Paul McCartney is actually dead conspiracy

Discussion in 'Conspiracies' started by C C, Aug 1, 2013.

  1. origin In a democracy you deserve the leaders you elect. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,907
    If you do not know, I certainly don't

    Well that's relief.
    Well praise Jesus!!!
     
    zgmc likes this.
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. brucep Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,098
    Exactly you don't know why. I don't need you to tell me which songs were written by John, Paul, George, or Ringo. You presumptuous twit.
     
    zgmc likes this.
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. parmalee peripatetic artisan Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,651
    Not sure what why I don't know exactly, nor where specifically I "presume" to tell you who wrote what; nevertheless, there are plenty of well-documented books which deign to inform us on such matters--would you like citations? You may not like such on account of punctuation and whatnots.
     
    Last edited: Feb 26, 2016
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. parmalee peripatetic artisan Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,651
    Apparently Roman Polanski is, however--who knew?
     
  8. brucep Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,098
    Books that document that John was a hack? That's what I'm getting at. I don't need some clueless crank to tell me who was brilliant and who wasn't. It's in the music. John was 'out front' with his politics. To my delight.
     
  9. zgmc Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    803
    Is there anyone that actually liked Wings?
     
  10. brucep Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,098
    Apparently Paul is a good guy since he renounced his LSD use and found Jesus while John was a 'hack', running his mouth, the devil incarnate.
     
  11. brucep Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,098
    Following the opening act was pretty difficult in this case. Some of John's best came during his very short solo career.
     
  12. parmalee peripatetic artisan Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,651
    You must have missed the part about the "wack theory" in a subsequent post:
    IOW: I am engaging in a bit of hyperbole and fanciful flight.

    Seriously though, '66-'70 were the Beatles most creatively fertile period (IMO)--do you agree? And a lot of testimony from The Beatles themselves, as well as associates--Mal Evans, et al--suggests that from about late '67 onwards, John was kinda... absent, distracted, disinterested, lazy. This stuff is pretty well documented. I think this most apparent on the White Album; there's undoubtably some good John tracks there, but he also seemed to be going a bit overboard with the whole "Uhhhh--I'm so strung out, man" thing.

    Re: his politics. He never seemed all that consistent, and--if you consider his actual life--rather hypocritical at times: he didn't treat Yoko terribly well, and he certainly didn't treat Cynthia that great either. Then there's the whole Brian Epstein thing: John--and noone else--could never seem to accept Epstein's homosexuality, and on many an occassion, he was downright cruel towards Epstein.

    Also, you mention above his very brief solo career--what was that all about? I mean, why so short?

    Part of it is that I was always a bit irked by what seemed almost cult-like adoration of Lennon--especially following his death. Few seemed to care about his many, and serious (i.e., spousal abuse), problematic attributes.

    In short, I don't really think John was a "hack," but I do think his contributions during the Beatles later--and better --period were growing few and far between, and a lot of it was a little weak IMO.
     
    Last edited: Feb 26, 2016
  13. parmalee peripatetic artisan Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,651
    Is that what Mr. Tull is getting at? I kinda got the impression that he meant "born again" in some other sense: some occult nonsense, or some such thing.
     
  14. FatFreddy Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    532
    This is what got my attention. Take a close look at Paul when the camera gets close to him at around the 1:40 time mark.

    The Beatles - Your Mother Should Know - (1967)



    It's obviously not this person.

    The Beatles - Paperback Writer



    This is so clear that I think it was their way of announcing it. Notice that Paul is wearing a black carnation.
     
  15. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,767
    If you watch The Flintstones carefully, you can see the exact moment when Bea Benaderet died.
     
  16. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,331
    Hey FatFreddy! Is there any conspiracy theory that you DON'T believe?
     
  17. RainbowSingularity Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,038
    if its not paul, then how can you say its not paul ?
     
  18. David C The print that nails this troofer Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    275
  19. David C The print that nails this troofer Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    275
    Hah hah, this is so daft no wonder FF(s) believes it!



    Watch this at around 2.30 onwards. Add another subject to FF's "I got owned again". That video has a whole plethora of before and after pictures that prove to anyone with a brain it's the same bloke.
     
  20. FatFreddy Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    532
    I would bet there were two Pauls. The eye color is different.

    The Beatles - Paperback Writer

    (1:35 time mark)

    The Beatles - Hey Jude

    (00:50 time mark)


    This documentary looks pretty objective.

    Paul is Dead/Faul McCartney/Plastic Macca on WAXE Radio w/ Tina Foster

     
  21. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,767
    I knew a girl whose eye color changed depending on the lighting. Mind you, she's dead now - and I wish she had been replaced.
     
  22. David C The print that nails this troofer Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    275
    I wish the spammer could be replaced with a clockwork wind machine. He posts his "objective" crap and ignored my video - the one showing so many bloody obvious comparisons.
     
  23. Neddy Bate Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,873
    I think it must have been some very high people who came up with the "Paul is dead" theory. It is one of the most far-fetched ideas ever. Paul has a very distinctive songwriting style, voice, and bass playing style which would make finding his duplicate replacement highly unlikely. Not to mention his unique looks, even down to his teeth, which would make it all the more unlikely.

    High people were just trying to piece together a bunch of random "clues" that they found in imagery from album art, and even some backward audio. What could be more unreliable than playing audio backwards, searching hours of sounds for one little clue "turn me on deadman" as if the remaining Beatles would decide that was the best approach to getting the message out. Even the theme song for the old Mr. Ed television show sounds like "someone sang this song for satan" when played backwards, it's just syllables in reversed order.
     

Share This Page