|
Post by Curious on Oct 23, 2003 13:31:39 GMT
Danny, just one thing - how do you KNOW that this chronology was fully researched? WHERE does it state its sources? Newspaper and press reports can be misleading, even today. Even in the last couple of years, awards ceremonies have been transmitted allegedly live on TV, only for the public to find out that they were taped days before. I think we need to try to find as many sources as possible to verify the statement about the MM awards.
|
|
danny
Contributor
Posts: 24
|
Post by danny on Oct 23, 2003 13:56:42 GMT
CURIOUS..... it wasn't just the MM awards it was john being on the set of how i won the war in spain when he was supposedly flipping out at the seen of the body how could he be in 2 places at once....that kills the credibility of 60 if.........and lewisohn has written a few books on the beatles including the beatles recording sessions, which is considered the definitive works of their sessions......now i know someone will say he is in on the conspiracy, but everytime some evidence is brought up that is the answer....even sun king has said that john was in spain on the 18th (or paris in some posts), but not in england, well i suggest reading 60if again, this document puts him in england, when in reality he was on the set of how i won the war in spain.....this puts the credibility of 60if in question.....when u r proving something, evidence against it cant be just shoved aside saying its a conspiracy.... i showed documented evidence which, until i brought up this book and author, was never discredited before.....60if is an unpublished document never seen by the public........u r all trying to prove something huge.... do it right
|
|
|
Post by innspector on Oct 23, 2003 14:50:06 GMT
From what I've read in this thread, for some reason somebody want to discredit everything that goes against 60IF and in his messages I see a somewhat nervous reaction, that puts me into thinking.
I'm sure Paul died. I believe in 60IF, although I sense that is not completely accurate, Sun King himself said that a mayor point is incorrect (by the way, why the source who said that didn't provide the answer??)
But, beware!! it's credibility can be wearing little by little , more threads against it appearing, one by one.
I agree with a post here that stated that the efforts should be directed to prove that Paul was replaced, and then fight in court with solid proofs regarding this, and then the rest must come out (the how and why).
|
|
danny
Contributor
Posts: 24
|
Post by danny on Oct 23, 2003 15:02:20 GMT
then explain the sept 18th date of john in spain when they suppsoedly found the body........and u sense a nervous reaction?...u make no sense.......i asked a valid question and ur answers are that now sun king says a major point of ur evidence in incorrect then how can u believe any of it ...it seems to me u r fixing it as u go along to match things up.....and dont get me wrong im not trying to discredit anything....just answer the questions i raised instead of discounting them because it screws up ur theory
|
|
|
Post by innspector on Oct 23, 2003 15:09:19 GMT
then explain the sept 18th date of john in spain when they suppsoedly found the body........and u sense a nervous reaction?...u make no sense.......i asked a valid question and ur answers are that now sun king says a major point of ur evidence in incorrect then how can u believe any of it ...it seems to me u r fixing it as u go along to match things up.....and dont get me wrong im not trying to discredit anything....just answer the questions i raised instead of discounting them because it screws up ur theory Hey Danny, I agree with your questions, the nervous reaction I was talking about was not from you man!! was precisely the reaction to your questions, you know who, and that's what makes me think about 60IF credibility. My motto is "don't believe all, but don't discard all also"
|
|
danny
Contributor
Posts: 24
|
Post by danny on Oct 23, 2003 15:52:38 GMT
ok i see what u mean i noticed that nervousness as well, too many questions unanswered and believe me i dont discard all, but many clues can be discarded because it seems many peolple are trying to find clues in lyrics etc. that arent there.......if u want u can find clues anywhere....don't stretch it ...u lose credibility that way
|
|
|
Post by Curious on Oct 23, 2003 16:13:00 GMT
It states CLEARLY in 60IF that John came back from abroad (Paris) the day the body was found. It's only an hour or 2 flight, even if coming from Spain. It never says anywhere that he was in the country at the time of the body being found.
Now, this is NOT a nervous reaction, it is a logical reply, as was my previous reply to you, Danny. SK has also clearly and publicly stated recently that he has new information as to one of the details of 60IF being incorrect. This may or may not have any bearing on the Spain/France thing.
|
|
|
Post by innspector on Oct 23, 2003 16:17:40 GMT
ok i see what u mean i noticed that nervousness as well, too many questions unanswered and believe me i dont discard all, but many clues can be discarded because it seems many peolple are trying to find clues in lyrics etc. that arent there.......if u want u can find clues anywhere....don't stretch it ...u lose credibility that way xactly!! I'll just say: time is passing. This whole thing can wind down, mess up, mislead, etc. or at least that's what I see in the near future, as long as: 1. The complete 60IF document doesn't get public. 2. Concrete actions don't take place, like a bringing a case to court or a media blowout. Finding clues in everything, making theories of how and why, only diminishes the main objective of this whole thing, that in my eyes should be ALERT THE WORLD THAT IT HAS BEEN FOOLED FOR 30 YEARS BY A GIGANTIC MEDIA INDUSTRY THAT GET MILLIONS FOR THE TRADEMARK "THE BEATLES" USING A DOUBLE OF ONE OF ITS ORIGINAL MEMBERS AND, THUS, THAT JAMES PAUL MC.CARTNEY IS DEAD AND HIS DEATH HAS BENN KEPT SECRET TO MAKE ONE OF THE BIGGEST COMERCIAL FRAUDS OF ALL TIME. The only really strong thing that stands here is the evidence that Paul was replaced.
|
|
|
Post by SunKing on Oct 23, 2003 16:28:07 GMT
xactly!! I'll just say: time is passing. This whole thing can wind down, mess up, mislead, etc. or at least that's what I see in the near future, as long as: 1. The complete 60IF document doesn't get public. 2. Concrete actions don't take place, like a bringing a case to court or a media blowout. Finding clues in everything, making theories of how and why, only diminishes the main objective of this whole thing, that in my eyes should be ALERT THE WORLD THAT IT HAS BEEN FOOLED FOR 30 YEARS BY A GIGANTIC MEDIA INDUSTRY THAT GET MILLIONS FOR THE TRADEMARK "THE BEATLES" USING A DOUBLE OF ONE OF ITS ORIGINAL MEMBERS AND, THUS, THAT JAMES PAUL MC.CARTNEY IS DEAD AND HIS DEATH HAS BENN KEPT SECRET TO MAKE ONE OF THE BIGGEST COMERCIAL FRAUDS OF ALL TIME. The only really strong thing that stands here is the evidence that Paul was replaced. Friends, standing ovation for innspector!
|
|
|
Post by PaulBearer on Oct 23, 2003 23:33:39 GMT
Danny, according to 60IF the body was discovered on the Tuesday of the following week, that's the 20th, not the 18th, stupid bloody Tuesday, Wednesday morning papers didn't come, that all fits. And it was nine days after the kidnapping - number 9 number 9 number 9...
The MM awards date has concerned me for some time, I asked someone who might have access to MM Magazine archives to research it but she hasn't got back to me. Please, could anyone (particularly in England) who has access to these archives or even British newspapers around this date period please do some research for us and see if you can resolve this anomaly, and also see if other events are reported that conflict with official chronology. But finding out exactly when the Melody Maker awards were and whether they were prerecorded is the most important one.
|
|
|
Post by beldabeast on Oct 24, 2003 1:43:16 GMT
Too hopeful? Not if we limit our presentation to what we can prove. I feel that by presenting a certain date or scenario would be a tactical error. The other side could discredit our whole case by leaping on a mistake we made on the date. They probally would trot out a witness they have stashed away somewhere that was with Paul the day after we said he died . I am sure they have a whole strategy worked out years ago against the advent of a group like we challenging them. No , I think that while it is well and good to discuss the accident date on ths board , but when we go public we should limit the scope of our case to proof that there are two Paul's . The other side would'nt have so many places to attack us .
|
|
|
Post by PaulBearer on Oct 24, 2003 9:22:47 GMT
I personally believe that, in case such an exposure as this every eventuated, that EMI deliberately created bogus activity that Paul was supposed to be involved with from the 13th to the 18th September - in fact I feel they have overcompensated in this area and that may ultimately be their undoing. But this has yet to be proved.
As regards Sept 19th - perhaps this is a misprint and is supposed to be Sept 9th (Friday). We have a picture (SK may show it here soon) which has the date of 13th for MM awards - if it was prerecorded on the 9th then everything would fit. But I don't want to "make" it fit, it has to fit of its own accord. Again, I need someone with access to archives around that time to do some checking and see what you can dig up please. I'm sure any major British library would have those old mags.
|
|
|
Post by ZioMarco on Oct 24, 2003 11:00:48 GMT
No, that photo is genuine. Probably only the date is faked. James Paul and Ringo filmed with Tom Jones and....a woman now I don't remeber her name. I suppose: that show was recorded on September 9th then trasmitted on September 13th. The woman was Dusty Springfield; the photo was taken from her official site. from www.dustyspringfield.co.uk/at page "the big time".
|
|
|
Post by PaulBearer on Oct 24, 2003 11:24:45 GMT
At least we know it's not Sept 19th so the chronology is wrong but...can we now find evidence that the show was prerecorded? Can anyone get hold of a copy of Melody Maker issues for Aug 66 to Oct 66? Also, is the show mentioned on the tv listings for Sept 13th?
|
|
|
Post by Karma76 on Oct 24, 2003 14:47:44 GMT
question though back then is that how they published photos with the date it aired NOT the date of an actual event. I mean sure the show may have aired on the 13th but if they were at an after party on the 9th why would they date it the 13th. i mean people knew it wasn't live so why doctor a date of a photo taken?
By the way danny and innspector I agree with you on so many points. this is one HUGE CHUNK of history actually that is trying to be exposed as untrue...you got to do it right!!!
|
|
|
Post by JoJo on Oct 25, 2003 22:52:32 GMT
There are newspapers on microfilm from that era in many libraries, there is the reader's guide to periodic literature from 1966 to dig through, who knows you might find something, even in some American magazine or paper. It's a lot harder than searching the web, but I used to do it all the time writing papers for school. (all those years ago)
|
|
|
Post by onlooker on Oct 26, 2003 17:59:54 GMT
There is a place in/near London referred to as the Newspaper Library. I can't right now remember exactly where it is, but it contains whole newspaper media from about 1850 onward... ...I've been there a few times in my life looking for specific articles - it is long and tedious work, but when found, you can get a reprint of said article to take with you. Of course, by having a range of dates to work with, one can find their specific article much faster. I usually have such a broad range of dates that I had too literally scan through thousands of newspapers. Wish I could give more info on the whereabouts, but I'm sure someone could find it. One must produce a press credential, I believe, in order to be granted entry. I think any kind of link to any media is sufficient. onlooker
|
|
|
Post by onlooker on Oct 26, 2003 18:50:16 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Chris on Oct 28, 2003 12:25:48 GMT
This is my take on it. It's very possible that the show was filmed on the 9th, & didn't aire till the 13th. The very logical reason for this is, at that time, the post-production work ( editing, sound, remixing, etc. ) could've taken 2 or 3 days to complete. This was a standard time frame for producing shows in the 1960's. So, I propose that the show was indeed recorded on Sept. 9th. It was edited & finally aired on Sept. 13th. And so, there it is... All we need is love & THE TRUTH !!!!! Chris
|
|
|
Post by Eggman on Oct 28, 2003 13:45:07 GMT
|
|
|
Post by SunKing on Oct 28, 2003 14:01:33 GMT
If thats so, we have here THE LAST PIC of James Paul ALIVE friends!!!!!! Surely, Eggy! I 've NOT found pictures of James Paul AFTER that date yet. The next (official) sadly are Faul's on December 20th 1966. The "bootleg" ones dated November 1966 are Faul's too. Then SURELY Faul "entered" before November 1966. "60IF" still all true then?
|
|
|
Post by Eggman on Oct 28, 2003 14:05:48 GMT
You're right Sunny!!!! Without any doubt, 60IF was and is THE TRUTH!!!!
|
|
|
Post by SunKing on Oct 28, 2003 14:33:53 GMT
...and... 11 September 1967 10.45am. The `Magical Mystery Tour' bus leaves from Allsop Place, London. Start of the Magical Mystery Tour. The bus visits Somerset, Cornualles; Devon; West Mailing Airport, Kent.
...from Allsop Place, London to...West Mailing Airport, Kent.
Wow! The travel James Paul made to caught Brian at the airport on .......September 11th 1966 just ONE YEAR BEFORE?
|
|
|
Post by Eggman on Oct 28, 2003 14:48:50 GMT
Just a coincidence? I don't think so!!!!
|
|
|
Post by Karma76 on Oct 28, 2003 16:41:32 GMT
If thats so, we have here THE LAST PIC of James Paul ALIVE friends!!!!!! BUT why would the photo be dated as the 13th. It would be dated as the 9th cause people knew a show was not live back then, so why make a photo false with a date? That to me does not make sense.
|
|