember that. Then a few pages later, Lennon asks "Was Magical Mystery Tour before or after Brian died?"

He does this kind of weird 'I can't remember things' routine. He never says all the acid trips damaged his memory, but that is the impression. What I'm getting at is that this whole 'I can't recall exactly' routine is a smokescreen so that if there is a real blunder, he can just say 'Oh, sorry, it's apparent isn't it that the drugs shredded some of my memories!" It's like an easy out, if he messes up. Blame it on the drugs. Know what I mean?

Some years ago, I purchased a very fine giclee print of the Sgt Pepper cover. It's top quality, like a fine art print. Last week, I had it custom framed and it's on my wall now. The print unframed is 24" square, so it's fairly large. If I stare at it for awhile, it gets creepy. Even if they were innocently saying 'out with the old, in with the new', the funeral atmosphere especially in the sad face of old Paul and the black shirted, tearful Ringo... it's just creepy. Like someotherguy said... this looks like a bizarre funeral for the original Beatles. It looks like this big gathering of celebrities at a funeral, the new Beatles seem to have in some way arisen from the dead and the somber, old Beatles are like ghosts looking down at their own funeral.

It's also striking how precisely art directed the Sgt Pepper cover is. This was not a haphazard thing at all. It's very precise. In the lore and legend history of the group, they want us to think everything was so serendipitous, spur of the moment, and just madcap fun. It couldn't have been. So much of the whole Beatles history had to have been precisely staged. Part of the mystique was their image they had constructed of four, charming, middle-class guys who improvised their careers as on a ten year lark. But that was the image they wanted to put out to the press and public.

This was the biggest and most powerful act in all of show business from late 1963 until about 1971, when people realized it was over. No way it wasn't carefully stage managed. You read all the interviews, not only with members of the group. but with George Martin and others and it's like they all have certain speaking points that they recite. George Martin has described the making of the Sgt Pepper album using the same little anecdotes every time. It bothers me that you can't really learn anything new in an awful lot of the interviews because they're all reciting the same little stories. It's like the George Bush inner circle would all get the same memo: 'here are your speaking points on issue X' and you could watch all the Sunday morning news programs and the Bush insiders would all be saying the same thing, all 'on the same page'.

Just intuitively, I think that beginning in 1967, the Beatles and their entourage were very controlled. Some of the stuff they did seemed to mask the control. For example, the film Magical Mystery Tour is shabby, not well produced. But I think that is to sort of disguise its real purpose. The reviews were negative and 'Paul' came out in the press with "We goofed!". I've always wondered why MMT looks like a very low budget movie when in reality they could have had the best, high dollar Hollywood team if they had wanted. Let It Be was also made shabbily, I think for the same reason... to disguise the real purpose of it. There again, you have a piece of crap movie when whatever they put out at that time should have been a top class production, no expense spared.

It's all creeping me out.






[edit on 19-4-2010 by switching yard]



posted on Apr, 19 2010 @ 12:35 PM
link   
Excellent commentary, as usually, SY. Now you've got me wondering why they'd put out crap movies. I could understand putting out the movies to create the illusion that the Beatles were still together, to re-write history, create a "story," etc, but why the poor production? And what were those movies trying to accomplish, exactly? And why wasn't Dick Lester involved? He'd done a fantastic job w/ the 1st 2 Beatles movies...

Something tells me that if they'd turned the real Beatles loose like on MMT, it would have been a mad-capped adventure. Those guys were funny. But, I bet they wouldn't have dared turn the real ones loose like that. lol


[edit on 19-4-2010 by someotherguy]



posted on Apr, 19 2010 @ 10:08 PM
link   
Just another idea as to why the original Beatles might have been replaced.

They were getting into Eastern religion & philosophy, which opens the doors, IMO, to greater spiritual truths. It also gives people the tools to set themselves free from control. At least, that was my experience. That is definitely not something the powers that be want.

The Featles in India in 1968 weren't the real Beatles. I've always thought the "falling out" they had w/ Maharishi was contrived. He denied any "hanky panky" w/ Prudence or whomever it was he was said to have come on to. I guess I just don't buy the "story." It might have been a way to discredit the guru & turn people off of Eastern tradition.



posted on Apr, 19 2010 @ 11:19 PM
link   
Did I already post this? Look at the nose...




posted on Apr, 19 2010 @ 11:26 PM
link   









posted on Apr, 20 2010 @ 12:08 AM
link   
Yes, I really agree with you, someotherguy. I've never believed there was anything to the story of Maharishi seducing women. I know he was the main man of TM and not Buddhism, but I personally have been involved in Tibetan Buddhism for many years. I've met many monks, lamas, and holy men of Tibet and India. It is just not in their behavioral attitudes to hit on women. They just do not do that. I think Maharishi would have also been above trying to lure and screw female guests at his ashram. It is just not done.

On the movies... HELP! was a pretty high budget film and although it was, granted, silly as could be, it was a very professionally made film. HARD DAY'S NIGHT, as you say, was also very professionally done. What on Earth could have possessed them to release the garbage movies MMT and LET IT BE. I have a Bachelor's degree in film and we used to joke that LET IT BE is a perfect case study of how NOT to direct and edit a film. It's a piece of garbage. The "Beatles" have all said it was a 'bad trip' and they hated it. Then, why the heck release it at all? I think, because they wanted some subliminal message to get under the skin of the viewing public.

Here's what I'm presently thinking about all this...

It was desired by Illuminati to usher in the "hippie culture" and they used Featles to do that. The Pepper album served several purposes, including introducing the fakes with their facial hair disguises, giving a major boost to what was at that time an embryonic hippie culture, promoting drugs, and mainly transitioning the Western youth into some sort of Illuminati agenda.

Magical Mystery Tour was a full on overthrow of traditional culture. In order to sell it as genuine, they made it look like 'Paul' and the others were making a sort of student film. They wanted it to look like unbridled artistic freedom, but crudely made so as to seem like 'Oh well, obviously the Beatles aren't experienced film directors so they goofed, but at least they had total creative freedom!", however, I think the opposite was true. I think it was very controlled, right down to the crude look of it. I think MMT is chock full of Illuminati symbolism, inside references and Illuminati mysticism. I would bet that the Vatican knows full well what was going down in that film. It was probably full of some sort of secret society sorcery.

LET IT BE is, in my opinion having a degree in film from a major university, one of the worst directed and edited films of all time. I think it was purposely produced badly because TPTB wanted to cushion the blow to fans of the inevitable breakup of the group. As I've said before, I think the deal was that these impostors would masquerade as the Beatles until the end of the decade and then it was planned in advanced that they would split up and have solo careers. The poor quality of LET IT BE gives viewers a very unsettling vibe. It conditioned all the fans to think "Oh what a shame, the Beatles don't get on well anymore, so there is bound to be a breakup." This message was couched in a slimy, jump cut ridden, grotesquely low budget hack job for the very purpose of making viewers feel like they need a shower afterwards, it was so grimy and grim. Done that way on purpose, is what I think. The friction between 'Paul' and 'George' and 'Paul' and 'John'... I think was all staged. In the solo years, the public feud between 'Paul' and 'John' was staged, too. All the lawsuits may have been just show, as well. Allen Klein may have been CIA. Just saying.

It is truly astounding that the New Beatles, of 1967 and going forward, didn't really look like, act like, or perform like the Original Beatles and yet, the public swallowed it hook, line, and sinker.

The story that The Beatles grew to hate touring... I don't buy it. I could list so many things that were radically different when the New Beatles emerged. The Originals loved touring and playing for a real, live audience. To just chuck it all and hibernate in the studio is very hard to accept. Even with the problems in Japan and the Philippines and the rainy monsoon in Australia, I just find it hard to believe they would have decided no more touring or live gigs in front of an audience. All these radical departures from how the Original Beatles were, just make me very suspicious.

The Original Beatles wouldn't have quit playing for live audiences. They wouldn't have released crap films. Epstein wouldn't have overdosed. I could go on and on.

I am haunted by what was posted previously, which looks to be a page of notes stolen from Mal Evans, that describes a scene of George (Harrison, one would presume) upset and sobbing and asking "Why? Why? Why?" and Mal feeling like he just stabbed a mate in the back. I am haunted by that.

The amazing, psychedelic Beatles albums could have been sort of cooked up in a lab. The music could have been crafted by some very advanced music composers who were willing to take part in some (grand, to them) social engineering experiment.

I am pretty well convinced that the entire output of the Beatles from 1967 forward was produced in a lab and intended for a social engineering experiment. I think that whatever they were trying to do in the experiment did work as planned to some extent.



posted on Apr, 20 2010 @ 02:04 PM
link   
Just another post about why they would release amateurish films...

Look at it this way...

Suppose Jesus was an extraterrestrial come down onto the planet Earth to enact a social engineering experiment. Let's say he was from a civilization monitoring our own, but they (this extraterrestrial civilization) were/are something like a million years more advanced in technology and capabilities than we are today.

So, this ET Jesus takes the form of a human man. He's got to have imperfections physically otherwise he would appear to be too perfect in physical appearance to be a human being. In other words, you wouldn't want your faux human to look too perfect, like a store mannequin, so you would want him to look a bit like Joe average. Imperfections are what make people blend in with all the other people. None of us are physically perfect. Although he could perform "miracles" (via super-advanced technology and perhaps assistance from a mothership), when it came to the persecution of him, torture, and crucifixion, he had to appear human. He would not use any miracle to escape appearing human to the onlookers. The atomic flash teleportation (resurrection, which resulted in the image on the Shroud of Turin) looked like a miracle, but was just another example of advanced technology. So now, after the ET Jesus visit, the social scientists on the mothership simply observe the development of the Christian religion on Earth and how it affects Earth humans. I think social scientists would be keen to see the sort of social dynamics that would unfold. Maybe the ETs were trying to see if they could elevate human civilization up to a Utopian level and they tried doing it by way of the introduced religion Christianity. We didn't evolve socially into a Utopia, so the Jesus experiment had mixed results.

So, what does that have to do with The Beatles? Let's suppose the Illuminati in 1966 had technology one-thousand years ahead of anything known to the public today. In super secrecy (and I would think in some kind of hugely significant occult ritual), they murder all four Original Beatles in the same ritual. They already have impostors who look so much like the Originals that they can easily fool the public on their looks (with the help of transitional facial hair and longer hair and distracting costumes).

Now, through some form of technology that the public today does not know exists, they synthesized the Beatles' voices so that the public can't tell the difference between the Featles singing and Original Beatles singing. Now imagine that there was a secret team of composers and musicologists who wrote the exquisite and pioneering psychedelic music that was attributed to The Beatles.

O.K., in order to fully fool the public, they intentionally made imperfect films that flopped. Kind of like Jesus looking like just another guy. You see, the Featles could not appear to be perfect or it might give away that something's wrong with the overall picture. I think MMT and LET IT BE were purposely made to look amateurish so that the public would say to themselves, "Well, nobody's perfect! Not even these four lower to middle class lads from Liverpool!" We all goof from time to time.

I think Richard Lester was allowed to stay out of the ruse, except for his film HOW I WON THE WAR, which starred the 'John' replacement. I've always thought that it made absolutely no sense at all that the real Lennon would accept a role (without the other Beatles) in that movie HOW I WON THE WAR having just come off a grueling world tour. I don't see him liking the script, for one thing. Why the real John would have ever wanted to portray a British soldier in a war, is beyond me. I don't think he would have gone for it. I think Lester was tapped to do that film, but then was let go from participating in the remaining crummy films the Featles put out.

The posts above, regarding the noses. More evidence. I've seen the differences in noses in all the other comps previously posted. Perhaps even after nose reconstruction surgery, they couldn't get the noses exactly right.

I wonder if, after the Jesus experiment failed to produce worldwide Utopia, the ETs or the Illuminati or both working together, turned their expertise and technologies into creating the post-1966 "Beatles" in another attempt to create Utopia on Earth or to just observe the results, as they did with the Jesus experiment. If that were the case, "Beatle" music post-1966 could have been written by an extremely advanced civilization which not only made the group appear to the public to be musical geniuses, but here's the kicker...

part of the experiment was to plant clues in the words and music and in the album cover art and in the events undertaken by the Featles. Maybe the ETs or the Illuminati or both combined wanted to see if at some point the public (we on this thread, for example) could possibly crack this code and understand the whole project.

What I'm in the process of is boiling down the lyrics from the HELP! album forward. First, I take out all the repeated phrases within each song. Then, I take out all the repeated words in each song. Then, after this boiling down process, I join all the remaining words together without any breaks between songs. Then I print that out on
paper and copy it many times. Then, using a highlighter, I am trying to stitch together an overall message or story. So, this is what I am still working on. I think that at some point I may see a pattern or just accidentally stumble upon the code that reveals the overall message. So far, it's going to take more work. I'm not there yet.

[edit on 20-4-2010 by switching yard]



posted on Apr, 20 2010 @ 04:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by someotherguy
Did I already post this? Look at the nose...




Another thing to consider is:


Ringo is NOT the same man. There are a number of elements, but the most obvious are that his nose has greatly different proportions to the size of his face and other features, secondly his neck doesn't rejoin his chin anywhere near the same place. Just how many Ringos were there ?


GS



posted on Apr, 20 2010 @ 06:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by switching yard
It was desired by Illuminati to usher in the "hippie culture" and they used Featles to do that. The Pepper album served several purposes, including introducing the fakes with their facial hair disguises, giving a major boost to what was at that time an embryonic hippie culture, promoting drugs, and mainly transitioning the Western youth into some sort of Illuminati agenda...


It is truly astounding that the New Beatles, of 1967 and going forward, didn't really look like, act like, or perform like the Original Beatles and yet, the public swallowed it hook, line, and sinker.


The story that The Beatles grew to hate touring... I don't buy it. I could list so many things that were radically different when the New Beatles emerged. The Originals loved touring and playing for a real, live audience. To just chuck it all and hibernate in the studio is very hard to accept...


The Original Beatles wouldn't have quit playing for live audiences. They wouldn't have released crap films. Epstein wouldn't have overdosed. I could go on and on...


The amazing, psychedelic Beatles albums could have been sort of cooked up in a lab. The music could have been crafted by some very advanced music composers who were willing to take part in some (grand, to them) social engineering experiment...


I am pretty well convinced that the entire output of the Beatles from 1967 forward was produced in a lab and intended for a social engineering experiment. I think that whatever they were trying to do in the experiment did work as planned to some extent.


Let's suppose the Illuminati in 1966 had technology one-thousand years ahead of anything known to the public today. In super secrecy (and I would think in some kind of hugely significant occult ritual), they murder all four Original Beatles in the same ritual. They already have impostors who look so much like the Originals that they can easily fool the public on their looks (with the help of transitional facial hair and longer hair and distracting costumes).


Now, through some form of technology that the public today does not know exists, they synthesized the Beatles' voices so that the public can't tell the difference between the Featles singing and Original Beatles singing. Now imagine that there was a secret team of composers and musicologists who wrote the exquisite and pioneering psychedelic music that was attributed to The Beatles.



Hi Switching Yard,


I think you've made some considerable advances in analyzing what probably went on in their mentally twisted Illuminati cult. Secret High-Tech or not, The Illuminati are beings of unspeakably low indignity.


I must agree that all four Beatles were assassinated and replaced. It is probably the context of their murder, likely in a satanic ritual sacrifice, which leads to such a tremendous barrage of denial and concerted disinformation. Only a geographically extensive secret organization, such as satanic Illuminati driven freemasonry, could garner sufficient complicities to prevent the outing of such a gruesome killing for decades on end.


While the Sgt Pepper album was a funerary one, introducing the Featles in full regalia disguise, I think that the next album released in 1968 was also revealing. It featured The Beatles' doubles, it was their only DOUBLE album. Also it showed that The Beatles were now encased in a vacuum, an information shutdown symbolized by the absence of any writing or images on the double album cover. It was officially called "Beatles" without THE in front... evidently introducing more Beatles as needed. It was only adorned with mugshots of the FEATLES to condition the world to recognize THEM as the real item.


The "Double" White Album



Also revealing, after the Sgt Pepper funerary wreath, is the color of the WHITE album.


In Chinese, Vietnamese, Korean, Indian and Japanese tradition, white is the color of mourning and death. In Europe also until the 19th Century the deceased were dressed in white prior to burial. Brides traditionally wear wedding dresses in white to symbolize the death of their former family as they enter a new family.


In ancient Egyptian "hedj" means white and "hedji" to whiten as well as to destroy, annihilate, kill, fell, perish, overthrow, assassinate. That the prime suspects in the assassination of The Beatles, namely The Illuminati, have chosen as symbol representing their order an ancient Egyptian Pyramid surmounted by the All-Seeing-Eye of Horus -- may not be coincidental.


The technology to imitate their sound was provided by their social conditioning research labs, using techniques developed by the composer who founded electronic music and referenced with a photo on the Sgt Pepper album cover, Karlheinz Stockhausen. This makes one wonder if replacing The Beatles wasn't planned a long time in advance. They may have even been threatened leading to them thumbing their noses to the satanist Illuminati by the Butcher album cover.


Yesterday and Today - BUTCHER Album



Apparently their defiance didn't go over too well, or their deaths were already pre-planned. At least they gave the Illuminati what they deserved, and we'll remember this heroic last stand against the Evil cast upon the downtrodden masses of humanity.


It is left up to us to bring their assassins to justice. Unraveling the yarn from today's Sir Paul to the string pullers behind the scenes is one of the paths of investigation. Using the freedom of information act to obtain and cross reference FBI and CIA reports would be another. Finally, taking legal action for criminal impersonation - addressed at the Estates of the deceased and living impostors of The Beatles, will do much to loosen tongues when personal liability and corporate profits are at stake.



posted on Apr, 20 2010 @ 06:06 PM
link   
Well, this is all quite fascinating to me.

There is a spiritual aspect to all of this, IMO. I believe the original Beatles were advanced light-beings here to help free people (per Timothy Leary). I have also studied the East quite extensively (Hinduism, mainly), & I believe tools from that tradition can help remove the veil of Maya. The Beatles were bringing the Eastern ways to the public's attention, which I am sure was threatening to TPTB, since a lot of people could have awakened from their coma. Since the Beatles weren't suitable for furthering a dark agenda, they had to be replaced. The doubles then served to discredit the Eastern ways (in discrediting Maharishi), & turning people off of the East. Plus, taking drugs would counter-act any spiritual steps in the right direction someone took. So... it seems to me that TPTB managed to keep the people asleep for another 40+ years. At some point, though, sleepers do wake up.

IMO, at least some of the music post-replacement was written by the originals.

And about mimicking the voice:

Voiceprints, vocal mimicry, & technology

Paul McCartney's voice v. Faul's voice

[edit on 20-4-2010 by someotherguy]



posted on Apr, 20 2010 @ 08:48 PM
link   
Yes, I do agree that song fragments were carried over from the Originals to the post-1966 era. I think they were embellished or combined by musicologists and contemporary "classical" composers.

So many post-1966 "Beatle" songs were fragmentary. "A Day In The Life" had a middle eight bars fragment welded into it. The whole side 2 of the Abbey Road album consists of song fragments welded together.

I think the Originals had extensive notebooks full of unreleased songs at the end of 1966. These notebooks could have contained lyrics and chord names above the words or some sort of tab notation. It seems completely logical to me that they would have had these notebooks to work from. It is not out of the question that they may have laid down demo tracks of many of these song fragments just so they wouldn't forget the rhythm of them or some other detail. I know someotherguy has made this point before --- that they probably had recorded demo tapes of many unfinished and unreleased tracks.

I just think a lab team took the notebooks and demo tapes and made releasable album tracks out of them, while adding some new ones composed by this secret team. The replacements may not have been songwriters at all, but just played the roles given them.

You know, I suspect that the basic truth of all of this is known by up to perhaps (just guessing) a hundred people still alive in Britain today. I think many rock stars either know first hand what went down or strongly suspect what went down and are afraid for their lives to ever mention it. I feel like Mick, Keith and Eric know basically what happened and I think people like Bob Dylan know, too. I believe they are all keeping this secret. Also, I believe Steve Winwood's song "The Low Spark Of High Heeled Boys" is a veiled reference to this whole tragic secret. The Original Beatles wore the Cuban heeled boots that were pretty close to being high heeled. I bought some as a young teenager and I can remember my Dad angrily on my case about it, "Why are you wearing ladies' shoes!?!" and I had to explain, "No Dad, these are Beatle boots." but he didn't get the connection. So yeah, listen to that song by Steve Winwood. I think it's about the Original Beatles as being boys wearing "high heels" (Cuban heeled Beatle boots). It's very eerie when you listen to it with that in mind. It's like he lays out that fortunes were made on The Beatles, like taking advantage of them --- as in, perhaps Dick James, for example.



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 04:33 AM
link   
I agree that Low Spark does appear to be a clue song...



Traffic lyrics - Low Spark Of High-Heeled Boys

If you see something that looks like a star
and it's shooting up out of the ground
and your head is spinning from a loud guitar.
And you just can't escape from the sound
don't worry too much, it'll happen to you
We were children once, playing with toys.

And the thing that you're hearing is only the sound
of the low spark of high-heeled boys.

The percentage you're paying is too high priced
while you're living beyond all your means.
And the man in the suit has just bought a new car
from the profit he's made on your dreams.
But today you just swear that the man was shot dead
by a gun that didn't make any noise.
But it wasn't the bullet that laid him to rest
was the low spark of high-heeled boys.


If you had just a minute to breathe
and they granted you one final wish
would you ask for something, like another chance.
Or something similar as this
don't worry too much, it'll happen to you
as sure as your sorrows are joys.

And the thing that disturbs you is only the sound
of the low spark of high-heeled boys.

The percentage you're paying is too high priced
while you're living beyond all your means
and the man in the suit has just bought a new car
from the profit he's made on your dreams
But today you just swear that the man was shot dead
by a gun that didn't make any noise
But it wasn't the bullet that laid him to rest
was the low spark of high-heeled boys....high-heeled boys.

If I gave you everything that I own
and asked for nothing in return
Would you do the same for me, as I would for you?
Or take me for a ride
and strip me of everything, including my pride
But spirit is something that no one destroys

And the sound that I'm hearing is only the sound
of the low spark of high-heeled boys.



new topics

top topics



 
22
<< 27  28  29    31  32  33 >>

log in

join