Paul hired a replacement in '66

[Perplexed]

Bill would have been further (or is it farther) along with the surgical protocols if they had been oraganized. This looks like a crisis control situation. Something had gone terribly, terribly, wrong.

But I do think that there is a lot of thoughtfulness in Scatterdomes theories. They read very plausibly-----they are complex and you have to read carefully. I wager many points he has found.

Perhaps James Paul was weary of it and planning an exit. Perhaps his associates were going to coopt with that----then boom! a tragic and ironic twist.......................I don't know.............

[Fwings]

Yeah, I agree... Bill still hadn't had any plastic surgery in mid-October of '66. Plus, there are several other things, like the sudden "maturing" of the band and the sadness you could see in their faces from late 1966 through '67. Look at the Pepper photos again... John looks like he's on the verge of tears. The only one who looks remotely happy there is "Paul." Then there's Paul's mangled corpse in the "Free as a Bird" video. Plus, we can't forget Frian. 60IF, to me, is the most plausible explanation to everything.

Sometimes I wonder though... for insance, Paul's last album was "Revolver." Revolver, as in a revolving door? Going from one Paul to the next? The "5 Beatles" clues are pretty big as well, but they were interchangable with "3 Beatles" clues as well.

[Perplexed]

Plus, the vocal on "Here, There, and Everywhere" is sung in a very light, competent falsetto. It is beautiful-----and the range crosses back and forth across the male voice "break" effortlessly. This is not a thing that I have found to be a JP ability in any other exposed solo. A hard call, but it could be Bill. But how?...............

I don't know when Revolver was released.

I think "For No One" is Paul, but the EQ is so different from "Rubber Soul" and earlier....................

drawing blanks tonight.............

[Scatterdome]

Howdy, everyone. I took a little time off from the forum, due to the combination of an out-of-order computer and a month’s worth of friends and family visiting for the holiday season, but during that time I had several new thoughts I felt I should post on this thread…

The first thought is something that I’ve withheld posting for a while, but was inspired to share once I saw the following posted here:

Perplexed said:

Bill would have been further (or is it farther) along with the surgical protocols if they had been organized. This looks like a crisis control situation. Something had gone terribly, terribly, wrong.

But I do think that there is a lot of thoughtfulness in Scatterdome’s theories. They read very plausibly-----they are complex and you have to read carefully. I wager many points he has found.

Perhaps James Paul was weary of it and planning an exit. Perhaps his associates were going to coopt with that----then boom! a tragic and ironic twist.......................I don't know.............

The following is a quote from page 33 and 34 of R. Gary Patterson’s book The Walrus Was Paul:

According to William J. Dowlding’s “Beatle Songs,” “McCartney did have a car crash on a Wednesday at 5 A.M. It happened on November 9, 1966, after an all-night recording session, and was coincidentally the morning after John met Yoko” (Dowlding, 158). As his sources, Dowlding cited H.V. Fulpen’s “The Beatles: An Illustrated Diary,” and “The Macs: Mike McCartney’s Family Album,” written by Michael McCartney, Paul’s brother. According to Michael McCartney, Paul had a crash on a motorbike that caused “severe facial injuries to one half of his baby face” (Dowlding, 158).

I noticed something strange since my earlier post where I pointed out three instances in the 8th tape of the Beatles Anthology where I think James Paul is shown (the two photos of John and what appears to be James Paul sitting and writing together shown during the Abbey Road sequence, and the video clip from the White Album sessions where it cuts from Faul singing the last line of “Rocky Raccoon” to what appears to be James Paul in the control booth saying “I wanna hear that, boy, I wanna hear that” in what appears to be unbroken real time.) What I noticed is that in all three instances, it is a pure left profile of his face, meaning that only the left side of his face is visible!

Could this be the ultimate reason that Faul was brought into the picture at this point? Maybe the right half of James Paul’s face was mangled in said accident, and rather than face the public as the world’s first facially disfigured (and maybe crippled) rock star, he decided to hire Faul as his public face and voice, while staying on board as a behind-the-scenes bass player, composer, occasional vocalist, and general musical mastermind. This would explain a lot, and would fit with most of my overall theory…

But I have some doubts about this possible angle. Firstly, if the above quote regarding a motorbike crash really did come from his brother Mike’s mouth as described, it seems like a rather cold way to refer to the tragic facial disfigurement of one’s little brother! The use of the term “baby face” in that context seems to indicate some general bad vibes—maybe jealousy and/or emotional distance. So can we really trust what James Paul’s brother said, if he really did say that?

My feeling is that this could be another smokescreen layer, designed to give a simple explanation for those that see past the first “Paul Is Dead” layer and realize that there were two Pauls actively involved with the Beatles from Sgt. Pepper onwards.

The biggest reason I don’t embrace this possibility more fully, and also the reason I didn’t post this until now, is that I’ve found so many strong indications and clues that James Paul had the Faul plan in mind long before November ’66. But then again, sometimes life does dish out strange coincidences, sometimes intended by higher forces on who knows which side! It just might be that James Paul did in fact have the Faul plan in mind for a while, but only decided to fully go for it because an accident disfigured and maybe crippled him. Refer to the above quote from Perplexed again…

If it’s a smokescreen designed as the next (but still not final) clue layer after the surface “Paul Is Dead” layer, it may have still been intended by James Paul himself, not just his brother and the makers of the Anthology. If my Klaatu angle is correct, then this layer might be found in the artwork of the first two Klaatu albums:

My feeling is that the smiling yellow sun on the first two Klaatu album covers represents James Paul, and that the artwork reflects the overall content and feel of each album. The first album contains a sunnier vibe, while the second album, Hope, is an overall darker journey, a foray into heavier, classical-inflected ‘70s prog-rock that seems to contain a lyrical theme of James Paul telling us he’s gone insane, whether or not he actually did. This theme is possibly highlighted by the placement of the song titles “Long Live Politzania” (Paulinsania) and "Madman" as a pair right under the cracked yellow sun symbol. The fact that the artist placed those two titles as a pair under the cracked sun, even though they are actually the 2nd and 4th songs on the album, seems to draw attention to the possibility of this theme.

Now here is where the theory that the right half of James Paul’s face was disfigured comes into play. Notice where the huge chasm in the sun’s face is? It’s on our left, but from the sun’s perspective, it’s the right half of its face!

This might seem confusing at this point, but I think what this could indicate is that James Paul was gleefully continuing to set up multiple explanations for what happened to him, in the tradition of planting both “3 Beatles” and “5 Beatles” clues in Beatles albums. The cracked sun symbol in the lower part of the Hope cover could be intended to simultaneously symbolize both his damaged face and his growing “insanity,” even if neither sad event, or only one of them, had actually happened to him!

Perhaps a simple “disfigurement” explanation was cleverly intended by James Paul, as the next layer under “PID,” to draw us closer to the truth of his existence behind the scenes, knowing that the real reasons he initiated the Faul plan, and the subsequent dramas, would be too complex to convey in simple clues. (Although I think the real story can be discerned from the collective content of certain Beatles, solo “McCartney” and Klaatu lyrics.)

On that note, I have thought of an additional possible inspiration for the Faul plan. James Paul’s main rival as a composer was Brian Wilson. In April 1965, Bruce Johnston joined the Beach Boys as an on-tour replacement for Brian Wilson. Summer Days and Summer Nights, released in June ’65, was the first product of Wilson’s new-found extra free time, and was, at the time, the Beach Boys’ best album to date, and surely James Paul noticed. The desire to compete with Brian Wilson may have led to his first thoughts on finding a way to get more of his own free time. (“Now I need a place to hide away”… James Paul, June ’65.) When Pet Sounds, Wilson’s masterpiece, was released in May ’66, a month before Revolver, James Paul may have been so blown away by the album that he felt that drastic measures would need to be taken to one-up Wilson in the next Beatles album (which turned out to be Sgt. Pepper’s) in both inspiration level and the personal free time required to conceive such a masterpiece. (As a songwriter, I have thought many times that if I could quit my day job, the extra free time gained would result in an improvement in my music. Perhaps James Paul (and the other Beatles, who also gained more free time by quitting touring) were thinking along those lines…)

I still think that the Beatles probably had Faul lined up by the time they recorded Revolver (thus, the album’s title), and maybe even had him sing a song or two on the album, while writing lyrics about the plan. But maybe at that time, they were only setting it up as a possibility, a source of lyrical inspiration, but were not yet committed to the plan. While the possible reasons I listed in the beginning of this thread may have been what initially put the Faul idea into the Beatles’ heads, perhaps an extra kick was needed before they actually decided to pull it off. Maybe it was the release of Pet Sounds, maybe a disfiguring (but not fatal) accident, maybe both, maybe neither. Anyway, I thought I’d put these ideas out there, and all comments are welcome.

Stay tuned—I have more new potential discoveries about Klaatu to share tomorrow, but now I must go to work.

(If inspiration for a song hits me at work, oh well—another idea flushed down the tube. If only I could record whenever inspiration hits me… if only I had more free time…get it? )

[Perplexed]

Agreed, that accident shot shows us far less than a "broken face", but rather minor, transient surface wounds.

Still, we can ALL agree that after a certain point in '66, we NEVER see JP's original face in any PR again. Not really.
Even in doctored pix, it isn't quite the same.

Shades of the Phantom of the Opera.

You know, for all his other acting moments(Shakespeare sketch, monieds, school plays, no?), Paul might have been content behind a mask, or lighting his face in half shadow, or any other trick to soften the effect of a messed up face. He was never dour and self-pitying. His humor and spirit would have found a amenable solution, I think, for that event, if it ever happened.

[MMCDHoward]

They spelled Pauls name wrong.

[Scatterdome]

LongJohn said:

FIRST. the accident didn't happen on november 9, 1966 and here's the proof. it's a scan from "Flip" magazine, May 1966.
so i guess that's one thing you got wrong.

You’re probably right… I have previously heard of the May ’66 motorbike accident, but I thought that the Mike McCartney quote was about a more severe motorbike accident in November ’66 based on the way Patterson wrote it into the paragraph. But upon closer inspection, I realized that Patterson probably wrote in that quote from Mike McCartney out of context. By placing the quote immediately after references to a November accident, Patterson makes it appear that Mike McCartney’s quote is about a November accident, but it was more than likely about the May accident. Oh well, that’s what I get for quoting third-hand information that was probably presented out of context.

However, if it’s not about the May accident, since the injuries from that accident don’t appear “severe,” it might be possible that Mike was talking about a November accident. But even then, who knows if he really said that. And if he did, who knows if he was telling the truth. And if he was lying, who knows why; it could be either an Illuminati smokescreen (if he’s on their side) designed to confuse, or even, on the other side of the coin, a James Paul-approved smokescreen (if Mike and James Paul were on good terms at the time) in the tradition of putting both “3 Beatles” and “5 Beatles” clues in the Beatles’ artwork to provide the multiple layers necessary to provide an analogy of Illuminati behavior to give the world the language and practice to see through the Illuminati’s own (non-Beatles-related) smokescreens. (Too many x-factors—I don’t think I’ll go there right now.)

I posted the “damaged face” idea as a potential alternate theory to my original theory, to see if it would hold water under this forum’s scrutiny and maybe offer a different reason for Faul being brought in while James Paul lived on behind the scenes. It’s not that I’ve begun to doubt the plausibility of my original theory or anything like that—I was just exploring another possibility. But now that I see Patterson’s quote was probably written into his book out of context, I think that for now, the “damaged face” angle is based on too little provable information for me to want to explore further; it’s more likely than not a dead end. If someone finds something more solid on it, great, but for now I think my original theory is stronger without it.

LongJohn said:

and now i'll go get some screen captures to check what you say about paul being in "let it be". though i would prefer next time you try to do the work YOURSELF to back up your words with some proof, just for a change.

Actually, the screen captures I was requesting that someone would post are from three different segments of the 8th videotape of the Anthology, the first from the White Album segment and the other two from the Abbey Road segment. (Their locations are described in one of my previous posts on this thread.) If I knew how to capture stills, I would do that work myself, but I’m not too technically oriented… it would be great if you would be up for doing that this time around, LJ. If you do, maybe you could send me a private message with the stills before you post anything, to see if you got the same stills I described. (I will try to learn how to do it myself soon.)

As far as backing things up with proof in general goes… my main theory consists of speculation based on commonly known facts about the Beatles and the hard forensic evidence of two Pauls, combined with theories on the Illuminati. Since proof outside of commonly known facts & the photo comparisons is hard to come by in general in regards to the Faul mystery, I ask readers (primarily those familiar with the theory on the Illuminati explored by David Icke, Jim Marrs, William Cooper, William Bramley and others) simply to use their own hearts and minds to ask themselves if the overall jist of my main theory seems plausible when factoring in human nature and known facts; I’m definitely not claiming to have proved anything or asking anyone to believe anything. I guess I am hoping that others will do most of the work in digging up any facts that may either strengthen or weaken my theory (beyond the ones I’ve already posted), because trying to actually prove it all myself would be a full-time job.

LongJohn said:

you probably say a lot more things that are refutable but i just can't read your posts... [img src="http://galeon.hispavista.com/whatevers/img/yawnhand[1].gif"]

I don’t blame you for being turned off by my “damaged face” idea, LJ, since in this case I used sparse and poorly sourced information to launch my speculation. But keep in mind that it’s the first time I have publicly speculated on a major alternate to my main theory, which I now think was a mistake, even if it ends up being an accurate lead; for me to be the one to pursue that angle further would be to spread my energies too thin, unless I find more to back it up.

I’m sorry to hear that you don’t like my writing, LJ. But you shouldn’t assume that the rest of my posts that you haven’t read are chock-full of refutable claims, since they are posts that you haven’t read. To date, since I first posted my main theory in September, whenever anyone has pointed out a seriously refutable detail, my subsequent modifications of the theory have only ended up strengthening it, at least in my opinion.

Oh well, it looks like my “damaged face” idea is probably a dead end, at least for now. Meanwhile, though, I’ve discovered some very interesting potential clues in the back two pages of the booklet of the Klaatu CD I just bought, a brand-new reissue of their third album, Sir Army Suit. Stay tuned, everyone— I promise that my analysis will be interesting!

[PaulBearer]

Just a gangster theme Chris, that's all. Nothing to get upset about. Alot more disturbing was the Butcher album cover, after which they began receiving death threats. To some, it appeared The Beatles were gloating that they had "butchered" the competition!

[Scatterdome]

Chris said:

Look at this photo, it's one of two, from the Sherriff Rd. - Fall of 1965 photo session...

Which means the photo session was over a year before Faul's first appearance…

Chris said:

I don't find these photos a bit funny. What were they THINKING

Under my theory, the Beatles (including James Paul) and Brian were planning the switch by mid ’65, with the plan for the upcoming transition to Faul and Frian providing inspiration for many of the songs that started appearing around that time. I think they started giving us clues by mid-’65, with the emotional and lyrical contents of many songs potentially revealing strong clues that Paul was planning to hire a replacement: “Yesterday,” “Day Tripper,” “We Can Work It Out,” “Drive My Car,” “I’m Looking Through You,” all from ’65, are some of Paul’s songs that, to me, strongly reveal that such a plan was possibly floating around in the Beatles’ heads, providing constant lyrical inspiration. (And of course, in my opinion “Paperback Writer” and the entire Revolver album, all pre-switch in their 1966 release dates, step up the intensity of the pre-switch lyrical clues even more)

So, under my theory, this could very well be a pre-switch clue in the ever-growing web of clues that they lovingly crafted for us.

Chris said:

Why is it Paul in the chair It could've just as easily been any one of them. WHY Paul?

If having Paul be the only one in a chair is a clue, I think it may have a simple interpretation: he is singled out in a different pose to convey that “Paul is different,” or more accurately (since it’s from before Fall ’66) “Paul is going to be different.” More vivid and well-known pre-switch examples would be: Paul being the only hatless Beatle on the cover of Help!, Paul being the only Beatle looking to the side on the Revolver cover, Paul sitting in a trunk on the second Yesterday and Today cover (all pre-switch); then, of course, there’s all of the post-switch clues where Faul is singled out in album photos, which I don’t have to repeat here since those clues have inevitably been discussed far more often on this messageboard, where pre-switch clues, bountiful as they are, are rarely speculated on, and usually are quickly dismissed when they are mentioned, by those trying to prove that the 60IF document is the truth.

Most unexpectedly, I see another potential theme in these photos that happens to tie in with a major Klaatu clue I’ve been planning to post for a few days; if my interpretation via Klaatu is accurate, you’re timing in posting these photos couldn’t be more uncanny, Chris!

Notice how Paul is holding a cane, with three more canes hooked around his arm? Hold tight, this ties in…

Just over a week ago, my copy of the brand-new (11-03) CD reissue of Klaatu’s third album, Sir Army Suit, arrived in the mail. Upon repeated listens I discovered many things in the lyrics, which I will analyze later… but first, I must tell you all what I noticed in the last page of the CD booklet. The back inner page from the new CD version is on the left, and on the right is the back cover of the original vinyl version.
www.scatterdome.com/images/sir army suit back (3).jpg[/img] www.klaatu.org/graphics/CAN-SBA-16059-Back.gif[/img]

Just as the Sgt. Pepper’s CD booklet includes a new directory for the people and objects that appear on the front cover, the brand-new CD reissue of Sir Army Suit has this new directory for the people depicted in its back and front cover art—something that was not on the original vinyl, which can be viewed at Klaatu’s homepage at this link:
www.klaatu.org/albums.html

The following is from the original promotion brochure for Sir Army Suit, which can be viewed in its entirety at the link below the paragraph:
All that's known about KLAATU is what was known in August 1976 -- that KLAATU is a self-contained, four member group based in Canada, that the band took its name from the character Michael Rennie portrayed in the 1951 sci-fi classic "The Day The Earth Stood Still".
www.klaatu.org/klaatu15.html

Once again, a four-member group! In the time since they “revealed” themselves as a trio, Klaatu members interviewed have periodically made passing references implying that producer Terry Brown was the “unofficial fourth member” who left the team before they “went public,” as can be viewed on bios on the Klaatu homepage. But bios also reveal that Terry’s role in the group was strictly as a producer, not performer or writer…

And now we have this brand-new (literally) clue from Klaatu, this directory revealing which people the Sir Army Suit album cover artist (Hugh Syme) was drawing when he created the album art back in ’78, while the group was still an “anonymous quartet,” with an extra drawing of the quartet by Dean Motter thrown onto the lower-left corner of the page to drive the message home!

See that little drawing in the left corner of the CD image, labeled “Klaatu Undercover?” It depicts a quartet with covered faces… now, look at the line of people walking in the top half of the image. From left to right, they labeled as follows: 1) John Woloschuk, 2) Terry Draper, 3)(the mystery old man with a cane is not labeled), 4)Dee Long, 5)“Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II,” (?!) 6)Linda Brown, 7)Terry Brown, and 8)Francis W. Davies.

The four men walking in front appear larger, as if they are closer to the “camera.” Three of them are labeled as Klaatu members… but who’s the old guy? He’s not fourth in line (Dee Long is) so he’s walking with the group, as if he’s part of the group… does he symbolize the real fourth member? I rather think he does…Terry Brown is depicted walking in the back of the line with his wife, not with the group in front… but this mystery “old man” is walking with the group!

Keep in mind that when this album was originally released, the membership of Klaatu was still unknown; this cartoon drawing of the band walking in line appeared on the back album cover, where fans at the time had no idea that they were looking at a symbolic drawing of the band. It is only now, with this brand-new CD reissue, that we know who the artist had in mind in these drawings… but they still didn’t give us a label for the old man walking with the group!

James Paul McCartney was born in 1942, while the three known members or Klaatu were born in 1951, so basically, if my theory is correct, he would’ve been the “old man” of the group! (Does the cane mean anything too, in light of what Chris just posted before this? I’m not sure, but it might… maybe if we find more images of Paul or Faul with a cane, this could turn into something too.)

As far as album artwork goes, something tells me that the Sir Army Suit cover is one of Klaatu’s biggest clues, and now they’ve just given us a key to decipher it!

Looks like my post today is so long, I have to split it in two to fit in the other things I wrote today...

It started off a routine day / I got through the morning in the usual way
I caught the bus on time / Good morning, Mr. Driver, drive
As I sat inside my overcoat I clutched my cane
And pressed my nose against the foggy window pane
Ho hum
The life I lead would even make a dead man yawn
-- The first verse of "A Routine Day," the first song on Sir Army Suit

[Scatterdome]

I now think that John Woloschuk functioned musically as the “Faul” of the group, having been given credit (after they “revealed themselves”) for James Paul’s compositions and bass parts while in reality, he really only performed the “Paul-esque” vocal parts (while Dee Long, the other songwriter, took the "John Lennon" role and Terry's voice the "George" role) and maybe played other non-bass instrumental parts with Klaatu.

One indication is the fact that when Klaatu finally played live in 1981, they hired a session player to handle the bass parts. Here’s a quote about the tour, with a link to where I got it from following after the quote:
"Magentalane", featuring the Terry Draper single "December Dream", was Klaatu's swan song and was released in late 1981 to coincide with a the band's first and only tour. They rehearsed for 6 weeks in a Toronto office building and hired keyboardist Gerald O'Brien (Surrender, The Hunt, Nightwinds), bassist Mike Gingrich (Toronto), and drummer Gary McCracken (Max Webster) to augment their own trio.

The first leg of the tour, in November and December 1981, was opening for Prism. Bruce Allen, Prism's manager at the time, laughed openly at the band advising them that they were going to get chewed up and spit out. Klaatu, as it turned out, stole the show at nearly every gig (Prism would split up shortly after). Draper acted as frontman/keyboardist to Woloschuk's quiet lead vocal/piano. And Long doubled on guitar and keyboards as well.
www.canoe.ca/JamMusicPopEncycloPagesD/draper.html

This doesn’t make sense, if Woloschuk was really the one who played bass on their albums—the bass playing on 3:47 E.S.T. is some of the best “McCartneyesque” bass playing I’ve heard on any ‘70s album, yet he had someone else handle bass when they played live! A modern equivalent of this event would be if one were to go see a Primus show only to discover that Les Claypool has hired someone else to play his bass parts, while Les concentrates on vocals. It just wouldn’t make sense…

Another indication of the idea that he was Klaatu’s musical Faul is the fact that Woloschuk, supposedly the “mastermind” behind the lion's share of 3:47 E.S.T. and Hope, is the only member of Klaatu to virtually drop out of releasing any music after Klaatu’s demise. Read his explanation for this from this interview from 1997 at the following link, and try to guess which parts he’s making up:
www.klaatu.org/interviews/liveandbeyond.html

=======================================
One more thought on Klaatu for this post, though I have many more to share after today.

I had previously considered that Klaatu were merely hard-core Beatles fans who had caught on to a Klaatu theme with the Beatles upon noticing noticed that Ringo appeared as Klaatu on Goodnight Vienna in 1974 and that Faul’s 1975 album was named Venus & Mars, and decided to name the band Klaatu (and plant a potentially lucrative rumour) accordingly, sometime after the release of Venus & Mars and before the 1976 release of their debut album.

But then I noticed something I had missed on the “official” timeline that appears on Klaatu’s website. Here it is, as it appears there:
In 1973, Klaatu released their first record, a single of "Hanus of Uranus" and "Sub-Rosa Subway" on the GRT label. Hanus later evolved into "Anus of Uranus" for their first album in 1976.
The release of this single, since it involves tangible objects released to the public, amounts to hard evidence that they really were named Klaatu by 1973, just like they later claimed! If my theory is correct, Ringo and Faul would’ve been well aware of James Paul’s new pet project in the works, thus explaining the blatant Klaatu clues they gave us in 1974 and 1975, prior to Klaatu’s full-length debut but after the first Klaatu release!

I feel that the content of “Anus of Uranus” and the title of “Sub Rosa Subway” refers to Faul, as I detailed in an earlier post here… interesting that those two songs were actually released before Band On The Run, the album containing “Picasso’s Last Words!” Looks like James Paul had it all planned out— I think he must’ve been nurturing Klaatu for quite a while before the debut finally arrived…

I’ve got many more discoveries about Klaatu to share, but today I’m going to give my fingers (and brain) a rest at this point.

[Perplexed]

Scatter------you have many many neuron connctions in your cerebral cortex. I can not keep up. But, I will try.

Very interesting stuff-----

[SunKing]

Chris said:

I was just looking at this link that is available at the beginning of this thread:
www.nemsworld.com/beatles/tit/tit.htm

All I can say is WOW...

Look at this photo, it's one of two, from the Sherriff Rd. - Fall of 1965 photo session...

These photos REALLY disturb me :



Here's the second one:



I don't find these photos a bit funny. What were they THINKING

A disturbed & upset...

Chris

James Paul was indeed under threat.........?

[Scatterdome]

From the day I first listened to the first Klaatu album, 3:47 E.S.T., I’ve felt that the song “Sir Bodsworth Rugglesby III” is an allegory for the continuing story of James Paul after the switch. It was after I had already come up with a strong interpretation of the lyrics that I read a decoding of the name “Sir Bodsworth Rugglesby III” somewhere, maybe in this forum. But I can’t remember where…

So, to whoever originally posted this decoding of the name, I give you full credit, whoever you are.

As can be seen on the original Klaatu website, the original title of this song was “Sir Bodsworth Rubblesby III.” This can be evidenced by the first lyric in the song:

Well do you get the itchin’ to trek about the latitudes? You do?
Well maybe you’re a chip off old Sir Rugglesby.

A “chip off old Sir Rubblesby” makes a lot more sense than “A chip off old Sir Rugglesby.” A chip off the old block = rubble. So now that the original title of the song is confirmed, here we go:

James Paul McCartney was the only one of the four Beatles to come from a middle class background; John, George and Ringo came from working-class backgrounds. In essence, when they first started playing together, he was the “wealthy" one.

When Paul, George and John first started playing together, they named the group “The Quarrymen.”

BODSWORTH = a body (person) of worth (wealth.) A person of wealth / a wealthy person.

RUBBLESBY = by way of the rubble/from the rubble. Rubble is the by-product of a quarry; rubble comes “from the quarry.” From the quarry = a Quarryman

BODSWORTH RUBBLESBY = the wealthy Quarryman.

And what about “III?” Here’s a thought: When Faul released the album titled McCartney II in 1980, he gave us what could be a major clue; the album title could be read as “McCartney the Second.” In essence, Faul potentially clueing us in to the truth of his musical identity. Klaatu, if my theory is correct, would’ve been James Paul’s third musical “act” (His stint as a public Beatle being the first, and Faul being the second), so “McCartney the Third” would be a description of this.

“SIR” could be reference to the Beatles having been “awarded” M.B.E.s by the Queen of England in 1965. Although no Beatle received an actual knighthood (where one is officially titled “Sir” ) until Faul was knighted on 12/30/1996, “SIR” could generally symbolize someone given a similar lower-tier award such as an M.B.E.

Next, here’s my analysis of the actual lyrics, which are written here as they are on the Klaatu website. The lyrics as displayed on the Klaatu website are in italics, and my analyses are in boldface.

Sir Bodsworth Rugglesby III

Act I
Act I: Paul forms his plan to hire Faul as his impostor. While that scenario is not specifically implied, this verse tells the story of a man who plans to embark on a daring, high-risk adventure that no man has ever attempted:

Well do you get the itching to
Trek about the latitudes?
You do?
Well, likely you're a chip off old Sir Rugglesby
Oh, he was quite the sporting sort
Behind his cup of tea he'd snort,
"I'll wager on the line
Ten thousand pounds and five
I'm the only man who'll ever get to hell and come back alive."

Act II
Act II: Paul embarks on his daring plan. (and “McCartney the Second” was Paul’s “Second Act.”)

Now in the fall of '49
The daring plan is initiated in the fall/autumn season…
He skipped across the seven brine
This time looking for a berth in naval history
This time Sir Rugglesby is hoping to make some history with an unprecedented feat!
"Twas never heard nor seen again
After the autumn of ’66, James Paul was virtually never heard nor seen again… (although I think his compositions and bass playing were, as well as a few vocal appearances, as detailed in my theory.)
Officially presumed as dead
O.P.D.? Now where have I heard that before in a Beatles clue…Yes, I know that Faul's badge in the famous Sgt. Pepper photo was actually an "O.P.P." badge, but the important thing is that is looks like "O.P.D." in the photograph the Beatles chose to present... and, "officially pronounced dead" is a vintage interpretation that was often heard during the original "PID" theory explosion in 1969.
But the words he left behind
Still echo through my mind:
"I'm the only man who'll ever get to hell and come back alive."
He's the only man who'd ever get to hell and come back alive.

So off he went around the world...

Intermission

Act III
Act III: Paul returns (for his third “Act” with Klaatu) and lets us know he’s back through an encoded message!

Then one night while tripping down the English coast
Here’s a major clue: the narrator is describing Sir Rugglesby returning home, which means England is Sir Rugglesby’s home!
The moon was whiter than a ghost almost
The use of the word “ghost” foreshadowing that someone “Officially Presumed Dead” is about to “return from death…”
When I heard a voice yell through a megaphone
And thereupon the midnight sea
A signal lamp signaled me
I could feel my blood run cold
As the message did decode:
"I'm the only man who'll ever get to hell and come back alive."
If Rugglesby is announcing his return by yelling through a megaphone, you know he wants everyone to know he’s back… but at the same time, in this song the narrator doesn’t actually see Rugglesby return by the end of the song; instead, he knows Rugglesby has returned because he decodes Rugglesby’s signal-lamp message! “I could feel my blood run cold as the message did decode,” indeed.
Well who else could it be
But good old Rugglesby?
When listening to this line amidst the extremely “Beatlesque” playing and composition surrounding it, it is difficult not to think: “Well who else could it be but Paul?”
He's the only man who'd ever get to hell and come back alive.
Yes he's the only man (he's the only one)
Who's ever gone and been (who's been and gone)
To hell and come back
Hell and come
To hell and come back alive

The End

Here’s the link to Klaatu’s lyrics page:
www.klaatu.org/klaatu4.html

[Rojopa]

This is for Scatterdome,

Here are the video captures from the 'Anthology' clips that you requested:

[Rojopa]

In regards to Scatterdome's theory of Paul leaving the Beatles and then possibly getting killed in the 70's: I would think that the picture in the 'Free as a Bird' video:


would show Paul's body, albeit, speculation.

[Scatterdome]

Thanks for posting those Anthology stills, Rojopa! The first two still photos (the still photos from the Abbey Road sequence) seem compelling so far... the third photo (from the "Rocky Raccoon" video clip) is compelling as well, but I was wondering if somewhere within a few frames of the frame you used for your still, if there is also a frame where we can see the angle of his jawbone area more clearly.

Rojopa said:

In regards to Scatterdome's theory of Paul leaving the Beatles...

It would be more accurate to say that my theory is that Paul never left the Beatles- he just hired Faul to do his public appearances in general (eventually including public performances on bass), and to sing most of his lead vocals in the studio. (That inaccuracy isn't your fault, it's mine; I need to modify some of my earlier posts on this thread to emphasize that angle more, since as the theory has evolved, it's gone more towards James Paul being more involved with the Beatles after '66 than I originally thought and posted. I now think he didn't just stay on as a songwriter, but that he also stayed aboard as the studio bass player and primary musical arranger of the group.)

[TotalInformation]

Anthology was all about deceptive editing and digital manipulation, though . . .

(FAUL was knighted soon thereafter.)

[Scatterdome]

Very true..

But first we must analyze the stills as they appear...

Once that technical analysis is done, there is an emotional aspect that must be analyzed in the presentation of the stills as well, even if the frames might be edited to look more like either James Paul or Faul, whoever originally posed.

For example, in regards to the "Rocky Raccoon" clip, why did the makers of the Anthology choose to present this short video clip in a way such that there is a shot of what is supposed to be Paul behind a vocal mic followed by a shot of what is supposed to be Paul in the control booth, both contributing sound in what is presented as real time to what seems to sound like an unbroken, live, 5 second audio clip?

These images could be intentional clues, if my theory is correct; the censors might have missed these ones, or even not cared (since, in my opinion, they look like the real Paul.)

For some reason, the Illuminati have not been able to stop the constant clues from the Beatles, including Faul, all the way up to the present day. (See Faul’s Back In The U.S. / Back In The World cover) My guess is that this is one example of the limits of the reach of the Illuminati’s control. While Faul openly serves the Queen (Illuminati), maybe at the same time he has long established the continuing ability to release “PID” clues as a condition of his service-- service which probably began, in one form or another, shortly after the release of Sgt. Pepper’s (if not before.)

I don’t know why nobody told you how to unfold your love
I don’t know how someone controlled you / they bought and sold you.

I don’t know how you were diverted / you were perverted too
I don’t know how you were inverted / no one alerted you.
-- George Harrison, “While My Guitar Gently Weeps,” 1968.

Perhaps Faul believes that as long as he keeps giving clues (and doing charity work, on that note), his “soul is saved” in the long run. If the truth about Paul is discovered because of the clues the Beatles gave us, the resulting mind-expansion of the masses would do far more damage to the Illuminati agenda in proportion to, for example, the advancement of the Illuminati agenda that occurred when Faul released the troop-rallying single “Freedom” as a response to 9/11. (If the song were released at any other time other than right after 9/11, one might be able to interpret the chorus “I will fight for the right to live in freedom” as a benign sentiment referring to the true fight for freedom rather than physical fighting. But since it was released as an immediate response to 9/11, when U.S. troops were being hastily gathered to go to the Middle East under a bogus pretense, the intent of the song is clear: it is an army jingle. “Give War A Chance” because a Beatle is now saying you should. Nauseating…)

If the Illuminati are confident that the truth will never come out, perhaps they view the continuing release of clues as an insignificant price to pay for the Beatles’ continuing silence on the matter, and for Faul’s continuing service. The Beatles, on the other hand, knew (and know) that the truth would come out as long as the clues were allowed to continue; their silence about Faul was (and is) probably motivated not by fear of the Illuminati, but by a view that their intended message (see my earlier posts on this thread) would be more powerful the longer the inevitable emergence of the truth is delayed.

Perhaps this is what is really going on in Faul’s head: maybe he believes the noble ends (continuing to help the truth emerge with continuing clues) justify his seemingly heinous means (openly serving the Illuminati during his lifetime.) Here’s an analogy from a fictional story to illustrate: remember Lando in the Star Wars trilogy? At one point, he seemingly betrays his friends to Darth Vader, but later it is understood that his surface “betrayal” was necessary to ultimately allow the Rebel Alliance to succeed in the long run! Maybe Faul’s soul is saved after all…

The Anthology is a double-edged sword; on one hand, on the surface it is full of image doctoring and maintains the continuing illusion that Faul is Paul; on the other hand, it is full of crucial information directly from the mouth of the Beatles and their crew that can’t be found in one package anywhere else, and it contains new clues. My view is that the “Rocky Raccoon” clip could be one of those clues that was slipped in for our benefit.

Here is one example of an intentional clue from the Anthology III CD cover art, which was designed by Klaus Voorman, a close friend of the Beatles. A very early photo of Paul posing with the Beatles is shown in the upper-left corner; the same photo is repeated in the upper-right corner, but with James Paul’s face “squished” to be narrower like Faul’s head! The vertical girders in the photo behind his head provide a blatant measurement reference that illustrates that one of the photos was smoothly altered. Klaus is basically blatantly showing us that photos of James Paul have been retouched, and he even chose a photo with a built-in measuring stick (the vertical girders in the background.)

So there’s one example of a blatant clue from the Anthology releases… and if that is acknowledged as a clue directly leading us to the fact that many James Paul photos have been doctored, maybe the idea of the “Rocky Raccoon” clip being another powerful Anthology clue (illustrating Faul behind the mic in the performance room and James Paul in the control booth in real-time) that slipped past the Illuminati censors won’t seem as unlikely…

On that note, if I’m wrong about all three of those images (Rojopa's stills from a couple posts back), I think it doesn’t weaken my overall theory; I’m kind of stepping out on a limb with this discussion about the images. (I think cause-and-effect is my strong point, not technical comparisons.) But wouldn’t it be interesting if one or more of those three images really is Paul? (And, taking the speculation further, wouldn’t it be even more interesting if, for the “Rocky Raccoon” clip, the Anthology makers edited two clips of Faul to try to illustrate the real 2-Paul situation, ironically through a deceptive edit?)

[Scatterdome]

I’ve recently noticed several more major clues supporting this theory.

The first of these was pointed out to me by Klaatu themselves, via the following quote from their website, at this link: www.klaatu.org/klaatu7.html
This quote is the two closing sentences of an article by Jaimie Vernon that appeared in the December 1990 issue of Great White Noise:

Attic also plans to re-issue Sir Army Suit and Endangered Species on CD. Meanwhile, has anyone noticed a giant smiling sun peeking out from Ringo Starr's latest album Time Takes Time? Nah, couldn't be.


Notice that the smiling sun on Ringo’s album cover is even tilted to the left, just like Klaatu’s symbol!

Of course, this wouldn’t be the first time Ringo has blatantly referenced Klaatu on one of his album covers… if you missed it, see page 5 of this thread for details.

While we’re on the subject, remember Faul’s song “Ou Est Le Soleil” from Flowers In The Dirt? The title translates into: “Where is the sun?”

As I’ve said before, I think Klaatu’s smiling sun represents James Paul. Interesting that Faul chose to place “Ou Est Le Soleil” as the last track on Flowers In The Dirt…

I’ve posted several new clue interpretations, all related to this theory, on other threads in the last week. Rather than repeat them all in detail here, I’ll provide the links:

On the thread titled “Maybe Paul wasn’t the eggman…” there is a discussion about “The Walrus” being interchangeable with “The Carpenter,” (which came from a 1980 quote from John) where I pointed out that in The Day The Earth Stood Still, Klaatu goes undercover as “Mr. Carpenter;” in that post, there are also other things I wrote that are extremely relevant to this thread. Here’s the link to page 1 of that thread: 60if.proboards21.com/index.cgi?board=60ifclues&action=display&thread=1075671967

On page 6 of the thread “Okay…” there is a new discussion that strongly illustrates how Klaatu’s timeline pretty much confirms that Ringo and Faul were intentionally pointing us to Klaatu with their albums Goodnight Vienna and Venus and Mars. Here’s the link to page 6: 60if.proboards21.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=60ifclues&thread=1066387943&start=75

On page 7 of “More evidence of the switch and the clues,” I wrote about a “5 Beatles” clue on the back cover of the original vinyl (but not the CD version) of Abbey Road, and about a possible subtle suppression of certain clues in various recent Beatles-related media. Here’s the link to page 7: 60if.proboards21.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=paul&thread=1063892646&start=90

On page 2 of the thread titled “MAGICAL MYSTERY TOUR,” I came up with a potential decoding of John’s finger-code clue which immediately follows “I Am The Walrus” in the movie. I decoded it into “5 Beatles, with a ‘gap’ separating the 5th one from the rest.” Here’s the link to page 2: 60if.proboards21.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=60ifclues&thread=1069334552&start=15

On page 4 of the thread “Are there clues in yellow sub?” I have posted evidence that Klaatu also know about the Illuminati, in the form of a 1993 "best-of" compilation album cover. (This cover might even be a clue leading to one of the hidden reasons Klaatu broke up; I might post more on that later on this thread.) Here’s the link to page 4: 60if.proboards21.com/index.cgi?board=60ifclues&thread=1064668996&action=display&start=45

(On page 3 of that thread, for those who missed it, a while ago someone posted a major clue in the form of a still from Yellow Submarine, which I interpreted as evidence that the Beatles knew about the Illuminati and were consciously fighting them. Here’s the link to page 3: 60if.proboards21.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=60ifclues&thread=1064668996&start=30 )

[Winston]

Kudos! Your alternate theory is interesting and possible.

Could you give us a clue as to the source of your "inside information?

[Perplexed]

"us"?

[Sdxo lv Ghdg]

Scatterdome,

First I'd like to applaud your focus and efforts.

Second, you issued a challege, so he's my shot.

"Plurality is not to be assumed without necessity." - William of Ockham , Quodibeta, Book V (ca. 1324)

"Entities are not to be multiplied without necessity"

The aforementioned maxims have, in my opinion, dispensed religious dogma relating to the existence of God.

Wouldn't, for example, it be simpler to suspect Paul overdosed on heroin, and the Beatles and the Powers That Be, decided to cover it up. Rather than suspect some sub-rosa conspiracy to keep the public from enlightenment. The employment of doubles is not a secret. Who the doubles are, is.

Why would a talented musician (you say Faul was a contibuting band member) go through so much trouble to 'be' a different talented musician, specifically Paul McCartney. Why not, more simply, assume it didn't happen that way. Just as it is easier to assume Paul was replaced by a convincing double, rather than belive Paul's face...you've seen the photos.

I admit, i can not easily counter much of the specifics contained within your premise. Alas, your premise sidesteps much of the subject matter discussed regarding PID. You assume that "some" clues left by The Beatles were false trails, and some were not.

btw - I thought Robert Anton Wilson invented the Illuminati. Illuminati is a metaphor (perhaps not - "I just had to look, having read the book" www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=1086). The existential situations we find ourselves within lead us to believe in illuminati, and similiar situations could theoretically have affected The Beatles.

[Scatterdome]

Winston said:

Kudos! Your alternate theory is interesting and possible.

Could you give us a clue as to the source of your "inside information?

Anyone can say that they have “inside information,” especially when you can’t see their face. In fact, one of the main things that bugs me about the 60IF document is that we are asked to believe it because it is “inside information.” I think that the Faul mystery can be solved without any inside information, and likewise, I also think my theory is strong on its own merits, with my claim of inside information inconsequential. But since I did choose to put it in there and I’ve now been asked to explain further, I will:

I do not know anyone famous or connected to someone famous, nor has any information been given to me that’s not available to those who seek it. In my case, the “conspiracy theory” explored by authors such as David Icke, Jim Marrs, William Cooper and William Bramley ended up being a gateway to additional knowledge derived from my own experiences and research—knowledge that I would have not sought out or even have recognized if I had not had my eyes opened by those authors.

I have had numerous experiences (most of which I enabled in one form or another with my “snooping”) that have collectively provided me with enough personal confirmation to conclude that the aforementioned authors’ “theory” is no theory—it is crucial information that represents the quickest way for anyone to form an accurate worldview and, if distributed widely enough, represents humanity’s clearest route to true freedom. “Knowledge is power,” indeed…

Some of these experiences led to my uncovering of specific information not discussed specifically in those books, but which added perfect-fitting pieces to the puzzle started by their “theories.” A large portion of the discoveries from my personal journey involves the origin and interpretation of crop circles (I decoded a formation), which I will save for another thread under a different subject, as it would be too lengthy and too “X-Files” for this thread. However, there’s a couple other examples of my personal discoveries that I can recap briefly enough here to demonstrate, without writing a 10-page essay, the kind of “inside information” one can discover when one’s eyes have been opened.

One involves folded money. Many people have heard or seen what happens when you fold up a U.S. $20 bill; it was even shown in Maxim magazine. But there’s much more to the folded money issue than the $20 bill alone, as I was shown by a random stranger at a bar where my band was playing. What I was shown confirms, in the most simple and tangible way that I have ever seen, that Icke, Marrs, Bramley, Cooper and others exporing that “theory” are on the right track in regards to the agenda and methods of the ancient coalition of royal bloodlines they refer to as the Illuminati. To save space here (and to tie it into a thread where the subject is more specifically discussed) I have posted it on another thread today. Click here to “swallow the red pill” and view my post on that thread: 60if.proboards21.com/index.cgi?board=60ifclues&thread=1064668996&action=display&start=45

Due to size limits, I'm splitting today's post into multiple parts...

[Scatterdome]

The other piece of obscure information I’m posting today involves the Mayan calendar— if you are unfamiliar with the Mayan calendar, don’t read this next part unless you have an open mind and are willing to follow the links provided to confirm the Mayan calendar’s validity for yourself.

For those who are unfamiliar, the Mayan calendar uses a 260-day cycle based on the phases of the moon, in contrast with the traditional Gregorian calendar (which adds an an extra day to February to compensate for the inaccuracy created by the fact that the Earth completes its rotation around the sun every 365.25 days, roughly) Each of the 260 days in the cycle has its own astrological sign, and the signs can be charted out visually on the grid known as the Tzolkin. (Here is an image of a Tzolkin which you will want to download and print out as a full-page image if you are unfamiliar with Mayan astrology and truly want to try to understand what I’m writing in this post: )


Mayan astrology is complex, and my own understanding is admittedly rudimentary; however, I think that beginners can easily get an initial feel for how it works (and also get a potent initial demonstration of the “eerie” accuracy of Mayan astrology) the same way I did—by charting out various Mayan birthdates and seeing how they relate to each other on the Tzolkin geometrically.

Go ahead, try it yourself—go to the following website, which contains tutorial information on the Mayan calendar, as well as a convenient Mayan birthdate calculator directly linked here:
www.tortuga.com/findkin/findkin.cfm
Use the calculator on the website to identify the Mayan birthdates of your friends, your family, your favorite authors and musicians, and various historical and political figures, and chart out the birthdates with a pen on your Tzolkin printout. The more of these birthdates that you write onto your Tzolkin chart, the more outrageous “coincidences” you will discover. For example, George Bush Sr.(b. 6/12/24) and Saddam Hussein (b. 4/28/37) are “next-door neighbors” on the chart. Another odd coincidence: Ian McKellan (b. 5/25/39, the actor who plays Gandalf in Lord Of The Rings) and Ian McCullough (b. 5/5/59, leader of Echo & The Bunnymen) are both “Lunar Humans,” which is a 1-in-260 chance (like any two people who share a Mayan birthday) and puts them on the same square on the chart. Chart out enough Mayan birthdates on your Tzolkin and you may just get some rare insight into the “hidden” patterns of life that really do occur on Earth, including patterns that relate significantly to your own personal life. (There’s nothing you can see that isn’t shown…)

In fact, I think this knowledge is a significant part of the knowledge that makes the Illuminati the “Illuminati” (or, “illuminated ones.”) If knowledge is power and the Mayan calendar is powerful knowledge that the Earth’s “royal” bloodlines have long been using for their own negative purposes (to help maintain an intellectual upper hand over the masses they wish to control) , then no wonder it remains obscure while far less accurate forms of astrology (Gregorian, Chinese) are widely distributed and promoted to the world’s masses. I think that this ancient knowledge is so powerful that some of the Illuminati’s major symbols were possibly even derived from the Mayan Tzolkin. Turn a Tzolkin chart on its side and you’ll see what I mean:
www.scatterdome.com/images/tzolkin side small.JPG [/img]

Shortly after I began posting my theory here, I made a bizarre discovery about myself via Mayan astrology. I was born on 11/20/75; it turns out that my Mayan sign derived from this date, “Solar Monkey,” occupies the square sandwiched in between David Icke (b. 4/29/52, Lunar Monkey) and James Paul McCartney (b. 6/18/42, Electric Monkey.) My interpretation: This would explain why I have spent the last 3 years fuzing “Ickean” references into the lyrics of my Beatles-influenced songwriting; it would also explain why I ended up on this forum, feeling compelled to write and post an alternate theory on Faul that uses an “Ickean” worldview.

I had been combining Icke and Beatles influences heavily in my music for a few years before I discovered my Mayan calendar identity in September; thus, with my “identity” as one of the 1-out-of-every-260 people who are the “middle ground” between Icke and McCartney already confirmed by my activities from before I had heard of Mayan astrology, I felt I would be a fool not to try to “complete the circle” taking my Icke-influenced McCartney theory as far as it would go. With less members on this forum (the only forum discussing forensic evidence of Faul at the time) than there are Mayan astrological signs, I figured odds were I was probably the only “Solar Monkey” posting here; I would say it was a “sense of duty” that compelled me to give it a shot and put so much time and energy into contributing to this forum.

”Only time will tell if I am right or I am wrong.” If much of my theory turns out to be correct, then my hope is that in addition to helping the “collective mind” solve the Faul mystery, I have also demonstrated the following:

- The theories explored by the above-mentioned authors, especially Icke, are a shortcut to solving any global “mystery” as they represent an accurate worldview.
- The Beatles are excellent role-models in the fight against the Illuminati, NOT a group who sold out to them out of fear.

And now that I’ve chosen to spill the beans on the Mayan calendar due to Winston’s question, I hope another thing will be confirmed: The Mayan calendar is some powerful information.

I realize that I’m opening myself up to ridicule by admitting that I take any form of astrology seriously, but anyone getting ready to heckle me for that would be well advised to follow the links I provided to do their own research on the Mayan calendar first.

I suppose it’s a matter of opinion whether personal confirmation of the reality of an “Ickean world” via strange experiences and obscure acquired knowledge, combined with said knowledge, counts as “inside information.” But I think it does. (Sorry to disappoint those who thought I was claiming I knew a Beatle or something.) The bulk of this information I sought out myself and was able to find because my understanding of the world has been made more accurate by my favorite “conspiracy authors;”-- the use of the term “inside information” does not have to imply that someone has handed someone insider tips on a platter. In some cases such as this, it’s available for anyone who truly seeks it.

However, since the Beatles gave us (and continue to give us) so many clues, I think there are only two requirements to solving the Faul mystery: 1) The music, words and artwork of the Beatles, and 2) an accurate worldview. But if an accurate worldview is an “Ickean” worldview, then hopefully that’s what I’ve demonstrated if my Faul theory turns out to be mostly correct.

[Scatterdome]

Sdxo said:

Scatterdome, first I'd like to applaud your focus and efforts.

Thank you!

Sdxo said:

Second, you issued a challenge, so here's my shot.

"Plurality is not to be assumed without necessity." - William of Ockham , Quodibeta, Book V (ca. 1324)

"Entities are not to be multiplied without necessity"

The aforementioned maxims have, in my opinion, dispensed religious dogma relating to the existence of God.

Good quotes.

Sdxo said:

Wouldn't, for example, it be simpler to suspect Paul overdosed on heroin, and the Beatles and the Powers That Be, decided to cover it up.

Not for me; the Powers That Be are the Illuminati, and the Beatles did so much permanent damage to the Illuminati agenda (after they went psychedelic) that the idea that they continued without Paul because the Illuminati forced them to, that the albums that instigated the bulk of that damage were forced into existence by the Illuminati, is inherently contradictory. Both my heart and mind tell me that “All You Need Is Love” was not forced into existence and broadcast worldwide on the orders of war-mongers.

Sdxo said:

Rather than suspect some sub-rosa conspiracy to keep the public from enlightenment.

I’m obligated to suspect that, because I know that keeping the masses ignorant has always been the Illuminati’s primary method of maintaining control. Control of public perception is their #1 priority…

When the Beatles started out, they unknowingly served the Illuminati agenda as a “relationship-pop” band (keeping people’s thoughts on reproduction and away from spiritual/intellectual matters, like commercial radio still does), and thus experienced no interference in rocketing to the top of the world, to say the least. But when they went psychedelic and thoughtful in ’65-’66 the Illuminati had an unprecedented problem on their hands, considering how many young people looked up to the Beatles. Martyring a Beatle shortly after Revolver’s release would’ve only worsened the problem; attempts at character assassination, however, would’ve been a good way to try to reduce the influence of the disastrous (to the Illuminati) event of the world’s #1 band suddenly providing a positive example of psychedelic evolution at the height of their fame. One example from 1966: the Illuminati media’s global-scale distortion of John’s “bigger than Jesus” comment and the subsequent Beatle-record burnings in the Bible Belt. Other 1966 Illuminati attempts to discourage, deflate and derail the Beatles are evidenced in events that happened during their 1966 tours, such as the “Marcos snub” incident or the seemingly orchestrated chaos (described by Harrison, as I posted earlier in this thread) of their tour stops in the U.S. in that year.

Sdxo said:

The employment of doubles is not a secret.

Yet at the same time, most people are not even open to the possibility of impostors outside of fiction. But if the truth of 2 Pauls became well-known, that would certainly change…

Sdxo said:

Who the doubles are, is.

Most of the time. Although sometimes we find out who the double is… check out my post about George Washington and Adam Weishaupt at this link: 60if.proboards21.com/index.cgi?board=document&action=display&thread=1067848992

Sdxo said:

Why would a talented musician (you say Faul was a contibuting band member) go through so much trouble to 'be' a different talented musician, specifically Paul McCartney?

Faul is a talented performer, but songwriters as talented as James Paul McCartney are not born every day, to say the least. There are many talented performers out there who couldn’t write their way out of a paper bag—just imagine how many of them would jump at the chance to become the voice and public face of one of the 20th century’s greatest composers, even if it did involve some plastic surgery, a loss of their original identity, and some serious acting/lying skills.

Sdxo said:

Why not, more simply, assume it didn't happen that way. Just as it is easier to assume Paul was replaced by a convincing double, rather than believe Paul's face...you've seen the photos.

Consider the following quote from Norman Smith, who was the Beatles’ engineer in the studio from their first album through Rubber Soul:

“There is no doubt at all that Paul was the main musical force… also in terms of production as well. A lot of the time George Martin didn’t really have to do the things he did because Paul McCartney was around and could have done them equally well. The only thing he couldn’t do was to put symbols to chords; he couldn’t write music. But he could most certainly tell an arranger how to do it, just by singing a part—however, he didn’t know, of course, whether the strings or brass could play what he wanted. But most of the ideas came from Paul.”

As a songwriter, it’s much, much easier for me to think that Paul lived, based on both the nature of the continuing evolution of the Beatles’ music after Revolver, and the undeniably good vibes contained within the music. As a person with working eyes, however, I can see that there’s 2 Pauls. Simply put, these two ideas, which would initially seem like they conflict with themselves, are reconciled for me with the idea that James Paul lived on behind the scenes while his hired impostor performed most of his vocals and “performed” most of his public appearances. (I’m still not sure who’s behind that beard in the Let It Be sessions.)

Sdxo said:

I admit, i can not easily counter much of the specifics contained within your premise. Alas, your premise sidesteps much of the subject matter discussed regarding PID.

On the contrary-- I have not sidestepped the “3 Beatles”/”PID” clues at all. (Search on my username for my earlier posts where I go into detail; I figure you probably missed it since you wrote that.) On the other hand, I could easily say that most “PID” advocates are generally sidestepping/ignoring the “5 Beatles” clues.

Sdxo said:

You assume that "some" clues left by The Beatles were false trails, and some were not.

That’s not an assumption, it’s a conclusion; if it is acknowledged that there are both “3 Beatles/PID” clues and “5 living Beatles” clues, then it is acknowledged that at least one of the two clue groupings has to be a false trail. While many clues fit either scenario, I think many of the other clues illustrate that the Beatles intentionally painted two different scenarios to explain the 2 Pauls in their clues, with only one of the scenarios being correct, to make the mystery deep and rich enough both to attract deeper interest in the matter, and to reflect Illuminati behavior accurately in order to give the masses the language to decode the Illuminati’s own displays, which often depict one scenario when interpreted on one level, while depicting an entirely different, more accurate scenario when examined on a deeper level. See my post on the folded bills to see what I mean; it’s at the link at the bottom of this post.

Also, keep in mind that I’m far from the first person to notice “5 Beatles” clues everywhere; ever heard the term “fifth Beatle” before?

Sdxo said:

btw - I thought Robert Anton Wilson invented the Illuminati. Illuminati is a metaphor (perhaps not - "I just had to look, having read the book" www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=1086 ). The existential situations we find ourselves within lead us to believe in illuminati, and similiar situations could theoretically have affected The Beatles.

If there’s no Illuminati, then I guess it’s possible the Beatles might have thought such a group existed anyway, from their unique vantage point inside Beatlemania. Alas, if only the “theory” on the Illuminati was just a theory. Follow this link if you haven’t yet seen the complete set of folded bills:
60if.proboards21.com/index.cgi?board=60ifclues&thread=1064668996&action=display&start=45