|
|
Post by daveyo on Jul 5, 2009 10:39:01 GMT
Hi I was reading an article about the death of Klein who once worked for the Beatles late 69-70. Upon reading the article I took notice of some excerpts so written. ""George Harrison and Ringo Starr also warmed to his pitch, but Paul McCartney was fiercely opposed. He preferred the expertise of his father-in-law, high-powered New York attorney Lee Eastman.""Can anyone verify if Lee Eastman is Paul McCartney's father in Law. Where did he come from. It is very odd that a person in USA happens to be Father in Law to someone from the British side. I have no recollection of Paul McCartney marrying someone from USA. Something is strange here?  ? Daveyo |
|
|
|
Post by Sun King™ on Jul 5, 2009 15:29:53 GMT
Hi I was reading an article about the death of Klein who once worked for the Beatles late 69-70. Upon reading the article I took notice of some excerpts so written. ""George Harrison and Ringo Starr also warmed to his pitch, but Paul McCartney was fiercely opposed. He preferred the expertise of his father-in-law, high-powered New York attorney Lee Eastman.""Can anyone verify if Lee Eastman is Paul McCartney's father in Law. Where did he come from. It is very odd that a person in USA happens to be Father in Law to someone from the British side. I have no recollection of Paul McCartney marrying someone from USA. Something is strange here? ? Daveyo The true Linda's family name was EPSTEIN. |
|
|
|
Post by daveyo on Jul 11, 2009 15:15:40 GMT
Ok if this is Epstein, I do not recall the real Paul McCartney ever getting married. If such took place it has to be done by the fake McCartney and if so when did that happen? Daveyo |
|
The Fab Faul™
Contributor
Is there anybody Going to Listen To My Story...
Posts: 25
|
Post by The Fab Faul™ on Aug 31, 2009 12:59:16 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Connor "The Red Neck" Terru on Aug 31, 2009 15:35:42 GMT
Yes, but Linda's maiden name was Eastman(not Epstien . Sun King, do more research). |
|
|
|
Post by Connor "The Red Neck" Terru on Aug 31, 2009 15:42:03 GMT
Yes, Linda is american. If Paul suggested Lee Eastman as the manager for The Beatles before March 12, 1969, then he meant his future father in law.
|
|
|
|
Post by romanruins on Sept 3, 2009 4:05:42 GMT
The guy's Name was Leopold Vail Epstein. 1.) en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_Eastman Not related to the Eastman's in Eastman Kodiak film, and camera company. 2.) Conner when declaring facts here cite a source! 3.) Yeah Fab we're nutcases here. What color are your eye's today? The Cover of the Sergeant Peppers Album is just about The Beatles saying how uplifting the discovery of drugs was to Them so they made a burial scene, and the "Lonely Hearts Club" just seemed intellectual sounding and where they were going with the music, "Rock The House man"! Why don't you stay in Your Sane World out there. You aren't doing anything here of value. |
|
|
|
Post by daveyo on Sept 3, 2009 13:54:14 GMT
Hi
Interesting that these names always have some connection. As odd as it may sound.
Now you mentioned us being a nut case. Well lets put one thing into perspective here. I watched the video very carefully of the Beatles playing their last concert on the roof and listened carefully and watched the moves of this Paul McCartney.
This person in 1969 is NOT THE REAL PAUL McCARTNEY. Totally different damn voice octave range, and when this Paul sang with John again a total different voice octave range. I compared this to their previous performances when they sang together in 1964,65,66.
At the end of the song Get Back, you will hear this Pauls voice as stand alone and its totally different. Then you will see John Lennon speak and his voice does match to 1964,65,and 66.
There is no way a voice will change inside less than 3 years. Impossible.
The forehead of this Paul in 1969 is twice the size that real Paul back in 1966!!! There is no way the skull will grow or the hairline be completely different inside 3 years.
I also watched the demeanor of this guy, and the way he played that bass is different than the real Paul did. Once you develop a specific habit, it stays with you. A lot of it was missing on this alleged paul in 1969.
The probable factor that we today have a fake playing all over the place is a good 90%
All you need to do is investigate and make comparisons and you will see the obvious differences.
I rest my case
Daveyo
|
|
|
|
Post by peoplescommittee on Aug 24, 2010 0:30:19 GMT
There is no way a voice will change inside less than 3 years. Impossible. Are you being serious? In puberty for human males alone, less than three years is ample time for a voice to change, and a voice continues to change as one grows older. It's a biological process. Opening one's mind to the idea that Paul McCartney might be dead and replaced with a double is one thing; completely throwing the laws of biology out the bloody window and making the case as a whole look stupid in the process is another. No more snap conclusions. It's time for a brand new day. |
|
?
