Tuesday, October 28, 2014

The Tragical History of Paul is Dead (PID) - Part 1

The Paul is Dead (PID) "rumor" began after fans noticed the Beatles had changed drastically seemingly overnight. For example, in March 1967, many audience members on the Dick Clark show  commented on the Beatles "new look," which was introduced in the promotional video for “Strawberry Fields Forever.” 1 Some complained that the Beatles looked “old” and “ugly.” In October 1967, during the filming for the "Magical Mystery Tour" movie in Nice, France, McCartney and Malcolm (“Mal”) Evans “were refused entry to the hotel restaurant because they didn't look the part." 2

Not only did the Beatles look different, they also acted differently (including becoming reclusive) to such an extent that fans sensed that there was something terribly wrong with the formerly happy-go-lucky Fab Four. After the lads returned from their summer 1966 U.S. tour, manager Brian Epstein publicly announced (on or about September 11, 1966) that the band would never play live again. Keeping Paul and the others out of the spotlight seemed deeply troubling because it was such a radical break with the past. 

Some grew suspicious that something was amiss with the group. Cynthia Lennon herself noted that this was a time of “tremendous ... mental and physical change for the Beatles” People began to whisper that Paul had died in a car crash, and the new Paul ("Faul") was keeping up appearances. 

The rumor of Paul’s death raged on, and before long, it was rampant around London. In February 1967, the Beatles Book Monthly, the Beatles' official fan club magazine issue #43,  responded with the following refutation: 

... The 7th of January was very icy, with dangerous conditions on the M1 motorway, linking London with the Midlands, and towards the end of the day, a rumor swept London that Paul McCartney had been killed in a car crash on the M1. But, of course, there was absolutely no truth in it at all... 4

Despite the Beatles Fan Club’s reassurances, fears that Paul was dead lingered. In the fall of 1968, someone approached Rolling Stone magazine about a list of McCartney death clues. Rolling Stone was not interested at the time because “too many people had seen Paul alive and it was the same old Paul...” 5

However, talk of Beatle Paul's death was so widespread that McCartney “was asked a thousand times” if he were “Paul or his clone” to which he prepared a ready-made answer: ‘I am neither Paul nor his clone, but I went out last night with your wife.’” 6 McCartney added “But it was a bit strange, because people started to look at me like, 'Is it really him or a very good double?' No, this is him!" 7

The rumor returned with a vengeance in September 1969. Adding fuel to the fire were a slew of clues to the switcheroo that fans gleaned from Beatles' lyrics, photos, and album covers. These were first exposed in a college newspaper article, and then picked up by a Detroit radio station before breaking worldwide with extensive coverage on all major TV and print media. By October 1969, people all over the world were crying over Paul McCartney. Many were convinced that he was dead. 

More to come...


1 American Bandstand, March 11, 1967, available at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ysG6GN9n3nE or http://www.jojoplace.org/Shoebox/dickclarka.mpg

2 "Mal Evans," available at http://beatlesnumber9.com/mal.html.

3 “The years 1966-67 were tremendous years of mental and physical change for the Beatles.” Cynthia Lennon, A Twist of Lennon, Avon Books, 1980,  p. 145; Alan Glenn, “‘Paul is Dead!’ (said Fred),” November 11, 2009, available at  http://michigantoday.umich.edu/2009/11/story.php?id=7565&tr=y&auid=5578331; Brian Moriarty, “Who Buried Paul?,” from a presentation on March 17, 1999, available at http://ludix.com/moriarty/paul.html; Paul McCartney รจ morto davvero, Interactive Media, 21/7/2009, available at http://www.tgcom.mediaset.it/spettacolo/articoli/articolo455762.shtml; Paul McCartney is really dead, Interactive Media, 21/7/2009, available at http://tinyurl.com/ngp29e

4 Beatles Book Monthly was the magazine of the official Beatles Fan Club. Brian Moriarty, “Who Buried Paul?,” from a presentation on March 17, 1999, available at http://ludix.com/moriarty/paul.html;  Jim Yoakum, “Man Who Killed Paul McCartney,” Gadfly May/June 2000, available at http://www.gadflyonline.com/archive/MayJune00/archive-mccartney.html; Alan Glenn, “‘Paul is Dead!’ (said Fred),” November 11, 2009, available at http://michigantoday.umich.edu/2009/11/story.php?id=7565&tr=y&auid=5578331 

5 John Burks, “A Pile of Money on Paul's 'Death',” Rolling Stone, 11-29-69, p. 10, available at http://www.turnmeondeadman.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=5&Itemid=12.

6 “Paul McCartney: A new Interview in an italian newspaper,” MaccaBlog, November 25, 2009, available at http://www.maccablog.co.uk/news.php?news=6524.

7  “Macca still laughing off 40-year-old death hoax,” 2009 WLNR 13648569, 7/17/09 Hindustan Times , July 17, 2009, available at http://zeenews.india.com/entertainment/celebrity/macca-still-laughing-off-40-year-old-death-hoax_35418.html.

The Luciferian Deception

Reptilians, Cetaceans and Frequency Wars on Planet Earth

Saturday, October 11, 2014



Tina Foster discusses the death and impostor-replacement of Beatle Paul McCartney and John Lennon with Dr. Jim Fetzer on the Real Deal.


Oct. 11, 2014

The Luciferian Deception

Reptilians, Cetaceans and Frequency Wars on Planet Earth

Thursday, October 2, 2014

Imagine: Fohn Lennonstein

Imagine, if you will, a band of highly popular and influential musicians that butted heads with the controllers of the media. Before the Beatles made it big, they seemed harmless enough. The lovable Mop Tops crooned about love, loss, and normal problems everyone experiences. No one thought that, once they got big, they would use their position to improve the social consciousness. From their soapbox atop the world stage, they would draw attention to problems affecting humanity at a deeper level. The Beatles did continue to sing about love, but added societal concerns, such as excessive taxation and having to become enslaved to the state for one's survival. The song, "Taxman," criticized Her Majesty's government and its almost punitive taxation system. Many people who had never considered the lack of fairness in the tax system began to think about it. Multitudes of dissatisfied subjects are a threat to the ruling elite. The Beatles as social commentators was disturbing to those in power. In addition, the Beatles were promoting religious beliefs that had the potential to free people's minds from control. Meditation breaks the shackles of mind control. The belief in the eternal soul removes the fear of death. Many people have been controlled by the fear of death - either due to the threat of eternal damnation or the cessation of existence. Once people realize that the consciousness (the soul) continues on, then there is nothing to be afraid of.  The control once wielded to great effect is lost. No one amongst the ruling elite appreciated the Beatles exposing the masses to such ideas. 

John Lennon attacked Christianity outright. In his famous statement, he said the Beatles were bigger than Jesus. HIs point was that the Beatles were comprising a larger part of people's lives than Jesus was. In good form, John apologized, but it did challenge people's belief structure. In his observation, John had hit a nerve. The outraged backlash betrayed how close to home John's words had struck. Many knew it was true, but did not want to admit it - not even to themselves. In actuality, Jesus was not the problem, but rather the control structure of the Christian Church. John had simply used Jesus as the symbol of the Church, and was heralding the loss of control over people the Church had suffered. His statement appears to have been exploited to tarnish John's image. After this statement, the Beatles as a threat to the established order could no longer be tolerated by the powers that be.

Once the decision had been made to remove the Beatles from the public stage, suitable replacements had to be found. As it turned out, the Beatles were easy to replace. Putting facial hair and colorful clothes on them, and keeping them out of the spotlight helped conceal the impostors. It is true that the public noticed that they seemed different, but only Paul was really suspected of having been replaced. His double did not portray Paul very well. In passing off the subterfuge, many techniques were employed. Audio and visual tampering helped create the illusion that the Fab Four were still with us. In addition, the infrequency of appearances helped people forget what the originals had been like. "John" appeared in "How I Won the War," but every screenshot was carefully managed. The actor playing John playing the character, Gripweed, had to study John to interpret how John would play that role. He did a pretty good job, as no one really suspected for a long time that it was not John.

At any rate, the doubles were completely bought and sold by their masters. It is important to understand that they were controlled opposition. The Beatles had been true to themselves and spoken their true minds. The replacements said what they were told to say. Even "John's" revelation about LSD was false information. He said LSD set people free, but in reality, it is a mind control drug. Many people incorrectly think that this statement precipitated his assassination. In actuality, John had been out of the picture for many years and his double was simply being retired. It was determined that it would be better for him to go out in a "blaze of glory" that would be seared into the public consciousness. Questioning the official story would be most unpopular, as it would be seen as a sign of disrespect. Only now can people entertain the possibility that the assassination was staged. It is not so far-fetched considering that a CIA guy (Jose Perdomo) was the doorman, how Paul's double reacted so nonchalantly to the news (It was a "drag"), and how quickly the body was "cremated." It may well be true that John was killed, only years earlier...

Now the time has come to wrap this up. Many indications exist pointing to Beatles' replacements. It may be more difficult to see that John was replaced than Paul, but the tells are there. Look at the eyes, the smile, the stance, the cutting wit, and the woman John chose - a beautiful blonde. The personality of Beatle John was nothing like "John" played by an actor. Discern subtle and not so subtle differences. Embark on the path to uncovering one of the most ambitious psyops in history - the impostor-replacement of the Beatles.

Tina's discussion with Jim Fetzer available here.


Visit Auriga Books