Beverly Hills | The former drummer of the Beatles, Ringo Starr, surprised the world this morning during an interview in his luxurious Californian residence when he admitted that the 45-year old rumors about the alleged death of Paul McCartney in 1966 were actually true.

In an exclusive interview with the Hollywood Inquirer, Mr. Starr explained that the “real” Paul McCartney had died in a car crash on November 9, 1966, after an argument during a Beatles’ recording session. To spare the public from grief, the Beatles replaced him with a man named William Shears Campbell, who was the winner of a McCartney look-alike contest and who happened to have the same kind of jovial personality as Paul.

“When Paul died, we all panicked!” claims Ringo, obviously very emotional. “We didn’t know what to do, and Brian Epstein, our manager, suggested that we hire Billy Shears as a temporary solution. It was supposed to last only a week or two, but time went by and nobody seemed to notice, so we kept playing along. Billy turned out to be a pretty good musician and he was able to perform almost better than Paul. The only problem was that he couldn’t get along with John, at all.”

William Shears Campbell, better known as Billy Shears, does indeed “disappear ” from records in 1966 and no traces of him can be found after Paul’s alleged death.


These pictures from 1966 show the great resemblance between Paul McCartney on the left, and William Shears Campbell on the right, at the time of McCartney’s alleged death.

Mr. Starr alleges that the group did send out a lot of hidden messages through the years to prepare the population for the truth.

He notably says that the entire Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band album was awash with Paul-is-dead clues: the Beatles had indeed officially formed a “new” band featuring a “fictional” member named Billy Shears, which happened to be the actual name of Paul’s replacement.

“We felt guilty about the deception” added Ringo Starr. “We wanted to tell the world the truth, but we were afraid of the reactions it would provoke. We thought the whole planet was going to hate us for all the lies we had told, so we kept lying but sending subtle clues to relieve our conscience. When the first rumors finally began about the whole thing, we felt very nervous and started fighting a lot with each other. At some point, it was too much for John and he decided to leave the band.”

Ringo Starr claims that he finally decided to tell the truth because he was afraid that it was going to die with him. At age 74, he is the only other surviving member of the famous band besides Paul McCartney, and he was afraid the deception would never be revealed.


According to Ringo Starr, the cover of the Abbey Road album was a hidden message to the world, symbolizing a funeral procession. John Lennon, dressed in white, symbolizes the clergyman. Ringo Starr, dressed in black, symbolizes the undertaker. George Harrison, in denim jeans and shirt, symbolizes the gravedigger and McCartney, barefoot and out of step with other members of the band, symbolizes the corpse.

The rumors of Paul’s death began more than 45 years ago but had always been dismissed as nonsense by the band and its entourage. In September 1969, American college students published a series of articles in which they claimed that clues to McCartney’s death could be found among the lyrics and artwork of the Beatles’ recordings. Clue-hunting rapidly proved infectious, and within a few weeks, it had become an international phenomenon. Rumors only declined after a contemporary interview with McCartney was published in Life magazine in November 1969.

Neither Paul McCartney nor anyone from his entourage has commented Ringo Starr’s declaration yet, but the interview has already provoked a lot of reactions around the world. Journalists and paparazzis from around the world have surrounded the residence of the musician only minutes after the interview was broadcasted and are waiting for the star to comment the allegations.

The British MI5 also announced an investigation to determine if an impostor could have indeed posed for 48 years as the Member of the Order of the British Empire, Sir James Paul McCartney, during official ceremonies involving Queen Elizabeth II.

 Next sent in by commenter.  Interesting, but not quite what I originally imagined it was when I posted it.  Paul’s twin brother?  Never heard of him before.

Sir Faul revisited

Note to readers: The following is a piece I wrote in early 2016. I was still quite wet behind the ears, and new to the idea that the truth is not only “out there,” but barely hidden and often easily discovered. I originally wrote it in hopes that Miles Mathis would publish it (without using my name), but he found it to be of low quality, and said he could not use it as I had put it together. That was OK, as it was a first attempt, so I gave him all of my work and asked that he merely credit me with any that he used as a “Friend in Colorado.”

He did so, and added much, much more. I wish to be clear, he did not plagiarize a word, and his final piece was his own with due credit to my small contribution, the discovery that “Paul McCartney” is actually two men whose real names we can only guess at, and that “Mike McGear” is a hired actor.

I am still damp behind the ears, and would have written the piece much differently then knowing what I know now. So I am rewriting it now, just for sheer enjoyment.

Sir Faul

Boat photo with arrows

It all started with the boat photo, and two “Paul’s” visible. I have arrows pointing at them in the photo above. I saw this photo long before I discovered the McCartney twins, and it stuck with me. But I did not know to follow my instincts. It just struck me as very strange.

The main characters:

There are three players here. Not knowing their real names, I will use their public identities.

Paul 1959McCartney 1964“Paul McCartney” is the original Beatle we came to know, the “cute one,” the one who starred in the movie A Hard Day’s Night. Keep in mind that we do not know that “Paul” is his real name. It could be, like “John Lennon,” a stage name, an invention by those shady men behind the curtain who formed the “Beatles.

Mike 1957McCartney 2007“Mike McCartney” is Paul’s twin brother. Again, we do not know that this is his real name, but for purposes of this essay we will call him “Mike.” He, for the most part, played the part of “Paul” in the movieHelp! He is known today as “Macca.” Paul mostly disappeared from public view, and has re-emerged on occasion, as will be seen below.

“Mike McGear”mike-mcgear is a hired actor. He claims to be Paul’s brother, but bears no resemblance to either Mike or Paul, as can be easily seen. McGear is a “lifetime actor,” or a person whose entire life is a lie. If the Beatles were going to use “Paul McCartney” as a set of twins,  then it was necessary for Mike McCartney to step out of his life and allow a replacement in. To pull this off, the handlers invented the character McGear.

Lennon 12I cannot help but notice that McGear bears a strong, perhaps familial resemblance to another character in this stage play, covered elsewhere, another set of twins and lifetime actors called John Lennon. I say this because of the curvature of the nose lightly to his right. I see this same feature in Lennon. It would well be that they are keeping it all in the family.

The Hoax

In the fall of 1969 radio disc jockey Russell Gibb, WKNR-FM in Detroit, received a phone call from “Tom,” who told him that Paul McCartney had died and had been replaced in 1966 by a lookalike. Thus began a cottage industry that continues to this day, now called “PID”, or Paul is Dead. It is continually churned, new clues added now and then.

It is misdirection, designed to get us asking the wrong question. Paul McCartney was indeed replaced by a virtual lookalike, and I know who the replacement is. It was not hard to discover. If I could do it, so too could all of the sleuths who make those PID YouTubes and run those PID web pages.  Why don’t they? It is, I suspect, because they are tasked with keeping the mythology alive. They are disinformation agents.

The phone call to WKNR and subsequent publicity was obviously a staged event. The troubling question why? Had the managers of the Beatles not done the whole business with album and song clues, the whole switch would have gone down seamlessly. It was done so well that we would never have known to question it. Why did they clue us in? Did they overplay their hand?

The Beatles in 1966 stopped performing in public. In a period of five years they released a series of albums – Rubber Soul (1965), Revolver (1966), Sgt. Pepper (1967), White Album (1968) and Abbey Road (1969). After the phone call to WKNR we would learn that the albums were littered with clues hinting at the death of Paul. Hundreds of thousands of kids rushed to buy them to examine the clues and, if somehow able, play the songs backward. (I never could pull that off.) We love a mystery, and they provided it.

Below is what is in my view the most impressive album “clue:”


That is the drum from the cover of Sgt. Pepper. If you mirror the top as the bottom, as done here, see how it spells out I ONEIX HE ^DIE. That could mean he died on November 9th, September 11th (Europeans list date and month rather than month and date, our custom) or they could be taunting us with 911 clues. (I ONE=11, IX=9.) Although the Twin Towers had only been recently completed at the time of the PID hoax, it seems that the numbers “9” and “11” have significance preceding, or even superseding, the events of 2001.

Who knows, but good lord! The effort, the sophistication of the PID psyop is impressive! There had to have been some of the top graphic artists of the time behind it. I can assure you it was not four twenty-something mop-tops who assembled the album covers. I also suspect they did not write the music or play the instruments in the studio. We had a long discussion in a previous thread where some claimed that the rooftop concert was lip synced. These were not the musicians we were led to believe them to be.

The boys as kids

Here’s a photo of the McCartney boys, Paul born on 6/18/42, and Michael, we are told, on 1/7/44, (am I seeing two 8’s?) or eighteen months later.


As I studied this photo, I realized that these are indeed brothers, as the eyes, nose, mouth and ears are a match. The one on the left looks two, perhaps three years old, which would make the other 6-18 months old. But wait! At that age he should exhibit more babyish qualities, in fact, should still have baby cheeks and be smaller in size. But these two kids could easily be the same age.

I began to suspect I was looking at twins. I found other photos:


That’s a lovely family shot of Mary and James and the boys, but again, I am not seeing eighteen months age difference between left  and right. In this photo I noticed something that would appear again and again over time.  I originally thought that it was Paul on the right, but looking at later photos, I discovered one key to telling them apart – one of them parts his hair on the right, in fact has what looks like a natural cowlick, or an unruly section of hair that goes against the grain of the rest. Hair partIn later years that cowlick would turn up in the twin I call Mike. (Note that Mary has dressed them in identical shoes, socks and shorts, and shirts of the same maker. It was common practice in those days to dress twins alike.)

Paul Mike Mom

Hair part 2Getting our bearings here, I can now assert that Mike is on the left here, meaning that must be Paul on the right. The cowlick is apparent again. Paul has lost a front tooth, so he must be about six. Again, they are dressed alike.

But I did find a photo of the two where there is a definite age difference. This photo is said to be of Paul and his younger brother Mike.

McCartney sister

It is hard to say which twin that is, but I am guessing Paul due to the part on the left.  There is, however, a slight problem here – the one on the left is not Mike. It’s a girl wearing a dress and strap-on shoes, girlish in style. I don’t know who she is, perhaps a cousin. That they assert this to be Mike and Paul … it reinforces the age difference, but is absurd.

Mike Paul twin shotThere are other photos of the boys in this era, such as the one on the left here, an obvious shot of a set of twins, Mike with the cowlick on the left. Check herefor yourself, and see what I saw. What a revelation!

Photographs of the boys dry up after this time. They will appear again in the late 50s, and then again as fully formed Beatles.

In the meantime, Mike McGear appears around 1962.

Mike McGear

McGear is one of the hardest aspects of this psyop for people to grasp (along with the role of Jane Asher – see below). If a guy has a musical career, claims to be Paul McCartney’s brother, and no one contradicts him, who am I to doubt?

We have found in these complicated and long-running stage acts that there needs to be certain characters in play to misdirect us and distract us from the truth. McGear, who doesn’t even remotely resemble a McCartney, is such a character, He is a lifetime actor hired to play the part of Mike McCartney to allow the real person to slip into the role of Beatle Paul McCartney.

The photos below appear in both my work and that mentioned at the outset. They were part of the work I submitted, so I am not borrowing or plagiarizing. They tell us all we need to know.

McGear apparently got married without the presence of fake Paul, who had to be pasted into photos. Below is supposedly McGear’s wedding day in 1968, also attended by “Paul” and his girlfriend, Jane Asher.

Mike wedding

The composition of this photo makes it appear that he’s an awkward man, even gawking at Angela’s chest. The wavy vertical line between “Paul” and “Mike” is just sloppy darkroom work, even to the degree of embarrassment for some lowly technician. Notice that “Paul” has that cowlick, which always gives him away. There are two sets of people in the photo, Paul and Jane, and Mike, Angela, the young boy and the older woman. “Paul” and Jane and McGear were not together that day, so “Paul” had to be added. Real Mike McCartney did not attend fake Mike McCartney’s wedding, it appears.Mike Wedding day

Same day, and an odd one, as Mike and Angela are not even front and center at their own wedding. They don’t seem to be important players. Notice again … the cowlick. That’s Mike, not Paul and Jane Asher. Mike and the man next to them were pasted into this photo. They are looking one direction while everyone else is looking at the camera. Another fake.

Just for fun, let’s take the same photo and see where they eyes are looking:

Wedding bells

My guess on this, an informal photo taken while setting up for real photos, which would explain the back of the head in the foreground. They are staging, as all of us who have been through wedding ceremonies know about. That’s why participants on the right are distracted. I think the three on the left, Jane, “Paul,” and the older man are inserted later, in the darkroom. A floating hand on the older man’s shoulder (red circle) is a clue. That often happens in paste-ups.

Anyway, forget Mike McGear, who is mere misdirection. He’s fake. They had to fake “Paul” being at his wedding, so did it in the darkroom.

Jane Asher

We are all familiar with the concept of a “beard,” or a professional starlet (usually) used to conceal the fact that a male star is gay. They are all over Hollywood, from Angelina Jolie to Kelly Preston to Katie Holmes. They are also present in politics, Melania Trump coming to mind. Hillary and Bill Clinton have been referred to as a “double bearded” set.

But beards perform other functions, as well. Jane Asher’s bearded role was that of “Paul” McCartney’s girlfriend in the early years. He supposedly moved in with her parents, Margaret and Richard Asher, a music professor and a doctor. Peter Asher, of Peter and Gordon and later a music producer, is Jane’s brother.

George MartinGeorge Martin was one of Margaret’s most prominent students. It is my suspicion that much of the early music of the Beatles was written in the Asher household, though not necessarily by any of the Beatles.Yesterday and Michelle have highly sophisticated chord progressions, far beyond the capability of a twenty-something kid with no formal music training, in my opinion. I’ve long wondered if they are George Martin compositions, or perhaps a committee in which  he participated. Often referred to as the “fifth Beatle,” he was the only one with serious musical training.

Jane with PaulJane with MikeJane’s bearded role, to be seen in public with both Mike and Paul during these years, was not something she relished, if these photos are any  indication. This was an acting gig and done to misdirect and sow confusion. How can we claim they are twins, or that Paul has been “replaced” when Jane is there riding sideboard, seen with both.

Anyway, that was Jane Asher’s role. Look at the fun she is having! Have you ever seen three people so deeply in love?

How to tell them apart

Photo montage

The above photo montage is page 118 from the book Face to Face: Analysis and Comparison of Facial Features to Authenticate Identities of People in Photographs, by Joelle Steele. Oddly, Ms. Steele, a facial recognition expert who has been called to testify in court on occasion, cannot tell the difference between Paul and Mike. Given her obvious qualifications, I would attribute that failing to the power of groupthink. Claiming that there are two “Paul’s” would endanger her career. I do not suffer that problem. My sleuthing “career” has never paid me a penny, nor will it ever.

Here are photos in order, left to right, top to bottom, year given by Ms. Steele:

1957: Mike
1959: Paul
1964: Paul
1965: Mike
1966: Mike
1968: Mike
1975: Mike
1977: Mike
1985: Paul (He’s alive! He’s alive!)
1995: A composite photo, upper half Paul, lower half Mike
2004: Mike
2007: Mike

Easy enough, right? I learned to tell the difference early on by the hair part, but in addition, Paul’s eyebrows wrap around and down, his ears are lower on his head.

Here are two photos of the brothers, side by side, both at young ages:

I have set pupil distance at one inch (if they are the same man, no problem, right?).


Their features line up very well, so much so that most people cannot distinguish them. That is an overlay, left over right photo. The arrows point to detectable differences. Look how the eyebrows do not line, up, the mouth, the size of the face. (The outline of Mike’s face on the right bears indication of paste-up, common with these very famous men at that time. Apparently his face was superimposed on someone else’s shoulders, or for some unknown reason the photo was monkeyed with. That is why there is a white line around the face in the overlay.)

After a serious amount of gazing at computer screens, you too will be able to see the differences. But one other way to tell, and this is with a hat tip to the work of others, can be found in this YouTube video. It is an 8:32 piece, and I am not showing it here – just go to the link if you have time. I will capsulize with this screen grab:


“Paul”, on the right, has a “…narrow palate that causes his upper left molars to be misaligned and angled inwards.” “Grendoza,” the maker of the video, uses the word “had” instead of “has” as the video is intended to advance the PID psyop. But it will come into play again momentarily. For now, understand the three easy recognition tools to distinguish between Paul and Mike: 1) wraparound eyebrows, 2) cowlick on the left versus part on the right, and 3) misaligned upper left molars.

In the video we learn that Paul and Mike have been stepping in and out of the role of “Paul” since the beginning, on Ed Sullivan, and as part of Wings up until about 1990. At that time it appears that Mike permanently took over the role, and Paul was retired.

The following clip, supplied by our writer Tyrone, is instructive of just how “in your face” they have been with the McCartney twins.

At 1:28 we find Paul talking about their dress style, and at 1:48 it is Mike! They pull the switch right before our eyes, expecting us not to notice.

John Halliday

The following video is about three minutes, It is worth a watch:

It came out a few years back, and was brought to my attention in the comments. I can add a little clarity to it by use of Photoshop:

I was able, on the right, to capture a moment in the video where Halliday is looking at us straight on. Here is an overlay gif:


The years have not been kind, the lines around the eyes evidence of heavy plastic surgery. But the same features are present, with longer ear lobes, of course. “John Halliday” is in my view “Paul McCartney” in retirement. I’ll go one step further – John Halliday might be his real name. If you watch the video, do pay attention to the teeth. Screen grabbing them proved impossible.  (I learned later that “Halliday”, caretaker of the McCartney childhood home, had been fired due to drinking on the job.)

The photo on the left is Paul wearing a wig, and heavily made up so as not to look his 71 years. He has, by that time, developed severe wrinkles around the eyes, not apparent here on either one, either slick photographic retouching or makeup. Richard noticed how, for purposes of this video, Paul and Mike were wearing the same clothing and wig, indicating that the psyop is still in active production.


The Beatles were an expensive and highly sophisticated psyop, introduced on the scene in the wake of the fake John F. Kennedy assassination.  I was around then, and remember all of the screaming girls, and although I was too young to understand the word “orgasmic” or realize that what I saw was an outpouring of pent-up sexual frustration AND grief over JFK. I suspect at this time that the two events, both highly choreographed, were timed to happen as they did, part of a major restructuring of our society, and destruction of a once great land.

And Paul is alive. He’s a set of twins, by the way. And, oh yeah, John is alive too. He’s a set of twins, by the way.

About Mark Tokarski

Just a man who likes to read, argue, and occasionally be surprised.


Former Beatle Ringo Starr Claims the “Real” Paul McCartney Died in 1966 and Was Replaced by Look-Alike



  1. pete fairhurst says:

    The source website says the following on its FAQ page:

    “Where do you find all this extremely well researched and credible information?

    Our News Team counts members fluent in more then 12 languages. We thus have access to thousands of newspapers around the world and choose information we feel is of interest to the Christian, Muslim and Jewish zionist community worldwide.

    How can I help your organization in its ever lasting quest for knowledge?

    If you wish to help our cause please visit our sponsors websites if you like their products and contribute to help us spread YHWH’s wisdom to the miscreants of the world.

    Why are Israelis God’s chosen people?

    Israel’s character as the chosen people is unconditional, as it says in Deuteronomy 14:2 ”

    Link here:

    Here is a much better source:

  2. pete fairhurst says:


    You have mashed up the original fake Israeli post at “worldnewsdailyreport” with the post that I pointed to in my earlier comment, at “Pieceofmindful”.

    This detracts from both posts and is confusing. Why not separate them out?

    Pieceofmindful is a very interesting and informative site that I can highly recommend to all Tap readers.

    • Tapestry says:

      No one complained yet. If I get time. I work under pressure from family that doesn’t like me blogging. I have to work quick! I read the long Paul’s twin thing and it’s interesting. I prefer Ringo’s version myself. I apologise for the mess but Sunday was a family day and I took a risk plonking these two together with the twin one unread, and it failed. If you search The Tap, there is plenty more on tis topic, much better researched, and posted by me when I had time to read things properly!.

  3. pete fairhurst says:

    Fair enough Tap. Your efforts are much appreciated by me.

    But the 2 posts conflict with one another. The headline being the old, false, story. The Pieceofmindful post being the later and much deeper analysis.

  4. aaron123 says:

    Hey this is said out of complete charity. I noticed you used the Lord’s name lighlty. Just as an expression. Most people aren’t aware that using the Lord’s name in vain ie lightly, without the due reverence is a grave matter. It’s the second Commandment because God wants us to know what will keep us alive or not (hence the grave matter i.e. with death, and life if kept). Using the Lord’s name in vain or passe is a grave matter meaning if it’s done deliberately and with full knowledge (both of which I don’t think you did) it is a mortal sin meaning if done as such one incurs the loss of the life of grace in the soul/hell eternally if one doesn’t confess and receive absolution from…..a catholic priest. We all have an obligation to tell those we know who do or have, as the case with any mortal sin (defined through the 10 Commandments) the truth, else that guilt lies on us who don’t.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.