Dr. Kevin Barrett, a Ph.D. Arabist-Islamologist, is one of America’s best-known critics of the War on Terror.

He is Host of TRUTH JIHAD RADIO; a hard driving weekly LIVE call in radio show. He also has appeared many times on Fox, CNN, PBS and other broadcast outlets, and has inspired feature stories and op-eds in the New York Times, the Christian Science Monitor, the Chicago Tribune, and other leading publications.

Dr. Barrett has taught at colleges and universities in San Francisco, Paris, and Wisconsin, where he ran for Congress in 2008. He currently works as a nonprofit organizer, author, and talk radio host.


View Latest Posts >>>

Barrett-Fetzer slugfest: “Did Paul McCartney die in 1966?”

Or is Fetzer having flashbacks? Your call!

Did Paul get hit by a car while crossing Abbey Road?

Did Paul get hit by a car while crossing Abbey Road?

By Kevin Barrett, Veterans Today Editor

On today’s False Flag Weekly News (click here for links to the 40 stories covered) my good friend Jim Fetzer and I found an area of serious disagreement. (Fast forward to the 47 minute mark.)

Citing a website I’ve never heard of, Jim insists that a newspaper called the The Hollywood Inquirer published an interview with Ringo Starr in which Ringo states that Paul McCartney died in 1966 and was replaced by a look-alike named Billy Shears.

Here is the story Jim believes is real:

FORMER BEATLE RINGO STARR CLAIMS THE “REAL” PAUL MCCARTNEY DIED IN 1966 AND WAS REPLACED BY LOOK-ALIKE

This story is a pathetic, badly-written hoax.

“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…”

“Obviously very emotional.” Give me a break!

There is no such newspaper as The Hollywood Inquirer – though there is an empty website with a logo at HollywoodInquirer.com.

This is one of those times when the Snopes.com debunking is clearly correct…at least as far as the sourcing of the bogus Ringo quote. Frankly, I’m surprised that a guy as sharp as Jim Fetzer would fall for this.

Though the “Hollywood Inquirer story” and “Ringo quote” are obviously bogus, there are serious researchers out there who believe that Paul McCartney died in 1966. Ole Dammegard is one of them. Jim Fetzer has been listening to these people, including Clare Kuehn, and he has bought into the story so utterly and completely that he actually believed this transparently fake “news story.”

So I am appealing to VT readers for help. Is there any real evidence that Paul McCartney died in 1966? Or have Ole and Jim and Clare been having acid flashbacks to the good old days when they used to stay up all night playing Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band backwards?

If anyone can cite a simple, straightforward, unambiguous piece of hard evidence like an actual well-sourced quote from a Beatle – NOT circumstantial evidence that the Beatles were playing around with the “Paul is dead” theme for fun during their druggie days (we all KNOW that) – please drop it in the comments box.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail

Related Posts:



The views expressed herein are the views of the author exclusively and not necessarily the views of VT, VT authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners, technicians, or the Veterans Today Network and its assigns. LEGAL NOTICE - COMMENT POLICY

Posted by on March 5, 2015, With 11566 Reads Filed under Humor. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

FaceBook Comments

71 Responses to "Barrett-Fetzer slugfest: “Did Paul McCartney die in 1966?”"

  1. Donald Iverson  April 1, 2015 at 11:18 am

    It’s much more believable that the marketing geniuses behind the Beatles created the story of Paul dying, reinforcing that idea by planting clues in their songs and album covers for the purpose of building increased interest in their rabid followers. Thus, they could appeal to these same followers as insiders; i.e. they are being let in on the “real story”, which only worked to heighten their fans’ devotion.

    I find it quite repulsive to think that if Paul did in fact die, that they would be so disrespectful as to carry on a charade as they are alleged to have done. That appears to be much less plausible than the idea that Paul’s death was merely an illusion for public consumption.

  2. Howard T.Lewis III  March 11, 2015 at 10:33 pm

    I have always been a Beatles fan, though not as much as a George Harrison and Diana Ross and the Supremes fan. I saw George Harrison’
    s tour with Ravi Shankar and a huge stage full of musicians from India. Magnificent. I had all of McCartney’s albums and always respected his talent as a songster and bass player. My date and I walked out of his Seattle show in 1974 it was so bad. Good records at the time but the show lacked life and purpose. TV dinner all the way. What happened and why I do not know. Was it Paul McCartney? Probably.

  3. Fed Up  March 8, 2015 at 9:36 pm

    This whole mess could easily be cleared up with a simple DNA test with the bogus Paul McCartney and the REAL Paul McCartney’s younger brother Michael. However it probably won’t happen as baby brother has been well compensated for his silence, along with signing on to the Official Secrets Act and possible threats which may have been made to him and his family by British security and the Kosher Nostra which controls the entertainment industry. I believe that has happened with George Martin, the Asher family and the surviving early Beatles friends and music associates as well. I have often wondered why Ringo and George were never knighted like bogus Paul and it’s plain as day that they were not happy to go along any longer with the charade and were rarely in the company of “Sir Paul” after the Beatles broke up.

  4. bobeejoe  March 8, 2015 at 8:51 pm

    This is hilarious stuff. It’s just ridiculous!!!!!

  5. wiggins  March 8, 2015 at 11:11 am

    I can recommend “The Falsification Of History” by John Hamer to give you the full gen on the ‘Shakespeare’ story…

  6. Fed Up  March 8, 2015 at 5:47 am

    I have studied many photos of “Paul McCartney’s” biological children Mary, Stella and James. Heather was adopted by him. None of them look like the original Paul. James is big and heavy, balding and blonde and his eyes do NOT have the original Paul’s eyes. James should have a round, cherubic face like the original Paul but doesn’t. He has the William Campbell eyes. James is also taller than the original Paul. Mary and Stella look like Linda Eastman McCartney, but Stella is blonde like her mother and Mary has dark hair like William Campbell. I have also scrutinized pictures of the children of John, George and Ringo and they do look like their fathers, notably Dhani Harrison. You just can’t fool Mother Nature when it comes to biology.

  7. dr. heidi Lawery  March 7, 2015 at 7:43 pm

    Please check the article in WIRED Magazine published August 2009.
    Two forensic scientists attempted to debunk the Paul is dead theory as a hoax. To their own shock and surprise they determined the current Paul is NOT the original. Use of voice prints, comparison of the mandibular curve, lips, and teeth did not match the pre-1966 Paul.
    I did not want to believe it myself, but I believe the science.

You must be logged in to post a comment Login


TOP 50 READ ARTICLES THIS MONTH