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: 42
22
<< 39  40  41    43  44  45 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 10:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by edmond dantes

Since this is addressed to me, I am welcome to post my reply here, and it is on topic.


No, you are not "welcome" to post on this thread. You were politely asked NOT to post on this thread, but you apparently cannot respect that. I am putting you on ignore, because I really couldn't care less about your OFF TOPIC posts. You people don't want to actually discuss anything about what happened to Paul McCartney. All you want to do is ruin this thread like you shills & trolls have done on almost every other thread &/or forum that has tried to discuss this issue. We know your objective is to shut down discussion because you don't want that old Faulster to be exposed for the fraud he is. So, knock yourself out posting. I won't read or see any of it.




posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 12:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by someotherguy

Originally posted by edmond dantes

Since this is addressed to me, I am welcome to post my reply here, and it is on topic.


No, you are not "welcome" to post on this thread. You were politely asked NOT to post on this thread, but you apparently cannot respect that. I am putting you on ignore, because I really couldn't care less about your OFF TOPIC posts.


LOL! Someotherguy/hermajesty has no right complaining about off topic posts. She was the one, along with getstupid, who derailed the 'Is Paul McCartney Alive Or Dead?' thread on Icke with continued posts about JOHN LENNON being replaced.

Seems it's one rule for her and one for everyone else, Edmund.



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 05:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Dakudo
 


Thanks, Dookie, for your rude, off-topic post. The mods have been alerted. I sent them the original text, so don't bother editing it.

[edit on 11-8-2010 by someotherguy]



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 07:00 PM
link   
The concept of a private thread on an open board is flawed.

If you want a closed thread, then PMH is where this belongs. Of course you want more than 12 people to read your theories, so you come to forums like this. Freedom of expression can be a drag huh?



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 07:54 AM
link   
THIS THREAD IS AN OPEN THREAD:


IT IS OPEN TO THOSE SINCERELY INVESTIGATING A MURDER.


ANYONE ATTEMPTING TO INTERFERE WITH THIS OPEN MURDER INVESTIGATION BY DENYING THE CRIME ARE


NOT ACCEPTED HERE ! ! !


All 3 thread detractors, refrain from posting disruptive attacks against those openly and honestly discussing the circumstances surrounding the crime.


YOU ARE NOT INVITED TO POST HERE. YOU WERE SO INFORMED IN THE FIRST OPENING POST AT THE TOP OF PAGE ONE.


You are given the LAST & FINAL WARNING.


Any further denial or attack posts will be reported to the forum moderators and administrator and sanctions will be requested.


The OP - Gestmart



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 09:03 AM
link   
Sorry, but if someone addresses a post on this thread to Edmond Dantes, then I will reply to it here. You can't post something here specifically directed at me, and then demand that I can't respond.



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 10:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Getsmart

You are given the LAST & FINAL WARNING.





All of those little warning markers under your name mean the moderators of this forum are warning you.

They do not mean you have authority to warn others.

Hope this is helpful.



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 10:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Getsmart

ANYONE ATTEMPTING TO INTERFERE WITH THIS OPEN MURDER INVESTIGATION BY DENYING THE CRIME ARE


NOT ACCEPTED HERE ! ! !


Sorry to burst your bubble - This isn't a murder investigation - it's a little thread on a conspiracy forum - ignored by all but a handful of people.

Leave the murder investigations to those who actually know something about them - the police.

If you have any evidence that proves Paul McCartney is dead, why haven't you contacted the appropriate authorities and reported the 'crime'?

Do you realise that by not contacting the police you could be charged with withholding information?


YOU ARE NOT INVITED TO POST HERE. YOU WERE SO INFORMED IN THE FIRST OPENING POST AT THE TOP OF PAGE ONE.


LOL! Since when did you have any authority to say who can and cannot post?



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 10:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Getsmart

THIS THREAD IS AN OPEN THREAD:


IT IS OPEN TO THOSE SINCERELY INVESTIGATING A MURDER.


ANYONE ATTEMPTING TO INTERFERE WITH THIS OPEN MURDER INVESTIGATION BY DENYING THE CRIME ARE


NOT ACCEPTED HERE ! ! !


All 3 thread detractors, refrain from posting disruptive attacks against those openly and honestly discussing the circumstances surrounding the crime.


YOU ARE NOT INVITED TO POST HERE. YOU WERE SO INFORMED IN THE FIRST OPENING POST AT THE TOP OF PAGE ONE.


You are given the LAST & FINAL WARNING.


Any further denial or attack posts will be reported to the forum moderators and administrator and sanctions will be requested.


The OP - Gestmart






HA! HA! HA-HA! HA-HA-HA-HA! HA-HA!



posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 01:20 AM
link   
Dear ATS and BTS friends,


I am happy to be back here among you to share ideas and prospectives regarding what happened to the Beatles in the 1960's and how they were used in the Tavistock agenda and later turn in turn disposed of. This thread treats the subject of the murder of James Paul McCartney presumably in 1966 and considers elements pertaining to his replacement by an impostor which may shed light on his murder.


All comers are invited to discuss the MOTIVATIONS for the Murder of JPM. This is what this thread is about, not about the OP or other members who have been contributing regularly to this thread.


There is an important aspect of the debate about the death of Paul McCartney which may surprise forum members unfamiliar with the topic's controversy, so I shall resume this to help new members reading this thread to better understand the subject at hand. Also this should help elucidate why certain parties, possibly even parties close to the groups who were involved at the time, may wish that this information remain shrouded in silence and obscured by static.


IF the allegations in this thread are indeed founded, and IF there was a conspiracy to use The Beatles to further an Illuminati objective of mass social control of populations through cultural engineering, then this would be through what is commonly called a "Black Ops" concealed operation which a number of known or secret government agencies would be missioned to keep hidden from public view.


IF Paul McCartney's murder was thus related to a "Black Ops" program it would therefore be protected by standard Counter Intelligence Programs in routine deployment inside these agencies.


In the past few years most western governments have stepped up their Internet forum "Intervention teams" which operate to obscure the truth about anything critical to their interests or their missions. Therefore, to such operatives, Truth Seekers are considered potential security risks and threats to be dealt with using whatever means may be dispatched with minimal risks.


Historically Cointelpro has been used to accompany military logistics as well as political intervention, and it has hence been extended to tacit penetration of political meetings using infiltrated militants inside various groups and organizations.


In 2010 Cointelpro has been openly promoted by the Obama administration as a key priority to be extended massively to internet forums. Such strong and open policy declarations have brought a curtain of suspicion to discussion groups, whenever posts appear to disrupt discussions or to ridicule posters or their logic with little basis and unclear motivations.


From reading the many threads in the ATS and BTS forums we can conclude that those in positions of power do things which nobody can explain satisfactorily by using standard geopolitical analyses or economic hypotheses. There is therefore a consensus that there must be hidden conspiracies, thus the names chosen for these forums: Above and Below TOP SECRET.


By exploring what is HIDDEN either above or below Top Secret programs we become typical security risks for any real Top Secret mission or operation run by agencies or similar groups wielding occult power and deciding our fate behind closed doors.


So we should not be surprised if a number of pressures and measures are used to counter our intelligence. Even if we are still only on the fringes of the truth, we nonetheless represent a concern which is being dealt with in various places on the Internet.


PAUL IS DEAD is something which fits right in with this preoccupation of WHO was ABOVE The Beatles, and WHO was BELOW the likely assassination and obvious replacement of James Paul McCartney.


So we shouldn't be alarmed when we set off alarm bells causing turmoil over our statements and inquiries. All is fair in Love and War, and this is a WAR FOR OUR MINDS which is being waged with the arms of conventional warfare as well as those of the SHADOW WARS.


In traditional Paul Is Dead discussions we thus encounter a number of different profiles and motivations for posting. I venture to offer a brief outline of these to help orient new members and provide some perspective on the arguments promoted and likely interactions to be witnessed.


1. Those who believe Paul is Dead and who therefore wonder why he died, how he died, who was involved or knew, when he died and where?


2. Those who don't know one way or another, but wish to know more as they are genuinely curious and want to figure it out.


3. Those who think that Paul is Alive because they have heard records said to be by him, been to concerts believing it was him, and generally believe that the individual who is presented by today's media and news organizations is the genuine Paul McCartney.


4. Those who don't care if Paul is Alive or Dead, and aren't concerned by his fate whether murdered or not, partaking in the discussion for entertainment purposes.


5. Those who believe that Paul is Dead but want others to think he is alive and that he is the same individual who has been presented to the public as Sir Paul. This would correspond to duty bound operatives used in Cointelpro propaganda tasks in order to fend off Truth Seekers and conceal whatever pertains, directly or indirectly to agency operations, missions or agendas.


This variety of profiles of participants in PID threads and their respective motivations is the reason that I politely requested in my first post that the discussion in this thread concentrate on one specific aspect of this matter, the MOTIVATIONS for the murder of Paul McCartney.


Even if some think that this is of no use, and that nobody will so much as even read it, I beg to disagree. Quite a lot of people are puzzled by the mystery of Paul's unusual "transformation" which has startled many over the years and continues to do so today.


For this reason, it is important to keep this subject in active discussion to arrive at a better knowledge of the circumstances surrounding Paul's disappearance and those surrounding the organization of his replacement and any complicities attached.


It is obvious that investigations into crimes involving people in high positions of power would cause dispute and bring forth dissent. Groups with enough power to murder a high profile celebrity and conceal his replacement for several decades in total impunity would have no trouble engaging appropriate means to cover up their misdeeds. A task force could be brought into operation on call or left in watch mode intervening only when a threat assessment motivates debunking action.


PAUL IS DEAD. Rest his soul.


GS



posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 02:15 AM
link   
Congratulatons, GetSmart...that was a lot more cordial than your earlier post.

However, as a by-stander I would have to say that you are giving way too much credit to those who simply disagree with you. You have cleverly made some very bold and matter-of-fact statements about the MURDER of Paul McCartney with no supporting evidence to the matter. Whatever happened to him simply dying in a car accident? Or what about the story that he had a massive IBS attack and literally crapped himself to death? You see, the story keeps changing and morphing and there has been nothing presented to support any of it no matter what anyone believes. And so the natural tendency would be for most NORMAL and free-thinking people to go with the status quo because there has been nothing more to support the Paul Is Dead story except a bunch of supposition and fantasies. Don't you think that IF there really WAS any REAL evidence to support the argument that at some point in the past 40 years somebody would have brought this to court and it would have been dealt with once and for all? Probably not because you seem to be keen to embrace this Illuminati secret society business, which I also believe you place way too much stock in.

I have had a very objective and open mind about the Paul Is Dead theory and have found myself very disappointed with the amount of assumption, supposition, and theorizing which has gone into it which has been baseless. There are some major flaws in the case which are easily debunked. I have posed honest and pointed questions about certain "facts" which are supposed to prove Paul Is Dead which have only been met with combative attitudes and being rudely put-down simply for asking questions while attempting to understand and even possibly accept Paul Is Dead. Since all I have ever received in response to my questions is a bunch of blathering with no real sustenance, I simply must disagree with the whole idea. I mean, like, I was born at night, but not last night...ya dig?

And now, since I disagree with you, I must be categorized as some agent for the government who is trying to silence you? What a cop-out on your part. I guess people are not supposed to be allowed to have opposing opinions unless they are trying to shut you up? Jeesh, man, it's your right to have your own opinion whether or not I agree with you. Therefor I will refrain from accusing you of being an agent from the dark side who is attempting lead me astray from the status quo.

In order show my desire to remain on the topic of this thread, I will just say that there are numerous motivations for murdering someone, one of the more common of which would be centered around jealousy. So maybe Gerry and the Pacemakers did it...they are another Liverpool band from the 60s, but they turned out to be one-hit-wonders, so there was certainly a lot of room for jealously to fester. The Beatles ended up touring the world while Gerry was still stuck playing the Cavern Club, what a bloody shame. But ultimately I would have to be able to present evidence to support that theory, and would have to be able to believe it myself.



posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 09:36 AM
link   
Dear fellow ATSers and BTSers,


I can well understand that some would have doubts pretty much about anything presented as the truth by the establishment media or new press. By the same token it is justified to have doubts about what anyone says, without corroborating elements to make up your own mind. There is also a well known contemporary phenomenon, that within the scientific community there are many researchers who are considered unorthodox and unprofessional as soon as they dare to contest the scientific paradigms in favor at the time.


So we live in a reality which is constructed and promoted by established mechanism, those of science, religion, culture and politics. Our society is therefore a virtual one, until it leads people to act and communicate at which time this virtual reality becomes our social reality and our existential experience of life.


We can however take back our reality, and therefore power over our social existence and political destiny, by thinking about things for ourselves and questioning relentlessly until patterns emerge and insight brings things into light. This is the purpose of these forums, and I hope that this thread will contribute modestly to that achievement. Yet this goes counter to the interest of those who seek to dominate the world and control us through our perceptions of reality.


This is why some consider that there is a WAR FOR OUR SOULS being waged, and that this war is going on in the virtual realm from which our reality is forged. This is the ROOT OF POWER and thus it is where much effort is deployed to control our reality, to make it one which corresponds to particular interests and objectives of control and dominance.


You will note that this analysis does correspond well with much of what is known about the Illuminati and Royal Monarchy Bloodlines who are said in numerous places to be HYBRIDS between humans and Aliens that have an INVADE AND CONTROL AGENDA to run Planet Earth for their own purposes, which are unclear to us at this time.


This also helps explain why the world's leading Cultural Celebrity during the 1960's may have been the object of serious scrutiny and pressures of manipulation.


Explaining at least partially the potential motivations for the murder of Paul McCartney and his replacement by a controlled impostor.


It is normal to contest this version just as it is normal to contest the versions promoted by the establishment. That is what self-determined thought is all about. If you currently don't see any possibility of Paul McCartney having been replaced, and are hungry for evidence or arguments pointing this out, this is a worthwhile pursuit but it is not the object of this thread given that this was better met by other threads here and elsewhere.


I shall therefore refer you to a thread which has over 500 pages of discussion of this very subject, a thread with a welcome question mark in its title which should better correspond to the questions of those still doubting the death and replacement of JPM.


Paul McCartney: alive or dead?


There is more than enough material in that thread to help you make up your mind and later decide if you agree with the premises of this thread, that Paul Is Dead, that he was murdered, and that we must investigate that crime. If so, you are more than welcome to join in the discussion here pertaining to likely motives.


Thanks for your participation.


Getsmart



posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 10:15 PM
link   
Hi everyone. I just found a an interesting video on YouTube.

He talks about wanting to retire and just write songs for other people. At 2:00 he talks about retiring in 2 years, the interview was made in 1964.

Also, I found some interesting PIR (Paul is Retired) comments

Anonymous said... Evidence (Wired Magazine, duly noted on this website) supports that the original Paul McCartney disappeared from public life in late 1966, and was replaced with a double. Once a person becomes aware of this, they quickly revisit the ‘Paul is dead’ rumors. From there, they move into heavy research and find out all kinds of incredible things, unfortunately, no concrete answers to the mystery of Paul McCartney. One would think after almost 50 years, someone would’ve spilled the beans by now. After all, we know more about the Kennedy assassination, but absolutely nothing on Paul McCartney…..and there is a logical reason for that. We know Paul was replaced in1966, the question is why? Did he really die all those years ago? We know the Beatles left messages of his ‘death’ on their albums, only to deny the rumor the messages caused, as well as to deny the messages themselves,…. again, why? Because Paul McCartney didn’t really die. Paul was seriously injured in a car crash in 1966; it left him with facial lacerations, and minor head trauma. He would not be able to continue with the group as things were, so they hired a double to stand in for him publicly while he continued to work with the band behind the scenes. The ‘clues’ were symbolic of Paul’s ‘death’ to the band; in the regard of his role having changed. It’s not sure who the first replacement was, but he didn’t work out so they brought in the man we know as Paul McCartney today. (Dr. Trudy’s study of voice patterns showed three different voices of Paul McCartney. Researchers believe the second replacement is William Campbell, better known as Faul.

here.



posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 05:13 AM
link   
I like this thread an iv been following since it started, but iv been a Beatle fan since the start an im 61 years old now an iv seen all the changes, when it comes to 1967 an Sargent Pepper an Abbey Road an the White Album, I went a long with the change in the world at that time, i lost all my so called friends an made new one's it was a time of separation from the people who were what yea might call "Hip" and what we called the straits Joe blogs to you in the States!
now what im getting at here is it wasn't ony the Beatles who were changing it was many Bands of the time including the Stones the Doors Hendrik's Dylan ect ect.. an in the art world as well as writers poets an intellectuals, we all grew up real fast an saw the bigger picture you might say! iv put up this vid of john an Paul an to me this is the real John an Paul, look keenly at the Body language!
thats the Lennon an McCartney iv always loved! if you compair this vid to the Frost vid its the same Paul sorry!




posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 05:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by mikeATSuser
Hi everyone. I just found a an interesting video on YouTube.

He talks about wanting to retire and just write songs for other people. At 2:00 he talks about retiring in 2 years, the interview was made in 1964.


Also, I found some interesting PIR (Paul is Retired) comments


Anonymous said... Evidence (Wired Magazine, duly noted on this website) supports that the original Paul McCartney disappeared from public life in late 1966, and was replaced with a double. Once a person becomes aware of this, they quickly revisit the ‘Paul is dead’ rumors. From there, they move into heavy research and find out all kinds of incredible things, unfortunately, no concrete answers to the mystery of Paul McCartney. One would think after almost 50 years, someone would’ve spilled the beans by now. After all, we know more about the Kennedy assassination, but absolutely nothing on Paul McCartney…..and there is a logical reason for that. We know Paul was replaced in1966, the question is why? Did he really die all those years ago? We know the Beatles left messages of his ‘death’ on their albums, only to deny the rumor the messages caused, as well as to deny the messages themselves,…. again, why? Because Paul McCartney didn’t really die. Paul was seriously injured in a car crash in 1966; it left him with facial lacerations, and minor head trauma. He would not be able to continue with the group as things were, so they hired a double to stand in for him publicly while he continued to work with the band behind the scenes. The ‘clues’ were symbolic of Paul’s ‘death’ to the band; in the regard of his role having changed. It’s not sure who the first replacement was, but he didn’t work out so they brought in the man we know as Paul McCartney today. (Dr. Trudy’s study of voice patterns showed three different voices of Paul McCartney. Researchers believe the second replacement is William Campbell, better known as Faul.


here.



Hi MikeATSuser,


That is an interesting analysis of reasons for replacing Paul in that website link. Thanks.



Also, the David Frost interview is CHILLING when you consider at the end that he envisaged Paul retiring in 2010 rather than 2 years later than 1964 when the interview took place. On two different occasions, separated by several minutes of interview on other topics, Paul said he wanted to RETIRE.


To me this shows that there must be a reason, especially as he says how he values to possibilities that his new status allows, the power to do things and undertake ventures, hardly the stuff of retirement. I think that Paul wanted to RETIRE FROM THE BEATLES meaning he didn't want to continue being piloted by Tavistock and their handlers. Did you note his reply about what he expected to be doing in the near future? After minute 1:30 he replies: "Don't ask me, I'm only doing it."


This shows that he was definitely NOT in charge of his actions or projects, despite what he said about having power to take initiatives. This interview is unsettling because it shows him to be very unsure about his own life, and to want to withdraw from active life, a customary reaction when you are being exploited, can't comply with what you are ordered to do, or have been traumatized.


I would definitely add this David Frost interview to the ponderous evidence helping to explain the circumstances surrounding the premature death and replacement of James Paul McCartney.


GS



posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 05:35 PM
link   
Very nice of you to ignore me thanks...tells me your not interested in any other point of view!



posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 05:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by DCDAVECLARKE
I like this thread an iv been following since it started, but iv been a Beatle fan since the start an im 61 years old now an iv seen all the changes, when it comes to 1967 an Sargent Pepper an Abbey Road an the White Album, I went a long with the change in the world at that time, i lost all my so called friends an made new one's it was a time of separation from the people who were what yea might call "Hip" and what we called the straits Joe blogs to you in the States!
now what im getting at here is it wasn't ony the Beatles who were changing it was many Bands of the time including the Stones the Doors Hendrik's Dylan ect ect.. an in the art world as well as writers poets an intellectuals, we all grew up real fast an saw the bigger picture you might say! iv put up this vid of john an Paul an to me this is the real John an Paul, look keenly at the Body language!
thats the Lennon an McCartney iv always loved! if you compair this vid to the Frost vid its the same Paul sorry!



Hi DCDAVECLARKE,


Does this mean that you think that Paul was replaced after 1968 or do you contend that he was never replaced ?!?


My conclusion after viewing these two videos consecutively is that we are seeing Faul in the later one. Sorry!


Among the things which are uncharacteristic of Paul are Faul's shifty eyes, his display of vanity, crass statements such as "we're in business, you know" which are all totally out of character. I changed back then too, and knew many others who changed. But this is NOT the nature of change you saw in people then. Beyond losing taboos and being more open minded, you didn't see people who were morally virtuous become corrupted by sewage, it was rather the reverse where people who accepted compromise started to no longer do things that were not in alignment with their conscience.


So let's not rewrite history about the actual incidence of the Cultural Revolution which achieved its objective of destroying the continuity of traditional society but at the expense of a collateral awakening of a number of people, some of whom even wound up here at ATS and BTS still contesting the establishment.


I think that Paul was killed in 1966. In concordance with the David Frost interview, he was forcibly RETIRED 2 years after publicly stating that he no longer wanted to continue at the job.


GS



posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 12:55 AM
link   
Very interesting comments in the last couple of pages of this thread.

I followed the link and read the Plastic Macca blog post by anonymous presenting the story of Original Paul becoming a recluse after a disfiguring accident; they put forward the double whom for some unexplained reason didn't work out at some point in the timeline; replaced the first phony with another; so the real Paul and two consecutive impostors have worked together in secret to this day, anonymous presumes.

Kind of like Phantom of the Opera, sort of.

The scene in which Her Majesty knights the phantom in secret, then does the knighting of Sir for public consumption, is so surreal.

I wouldn't dismiss this phantom theory too hastily, but I think it would have been even more difficult to keep the lid of secrecy on it. I get the feeling it's a melodramatic, made up story and is a red herring, albeit a very entertaining story. There have been silly stories in the goofy National Enquirer for years that JFK survived and was an invalid in some secret asylum. Makes a colorful story, but blatantly ridiculous.

Logic supports Getsmart's view that Paul didn't really want to retire in 1966, but Paul was hinting that he was caught up in something more powerful than his own fame and privilege. Perhaps the controllers who mandated that the early Beatles would be replaced by the psychedelic Beatles were the behind-the-scenes power Paul was very subtle about alluding to and could not publicly name or accuse. Paul seems a bit depressed in that interview, talking about retirement. It's like he knew more than he could say, which is, I think, in line with Getsmart's point of view. Some cabal could have been taking over control and Paul wanted an exit strategy so he was mentioning retirement.

I've been on this thread since the beginning of it and prior to that was on another huge thread on the PID topic. I've seen and discovered quite a lot about it. My mind still plays tricks on me (part of the social conditioning?) so there are times when I'm not decisive and I become agnostic rather than a true believer. I think that's probably normal considering that I had bought into the whole, entire, official story completely, up until I started reading faulconandsnowjob posts on another thread that began to convince me that Paul is really dead.

Where I am on this topic right now is that I am sticking with my support of the PID theory that Original Paul was murdered and replaced in late 1966. However, I feel like we are at a point where we need another new revelation of evidence. I'm in search (research) of any new piece of evidence that will implicate the powers that be and get us closer to the truth of the motivations.

Sir of today does not look like or behave like Original Paul. I've been looking at photos and films of John Lennon and I've been seeing that there are profound physical and behavioral differences in the early vs. late "John Lennon," so I would not be surprised to find out someday that Lennon was killed and replaced, as well. The others, George and Ringo, I'm not so sure, but I could imagine all four Beatles being murdered and replaced in order to start with a clean slate.

Having been a Beatle fan since 1964, all of this is terrifyingly grotesque and shocking. Is there an Illuminati? I suppose yes, there is. Would they be so bold as to kill and replace celebrities? Yes, I think so and would do everything in their power to cover-up the truth.

I have no doubt, after studying it for years, that JFK was murdered in broad daylight by a cabal of power behind-the-scenes. That same power covers up the truth still today and indefinitely. It makes sense to me that The Beatles could have been taken over, controlled, experimented with, murdered, and replaced by a similar cabal, likely tied in to the same ultimate power, presumably the Illuminati but certainly a sinister uber-power that can easily employ intelligence agencies of the UK and USA in their ever unfolding charade.

JFK was rebelling against orders from the uber-power, so they shot him. The last straw was JFK's turning his back on the Federal Reserve and trying to bring the nation's currency back into its rightful place as a truly U.S. government tender. After they forcibly removed JFK, the way was paved for the USA to be owned by the Federal Reserve (a covert company of foreign and domestic private interests).

So why were The Beatles a target? I think it was their shockingly powerful mass appeal. The powers that be wanted to control that power and use it for social conditioning experiments.

That's in a nutshell where I am on the topic these days. I want to find another piece of evidence and I'm willing to start dissecting the official story to note where it seems false and misleading. Working on it.



posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 05:08 AM
link   
reply to post by switching yard
 


There is a new book out, later this month, about Paul McCartney. It's written by Howard Sounes and appears to concentrate on his love life. The Daily Mail has published some extracts:

www.dailymail.co.uk...

I don't know if there might be some clues anywhere, but it might be helpful with dates and possibly rarely seen photographs.



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 10:44 AM
link   
Another excerpt from the book:

www.dailymail.co.uk...
I hope this isn't 'spamming' the first D. Mail article doesn't link to this new one.



new topics

top topics



 
22
<< 39  40  41    43  44  45 >>

log in

join