This is your wake-up call!: Was Paul McCartney murdered and replaced?

maandag 18 augustus 2014

Was Paul McCartney murdered and replaced?

Quotes"A biometrical analysis by a team of Italian forensic scientists has proven Paul McCartney was replaCIAed by a CIAlebrity impersonator in 1966. The mandibular curve, the tragus, the nasal spine, the palate, & the canines were suddenly different, making it impossible that it was the same person.

It's possible the Illuminati tried to use the Beatles to push a drug agenda (LSD) on the public as part of MK-ULTRA. Paul, reserved in his drug usage. probably refused to go along with their agenda and was eliminated. They found a stooge double who could exploit Paul's popularity to promote their agenda. Not long after, Faul (Faux Paul) began promoting LSD use & the drug culture in interviews, and

according to George Harrison, "the whole world went crazy."
Paul's murder not only eliminated someone who wouldn't get w/ the program, it may also have served as a warning to friends & family to not step out of line."http://www.youtube.com/user/faulconandsnowjob http://plasticmacca.blogspot.com/

http://doppels.proboards.com Paul McCartney: Paul (JPM) retired in late 1964 and Revolver was his last album (same for all the Beatles). Was substituted by various "Pauls" from 1964 to 1966 when twin brother Faul stepped in after plastic surgery. Faul finished up with the Beatles and had Wings, of course, until 1979/80. Faul was replaced by a third "Paul" - Phil Ackrill - who also had plastic surgery. Ackrill mostly took over until 2002, when the real Paul (JPM) came out of retirement with Back in the U.S. tour. You can tell the real Paul now by his RED HAIR. Faul has brown hair and a clipped London accent. Phil Ackrill sounds half-American. --Xander Taylor

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz...k-Of-Fame.html
Sadly fellow Beatle Ringo Starr was unable to be there, as according to Paul he was 'under the weather'.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/indiahome...=feeds-newsxml
John Lennon posthumously got his star in 1988; The Beatles as a band got their star in 1998; George Harrison got his star posthumously in 2009; and Ringo Starr got his star in 2010.
Like their respective stars, McCartney's was placed today in front of the famed Capitol Records building.
Reportedly, McCartney was nominated for a star in 1993, but scheduling issues kept the ceremony from happening until 19 years later

1966 Sanpaku eye

Hand on Heart

666 hand sign

The "V" Sign

Satanic Hand sign

All seeing eye (people)

Externalhttp://digilander.libero.it/jamespaul/fc1.html
http://xoomer.alice.it/james_paul_mccartney/fc1.html

[Forum] PAUL IS DEAD!

[Forum] The King Is Naked! The True Story Of The Beatles

Plastic Macca - Paul is Dead

[Forum] Doppelganger and Identity Research Society

The Beatles, Coleman, Adorno, and the Walrus (Oct. 17, 2009)

Original.

Taller, & looks different.

Taller

Original.

1963

1964

Taller

"Faul" the McCartney Imposter caught on film unawares with his fake plastic ear missing a piece.

Faul McCartney caught playing guitar right-handed in India on the Anthology. Plastic Macca - Paul is Dead

Pictures from (the Jane Asher/Paul height photo is the most striking) http://digilander.libero.it/jamespaul/fc1.html

Before we move on, let's look quickly at some more pictures of pre-67 Paul (on the left) and post-67 "Paul" (on the right):
http://digilander.libero.it/jamespaul/fc1.html

**Part 4 section 2: The Imposter's Height.**
Here we will look for put forth evidence of the height difference between the real Paul McCartney and his look-alike replacement. http://digilander.libero.it/jamespaul/fc1.html

We know that John, Paul and George were all approximately the same height, 5'11". Here are John and Paul standing side by side during their last performance on Ed Sullivan on August 14th 1965:

Paul was still the same approximate height as John three months later, during the filming of the Day Tripper video on November 23rd 1965; it's hard to capture on their exact heights in a frame like this, as they bop around a lot while performing, but they appear roughly the same height:

Now we see "Paul" from the cover of Sgt. Pepper; he suddenly appears to be a few inches taller than the others. It would appear this man is roughly 2 to 3 inches than taller in real world terms. This difference is also seen in the inside photo:

     From the other photos in the booklet, they all seem to be wearing the same kind of costume shoes to match their outfits, and they actually rented these costumes from a costume shop, so it is unlikely that different heels are to blame
     Now, when we view the wax figures of the Beatles in the same photo, Paul's figure appears the same height as John and George. Madame Tussaud's is known for preparing their figures to the subjects specific physical measurements, and indeed they have prepared John, Paul and George at aprroximately the same height:

We see this difference in height again in the film Magial Mystery Tour. Here we see the boys standing side by side, again wearing matching shoes; "Paul" is on the right end and clearly stands a few inches taller than John and George. His shoulders in particular are considerably higher. You can also just make out the infamous "black carnation" clue; the others wear red carnations, while "Paul" is singled out by wearing a black carnation:

And here we see a frame from "I Am The Walrus"; note that he is actually wearing no shoes in this video sequence, and yet he still appears taller than the others. Could this man really be the same height as John Lennon and George Harrison?

So let's come back to the comparison from the introduction page:

Although the angles are a little different, I think with the other evidence and the fact that the head size is the same result as the head size comparison make this comparison at least partly reliable. Again, the bass is the same model, a Hofner 500/1, and the headstock, neck length and fret spacing has been equalized close enough to say that these pictures are now on the same scale.
Paul, John's and Georges heights are was listed as 5'11" in biographical descriptions going back to 1963, and Paul was definately the same approximate height as John Lennon at the end of 1965. He was 23 going on 24. Men generally stop growing in height between the ages of 17 and 21. It is very rare that a man will gain any significant height past the age of 22; Paul was the same height in 1963 as he was in 1965. It seems highly unlikely that he would go for several years without any significant growth, and then suddenly, at the age of 24, suddenly grow between 2 inches and 3 inches to 6'1 or 6'2, suddenly looking over John's head.

Below we see two picture's supposedly of "Paul" with his girlfriend Jane Asher; one taken before 67, and one taken after:

Now and now the photo from after 67:

The difference in height is immediatly obvious; his nose now rises well past her forehead, and her eyes are level with his chin. It is of course possible that she is wearing heels in one, but not the other. However, this change is perfectly consistent with the other photos shown above, as well as the scale comparison.
Another interesting note that may or may not be significant; notice where they are walking........A GRAVEYARD! Now, this is almost certainly a sheduled photo shoot for a magazine, and not just some nut with a camera following them. Why in the world would they pick a graveyard for the location? This is a completely contrived photo of a romantic couple on a quiet stroll........THROUGH A GRAVEYARD!

Now what about eye color. Is it possible to find a this good a look-alike who just happens to have the same eye color?

To conclude, let's look at a few more pictures of Paul and "Faul". You decide if there's a difference...

Once again, THIS IS THE ONE AND ONLY PAUL MCCARTNEY:

And this is "Faul", a convincing imposter, but in the end his face simply does not match:

     Well friends, I think that we've pretty much covered the facial comparison. While there are similarities in these men's features, the overall differences in the size and shape of the skull make for a very convincing evidence that this is in fact a different man, and the fact that distinct and deliberate changes have taken place in this second man's face further demonstrates his attempts to look more like the real Paul McCartney. Poor, poor Paul; we love you Paul, you are sorely missed.

     Details about the story at: The King Is Naked!
     Any question about? Please e-mail us at: 60IF Forum

Return to Main Page