Interview 1423 – Vinnie Caggiano on Beatles Conspiracies

by | Feb 26, 2019 | Interviews | 40 comments

Vinnie Caggiano (aka Vincognito) joins us to discuss everyone’s favourite subjects: The Beatles and conspiracy theories. From the wacky to the laughable to the thought-provoking, join us for this surprisingly thorough dissection of conspiracy lore surrounding The Beatles and their place in the manufactured mass media universe.

Watch this video on BitChute / Odysee / Rokfin / Rumble / YouTube or Download the mp4

Vinnie Caggiano – Razzamatazz

Replacing Ringo? The Story Behind Bernard Purdie and The Beatles

Vinnie’s YouTube channel

Replacing Ringo? The Story Behind Bernard Purdie and The Beatles

Everyday Chemistry – Is this The Beatles’ Long-Lost Album? (spoiler: no, it isn’t)

The greatest musical hoax of all time? The Fab4, Jagger & Dylan release record as Masked Marauders?

Klaatu – The Band Everyone Thought Was The Beatles

The Knickerbockers – Lies

Mark Lewisohn’s The Beatles: Tune In (volume 1)

Lens focal comparison

The Beatles’ height discrepancies (P/Faul)

The real Paul McCartney


Stairway to Heaven backwards

John Coleman’s The Conspirators’ Hierarchy: The Story of the Committee of 300

John Lennon: Home Demos – ‘She Said, She Said’ 1966

John Lennon’s ORIGINAL TEMPO Help! [Home Demo] – 1965

The Truth About John Lennon May Pang breaks her Silence


  1. First / Worst!

    Some of the Paul-Faul (Fake Paul) theory elements are so funderfully elaborate and self-referential for those who know the Beatles music and history inside out – but the real failure is the images of Paul-before and Faul-after that are always so mismatched and unconvincing when an abundance of good comparative images could easily be assembled.

    If they could really do that miraculous and remarkable plastic surgery in the 1960s to make someone look like the original Paul McCartney, down to the little bump/scar on one side of his upper lip… then why are there so many freaky plastic surgery victims walking around Hollywood today?

    Including the late great Joan Rivers – unless she actually wanted to look like that.

    I still have many of my parents’ vinyl albums, including the Beatles and Klaatu.

    Klaatu “Calling Occupants Of Interplanetary Craft”

    • Dearest James Corbett,

      Re: Your Bitcoin

      I was waiting for another show that touched on cryptocurrencies, etc. I looked but didn’t find the episode where you gave away bitcoin to post there but since I’m here now…

      Back then you gave some to me. I said then I’d let you know what I was going to do with it. I looked it up and it’s worth about $50 now.

      I’ve come to a cross roads. As it’s now burning a hole in my pocket.

      I wouldn’t have even looked if I hadn’t been working on this article:

      I could:

      1) gift it to

      2) give it back to you

      3) buy something online (a couple truther books, some tech, ketamine?)

      4) keep sitting on it

      5) some combo of the above

      I’d like to hear what you think. I’d also like to offer you a bribe with your own bitcoin to interview magnora7, founder of Links to his other interviews on “Tin Foil Hat” and “Higherside Chats” (2x each) are in that article above. If you’re having a busy week, need a break, or something light, or heavy, an interview with magnora7 might be an easy but fulfilling option.

      There are a lot of undertold stories about ketamine as an effective anti-depressant for non-responsive chronic depressives – like MDMA for PTSD etc. It’s been at clinics in US, UK, and Australia for a long time, but only recently has it come to Canada (_very_ expensive). Fortunately I’m past the poisons of Big Pharma so I don’t even need it. Also there’s a distinct difference between a therapeutic dose, a recreational dose, and a k-hole dose – like the difference between wine tasting, alcoholism, and passed out drunk. When Silk Road was closed the FBI took $36CAD at that time’s worth of my bitcoins. IMHO, “special K” and “molly” could be the next cannabis.

  2. Paul died in a VW bug seen on the album cover of Abbey Road. Everyone knows that.
    I still have that magazine from the 70’s “Paul is Dead” – it burned into my brain 😉

  3. Lol I had always thought the info people told me about the Beatles was unconvincing, but never looked into it

    However, with what I have learned about Hollywood in the last year I highly doubt they were a group of regular people with talent who then became controlled and directed.

    That’s not how the entertainment industry works. You maybe catch the eye of a perv producer (like Dan Schneider) or maybe a hot shot Mogul wants to bed you(say David Geffen) and they agree to bring you to fame and fortune if you let them and their friends and probably their dog have their way with you. Let us be honest, That’s the only way outsiders get in.

    I could name many A+ to B+ musicians who have said they sexually abused or physically abused as children. Many by their parents. And people like Tom Delonge for Blink, his dad and all the into the stars stuff? I believe I even saw one of those triangle triangle pedo signs at his site.

    Lol I think your guest a nice guy James, but I’m guessing the Beatles were involved in some much deeper things than he told us here. But as I mentioned, the direct evidence weak but circumstancial evidence about the industry very strong

  4. Lol I just came across information unknown to me relative to the true workings of the entertainment industry. Check out Tatum O’Neill s book A Paper Life.

  5. lol omg , sorry for all the comments, but I jus learned of another entertainment industry perv: Cameron Thor.

    Just tonight I learned of 3 more cases of sexual abuse of the underage by figures in entertainment industry.

    James, maybe you have been watching too, but the cork has popped off and the champagne is all over the floor. The entertainment industry now has an unbelievable amount verifiable sexual abuse cases. Seriously unbelievable. It’s like every single household name is involved. I never even imagined it was this deeply rooted.

  6. I had to take a break from the video. I got just past the 1/3 mark.
    It’s not exactly edge of your seat, must see, infotainment. 🙂

    Time for an anecdote.

    You guys were laughing about bands pretending to be The Beatles.
    Well I have a confession to make.

    When I was young and naive and didn’t know my ass from my elbow,
    I got suckered into buying my first ‘Beatles album’ that turned out to be made by a cover band impersonating the Beatles!

    They had a drawing of the Beatles on the cover.
    I think it was called Beatle Mania or something like that.

    I was totally fooled (and really pissed)!

  7. I turned 15 the summer of 64, the year the Beatles broke out and became big in Canada. They only grew bigger as time passed. Kids would openly speculate when the next Beatles album would be released. They were a very tuneful group and the marketers no doubt fed the hype as much as possible. It must be difficult for those who did not live through those days to imagine the exuberance of the music and the times. A tune a few years earlier ‘Louie Louie’ by the Kingsmen gave me the music buzz that comes with youth and I was playing drums by the time the Beatles broke. The top forty rock band I played in did everything that came along but we didn’t cover all that many Beatles songs. We found we just couldn’t seem to get the correct spark, vocals and nuances that we wanted and required in doing a proper Beatles cover as we wanted. Or why I’m deaf now having a Fender Bandmaster right over my right shoulder for two nights a week for two years and practices in between.

    Anyway a fascinating conversation for us children of the 60s and the music group that Beat All…. and there were some serious contenders. It is almost like the music the Beatles wrote grew up as we did.

    • Good post blad.
      I believe it about the ears going south.

      While much of the conversation between Vinnie Caggiano and James didn’t spark a strong interest from me, it sure brought back some memories of the era. A lot of the stuff they talked about, I had never heard about.

  8. As all the horrible things going on get exposed in the coming years, I think it important that we be there for the victims of those sexual abuse who try not to continue the culture. A person must be so severely messed up and this culture has mad victims for centuries.

  9. I think a helpful approach to the Paul is Dead question is to research the assertion that Paul McCartney died and was replaced in Mid 1966 on its own terms. That is, a serious investigation, based on the available facts, into whether or not a great crime remains to be recognized and addressed. Attorney and author Tina Foster is someone who has been researching the PID phenomenon for many tears. Foster has recently published a heavily footnoted book on the topic entitled Plastic Macca: The Secret Death and Replacement of Beatle Paul McCartney (2019).

    Foster also published as a primer on the topic The Splitting Image: Exposing the Secret World of Doubles, Decoys, and Impostor-Replacements (2017). The author does address the dark side of what became of the Beatles and focuses on facts and forensic evidence, not the PID clues so many get caught up in. In a nutshell, Foster has concluded that McCartney was murdered and in her interviews and on her website Plastic Macca ( she has addressed some likely motives for Paul’s replacement.

    As James stated “Beatle mania was engineered to some extent– by whom and for what purposes?” Vinnie Caggiano’s mention of Paul McCartney as conspiracy theorist towards the end of the interview begins to get at a motive for replacing Paul. McCartney after reading Mark Lane’s Rush to Judgement concluded that Oswald could not have killed Kennedy. Moreover, he offered to help Lane with his film version of Rush to Judgement by gifting him with a score for it. This is surely not a development that promoted the plans of the social engineers to further mislead the public and distract them from what was essentially the overthrow of the united states government in 1963 and a rush headlong into perpetual war. With the Beatles reach to the hearts and minds of millions, it amounted to what was, I think, a most serious threat to the worst kind of plans.

    Paul McCartney, Conspiracy Theorist

    Foster cites McCartney’s refusal to play ball with the the social engineers as strong motive for his elimination and replacement. Then there is the role of the post 1966 Beatles as an agent to promote the drug culture, especially via the LSD embracing post-1966 McCartney. It is significant that the pre-1967 McCartney has not been identified as welcoming LSD use or as wanting to influence his fans toward drug use. Given the above, McCartney would have been a stumbling block in creating the environment for drugs that emerged after 1966. If you ask me, the pre-1967 Paul McCartney would not serve the masters of distraction and self indulgence that the post 1966 McCartney went on to model for the young. See

    Agents for change: Beatles, LSD, & social-engineering

    James, you referenced the Italian study by forensic experts which caught your interest but presented somewhat of a barrier due to the original text being in Italian. The language barrier can be overcome and I think, this source deserves serious attention. Perhaps researchers speak some English and could be interviewed through a translator. In any event, here is an edited translation of the original article which, of course, could be checked against the original:

    Paul is Dead: New evidence based on computer enhanced forensic techniques

    I would like to suggest Tina Foster as Corbett Report guest as a follow to the conversation with Vinnie Caggiano on Beatles Conspiracies. I understand that the Corbett Report and a possibly a large portion of its readers are highly doubtful regarding McCartney’s death and replacement. However, I think there is enough physical evidence for those who continue to look through the facts to establish Paul McCartney’s death and replacement by an imposture by 1967. Let’s also remember that at one time many of did not doubt the official story of the September 11 attacks until, in many cases years after, our eyes were finally opened to what happened. And of course some still are in denial or haven’t gone deep enough to follow where the evidence leads and still are at square one. Thanks for listening.

    • For the Beatle who ‘died’ first I’d say he’s doing pretty well right now wouldn’t you?

      Wouldn’t it be somewhat ironic if it was Paul who ended up outliving the rest of the Beatles?

    • With all due respect to Foster’s work.

      As James and Vinnie pointed out in the video, the sheer number of coincidences that would have had to take place to replace Paul boggles the mind.

      I’ll just start a list. Feel free to add to it:

      1. Body double that is a spitting image of Paul in ALL respects including height, weight, bone structure, facial structure and facial details.

      2. Identical voice.

      3. As good or even better song writer, in the EXACT same style of Paul’s songs.

      4. As good or even better a bass player as Paul.
      A bass player who created sophisticated bass lines as good as or
      better than Paul AND could sing and play these lines at the same

      5. A left handed bass player at that!

      6. A Paul who was able to fool all of his friends and family for

      7. Idiots who would murder Paul and then immediately give clues to the crime they just committed on records, photos, etc…

      8. …

  10. Ha! This interview reminded me of the Black Exploitation or Blaxploitation Films of the early 70’s. Shaft, Super Fly, Foxy Brown, Cleopatra Jones, Dolemite, etc.

    The following Black Dynamite CONSPIRACY Theory has been posted before on Corbett Report. The Beatles conspiracies reminded me of this.
    (3 minutes and a good grin)

    • Homey , way down the conspiratorial rabbit hole this innocent show on the Beatles has gone. Homey your take is by far the most accurate in the absurdity of reality. Mix in a little MBPs dark Be´re´govoy and it will explain my hypothesis on dead Paul and dead Paul wife.
      1. The English establishment Masonic order who is compelled to control culture in a full spectrum dominance kind of way, steps in to give the artists a lesson in life. Paul the every stalwart defender of the fruits of his labor resists. They flex a little muscle in the entertainment and tabloid world to prove to Paul how powerful they really are and how he should play Cricket. Proving their point with out really hurting his fruits of his labor , Paul realizes the tenuous position his wealth and health are in. He plays cricket to their tune until the break up and he feels a little over competent and again pushes back, thinking himself free of the sick crazy bastards. They send in the new bio- squad to dose poor Linda ending any hope for Paul to free himself of their grip on cultural domination. He comes to predition a sadder, lonelier but wealthier man. The third act has yet to come, I’ll leave it here for now at The beginning ….
      A new conspiracy is born.

      • Thank you Sunny. I stand to correct the rant above. I had heard from somewhere the difference between conspiracy hypotheses and conspiracy theories. Has something to do with evidence. Im assuming also objective and subjective are not the same but one feels better than the other. Hope this clarifies what I don’t know about it.

        Correcting my last line. “A new conspiracy is born.” It should read: “A new conspiracy hypothesis is born.”

  11. Watching the beginning of this podcast i got inspired for what might be an interesting idea for passing on conspiracy research.

    I might use the idea myself through social media. Posting it here in case it might be picked up by someone else who might like to use it himself/herself.

    The idea is to actually give information about ridiculous conspiracy theories (Although not about official ones)

    Now many people probably want relief from ridiculous conspiracy theories. So maybe they will happily listen/read. And along the way, as a matter of fact, one could write about past conspiracy theories that turned out to be true. The contrast being a tool to highlight that the term conspiracy theory does not mean it is not true.

    One posting could start as follows:

    “One extremely ridiculous and laughable conspiracy theory is that the earth is flat. Here are some arguments used by the conspiracy theorists, which we will show are scientifically flawed.

    Before we do so, it is important to know that although for some this may be a surprise, some conspiracy theories, in fact many, that would seem bizzare at first turned out to be true. So the term does not necessarily imply something is not necessarily true. For example,…”

    I would presume there are many ridiculous conspiracy theories which are clear nonsense and could be used (no planes in 9 11 and 432 vs 440 hz in music come to mind)

    One possible title for such writing could be: “Which conspiracy theory do you find to be the most ridiculous?”

    And maybe one could even mention at some point that regarding so and so conspiracies…Say certain rich powerful people controlling lots of things behind the scenes, well, it may well not be nonsense at all…

    • Science and logic in conspiracies and crimes

      IF someone is doing those conspiracy theories, it may be interesting to look at how to approach theories from a scientific and logical standpoint.

      You can introduce logical fallacies and biases and physics.
      While 911 thermite demolition theory is follows clear physics and logic, the 911 noplane theory breaks most fallacies.
      You can explain how to differentiate between them.

      Usually wild conspiracy theories are based on a few bits of evidence, which are then taken to the extreme. Like “the NASA is lying” to us, so “the earth is flat”.
      While normal criminal conspiracies are different. They have evidence and more evidence, with many layers and different aspects. Like we found traces of thermite, molten steel (even vaporized steel), high temperatures, free-falling structure, full breaking down of structure, and much more. This gives the conclusion that these “towers were demolished with thermite” and maybe more.
      The next layer is that we see that there was a team working on the structure and that the evidence was destroyed. This all uncovers more and more layers of the crime.

      This shows that you can have a good investigation of these crimes and conspiracies. Even though they are often placed in the same category.

      In discussions we get: There was tampering with the evidence on JFK’s murder. So people think there was a conspiracy. But the stupid person will say that it was not, because there could be something else (without explaining what else).
      The better approach would be to start with declaring that the official story is wrong, so we have to build a new one. This also means that nothing of the official story can be used.
      And this new crime-theory can be constructed with the little evidence that is left. Note that a lot of the evidence is tampered, confiscated and not released. But we got the time of the shots, the likely directions. The likelyhood of more shooters. And most important: the involvement of the local police and security. The bodyguards get from the vehicle before the murder. This makes them suspect. The police immediately goes after a certain person, which makes their behavior suspect. And this all ends with a deathbed confession by CIA-operative.

      In this approach we see the same pattern: each time we uncover something new. A new layer of evidence behind the secrecy. This means that this is a valid approach towards exposing the crime.

      • What if our understanding is not progressed enough?

        There are also some weird things that are really on the edge.
        The problem here is that we need new physics to explain that what we see.
        But there is actually some evidence for them.

        I know a lot about those and can support good evidence for them.
        The paranormal is my home. 😉

        These weird subjects are:
        UFOs at nuclear bases / foo-fighters,
        UFO abductions.

        There is a lot of weird stuff around these subjects that can be
        discovered and proven. Like increased radioactivity or weird residues.

        But since they are not related to clear criminals directly, it is
        hard to point out ways to uncover more evidence.
        This means that these things do not leave a trace of evidence as we
        see with the big crimes.
        Some UFOs may be related to secret underground bases, but usually
        we do not see any direct link. It is as if many UFOs disappear in
        thin air.

        Instead we see more spiritual/theoretical interpretations that may or
        may not be true. While interesting they do not bring us much further,
        until we can investigate them more.

        Without a testable model, there is no science, no investigation.
        But with a testable model (or observation), we can slowly expand
        our knowledge about it.
        Even when it is weird paranormal stuff.

        Because our knowledge is very limited, we can only investigate
        these cases partially.

        But I discovered that most people can learn to observe
        spiritual things.

        And with shared observations, without falling into religions, we can
        build some kind of a consistent model that works for the phenomena
        that we are studying.

        When we add some kind of spirit to our physical body model, we can
        actually improve the understanding of the physical body.
        Now we can understand why the psyche of a person is so important
        in the health of the body.
        We can understand how a brain can decide between what is important
        and what is not, because now there is something that is in control.
        We can also understand psychiatric diseases, and even heal them.

        Now we see the same pattern as above. After we study the first
        observable layer, we discover the next layer. So we get more and more
        understanding to what we observe.

      • While 911 thermite demolition theory is follows clear physics and logic, the 911 noplane theory breaks most fallacies….

        Like we found traces of thermite, molten steel (even vaporized steel), high temperatures, free-falling structure, full breaking down of structure, and much more. This gives the conclusion that these “towers were demolished with thermite” and maybe more.

        Thermite was used in the demolition of the towers, however it was not the primary agent of destruction.
        Various steel columns needed to be severed in advance with thermite, however nuclear devices were responsible for almost all of the towers’ destruction.

        • I disagree with the nuclear theories.

          Thermate and possibly some slow explosives will work,
          and have already been used extensively in demolitions.
          The youtube channel physics and reason also has
          shown that absolutely does work in demolitions and
          looks very similar to 9/11.

          Nuclear explosions leave very strong evidence.
          From the fallout specialists can determine where the nuclear
          material came from, by measuring the exact composition of the
          In this case there were no such isotopes, except for
          tritium that is commonly used in exit-signs.
          (because it gives light in the dark)

          It is impossible to have an exact explosion with nuclear
          bombs. That is because they are unstable in many ways and over time.
          The shock waves would have broken most windows in the whole city.

          But before you insert your nuclear theory..
          Why do you need it?
          What made you think you need to add something weird to
          a problem that is already completely solved?

          When I started investigating 9/11 I thought something similar.
          I was convinced that scientists would have found out, if it
          was done in a simple way.

          But it is not necessary at all.

          It was my belief in the capabilities of these scientists
          that was wrong to begin with.
          Scientists can be very stupid,
          even more stupid than normal humans.

          That is because they can not deal with the feeling that something
          is really wrong. They are thinkers, not feelers.
          They have also trained to simplifying problems to fit them to
          their equations, that they can just overlook the reality of the
          The reality that some in their own government are involved
          in one of the biggest crimes in history.
          So their mind starts backwards: how can I convince myself
          that the bad guys are dumb extremists with box-cutters.

          I see the same problem with people in 9/11 truth that blame
          Mossad for it. They probably can not handle the truth that
          psychopaths from their own country were involved.

          This is basically the mass-psychosis of the US:
          Let us blame a far foreign country for the problem of
          psychopaths in our government.

          So no. I do not believe any of the nuclear theories.

          Do not mean to attack you, but I
          also believe that you are running away from
          some reality by denying the micro-termite theory.

          If you do really think that there is nuclear or whatever
          used in 9/11, you can just do it from a sideline.
          Like: “hey I understand that Thermate can do a lot, but maybe
          we can find something more.”

          • I personally believe that the variants were pushed by CIA
            to make the scientifically supported 911-truth seem outrageous.
            This includes energy-weapons, no-planes/UFO, etc.

            The real attack is already very confusing for people to look
            into. To hide the demolitions, the plane crashes are an
            enormous terrifying distraction.

            It is a standard magician’s trick:
            One hand is distracting the audience with a flash,
            while the other hand steals the money behind the back.

            The more frightening the distraction, the easier it is
            to trick people into believing, that what they see is real.

            And that is how simple it is.

          • I disagree with the nuclear theories.
            Everyone has a right to their own opinion.

            Nuclear explosions leave very strong evidence.
            Clean nuclear devices do not leave strong evidence.

            It is impossible to have an exact explosion with nuclear
            bombs. That is because they are unstable in many ways and over time.
            The shock waves would have broken most windows in the whole city.

            Nuclear bombs were not used.

            I give ten pieces of evidence that show nuclear devices were used to bring down the towers in this post:


            And then I give the main source of my research, listing three videos:

            The 9/11 nuke’s total energy; Part 1 of “The Power Source(s) of the 9/11 Event”

            The 9/11 nuke’s fingerprint; Part 2 of “The Power Source(s) of the 9/11 Event”

            The 9/11 [gamma radiation] nuke’s design; Part 3 of “The Power Source(s) of the 9/11 Event”

            • By introducing the “weird” explanation for the collapse
              of the towers, you can no longer use scientific route.
              Your explanation is not based on science or technology
              that we understand yet. And we have to speculate
              how this works exactly.

              This does not directly mean that it is incorrect,
              but your explanation gets on the same level as
              the UFOs. We do not know exactly how the science
              or technology works.
              On the other hand the micro-thermate has been replicated,
              and thermate is often used in demolitions of steel

              I think you can recognize the “unknown technology”
              part of your explanation?
              And can you understand that I think that it is a
              degradation of the explanation that the experts
              in this area provided?

              • Like you zyx, I had been a 9/11 thermate disciple for years.
                Then quite unexpectedly a filter bubble presented itself a couple of years ago and I clicked on it.
                The rest as they say is nuclear history.

                Let me make a few things clear here.
                Hans Pommer and I are absolutely certain simply that nuclear devices were used to bring down the towers.

                He admits, and I am fully aware of this, that the exact nature of the nuclear devices used is not known.
                Nuclear devices come in all different shapes and sizes and those who design, build, control and use them are “far ahead of the curve” that civilians are privy to.

                Each of the ten pieces of evidence I gave in the other thread showing that nukes were used to demolish the towers are rock solid.
                My personal favorite is the first one. But they are all solid.

                A thermate-driven demolition, even if it were possible, would not be able to create the dust clouds we saw on 9/11.
                A nuclear demolition and a volcano are the only two instances when pyroclastic dust clouds would be visible on this planet.

                The dust clouds were outrageous “in-your-face” evidence of nukes.

                Of course there were many in-your-face pieces of evidence that shouted “This was a nuclear event!” but the dust clouds are my favorite.

                but your explanation gets on the same level as
                the UFOs. We do not know exactly how the science
                or technology works.

                That is not only a poor analogy, but also totally inappropriate.
                We have scant evidence of UFO’s, whereas we have an abundance of physical and visual evidence of nuclear devices having been exploded.

                On the other hand the micro-thermate has been replicated,
                and thermate is often used in demolitions of steel

                Be careful with what you say zxy, because I will call your bluff each and every time!

                What did you mean when you said “micro-thermate has been replicated”?

                And can you please provide Corbett subscribers evidence that
                “thermate is often used in demolitions of steel structures.”?

  12. “About a decade before he released the anti-war anthem “Give Peace A Chance,” John Lennon was sketching self portraits depicting himself as Adolf Hitler.” “The self portrait was drawn during the late 1950’s when Lennon attended the Liverpool College Of Art.”
    a fundamental element of trauma based mk-ultra programming is the deliberate creation of dissociative identity disorder(DID). in my case, incl a ‘hitler’ alter, & ive known other mk survivors with such.
    the music industry is loaded with mk slaves & handlers, part of my childhood programming/trng ~ mid 60’s to early 70’s, from the beatles to led zeppelin… many pts in between & beyond.

      • MBP- You touched on a moment from the past. I had the opportunity to work with an Art Therapist in expert witnessing program in district court. The pictures, drawn by children, we evaluated were to determine the guilt of the accused.
        It didn’t take me long to realize how subjective and open to interpretation the whole process was. Children are all over the map. The science was just as you described. It could mean whatever you wanted it to mean. I was convinced there are no experts in that field of psychology and I shutter at the number of convictions that were based on bogus interpretations.

      • HRS, thanks!!

        another page from john’s sketchbook can be found here: The Beatles and Hitler – its far from being a conspiracy site & i definitely dont see eye-to-eye w/ the author, but the nuggets of historical material & photos make it well-worth sharing… albeit has also made it difficult to post- not b/c of the lennon stuff, but b/c i feel like im “betraying” george, ive got lingering mk loyalty programming – that said, i truly did & still do love him.

        • Victoria says: …nuggets of historical material & photos make it well-worth sharing…

          No kidding. The photos are fun to look at.

  13. The interesting thing about the Theo Adorno connection, or non- connection depending on who you are, is that The Beatles broke up the year later after Adorno dies.

    Check the links for the dates…

    I have studied music deeply in my life since I was 13 years old, i am now 43. I spent a good amount of time studying the chord structures and analyzing all of the songs from the complete Beatles song book.

    If you ask me – the songs that were written as the Beatles before the breakup and then going on to their solo careers are of a drastic different caliber from each other. It was Harrison who was the only one to come close to the kind of writing later that was done before as the Beatles.

    I don’t find this to be of any coincidence at all and is the reason that I think there is something to the idea that Adorno was connected to writing music for the Beatles.

  14. The guy has a way with words.
    I have had experience with PsychoSpouse, so I caught the drift.

  15. I loved the show, but you may have missed the biggest Beatle ‘conspiracy’ of all, that John wasn’t murdered and was alive as recently as 2009. I’ve done quite a lot of research on this issue, and although I don’t believe the Miles Mathis hypothesis that Mark Staycer (aka Mark Stytzer) is really John Lennon, Miles did present some interesting ideas and his thesis is definitely worth reading as an intro to the whole issue. Also, I recommend listening to the CD (or MP3 or steaming version, etc, available on Amazon) called ‘Listen to the Picture’ by ‘Abracadabra’. Although no artist or musician is credited anywhere, I am 99% certain that the artist, musician and songwriter is John Lennon. I’m also fairly certain that John Lennon starred in the film ‘Let Him Be’, and that Lennon impersonator ‘Mark Staycer’ was just a red herring who looks a bit like John, but isn’t talented enough to pull off the level of authenticity we see in the film. Similarly, in the DVD about the making of Let Him Be, which is ostensibly about makeup tricks that turned Mark Staycer into John Lennon for the film, and assembling a credible backup cast (which is actually INcredible), John Lennon also appears in one scene – the ‘dress rehearsal scene’. It is absolutely clear that the musician in that scene is NOT Mark Staycer. Watch the various Mark Staycer videos on You Tube or on his website and you’ll immediately see that he just doesn’t have that level of talent – or the right look, even with makeup. There’s a lot more – If you’re interested in more about my take on the issue, I’d be happy to fill you in on anything I’ve found in my research.

  16. If James Corbett can’t find evidence that McCartney was replaced with a substitute in ’66, it must mean that they did a very good job of covering their tracks. Because for me, I can see that it is a different Paul (Faul) starting with Sargent Pepper. I don’t think I’d have seen it with still photos, but my sister pointed out videos from shortly before and after the switch that really bring out the difference in looks, but much more significantly in demeanor, presence or countenance. The biggest difference is the eyes: not shape, size or color, but the countenance of the soul behind those windows. Paul had very expressive eyes. Faul did not, by any stretch. No doubt, it’s amazing how they could pull it off and get so many to go along with it, like John L or Jane Asher (she went to the Ashram with Faul!). After a while I got to where I could spot the difference very easily.

  17. Christopher, thanks for sharing that! Right on. And so sad.

  18. Fun show, James. Kinda spooky at the end there with the haunting tech echos and Vinnie’s tech issues with his retail music host’s disappearing profile, no music, nothing for sale, no evidence he’d been on their roster. A “Glitch,” or the soft massage of the humming AI, or even an honest mistake? All brought up after the mention of magic, and the dark or silent influences that emerge to shape powerful people or important subjects. Or sometimes Mercury just goes Retrograde, and shit happens. That ambiguity is really the subject of Espionage Phenomenology, as opposed to Conspiracy theory, which I find the more profound and less socially ostracizing pursuit.

    This is an important foil, the distinction between the analogue days of the Beatles and their whole gestalt phenomena, which presented so many pathways for collective study about THEM, the Beatles public icons, for us to reflect upon, and the digital days of today, as all of the same or similar treacheries, manipulations, soft peddling, gentle prodding, string pulling of influence can all been automatically – by degrees increasing – applied to US. The system is fairly omniscient these days, and increasingly so with every year. Its automated scans set certain reactions and incentives in motion when any individual psyche behaves in any particular manner. Such things used to happen in analogue space beyond us; now they are wired to our eyes and thumbs. Whether it’s showering less and needing to be reminded through a pop-up advert, that you are behind on your soap orders, or whether it’s a DHS monitor that puts one’s number in a bucket because one begins to fit possible social activist profiles in reply to something one reads, writes or stares too long at. This is what the system is designed to do.

    The ultimate Espionage Phenomenology hypthosis that hasn’t been considered about Faul, and one that seems like a natural offshoot of MKUltra ambition and creativity is this: How do we know that Faul who lives today as Paul, wasn’t a genuine replacement, but was one who had consented to be primed, so to speak, and voluntarily brainwashed into a the persona of the Original Paul, into a man mostly believing that he was, in fact, the original Paul in a manner ‘good enough for him.’ A spirit transfer, metaphorically speaking. Because even if he wasn’t, the technology and systems exists that MAY… they COULD, phenomenologically speaking, potentially be executed on any person, at all, today – if enough interest could be brought to bear or if it could be in some meaningful way advantageous to someone or something with real power.

    Personally, I think you guys missed the boat on the WingedBeatle subject. As a content producer, James, I can dig how and why you found it unpalatable. But I’d urge you to spend more time with it. Consider the 2 albums that came out in conjunction with it. And watch it on Vimeo where it’s clear. The production value is incredibly high.

    [SNIP – Please keep comments to 500 words. -JC]

  19. James, we’re all waiting for you guys to do Abby Road.

Submit a Comment


Become a Corbett Report member