Breaking Down Plastic Macca : An Interview with Tina Foster

Kirby-Macca-15

While listening to a conversation between Greg Carlwood and Mark Devlin on Carlwood’s wonderful podcast The Higherside Chats, the discussion at one point moved into the infamous Paul Is Dead/Faul material.  Like many of us who have actually taken the time to look into the construct that is Paul McCartney post 1966, Devlin mentions that he initially had skepticism regarding the possible Great Beatles Conspiracy, but the more he researched the information, the more plausible he found the idea of a replacement Paul McCartney having been inserted into the Beatles @ late 1966.  Devlin also mentioned the work of Tina Foster and her website, PlasticMacca, as a great resource to those interested in the material.  Always appreciative of the wonderful work of other bloggers, I immediately read Tina’s work, took the time to take some notes, and reached out to her for a written interview. Fortunately for me, Tina was able to accommodate my request (again, thank you Tina!).

This interview was concluded on June 2, 2016.

sgtpeppers

 

Q: Thanks for agreeing to chat with me, Tina.  I recently became acquainted with your work courtesy of a couple of recent interviews with English researcher Mark Devlin and his mention of you and your work published on the website PlasticMacca.  To begin with, could you tell us a little bit about you, your background, and how you became involved with the Paul is Dead (PID)/Faul movement?

TF: I am a lawyer with an interest in social justice issues. I realized Paul McCartney had been replaced while getting my LLM. At that point, I was swept away by the sheer evil if impostor-replacing someone. I felt driven to uncover what had happened to Paul and why. Once I had a pretty reasonable theory, I felt I had to expose it. The reality is, we will probably never know the whole story, but at least people  know about some sort of impostor-replacement agenda now. Public ignorance in the past made it easier for the powers that be to put their puppets in place. Now, because of Paul, many know to be on the lookout for doubles. Just accomplishing that makes all the research and work into PID well worth the effort. So many have been a part of the effort to pull the wool off of the eyes of humanity. Everyone’s contributions have made a huge difference. Thank you to all. 

I did an interview with Mark Devlin about PID, available here: Good Vibrations podcast, Vol. 42. Tina Foster Matt Sergiou re ‘Paul Is Dead’

Please see plasticmacca.blogspot.com for information and resources  about PID.

Q: Were you a Beatles fan growing up?

Yes, since high school.

Q: You have done a lot of fantastic analysis regarding the use of body doubles in the 20th century.  Could you provide a quick synopsis of the history of known uses of body doubles for a baseline of your analysis on Plastic Macca?

mccartney_impersonator

TF: Doubles have been used as political tools for centuries. Once that reality is accepted, recognizing impostors becomes much easier. There have been a number of body and voice doubles in the past 100 years. Mata Hari, Stalin, Monty, Saddam Hussein, Churchill, Kim Jong Il, and Osama bin Laden are some of the better known examples. Their doubles all served a political purpose. Some were used in psyops to spread disinformation. Some were replaced by impostors to serve as puppets by others who pulled the strings. People have become aware of these tactics. Once it is known that political figures can be used in such a fashion, it is a simple deduction to see that other public figures could be used in such a way. That was my conclusion with Paul McCartney. Namely, that his impostor served a political agenda. 

Q: I think this is important to understand in the context of celebrities/public figures and the use of body doubles.  This ultimately leads into the crux of your hypothesis: you mention on your site and in interviews that you believe that Paul was replaced by a double between August 25-28th 1966.  What has led you to that hypothesis?

TF: After studying hundreds of pictures of Paul, I came to believe he was replaced on or about Aug. 28, 1966. Pretty much everyone involved in PID research agrees he was replaced by Nov. 1966. I think it happened at the end of the US tour – in LA or Seattle. The LA press conference was Faul’s debut as “Paul McCartney.” The press conference was very odd. Reporters made mention of doubles, John and Faul made cryptic remarks about not being the real deals, and of course, Faul just does not look or act like Paul. Please study several interviews with Paul before watching the LA press conference. The differences will be obvious.

Q: I picked up on that press conference in LA too and the random question regarding doubles…What is the key piece evidence, or pieces of evidence, in your opinion, that a false Paul was inserted into the Beatles?  Is it pre-67’ versus post-66’ facial features, voice differences, ear lobes, etc?

p1

TF: In my opinion, the forensic analysis by the Italian scientists, Carlesi and Gavazzeni, is irrefutable proof that Paul was replaced. There is just no way Paul’s skull shape, ears, nose, mouth, and jawline changed so considerably in the space of four months. Any one of those would have been enough to prove Faul was a double. The next most compelling evidence is the three sets of voice prints Dr. Truby identified for “Yesterday,” “Penny Lane,” and “Hey Jude.”

Q: The great Beatles mystery, to me, is the song “Woman,” written allegedly by Paul McCartney under the pseudonym Bernard Webb, and then was given to the pop group Peter and Gordon in early 1966.  To me, that song is absolutely amazing, and could have at least have been a B-side, yet the official story is something along the lines of  “We had written too many love songs, so we gave that one away…”  Has this song ever been brought up on the context of a Paul vs Faul scenario?

pgwomanUK45

TF:” I have not considered that song as a PID clue. However, Paul wrote many songs that were received very well. Faul, on the other hand, has really struggled to gain even positive reviews of his songs. Paul’s song-writing ability surpassed Faul’s by miles (in my opinion). Paul had a natural gift that Faul just cannot duplicate. One should analyze the different song-writing styles as part of the PID evidence. 

Q: Did Jane Asher, Paul’s first significant love interest, ever provide clues regarding a possible Paul McCartney double inserted into the public’s consciousness subsequent to her breakup with Paul McCartney?

Paul_Jane7June1968d_zps8b28e5d4

TF: I believe Jane and Paul’s relationship was an arranged relationship to further their careers. It would explain why Jane dated Faul until she was replaced by Linda. Since it was just for show, Jane kept quiet about Paul’s disappearance. She has refused to speak publicly about her relationship with Paul. I think it was just safer that way.  

Q: Do you think the Tavistock Institute was involved with either the A) engineering of the Beatles in the 1960’s or B) the creation of Faul?

TF: Yes, I think Tavistock engineered the replacement Beatles, aka Sgt. Pepper Beatles. Tavistock leveraged the Beatles’ popularity to serve the NWO agenda. When the replacements came on board, the music and the message changed. The focus shifted from ascension to descent. Light was replaced with Dark. 

Q:You have also mentioned that the popular theory that Paul McCartney died in an automobile accident in the fall/winter of 1966 was/is possibly disinformation.  Do you believe Paul McCartney actually died in 1966, or that he possible “retired” from public exposure?

TF: Yes, I think the car accident is disinformation. Unfortunately, the messages seem to indicate that Paul was assassinated. So many references to head injuries, both pictorial, in song lyrics, and reverse speech, indicate a shot to the head and not an accidental death. Remember that the time of death was probably late August 1966 while the Beatles were on the West Coast of USA. Disinformation about a car crash months later confuses the issue. It also helps to conceal a sinister plot to hijack a popular band to serve the ruling Elite’s agenda. Should someone discover that Paul died, it is preferable for them to think it was an accident and not an assassination.  

Q: Do you have any ideas on the motivation to execute Paul McCartney?  I’ve personally always thought John to be the spiritual leader of the Beatles, but is there a sense that Paul ultimately was?

21a0a69038624bf44a72a3905d6daa27

TF: Paul McCartney was the musical genius. John Lennon was the wordsmith. Both collaborated to bring in songs of high spiritual frequency. Love and Light were “funneled” to the world through their songs. People recognized real unconditional love emanating from the Beatles and returned that love. John and Paul were essentially changing the world through music. 

The Illuminati decided the Beatles had to be stopped. John and Paul were executed; George and Ringo fled. In their stead, an Illuminati-controlled puppet band was installed. “Sgt. Pepper” is betraying this secret for those with the eyes to see.

The replacements set out to undo what the originals had achieved. The music was purposefully written to resonate at an unhealthy frequency. What was also done was to recast Paul as an inept, weak character. This was done to discredit him and devalue his considerable contribution to humanity.

Q: Do you think all of the original Beatles were executed as well?

As mentioned previously, it seems that Paul was executed in late August 1966. John and the others must have been replaced sometime between Sept.-Dec. 1966. Paul is the one most people have noticed was replaced. Most research has been focused on him, including forensic analysis. Not nearly as much energy has been spent exposing the other Beatles’ doubles. However, if one is discerning, one will notice subtle differences in physiognomy and personality. More detailed analysis needs to be carried out.

There is really no proof that anyone but the John Lennon double was killed (if he really were killed). However, based on my analysis of song clues, pictures, back-masked messages, and reverse-speech, it seems they are telling a tale of the murder and replacement of Paul McCartney. It does not necessarily follow that the others were killed. It is my impression that George and Ringo either fled for their lives, or took a payout to live in seclusion. Since John’s double was publicly executed, it stands to reason that that could be a big clue about what happened to John. 

Q:Personally, I have always appreciated the Beatles work up to their 1966 album Revolver.  Help!, to me, is the quintessential Beatles album.  You have mentioned in interviews that Help! was recorded with the A=432 HZ tuning.  Do you know if other albums and/or tracks were also recorded at the 432 HZ frequency?  Do you think this album possibly led to the demise of the original Beatles?

Help

TF: “Help!,” to my knowledge, was the only album recorded in A=432 Hz. However, other albums (pre-replacement) channeled Source Light into the music. Songs that lift one’s spirits are examples of those containing Source Light. Quite a few Beatles’ songs did this. To answer the question as to whether this was a motivation to replace Paul, I would have to say yes. In fact, this was the biggest reason. If people integrated Source Light into their bodies from listening to the music, it would raise their frequency. Realize that the powers that be rely on low frequency vibration to maintain control. The low frequency makes it difficult to discern the truth. It is like being surrounded by a thick fog. One cannot see clearly. As the frequency rises, the fog lifts, and the truth is revealed. The Beatles were raising the frequency and freeing people. The powers that be had to stop the Beatles before they lost control.

Q: Also of interest Paul McCartney was to have provided a sound track to a film regarding the Kennedy assassination of 1963.  What is the backstory on that situation?

TF: Yes, Mark Lane said Paul wanted to write the score for the movie, “Rush to Judgment.” Lane’s book raised many questions about the official story of the JFK assassination. If Paul had been involved, many more people would have seen the movie. The more people who questioned the official story, the harder it would have been for the powers that be to keep the lie alive. I think the Elite panicked when they found out Paul wanted to be involved in exposing the truth. I think they decided Paul could not be allowed to write the score. Of course, the Illuminati-controlled puppet bowed out of the project. As a result, the movie had much less attention from the public than it could have had. 

Q: I’ve been collecting all of the new Beatle mono vinyl LP’s, and at some point would like to compare the covers to the original issues in the 1960’s.  Have you seen or found any evidence that highlights altered images of the Paul, or any other Beatles for that matter, on rereleased album covers post the 1960’s?

TF: I have found evidence of altered photos of Paul post-replacement, as did the forensic scientists, Carlesi and Gavazzeni. I noticed the photo of Paul from the Aug. 19, 1966 Memphis interview was a composite of Paul and Faul. In other photos, Paul has had his face elongated to match Faul, while Faul has had his head made rounder to match Paul. The clue to the former is “you’ve been a naughty boy, you let your face grow long” in “I am the Walrus.” Other people have noticed other photo-composites of Paul and Faul, some of which can be found on the Plastic Macca blog.

Q: Have you, or anyone in your research group, analyzed the chord structures of songs composed by Paul vs Faul?  Is there anything revealing in the chord structures of Paul McCartney majority composed songs 1966 versus post 1967?

TF: I have not personally analyzed chord structure. However, I have had several musicians mention this clue, saying that Paul’s chord structures were more complex and interesting than Faul’s. One said it was a point of great confusion among music scholars. The confusion arises because they cannot understand why the music became simpler rather than more complex, which is more usual with composers. Of course, it makes sense if you factor in PID. 

Q: Paul McCartney and the Wings – what an interesting moment in the context of the larger Beatle Universe. Have you found any evidence in the Wings material, lyrics, cover art, videos, etc, that suggest or hint at the fact that Macca is indeed Faul?

TF: The biggest clue, in my opinion, is when Faul approached Isaac Asimov about writing a book about a rock band that had been replaced by alien impostors (“Five and Five and One”). Other than that, “Wings” could have a couple of meanings. One could be that Paul now has wings because he is an angel. Another could be a reference to Faul waiting in the wings to replace Paul in the Beatles.

Q: Could you rattle off your top 5 least favorite Faul songs?

TF: “Frog Chorus,” “Silly Love Songs,” “Helter Skelter”… he wrote too many terrible songs to mention them all. 

3354678270_1caf595099_z

Q: Do you have a top 5 favorite Faul songs?  Are there any songs that come close to the original spirit of Paul McCartney, in your opinion?

TF: Paul probably penned most songs Faul sang in the Beatles. Of course, they were altered a bit to serve the Agenda, but they still sounded pretty good. “Penny Lane,” “Hey Jude,” even “Maybe I’m Amazed” come to mind.

Q: Who do you think ultimately is Faul?  There is quite a bit of speculation on who became Paul McCartney in August of 1966, or shortly thereafter.  Do you sense there is a high probable candidate that fits your research and findings?

TF: It seems Denny Laine was a Faul, at least for a time immediately following Paul’s disappearance. The song, “Penny Lane,” seems to be a big clue to that. In addition, December 1966 Faul looks a lot like Denny Laine. Remember that several stand-ins may have played the role of “Paul McCartney.”

denny_laine_faul_paul_pid_mccartney

Q: In respect to Faul and interviews after 1966, do you get the sense he is more hateful, arrogant, and/or egocentric?  I’ve seen a few clips on your site and he apparently likes to “inadvertently” flip off the interviewer.  Is that a consistent trend seen with interviews with Faul?

TF: Faul seems to be very uncomfortable playing the part of Paul. He probably hates being compared to Paul, even though it is usually an honest mistake on the part of the interviewer. For example, if someone refers to “Yesterday,” or another one of Paul’s hit songs, Faul will get annoyed. Faul’s songs have never received the public acclaim Paul’s did. It must be irritating being stuck being someone, but knowing you could never really fill their shoes. Anyone would be unhappy in that situation. Faul displays his unhappiness by his generally unpleasant disposition. Thus, you see him make rude gestures at interviewers, etc. 

sunglasses1-1

Q: If you take the idea of the original Beatles and their music, replacement Beatles, and the impact of these Beatles’ changes on the grander population, and extrapolate this change on to a larger world view, what is your philosophy?  Are we ultimately sheep at the command of an elite minority?  What do you think is the ultimate outcome of humanity through the manipulation of popular music acts, such as the Beatles, the Rolling Stones, etc?

TF: People are not sheep, but sometimes their eyes need to be opened. Yes, it is true the powers that be have been able to manipulate them in the past, but many are seeing reality much more clearly now. In the larger context, Paul has exposed the impostor-replacement agenda. Many people have no doubt been switched out to serve a political purpose, but PID has really focused attention on this tactic. In the future, it will be much more difficult to impostor-replace someone, because people now know to be on the lookout for doubles. The powers that be will now have a more difficult time manipulating the public in this way.

Q: Do you believe the truth of Paul McCartney will ever be released?  What are you thoughts on possible leaks of the truth through items such as the Youtube’s the Rotten Apple series and the book Memoirs of Billy Shears?

TF: I think the truth has already been leaked, at least to the extent that Paul was replaced. I do not think any insiders have leaked any information in a meaningful way. Mal Evans seems to have been murdered to prevent his biography about the Beatles from coming out. Heather Mills was threatened. Obscure references to PID are tolerated, but nothing transparent from insiders. The powers that be seem to tolerate people like me who formulate their own theories about PID, because we are not insiders. Everyone who contributes to PID research is making a difference. 

macca_66_67_comp

 

Q: What is your take on the Rotten Apple series/ Aleister Crowley references to Faul?

TF: Aleister Crowley was a co-founder of the Tavistock Institute. I think that is what Iamaphoney was getting at – his involvement in the manufactured Beatles. 

Q: What’s up next for you?  Do you have any new veins of research in the works?  Have you considered publishing a book with your research?

TF: I still have research I plan to publish on the blog. I have decided not to publish a book on PID because of copyright complications. I would appreciate it if people who want to support my PID research would visit my sponsors’ sites, i.e. click on the ads. I feel PID gets more exposure from the blog that it would from a book. This has been a labor of love and was not something I set out to profit from.

JA: Well, thank you so much for taking the time to chat with me, Tina.  I’ve really enjoyed reading the work published on your website, PlasticMacca.  I recommend it to all who are interested in the Beatles and McCartney.  The Beatles, to me,  are still as enigmatic and mysterious as ever before, and I am excited to see where your upcoming research leads you.

The-Beatles-help-the-beatles-movie-26900619-500-301

Link back to Dialogues

41 thoughts on “Breaking Down Plastic Macca : An Interview with Tina Foster

  1. The notion that Paul was replaced during the U.S. tour is absurd. It is clearly him at the L.A. press conference, complete with his soft-spoken demeanor and characteristic wit. His chemistry with John is also present, something the replacement (I’ll call him ‘Bill’) never shared with Lennon. Also, it is clearly Paul who got off the plane at Heathrow, London airport on August, 31rst. Bill was not filmed in public until a short interview outside Abbey Road Studios in December, 1966. Ms. Foster is very mistaken when speaking of replacements for John, George, and Ringo. The idea is laughably absurd and demonstrably false. It is based almost entirely on a misreading of certain photographs. If one discounts laws of photographic variation one might observe images of oneself captured over a span of time and conclude that they too have been replaced! And multiple times as well! A single photographic subject can appear different from image to image due to factors such as lighting, lens, and position relative to camera. These factors fully account for any supposed changes in John, George, and Ringo over the years. In John’s case, heroin addiction and anorexia also played a role, to say nothing of the natural aging process. This is not the same case with Paul, however. The vast changes in his appearance beginning in late 1966 simply cannot be attributed to factors of image variation. It is a different man. And that fact can be verified forensically. In no way can Paul’s situation be compared to irresponsible speculation regarding the other three. To do so is not research or historical analysis of any kind and Ms. Foster should be ashamed of herself for indulging in it and promoting it. Her contribution to this case has been primarily in the form of compiling information, which was helpful initially. Her early efforts aided in the Italian forensics study becoming more widely known. But Ms. Foster lacks a grounded research methodology, as revealed by her indulgence in irrational theories and speculations.

    Like

    1. Out of curiosity, James, what is your take on the “use of doubles” question posed to the Beatles at the LA press conference? Do you think something happened on that tour that precipitated that question?

      Like

      1. Hello,

        I went and viewed the press conference in question. Personally, I believe the inquiry put to the group regarding doubles was just an innocent question. The basis for it was most likely the violent sentiment the Beatles had been stirring up, first in Manila and then in America over John’s ‘Jesus comment’. The passion of fans as well. I think it would be natural to assume they might employ doubles for safety’s sake. I feel this question being asked so close in proximity to the time of Paul’s death and replacement is mere coincidence. It’s in a similar vein to the alleged pre-1967 ‘death clues’–Paul in a steamer trunk, the Revolver cover, etc. None of which shake out or are comparable to the later blatant death clues. Conspiracy theorists often forget that coincidences exist just as much as conspiracies do :).

        Like

  2. Hello,

    I went and viewed the press conference in question. Personally, I believe the inquiry put to the group regarding doubles was just an innocent question. The basis for it was most likely the violent sentiment the Beatles had been stirring up, first in Manila and then in America over John’s ‘Jesus comment’. The passion of fans as well. I think it would be natural to assume they might employ doubles for safety’s sake. I feel this question being asked so close in proximity to the time of Paul’s death and replacement is mere coincidence. It’s in a similar vein to the alleged pre-1967 ‘death clues’–Paul in a steamer trunk, the Revolver cover, etc. None of which shake out or are comparable to the later blatant death clues. Conspiracy theorists often forget that coincidences exist just as much as conspiracies do :).

    Like

    1. Hey again James, out of curiosity, what is your thought on the possible timeline regarding a potential impostor Paul McCartney? Do you think the switch-out, whatever that might be, occurred at different point in time?

      Like

  3. Personally, I wouldn’t discount the idea of doubles so quickly. All in all, it makes a lot of sense from an administrative point of view. Traveling theater productions all have understudies ready to go in case the leads become ill, or need time off etc. which know all the lines, all the dance steps…. Why not the Beatles? Especially in 1966 when touring became extremely dangerous for the fab foursome. It is dangerous being a Beatle.
    I am not trying to discount anyone’s theory here, I appreciate everyone’s input and enjoyed the interview. Thanks James and Tina.

    Like

    1. I see your point, dizzydezy. On the face it seems plausible. But remember the Beatles were a global phenomenon. I can see using body doubles or decoys to distract fans during times of transportation, but employing actual doppelgangers to perform for the group would have been impractical, difficult, and too risky. They were barely able to pull off the Paul switch with Bill in late ’66, and it only worked then because they ceased touring and Paul had been out of the public eye for two months. If the Beatle machine already had perfect doubles in its employ prior to 1966, why the careful precautions with Bill? Why did they have to constantly work on his appearance up until 1970 when the band broke up? The idea of multiple Beatles–meaning near-perfect replicas of the originals–is a concept devoid of critical thought. It is pure moonshine and would have required magic to execute. The one and only Paul McCartney was replaced in 1966 by one and only one individual who remains ‘Paul’ to this day. The switch was a historical event that occurred in real time and was subject to trial and error. It was an extremely difficult operation to execute. And even with their best efforts, they could not perfectly replicate Paul, because each soul is unique. Up until late 1966, Paul always exuded his unique spirit, full of youthful vitality and natural charisma. This holds true in every performance captured on film. Bill could never replicate it and didn’t even try. The above holds true with John, George and Ringo and their own individual spirits. Except none of them were ever replaced like Paul was. Aspects of personality change over the course of a lifetime, and this was certainly true of the other three guys. Paul’s death altered them greatly, especially John, who spent the remainder of his life in a terrible cycle of bitterness, depression, loneliness, and disassociation. But he was John until the end. I take great exception with Ms. Foster’s offensive suggestion that it wasn’t John who died that night in front of the Dakota. No, not all theories are equal. This is an investigation, not a child’s playground. Ideas must be tested by scientific methodology and critical thought, and if found lacking, rejected. Ms. Foster thinks John was replaced because she doesn’t know John well enough. It really boils down to that.

      Like

  4. Alice

    She’s right about Paul being replaced. My friend is a session musician and he told me in the late 80’s when I was a teenager and he was starting out in his career that someone from an American rock band told him that the real one was dead. Pretty common knowledge in the industry and nobody likes him either.

    Like

    1. Paul

      “…….someone from an American rock band told him that the real one was dead….”

      Fucking hilarious!!

      “….someone from an American rock band told him that the real one was dead…”

      LMFAO

      Like

  5. michael

    I am convinced that Paul died in 1966 ,I was 16 at the time and since tv was not prominent enough (poor reception and such) the face and mannerisms and character of Paul were only available in their movies. After 66 they were no longer as visible and all their appearances changed due to age and style trends,so most people myself included didn’t notice. The thing that changed was the music and the fans who were friends of mine just said they liked the earlier stuff better. It was only a couple of years ago I found out about Tina Fosters theory,although I had heard the rumours.The evidence is compelling and when I see videos of interviews with Paul followed by interviews with Faul it is so easy to tell that they are two different people. I should have known better.

    Like

  6. KG

    “Lennon’s reading of The Passover Plot showed him that culturally rich narratives were strung together from assortments of details.

    It followed, therefore, that the artist’s task is merely to provide the details; the consumers of the art object can be counted on to weave the narrative.

    And this is precisely what Beatle fans did, eventually elaborating a Byzantine conspiracy theory cum hero’s resurrection myth: the “Paul is Dead” rumor. . .”

    — Matthew Schneider

    http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/ap0802/beatles2/

    Like

    1. KG

      “The deluge of information that both creates and is created by the mechanisms of contemporary celebrity falls sequentially into the ubiquitous scene of public representation.

      The jumble of evanescent images, publicity, rumor, anecdote, and conflicting eyewitness testimony that surrounds celebrities cries out to be arranged into a story that makes sense, a narrative. ”

      — Matthew Schneider

      Like

      1. KG

        “Conspiracy theories are the myths of our age, in which the random and chaotic events of life are retrospectively ordered into a story with an explanatory purpose.”

        – Matthew Schneider

        “What matters is the system!” The Beatles, the “Passover Plot,” and Conspiratorial Narrativity”

        http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/ap0802/beatles2/

        Like

  7. Cynthia

    “Breaking Down” Plastic Macca?

    Does this mean that Tina Foster’s
    Plastic Macca PID rubbish is
    biodegradable? If so, what exactly
    is the biodegradable half-life of
    this Plastic Macca crud? Hours, days,
    months, years, minutes…..seconds
    or…..nanoseconds?

    Thank you for any help you can give.

    Cynthia

    Like

  8. Gary

    ” There have been a number of body and voice doubles in the past 100 years. Mata Hari, Stalin, Monty, Saddam Hussein, Churchill, Kim Jong Il, and Osama bin Laden are some of the better known examples. ”

    Tina forgot to tell you that
    President Jimmy Carter
    is also a body double.

    Got that?

    President Jimmy Carter was
    replaced by a body double!! 😂

    Like

  9. Whatever happened to attacking the message and not the messenger? Degrading Tina on her beliefs and life work do not make the “Paul is alive” case any stronger, in fact- in the alternative mindset, it only solidifies Tina’s case.
    I remain neutral to the “PID” narrative, but if anyone discounts the idea of using body doubles as rubbish, then they have had the wool pulled over their eyes.
    Wake up- it’s time to question the wolf.

    Like

    1. Kal

      It’s old soft soaper dizzydezy who,
      as usual, brings nothing to the table but platitudes, banalities and clichés.
      dizzydezy will huff and puff
      and blow us all away with
      empty blether, glib bleating
      and disingenuous waffle.
      When can we expect something substantive from the prattling and
      prating dizzydezy?

      Like

  10. Agendum

    Old abandoned PID blogs and other similar blogs are being scanned by US, European, Russian and Chinese Law Enforcement Agencies
    looking for defamatory, libelous and slanderous material against Paul McCartney and others with a view to legal action in the respective jurisdictions. IP addresses are being logged and followed up. Servers hosting PID and other blogs, websites, forums etc., etc. are being taken over and manned by Law Enforcement Officers. President Trump has made it clear to world leaders that illegal activity on the internet must stop. Those who promote Fake News and bogus conspiracy theories will face criminal proceedings in a court of law near them.

    Like

      1. Operation Condor

        Wonderful Christmastime is currently being scanned for subversive and treasonous content. Reliable sources report that a cease and desist order has already been slapped on The Frog Chorus and Mull of Kintyre for having too many musical notes.

        Like

  11. Peter Beech

    New groundbreaking research into the Paul Is Dead controversy shows conclusively that dizzydezy is, in fact,
    Paul McCartney. dizzydezy’s reluctance to get off the fence as regards PID adds
    further proof to the truth that dizzydezy
    is, indeed, Paul McCartney.
    The recently released research evidence
    is overwhelming, incontrovertible and irrefutable.

    It’s time dizzydezy did the right thing.

    We, therefore, call on dizzydezy to come forward and reveal his true identity NOW.

    Liked by 1 person

      1. John

        Thank God you’re alive, dizzydezy…..Or Paul….should I say?
        So when will you be available
        for some publicity work? TV, Radio etc., etc. You know the kind of thing…
        And by the way, congratulations
        on your walk on the moon in ’69.
        Monkberry Moon Delight, C Moon.
        Great songs, Paul. Great songs.

        Like

  12. Mike

    Did Paul McCartney walk on the moon in 1969?

    Paul McCartney disappeared fom public view in 1969 and was not seen for several months. New evidence recently released shows that Paul McCartney was in America for several months in 1969 training to be an astronaut at the
    NASA Kennedy Space Center.
    Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin ignited Eagle’s engines but it was Paul McCartney who guided the lunar module
    and landed on the moon’s surface.
    Evidence also shows that it was Paul McCartney who walked on the moon
    and said his famous words:

    ” That’s one small step for a Beatle and one giant leap for Beatledom.
    Scrambled eggs. Oh, my baby, how I love your legs……

    Do-do-dooooo, do-do-do-doooo..”

    Paul McCartney’s words were , of course, changed later.

    After his epic journey and return to earth
    Paul McCartney drove to Scotland on a moped and in disguise (three false ears and carrying a transparent plastic bag full of assorted moon rocks over his head).

    Paul would not be seen again in public for another two years.

    Like

  13. Jill

    With all due respect, I wonder about Paul is Dead experts who say there was a “real” or “biological Paul,” and claim to know who that was. Heck, there are clearly altered SCHOOL photos of “Paul,” so who was real? Further, they claim there is one man who replaced him. Sorry, but a few weeks of studying photos (some of the old ones are altered, but not all of them) makes it clear that there were multiples THEN and NOW. There currently are at least two working Pauls..
    The main Pauls in the 1960s (before the 1966-67 period) were as follows: one with a short, “perfect” triangle profile nose; another with a short, hooked-bridge nose; and a third with a longer, sloping nose and big chin. Perfect Nose still tours. His right hip always has stuck out a bit, even when he’s seated. He’s the one on the infamous Letterman Show episode.
    The double with the short, hooked-bridge nose still performs sometimes, too. He seems far more awkward with his bass and kind of stops playing a lot when performing. He was the Kennedy Center Honoree, seated next to Oprah Winfrey. Although “he” had appeared on her show years before, this night it was clear they’d never met. That’s because that night’s honoree was never on the Oprah Winfrey show; Perfect Nose was.
    One of the current doubles (I actually haven’t seen him lately – maybe he’s retired or passed on) has a nose that is very thin, long, and hooked on the end. He has blue-green eyes and doesn’t care who knows it. Doubles with noses like this appeared in the 1970s. None of them were convincing and they did not perform with the Beatles.
    Or you can forget the faces and just stick with the body types. Back in the old days, there was a Paul with wide hips, a short torso and somewhat bowed, muscular legs. He had a fleshy face and full lips. There was another with a short torso, but long, thin legs. He’s the one with the jutting right hip who is the most active now. Both of these men performed live in the 1960s. After 1966, a much taller man with a long torso who, save for having black hair, looked nothing like any of the McCartneys, came on the scene. He’s the big guy galloping around in the Fool on the Hill video and staring at you in Strawberry Fields.

    Like

    1. Tina

      Can you supply full information on the facts and sources for your demented truth-challenged rant, rave and diatribe above?

      Facts and sources, please.

      Thank you

      Tina

      Like

      1. Jill

        Wow. Your reaction is a bit much, no? Rant? Demented? Diatribe? I wrote what I’ve observed. Where is YOUR proof of the “real Paul?” Sorry, but when people start attacking folks personally because they disagree or have questions, you have to wonder where they’re coming from. And I do.

        Like

  14. Jan Garcia

    Just cut a tomato in half and would you believe it, there’s an image of Paul McCartney on a horse galloping across the Sea of Tranquillity on the moon.
    Or maybe it’s across the Mare Tranquillitatis. Image on both halves
    of tomato. Not sure what year….1969?
    Paul I mean….not the tomato.

    Anyone know a good PID expert?

    Like

    1. Wendy

      Is there any possibility that you could scan your tomato image with a laser beam and create a hologram? This would allow the viewer to walk around the Paul image in your tomato and view it in greater 3D detail. Failing that a simple photo would be useful for future reference.
      Just a thought…..

      Hope this helps.

      Like

  15. Gareth

    Are you confusing “hologram” with
    “orgasm”? A lot of people do – for
    some reason. Not to worry, it’s easily done. We all make mistakes from
    time to time.

    Like

  16. Daniel

    Is Tina Foster a lawyer?
    Where exactly does she practice law?
    She writes:
    ”  I realized Paul McCartney had been replaced while getting my LLM.
    At that point, I was swept away by the sheer evil if (sic) impostor-replacing (sic) someone. ”
    An LL.M. degree by itself generally does not qualify graduates to practice law. In most cases, LL.M. students must first obtain a professional degree in law, e.g. the Bachelor of Laws (LL.B.) in the United Kingdom or the Juris Doctor (J.D.) in the United States.
    A bachelor’s degree is the minimum educational requirement for admission
    to law school.
    Has Tina Foster passed the Law School Admission Test? Has she earned a Juris Doctor Degree and has she passed the American Bar Examination?
    What are Tina Foster’s full qualifications
    to practice law in the United States of
    America?
    Daniel Soames

    Like

    1. Jill

      I still am hoping she is not a fraud, but her livid non-response to me now forces me to consider it. I like that she keeps the Tavistock discussion alive, but suspect anyone who has spent time on this who still believes that there was one real Paul McCartney, and that we know who that was. As an attorney myself, I would not be caught dead in front of a jury with pictures of JPM from the 1950s and 60s trying to make the argument that they were one man. Look, I had the same weepy notions as Foster of one wee little love bug named Paul McCartney who was brutally stamped out by the Blue Meanies and replaced with one talented guy with a huge ego. It just doesn’t hold up to the evidence, though, and I was not too proud to revise my thinking.

      It’s one thing to have a murder/death that ends with another musician taking up the baton and running it hard for 50 years. Tragic, but you can see where the new guy could be a sympathetic figure to some. If the tale proved true, it would be fodder for TV debates of silly questions like: “Billy Shears: hero or liar?” Somebody from Apple would sit down with Oprah and explain how they didn’t want to break the public’s heart. There’d be some “intriguing” discussion of how we were fooled, and an “expert” yammering on about how the human brain recognizes faces. In a week, planet Earth moves on. The “controversial” Memoirs of Billy Shears and the iamaphoney project- both of which can readily be accessed by a five-year-old – seem to be preparing us for this actually fairly harmless scenario.

      Now come with me to a world where, whether anyone died or not, JPM was never one person. I try to ignore them, but there are plenty of photos of wildly varying heights among the four, as well as one creepy one where a Paul looks about 16 or 17 while the rest of them look to be in their 20s. (Again, I can’t deal with that.) Suppose we were all had by a Beatles project? By whom? Why? Why are these actors STILL AROUND? By which “artists” are we being had even as we speak and why? These are the questions we need to ask. Meanwhile, Foster asks me for proof. Here it is: the enormous body of videos and photos, doctored and otherwise. SAME PROOF WE’VE ALL BEEN LOOKING AT. Where is HER proof that The One Paul was shot in the head, and was crafting music on behalf of angelic realms? Lyrics? A guitar tuning? Sorry, would never hold up in court.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s