IMPORTANT--Our Paul's Hint At His Age and Where He Grew Up

In the same hour-long press conference in Tokyo on June 30, 1966 that I mentioned in my last post  there was an important exchange between our Paul and a reporter that narrows down our Paul's true age and where he grew up. (Read the entire interview at:  www.beatlesinterviews.org .) Here's what Paul said:  

     KEN GARY:  "Would you pay two or three pounds to go and see people like yourselves and
                                that sort of music?"

     PAUL:             "Yes, if we like them.  Yeah.  I paid seventeen-and-six to see Bill Haley.  I was
                                 twelve.  It broke me."

Bill Haley and his Comets first toured England from February 6-24, 1957.  This would put Paul's year of birth at--most likely--1944 and an outside chance of 1945. 

He said he paid 17 and 6 for the ticket and I am still trying to track down which city the ticket price would be from.

But we know that Paul was born in 1944 or 1945.  An IMPORTANT clue!

John's Small Hint Of Different Beatles

In one of the Japanese interviews---the news conference of June 30, 1966---[listen to it on http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o3LGZOymkQY ], a Japanese reporter asked John [in part]:

     0:45-0:49  "Do your families associate with one another?  With one another socially?"
     And John answered:
     1:00-1:04  "Which families?  I mean, the old Beatles?"

A small "slip",  but telling.

Why Didn't The Beatles Record In America in 1966? (continued)

In my December 18, 2010 post I mentioned a book that stated The Beatles planned to record in Nashville in 1966.  I haven't found that city mentioned in any other references, but I have found six references that describe Brian Epstein's visit to Memphis in March, 1966 with the intent of having The Beatles record an album and single there.  They are:
     1.)  Soulville, U.S.A.: The Story of Stax Records by Rob Bowman (1997)
     2.)  The Beatles As Musicians:  Revolver Through The Anthology by Walter Everett (1999)
     3.)  Memphisflyer.com (the online version of The Memphis Flyer newsweekly), May 3, 2007
     4.)  Revolver:  How The Beatles Reimagined Rock 'N' Roll by Robert Rodriguez (2012)
     5.)  Reference #2 quotes The Beatles Monthly Book, no. 33:  April, 1966, p. 29 as its news
           source.
     6.)  References #3 and #4 mention an article dated March 31, 1966 from The Memphis Press-
           Scimitar newspaper as their source.

So, it looks as though Brian Epstein was investigating having The Beatles record in America.

The Press-Scimitar article quoted said that "The Beatles were to arrive at Stax Record Studios on April 9, 1966 and were to stay two weeks, recording an LP and one single."

There were different conclusions in the articles as to why The Beatles never came to the U.S.  The fourth reference said it was because Epstein cited security concerns and possibly also because of inflated rates for studio time.  The first reference agrees with the "security concerns" conclusion.  The third reference concluded that there were squabbles about getting The Beatles from the airport and where they would have stayed for the two weeks they would have been in Memphis and that Epstein didn't want to get in the middle of it.  Do any of the conclusions make sense?  Think about it. 1.) As I said in the December, 2010 post, The Beatles were multi-millionaire producing stars.  They could command unlimited studio time at EMI in England, so I don't believe U.S. studio rates would have been an issue.  2.)  Epstein had a long, successful history of negotiating tours for The Beatles in and out of dozens of cities throughout the world, so I don't believe he would have been discouraged by problems in Memphis.  3.)  Epstein also had a long, successful history of coordinating movement of The Beatles in and out of the same dozens of cities, so security issues don't seem a plausible excuse.  Also, remember the "bigger than Jesus" controversy started by John that began stirring up trouble in the south in late July, 1966?  Epstein did not cancel the last American tour despite threats on The Beatles' lives.  And one of the concerts planned and completed was in Memphis. I read the details of The Beatles visit to Memphis in the 1996 book, Goin' Back To Memphis:  A Century of Blues, Rock 'N' Roll and Glorious Soul by James Dickerson.  He described The Beatles' visit to Memphis:
     "Word was out:  the Beatles were going to get their asses kicked.  By the time they took the stage, John, Paul, George, and Ringo were basket cases.  Halfway through the performance, someone threw a firecracker onto the stage.  George Harrison nearly fainted."

So much for security concerns.

Here is my speculation on The Beatles staying in England to record Revolver from April to June, 1966.  I believe that Paul was out of the group on July 1, 1966.  I think his last concert (and, possibly, public) appearance was in Japan on June 30th. They sent a Paul (and a John) replacement to America in August, 1966.  I think Paul might have been casting around looking for an escape route because I think he saw "the handwriting on the wall" and feared for his life.  It's possible that he either wanted to make clandestine arrangements to come over to America when he was officially ousted from the group or it's possible that he even contemplated what would have amounted to a defection to America in April, 1966.  My guess is that he thought he'd be safe in the U.S.  If he didn't just disappear here, he might have had plans to finally tell the truth about being a replacement for the real Paul McCartney.  It's my firm belief that OUR John did come over to America and settled quietly in Palm Beach, Florida.  I think he "came out of retirement" in 1980 and recorded the Double Fantasy album with Yoko Ono.  It is our John's photo on the front of that album.

But Paul's American escape route was blocked in April, 1966.







 

The Russian Revolver Cover Is Different and Revealing

When the former Soviet Union released the Revolver album, it had the large drawn images of the four Beatles BUT the small photos interspersed between the drawings are different.

Take a look at the two album covers.  The American and British release is on the left.  The Russian release is below on the right.  The US/Brit release appears to have only our Paul and our John on it, except for the curious photo of a "Paul" with a sharp nose and long sharp chin--seen just behind and below the Paul drawing's ear.  I've commented on this before:  the same sharp-faced "Paul" shows up in a photo from George Harrison's autobiography that was supposedly taken when the Beatles were originally in Hamburg around 1961.

It appears as though that photo is the only one that survives in the Russian cover.  The photos that grace the Russian Revolver show the spectrum of the various Pauls and Johns from the original real Paul and John, through our Paul and John, and then the John that replaced our John.  The only original photo of "Paul" that survives from the US/Brit cover is that sharp-faced Paul and the replacement for our Paul is not seen in any of the photos.  So the question to ask is:  was the Russian cover's sharp-faced "Paul" a photo of the man who was retooled into our Paul's replacement?

 

 

How Old Is Paul In This Photo and Why Are They Claiming He Was Alive And Six Years' Older?

I found an article at BBC Leeds online that gives you an idea of the length they'll go to perpetuate the farce that Paul of early 1966 is the same Paul that was around and kicking in 1972.

First, take a look at the photo from the article. If you are a Beatles fan you know that this is our Paul from 1966. But the article--at:  http://www.bbc.co.uk/leeds/features/radio_leeds/macca.shtml leads you to believe that the Paul in the photo is our Paul in 1972.  (NOTE:  You will need to type the website info above directly in your computer's address box to link to the article;  I tried the link, and BBC gives an error message.)

The gist of the article is that the teenage reporter got a phone call from "Paul" in 1972 and "Paul" told him that he was going out on the road with wife Linda and a new band called Wings.  If you saw the photo and then read the article, you would conclude that our Paul is the Linda and Wings Paul.

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is how they perpetuate a farce.

Was This Paul's Yellow Submarine?

In my September 28th. (2012) post, I talked about Los Angeles radio station KRLA's magazine article that hinted that our Paul's hometown was Leeds, England.  This led to the idea that the B/Featles' Magical Mystery Tour film comment about "the bus being ten miles north on the Dewsbury Road" might have been a reference to our Paul.

I was reading a book called Yorkshire West Riding written in 1950 by Lettice Cooper.  She was talking about Huddersfield, West Riding, which is ~ 21 miles southwest of Leeds.  (See map on right.)  On page 132 she said:  "During the second German War, when she [Huddersfield] was happily untouched by air-raids, she produced an enormous quantity of munitions of all kinds, even turning out midget submarines, fitted to the last detail and complete with crews."

   At the top left is a photo of the HMS Expunger XE8 that was made by the manufacturer Broadbent in Huddersfield in 1944.  At the top right is an image of the famous "yellow submarine." 

When Paul wrote the song, was he making reference to a little of his past in Yorkshire, West Riding? 

paulumbo's back

Just a note to explain that I have not published for some time due to an accident.  I'll have a new post up in a few days .  And . . .   Paul fans have waited over forty years to have the truth told and I really believe that people researching this mystery must step up the pace, collaborate and get the truth out!  We have waited long enough.  I'll do my part.


                                                                        ---paulumbo (again)