Tuesday, June 18, 2013

Disinfo that Theodor Adorno wrote Beatles' music abounds


I would like to thank Ab Irato of Radio Ab Irato for sending me the following link. 

Theodor W. Adorno was the brains behind the 'Beatles' as he held the rights to the music and eventually his estate sold those rights to Michael Jackson. Adorno a classical musician wrote their music and it was all filtered down through Paul who could not read a note of music by the way... Oh and as an aside, Paul ended up being Knighted, and you don't get Knighted unless you have done as you were told and made your masters proud...


The disinformation that philosopher Theodor Adorno of the Frankfurt School  wrote all the Beatles' music has been in circulation for years. This theory rests on the claims of one person - Dr. John Coleman, which he made in his book, The Committee of 300Dr. Coleman was a former British Secret Service agent (supposedly). With no intention of disparaging Dr. Coleman, intelligence officers have been known to spread disinfo if it suits the agenda. 

I have a number of problems with the above claim. For starters, is it logical to think that a dusty, old professor would be so hip and cool as to write hit songs for the hot new bands of the 60's, while at the same, publishing his own writings and teaching classes? And if the same person were writing all the Beatles songs, why did the musical quality decline (or at least change) after Paul McCartney died/was replaced? If "Teddy Boy" Adorno had been writing all the music, the quality should have remained consistent. "Obladi [oh bloody] Oblada" is no "Eleanor Rigby!" Mal Evans maintained that he helped Faul write songs for "Sgt. Pepper." If Adorno had been the mastermind, why would Faul need help from the roadie? 

The possibility that a ghostwriter wrote "Beatles" songs after the replacement(s) is likely. "Helter Skelter" was written and recorded by Charles Manson at Apple Records (B side was "Cease to Exist"). The song appears to have been stolen by Faul and put on the White Album. In some instances, it appears that the later Beatles/Featles' and solo songs were the Fab Fours' songs re-worked. For example, Faul's "Another Day" is just Another "Yesterday," famously penned by Paul McCartney. At any rate, just someone owns the rights to songs does not mean that s/he wrote the songs. This is obvious, as the song rights were sold to Michael Jackson. 

The fact that Paul could not read or write music is irrelevant. Many musicians do not know how to read music. It is not necessary to read or write music to compose melodies. It is possible to sit down with an instrument and find chord progressions or pick out melodies. Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart wrote entire compositions in his head. Paul knew chords and could write down tabs. The lack of formal training does not negate musical talent. Formal training may even stifle creative genius. At any rate, someone else could have transcribed the music for Lennon/McCartney songs upon publication. 

The claim that "Paul ended up being Knighted" is erroneous. James Paul McCartney was not knighted. Paul was replaced in 1966, which has been proven by forensic science. Sir Faul was the one knighted. In this author's opinion, Sir(pent) Faul is very much a team-player for the powers that be (Illuminati). 

Here are some thoughts by another author who has considered this issue:

Beatlemania, Mind Control and the New Objectivity by Zabode
http://www.hiddenmysteries.org/themagazine/vol12/articles/dr-boogie.shtml

... Then there's this whole matter of some Tavistockian by the name of Theo Adorno (actually a German professor of philosophy who wrote about music, though Dr. [John] C[oleman] never tells us that) having written all the Beatles' songs (both music and lyrics), which they then simply had to memorize like obedient little drones. This I'm not buying for two reasons. First, Dr. C. supplies exactly zero evidence to back up this contention (although it did come as something of a shock reading in the Interviews [p. 142] that not one of the Beatles could read or write music, though Margie has assured me this is not uncommon amongst musicians); second, the last almost-third of the Interviews involves David Sheff rattling off Beatles' tunes and Lennon firing back who originated them, who contributed and whatever background he could recall. Dr. Coleman's ranting aside, Lennon does a convincing job of accounting for scores of Beatles' songs, hits as well as more obscure tracks, and nowhere, trust me, does Theo Adorno come up. In fact, beyond Paul and "me" very few people get mentioned at all. Okay, one might counter, perhaps Lennon had been programmed (given screen memories) to account for every Beatles' song. It never once comes across that way in the Interviews -- and I was on the lookout, believe me! -- but who's to say... 
Co-opted they may have been; one thing, however, I want to stress: The talent, the wit, the joie de vivre that typified the Beatles and their music I believe were genuine. Dr. Coleman's notion of a sixty-year-old philosophy professor -- from Germany no less! -- writing "Strawberry Fields" and "Penny Lane," the stuff of John Lennon's childhood, is simply absurd. Then how is it I can still recommend Conspirators' Hierarchy? The research in this book on the world narcotics trade and on the existence of the groups advancing the Agenda of the "One World Order" (as Dr. C. prefers to call it) is thorough and credible. It's quite feasible in light of his biases that the good doctor was himself disinformed in regard to the Beatles. Such disinformation would serve to discredit his book in general and also to demoralize his readers by suggesting that the GSE are 100% behind all great creative endeavors, the implication being that we, the human herd, are unimaginative clods from whose ranks nothing exceptional springs lest it be nurtured by evil (after all, the Sumerian word for "human being" -- according to R.A. Boulay, author of Flying Serpents and Dragons: The Story of Man's Reptilian Past -- is LULU or "big sheep"). This, however, is unadulterated bullsh*t. Creative expression is a human trait, evident in everything we are. The Agenda must place limits on this creative potential, including our awareness of even having it, because this is our strength. The GSE have adroitly kept us pitted against each other till we've truly come to believe the lie that human nature is inherently destructive...

Why would someone spread disinformation about Paul's supposed lack of musical talent? In my opinion, such hit pieces are aimed at belittling the Beatles and making them seem unimportant. If people believe Paul was a fraud, then why would they be interested in researching his murder/replacement? The fact is that Paul was a gifted musician who wrote hit after hit, even under goofy names and for other bands such as Peter & Gordon. His songs even inspired other hit songs. For example, the Beatles' number one hit, "Paperback Writer," inspired the number one hit "Last Train to Clarksville" (recorded by the Monkees). It was the Beatles' inspired musical genius that got them to the toppermost of the poppermost.  Faul, on the other hand, did not achieve as much success - and not for lack of trying. He has been at it ever since 1967, and has never equaled Paul's success. As mentioned above, he needed his roadie to help him write songs. It should seem obvious that different people were writing Beatles' and solo songs. Therefore, they could not ALL have been written by Theodor Adorno. 

Tina Foster
Join the discussion: Paul is Dead: Miss Him forum

P.S. Today would have been James Paul McCartney's 71st birthday. 



     

     

   

Tuesday, April 16, 2013

Art Critics Reconsider 'Mccartney Is Dead' Myth


Art Critics Reconsider 'McCartney Is Dead' Myth

25 September 2005

New York's top art critics are refuelling the rock 'n' roll myth that Paul McCartney died over three decades ago - after taking a rare close-up view of his paintings.

Top Big Apple celebrity art expert BAIRD JONES staged a one-night exhibition of John Lennon and McCartney art from his own personal collection at New York club Deep earlier this month (15SEP05) and was left stunned by the reactions of his "austere" friends.

A fan of McCartney's art for years, Jones admits it took the opinions of his critical pals to make him realise that the 'Paul is dead' rumours that started in the late 1960s could be true.

He explains, "There were lots of questions about why he (McCartney) predominantly uses the colour red in ways one would not. It's the colour of blood and death.

"The critics were asking questions like, 'Why is there so much red in the garden (painting) and on the beach (painting)? It's macabre.' Call it art psychoanalysis, but the 'Paul is dead' rumour has started to spread.

"These were highbrow, austere people who take their art seriously. Some had never really had the chance to see McCartney's art up close."

Jones now claims there are major clues in McCartney's art that suggest the rocker might not be what he seems to be.

He explains, "It's one more sign that this man is communicating something. Red has been a dominant colour of his for some time.

"It might be evidence that the Paul McCartney we think we know is not Paul McCartney; he's an imposter - and here's a signal."

Originally posted by contactmusic.com

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

Tina Foster

Join the discussion: PID Miss Him forum

Monday, April 15, 2013

More PID clues in Beatles cartoons


"MKULTRA" sent me some more Paul is Dead clues he found in Beatles cartoons. Enjoy!


Tina Foster

Join the discussion: PID Miss Him forum


____________________________________________________


Cartoon Episode 1: "A Hard Day's Night"

On a gravestone is written "MAC" in the center and "PAUL" in tiny letters on the lower left.



Cartoon Episode 14: "No Reply"

Jewel thief: "Anyface"---The world's greatest master of disguise.  Suddenly there are two Pauls.  Both accuse the other of being "Anyface."  The Beatles play "No Reply" with both Pauls to find out which one is the real Paul.






     

     


   

Saturday, April 13, 2013

New (?) Paul is Dead Clue from John Lennon


I was asked to pass on the following article that speculates that a drawing by Lennon was hinting at Paul McCartney's demise.  The 1971 drawing depicts a person with what appears severe head injuries. 


Off topic: New (?) Paul is Dead Clue from John Lennon


Tina Foster

Join the discussion: PID Miss Him forum





     

     

   

Monday, April 1, 2013

Was Paul McCartney "Replaced" By a "Double" in 1966? - Andrew Johnson


The following PID article is being re-posted here with permission from Andrew Johnson of Check the Evidence and co-author of 911: Finding the Truth. The original article can be found here

Tina Foster
Join the discussion: PID Miss Him forum


Please support this blog - click on the ads. Thanks!

__________________________________________________________

Was Paul McCartney "Replaced" By a "Double" in 1966?PDFPrintE-mail
Andrew Johnson ( ad.johnson@ntlworld.com
21 Jan 2012 (Revised in days following to add details and correct typos etc)
Some years ago, I came across some evidence that Paul McCartney had been "replaced" by a "double" - some time in 1966. Paul was replaced by "Faul". This is, again, one of those stories which people can snort with laughter at, as it just seems unbelievable for so many reasons. A close member of my family who, like me, is a fan of the Beatles found it very difficult (impossible even) to entertain the notion that McCartney could have been replaced. Who can blame him - watching things like "Anthology" or any of the numerous Beatles-related documentaries and interviews makes is hard to believe that "Faul" could have the memories that were really Paul's.
Nevertheless, the physical evidence is quite compelling - as shown in this detailed analysis here http://digilander.libero.it/jamespaul/fc1.html. I have reproduced a small portion of this below.

With the Beatles 1963 + Yesterday and Today - 66

Sgt. Pepper + Spies Like Us
 

Watch the ears, nose and chin closely - the distance between the eyes has been equalized , and you have already seen that this comparison should be an almost perfectly clean crossfade. But instead, the nose changes in length and width, the chin changes dramatically from an almost perfectly symmetrical one with a cleft straight down the middle



But what does the evidence show? Is the above just "cherry picking"? What are the things that are "glossed over"? You won't know until you've looked, will you?

Interview with Tina Foster re "Faul and Paul"

Thanks to a link sent by a friend, I found out about a comprehensive blog detailing a number of areas of evidence which seem to show there is more to this than backmasking, reverse speech and rumour. You can find the blog at http://plasticmacca.blogspot.com/ . As I was troubled by this issue, I asked Tina if she would record a Podcast with me, which she kindly agreed to do on 21st Jan 2012. You can listen and download using the links below.
Tina contends that Paul was switched with Faul between about the 26th and 28th of August 1966. However, I wonder if it happened at the end or after their tour of America. It is hard to believe and hard to accept that they other band members, friends and so on would either not have known this or would have known and "gone along" with what transpired. We discuss some of these troubling issues in the interview.

"Do You Want to Know A Secret... Do You Promise Not to Tell..."

Added to the facial evidence, we have a catalogue of strange remarks made by John Lennon, Heather Mills and others close to McCartney.
Paul has himself made strange remarks about "another him", which could easily be interpreted innocently - referring, perhaps, to how much one's life changes over time. But do they have a deeper, more sinister meaning? On their own, they prove nothing, but knowing "operating procedures" of the Secret Apparatus which runs all major affairs on Planet Earth, we can see that this may be one of those scenarios in which they "give us clues" as to what they are doing behind the scenes.
We also have a number of untimely deaths - Brian Epstein and of course John Lennon and George Harrison. But other deaths are not that well known about - such as the death of Mal Evans, a "roadie" for the Beatles, .
I found Heather Mills remarks on GMTV on Nov 1 2007 to be very interesting - and whatever their meaning, she does an excellent job of illustrating the role of the media in "dealing with" any "nails that stick up" which need "bashing down".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVUDXZfdObw

If you're short on time, the key remarks are in part 2 at about 3 min 14s in. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Gl2iq3KTs8&t=3m14s

"Getting By With a Little Help From My Friends"

I have to be honest and say that one thing that really gave me the creeps was McCartney "buddying up" to Obama and taking a swipe at those who question the AGW Agenda - and those who question other "official truths".
The Beatles legend said:
"Sadly we need disasters like this to show people. Some people don't believe in climate warming — like those who don't believe there was a Holocaust."
He also said:
"It was such an honour. I'd heard of the prize — it's the biggest for popular music in the US. When the President gave it to me, I was so touched. I'm a huge Obama supporter. I really love him.


Prize - Paul [Faul] shows off Gershwin Gong

Penny Lane in the White House



McCartney Sings to Michelle Obama

If you can find a film called "The US Versus John Lennon" and the consider its content, and also that Lennon returned an MBE he was awarded in protest, you will perhaps share my feelings of concern at this sort of "hobnobbing" by McCartney - or Faul.
And just why was it so Newsworthy that McCartney visited Bethlehem in 2008? What can that have meant?
For me, if for no one else, it shows that whether he is Faul, or really is Paul, he has become successfully embedded in the program of lies and deceit - and his celebrity status has been used to further this agenda.
"Paul" McCartney's reaction to the news of John Lennon's Death