Here is an interesting theory that I just read about the Beatles possibly all being secretly killed and replaced with look-alikes in 1966. This ties in with @Martin Alonzo 's thread about backmasking, and @Chrissy Page mentioning about whether Paul McCartney was actually killed and replaced, but I didn't want to sidetrack that conspiracy thread, so I just started this information as a new thread unto itself. The basic premise of this article is that after their last tour here in the United States in 1966, that MI6 had the Beatles put into one of those armoured vans after the concert, and they were never seen again. Supposedly, they were gassed while in the van, and their bodies dumped into the ocean, and they were then "replaced" by trained agents back in England. Besides the story about Paul being killed in the car accident and replaced, there is also an interesting record cover that shows the real Beatles looking down into a grave, and the fake Beatles standing beside them holding musical instruments that the actual musicians couldn't even play. http://www.reformation.org/beatles-were-titaniced-in-1966.html
Why Yvonne? For what purpose? Replaced with perfect look alikes? And nobody that knew them intimately could tell?
Three out of five grandsons still believe in Santa. Yikes, if you rearrange the letters in Santa you have Satan.
Shirley is absolutely correct. Elvis never really died, that was a cover story. He is still performing but as his new persona, Lady GaGa!! It was a difficult cloning but it did work out.
Actually, all of your questions are explained in the article I posted; so there is really no sense in me trying to explain everything again, and probably nowhere nearly as well as the article itself does. I have heard the usual stories about Paul McCartney being killed in the car accident, and replaced with a look-alike; but this is the first time that I have read about the English military intelligence having them all killed and being replaced with other singers who were on the MI6 payroll. There is a lot of information about a similar thing actually happening here in the United States, only instead of replacing the musicians, what they did was pick young people from military high-up families and train them to do the work they wantd done. There is a whole book about that, don't remember the name exactly; but it is something about the "Laural Canyon" mysteries or something like that. I read some of the information about it, and will look for the webpage again. The webpage tells part of the Laural Canyon book about what happened in California in the early 1960's.
I am sure that Yvonne will answer yea or nay at some time or other. I have looked back at the posts and find no place when she has said anything one way or the other. The conspiracy board is an interesting thing in that it doesn't ask for us to believe what we post but merely post what may be interesting not only to ourselves but to others. Now, here's the trick about refuting a so called conspiracy theory. In order to properly allay any idea that the theory is correct then there must be some sort of empirical proof that it is incorrect. When a link is provided in a post then chances are the writer of the article mentioned in the link believes whatever he or she wrote. It is the unbelievers job to refute the article, not the person who posted the theory. Now, I believe I can come up with some proof that the Beatles were not replaced but I am anxious to see how you, @Jim Beam will demonstrate why and how the article is bogus.
It would take many articles to show how bogus the claim is in my opinion. Since this is intertwined with Paul dying in a car crash. One or the other or both aren't true. Paul didn't die twice for one thing. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...43-years-conspiracy-theories-sold-20-000.html
I've never been much for conspiracy theories. It seems a great majority of them are started specifically to stir up trouble. I've heard so many ludicrous things over the years (NOT saying this is one of them... haven't heard this one before and I'll check out the link in a sec)... BUT.... .... Yeah, every time someone is really big, these things start. I've heard that Elvis didn't die. And Amelia Earhart. And Jimmy Hoffa (although we all probably know where HE is) and... who else? Oh yeah, Bruce Lee. And Marilyn Monroe. And JFK. Rumors of someone dying when they didn't, though, is opposite... and all four of them?! Not sure what I'll read in the link, BUT I can easily see the Beatles being "replaced" with body doubles for certain events that may have proven dangerous for them because of threats or perceived threats, sure. But replace like... permanently? That would have to make more sense for me to believe it. There would need to be a purpose. And "money" isn't a good purpose because the new guys would have to sing the same as well as look the same. I can't see that happening. Body doubles when it was thought their lives may have been endangered? Sure... but only for those public appearances.
I don't know much about conspiracy theories, but it seem to me they make us ask some pretty good questions. Now I love a good mystery or thriller, and it seems to me that many great novels have been based on conspiracy theories. I think the theory about the Beatles would make an interesting mystery story.
Yes, Mari...I can see that happening. Body doubles are used for those type of purposes but to kill and replace the Beatles for no real purpose doesn't make any sense. You might be able to fool an audience from far away but you won't fool their wives or families. You can go crazy reading this stuff.