|
|
Post by Paulythene Paul on Sept 21, 2006 6:45:30 GMT
Can anyone provide a brief summary of where we are to date with this thread. I just don't have time to get myself properly up to date with all the stuff on the forum. Unrepentent wrote something similar. I'll give it a try. Paul McCartney went missing. Most likely he died, just like the many clues on Beatle albums suggest fairly clearly (e.g. "I buried Paul" and "Paul is a dead man; miss him, miss him, miss him" from The White Album). Why did he die? We don't know. Some of us have presented theories as to why it happened. I think none I've seen here are conclusive. What is certain is that he was replaced. The evidence is undeniable, especially the ortho-biogenic comparisons. Who was brought in to replace him? Quite likely a list of candidates was written up, and maybe some of them were met with. I have suggested that Denny Laine, who had recently left the Moody Blues and was an ambitious and lively performer with similar looks to JPM would have been one of those who were being considered, but ultimately rejected for various reasons. Perhaps because the voice was too distinctive and unlike McCartney's. Perhaps because he was too well known due to his fame from the hit he wrote and sang, "Go Now". I also suggested that Denny Laine probably suggested that his ex-bandmate from The Diplomats, Phil Ackrill, who had left the music business only two years previously, who had a very low profile, and was an accomplished guitarist and singer as well as a vibrant, positive personality - all similar to JPM - and as well, already contracted to some extent with E.M.I., might be the ideal candidate. About Neil Aspinall having been suggested as the replacement, with all due respect to those who suggested it and supported that idea, it just is not correct. It was a dead-end theory that has been superceded by a new theory centered around Phil Ackrill. This thread quietly morphed along these lines around page 6. In my opinion, Neil Aspinall never was placed in the role of Paul McCartney. His inclusion in the poster of the Beatles' White Album was not meant by John Lennon to imply that Neil Aspinall had taken on the role of Paul any more than the inclusion of Mal Evans in the poster was meant to imply that Mal was playing that role. It is only because this thread started from page 1 with the mistaken viewpoint of Neil As Paul that people are confused. Perhaps for the sake of clarity, and the further development of this thread without past problematic encumbrances, it would be helpful if others who are in agreement with me that Neil Aspinall never was Neil As Paul would say so now. |
|
|
|
Post by Perplexed on Sept 21, 2006 7:28:02 GMT
If Phaul is Phil from Birmingham (as I'm fairly well convinced), then he'll not speak with a Scousers accent but a Brummy accent, no? Just like we heard at the Rock Show from "our dear old friend and confidante, Mademoiselle Kittay"! "... 'y' at the end of a word becomes 'ay'" (as copied from... www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A496352 ). There maybe something reallay to this Brummy Business. |
|
|
|
Post by unrepentant on Sept 22, 2006 3:21:33 GMT
phil ackrill, eh?
so why try [on SGT. PEPPER] to mentally connect WILLIAM SHEPHERD with "paul" being replaced? pablo after all is spanish for "paul", and the name pablo is a well-known part of the song BEING FOR THE BENEFIT OF MISTER KITE. so why would john include lyrics on PEPPER from an old circus poster, mentioning this pablo fanque, like he did? in case you don't know, pablo fanque was an early circus promoter who was represented [after he got sick] by someone named william shepherd. then there is the mention of BUNGALO BILL on the white album........a man who, by amazing coincidence, was also born william shepherd.
two william shepherds mentioned from the horse's mouth in the span of about a year, yet not one phil ackrill....... sorry, but i trust lennon's creativity more than the speculation of my fellow boardmates. at least till something more concrete comes up.
|
|
|
|
Post by Perplexed on Sept 22, 2006 3:28:48 GMT
Hmmm. Agreed. In my view, Acrill is for sure NOT William. Maybe there is a remote connection.
But it's 2 separate guys.
|
|
|
|
Post by Paulythene Paul on Sept 22, 2006 6:15:13 GMT
Yeahr. so why try [on SGT. PEPPER] to mentally connect WILLIAM SHEPHERD with "paul" being replaced? I don't buy into that assumption. pablo after all is spanish for "paul", and the name pablo is a well-known part of the song BEING FOR THE BENEFIT OF MISTER KITE. Yeahr. so why would john include lyrics on PEPPER from an old circus poster, mentioning this pablo fanque, like he did? Why not? I've written some songs. I know, just as any songwriter knows, inspiration can come from many triggers. Here is a story of the genesis of the song: "On January 31, 1967 the Beatles went to Knole Park near Sevenoaks in Kent to make the promotional film for Strawberry Fields Forever. 'There was an antique shop close to the hotel we were using in Sevenoaks,' remembers former Apple employee Tony Bramwell. 'John and I wandered in and John spotted this framed Victorian circus poster and bought it.'
Inspired by the finely-wrought language and the evocative names of the performers on the poster, John began to compose a song based on it. By now it was hanging on the wall of his music room and John's long-time friend Pete Shotten can remember him squinting at the words while he picked out a tune on his piano. "You can read the original wording of the poster here. in case you don't know, pablo fanque was an early circus promoter who was represented [after he got sick] by someone named william shepherd. That doesn't mean that Phaul was previously William Shepherd. then there is the mention of BUNGALO BILL on the white album........a man who, by amazing coincidence, was also born william shepherd. I'm not familiar with this Bungalo Bill/William Shepherd coincidence. Please provide support links, Unrepentent. two william shepherds mentioned from the horse's mouth in the span of about a year, yet not one phil ackrill....... You left out "Billy Shears". Still, it could all be coincidence. sorry, but i trust lennon's creativity more than the speculation of my fellow boardmates. at least till something more concrete comes up. Suit yourself, but I'm more inclined to believe my eyes. We have photo comparisons showing the similarities of appearance between Phil Ackrill and Phaul. (Thanks BeatlePaul, SunKing, ezWizard & Doc!) What photographs are there of the William Shepherd you and others hypothesize existed? I know of none. As much as I might have wanted to believe in him (especially from a Canadian point of view), I believe that William Shepherd is just a figment of some enthusiast's imagination. At least Neil Aspinall is a real person, and even though the case for him being the person to replace Paul is weak, it is a lot stronger than the case for some unknown, unseen person vaguely thought to be named William Shepherd being the replacer. I ask again, who here does not agree with the idea that Neil Aspinall is the one who replaced Paul McCartney? And I add to the question, who here does not agree with the idea that the person who replaced Paul McCartney was named William Shepherd? Lastly, who here agrees that Phil Ackrill became Phaul, or at least believes the evidence is strongest for him being the one? By the way, I love that name, Ackrill. It sounds like "acrylic", which is an artificial fabric meant to replace a natural one. What tremendous irony! |
|
|
|
Post by plastic paul on Sept 22, 2006 12:29:23 GMT
To be honest there are a lot more references to a man named William, Bill, Billy etc. in Beatle related history than Phil, not that necessarily means anything!!!  |
|
|
|
Post by Sun King™ on Sept 22, 2006 17:17:48 GMT
I need more informations about Denny Laine and The Diplomats and about Phil Ackril (or RalSton) BUT all those photos are SURELY about our Faux-Paul McCartney AKA Faul or Phaul .... I still thing that Faul's name was William or better he was called Bill. Neil Aspinall (the true one) and Bill were TWO different people. Maybe Bill was confused with Neil since their similar haircut. Bill/Phil replaced in the first time Brian Epstein (26 August 1965). On Tuesday 27 September 1966 Bill/Phil already "Frian" enters the Priory Hospital in Putney, for a complete rest-yling and surgical che(e)ks. There was a "Full British Way" to replacements AGAINST the U.S one ALREADY set up (see Dino Danelli). |
|
|
|
Post by ezwizard on Sept 23, 2006 14:18:19 GMT
Believe whatever you'd like.   But until someone finds Phil...he's my man. EZ |
|
|
|
Post by Paulythene Paul on Sept 24, 2006 6:38:08 GMT
Sun King, that's great work you've done matching the photo of Phaul with Phil. I'd like to share the picture with others outside of this forum, but before I do, I'm wondering if it would be feasable for you to fix the spelling mistake in Phil's last name as it appears below him in the photo, adding a second letter l at the end so that it says, correctly, "Phil Ackrill" instead of the misspelled "Phil Ackril"? Also, do you have any objection to the animated photo being shared with others outside of this forum? Cheers!  Paulythene Paul |
|
|
|
Post by Sun King™ on Sept 25, 2006 17:46:24 GMT
The Diplomats ended because Bill/Phil left them.... for the ..Pepperpots...but... Denny Laine was the first Beatles choice about a vocal Paul's replacement..... |
|
|
|
Post by LUCY on Sept 26, 2006 12:14:21 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by unrepentant on Sept 26, 2006 14:54:02 GMT
john lennon, bill clinton, O.J. simpson........three blue ribbon RACONTEURS.
|
|
|
|
Post by Paulythene Paul on Sept 26, 2006 15:22:16 GMT
John doesn't say anything about Phil Ackrill in this interview. With all due respect, Lucy, I don't think the interview on YouTube you've posted here is relevant to this thread. Perhaps posting it, along with a transcript (if possible) to another thread would be useful. Paulythene Paul |
|
|
|
Post by unrepentant on Sept 27, 2006 1:08:30 GMT
john was more or less divorced from reality since paul's death. he sounds mind programmed there.....like a used car salesman trying to make a sale to keep his job. when i was listening to that interview it made me rethink the rumor that he really HAD killed paul in a fit of paranoid acid-fueled rage. i don't want it to be true either, but why couldn't that have happened? because john "wouldn't do something like that?" give me a break. john was notorious for violence when under the influence of drugs prior to 1967. and paul was known to play practical jokes from time to time.....you add it up. the late 60's LSD was a brand new drug and no one knew what to expect with it....lennon publicly stated the drug made him paranoid.
i can't see john doing a complete about face the way he did [to pacifism] unless he had personally seen how ugly the results of HIS own violence could be.
that interview is interesting for several reasons. john was no doubt prodded by the powers that be [via yoko?] into doing some damage control, as part of his "pennance" for placing those clues everywhere. in hindsight the "paul is dead" rumors were the equivilent of firefighters in a forest fire LIGHTING a small blaze in oder to put out a larger one, but john's help was needed; his legion of followers would believe him with no questions asked. yet it is still pretty desperate of him to claim that he never had any knowledge of clues.....
and then there's his declaration that the beatles would have told everyone if paul DID die. hmmmmmm.................. there is something disturbing about that statement. it IMPLIES that his death was something that COULD have been covered up by everyone involved if they did NOT want to disclose it...... does anyone else pick up on that??
|
|
|
|
Post by unrepentant on Sept 29, 2006 21:30:21 GMT
since most of the board is away on that important secret mission and unable to post here i guess i will add another two cents worth:
it is fairly hard to deny john put clues in lyrics and that he was ordered to recant all of that in 1970. this by itself seems like a pretty open and shut case of a coverup to me....if he put CLUES, all centering on paul and a death/replacement scenario, and EVEN NAMEDTHE REPLACEMENT, then there was something that made him do all that....so what was it? not a "hoax" as the beatles were in the business of making music, not hoaxes. so if we rule out a HOAX then what are we left with? LOL, i think you know what i'm getting at here. where there's smoke there's fire.
who would need a stupid hoax to be put to rest, a dumb publicity stunt?? it wasn't hurting record sales.... no one would. but powers that be could not allow these very REAL clues to come out and gradually turn world attention to the very REAL replacement.
hells bells, this whole damn thing would have been exposed 35 years ago if not for john's regrettable decision to play dumb and the tendency of the masses to have their heads up their rumps.
|
|
|
|
Post by Paulythene Paul on Sept 30, 2006 0:00:40 GMT
hells bells, this whole damn thing would have been exposed 35 years ago if not for john's regrettable decision to play dumb and the tendency of the masses to have their heads up their rumps. Well said, unrepentant. |
|
|
|
Post by latvietis on Sept 30, 2006 5:15:28 GMT
Wait a second....
Denny Laine (and the Diplomats) => Penny Lane?
|
|
|
|
Post by Paulythene Paul on Sept 30, 2006 7:55:58 GMT
Wait a second.... Denny Laine (and the Diplomats) => Penny Lane? Yes, Latvietis. The Rutles saw the connection first (see song titles at the bottom of the image):  Pig it! |
|
|
|
Post by latvietis on Sept 30, 2006 13:19:52 GMT
And yes, you can say, that Penny Lane (song) was named after a street in Liverpool, and also i don't disbelieve (sorry, if incorrect) in it. I just say that the name (Denny Laine) reminded them about the Penny Lane.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sun King™ on Sept 30, 2006 14:00:56 GMT
Wait a second.... Denny Laine (and the Diplomats) => Penny Lane? All You Need Is ..... to search in this forum BTW I met Ayrton at Imola on 1986. A Great Great Great Man! |
|
|
|
Post by latvietis on Sept 30, 2006 17:16:02 GMT
WTF?  ?   P.S. Image made by me ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Sun King™ on Oct 1, 2006 20:09:47 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Paulythene Paul on Oct 2, 2006 3:00:18 GMT
 One the singer Denny Laine, the other the stand in, Phil Ackrill With all due respect, Sun King, I strongly disagree with what you're concluding here. I don't disagree that there may have been a Faul and a Phaul at the Magical Mystery Tour dinner. One of them might even have been Denny Laine! I don't know. However, one thing I'm certain of is that Denny Laine could not sing as well, nor as with as much versatility as the actual person who took over the job and life of Paul McCartney. Perhaps that's just a matter of opinion, although if anyone listens to the singing of Denny Laine with Wings and Moody Blues before that, I think it would be pretty close to unanimous that the man's voice was not versatile. He always sounded more or less the same. I don't mean that in a monotonous sense. I mean that in a distinctive sense, about as unique and distinctive as Rod Stewart's voice is in his own way. I mean, if you hear a clip of Denny's voice and right away you know it's Denny Laine. In contrast, listen to Paul and Linda McCartney's album Ram and you'll probably hear about a half dozen different kinds of singing voices from that man. The rollicking voice in Smile Away where Phaul comes close to matching JPM's imitation of Marvin Gaye's bellow (but overshoots the mark). The cooing Ram On. The bizarre Monkberry Moon Delight. The dreamy, romantic Back Seat of My Car. Heck, Admiral Halsey is a treasure trove of variety in and of itself! That's versatility! Opinion aside, I think it's obvious Denny Laine could not have been "the singer" and Phil Ackrill "the stand in". Obvious how? Well, close to ten years of being in the same musical group, recording albums and playing live in front of audiences from the time of 1971's Wild Life to 1979's Back to the Egg kind of obvious. Sure, Denny sang a lot in Wings. Beware My Love. Go Now. I Must Do Something About It. But he wasn't THE singer. I'm still hoping someone in England will do some detective legwork and find out what happened to Phil Ackril after he left the Diplomats near the end of 1964 and report what they find out here. Also, it would be nice to get some info from people who were into the Brumy rock scene what they thought of Phil Ackril as a guitarist and backup singer. I think one of the reasons why some people are finding it difficult to accept that Phil Ackrill is "the one" is due to the fact that we don't yet know what kind of a singer or musician he was when he was in The Diplomats. But most of all... I want a horse. I want a sheep. I wanna get me a good nights sleep! |
|
|
|
Post by Sun King™ on Oct 2, 2006 5:50:42 GMT
One the singer Denny Laine, the other the stand in, Phil Ackrill With all due respect, Sun King, I strongly disagree with what you're concluding here. I don't disagree that there may have been a Faul and a Phaul at the Magical Mystery Tour dinner. One of them might even have been Denny Laine! I don't know. However, one thing I'm certain of is that Denny Laine could not sing as well, nor as with as much versatility as the actual person who took over the job and life of Paul McCartney. Perhaps that's just a matter of opinion, although if anyone listens to the singing of Denny Laine with Wings and Moody Blues before that, I think it would be pretty close to unanimous that the man's voice was not versatile. He always sounded more or less the same. I don't mean that in a monotonous sense. I mean that in a distinctive sense, about as unique and distinctive as Rod Stewart's voice is in his own way. I mean, if you hear a clip of Denny's voice and right away you know it's Denny Laine. In contrast, listen to Paul and Linda McCartney's album Ram and you'll probably hear about a half dozen different kinds of singing voices from that man. The rollicking voice in Smile Away where Phaul comes close to matching JPM's imitation of Marvin Gaye's bellow (but overshoots the mark). The cooing Ram On. The bizarre Monkberry Moon Delight. The dreamy, romantic Back Seat of My Car. Heck, Admiral Halsey is a treasure trove of variety in and of itself! That's versatility! Opinion aside, I think it's obvious Denny Laine could not have been "the singer" and Phil Ackrill "the stand in". Obvious how? Well, close to ten years of being in the same musical group, recording albums and playing live in front of audiences from the time of 1971's Wild Life to 1979's Back to the Egg kind of obvious. Sure, Denny sang a lot in Wings. Beware My Love. Go Now. I Must Do Something About It. But he wasn't THE singer. I'm still hoping someone in England will do some detective legwork and find out what happened to Phil Ackril after he left the Diplomats near the end of 1964 and report what they find out here. Also, it would be nice to get some info from people who were into the Brumy rock scene what they thought of Phil Ackril as a guitarist and backup singer. I think one of the reasons why some people are finding it difficult to accept that Phil Ackrill is "the one" is due to the fact that we don't yet know what kind of a singer or musician he was when he was in The Diplomats. But most of all... I want a horse. I want a sheep. I wanna get me a good nights sleep! Better ..... Denny was the singer of few Beatles song. Penny Laine Mother Nature Son and very few other... Ob-La-Di Ob-La-Da was already sung by Bill/Phil. I'd like to hear Dino Danelli voice too.... |
|
|
|
Post by unrepentant on Oct 2, 2006 23:56:50 GMT
"too much monkey business" - CHUCK BERRY
|
|
? 
