Re: Some Thinghs to THink

[Athenais]

Interesting collection of clues, thanks McCartneyIII

I haven't seen "Give My Regards to Broad Street" (don't know if I can stomach watching it)...I didn't know they said that. "Do you know William?" indeed!!

[TheDZ]

McCartneyIII said:

These are some of my post in other forum (if this place is a forum)

The song "Sun King" could have a hidden meaning, as King Louis XIV was called the "Sun King". Alexander Dumas' famous novel "The Man In The Iron Mask" tells how the Sun King was replaced by an imposter.

On Sgt.Pepper's: behind the famous hand there's the face of Stephen Crane, who not only died at 28 (IF28), but also wrote a book about 4 men at sea. One of them dies and the other 3 pretend nothing has happened.
Here is a link to read it classiclit.about.com/library/bl-etexts/scrane/bl-scrane-oboat-1.htm

"Apple" sounds like "A-Paul", meaning without Paul in the same way that "amoral" means without morals and "asexual" means without sex.

In the film "Give My Regards to Broad Street",
Paul enters the BBC and is introduced by an older man
whom then turns to another man and says:
"Do you know William?"

During 'A Northern Song' when they sing
"you may think the band are not quite right"
Paul's face completely fills the screen.

Well in all web pages i'm surfed, everybody take this clue like if mean JPM was burried in a island call Leso, and leso don't figure in any atlas. If you put the word leso in the altavista translator from portugese to english you found leso = injure.
In a lawyer book i found this description " Leso/a means damaged, offended and derives from Latin laesus, past participle of the verb laedere: to damage, to offend". So the meaning now is be at damage? The other three boys told us he's not he because he got deep damages?

A Collection Of Beatles Oldies

This was a British album released just before Sgt. Pepper's in time for Christmas. It also contained clues. On the front cover, a Paul-like Beatle sits with a cigarette in his right hand, just like in Abbey Road. There is also a picture of a car driving straight towards his head - suggesting a car accident and decapitation.

The title "Beatles Oldies" on the drum Paul is sitting on also contains clues, and is the second drum to conatin clues. Firstly, it says "Beatles" and not "The Beatles", the significance has been discussed before. The word "Oldies" is also interesting. The last four letters are, of course, "Dies". The first two, are O and L. What letters come after O and L in the alphabet? P and M - Paul McCartney's initials - so the title says "P M Dies".
Front Cover
The Drawn Cover
Again, like the cover for Revolver, Oldies... but Goldies features a drawn picture for the front cover. Could this have been because William Campbell was still not confident enough to participate in group photo session?
The Car Driving at Dawn
Nearing the top of the hill in the background there is a car with its headlights on. Either this is coincidental, or this is a reference to Paul driving his car at 5am when the crash occured.
The Cryptic Message 1
On the left there is a large painted image of the group standing around a car. To the right of them there is a board that has the partially obscured words 'The End' and 'Original'. Could this be a cryptic message regarding the end of the original Beatles?
On the back cover, Paul is the only Beatle dressed in black - the colour associated with funerals.


"I was quite broken up by the end of the Beatles," says McCartney, whose latest project is a retrospective album and TV documentary on Wings, both titled Wingspan. (The album arrives in stores May 8; the film--directed by McCartney's son-in-law, Alistair Donald--airs May 11.) "I'd been trying to hold them together, but it was something that wasn't to be. So I went into a bit of a depression after that; I'm normally optimistic, but I'd just lost the best job in the world--really the only job I'd ever had, besides being a second man on a truck when I was a kid, and a paper [route]. It was quite a shock."

I can't seem to find most of your posts on the other forum McCartneyIII. Maybe if I quote this one it'll stay.....before you delete it too.
BTW TKIN! tells that Beatles(o) means Be at Les (O)utreau , but then you knew that already....
And Apple Corps is read as A Paul Corpse get it?
Most of these clues were posted by others at the 'other' forum BTW....

Have a nice day fishing!

[Athenais]

This thread seems to have caught the latest forum bug today.

Let me try to straighten this out...
There's no need for arguing about the TKIN document.

TheDezombificator said:

Note the Forums Links....the 'Owners' of the TKIN! internet document.

It is the best source of truthful information about this particular subject anywhere, compiled from many sources, many minds.It may not be totally accurate in all respects, but....it's damn sight better than one man's OPINION.


...and I agree with that. I haven't seen any other document or website that comes closer to explaining what really happened. However I feel it is incomplete and I'm not closed to hearing other explanations.

Sometimes there are many different ways to interpret a clue and it could be that only one way is right, or some are right, or all are right. But picking over clues can be like missing the forest because there are so many trees in the way.

The important thing is we are trying to find the truth about why people died. There are no prizes for getting the answers right. There are no winners. There's just the truth and the saying has always been, the truth will set you free. But I think in these times it could be the opposite, the truth needs us to set it free.

[William H Moore III]

Perhaps it is felt that it is at last time to get on with unveiling the truth.

Perhaps those in charge would actually LIKE the resolution of this to finally come forth, in a big way.

Perhaps they are obligated by vows, or promises, or contracts, to never speak of it.
Which means, that by their position and imprimatur, they really can't, or at least, should not in honor. In honor of the word they gave.

With no one anywhere living that is free to expose the facts, about all they can do is tacitly, slowly, uncommitedly, lead others to, by study and delving into all that is available about the Beatles, etc.,discover by deduction the truth, WITHOUT being told directly.

In this way, the story can at last innocently find it's way into general circulation by minds capable of discerning the signs and reading sufficiently between the lines and clues.
And, concurrently, no one in "the know" would ever be guilty of violating their professional word, or even, security clearance.

What gets figured out, gets figured out.

Unfortunately, that brings with it the element of misunderstood circumstances, faulty deductions, and
flawed assumptions. It also leads to verbose screeds like this one. Which, as much as is possible, I would like to make light-hearted and fun, though I often fail.

Nobody wants to hide the first James Paul from the world, I do not really believe that. It just isn't always convenient to let him totally shine through, until now.

The ground that we gain that is true, is truly gained ground! So, Without a team to challenge and refute those working to understand this mystery, (which simply said, legally can not yet be explained), the team straining to organize the particulars would not mature into people capable of being a credible voice for the truth.
After all, the REAL skeptics and nay-sayers out in the world would make far worse ridicule of the PID-thinkers than the
coaching "trolls" ever did.

What football team ever scored a touchdown that didn't have to score downs, or play defensively against the on-rushing opponents?

Without resistance and competition, the voice of those willing to say something in the future about this would remain frail and disorganized.

Remember: the rules of any game make the coaches invalid for taking part in the actual action. They can't score points, win a game, even out the ball in play.

All they can do is stand off to the side and yell and make suggestions!

And, the owner of the team has to watch from the club level......

So, although I can't determine the yardage yet won in this
crazy match, I can say that they could have called this game due to "Rain" long ago, but chose to let it continue........


Clock resumed: Second down. Half-time isn't even close.

[jojo]

Reading a post like this makes me glad I stayed in the game if you will..

All things I've thought that were quite possibly what was going on here.

Coaching trolls, well..they may have at times been the motivation to fight harder, yes.

Anyway Sir, hope you drop by again.

[Athenais]

Guest-William said:

Nobody wants to hide the first James Paul from the world, I do not really believe that. It just isn't always convenient to let him totally shine through, until now.

Yes?

There was NOT a "first" James Paul.
There is only ONE James Paul McCartney.

I can't believe that "no one" wanted to hide James Paul from the world when so much evidence has been presented to the contrary.

Instead I have witnessed every effort by the establishment to hide the truth.
Almost as if to erase the fact that the REAL James Paul ever existed.

Please tell me...how is James Paul McCartney shining through now in a way that he was not before, when the world still does not understand who he is?

Your analogy is well written, however, I feel strongly that this is NOT a game.

And if it were, it sure wouldn't be a fair one.

[TheDZ]

Well ,this thread took a turn...for the better. Truly Some Thinghs to THink!

Rain, I don't mind.
Shine, the weather's fine.
Can you hear me, that when it rains and shines,
It's just a state of mind?

With regards to erasure of the real McCoy, so to speak...

1. Visually, yes most certainly at least subtle doctoring has been performed in order to blur the differences(stretching, airbrushing). I still 'see' JPM in all the pre mid sept 66 video that i have though...

2. Aurally , no , I personally find it easy to tell JPM from the pretenders...CD to record I haven't heard any overt or subtle changes to erase JPM's vocals.....yet.

Bring on the Lucie!

[Athenais]

It's not hard to tell the difference between the two men...if one knows that there was indeed a replacement.

But for the majority of people who don't know that, it's as if the true James Paul never existed. Instead they know another man as Paul, or maybe the Paul they think of is a composite of both men.

The two identities are distinct. They look different, they sound different, and most of all to me they "feel" different. No amount of doctoring can erase that.

The erasure happens in the minds of people who look at two different people and believe it is the same person because they are told it is the same person.


He who has gone, so we but cherish his memory, abides with us, more potent, nay, more present than the living man.
-Antoine de Saint-Exupery

[Perplexed]

Certainly, God remembers there was a James Paul.

[LibertyX]

Yes, Perplexed, he most certainly does.

[TheDZ]

Athenais said:

It's not hard to tell the difference between the two men...if one knows that there was indeed a replacement.

But for the majority of people who don't know that, it's as if the true James Paul never existed. Instead they know another man as Paul, or maybe the Paul they think of is a composite of both men.

The two identities are distinct. They look different, they sound different, and most of all to me they "feel" different. No amount of doctoring can erase that.

The erasure happens in the minds of people who look at two different people and believe it is the same person because they are told it is the same person.


He who has gone, so we but cherish his memory, abides with us, more potent, nay, more present than the living man.
-Antoine de Saint-Exupery

I believe your post goes to the very heart of this whole matter, Athenais.

To be honest , the biggest hurdle I faced when slogging through TKIN! ( It really is a mucky field )
was not that of could they replace a man, but why?

Why not just announce his death and be done with it?

The fan suicide story ,well, it's not fully compelling to me
and in retrospect since so many others have had their lives cut short due to this event ,
it seems like a coercive tactic used on the remaining Beatles and Bill...
perhaps to help them feel better about their choice.

This is a really big part of the mass hypnosis ...
he was just a pop star after all (Or so it might seem
on the surface...) why bother?

Scratch the surface though and we see a far more complex
picture than most people would ever hope to experience.

It can be quite mind boggling. And that's why we
( thankfully not all of us ) subconciously agree to the
hypnotic suggestion that Bill is Paul.
It's just seems easier that way.

Living is easy with your eyes closed....

[McCartneyIII]

Oh! don't make me cry

[ForNoone]

So sad, but true. Somehow life as a "sheeple" just doesn't seem worth living.

[Athenais]

TheDeZombificator said:

Why not just announce his death and be done with it?

I think that would be the most compassionate decision.

Hiding the truth about something as important as death doesn't do anyone any good. That doesn't mean that the details have to be dragged out in the open, death certainly deserves some amount of privacy, but it also deserves to be announced openly.

It's just wrong to go on pretending that someone is alive when they are not. People have to be allowed to grieve and move on. What bothers me most of all is that the children involved had to grow up living a lie.

The truth is, deceiving the fans was far from kind. It could only be so much more devastating to find out the truth forty years later. The kids who grew up listening to the Beatles are the backbone of western society today. They are parents and grandparents, they are teachers, they are workers, they are business owners, they are investors, they are voters, they are community leaders, and so many of them still believe in the dream of the sixties.

DZ I agree with you it's a VERY complex picture

[Perplexed]

Well, first of all, it isn't contingent on what any one individual thinks is moral, or not moral, or right or wrong about it all.

As long as the whole things isn't a cover for cold blooded murder, or some heinous crimes, it isn't bad to, IMO< continue the cover until the resolution could be worked out.

Of course they coudln't just put it in the paper one day, or have Sir Paul shock the world on Larry King (Larry would have to re-regulate his pace-maker....)there are reasons for maintaing the utmost, well, discretion and class about the whole thing.

Maybe the wise path would be to, somehow, only "educate"
those that seem capable of the highest degree of sane coping with such a piece of news.

It really, in 2005, PID should not be such an awful shock to many people. I think many people, apprised of reasons and rationale behind it (avoiding international incident, angry parents = angry foreign relations, and the protection of MILLIONS of young and impressionable children, mainly girls, who would absolutely NOT have taken it well. Maybe they'd not all commit hari-kari, but the combined impact of MILLIONS of sad teenage girls would be felt!
I have said it before, the timing sucked.

And, if James Paul had been fooling around into any drug/sex scandel shanagans, as young men who shoot to stardom sometimes fall into, public indignation could have been far reaching.

As for Sir Paul, William's partying and loquacious interviews on pot and matijuana and LSD appear, in retrospect, actually subdued, removed, somehow benign. He doesn't SEEM like a hellion at all. I imagine Sir Paul to have been far more conservative in his "partying" than the official reputation implies.......its all relative sometimes....

It would help to know the percieved legal grounds all this has. I am sure that the law people would have done this whole Paul-switch thing with every t crossed, every "i" dotted. The sly, double loaded clues even reveal that, it was all there for everyone to know, all along.......

People might wonder why Sir Paul, then, had a 35 year career after the dissolution of the Beatles. But I know why. The man is very talented!

I dunno. There are always people, or groups who might look for the negative and try to make a stink, but I think an honest appraisal of the facts would make most people accepting of it.

I hope, my preference would be (for what it's worth), that one day, a open admittance to the major details of this "case" would be allowed. We all know that the intelligence groups and military policies runagainst openess about an operation done covertly. They are squeamish about breaching protocols. They understand this, they know why better than I ever will. They are professionals; they study everything
and probably have done feasibility studies on the McCartney question.
Many Thinghs do get declassified eventually. They may nave an iron grip into 2200AD on this one; how should I know.

Or, maybe the documents start becoming available in a few months, and nobody knows what will happen when the shoe drops.

Or, I dunno. I'm losing my grasp of reality.

Frankly, it ought ot be a piece of cake to unveil; it ought to be a relief to many people, on both sides of the fence. It ought to be a new beginning for Sir Paul-it ought to at last answer the nagging questions about the mystery of the Beatle breakup for us old-geezer middle aged dust-f*rters like myself that still think about it.

It makes listening to the canon of the 13 regular BEatle releases a new experience. It makes hearing Sir Paul's music a new experience.

ALl that need to be understood is there was a first Paul, and a second Paul, who was drafted in to save a disaster.
At the time, it wasn't advisable to announce Paul's end publicly.It ought ot be reminded, that, and I believe this is very possible, that love WAS the motive, in essence, to play against hope to pull off the world's most unusual 3 act play in history.

They could find a way to "test-market" the true story in some anonymous, crowded, but easy to dismiss cross section of the public....or they could hawk it on the internet and see what happens..........or make a movie, or say, a play about it.....thinly veiled........

Oprah?

Leno?

Letterman?

Carson would have been able to host such an interview and keep it classy...that was his talent.......Johnny Carson. Miss him, miss him, miss him.........

I know , that, whatever else is true, (and I am fishing in the dark like everyone else here), that there is a layer of real pathos in to story. There is also a big layer of hope, and a layer of love.I hope the last part, anyway. I'll hang on to the hope of that until otherwise convinced....


I drone on and on...

[TheDZ]

Ok So here's the thing.

I think that maybe, just maybe that Paul McCartney's death and the circumstances surrounding it
was actually a well known fact in certain circles.
I think that some of these people ( Not Just the Beatles )wrote songs commemorating this momentous event.
Why momentous? Because Paul McCartney was THE VOICE. He had it all , phrasing, timing, impeccable pitch , impeccable control and above all rich TONE.
The day the music died changed the course of music history forever. Music recording in general turned
into an attempt to obscure, confuse and distract. The Beatles did it and gave everyone license
to be " good " in the studio but "mediocre " live.
The impact was huge.

They were the live act of their time , for a damn good reason: They were amazing musicians!
Their music was uplifting and energizing ( and still is ) and they could deliver that live!
How could they even think of replacing him?

I'm sorry Perplexed , but I think Bill's little pantomime falls hideously short of satisfying.
How can a man , by definition not singing in his natural voice sound like the relaxed,effortless and
natural voice of JPM? Impossible!
I hold no hatred towards Bill in my heart: in fact I think that he was somehow powerfully coerced
into continuing his role as Paul against the explicit wishes of the remaining Beatles. I think he has
paid a pretty heavy price to be a marionette.

No hatred here , just a thirst for the one and only truth and a distaste for lies....

[Athenais]

Perplexed said:

Well, first of all, it isn't contingent on what any one individual thinks is moral, or not moral, or right or wrong about it all.

So true. It only depends on what the people in power think is moral. And holding back the truth only gives greater power and control.

If the people behind this conspiracy felt the need to justify their actions they might use a rhetoric a lot like yours.

...only "educate" those that seem capable

there are reasons for maintaing the utmost, well, discretion and class...

There are always people, or groups who might look for the negative...

...intelligence groups and military policies...know why better than I ever will

ALl that need to be understood is...

But I highly doubt they feel the need.

[Perplexed]

I read and thought about the last two posts.
Dezom, Athenais.

The truth is always better than a continued subterfuge.
I could see it in 1966, for a time, for the sake of the
youth reaction, really I do. I was 9.

Of course, they didn't spare us Kennedy's assassination in early Nov of '63. I was 6. Every student in the class wept; some howled. The announcement came over the loudspeaker right after lunch. They sent us all home. We were devastated, we kids. We coped, but it was tough for a few days, really tough.

I guess we could have coped with Paul's death; we would have had to, of course! The boys would have not been affected like the girls, though. The parents would have been so angry and resentful to the music companies, primarily. I do believe that.
If drugs and a sex scandel were involved, even more so.

Wiliam is a very capable, creative musician in his own right.
Too bad he can't just be himself.

William was not the conspirator to hide Paul's death. He was
a person drafted into it, convinced of the empirically sound reasons justifying it.

And, no, he can't just break out of it.

OK. Forgive my rhetoric. I offer no one excuses for their choices.

I just have not wanted to face looking at it this way.

[TheDZ]

I think George put it best...

You might not feel it now
But when the pain cuts through
You're going to know and how
The sweat is going to fill your head
When it becomes too much
You're going to shout aloud....

[TheDZ]

McCartneyIII said:

Hey Dezombificator

The tings tkin says are pure bullshit, and you and all your people sucks. This document is a compillation of fakes and stupidity. Get it?

Have nice week jerking off BeatlePaul (aka SunKing)

Ding Dong Dang, Tripod Strikes Again!

PS. I Love You Too! Sorry we made you cry!

Tank yu for teh Tinghs to Tink

[McCartneyIII]

TheDeZombificator said:

Well ,this thread took a turn...for the better. Truly Some Thinghs to THink!

Rain, I don't mind.
Shine, the weather's fine.
Can you hear me, that when it rains and shines,
It's just a state of mind?

With regards to erasure of the real McCoy, so to speak...

1. Visually, yes most certainly at least subtle doctoring has been performed in order to blur the differences(stretching, airbrushing). I still 'see' JPM in all the pre mid sept 66 video that i have though...

2. Aurally , no , I personally find it easy to tell JPM from the pretenders...CD to record I haven't heard any overt or subtle changes to erase JPM's vocals.....yet.

Bring on the Lucie!

Rain, I don't mind.
Two of us wearing raincoats
Shine, the weather's fine
Standing so low In the sun
Can you hear me, that when it rains and shines,
It's just a state of mind?
get a tan from standing in the English rain

[ForNoone]

So, what's with the rain references ? The fact that when they found Paul's body it was in the rain

[Perplexed]

Deez tings vich vee haff bin giffen to tink aboute eez vunderwul tings to tink aboute.

De Dutch eez de vuns who know der trüten.<br>
Dat eez vhy de nowhare Mannes libbs een hees Nederland.

OK, now zat I have, 'scuze, me, now THAT I have you attention, I will make my point. Ignore the foolishness I wrote above.

My point, is that I notice that screen name McCartneyIII is labeling the ideas in the TKIN! compilation with derisive terms. This bothers me. I feel that he could be more open to our expressions of free thought. I would recommend this notion to him.

In the George Orwell book 1984, the state found even trivial dissent to the official by-line as criminally offense. The unnofficial assembling of people and sharing of ideas is suppressed in the novella.

We may be eccentric in our opinions, but it's good that we can be. Being free to interpret things for ourselves, and to have an "eccentric opinion", as it were, is an important freedom indeed.

If you "put somebody down" once for their opinions, then that is expressing your opinion. Your opinion then becomes, at that point, a matter of common knowledge to those you've redressed.

But, if you continue incessantly to put those same folks down, then, you are engaging in a purposeful campaign to hinder their priveledge of communication.

Which indicates that you have no interest in "defending" the subject by reason and proofs, but, rather, by continuous pressure brought to bear against the contributors here, seek to undermine the people's right here to debate and conjecture.

We've never come to you and told you your ideas were "b*llsh*t."

Nor would we. We are delighted for you to believe as much b*llsh*t as you can possible digest; far be it for anyone here to want to squelch your personal pursuit of understanding. As it should be for everyone, provided such sharing of knowledge neither incites others to danger nor to mischief.

Statements like "I find this notion hard to go along with," or even, "That is certainly imaginative, but I fail to see the practicality of it", are much more sociable and productive than, "You all are full of sh*t. Please die and go to h*ll, including the swine that calls himself S*nK*ng. That vile, evil b*st*rd."

A rancor filled screed railing our intelligence will likely earn you a fetid reply.

Thank you for you earnest consideration.

[ForNoone]

Perplexed, you never fail to amaze me ;D

[Athenais]

Perplexed said:

...if you continue incessantly to put those same folks down, then, you are engaging in a purposeful campaign to hinder their priveledge of communication.

Which indicates that you have no interest in "defending" the subject by reason and proofs, but, rather, by continuous pressure brought to bear against the contributors here, seek to undermine the people's right here to debate and conjecture.

Yes! I couldn't have phrased it better.
THANK YOU Perplexed for your wonderful words

[lovelyrita]

Maybe Paul was assassinated because he didn't want to be part of this evil "program" of getting to the youth through music and drugs, realizing how evil it was becoming and he was either going to expose it or escape it. Like Kennedy, he wanted to reveal the plot and he was eliminated.

Replacing Paul at that time was necessary because the Beatle's music had not really infiltrated the youth with drugs and sex and rebellion and replace Judeo-Christian values with Eastern Mysticism and New Age beliefs. So a replacement had to come to complete their mission.

But I do believe that article that was from George, that was released after his death, that when the Beatles split, that was to be the end of it all.
But Faul wanted his solo career and pursued it, and I believe that's why John never reconciled with Faul, because of this charade continuing with the lame solo Faul music.

Compare the styles of Paul to Faul and you can clearly see the music of Paul surpasses Faul's.

I also was listening to tape of the Beatles 66-70 and something that I had not noticed before, the harmony just isn't there because it's truly not the same voice.

[ForNoone]

Rita, I can't agree with you more. I also have found that the songs recorded without Paul do NOT have the same harmony as the earlier ones.
George & John just couldn't harmonize with Bill the way they did with Paul !