|
|
Post by Sun King™ on Jan 21, 2007 22:44:41 GMT
I still don't get it. The Faux Paul as you call him looks more like Paul McCartney than the older man.  Even if Paul is in disguise (he had his eyebrows dropped down with surgery and other "variations" like increasing ear lobes and changing a bit cheeks) his nose is still just the same as at the Beatles time.... Not Billy's one...... |
|
|
|
Post by Sun King™ on Jan 21, 2007 22:51:37 GMT
And what about the car accident???  So he must survived it?! THAT is the question....   He still presents a very long scar all along the area between nose base and upper lip JUST LIKE the "Walrus" picture of "Free As A Bird" ... "he was with his teeth hanging outside of his cut upper lip...." The Walrus Is Back! |
|
|
|
Post by The Duke of Spiders on Jan 22, 2007 18:49:47 GMT
So now you're saying the 60IF document is false?
|
|
|
|
Post by Sun King™ on Jan 22, 2007 22:55:55 GMT
So now you're saying the 60IF document is false? If we are at this stage (I think the last one, at last) of truth it's BECAUSE there was that document. Now I think that if we found all the truth, all at once, it would just be TOO MUCH. So it is phased out so we can handle it. And it's still too much. |
|
|
|
Post by Paul Bearer on Jan 23, 2007 0:01:52 GMT
SK, where did you make the sudden connection between JPM and Rumsfield? Out of millions of people you could have compared? This connection seemed to come from you out of thin air. It's like you've jumped the shark. Did you get a tip off from somewhere? Hmmm...Rumsfeld...Strawberry fields...Strawberry rum...  |
|
|
|
Post by Sun King™ on Jan 23, 2007 0:23:11 GMT
SK, where did you make the sudden connection between JPM and Rumsfield? Out of millions of people you could have compared? This connection seemed to come from you out of thin air. It's like you've jumped the shark. Did you get a tip off from somewhere? Hmmm...Rumsfield...Strawberry fields...Strawberry rum... As Always ... The King Is Naked!  |
|
|
|
Post by Perplexed on Jan 23, 2007 8:37:21 GMT
SK, where did you make the sudden connection between JPM and Rumsfield? Out of millions of people you could have compared? This connection seemed to come from you out of thin air. It's like you've jumped the shark. Did you get a tip off from somewhere? Hmmm...Rumsfield...Strawberry fields...Strawberry rum... As Always ... The King Is Naked! But let's at least toss him a fluffy bathrobe, shall we? A "woolens" one..... |
|
|
|
Post by Paul Bearer on Jan 24, 2007 1:25:23 GMT
*** post removed in a feeble and pathetic attempt to deny I ever posted it due to a rather embarrassing misunderstanding on my part ***
|
|
|
|
Post by Forum Manager on Jan 24, 2007 3:25:25 GMT
SK, where did you make the sudden connection between JPM and Rumsfield? Out of millions of people you could have compared? This connection seemed to come from you out of thin air. It's like you've jumped the shark. Did you get a tip off from somewhere? Hmmm...Rumsfeld...Strawberry fields...Strawberry rum... en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_RumsfeldClose Up - Young RumsfieldDoes it sound like the Paul we know? If the scenario is true however, I wonder that JPM didn't replace the original Donald Rumsfield. Note one of Donald's children is called Nicholas! The link below shows a series of photos of the young Donald Rumsfield. I don't think this is JPM at all! Young Donald RumsfeldAnd rumsfeld was born in 1932 - ten years BEFORE JPM. This makes less and less sense to me.  What are you talking about? No one said that JPM is Donald Rumsfeld.   Yes, but......when he's 74! Instead there is no solution of continuity among the "two" persons in the original comparison.... Doc, you told me that you was listening to the REAL Paul on some songs on the "Paul McCartney" last album ....  Now you SEE the reason why....  |
|
|
|
Post by Sun King™ on Jan 24, 2007 16:55:03 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Paul Bearer on Jan 25, 2007 0:49:46 GMT
Sorry FM. I just got confused. I thought the follwing guy was Rumsfeld. So this is Neil Aspinall? If JPM decided to change his identity to avoid mafia hits and the like, want I want to know is why would the remaining Beatles really mourn if they knew he was still alive and part of their entourage? And couldn't he keep secretly writing and singing for them? Why would they need an impersonator's voice? |
|
|
|
Post by Sun King™ on Jan 25, 2007 5:07:57 GMT
Sorry FM. I just got confused. I thought the follwing guy was Rumsfeld. So this is Neil Aspinall? If JPM decided to change his identity to avoid mafia hits and the like, want I want to know is why would the remaining Beatles really mourn if they knew he was still alive and part of their entourage? And couldn't he keep secretly writing and singing for them? Why would they need an impersonator's voice? He needed a place to hide away.... Into a British "Foreign" Legion? Photo of Paul disguised as "Aspinall" are only about last time.  www.vh1.com/artists/news/1530354/05082006/beatles.jhtmlSending us messages? |
|
|
|
Post by Perplexed on Jan 25, 2007 10:09:35 GMT
On left: Faul in a baldcap. On right: Nancy Pelosi out of make-up. |
|
|
|
Post by Paulythene Paul on Jan 25, 2007 16:32:52 GMT
If today's Neil Aspinall is really truly Paul, what's with the bushy eyebrows? Those wirey strands jutting out every which way don't look fake, and they certainly don't look like Paul's eyebrows. I do admit, the scarring and the facial shape do look telling. The eyebrows are holding me back from acceptance of this twisting tale's most recent assertion.
|
|
|
|
Post by PaulDead66 on Jan 25, 2007 18:10:16 GMT
You're right Paulythene Paul I've try to spoke with my mother about the Neil / Paul Story, but she won't hear it... I can understand she, because I'm the same conviction that Paul is really dead We think that "Neil" has no likeness with Paul |
|
|
|
Post by Paulythene Paul on Jan 25, 2007 18:23:09 GMT
I see a little bit of resemblance to Paul, 1 ONE IX HE DIE, in the lips, chin and nose, as well as the baldness factor, but around the eyes there seems incongruity. Furthermore, I've heard "Neil" speak in Beatles Anthology videos and the voice he has sounds almost nothing like Paul's. I'd also want to know which hand Neil has dominant. Is he a "lefty" now when before 1966 he was a "righty"? I am intrigued, but quite uncertain.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sun King™ on Jan 25, 2007 23:41:51 GMT
 What impresses me is that head shape is just the same... |
|
|
|
Post by Paul Bearer on Jan 26, 2007 0:51:38 GMT
Rethinking the story a bit then, If Neil Aspinal is our JPM them perhaps:
Paul changed his identity to avoid any more mafia-type attempts on his life.
In September/October, to avoid being noticed, he tried experimenting with disguises in one or two public places, a concert (disguised as an arab) and a pub but he still got recognised in the pub.
Therefore he realised a more permanent solution was required and had plastic surgery to become a new identity - Neil AS-IN_PAUL. (And Neil backward spells LIEN meaning lying).
The Paul-is-dead clues were implanted to convince the hit men that Paul was dead.
Enough "mistakes" were made with the replacement (ie: forgetting the cleft in JPM's chin before Bill's first press conference as Paul - would professional surgeons really be that careless?) to ensure rumours spread about Paul's death without actually putting it into exact focus.
They used impersonator voices rather than JPM's real voice to make it even more obvious to any would-be killers but it was still enough to fool the fans for a while to keep them happy and for the money to keep rolling in.
The remaining Beatles could always deny that Paul was dead with a straight face because it was true!
In 1969, the rumours were becoming too pronounced - they didn't want the truth to come out YET so they made out it was a hoax by popularising the rumours with some confusing or false clues.
However, Bill deciding to keep the role meant it now became a permanent thing.
Different people were given slightly different stories over time so that confusing rumours would spread - some were actually told that Paul was dead. Perhaps the remaining Beatles were actually told this at first!
Perhaps many music industry insiders, including musicians, were told that Paul was actually dead and so it became an official industry "secret" and hence many Paul-is-dead clues by other musicians. This is the way JPM wanted it so he could live a new life, so-of like a music industry witness-protection program.
Different insiders coming forward have really believed the information they have given us is valid but maybe they all had been given slightly different stories. So while they may be sincere, they may also be wrong in an area of two. This was to prevent the true and full story ever coming out. Perhaps the original insider who gave the original version of 60IF really believed the original story we were told.
Question: If the name Neil Aspinal is indeed a code word, doesn't that imply the identity didn't exist until JPM decided to disappear? Have some of the photos pre-fall 1966 then been tagged with Neil Aspinal's name SINCE that time, like a rewriting of history or is there vintage documentation of a Neil Aspinal prior to this time?
|
|
|
|
Post by BeatlePaul on Jan 26, 2007 22:46:44 GMT
Rethinking the story a bit then, If Neil Aspinal is our JPM them perhaps: Paul changed his identity to avoid any more mafia-type attempts on his life. Wounds of his last accident (september 1966) were very deep. He needed too much time to restore a good look. It was Bill. Paul as Neil is VERY recent appearance. Minor and light surgery (increasing ear lobes dropping eyebrows and changing a bit cheeks shape) to "take" an "Aspinall" look. Actually in MMT stripes it was told about McCartney being a Major. Not that he was dead. Paul was a dead man .... miss him miss him miss him Paul was NO MORE as before Yes Exactly Y E S Y E S I don't know why you say Goodbye.... Y E S |
|
|
|
Post by The Duke of Spiders on Jan 27, 2007 0:14:58 GMT
Okay, I'm completely confused. Paul never died and he and Neil switched places?
|
|
|
|
Post by BeatlePaul on Jan 27, 2007 9:25:45 GMT
Okay, I'm completely confused. Paul never died and he and Neil switched places? There were many "Aspinalls" that was a "buffer" role. Maybe there was an "original" Aspinall but that place was covered by many characters. Returning back to the scene Paul took the "Aspinall" place that was already prepared for him, the MAIN representative of the "Apaul ltd" or just "Apple ltd" |
|
|
|
Post by Paulythene Paul on Jan 27, 2007 10:06:50 GMT
Neil Aspinall interviewed on Dutch TV in the early 1990s: www.youtube.com/watch?v=pfiSn2U-woM&NRNeil Aspinall playing guitar on the left side of the screen (strumming with his right hand) at John Lennon's 31st birthday party in 1971: www.youtube.com/watch?v=zcshoQ5C71sThese two "Neils" appear to be the same person, in my opinion, judging by the shape of their noses and predominant forebrows. They are not the same person as the "Neil" we are now focused upon. |
|
|
|
Post by cranberrysauce on Jan 27, 2007 12:37:46 GMT
I still believe that Neil is not Paul no matter what you can come up with. Neil was with the Beatles from early on and not a new comer in the mid 60's and made to look like Paul.
This forum is going in a completely different direction from where it started. It is good to introduce new ideas, but when some of those ideas are ridiculous then we need to stop pursuing in that direction. So I think that the majority of us can say that Neil is not Paul and Paul is not Neil.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Duke of Spiders on Jan 28, 2007 16:54:55 GMT
But are we now saying Paul never died? This is all very confusing.
|
|
|
|
Post by unrepentant on Jan 28, 2007 21:53:45 GMT
i leave this place for two weeks and it's gone completely bonkers!!
well almost....but i like the world better with JPM still in it. convincing my intellect it really IS that way is not going to be easy.
|
|
