The Charming, Amazing Rude Faul McCartney

Written by WilliamBillyShears

When we look at celebrities we have our favorite ones. You can tell which ones are a "class act" and which ones are a fake replica.

If your new to the entire story of the killing and replacement of James Paul McCartney, you have to look at a lot of the evidence that is out there.

My own search for the truth around the Paul is dead / Paul was replaced story started in the late sixties and it was not until 2010 while living in New Zealand that I devoted over 1000 hours to the subject of "Faul." 

I'd like to thank Tina for allowing me to place additional research here. It means a lot to me as I am a syndicated radio and music producer by profession and took on the name of William Billy Shears to simply be able to "research" and "vent."


Paul (left) vs. Faul (right)

There are millions today who were not around in the early 1960's when John, Paul, George, and Ringo hit the world stage. So first I want you to watch the real Paul. Yes, thousands of photos and videos are being changed as Faul's manager even stated that over the past 5 years that he has managed "Faul," that all of the photos and videos are being retouched. (I smell more fish).

To get you quickly up to speed I want to you look at an original James Paul McCartney. You may have to watch it more than once as he replacement (and there may be more than one), took over since 1966.

A link to the video above: http://youtu.be/tNYVxqJ83W8

Got it? The reason I became so obsessed with the story was I noticed bizarre differences in not only his "personality," I noticed changes in attitude.

Now fast forward to 1968. Really compare the two interviews. Now I know what is below is from 1968 and if you look carefully, you'll see that the mannerisms are "imitated" not real.

This video was placed here for educational purposes only and without profit.

After looking at hours of video tape, I also started looking at photographs that look strange to me. Ready to look at a few? Hold on to your seat bels.

So how did the charming Paul turn into such a rude guy.....

         

                                         This video was placed here for educational purposes only and without profit.

If you think the above picture(s) [removed], are Paul you better look closer. The video at the top of the post is very telling. Now look at another situation where Faul is just rude:

One researcher wrote:

Little is known about the impostor. He is sometimes known as William Shears Campbell, or William Sheppard. It is said that he once won a Paul McCartney lookalike contest, and was plucked from obscurity to become the new Paul. Some have claimed to have known him, but few have corroborated their tales. What is known is that the Faul was required to have many plastic surgeries in order to look more like Paul. Retouching on album artwork and official photos was painstakingly done. In attempt to hide the imperfections, he grew a mustache. And for long, no one suspected a thing. Foolishly, many still don’t.

Most have considered the story of Paul’s tragic death a mere hoax — a story, and a blatantly unreliable one at that. Until now.

Before you watch this final video below.....I want you to think about something ready? Why did Billy Preston Die on June 6, 2006? (Often considered the 5th Beatle...why 06/06/2006.....666).

Here is what Faul Had to say......directly:

FBI WARNING 

Federal law allows citizens to reproduce, distribute or exhibit portions of copyright motion pictures, video tapes, or video disks under certain circumstances without authorization of the copyright holder. This infringement of copyright is called FAIR USE ... and is allowed for purposes of criticism, news reporting, teaching and parody.

__________________________________________________

Tina Foster is the author of

Plastic Macca: The Secret Death and Replacement of Beatle Paul McCartney &

The Splitting Image: Exposing the Secret World of Doubles, Decoys, and Impostor-Replacements

Email Tina at faulconandsnowjob at hotmail dot com.

Tina's interviews on Youtube

Add Tina as a friend on MeWe

Forbidden Secrets of the Illuminati:

The Luciferian Deception

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

Deep End: possible PID clue movie?

A movie starring Jane Asher (former girlfriend of Beatle Paul) from 1971 has been salvaged from obscurity. Was it censored for many decades because it revealed PID clues? The critically-acclaimed film is being re-released on May 6, 2012, so it might be worth watching to see if it reveals anything about James Paul McCartney's fate. It is quite possible, especially considering that another movie by the same director (Judd Bernard) outed the Illuminati's depopulation agenda.

Deep End: pulled from the water

• Ryan Gilbey
• guardian.co.uk, Sunday 1 May 2011 17.00 EDT

It's not uncommon for movies to drop out of circulation and simply disappear, as fans of Deep End will attest. Barely seen since its release in 1971, the film concerns Mike (played by John Moulder-Brown), a floppy-fringed 15-year-old who becomes dangerously infatuated with Susan (Jane Asher), his co-worker at the public baths. What's unusual about this prolonged absence is that it should have befallen a film so passionately admired. The influential critic Andrew Sarris thought it measured up to the best of Godard, Truffaut and Polanski. The New Yorker's Penelope Gilliatt called it "a work of peculiar, cock-a-hoop gifts". If something as venerated as Deep End can sink, what hope for the rest of cinema?

After years of being mired in rights issues, this vivid, rapturous film is about to return in a restored print. It's appropriate that such an elusive picture should transpire to not be quite what it seems. What could have been just another coming-of-age story is transformed by an absurdist sensibility, uninhibited performances and a heightened use of colour. Although considered a defining British work, as well as one of the most acute screen portraits of London, Deep End is actually a US/German co-production, written and directed by a Pole (Jerzy Skolimowski, best known then for co-scripting Polanski's Knife in the Water), and shot largely in Munich.

There are glimpses of the capital – the exterior of the public baths was in Leytonstone, London, while Soho is the setting for a dreamlike sequence in which Mike visits the boudoir of a prostitute whose leg is in a cast, before purchasing an excessive quantity of hot dogs from Burt Kwouk (Kato from the Pink Panther films).

Jane Asher remembers receiving the script. "It was a bit of a mess," she says. "Jerzy's English wasn't great at the time. I remember sitting up late every night rewriting my dialogue. But Susan was terrific to play. She's at that stage where she's completely aware of her sexual power and uses it ruthlessly. Now that I've got two sons of my own, I feel more protective of Mike, more so than back then, when perhaps I was a bit more like her myself."

Skolimowski maintains that he cast John Moulder-Brown as soon as the 16-year-old walked into his office. ("His charm and innocence were obvious.") The actor has a different recollection. "I was trying to be very sophisticated, smoking cigarettes and being cool," he says now. "I must have looked ridiculous. Jerzy thought I wasn't vulnerable enough, but the producer Judd Bernard persuaded him to give me a screen test, and that convinced him. I was going through the same adolescent period as Mike. Unlike him, I was lucky enough to have had girlfriends, but I still had that rawness. For me it became all about allowing emotions I understood as a teenager to have a life within the context of the scenes."

Despite his youth, Moulder-Brown was undaunted about working so intimately with Asher. "She had broken up with [her fiance] Paul McCartney by then, so there may have been some sensitivity about that – you know, better not start humming any Beatles tunes. But she didn't arrive as a celebrity, just a member of the team." The two actors' easygoing rapport is one of the film's joys, and a consequence of the playful atmosphere fostered by Skolimowski. "Jerzy is very charming," says Asher. "He's not one of those directors who use fear, but you still felt a core of steel. He knew what he wanted."

The cast were free to improvise, and were instructed to remain in character even if a take went awry. "There's a bit where I'm on my bicycle, riding alongside Jane's car," says Moulder-Brown. "I was supposed to stop the bike in front of the vehicle, but it was raining and the brakes didn't work, so the bike skidded, hit the pavement and I went flying. As I was in the air, I remember thinking, 'We've got to keep going because this is going to look great.' When I landed, I could just hear Jerzy calling out: 'Kip feelming! Kip feelming!'"

While the spine of the picture is Mike's growing obsession with Susan, there are priceless incidental pleasures along the way, notably a cameo by Diana Dors as one of the boy's more demanding clients. This blonde typhoon in polka dots makes the bewildered hero an accessory to orgasm, clutching him to her bosom as she conducts aloud a George Best fantasy ("Tackle, dribble, dribble, score!").

"What a lady!" Skolimowski exclaims. "Casting her was such an event. When she put on the ridiculous costume we had prepared, she looked at herself in the mirror and said, 'So. This is how you see me?' I said, 'You look fantastic!'"

"Jerzy would seduce people into doing whatever he wanted them to do," says Moulder-Brown. "In that scene with Di, she really bared her soul: this glamorous star suddenly allowed herself to be that vamping caricature."

Skolimowski's powers of persuasion extended beyond the cast. He had his friend Cat Stevens write But I Might Die Tonight, the movie's opening song. Markedly different was Mother Sky, a grinding 14-minute number by Can that plays during the Soho sequence. The two songs represent opposing impulses in both Mike and the film: the Cat Stevens is tender and hopeful, while the Can is "a bit of a downer", Skolimowski says.

From conception to completion, Deep End took scarcely more than six months. The consensus when it premiered at the Venice film festival in September 1970 was that it would have been a dead cert for the Golden Lion, if only the prize-giving hadn't been suspended the previous year. "The organisers had decided it should all be democratic," grumbles Skolimowski. "Every film equal, or some idiotic idea."

Early indications that the picture's downbeat ending might prove problematic for audiences were felt at the San Francisco film festival. "I was supposed to do a Q&A afterwards," the director says. "The organisers brought me to the cinema, they were so happy – 'Oh, the whole room is laughing and enjoying the film.' Then in the last five minutes the room fell silent. When it finished, there was no applause. They said to me, 'Let's forget the Q&A and go for dinner.' During the meal, some audience members came over and said, 'Look, you had such a fantastic film, 90 minutes of enjoyment and humour. Why did you ruin it with the last five minutes?' I told them, 'You know what? I made the film for those last five minutes.'"

Deep End never matched its critical success at the box office, and was soon relegated to the bottom half of a doomed-love double-bill with Zeffirelli's Romeo and Juliet. "It still seems very fresh to me," says Skolimowksi. "That surprised me. It hasn't aged." Moulder-Brown hasn't seen the film for 40 years. "I don't like watching myself. But I liked Deep End. It had charm. Whenever I went for auditions after that, it was always the one everyone mentioned." Asher believes the film's idiosyncrasies have helped insulate it from the ravages of time. "I don't think it's dated at all. But then it didn't fit its time even when it first came out. It always was an odd one."

• Deep End is rereleased on 6 May.

1. Deep End
2. Production year:1970
3. Country: Rest of the world
4. Cert (UK): 18
5. Runtime: 88 mins
6. Directors: Jerzy Skolimowski
7. Cast: Christopher Sandford, Diana Dors, Jane Asher, John Moulder-Brown

__________________________________________________

Tina Foster is the author of

Plastic Macca: The Secret Death and Replacement of Beatle Paul McCartney &

The Splitting Image: Exposing the Secret World of Doubles, Decoys, and Impostor-Replacements

Email Tina at faulconandsnowjob at hotmail dot com.

Tina's interviews on Youtube

Add Tina as a friend on MeWe

Forbidden Secrets of the Illuminati:

The Luciferian Deception

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

Faul McCartney, Templars, and Khashoggi

Faul McCartney, Templars, and Khashoggi

Forbidden Secrets of the Illuminati:

The Luciferian Deception

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

Ringo: "I am the last remaining Beatle." Repeat: "I am the last remaining Beatle."

Mop-Top Paul (left) vs. Faul (right)

In this article excerpted below, Ringo Starr claims to be the last remaining Beatle. It is played off as a "joke," but even Ringo admits there is an "element of truth to it." As followers of this blog know, it has been proven by forensic evidence that Paul McCartney was replaced circa 1966.

How many hints do these people need to drop before people start thinking *maybe* there is something to PID? It was stated that Ringo was the last remaining Beatle not once, but *twice* in the same article - just in case you didn't catch it the first time. Please, read between the lines! They are not going to just tell you Paul was replaced.

'Paul likes to think he's the only remaining Beatle': Ringo Starr on why the world's most famous band was lucky to have him

By COLE MORETON

Last updated at 10:00 PM on 21st May 2011

...

‘You all know that the only person round this table who can go is me. I was in the biggest rock ’n’ roll band in the history of music… I am the last remaining Beatle.’ ...

The best jokes are based on truth...

‘There is an element of truth in it,’ Ringo says, before pausing for thought.

‘But I think it’s people on the outside who perceive Paul as thinking he’s the only one left. Actually, it’s me. I am the last remaining Beatle.’ ...

[M]aybe Ringo is the one who has stayed closest to the original spirit of the Beatles...

__________________________________________________

Tina Foster is the author of

Plastic Macca: The Secret Death and Replacement of Beatle Paul McCartney &

The Splitting Image: Exposing the Secret World of Doubles, Decoys, and Impostor-Replacements

Email Tina at faulconandsnowjob at hotmail dot com.

Tina's interviews on Youtube

Forbidden Secrets of the Illuminati:

The Luciferian Deception

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

The bigger they are, the harder they Faul

"I look pretty tall but my heels are high."

~ The Who, from "Substitute"

Paul McCartney may have been smaller than "Faul,"

but his stature as a musician is colossal.

One of the differences between Paul McCartney and Faul that stands out is the difference in height. Paul's "official" height was 5'11":

The Celebrity Heights website lists his height as 5 ft 10 in (178 cm), with a "peak height" of 5 ft 11 in (180 cm). The other Beatles' heights are also given:

John Lennon's height: 5 ft 10 in (178 cm)

George Harrison's height: 5 ft 10 in (178 cm)

Ringo Starr's height: 5 ft 6 in (168 cm), although "there seems to be no reliable figure on Ringo's height." [from Celebrity Heights]

If one compares the heights of the Beatles over the course of their history, one will notice that the relative heights seem to fluctuate. In the beginning, the heights were more even. In the latter years, a great discrepancy between Paul's and Ringo's height becomes apparent. If images do not show in the blogger window, simply click on them to see them full size. 

Muhammad Ali's height was 6 ft 2.5 in (189 cm) [source: Celebrity Heights]

The wax figures of the Beatles made by Madame Tussaud's Wax Museum show the lads' heights. Paul is a bit taller than Ringo, but there does not seem to be a great height disparity. Madame Tussaud's figures are "based on hundreds of precise measurements... [M]ore than 250 precise measurements of the body... with calipers and cloth tape measures." [source: The Unique Art of Wax Figure Making]

At some point, something curious happened. The heights became very uneven. This is most obvious between Paul and Ringo.

Paul was a little bit taller than his father, but Faul is a great deal taller:

Faul's height seems to vary when compared to Mal Evans:

Paul's height also seems to vary when compared to Jane Asher:

What is going on here? Faul may be nearly six feet tall, but the real Paul McCartney was not that tall. "Anonymous" has offered his estimations of Paul's and Faul's heights based on the length of the instruments, which are a known quantity. Using the Hofner violin bass (30 inch scale) and other instruments as a yardstick, Anonymous has determined that Paul was actually 5'7" to 5'8," and not 5'11" as we have been taught. Faul is about 2.5 inches taller than Paul. Using Ringo's 20 inch diameter bass drum, Anonymous calculated Paul's height to be approximately 5'7" to 5'8".

After Paul was eliminated, the carefully controlled media distribution concealed the height difference from the public. Faul is most often shown playing piano, sitting down, or with his feet or lower legs obscured, unless there is no instrument in hand. Faul also switched to using an Epiphone, which is about 4 inches bigger, making the size ratio seem consistent.

Anonymous also used the length of Faul's English Horn (Cor Anglais), which he is seen holding on the Sgt. Pepper album (1967). Anonymous used its length (31.14 inches) to calculate the heights.

In addition to using instruments to calculate the heights, Anonymous matched up the shin bones. Using this method, he revealed again that Faul is taller than Paul was. Anonymous has added some of his own comments to these images.

It seems that our efforts to uncover the truth about Paul's replacement have been complicated by out-right photo-tampering. Pictures of Paul and Faul have been altered to conceal the height difference. The Powers that Be are re-writing history.

Anonymous predicted that new full-lenth photos of Faul would appear as a "response" to his efforts, and indeed they did. On March 25, 2010, there were suddenly a new series of Sir Paul pictures from LIFE magazine on Google Search. It seems that the Hofner ratio was modified in those pictures. However, it appears the revisionists mis-calculated the scale and made Faul even smaller than Paul was - a petite 5'3" - 5'4". From Anonymous:

Here is the absolutely corrupt LIFE photo manipulation, the obvious obliteration of truth.
These pix were either posed with a really huge Hofner, or someone has been tweaking reality, The revisionist reality of Big Paul converted to Little Paul, even smaller than the original.
Stinks of some cover-up beyond ego.
LIFE has done some twisting before, as in the Re-born Macca of 1966.
These guitars are all calibrated to be equal in bulk & size on this panel. Paul is not 5ft 3 inches.

Let us not forget LIFE Magazine's role in convincing everyone that "Paul was still with us."

Special thanks to "Anonymous" for his research and images.

__________________________________________________

Tina Foster is the author of

Plastic Macca: The Secret Death and Replacement of Beatle Paul McCartney &

The Splitting Image: Exposing the Secret World of Doubles, Decoys, and Impostor-Replacements

Email Tina at faulconandsnowjob at hotmail dot com.

Tina's interviews on Youtube

Forbidden Secrets of the Illuminati:

The Luciferian Deception

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