Saturday, September 19, 2009

Paul McCartney is dead: proof he was replaCIAed


"I'm looking through you, where did you go?

I thought I knew you, what did I know?
You don't look different, but you have changed
I'm looking through you, you're not the same."

~ The Beatles, "I'm Looking Through You"




As shocking as it may seem, the real Paul McCartney is dead. He was imposter-replaced in 1966 by a double. This "conspiracy theory," called PID (Paul is Dead) for short, involves some of the following tangential issues:

  • public figures (including doubles) used as puppets to manipulate the masses;
  • elimination of opposition to this elite by horizontalization (th e likely assassination of James Paul McCartney with impunity);
  • deception of the public by a cartel of media groups controlled by a governing Luciferian elite (Illuminati);
  • social control through Psychological Operations (PsyOps); and
  • Info War in cyberspace using disinformation, debunking and counter Intelligence techniques to discredit ideas and individuals who oppose their plans.
I recommend these resources for further research:

Paul is Dead Miss Him forum: http://pid.hoop.la/displayForum

Paul is Dead - Rotten Apple series of videos:

The "official" PID story has it that Paul was killed in a car crash on or about November 9, 1966 and was replaced by look-alike William Campbell. This rumor first began in England in 1967. However, it picked up steam in the Fall of 1969 when clues allegedly planted by the Beatles themselves began to be uncovered.

On September 17th, 1969 The Drake Times-Delphic published what is widely considered the first printed account of Beatle Paul McCartney’s supposed death. Days after Drake undergrad Tim Harper asked the question “Is Paul Dead?” on the TD’s front page, college papers across the country ran with the story and the theory of “Paul is Dead!” raced across America.
Bart Schmidt, "It was 40 Years Ago, Yesterday…," September 18, 2009.

On October 12, 1969, a Detroit disc jockey, Russ Gibb, received a call from a listener (“Tom”) insisting McCartney was dead and suggesting he play the Beatles' song ''Revolution Nine'' backwards. Gibb did, and heard “turn me on dead man, turn me on dead man.''

In an article in the August 2009 Italian issue of WIRED magazine, two forensic scientists conducted a biometrical analysis of Paul pre and post 1966. They set out to prove PID was a hoax, but they actually ended up proving Paul was replaced.

In 2009, two Italians, Francesco Gavazzeni (IT analyst) and Carlesi Gabriella (medico-legal), studied images of Paul McCartney taken before and after the alleged death, and claimed there is high probability that it is not the same person, based on analysis of the shape of the skull and jaw, the curve of the jaw, the ear, palate and teeth.[17].

17. ^ Wired Italia, "Chiedi chi era quel «Beatle»", July-August 2009
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_is_dead
The following are excerpts from the article. Please note that this is a machine translation of the original Italian.




Jaw line: “The mandibular curve between the two sets of photos showed a discrepancy of over 6 percent, well beyond the threshold of error. But there was more. Changed the development of the mandibular profile: before 1966 each side of the jaw is composed of two curves, since 1967 appears to be a single curve. There is therefore a curve morphological different.” [Andriola and Alessandra Di Fabio Gigante, “Ask Who Was the ‘Beatle,’” WIRED Magazine, July 15, 2009, http://tinyurl.com/mw83db]




Lips: "Compared to the previous picture, that of Sgt Pepper's show clearly that the commessura lip, that is the line formed by the lips of the two, it was suddenly stretched. Which obviously is not possible and that the whiskers cannot camouflage. In other words, the phenomenon is all too frequent these days, the lips can be inflated and increased in volume, but the width of the lip commessura cannot vary that much. Maybe slight, but this is not the case for the photos examined: here the difference between the before and after is too strong to have been caused by any surgery.” [Andriola and Alessandra Di Fabio Gigante, “Ask Who Was the ‘Beatle,’” WIRED Magazine, July 15, 2009, http://tinyurl.com/mw83db]




Nose: “[A]lways under the mustache of the McCartney Sgt Pepper's, maybe it was trying to hide something else: what the experts call it the nose-spinal or sottonasale [nasal spine: http://www.revisionrhinoplasty.com/anatomy.html]. This is the point between the two nostrils where the nose begins to fall off the face: ‘This is also in this case a distinctive feature that medicine cannot alter surgery. It can change the shape of the nose but not the nose-cord,’ says Gabriella Carlesi. ‘And McCartney from the first group of photos and the second point that clearly varies’” [Andriola and Alessandra Di Fabio Gigante, “Ask Who Was the ‘Beatle,’” WIRED Magazine, July 15, 2009, http://tinyurl.com/mw83db]



Ears: “Technically called trago [tragus: http://www.westone.com/content/234.html]. All we have two, one by ear, but the characteristics are different for every human being. ‘In Germany, a recognition procedure craniometric, identification of the right ear is even tantamount to fingerprint, ie the collection of fingerprints,’ recalls Carlesi. But what is trago? It is the small cartilage covered with skin that overhangs the entrance to the ear and ear canal, like the whole ear, cannot be changed surgically. How then to explain the differences between the right ear of Paul McCartney in a previous snapshot to 1966 and probably a built in the late nineties? It is not only to betray trago a different conformation as well as other parts, just above the ear canal entrance, measurements and dell'antelice propeller. Things that ordinary mortals might seem irrelevant or unclear, but instead, every day, allowing the experts to locate and identify persons, bodies, photographs.” [Andriola and Alessandra Di Fabio Gigante, “Ask Who Was the ‘Beatle,’” WIRED Magazine, July 15, 2009, http://tinyurl.com/mw83db]

[Please support this blog by clicking on the sponsors' ads - Thanks!]






This comp is from a Beatles book (left) & from an interview "Paul" did during a Wings tour circa 1976 (right).


Teeth & Palate: “There are impossible things and things that are possible but at the cost of operations long, painful and never perfect. Especially if done in the sixties. Now, careful examination of some pictures of McCartney before and after the 1966 autumn leaves, it must be said, in amazement: ‘First of all there is right upper canine,’ observes Carlesi Gabriella. ‘In the photos prior to 1966 is known as protruding relative to the line of teeth. It's the classic case of a tooth that lack of space it ends up misaligned, pushed out by the pressure of other teeth. It is curious that the same canines in the photos from 1967 forward, but without ever protruding apparent reason: the images show that the space would have to be aligned with the neighboring teeth. It's like if you wanted to recreate is a detail in a mouth where such an anomaly would have never been able to express.’ The real crux of the reasoning of dental identification suggested by Gabriella Carlesi covers the whole palate of McCartney that before 1966, appears close to the point of justifying various misalignments of the teeth, although in less obvious forms of upper right canine. After the publication of Sgt Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band, however, the palate of McCartney widens considerably, to the point that the front teeth do not rotate on the axis more as before. With the only on, than the usual canine. ‘A change of the shape of the palate, Carlesi concludes, 'in the Sixties was not impossible but would be very traumatic, the result of an actual intervention maxillo-facial. In practice McCartney should have been subjected to an operation that would involve the opening of the suture palate, broken bone and then a long prosthetic and orthodontic treatment. In other words, for a change so sensitive in the sixties to McCartney would be required not only a particularly painful and bloody, but also the use of a fixed orthodontic multiband then, for over a year. Which would not have been possible to hide and would be obvious repercussions on the performance of a vocal professional singer.’” [Andriola and Alessandra Di Fabio Gigante, “Ask Who Was the ‘Beatle,’” WIRED Magazine, July 15, 2009, http://tinyurl.com/mw83db]


The following comp is upside down to break the viewer's normal conditioning. The nose on the right is markedly longer than Paul's nose on the left. The images are screen captures from the Aug 19, 1966 Memphis interview (left) and an interview in Dec. 1966 in front of EMI studios. Both are supposedly Paul.


For more background information, please check out these radio interviews
Ghostly Talk Radio: http://www.ghostlyta...baralamb32k.mp3 (starts about 1/3 of the way in)

Freeman Perspective:


Paul is Dead Podcast with Andrew Johnson from Check the Evidence (01/21/2012)


Paul McCartney is really dead

This is confirmed by an investigation of "Wired"
It 'one of the best known legends of rock: Paul McCartney died in 1966 and what we know today is merely a double that has changed. A legend who just now seemed to have been dismantled and forgotten. But now two scientists have conducted an investigation for "Wired": The objective was to demonstrate that everything was false but the results were rather surprising ...

The object of the dispute is the "PID", or the legend "Paul Is Dead". Dedicarcisi A were two experts, the computer Francesco Gavazzeni legal and medical Carlesi Gabriella. The objective was to demonstrate that all these entries were false and unfounded, urban legends, in fact, throw a meal in the media and fans. The studies conducted by two experts however have led to quite unexpected results.

The story in brief: Paul McCartney, the original is in fact died in a car accident in 1966, a crash occurred on board of his Austin Martin after a quarrel with other members of the band. From that time to replace him there would be a double. Would have been the Beatles themselves to disseminate texts confirm this in the coming years more or less messages subliminal by allusive covers such as "Abbey Road", a message engraved on a disk on the contrary.

Gavazzeni Carlesi and were based on anthropometric and craniometrica, comparing, through images of repertoire, shape of the skull, teeth, etc.. in the before and after 1966. And, since these tests, however, we can express only in terms of compatibility and non-certainty, the results still give a negative result: that is, the person known as Paul McCartney before 1966 would not be the same that we see in the photos taken after that date. Case reopened?


Machine translation of:

Paul McCartney è morto davvero
http://www.tgcom.mediaset.it/spettacolo/articoli/articolo455762.shtml




Update: it is exciting that some people are starting to wake up to the imposter-replaCIAment agenda.



feed://www.howstuffworks.com/podcasts/stuff-they-dont-want-you-to-know.rssDoes the CIA use body doubles?
Conspiracy
Jan 1, 4:07 PM
Over the past decades, the CIA has been accused of everything from selling guns to assassinating people. Yet that's not the craziest part: Some people believe the CIA is actually replacing its enemies. Tune in and learn more in this episode.


Podcast at
http://podcasts.howstuffworks.com/hsw/po....ody-doubles.m4v

___________________

Tina Foster

ALIEN INVASION:
Reptilians, Cetaceans and Frequency Wars on Planet Earth


     



     


     

111 comments:

  1. What a herculean effort you have undertaken. You are doing an exemplary job. I will be making a contribution to this blog very soon.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well if you all want to learn more check out this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8W9_qN64S4s

      Delete
  2. fantastic work Tina.
    heard you on freeman.

    ReplyDelete
  3. You made some persuasive arguments. I'm wondering how you got onto Faul and not Billy Campbell?

    ReplyDelete
  4. The photo above, captioned "from the interview Paul did when John Lennon was killed in Dec. 1980", is incorrect. The photo is circa 1976, during the time of the Wings world tour. By 1980, the Macca mullet was shorn and Linda was not present when Paul was interviewed, following John's death. While photo documentation exists of that occasion, this is not it. Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Thank you for that correction, Kary.
    Xnihilator, Faul was the name that Johnny gave to the replacement. That name is used by many in the PID circle, because we are not sure if William Campbell was just a pseudonym.

    ReplyDelete
  6. i believe the comparisons of mccartneys muscial skills are more telling.

    listen to the album revolver and then listen to the later albums,

    or more easily listen to the song here, there and everywhere off the album and then listen to it being played by faul on you tube, its horrible.

    ive also seen analysis of his bass play, faul apparently was a better bass player, but also they had to record it on a separate track as he was a little slow and couldnt just play it live with the others.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Oh, I totally don't agree that Faul was a better bass player. I love Paul's bass lines - especially in Day Tripper, Paperback Writer, Rain, etc. But that sort of thing is just personal taste :-)

    ReplyDelete
  8. Also, if it's true that "they had to record it on a separate track as he was a little slow and couldnt just play it live with the others," then Faul was definitely not a better bass player.

    ReplyDelete
  9. yeah it is hard to beleive faul is paul, what happened to the good music?
    daytripper is immense. all the pre 67 music is.
    when i was a kid my babysu
    itter would play the red album with all the older stuff never the faul stuff.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I love your blog Tina. it's tip top, great research. Now, I remember seeing this video with Heather Mills, now Faul's ex wife and in this one clip she talks about the "great conspiracy." Do you think she found out?

    Also Faul's post Beatles stuff sucked, however, Bank on the Run was a great fake....although the one album that makes you think it's Paul is Chaos and Creation in the back yard.....is another one....the rest? Well, I can't say.

    Again, great job. Read this blog all the time.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I grew up with the music of the Beatles, it gave me joy in times of sorrow. I've always had this doubt in my mind, IF the present Paul McCartney was indeed, the real, original Paul McCartney, because of the clues given on records and lyrics. I came across this video in YOU Tube , everything fits like a glove, George even mentions over 100 new clues . I can't insert the link, but is under the title of " George Harrison's last testament "
      One big doubt about this video, is that I tried contacting the producers of it thru the e-mail addresses given, they simply don't exist. But I do have the following questions to the makers of this video



      Did the wives of The Beatles knew of this ?
      Did brian Epstein knew of this?
      Was that the reason he commited suicide?
      Did Mal Evans and Derek taylor knew of this?
      Then Paul didn't dreamed " Yesterday" as the present Paul has stated so many times?
      How can Mark Chapman be linked to MI5?
      Was that the reason he was able to get his gun thru 3 airports? Hawaii, Califoria and New york ?
      Is Ringo's life in danger?
      "Abbey road" was the last record they recorded, not "Let It Be".
      You be the judge. Thanks.

      Delete
  11. Hi, Mitchell,

    I noticed you spelled your name MItchell. Clever, if you were alluding to MI-5 or 6.

    As far as Heather Mills goes, it certainly does seem like she may have found out. It must have been terribly upsetting.

    "Band on the Run" had the bizarre story of the tapes being stolen by bandits in Lagos, Nigeria. Just one of many rather bizarre stories...

    Tina

    ReplyDelete
  12. para mi q Paul Mccartney está vivo pues el Paul d 1964 tenia la barba partida y el Paul d 1967 también; es casi imposible q William se pareciera hasta en eso a Paul.
    Paul con barba partida (1967)
    http://i27.tinypic.com/2zxphdl.jpg
    http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a386/B…

    Paul con barba partida (1963)
    http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_jgTnP3hsSv4/Sr…
    http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/09/0…

    y aqui unas fotos de Paul con barba normal (1964)
    http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v156/i…
    (1966)
    http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LXqBXJEfW0A/SR…


    Además por q William querría ser descubierto, al dar publicaciones y pistas d q es un impostor d Paul? El q de vrdd murió el 18 d diciembre de 1966 fue Tara Browne; amigo de Paul y de los Beatles ademas apoco la familia d Paul no se iba a dar cuenta d q Paul era distinto; su padre no dejaría q un intruso remplazara a Paul además Jane no ha dicho nada no ha hecho ninguna declaración sobre el tema; y al fin y al cabo la única q podría saber si Paul murió o no sería ella y no Heather; además si esto hubiese sido cierto los reporteros hubieran publicado todo y no se hubieran perdido de una fuerte suma de dinero y como se iba a saber cuál era el nombre del sustituto de Paul; y además Paul tenía una afición por la palabra yea escuchen la mayoría de sus canciones con los Beatles y con su banda Paul McCartney & Wings casi siempre en las canciones decía la palabra yea y tanto John como George y Ringo hubiesen ido a la cárcel si en vrdd ellos ocultaron la muerte d Paul ¿y apoco ellos solitos se echarían de cabeza?; y creo q Paul era judío como William iba a entrar en las organizaciones d judíos sin siquiera saber d q se trata? Paul canta igual y habla igual además como Paul iba a hablar en las antologías 1, 2,3,4 y 5 sin saber q paso en 1963-64-65 y 66. Lo q si es q su hijo James no se parece mucho a Paul por q James no es nada guapo, y q me dicen de las hijas de Paul ellas si q no se parecen nada a Paul.
    para mi q Paul esta mas q vivo!!!!!!!! te amo Paul McCartney!!!hermoso

    ReplyDelete
  13. There's a woman in Germany who was Paul's girlfriend before 1966 who has always claimed she had become pregnant with Paul's child & he knew about it. Paul was worried about his reputation and asked her to have an abortion because he knew the child was his. This woman had contact with Paul, but all of a sudden he cut it off post November 1966. Recently, she obtained a court order for a DNA test to prove once and for all her daughter is Paul's biological child, and this woman knows she didn't sleep with other men, only Paul McCartney. Faul agreed immediately to the test, he didn't hesitate for one second. The DNA test was done, and to this woman's horror it said "no DNA match". As a result, she is on a crusade to prove that this Paul is Faul. One must remember that in those days things were different woman didn't sleep around, it was considered bad enough if you slept with one person. Apparently, this woman has a lock of hair Paul gave her before 1966, she wants to have it DNA tested and compared to Faul's DNA but guess what; she's having a hard time finding someone to do it. They have Faul's DNA profile but asked him to provide a hair sample just to see his reaction. Faul had a fit and won't do it.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I don't understand it. This should have been ALL over the news and entertainment news like TMZ etc. How did anyone miss this? Unless our favorite imposter purposefully took control and shut down any debate.

    What's your take on that, PM?

    ReplyDelete
  15. PID was all over the news in the Fall of 1969 in Europe & USA. The Controllers managed to suppress people's waking up to JPM's replacement through their control of the media. When our favorite impostor told LIFE magazine that he was still alive (not that he was JPM), then most people were satisfied. It seems people had more blind faith in the media back then.

    ReplyDelete
  16. ever read the lyrics to "how do you sleep" by john lennon?

    ReplyDelete
  17. ^ Yes, that song definitely seems to suggest Faul is an impostor.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Sorry to take up space only to give a compliment, but ... fabulous. :)

    ReplyDelete
  19. paul.. I really love you
    I LOVE PAUL NOT FAUL
    I love him in 60's not i'n 67- until now

    ReplyDelete
  20. I recently watched a documentry about "George Harrison's Last Testement" which provided information about the clues the Beatles left behind in their music as well as record covers post Nov.1966 ... I find it interesting that Paul was left handed and today's "FAUL" is right handed. I think the picture comparisons are great and something that was not mentioned in the documentary.

    ReplyDelete
  21. I like the effort that went into this article. Can you answer one question though? Why would the CIA replace dead Paul McCartney with an impostor?

    ReplyDelete
  22. ^ Please see "Agents for Change: Beatles LSD & Social-Engineering" at http://plasticmacca.blogspot.com/2010/02/agents-for-change-beatles-lsd-social.html

    ReplyDelete
  23. in reply to anonymous 2/3/11 6:26am - wait just a second... as a life long Beatles fan and quazi-believer in the PID theory... the "Last Testament of George Harrison" movie is complete BS, especially the pictures. Look at the movie at 55 min: 50-55ish seconds and see the picture they show from 'MMT'... now do ANY search for that same pic from a different source and compare...

    BS.

    There are other "mistakes" in the movie, like the order of recordings - 'Let It Be' was not last. This recording was sent to that "unknown" studio vs. BBC or CNN?

    I still believe there is much more to this than The Beatles trying to play a joke on the world, but to use that "film" as evidence is disproving your point.

    ReplyDelete
  24. ^ Many PID Truthers think "Last Testament of George Harrison" is just disinfo to discredit PID. It makes outrageous claims & focuses on goofy theories rather than sound forensic evidence that proves Paul was replaced.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Wow, thank-you so much for posting this! I'm giving a persuasive speech tomorrow morning on this, and this is a super good source! Thank you SO much!!

    ReplyDelete
  26. I was reading about the Illuminati and came to this article. I always wondered if it were true about Paul and now I know. There was something about that 'Faul' that never rang true. Now I know the truth. Thanks for posting! Great work.

    ReplyDelete
  27. I also watched "Last Testament of George Harrison" last night, and I have to say, it didn't convince me very much. The photo's maybe and the album covers yes, but some of it had misinformation, such as Let It Be being the last song. I admit I'm not a huge Beatles fan, I'm just beginning to listen to them and I don't know much information about them, but this article did it! I studied Biology and I now have a B.S. in Biology and all these examinations of photographs makes complete sense. Especially the photo of Fauls ear and Pauls ear, the bottom of the ear is completely different, and Fauls nose is not Pauls nose. I also remember watching an interview of Faul last year on a morning news channel where he was asked if he would sing old Beatles' hits and he said no he didn't want to ruin the songs themselves. BS! I now believe that he doesn't want to sing them, because it would show everyone that his voice is not Paul! Thank you for this article, well done!

    ReplyDelete
  28. To Anonymous April 1, 2011,

    Paul/Faul has sung Beatles songs in live concerts many, many times. I don't doubt his talent, even if he's not the real Paul.

    I just watched George Harrison's last testament last night. I thought it was pretty ridiculous. If Paul were lying dead on the ground mangled and decapitated, do you really think an MI-5 agent named Maxwell would say that he looks like a walrus? After watching that, I was convinced that PID is a hoax. After seeing this site, I'm starting to think otherwise.

    ReplyDelete
  29. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  30. ^ The "Last Testament" is based on the 60IF PID document, which has many problems with it. The "Last Testament" was identified early on as a disinfo hit-piece put out there to 1) cash in on the renewed interest in PID & 2) discredit PID w/ ridiculous claims. It is obviously not George's voice & does not concentrate on the documented physical differences between Paul & Faul. It just makes asinine assertions not based in any fact, which of course, turns people off of PID. Unfortunately, it is not an ineffective tactic.

    Thanks for reminding me that I need to make a post dedicated to The "Last Testament of George Harrison."

    ReplyDelete
  31. I saw "The Last Testament of Geroge Harrison". At first I thought it was a real attempt at a documentary as Harrison's bad Liverpudlian accent and American pronunciation of English words. When it was pointed out at the end that Rita and Heather Mills were the same person (despite the fact that Heather had yet to be born) I realised that the whole film was a spoof. Sucker bait. It was an entirely fake effort otherwise why leave in glaring errors and close with a real peach or a mistake? Quoting this film will only hurt your cause - it's on the side of non PIDS!

    ReplyDelete
  32. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  33. ^ "The Last Testament" was identified early on as a disinfo hit-piece. It's based largely on the 60IF document, which was supposedly dictated by George, but it's full of holes.

    Thanks for your input, though :)

    ReplyDelete
  34. Paul Mccartney is dead. A real beatle fan knows.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Thanks for your due diligence in this matter. As citizens of a government we may not want to know the truth about certain events or things for knowledge of the truth and actuality may be more disturbing than we can rationally deal with. Of course there is official decisions and actions taken that are declared secret, with fear of be taken out and other wise classified under "Need to know." Then there is the spin, the disinformation, the so called unbiased reviews of evidence - an agency and internet trolls and co-conspirators descrediting any evidence in the public domain. The very phrases "Conspiracy Theory" and "Urban Legend" or "Urban Myth" to you and I may simply mean as of yet unproven, while to others it is assumed to be a fable, a hoax, a wild imagination, a sensational story, entertaining , yet not true. Assasinations and cover-ups have been etched into our collective conscious, and others want to live blissfully spouting "nothing awry." So if nothing is awry, get out of us truth hunters way. That's what I say... Q: Is it possible to view a copy of G.H.'s Last Will and Testament. I suspect if those audio tapes have any authenticity to them and they were mailed from London, that they were mailed from George's Barrister / Executor of his estate. If the joke is on me and Sir Paul is the real deal, than so be it, and peace out. Faul would never go public if there was a pact made under severe penalty, and also there would likely be many multimillion dollar lawsuits filed against him.

    ReplyDelete
  36. This Paul is Dead movie looks promising!
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_jQu5oBl4U

    ReplyDelete
  37. ^ Thanks for posting that. In my opinion, the movie is going to perpetrate the disinformation that Paul died in an accident. I find the accident scenario highly unlikely. However, it will, at least, gain attention for PID.

    ReplyDelete
  38. I saw "Paul" and band in the early 2000's.

    The man performed two sets for about two hours total.


    He hit every note and phrase perfectly.

    (With a few very slightly off intonations).

    No matter who the impersonator, this seems most unlikely of an off the street substitute.

    Enter "The Alien Conspiracy" (veraciity TBD).

    Oh, now it makes sense.

    ReplyDelete
  39. The teeth? He chipped his tooth in an accident. you can see the damage in The Beatles' Rain music video. Since then he got it fixed. The other stuff.. I dunno. But this all seemed ridiculous at first, but now I have my doubts

    ReplyDelete
  40. Yes, we know Paul chipped his tooth in a moped accident in Dec. 1965. That is not what the forensic scientists are talking about, though. They are saying the tooth was twisted, then it wasn't later. Paul would have had to have had major reconstruction on his teeth & mouth to account for the changes the forensic scientists noticed. That didn't happen, obviously, so it's proof Paul was replaced by a lame impostor. (Sorry, hope you're not a Faul fan - lol)

    ReplyDelete
  41. If he is a imposter, he is one talented, and gifted man.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Hey Tina,

    I've recently heard about a phenomenon called "change blindness" which might explain others inability to see the switch right away, besides media manipulation.

    In visual perception, change blindness is a normal phenomenon of the brain which show in light that the brain does not have a precise representation of the world but a lacunar one, made of partial details. Despite the name, this phenomenon does not affect the eyes but the brain, and as such is bound to happen to all the human senses...Another issue is that the brain cannot see a change happening to an element that it has not yet stored.

    A spectacular showcase can be seen in Derren Brown's "Person Swap" sketch, which can be found on youtube.

    ReplyDelete
  43. ^ There is a famous quote by Henry L. Bergson that goes something like the eye can only see what the mind is prepared to comprehend. Plus, people have been trained to see Faul as Paul. There is a lot of Pavlovian conditioning to over-come to get people to see what is *really* there, namely a very poor double.

    I'm familiar w/ that Derren Brown episode. He even mentions a "famous pop-star." Wonder who he was thinking of. LOL Yeah, I'm pretty sure he isn't fooled by Faul...

    ReplyDelete
  44. Obviously the bad reviews of the the Paul Really is dead movie are further evidence that MI5 continues the coverup in the digital age. Oh wait- they are MI6 now. Ironic!

    ReplyDelete
  45. My only question is...just what will it take to finally get the truth out that this man who calls himself Paul McCartney is not the same man as the Paul we all knew in 1964 ?

    ReplyDelete
  46. I was watching an interview of Faul on the David Letterman show . Has this interview ever been looked at by a body language expert ? I'm retired in Law Enforcement , and I learned that excessive blinking is a sign of extreme stress , which may indicate lying.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It is so true, Anonymous. I just wrote that on a comment a few minutes ago. Blinking and putting the hand to the face. People in law enforcement, FBI, psychologists are all trained to look for this in people being deceitful. You notice when he says that it was hot on the day of the Abby Road shoot, he was telling the truth. Faul is a cautious man. BUt he does slip up from time to time, and Faul does touch his face when talking of the old Beatles.

      Delete
  47. HI Tina,
    do we know where and when Paul died?
    do you agree that he was murdered in France and died before Nov/9?
    http://digilander.libero.it/p_truth/index.html
    thanks

    ReplyDelete
  48. My research indicates Paul was replaced August 26-27, 1966 in either Seattle or LA.

    http://plasticmacca.blogspot.com/2009/12/was-paul-mccartney-replaced-in-august.html

    ReplyDelete
  49. the last live concert was in S Fran end of Aug, how did they have time to replace him that quick ?
    how did he die and where?

    ReplyDelete
  50. ^ My research is that Faul stepped in on Aug. 28, 1966 (LA), so it was Faul playing at Candlestick. Probably why the concert - the last Beatles concert ever - has not been hyped. By most accounts, it was a catastrophe. At the LA press conference, well-known Illuminati-musiCIAn, David Crosby, was hovering around in the background. Also, the Beatles took a couple of days off in Hollywood Aug. 26-27 where no one saw neither hide nor hair of them. If you are familiar w/ Dave McGowan's work, you will know that being a celebrity is more dangerous than being a cop or firefighter - especially in Hollywood. All the pieces fit for an Aug. 26-27, 1966 Paul replacement... oh, one other thing. Pics from the Aug. 25 Seattle concert were recycled & pawned off as being from Candlestick.

    ReplyDelete
  51. I did a lot search but can't find the name of Faul?
    if it was Bill Campbell from Ontario, even if he looks a like,he must be good musician?
    how about Phil Ackrill ? he's a musician from the diplomats band and his friend was Denny Lane amazingly he later teamed up with him to play with Wings!

    http://digilander.libero.it/p_truth/index.html

    ReplyDelete
  52. No one really knows what Faul's real name is. He has been called Billy Shears, which some of us think is an allusion to William Shakespeare, which was the alias of Sir Francis Bacon.

    I don't really buy the Phil Akrill story. I doubt anyone famous became Faul. I suspect he was recruited by some intell agency to become Paul. Actually, I think he might have been discovered via the 1965 Paul McCartney look-alike contest. Here is something about the Faul guy:

    http://plasticmacca.blogspot.com/2009/11/is-faul-linked-to-intelligence.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I thought it was William Campbell?

      Delete
  53. supposedly someone won the look alike contest, he must be musician no?

    ReplyDelete
  54. Yeah, Keith Allison won the lookalike contest.

    ReplyDelete
  55. Keith Allison, born 8-26-42 in Coleman Texas. I think he was a member of Paul Revere and the Raiders from 68-75. He also toured as a lead guitarist with Tommy Boyce and Bobby Hart, and Mickey Dolenz and Davy Jones in 1976. He was surely a musician, but what is his part in this?

    ReplyDelete
  56. ^ I don't think Keith Allison had any part in it. I think the Paul McCartney lookalike contest might have been a ruse to find a double for Paul. If Faul had been recruited this way, then I bet he never even was entered as a contestant, but quickly whisked off to begin his training, having never appeared on the radar. Then the "contest" is carried out as a legit endeavor w/ a real winner, etc.

    ReplyDelete
  57. you said earlier the winner of look alike contest replaced him

    ReplyDelete
  58. ^ I never said that. I said "I think he might have been discovered via the 1965 Paul McCartney look-alike contest." I highly doubt the winner would have been the replacement. Too high profile.

    ReplyDelete
  59. so who replaced him? since you didn't believe in Phil Ackrill either?

    ReplyDelete
  60. I have no idea who replaced Paul. Whoever it is was was probably a no-no name nobody who "died" right around the time he became Paul. Just a hunch...

    ReplyDelete
  61. Who ever it was who replaced him well financed , and organized, which might explain why he is still pretending to be Paul even today. Sooner or later somebody is going to ..."slip up" and that will open a can of worms , if you know what I mean. I wouldn't be surprised if individuals, and or family's have been threatened with death.

    ReplyDelete
  62. please tell me! is real Paul McCartney dead?? really really???
    just YES or NO!

    ReplyDelete
  63. YES. It is my information and belief that the real Paul died at the end of August 1966.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. NOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

      Delete
  64. Ohhh....Now i feel like i dont want listen this music..oh my god...this is crazy... the most crazy thing i ever heard...i love Paul McCartney...real Paul i had some feelings that he changed..that he is strange...but...THIS??!!

    ReplyDelete
  65. You don't want to listen to Paul's music? I can't stand listening to Faul, but I love Paul's music. He was a genius, IMO :)

    ReplyDelete
  66. I like music by Beatles...by Paul I like songs like "Sing the Changes" or "Here Today" because these songs makes me want to cry and so I fall in love with "new Paul"...and now i feel like "Heey girl..what the hell you like ???" because i don´t know what is true...

    ReplyDelete
  67. There must be someone out there who has interviewed both Paul,and Faul, I mean come on now! The difference in the two has to be obvious! I never met the man, but red flags popped up for me in 1968, when I noticed the voice, appearance,and style of music suddenly and drastically changed big time. I've been studying this since then, and there is absolutely no way that this man ( Faul ) is the same Paul we all loved back in 1964. This website has done it's homework , and I will continue to support them. Good job Tina!!!!!!!!!! Jackhammer9132 aka Frank

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. David Frost is the man you need. He had an interview with Paul in 1964 and in 2012!
      He even let Paul remember the conversation they had back then.

      Delete
  68. I love Paul.......... and Faul is a wierd name

    ReplyDelete
  69. I met John and Faul before the media hit with the PID controversy, and I sensed then, in 1968 that there was something strange. His skin looked waxy, his shaping was angular, voice higher than normal.......and there was no connection between him and John. I grew up in the Beatle era and now 60. But trust me, the man posing as Paul all these years is someone else. I was two feet away from him for about 15 minutes....that was enough!

    ReplyDelete
  70. Whoever "Faul" is,he's a talented musician too.

    ReplyDelete
  71. I wish i could get seriously involved in this PID campaign because I`m 100% sure that this is not the real Paul McCartney and I will tell you how I came to this conclusion:

    first of all, I was never a Beatles fan (my shame) because I never bumped into them during my childhood. My parents lived during the comunist era and in our country there was not that much music to listen to those days and even if the listened to one or two Beatles songs, it never stuck to them so no one passed it on to mes.

    The awkward thing is that some time ago I became curious about the Beatles because i knew a few songs and a few lyrics but i didn`t know how they even looked like.

    to make a long story short and i am giving you my oath that i am not telling lies, when seeing a photo of Paul nowdays my first reaction was " My God, this guy had a lot of plastic surgeries when he was young...he looks disfigured"

    I repeat, I had no idea the PID theory even existed.

    After a while I started noticing the big diferences between the two "Pauls" and realised that even if time has aged them, all of the Beatles had the same artistic gaze...except Paul. I asked my mother if over the years Paul became more cocky then the other group members, but, as i previously stated, she had no idea beceause she never payed much atention to them as a teenager.

    A bit later i noticed that his body language had slightly changed. If you look closely you will see that it just resembles the real Paul`s body language...like it was copied!

    After a short while a came across the PID theory and it seemed farfetched but i started to research it and the evidence is astounding.
    I couldn`t believe it when i found out about the plastic surgery. Suddenly the image became clear.


    All the proof I needed I got from George Harrison`s various interviews in wich there is a very big difference when he speaks about his former school mate, the Paul that convinced John Lennon to let him into the band and the Paul that came later. Also he states in an interview that Paul was lefthanded, then lets us understand that Paul started to play with his wright hand and finnaly states "I`m still right handed, unlike others.."
    Also, George calles him "Faul" a number of times in interviews...

    This is the documentary when George says this so you can see by yourselfes:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_wiKO2QaO8


    Ringo gave me a clue before i became aware of PID too. I read they where both attending some kind of official meeting and at the end of it there was an invitation for one of the beatles to go somwhere (i`m sorry i forgot where i read it but i will look it up) and Paul said "I will goo because I am the last remaining beatle".
    Ringo was there too and calmly said "Actually, I am the last remaining beatle".

    The PID theory, if proven right, it would explain everything: John divorcing and fleeing England not like a jerl but in order to protect his family....his relation with May Pang...his return to Yoko... George`s attack....John`s murder. The band breaking up when they could have lasted as long as the Rolling Stones.Their three year public dissapearance.....

    I didn`t mention the Beatles` hidden messages because I know they sustain themselves upon hearing. It is all more than clear.

    And I understand why this theory hasn`t created the same h

    This is just brief and frantically written material but I am sure that i can help a lot more in this situation

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "I couldn`t believe it when i found out about the plastic surgery. Suddenly the image became clear."

      Sandra, I also thought this. Given that the two remaining Beatles (Ringo & Faul/Paul) are rich men and can afford the best of health care, lifestyle & food etc, Faul has aged very badly. I even noticed this before I heard about the PID theory. He has always reminded me of those people who over-indulges in plastic surgery. There was always something fake about his appearance when older. Also I would not be surprised to find that Faul was older than the real Paul.

      Delete
  72. I was just about to mention the "last will of george harrison" Although it does seem like complete rubbish, it does show a few interviews with george calling him "Faul". I can remember seeing an interview in history class of George Harrison that my teacher showed us, in it he kept saying "Faul" I asked my teacher about it, and he said, sort of half jokingly, "Because Paul is dead" at the time i thought it was a joke, but he's a smart man, and a huge beatles fan, now i'm not so sure.

    ReplyDelete
  73. btw: Here is a link to a take to 'Here, There and Everywhere' with just the basic elements, and to which the vocals can be discerned very clearly:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iELGhAGwBdc&feature=related

    ReplyDelete
  74. I was a huge Beatle fan and loved Paul. I had heard a little about the PID conspiracy when Sargent Pepper came out and l liked the album However, I fell out of love with Paul because he was no longer cute. He just looked different to me and I didn't know why. Also, I thought, post Beatles, his music sucked. It was just awful. Something was just "off" about him.

    ReplyDelete
  75. Just for the curiousity of those interested: there's a movie that came out in 1966 called 'Seconds' (John Frankenheimer) in which a person is completely made-over into a new identity. For the technology of the 60's it was fairly possible without too many scars. Today, it's a whole new ball game.

    ReplyDelete
  76. i just dont understand how the beatles would benefit from a conspiracy like this if bands like the who and the rolling stones were equally as succesful after the death of one of their bandmates, i mean they could've pushed their reform agenda further with or without paul

    ReplyDelete
  77. What I never understood was how Paul could have got involved in something like this -

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/We_All_Stand_Together

    Now i know it was Faul all along...

    ReplyDelete
  78. I still have not learned how Paul died. I read here that it was not a car accident that caused this whole mess. What killed our beloved Paul? And where is he buried? It must be eating away at poor Ringo, the last remaining Beatle, that he is the only one left that knows the truth. I hope he tells it before he leaves this world and sticks it to Faul.

    ReplyDelete
  79. The official story is that he died in a car accident. This is possible as he had not a few traffic incidents that may or may not have been accidental. However, if there was intent to get rid of him, they could easily have taken him to the back of a plane in mid-flight during one of their tours, and dealt with then disposed of via the baggage door. Back then, security wasn't so tight and aircraft were even less so, and it would have taken less time as planes were a lot smaller back the. This would explain why there has never been a body to perform forensics on. This would be the perfect crime.

    ReplyDelete
  80. So there is a biological daughter of Paul McCartney? If so she is the heir to Paul's royalties, and it would be wonderful to have Paul,s blood kin here. I would love stella McCartney kicked out on the street

    ReplyDelete
  81. There are more clues... I have one which can be proven, though you can call it anecdotical evidence only, at best. I was in Mexico City when Ringo Starr visited for a party at the local Capitol Records (now defunct, at least there), as he was promoting a new album where he sang a mariachi song (Mexican folk music), which was of course recorded with Mexican musicians, though I think it was recorded in the USA (Las Brisas is the name of the song) ~ A local journalist asked him if the four Beatles would ever play live again (as it was known that there had been several Beatle contributions in many of Ringo's solo albums). Ringo had been in a good mood, joking around and smiling; he was more than a bit drunk on tequila by then, and suddenly his mood changed, his smile vanished, and he said, "If it was (sic) possible, maybe... but it will never happen!"- He was asked why. Next moment, blank stare, and then there were tears in his eyes, and a look of deep anguish in his face. My companion said, oh poor Ringo! He is the soft one, so it hurts him very much, all the rancours between them. Now I think it was much more than that, but at the time I had no clue, so I agreed with her. Then, someone said, "no more questions!", and Ringo was whisked away... while he was crying out loud like a baby! Journalists were ordered to not take pictures, threatened with being sued later if they did dare. I think what triggered his reaction was the Mexican journalist specifying a reunion of the "four" Beatles, in his question. A recant of this brief exchange actually appeared in local newspaper El Universal, and a few others, where the journalists complained that neither the rock star nor the record executives were very cooperative with the press. But the journalists all said that Ringo was just drunk and sentimental about his bandmates.

    Key-Pan-Eye

    ReplyDelete
  82. I'm very interested in this whole 'Paul Is Dead' issue although I have never been a huge Beatles fan up until now. Anyways I'm only half convinced. I need to research this more before I'm on board. But what truly drew me in was the face.I never bothered to actually see the real Paul's photos before, i.e. from the early 60s. I only watched some of Faul's current appearances on TV (the Insider, ET and whatnot) and some of his photos from the 70s. I frankly found him to be quite ugly and I didn't understand what the hoopla was about. People used to say that he was the cutest and hottest 'Beatle' but I didn't buy it. Not until now anyway.

    So after finding about this PID theory I googled Paul's photos up to 1966 and whaydya know the man was simply beautiful. His full lips,puppy eyes, hair, nose and chin were gorgeous. I thought, hey wait a minute, this is a different man. Note that I haven't been trained to see Faul as Paul mainly due to a lack of interest from my part. Therefore it was very easy for me to spot the difference. The pre- Sgt Pepper's Paul had a kind of innocence to him which was now lost. It could be due to a combination of drugs, age, stress or unhappiness. But the question is: Could all these factors cause a drastic change in just one year?

    By the way I showed my mom several photos of Paul and Faul (she isn't a fan and couldn't care any less). She said that they were different people. And she could easily distinguish between them 100% of the time. So this 'PID' theory could be something after-all. But I still have my doubts.

    Fatema

    ReplyDelete
  83. My own experience was quite the opposite, as an early Beatlemaniac, I was amazed to see the replacement occured without the fans taking notice. As an artist and musician, it was plain to see that many photos were of some kind of double, and there were at least 2 new voices. The real Paul was absolutely diplomatically thoughtful with the intellectual Grace of a cat, always landing on his feet. Now the first time I witnessed these changes was in the october of 1966 at this time a rumor occured about Paul being killed. However in 1965 the fake pictures were already common in teen magazines.There were storys of the real Paul having digestive problems described as stage fright related, vomiting Etc.. I believe Faul was brought in originally as a double as early as spring 1965, to cover for the ailing Paul.

    ReplyDelete
  84. I have a few question concerning the accident which I couldn't find answers to. Maybe you can help me then as an early Beatlemaniac.

    How was the accident reported? How did people know about it and infer he was dead? Was it in 1966 or was it in 1969 when people were searching for clues and guessing his fate?

    Thanks in advance.

    Fatema

    ReplyDelete
  85. I don't think there was any "accident." I think Paul was assassinated and impostor-replaced with a double who had been trained & was at the ready. This happened sometime after the Seattle show on Aug. 25, 1966. Faul's debut was the Aug. 28, 1966 LA press conference. I think the accident story is just disinformation to throw people off the trail of something most sinister.

    ReplyDelete
  86. Plastic Macca Thanks. This is all very complicated with many layers. Where there's smoke there is fire, right?

    Anyway what I meant is , when was this disinformation spread and by whom? Was the alleged accident reported in a newspaper ? Or people just inferred that he was dead from the clues.

    One more thing. I noticed that nobody has discussed the issue of Faul taking off his sandals for the Abbey Road cover. He claimed that it was a hot day, so why on earth would he walk barefoot on hot and burning concrete. Just a thought...but I might be mistaken because I am no physicist.

    What do you think Plastic Macca?

    Fatema

    ReplyDelete
  87. Back in 1967, people were already whispering that Paul had died. It was a pretty widespread "rumor" in London. I guess they assumed it was an accident, but I'm not sure why they thought that. In Oct. 1969, it was reported in some college papers USA that Paul had died in an accident. It became international news - everyone was wondering what was going on w/ Paul. When LIFE did its article, "Paul is Still With Us," people relaxed b/c the mainstream media assured them Paul was still alive. Ha! I wonder if people would be so gullible today?

    I called out Faul on his different versions of the Abbey Road sandal story in "Funny Faul Flubs," which I think was in Jan. 2010. He said it was hot, so he took them off, he said they were uncomfortable, so he took them off, & there was another BS reason, but I forget now. The story is constantly changing. Obviously, it was a clue, but they don't want to admit it. But you're right, Why would anyone walk across a street barefoot when it's hot & there could be broken glass, cigarette butts, dog poo, & who knows what else? Stupid. lol

    ReplyDelete
  88. Hey again Plastic Macca! Sorry for bothering you, but is there a forum where this issue is being actively discussed right now because all the forums I know have been closed.

    Thanx.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. you can start a thread at the pid.hoop.la forum... :)

      Delete
  89. Could it be that Brian Jones was died because he knew Paul is dead? Or Keith Moon also died because he knew Paul was an impostor?

    ReplyDelete
  90. anche sforzandomi di trovare delle differenze
    io nelle foto vedo solo palesissime uguaglianze.
    e comunque si tenga presente che
    le angolazioni e la luce influiscono notevolmente
    sulla resa visiva.
    senza contare l' autosuggestione.
    secondo me, si è trattato solo di uno scherzo mediatico.
    del resto andavano di moda i messaggi subliminali
    per creare attraenti aloni di mistero.
    credo che Paul stesso abbia recitato il ruolo
    del suo "falso".
    insomma, un mistero autentico, ma non veritiero.
    Debo

    ReplyDelete
  91. I'am thirty three years young. I've been listening to the Beatles most of my life. To read that the real Paul died forty plus years ago. It Breaks my heart. breaks my heart to know that I've been listening to a second rate Paul mccartney my whole life.

    ReplyDelete
  92. well I was just a kid at the time and remember seeing the beatles on tv and saying where is Paul? and everyone said to me - there he is...I said where? I never knew about these things as a child. On the naivety of a child I have to say sadly with this information - that he was replaced.

    ReplyDelete
  93. I'm 22 years old and always been The Beatles fan. But all I remember is I used to say to my mom that Paul McCartney was suppose to be the cutest one. I remembered him from black-white photos. Pictures from 70's and later are showing not really handsome guy. I was like "hmm maybe because of black-white effect he looked cute, short hair and puppy eyes makin him very adorable" Thought his new style PLUS drugs/alcohol was making him look just not atractive. Also why The beatles broke up? Why never back on the stage together. And why the heck rich guy like Paul looks so fake being 71 years old of course he will never look like young 20 year old boy but still... Ringo Starr always looked same lol well maybe bad gens, maybe other reason but what about his green eyes? It's so confusing, also shape of his nose it's different. I'm not sure if he is dead or he just using his double(s) but some picture of him are just fake! Sometimes we see Faul, sometimes Paul's and Faul's features are mixed. His voice also sucks (to be honest) I've noticed you mentioned "How do you sleep? song, the line "the only thing you've done was yesterday" means that Faul made that song lol which is not true because we remember his live show singing Yesterday (Ed Sullivan show 1964). Also cluse in songs and covers (some of them appeared before 1966) so they knew he will be dead? LOL I'm really torn about this theory. I'm not saying it's not possible, but some clues are just bollocks. But still I tend it's something fishy. Photos are the most truly proofs for me. Anyway I saw Paul's father picture when he was old, and he looked very like Paul (except he was almost bold), so maybe Paul's got just bad gens, or drugs influenced. What about Heather Mills? She probably knows something important, but we can't be sure If she means the Faul story, or something different. All I know that Paul's apperance after 1966 is different, it's not the same cute and a lil bit shy guy.
    BJ

    ReplyDelete
  94. Thank you for your beautifully researched pages. I am very interested in this whole issue of Paul McCartneys ID, and am almost completely convinced that this man is an imposter. I will be carrying out my own research on this, but I am finding your blogspot most helpful and will be coming back to you quite often. Once again. Thank you. D F Morgan-Smith

    ReplyDelete
  95. am not half the man i used to be
    i'll be back

    ReplyDelete
  96. Photographic images are clearly admissible forensic evidence. I am not a scientist, but a lawyer. Essentially the way the judicial system works is as follows: The only main form of evidence which is inadmissible is "hearsay" evidence, that is, one witness states what he heard another person allege. However even this can be admissible if eg a person states under oath that he heard a person confess to an act. But one witness on his own would not be enough here.
    Forensic evidence sits at the top of the pyramid of evidence, above documentary evidence and above eye witnesses. Why? because it is based upon scientific analysis, which reduces the window of reasonable doubt. Witnesses can lie, or forget, or genuinely be mistaken about something they thought they saw, or recognised, or they may be intimidated or bribed or blackmailed. Documents can be forged, signatures can be forged. Photos can be forged (manipulated). But it is the duty of forensic science to verify signatures, or handwriting, or photos, or documents, or honesty through lie detector tests, etc etc. Forensic evidence is not fool proof, but it is the best we have, and it keeps getting better. So yes, the forensic evidence carried out by the Italian team is thus far the weightiest evidence that the post 66 Paul is not the same man. On the basis of that evidence, a court of law would, in my opinion, decide beyond a reasonable doubt that the pre and post '66 persons are not the same, unless and until defendant counters such evidence through other forensic tests, such as DNA, which of course would allow Faul to close the case, or through similar forensic photo analysis that results in conclusions different from the Italian forensic analysis. Of course neither have been furnished by the existing Paul. There are 2 levels of evidence required at Law. One is called proving your case on "the balance of probabilities" and the other is proving "beyond a reasonable doubt". The former is used in civil cases. It is like checking whether you pass a test by getting over 50%. If you do, you have passed the proof test and win the civil case. However in criminal law, where a person stands to go to prison, this level of proof is insufficient, and you need to prove his guilt "beyond a reasonable doubt" to convict him. This is like having to get an "A" to qualify to go to University. The level of proof needs to be higher. In the Paul case, my legal opinion is that the forensic analysis carried out by the Italian team proves not just on a balance of probabilities, but even beyond a reasonable doubt, that we are looking at 2 different persons. Furthermore such forensic analysis is supported by corroborating evidence. Corroborating evidence alone would be insufficient in a court of law, but has great validity to further substantiate the higher level of evidence. Such corroborating evidence includes many, many things, like the difference in the voice, which seems clear to the naked ear, in the absence, unfortunately of forensic voice analysis, the colour of the eyes, the difference in style when speaking, and the highly suspicious circumstances of the band suddenly disappearing from tour for the rest of their career together, as well as from media interviews for over 2 years. Lastly there is the absence of Paul's unique music style, which would have seeped through, even with a total rehashing of the Beatles' style. This is conspicuously absent. As I said, these bits alone would be insufficient to prove a case, but following the Italian forensic analysis they become highly interesting pieces of corroborating circumstantial evidence.

    ReplyDelete
  97. This has got me wondering!

    ReplyDelete
  98. Are you a business man or woman, are you a musician or an artist, politicials do you want to be famous, fame or you want to become rich, powerful, be a member of the Illuminati and make your dream come through, this is the chance for you now to become a member of the brotherhood and be known worldwide, if you are ready to become a member and realize your dream then contact us now @ secure.illuminati000@gmail.com or visit us on our Facebook page at ILLUMINATI REIGNS. WE REIGN FOREVER

    ReplyDelete
  99. Easy way to join the Illuminati brotherhood in the world.

    Are you a business man or an artist,Politicians and you want to become big, Powerful and famous in the world, join us to become one of our official member today.you shall be given an ideal chance to visit the illuminati and his representative after registrations is completed by you, no sacrifice or human life needed, Illuminati brotherhood brings along wealth and famous in life, you have a full access to eradicate poverty away from your life now. it only a member who is been initiated into the church of illuminati have the authority to bring any member to the church, so before you contact any body you must be link by who is already a member, Join us today and realize your dreams. we also help out our member in protection of drugs pushing email: churchofdevililluminati@gmail.com or you contact our phone number +2347056024545

    Once you become a member you will be rich and famous for the rest of your life, illuminati make there member happy so i will want you all to also be a member of the illuminati if you are interested contact email on churchofdevililluminati@gmail.com or you contact our phone number +2347056024545

    ReplyDelete
  100. NO NO NO. NOTHING IS TRUE AND EVERYTHING'S REAL

    ReplyDelete
  101. Some said sylvie vartan and another man have been replaced too:

    http://digilander.libero.it/p_truth/sylvie_vartan.html
    http://digilander.libero.it/p_truth/forbidden.html

    And Paul:
    http://digilander.libero.it/p_truth/

    ReplyDelete

Thank you for your comments. They will appear once they have been approved.