Sage of Quay® - Mike Williams - The Beatles' Rubber Soul: The Unofficial Narrative (Feb 2024)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 12 сен 2024
- Mike analyzes the Rubber Soul story and demonstrates how it supports his conclusion that the Beatles did not compose all their music or perform on all their recorded tracks.
🔗 LINKS:
👉 Did The Beatles Write All Their Own Music? Part 1: tinyurl.com/bd...
👉 Did The Beatles Write All Their Own Music? The Addendum: Part 2: tinyurl.com/2w5...
👉 The Making of Rubber Soul (Beatles Bible): • The Making of Rubber S...
👉 Scott Freiman: www.beatleslec...
👉 Mark Lewishohn: en.wikipedia.o... and www.marklewiso...
👉 Two Beatles albums per year: tinyurl.com/yc4...
👉 Vinyl record manufacturing - lacquer, master, mother, stamper and pressings: tinyurl.com/5xm...
👉 August 5 1966 BBC Interview: • Lennon & McCartney - A...
Please support Sage of Quay™ Radio:
* Sage of Quay Hub Website: www.sageofquay....
* Sage of Quay blog: sageofquaydisp...
* Mike's music: laboroflovemusi...
* RUclips: / @thesageofquayradiohour
* Rumble: rumble.com/c/S...
* Bitchute: www.bitchute.c...
* Odysee: odysee.com/@sa...
* Brighteon: www.brighteon....
LEGAL STUFF
Sage of Quay™ is a TRADEMARK. All Sage of Quay™ Radio Hour shows and interviews are COPYRIGHTED. No portion of this presentation or any Sage of Quay Radio Hour show may be used, reproduced, altered or uploaded in part or whole without the expressed written consent of Mike Williams.
The views and opinions expressed by any guest featured in The Sage of The Quay Radio Hour are those of the guest and do not necessarily reflect the opinions or views of the host Mike Williams or of The Sage of Quay Radio Hour as a whole.
All content provided on The Sage of Quay Radio Hour is for informational purposes only. We make no representations as to the accuracy or completeness of any information discussed or presented during the show or found by following any link mentioned in the broadcast or in the show notes.
Any images used in this video or any other Sage of Quay Radio Hour presentation are considered to be in the public domain, free to use, royalty-free material we have licensed or in compliance with the Fair Use Clause contained within the Copyright Act (17 US Code § 107). If by chance this is not the case and you are the rightful owner, please contact us at sageofquay@aol.com.
COMMENT POLICY: Thanks for watching 👍 Please keep comments on topic and value-add. Comments, where it is obvious the person did not watch the video, will be deleted. Comments containing arrested-developed behavior (nastiness, belligerence, stupidity, trolling, etc.) will also be deleted and the commenter permanently banned from the channel. No self-promotion/advertising.
Mike, aren’t there a few songs that were recorded by artists that are not the Beatles, that are credited to Lennon & McCartney? Should we add those songs to the ridiculous # of songs that Lennon & McCartney supposedly wrote for the Beatles?
Yes. i thought I mentioned the songs they "gave away" when I was counting up the 189+ songs from from 1956 through 1966.
I introduced PID to my students, and in spite of all the evidence, and their inability to adequately counter it, they still remained normies and rejected it. Imagine what they would say to the notion that they did not even write or play on the records! You can lead a student to knowledge, but you cannot make them think.
You are either aware of the programming or the programming worked. Most people's ability to critically think is gone. Pass the beer nuts.
Your students are smart. They would laugh at the notion that the Beatles didn't write or play on the records because there's proof. Demos, outtakes, witnesses, and even video of them writing and playing their songs.
@michaelharrington75 Actually, the students are *brainwashed* like you. And like them, you have no clue you have been programmed to recite a story that has been drilled into your head for 60 years. And, you have no idea how the world really works. The problem with the world is that it is full of individuals like you who lack the ability to critically think. Here is a video (with links) to help you wake up: The Beatles Conspiracy 101 ruclips.net/video/1DdfSl3LO5Q/видео.htmlsi=J0zk5YgJs6Z51KRJ But if it scares you to be presented with an alternative narrative, hang out here: www.youtube.com/@TheBeatles
@@MikeWilliamsPaulIsDeadChannel You have nothing to say about the demos of them creating songs, outtakes, witnesses to them writing songs, or the videos of them writing songs and playing their instruments in the studio? Instead you reply with a bunch of ad hominem?
Each of the Beatles had a certain style of songwriting. A style that continued throughout their whole careers. They also had their own individual playing style, which also continued throughout their whole careers. The same playing style they had on stage is on those records they made in the studio. If different songwriters were writing their songs, and studio musicians were playing on the albums those individual styles wouldn't be recognizable, and you wouldn't hear them on the recordings. But they individual styles are present on the albums. People have analyzed the Beatles under a microscope for over 60 years, and 60 years later some guy suddenly decides to say "They didn't play on their albums."
Come on Mike, you know the PID stuff is all BS, but you're making money off it. Gullible people eat this stuff up.
@michaelharrington75 Try not to be a dullard, Michael. I left links to my presentation that answer all of your questions. If your only mode is to recite the official narrative like a parrot then hang out here: www.youtube.com/@TheBeatles I have no time for people who waste my time. If you want to attempt to break the programming, I recommend checking out the links mentioned in this short video.: ruclips.net/video/1DdfSl3LO5Q/видео.html
I cannot wait to go home and listen to this. You are the best.
Once it became clear the Beatles were not REQUIRED to write their material but that their primary jobs were to record the vocals, do public appearances, movies, interviews, to provide all the VISUALS, etc, it seems to me that they were likely quite comfortable with NOT HAVING TO WRITE NEW MATERIAL since they knew that that part of the equation was already being done for them. I have to also think that they knew goddamn well that the new material being handed to them was infinitely superior to anything they themselves could possibly compose.
At the time, it seemed to me that even though they were under immence pressure with composing, recording albums and singles, making films, photo shoots, far flung tours, and hounded by fans, they mostly seemed calm, chilled and humorous in interviews, and in fact made everything look easy. All the different styles of music, all the startling new sounds. All hits in a very competitive market place. So easy; they appeared to hardly break a sweat with no casualties.. It was unprecedented and for a young boy very inspirational.. The fact it was Lennon/McCartney credits all the way through the 7 years without any arguements or breakups (like other bands) made me think they must have been great mates.
@@SuperNevile you do realize paul was killed, right?
@@brianjacob8728 Whatever; the point I was making was that a (very lucrative) fairytale was being spun, that in hindsight was, in many respects, quite implausible.
Yeah! They looked super cool. Doing drugs and living the life. Bunch of punks!
@@brianjacob8728 killed? Why?
Fabulous I can share this to all my newly awakened.
Mike, question: if we accept the idea that the instrumental tracks were prerecorded for the Beatles to record vocals over, what's to prevent us from also considering the possibility that at least SOME of the vocals WERE ALSO PRERECORDED BY VOCALISTS WHO COULD IMPERSONATE THE VOCAL SOUND OF EITHER JOHN OR PAUL OR EVEN GEORGE??
That's possible. If we listen to their debut album, Please Please Me, I have wondered if we are hearing studio singers doing the harmonies.
I agree. If they had studio musicians performing the music, it’s not a leap to think that some of the vocals were also trained professionals.
Another thought: most songwriters will tell you that they don't know where the songs come from. They sort of drop into the head. Neither John nor Paul mentions that sort of experience. You get the song, but then you have to learn it, flesh it out. That's where you figure out the chord changes that go with the melody. That's where the genius part comes in. Most songs can be fleshed out with three chords, Finding all the related possible intervals and turning them into chord changes is pure genius. They never mention this process, but every songwriter will tell you that this is how it works. You hear the song in your head and you try to bring it out as true to what you heard as possible. The songs come from the aether. You don't choose when to write. The songs pop in when they pop in, and you'd better always have some paper and a pen on you.
Yes, that's how the process works. The lads were dancing around their songwriting method during the interview telling us it's a process and can take weeks to write one song and then stating they wrote in great big batches and didn't write between albums. Two diametrically opposed approaches. Which is it?
I was a Beatles fan since I was a kid, buying my first singles from about '66 or '67.
I watched their movies, saw their interviews, and listened to their records.
In the seventies, I started reading about the Paul is dead conspiracy, and I found it highly possible, as well as a possible explanation of the immense change in their sound in that era.
I enjoyed all their music well enough, but I always loved the early Beatles much more3 than the late Beatles.
Also, as I was learning to play their music, I became skeptical of all their talent at such a young age.
I found song writing secrets in their songs, but I was amazed that they said nothing about them. When they were talking about writing songs, it was always about lyrics, and never some of the clever harmonic tricks, which I found were also used by other song writers like Gordon Lightfoot.
You could describe the tricks without using formal music language, but by describing how to use fretting positions on the guitar.
I think it would have been possible for them to write a lot of songs by using a bag of tricks concerning fret positions on the guitar, rather than formal harmonic music theory, and they might guard song writing secrets like that, as some song writers seem to do, but they don't even mention writing songs by experimenting with fret positions.
Later, I read that Adorno, who owned the Beatles music because he wouldn't sell music he wrote, which he was doing by back engineering them from Classical music. Many Classical musicians took original, ancient peasant songs and fleshed them out into symphonies.
Witnesses said Adorno could crank out a hundred songs in an hour, and he was selling them to many of the bands in the era. The music died in the early seventies shortly after he died in August 1969, before the Beatles last photo shoot.
Within a couple of years, Don McClain had the song about the day the music died.
That sixties and early seventies sound, the great hits of that era, did seem to peter out at about that time.
You must be familiar with the site that shows some of the original classical music that some of the Beatles songs came from. "Blackbird" is unchanged, note for note. And numerous other songs are very obvious.
The funny thing is that this issue was very important to the younger generation at the time.
They needed to believe their pied pipers were geniuses.
I wasn't more than six years old when I had a dispute with a friend. We both liked the Beatles, and I said I liked the Monkees too. He had utter disdain, the artistic arrogance of a seven year old, for the Monkees, because they were "fakey" and they couldn't play their own instruments.
I didn't really care who played the instruments - I liked the sound, but I couldn't get him to admit he liked the sound.
He would ignore the Monkees because they were fakey, but he had enormous respect for the Beatles because they were genius.
It was all important to even a seven year old kid.
So, why would they fake?
Why was it so important to have youth leaders for a youth movement, and not just more of the old tin pan alley professionalism of the corporations?
They had to fake it.
By the way, I like the research. I made similar arguments, but only by my recollection of a little bit of this and a little bit of that.
I would not have made the effort to research everything and put together a presentation like this.
I can't overestimate what an emotional issue this was for kids at the time.
When I suggested that maybe the Beatles didn't play their own instruments either, it outraged him, and I couldn't understand why it should be a big deal.
I went on enjoying the Monkees and the Beatles, but it depended on my mood.
The Beatles were darker, and more British, crumbling empire.
The Monkees were brighter and more optimistic and American.
I'd be interested to hear about that website (I don't think you can put a full link on RUclips without the comment disappearing though) and the complex musical structures they used. I've always wondered to what extent The Monkees were devised to distract from The Beatles.
@@kimchi_b, Interesting theory. I had the same thought. Dave McGowan talks about how close the Monkeys were to other rock bands in Laurel Canyon. But then he comments that they all used the same session artists. The Monkeys were faked in the same way that the Beatles were.
You of course touched on this Mike, but as a songwriter myself I know only too well that just because you're a songwriter doesn't mean that every single thing you compose is gonna be "top shelf" grade stuff. This phenomenon strongly argues AGAINST the narrative that the Beatles were capable of cranking out #1 hits one after the other as if it was no more difficult than changing shirts.
Exactly. Everything they touched turned to gold.
Well said!
At this point Mike only the truly willingly ignorant “believers” are clinging to the story. I don’t even blame them. It’s a ray of light in a grey world. I’d rather know the truth though and can still enjoy the music. Peace
I posted a meme on the community tab: 'You are either aware of the programming or the programming worked.'
It is such a buzz kill when you find out that the Beatles were a Tavistock reality TV show. I still think it’s great music, I just enjoy it in a different way now.
@@subrosa4792Agree. What else is there to do? Ignoring this music is not an option.
Thnx Mike. I'll keep promoting your work because I think you do a magnificent job.
Such a great point about the idea that EMI and George Martin would allow a recording session for a X-mas season release (or any release for that matter) to go forward with the hope/idea that the lads would pull it off in the end. Really absurd when you get down to it. Rubbish.
There's just no way. It's a ridiculous premise.
"under the gun", perhaps that's why the album is called Revolver? Another v v interesting vid. Thank you.
I have been seeing the damage control on the Beatles Bible site, I have been doing my due diligence to drop as many truth bombs as I can. Keep up the excellent work Mike!!
I've seen it too. If they were smart, they would do nothing. The percentage of people who are aware of the conspiracy is small when compared to the fan club. Even when you expose them to the evidence, most fans want to ignore the truth and continue worshiping.
@@MikeWilliamsPaulIsDeadChannel the cognitive dissonance is staggering. I’m still trying to figure out what if/when I’m going to break it to my former bandmates.
Believe me, I know! 😎
im a musican/studio engineer of over 30 years and i find that just by listening to these guys speak, its apparent to me that they didnt write any of those sophisticated songs. they just sound dopey and uninspired. ive worked with tons of super creative folks and theyre just a different breed. These guys aint it.
Thank you. The channel has a large number of musicians, songwriters, studio technicians, engineers, and producers who subscribe and would agree with your sentiments.
If this is the interview with the BBC where Paul's puppy was yelping in the background, there was a question where the interviewer asks them whether they think they sound better when they perform their music or do other people sound better when they perform the Beatles' music. John said he thought the Beatles sound better and Paul said he thinks that other people sound better performing the Beatles' music. So, Paul was dropping bombshells and blowing up the narrative and John was staying quiet, and he gave a positive comment for the Beatles. Do you think this is one reason why the controllers went after Paul instead of John, he was getting more negative and exposing more of the truth and unofficial narrative than he should compared to John? I always wondered why they chose Paul as the sacrifice (if this was what happened, not an accident) instead of John. If he was offed 9-11-1966, it was a little over a month after this BBC interview.
Yes, it is that interview (the link is in the description box). It could also be revelation of the method. It's similar to Billy saying he took his shoes off at the Abbey Road photoshoot because it was so hot outside and walked across hot pavement in bare feet. It makes no sense. Paul's statement that they wrote in large batches makes no sense either, especially after he explained the challenges of songwriting. They put the truth out there and if people cannot apply common sense and connect the dots, then they're off the hook. Another example is kids believing Santa can squeeze down a chimney pipe to deliver toys. Except kids accept the truth about Santa much better than adults accept the truth about the lads.
@@MikeWilliamsPaulIsDeadChannel True, that makes sense. I've just never figured out how they chose between the two, if they both engaged in the Faustian Bargain, and if it was a sacrifice.
I just read the Memoir of Billy Shears - after seeing your interview with David Nino Rodriguez. I loved it!!! Not really shocking to me because I have been awake for around 8 years now, so hearing this info doesn't surprise me very much. Almost everything has been an illusion.
What comes through in these interviews is their complete inability to articulate their creative process. And we’re talking some pretty sophisticated music here too which is hardly the product of the ‘innocent’ creativity that the narrative plays on. You either know what you did or you don’t. The constant generalisation and making light of it all is a dead giveaway
I agree. The creative process is so intimate, so challenging that it leaves a deep mark when you make an important transition in consciousness. To say, as John does, "I don't remember" realizing they were songwriters and not just part of a boyband gives grounds for the hypothesis presented, that they were _not_ the brilliant, prolific composers that one LP after another climbing to the top of the charts led us to believe they were.
Paul Weller announced his new album "66" today, to be released on "May 24" which is 66 in reverse ordinal. These people...
Life is a psyop it seems
And death?
This whole channel is well worth diving into, another great lecture from Mike. The electric fence effect is real, you get cognitively zapped with "societal" ridicule if you dare question official narratives, but anyone with the willpower can power through the defense and make strides toward the truth. Thank you for your work, Mike.
I got one for you. It's possible that people in the music biz have figured this out. I was back stage hanging out with Los Lobos, telling my friends about my new music project, doing covers from the mid sixties. I told them I was playing Stones, Brian Jones era, and Beatles pre car crash. They giggled, because they got the joke right away.
Once you put the lost pieces of the ‘Beatles’ puzzle together, it all truly makes sense. Critical thinking is the key folks. Thank you Mike, your extensive research is truly appreciated. 👍🏻💯👏
What stands out for me is the real Liverpool accent of Paul here which sounds completely different to the later Billy.
All that is hidden will come out but it has been out this whole time. It’s people’s mind opening up to truth and that is by the Grace of God . There are chosen people who lead others to think about what is right vs wrong ,we have been blinded so long . Thank you Mike being that chosen person to allow people to be in the fight for truth.
Great information as always Mike!
Glad to help!
I’ll never forget the clip that was buried inside on of those “I am a phony “ type compilations that had an older music insider fat cat that was talking about how the Royal Family or the British secret service knows all about what is the real deal about Paul and likely the general public will never find out what they have on him so that implies what we know now or what they tell us is not the whole story or there’s more there that is hidden. I found it laughable how these new news stories are popping up about Paul stolen Bass guitar and I only want to know about Paul’s stolen identity being found!;)🧬
Also your vid got me hearing Faul’s lazy facile songwriting skills like Coming up- like a flower.. and with a little luck, we can work it out - send it rocketing skywards.. Smile away, smile away , brother I can smell your feet a mile away(did he just rhyme away with away?!?No, actually it was”I was walking down the street the other day” ..but that’s still not genius stuff.
I had more Wings albums than actual Beatles albums so I could go on and on about the iffy lyrics he just throws out there that show very rudimentary rhymes and shallow emotional depth. He was much better Yesterday if you know what I mean.He knows “ catchy” that’s about it. Not even that now.
They'd have to know, "McCartney" has been knighted twice. They are all part of the same elite club.
@newsbender Billy was knighted 1x. He also received the Companion of Honor Award (another high level award from the Queen) en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_the_Companions_of_Honour
@@MikeWilliamsPaulIsDeadChannel Good point, thanks for the correction! Interesting that YT has hidden my comment anyway, I wonder why?
In truth, King Charles is the antichrist and this whole thing was orchestrated by Satan himself to reign in the last full generation before the return of Messiah. It has been a psyop from day one for us boomers. I guarantee you that KC is the AC.
One only needs to watch the Get Back documentary and see how the "world's best band" work. They couldn't even play or sing their own songs recorded just a couple years ago. They perform Get Back like 3 times on the rooftop. Why not perform a top song like Help!, Ticket to Ride or She Loves You on the rooftop instead of a dumbass song 1 after 909?
ruclips.net/video/0FnVOTmKoqU/видео.html
Because they weren’t capable of performing anything more complicated than that dumb song.
What an unexpected treat for the weekend, thanks Mike!
Edit: I listened to the clip just before 23:53 several times and what McCartney actually said here was "we didn't have to show ourselves up" which means embarrass themselves (presumably through bad playing). This might be a British phrase and is not the same thing as not showing up. Although it is probably a Freudian slip as they probably didn't show up either! So it doesn't detract from the point you are making 🙂
Thanks for the clarification.
@@MikeWilliamsPaulIsDeadChannel listened again and you are absolutely right, as usual. I misunderstood what you were saying. Sorry about that. Fantastic video btw!
Hi Mike, excellent video as always.
Just one detail: when Paul says, “We didn’t want to show ourselves up in the studio,” if he’d said “show up to the studio” or “show ourselves in the studio” I’d agree. However, I think he’s saying they didn’t want to be shown to be the average musicians they were in front of all these session musicians that they admitted to be.
I don’t know if it’s a British expression, but if, say, your toddler is having a temper tantrum, you might hear the mother saying, “Don’t you dare show me up in public!”
But you’re right about the BBC interviewer: he was definitely suspicious of them!
Thanks for the clarification. And yes, I thought the BBC interviewer was scratching his head.
Either would mean he's saying they didn't play on it, but yes the extra meaning in 'to show oneself up' (in Britain at least) would be to let yourself down in front of others. Unbelievable he said that!
Yes agree - here in the UK the phrase 'show oneself up' doesn't mean to be present but to embarrass oneself - here by displaying the lack of musical prowess
@@MikeWilliamsPaulIsDeadChannel Mike we are agreeing with you given the rest of the quote about Paul saying he didn't play on Yesterday. What we are all trying to explain is that there is a FURTHER level to it (be it a Freudian slip, Paul deliberately spilling the beans, etc) that is clear as day as to anyone British - it is a very very clear phrase to use and sticks out like a sore thumb, it only has one meaning in Britain, there is no debate.
@kimchi_b OK, got it. Thanks for clarifying 👍
Mike, you’re a national treasure!
xoxo The Clarences
well done partner. as always
Thank you so much 😀
The "guitar solo" in Michelle was actually a keyboard played by George Martin.
My dad would have loved this. He hated those guys.
All of this is starting to sound as if the Beatles were just as manufactured as the Monkees.
I think the Monkeys were like revelation of the method. They were telling us that the Beatles were fake.
I was jonesing for some content - thanks Mike!
Glad to help!
“We’re not very good musicians and we never claimed to be. We’re adequate.” -Paul
ITS CALLED MODESTY.
@kingyfloyd 🙄 sigh... I knew someone was going to come up with that lame excuse. How about JPM was telling us the truth?
Paul is a puppet.
"Scrambled eggs, all I need for breakfast is my scrambled eggs..,
Bacon, toast, and radish on the side...
I find relief in scrambled eggs."
They only talked about writing the lyrics. and there is the story of how Paul had something like that, but John suggested "Yesterday".
If Adorno, the old genius, was back engineering the songs from a lot of obscure classical music, he just sold the music, and it would be up to The Beatles, and possibly others, to write the lyrics.
Paul said throughout their career that they're not good and adequate musicians. When he compared themselves to so called real musicians with a degree. In fact he knew they were the best selflearned musicians in their genree until Zeppelin came around. Lennon said they were above everyone until 1968.
I suggest watching the *entire* presentation. Not very good or even adequate musicians did *not* pull of Rubber Soul in 30 days. I cover this in the presentation.
Interesting that the Beatles led the way in changing perceptions to pave the way for the great reset etc; as Beatles is a major part of our new reality,you will eat bugs ,what is a beetle ,it sounds like a bug 🐞,just a thought,being awake is a mind blowing deal.😳
Your comment is very thought-provoking 😮
In 'The Wrecking Crew' documentary (currently streaming for free on RUclips), session guitarist Tommy Tedesco makes a VERY revealing comment! When mentioning a few of the bands he'd played for, he says "What is this tune? Beatles? Cockroaches? I had no idea. I didn't know them kind of names then..."
And yes, even in the closed captions, the word is spelled 'Beatles', not beetles. So he was definitely talking about the band! It's around the 44 minute mark of the movie.
Awesome work, Mike! 👍🏽
Thanks for another explosive presentation Mike. Although a lot of it you have covered before, for me it's good to hear it again so I can share it with those that want to listen
I found Paul's quote so telling "forced to write a batch of songs". So not a few but a batch, a batch denotes a quantity. And as you pointed out John is totally silent during this 🤔
I did the presentation for the new subscribers (hundreds over the last 6 months) and for anyone that did not understand why Rubber Soul is a problem for the official narrative.
Thanks Mike, excellent presentation 👍
Considering how far you've travelled down this path Mike, the public are such mugs to still believe any of the accepted tales about the fab tavistooges...
So many people cannot connect the dots even after you do a "see Spot run" presentation for them. It speaks volumes about how clogged up most people's minds are.
I was born in 1962. Here's what happened, take it or leave it, I don't care. You are correct to indicate how implausible it was, because it was a miracle: a divine intervention into human history by God for the salvation of all the world. I am not speaking metaphorically; I am referring to a actual decision made by the Monad to act in the earth plane. The lads from Liverpool were just the Monad's inspired mediums. They were taken over, possessed, at various times by the Monad and implanted at an unconscious level with musical phrases; these musical phrases rose up into the surface consciousness of the lads from Liverpool, who transcribed them into the singing of songs. I can remember that during the 1960s there was something in earth orbit from a parallel universe in the quantum universe transmiting Goodness from God into our souls through an etheric opening the back of our skulls.
@jamesmullaney5841 The Beatles and the Occult ruclips.net/video/1EXdiD8y5AI/видео.html
It's an occult phenomenon. On the human side it was connected with the space program and the research by the Army to build an anti-ballistic missile to counter the German V2 rocket. Wehrner Von Braun, LSD, MKULTRA. The Beatles means The Baetyls. Beatles-Stones means Baetyl stones. You dig? Omphalos stones, Benben stones, Stonehenge, Pre-Christian Ireland, Ancient Greece, Mesopotamia, Egypt, and Rome. The Quest of the Holy Grail, King Arthur, the Knights of the Round Table, Chivalry, and Courtly Love. These are the things the Germans were looking for; at the end of WW II, Himmler surrendered to the Brits and was incorporporated into the Tavistock project. The CIA did the same thing in Laurel Canyon and Montauk Point. I'm telling you these things because I like you, Mike. ✌😎
Woodstock was held in Bethel, NY at the height of the Beatles-Stones [Baetyl stones] era. The word Bethel is cognate with the Hebrew word Bet-el, or Beit-el: House of God, or God Is In This Place. When Jacob in the Old Testament beheld the ladder of angels in his dream ascending and descending between heaven and earth, his head was resting on a large rock. The rock was a Baetyl stone [Beatles-Stones]. So Jacob named the place Bethel. The word Baetyl is cognate with Bet-el, Beit-el, and Bethel. Another way of describing Jacob's Ladder or a Ladder of Angels is a Stairway To Heaven [Led Zeppelin] Also: There is a Woodstock in York, England. Is there a Masonic connection? Yes, of course: because the Quest of the Holy Grail dates back to the Knights Templar and Camelot. The Beatles songs, especially the love songs, are Troubadour songs. The Trouadours are from the 11th century, Eleanor of Aquitaine was called The Queen of the Troubadours. This was the era of chivalric romance literature: Lancelot, Galahad, Gawain, Perceval, Guinivere, Arthur, and Merlin the Magician. [Magical Mystery Tour.] The purpose of all this is to assist humanity, not to hurt humanity. What came after the Medieval period? The Age of Reason. Oh, everything has a RATIONAL explanation! We were so childish to believe in enchantment and fairy land. Now we can discard all that and have The Industrial Revolution. We can build factories, mass produce commodities, work 12 hours a day, create blighted ghettos like the ones in London that Charles Dickens wrote about in Oliver Twist.
George Martin: "Love Me Do" was the best thing they had." "I Saw Her Standing There" should have been their first single instead of the opening track on "Please Please Me" surely.. .
“A little bit impossible”
Thanks, Mike. I know I’m going to enjoy this one…You NEVER disappoint!
Glad you enjoy it!
John's the only one facing the camera! I wonder why??
Thank you, Mike. Another well researched presentation. The Donovan testimony is an interesting new support for your thesis. I suspect the same thing was done for Robert Zimmerman (Bob Dylan). In his early years he produced a lot of political songs. Was he a fake and controlled "Woody Guthrie?" His later attitudes make me think so.
Especially when he talks about going to the crossroads and making a deal with the chief commander. Says he can’t write like that anymore.
After being aware of your work for sometime now Mike, tonight I watched a BBC documentary with the official narrative, fully propagandised story. It now frankly seems ridiculous. At the point where Paul is replaced, the pictures of Billy look nothing like Paul. He’s clearly wearing a wig, face is much longer, etc. Even my wife who has been resisting letting go of the fairytale had to admit, whoever this guy is, he’s not Paul. McCartney. The Donovan conversation you cite is really compelling. I’d love to know who the ‘songwriter of genius’ is that he refers to. Of course, there must’ve been a team of them. It’s looking more like the Shakespeare conspiracy all the time. To my mind, that was the blueprint for this deception.
I want to know who that songwriter was, too.
Just can't stop staring at his sly eye now. One eye in Huyton, one eye in Brighton!
Every new video is better than a New Year present
Hi Mike, excellent presentation, as usual, with thought provoking and bubble bursting insights! Just to prove your point about the Beatles official narrative, tonight, Sky Arts in UK are dedicating a whole evening of programmes to it!
6:05 PM
Beatles Stories
Fans and friends discuss encounters with the Fab Four, from eating beans on toast with Ringo Starr to playing Monopoly with George Harrison
8:00 PM
How the Beatles Changed the World
Through exclusive interviews and a wealth of rarely seen footage, this film reveals the previously untold story of how four young men from Liverpool transformed the world for ever
10:15 PM
George Harrison: Living in the Material World
Martin Scorsese's documentary tracing Harrison's early life in Liverpool, Beatlemania's advent and his fascination with Indian culture, both musical and spiritual. 3 hours.
All Beatles, all the time!
The next few decades are going to be fascinating as the second generation who grew up with The Beatles legend dwindle. If the truth doesn't come out in the next ten/fifteen years or so I do wonder if it would make make many waves at all!
@@MikeWilliamsPaulIsDeadChannel
Mike you mentioned Donovan in your presentation. In Beatle Stories, which was aired on UK tv tonight, Justin Haywood of the Moody Blues, related a story when he was invited to Donovan’s house one night. George was there. The three of them played their guitars. Justin said, you know George, I like ‘I’m Only Sleeping.’ Let’s play that. George said he didn’t know the chords! Justin ended up showing him how to play it! Imagine that!? They explained it away in the documentary later by saying oh he didn’t know the chords because it was John’s song !
They come up with absurd excuses when a simple search reveals the following: George Harrison - acoustic guitar, backwards lead guitars, harmony vocals en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I%27m_Only_Sleeping
@@MikeWilliamsPaulIsDeadChannel in the same programme, Beatle Stories, Norman ‘Hurricane’ Smith, the sound engineer at EMI, said he ended up playing the bongos on Hard Days Night because Ringo couldn’t get it! The more they drop out, the more your research is proved right!
Also he might be making the point that part of the idea of social engeneering is to entrain the public to "adequate" music, entertainment, news etc.
We are told the Beatles were brilliant songwriters/composers and their music is some of the best (if not the best) in the annals of music. Adequate musicians do not generate that type of resume. I think it comes down to revelation of the method.
I see Billy got Paul’s bass back…
Yes. I posted the link to my community tab. Sounds like another "story".
Wondering if this will turn out to be very symbolic...
Remember in the 1970s the Beatles were offered millions $$$ to get back together and perform live just for an hour or two and they turned it down..
Now we know why ,,, They couldn't pull it off. What would they do anyhow , that same old set list they were performing over and over before they stop touring . Must be a great thing to have other people do your work for you , and then take credit for it ...
Lennon McCartney
Yes and that's why I'm sure they couldn't have all been allowed to live through the musical plans for the 80s (huge charity events like Band Aid). The pressure on them to perform would have been massive, and the world would have expected them to put any issues aside. They would have distracted from everything else and that's when the legend was consolidated. The thing that annoyed me was Julian because iirc he said he didn't want to ride on the coattails of his father, while releasing tracks like Saltwater. And just listen to his recent version of Imagine! But, if the other three were not up to playing together (even less so after so long apart) the whole reason he kept a great distance makes sense.
I will have to look at the timeline, but recently saw a few movies, including a John Lennon quote about Andy Warhol putting his name on his factory of art workers. Parallel worlds.
Lol😅, it's so obvious they didn't write diddly squat nor recorded diddly squat.. as someone who has studied music, written music, recorded music... blah blah blah... they are all characters to grab our attention and consciousness to get us to be complacent and comply... great presentation Mike
Boom 💥 mike that came into my mind also
He seemed skeptical
And why not
The answers were ambiguous and have no details
It's clear as someone who writes poetry these answers are suspicious
And John not contributing to the conversation just makes it even more so.
Mike...could you take a look at the footage of John Bonham during his solo on The Song Remains The Same....where he's playing pool.
And then look at his 1980 interview with Billy Connolly......I think it is 2 different people.....he looks 50 years old in the SRTS footage and younger in the 1980 footage.
many LPs from that era and today have throwaway tracks to fill in between the couple decent songs - somebody please show us all a tosser on Rubber Soul
54:00 never seen that pic before, all he''d need is the one hand in his jacket for the hat-trick!
I don't know. Do you think Don is in the club? 😅
So incredibly creepy!
@@MikeWilliamsPaulIsDeadChannel Let's not get carried away, maybe "the photographer tricked him into doing it" lol
Any musician/songwriter listening to Paul and John talk would see straight through them.
Paul says “We didn’t have to show OURSELVES up.”
Mike. Does this carry the same meaning in US English? As a British person, I understand that to mean “We didn’t have to EMBARRASS ourselves.” Which is even more telling! Their playing was embarrassing.
In British English “to show oneself up” means “to embarrass oneself”.
“To show up” means “to arrive/appear at a location.”
My British listeners explained it means not to embarrass yourself. In the US it means not showing up some place (i.e., absent). Either way it's not good for the official story. He's telling us he didn't play on the recording of Yesterday 😉
@@MikeWilliamsPaulIsDeadChannel Right. Even more damning. Their playing was not up to studio standards.
@@damianrf6309their solo albums weren’t up to Beatles standards, either. They either regressed as musicians, or they had help writing and recording the Beatles songs.
Watching the Wheels is a great song.
They finished it on Nov 11, 1965? 11, 11, 11 (6+5). Okay....
What I think Paul was saying in that clip is "we didn't have to play and we didn't have to show ours selves up again" then he gives a little laugh! So instead of we didn't have to play and show up our selves to record its we didn't have to show our selves up again, a very English way of saying we didn't have to make fools of ourselves again with our sub par playing. That's just my interpretation of the clip and I'm English and have a similar accent and I believe that was what Paul meant and the little laugh seems appropriate to that comment. Love your channel by the way, keep up the good work!
My British listeners explained “we didn’t have to show ourselves up” means not to embarrass ourselves. In the US, it would be interpreted as being absent. So, either way, Paul is stating he and his mates were not on the recording of Yesterday.
Yes either way they didn't do the work they are credited for. Its a shame really when you come to realise that most things from music, history to the sciences have been faked and twisted for their agendas... @@MikeWilliamsPaulIsDeadChannel
Well, now we know why Paul had to be removed.
Other urban legends abound of John Lennon writing a book that would spill the beans about all this stuff and more, but coincidentally he died before this book could be released.
@@jpalberthoward9 Now we know why they killed John.
People don't mention the wigs enough. Also they cover the ears which hides the specific features.
The wigs are so obvious.
The fake beards too. The photo of them standing in a wheat field, with beards down to their waists. They not only wrote perfect pop songs, they grew perfect beards, in almost no time at all!
Another gem, you're the best Mike!
Cheers to you mike , i think this episode wil be some food for thought . Keep fighting the good fight ❤
Eye opening. Great analysis as usual.
Glad you enjoyed it
You've really made a very poor argument here. By concentrating on a few flippant comments by people who were known to be stoned almost constantly, you've disregarded many, many interviews in which they go into detail about the writing of their songs. Furthermore, the obnoxious incessant repetition of your points seriously waters down your argument. The salient question is, if Lennon/McCartney/Harrison didn't write the songs that were credited to them, then who were the brilliant songwriters that wrote these iconic songs? You've mentioned Donovan Leitch but he never said anything definitive. All you've got is some very poor conjecture.
Yawn, another Beatle Bot 😴 Let me guess... You were triggered and then short circuited during the BBC interview. It's a very common reaction. That's why I created this presentation: ruclips.net/video/TMpj7fzPf4k/видео.html It's meant to help those who are heavily indoctrinated. You can also check out the links in this short video: The Beatles Conspiracy 101 ruclips.net/video/1DdfSl3LO5Q/видео.html Otherwise, you can always hang out here (the safe zone). www.youtube.com/@TheBeatles
Dear Mike! What an eye opener this research is. Now it makes sense. Thank you!
Glad it was helpful!
Regardless of who wrote, what musicians recorded on the album "Rubber Soul", it is still in the top 3 of my favorite Beatles albums. I really enjoy your channel !
Gold
Aware of the programming is much better than "the programming worked."
Thanks for all you bring here @@MikeWilliamsPaulIsDeadChannel
Mike, listening to these recordings brought this question to mind. Has any scientific comparison been done of Paul’s recorded speaking voice pre-1966 and these later recordings? Mimicking a singing voice is one thing, but faking the speaking voice would be trickier to pull off, I would think.
Yes. Dr. Henry Truby, who was a professor at the University of Miami and an expert in linguistics and voiceprints (sonograms) did an analysis back in 1968 where he compared Yesterday (bio Paul) to Hey Jude and Penny Lane (if I recall correctly on Penny Lane) and concluded the vocalist on the latter two songs was not the same person singing Yesterday. Comparisons using autotune where a note is sung a little flat or a little sharp (and then corrected) is not a voiceprint analysis. It only shows when a note(s) are off pitch. I bring this up because a music channel on YT tried to pawn this approach off as a legit voice analysis. It is not. The person claimed that since the pitch was off on the same note on Yesterday when comparing Paul to Billy (his version of Yesterday) that "proved" it's the same person. That's a very flawed analysis/conclusion. If I bring 50 people into the "test" and 5 of them sing a particular note a little sharp or flat on Yesterday does that mean those 5 people are all Paul McCartney? Setting aside voices, what is interesting is how people do not or cannot discern the differences between Paul and Billy by scrutinizing their physical characteristics.
It would seem John as well as Paul have amnesia at times about their most important accomplishments and how actually their process of writing songs only happens during their time of the albums.
Mike, Do you know if there is any connection between Tavistock and the German composer, Karlheinz Stockhausen? You have considered Adorno and George Martin as possible composers for the Beatles. Karlheinz Stockhausen should also be considered. His face appears on the Sgt. Pepper album cover. Perhaps that is telling us something. His appearance on this cover coincides with the rise of "psychedelic music" including "Piper at the Gates of Dawn" which was being produced at the same time (in the same studio). Could the music be his creation, at least in part? The album cover may be giving us clues as to who the Sgt. Pepper band really is.
It's possible. The German connection into the Beatles is all around them (Tavistocks's playground). Within the deep state, there are many influential players who are relatively unknown in public.
i have written a hundred songs at least. ever since i had a basic handle of guitar and poetry... i knew at a very young age it would take personal work to become a musician- band memeber- my only questions were of a higher order- when you witness songs can fly through you as if from nowhere- johns answers are not someone familiar with this... experience. in my opinion of course- but the answers that John has been making are the answers of a schill. i knew i was a song writer- it opened bigger questions nothing would ever keep my curiosity from voicing.
Thank you for your insightful comment.
@@MikeWilliamsPaulIsDeadChannel still watching! thank you for your work
If Scot Frieman could speak on a cross country tour Mike would wow them with his quality and quantity of earth shaking truth telling ...... Maybe Mike needs to get out and Do it on the Road tour😊
Thank you for your kind words. I think my videos will have to suffice 😉
Hey, Mike, I have a question. The guy who wrote this Beatles Bible, is he in the know? Or does he believe the official narrative that he wants US to believe? If you had to speculate? He doesn’t suspect that any of that timeline is bogus? I’m curious how many of these Beatles prophets (profits) believe in the Beatles Gospel that they preach?
There are two camps. There are those who are paid to support an official narrative and those who truly believe it and build upon it. I don't get into who I think is in which camp. I let the listener make the decision.
@@MikeWilliamsPaulIsDeadChannelthanks for your perspective, Mike! Keep up the great work, buddy!
Your material is very interesting, and I find many things you say compelling however when it comes to the timeline you've mentioned being too short of a time for the Beatles or someone else to put these songs together, something seems incongruent. By comparison let's looks at the album Aftermath by the Stones. Recording starting in 12/65 and ended in 3/66. UK version was released 4/15/66. 14 cuts on the UK version and 11 on the US. The Stones had 90 tour dates, and the Beatles had 60 that year. It doesn't seem unimaginable that bands in demand had a quick turn around on putting out albums. Thoughts?
I think it was Ginger Baker who called Jagger a musical moron. Richie Blackmore wasn't very complimentary towards Mick and his bandmates either (but I digress). Both the Beatles and the Stones were creations of Tavistock (social engineered). The Beatles were the 'good boys' and the Stones played the 'bad boys' (a little something for everybody). It was all hocus pocus behind the scenes. The classic Stones faux pas is Keith saying he wrote Wild Horses (from scratch) on the crapper at Muscle Shoals studios (documented in the Muscle Shoals DVD) when Mick in the liner notes to the 1993 Rolling Stones compilation album Jump Back, stated, "I remember we sat around originally doing this with Gram Parsons, and I think his version came out slightly before ours." 🤔 I will say this, at least the Stones acknowledged the use of studio players on their recordings. Regarding Rubber Soul: 1) There was no way the lads wrote, learned, rehearsed and recorded 16 songs from scratch (or 10, 12 or 14 tunes including lyrics) in 30 days for Rubber Soul, and 2) The manufacturing cycle time for Rubber Soul does not work. We're told the song sequencing for RS was completed by George Martin on November 16, 1965, and the first batch of albums was released in stores 17 days later on December 3, 1965. Without sequencing, the printing could not have begun because the names of the songs are printed in sequence on both the center label and the back of the album jacket. The center labels adhere to the vinyl at the very same time the record is pressed. So the final printed center labels had to be at the pressing plant before production started on November 17, 1965 (or November 18th the latest). Labels and album jackets with the listed/sequenced songs were not printed by EMI in a single day. Before the Beatles entered the studio to sing the vocals, everything was already in progress. Here's Billy ("Paul") validating my research and conclusions. He substituted Let It Be for Rubber Soul, but the premise was virtually identical. If they couldn't do it in 1969 what makes anyone think they did it in 1965. Paul McCartney Admits 14 Songs for Let It Be in 30 Days was Impossible ruclips.net/video/0FnVOTmKoqU/видео.html Thanks for the question 👍
Mike, I want to Thank you for all your work. As a retired fraud investigator, your work is very thorough and complete. It is very detailed and you present it very clearly and very easy to understand. You would have been great in my former profession. Again, thank you for all your hard work!!! (Since retiring, I now play music full time (cover band of oldies 1950's - 1970's). I can't even spell fraud now! 🙂
Can any one else see "The green leaf man " in the photo above ? He is in between John and Ringo.
63- 66 BEATLES = barbershop quartet
No , you see some people like rock and roll and even 50's music !! To you we are squares -- but I don't care . I like quite a lot of my parents records . Danceable & enjoyable for me .
Paul gave away too much!?
Paul blew it wide open.
...and the offer for a McCartney solo album from Capitol? 😃@@MikeWilliamsPaulIsDeadChannel
Ha! Or... write the score for Mark Lane's movie 😏
😀👍
Brilliant video. And what about the Rubber soul session, the earlier takes? If the Beatles' job was here basically to karaoke, then what is the explonation for example an earlier Norwegian wood version with different instrumental sound, structure etc with John Lennon's voice on it. Did they learning the vocals with earlier takes?
There was a lot gaming. I concluded the alternate takes (outtakes) were staged. There are three scenarios: 1) The Beatles was being taught the songs to possibly take out on the road and the practice sessions were recorded by George Martin. In this scenario we would hear them playing on the outtake recording. Martin would record these sessions for two reasons a) so the lads could listen to the playback to hear how they sound, and b) to create an *audio* "historical record" to document them in the studio. 2) The Beatles were singing (practicing) to alternate takes recorded by the studio musicians. This would have been done by George Martin to also create an *audio* "historical record". 3) George Martin fabricated "outtakes" by editing and mixing together recorded instrumentals variations with vocal variations. Again, to create an *audio* "historical record". Martin knew he had to create a backlog of *audio* "outtakes" that would eventually make their way onto bootlegs, Anthology, RUclips, etc. None of the audio outtakes people like to point to prove that the lads are playing on the actual recorded (released) tracks. After they released Revolver on August 5, 1966, not one track from the album was played during their post Revolver tour. So, they released a brand new album and not one song made it to the set list. The Achilles heal is it's all AUDIO "documentation" and audio can easily be manipulated. What we do *not* have is genuine, authentic film footage of the band writing and recording in the studio until the Get Back (Let It Be) sessions (more on LIB in a moment). Film crews followed and documented the Beatles doing everything *except* writing and recording in the studio. Why were Lennon and McCartney's songwriting talents not documented on film? Wouldn't historians want actual film footage/archive of a brilliant songwriting team practicing their craft? It's not like they were declared geniuses later in history. They were labeled as 'geniuses' during their tenure as a band. People will point to still photos of them in the studio, but images are not proof of anything. These are staged photo opportunities, especially during the period from 1962 to 1966: ruclips.net/video/b1TF8jOHs1I/видео.html Circling back to the Get Back sessions, my theory is Billy "Paul McCartney" knew the historical record did not have film footage of the band writing and recording in the studio. He knew this was a significant gap in the official narrative so he convened the Get Back sessions to try and plug the hole. Except, the Get Back sessions were unsuccessful. The original plan was to write, learn, rehearse and record 14 new songs in a little over two weeks. Then do two live shows that will culminate in a TV special. The two weeks became a month and resulted in the band playing five songs on a rooftop to an audience of no one. Many fans don't know that the songs for Let It Be were recorded on and off throughout 1969 and into early 1970. It extended beyond just the 30 days in January 1969. Here's Billy giving us the truth about the Get Back sessions and therefore, for Rubber Soul as well: ruclips.net/video/0FnVOTmKoqU/видео.html
@@MikeWilliamsPaulIsDeadChannel Thanks for your reply, Mike! All the 3 scenarios make sense...
Why don't we see any VIDEOS of the geniuses in the studio, only staged photos? Significant gap, totally agree...
So, they had to learn to sing ALL the Beatles songs to make the records, but they did not learn all of the songs to perform with instruments live... only a FEW to make the shows, right?
I think they played mostly live at concerts (sometimes they used some backing tracks too), they were able to play the songs - as many Beatles tribute bands can. But they obviously didn't write songs of such a high standard, and they didn't record them, especially not in such a quantity in such a short time.
So they did not learned the Revolver songs, they knew that a new era is coming, with replaced members, no live shows etc.
I'm glad that it is possible to awake from this hypnotic dream, no longer under the deceptive spell. The Beatles' story is supernatural and very dark in my opinion. The truth sets you free!
Thank you for sharing your research, thanks for your reply!
Correct. To record vocals for album tracks and singles, they had to learn them in large batches. For the live gigs they only had to learn ~25 songs through August 1966. Their concerts were 30 minutes and the set list was typically 11 songs which included 1-2 covers. They did use backing tracks for some of the concerts. Here's a video I uploaded where George and John miss their cue at the beginning of Day Tripper: Protecting The Beatles' Official Story (Budakon footage): urlzs.com/Vpz1K For televised shows like Ed Sullivan they played to a backing track. There was no way EMI/Tavistock was going to take any chances with their American debut ("conquering America"). Here's a clip of the Dave Clark 5 where the backing track failed: ruclips.net/video/MTQf26sZxYw/видео.html With Revolver they either did not have time to learn to play the songs or George Martin decided it was not worth teaching them since the next phase (1967-1970) was going to be dedicated to studio work only (no live gigs). Their audiences started to diminish by the time they reached '66.
@@MikeWilliamsPaulIsDeadChannel Thanks for your replies!
@@MikeWilliamsPaulIsDeadChannel Maybe I'm wrong, but it is fitting in. :D "Don't do it while we singing." "Don't do it while we playing." ruclips.net/video/65gssFapBdo/видео.html At 0:20
I have followed Scott Friedman series since 2016 and got to meet him around the same time that I discovered your channel. I’m so gladl everything is coming together.
Scott does a nice job of presenting.
There is so much dodgy evidence and personal opinion in this its hard to sum up how just wrong it is. The bias is obvious, he started with a conclusion then went about sticking his attempts at evidence to it. He takes most quotes either at face value (ignoring the humour) or he puts his own perception of what he needs the quotes to mean to fit his conclusion. Using this method we could probably do exactly the same type of video about most successful bands. It's never been a secret that George Martin had a big role to play so nothing to see there. In my experience anyone who plays guitar (including myself) will have plenty of songs in different states all the time. So going into Rubber Soul with zero ideas is an absolute impossibility. Also to find out that a band gets session musicians in from time to time is no big secret to anyone. This should be filed right next to videos about FAUL and 'Paul died' videos. Finally we are also meant to believe that non of the session musicians or all the people working at the studio or for George Martin kept the secret all this time.
What's dodgy is the inability to critically think and believe in the adult version of Cinderella. The 'if I can do it, they can do it' rationalization is as weak as anyone could put forth. So, if you want to break loose of the programming you might want to listen to this show: ruclips.net/video/et2ersHneD0/видео.html if not then I suggest hanging out here: www.youtube.com/@TheBeatles
@@MikeWilliamsPaulIsDeadChannel They are just songs mate. Good songs written by lads with a hard working class ethic. So they obviously worked well to a deadline, nothing "Cinderella to see there' our kid. Good input though keep it up you may produce something as good as Rubber Soul one day laaa! 👍👍
Do some research mate. Check out the link I posted. If you prefer to stay where you are then hit the Beatles YT channel 👍👍
The Beatles psyop forensically exposed once again. Thanks Mike
Hi Mike, My Son Christopher was so happy with this amazing presentation he can not wait to tell his friends in school once again take a bow your the best my friend Keith and Christopher carrot 🥕🥕🥕🥕 eating Scous ers
Strangely enough I appreciate Billy's contributions more than ever after reading his memoirs. I still enjoy the early Beatles stuff even though I don't believe they wrote much of it. Whoever wrote and played it is talented though!
I understand completely. I started playing guitar. In 5 years I manged to write well over 100 songs and song fragments, but if I was going to record them, I would have picked up the rough stuff and finished it. That's where the work comes in. It wasn't work to do the fragments. Now when you put in the concept of great songs, in my case hopefully good songs, I figure only 10% was worth salvaging. I think they wrote the rough stuff all the time, but they only did the finish stuff when they had to make an album.
Between 1962 and 1966, they did not write music or play on their recorded tracks. They wrote more of their own material between 1967 and 1970, but even during this period (and their solo careers) outside songwriters and session players were still employed. The story of them writing songs constantly is a work of fiction. The Beatles were actors and performers. An illusion that was sold to the public. If you go back and listen to what Donovan said, 'while they were out gallivanting, a genius songwriter was writing the songs'. It's likely Don was referring to Theodor Adorno in cahoots with George Martin. As Lennon sang in the song God, the dream is over. I don't believe in the Beatles. People have to stop making excuses and rationalizing about the lads and come to grips with reality.
All you need to know.
The Beatles narrative always made me and my friend group of musicians feel inadequate in comparison. We idolized them but always suspected there was more to the story and explained away their prolific career by assuming George Martin was working miracles. Thanks Mike for continuing to expose the Beatles psyop. I followed those false idols down the long and winding road and it led me nowhere man.
P.S. Donovan’s last video “I am The Shaman” directed by David Lynch is creepy as hell. Back masking on full display and dripping with occult symbolism. Gave me the heebie- jeebies
That's the thing. They made us all feel like we couldn't reach their ability. It was always something to strive for but thinking we couldn't do it. When the truth is Alex, people like you and others have more talent and skill than the lads ever had. That's what the psyop was about. It created followers. We followed the Pipe Pipers of the Aeon of Horus.
That’s high praise Mike especially from you. Thanks 🙏🏼 and God Bless!
@@MikeWilliamsPaulIsDeadChannelIt probably wasn't within the scope of this presentation to include John Coleman's "Committee of 300" or the Tavistock institute's role in the creation of not only the Beatles, but all of the music of that era. It's very disappointing to find out that your heroes, whom you thought were geniuses, are nothing more than hired stooges who are working for the same establishment that they're singing against.
I believe the proper term is "controlled opposition"
It would seem that the golden idols have accquired a layer of tarnish, wouldn't it?
Mike its hard to listen to them talk and know they lying! Thanks Mike!
When they covered it was always nuanced. When they announced the songs during their concerts, many times they couldn't remember which album the song was from or if it was a single. But I will give Paul credit for dropping the bombs during the BBC interview. Perhaps his final words.
mike, what is your point in constructing this elaborate story? if you’ve heard any of the bootlegs, if you watched the get back and let it be films, if you’ve listened to all the interviews over the years, then you would have no argument that they didn’t write and play their own songs. they could bang out an album in a month if they had to; they were used to working incredibly hard. when they were in hamburg, they often played on stage 16 hours a day. being a contrarian to irrefutable facts is just lazy and dishonest to the viewer who doesn’t know the history of the beatles. it’s one thing to be pedantic, it’s another to take everything they say and contrive it to be a secret clue to their “fakery”. and if this music was not done by the beatles, don’t you think john would have revealed this during his interview with jann wenner? he certainly didn’t hold back on how bitter he was about the group’s demise and how he didn’t like george martin’s production, how he would have redone the whole catalog. John was absolutely done with the whole beatles business by then; there was nothing at that point to stop him from calling out the whole thing as fake. you’re either willfully ignorant or you assume beatles fans are so gullible they’ll believe any nonsense you put out.
If you want to understand the point, then I recommend watching the presentation. It's obvious from your comment that you did not. You're simply playing back the official programmed talking points. Other presentations on the topic: Did The Beatles Write All Their Own Music? Part 1: tinyurl.com/bde8t475 and Part 2: tinyurl.com/2w58w9hv
You make a compelling case, Mike. But there's an encyclopedic book called 'The Complete Beatles Recording Sessions, 1962-1970' which documents every take of every recording session The Beatles ever had in Abbey Road Studios, day by day, year after year. You need to refute that to prove your case. Just sayin'. 🙃 Believe me, I know how you feel. I remember when Yesterday was released; I heard it on the radio. I was only 2 or 3; yet it stopped me in my tracks. I actually had to pause and enlarge my understanding of what it means to be a human being on earth and what our spuritual relationship to music is.
Many historic events are documented lies. Questioning The Beatles’ Official Narrative ruclips.net/video/b1TF8jOHs1I/видео.html Also, If you had watched the entire presentation you would have known I covered the RS entry in Mark's book (I have it).
Ok, you can have Eisenhower then; I'll keep The Beatles.
We all saw, live on film, what the Beatles did in 28 days, which resulted in the 'Let it Be' album. I think their talent was so incredible that it's difficult to believe they actually did it.
They did *not* do it. ruclips.net/video/0FnVOTmKoqU/видео.html and The GET BACK Discussions - FULL COMPILATION ruclips.net/video/pB1xRWnmIS0/видео.html
Mike, I have a question about the 27 club? Why do you suppose so many die at this age? My guess is that 2+7=9 and 9 means to rotate out.
That would be my guess. Nine = endings, transformation and change.
Thanks Mike
Saturn return? Katy Perry/REM/Gwen Stefani etc.
I think you should know that there are Beatles Channels like Sam Popkin, Guitar gear connection, Perry Stanley and Ably House that focus on reproducing the songs and investigates the instruments , amplifiers , strings deep down. A fact shows up, even if the songs were ghostwriten or even ghostplayed they sticked to the instruments the main narrative is telling us they used.
Of course they stick to the official narrative. Either they're as conditioned as most other Fab fans or they're aware and afraid of losing their subscriber base, so they go along to get along. ruclips.net/user/shortsB15eReAoJAE
@@MikeWilliamsPaulIsDeadChannel well, still they are right abouth do not use a stratocaster there, use a rickenbacker bass there use a vox conqueror distortion channel etc. You see, my self i consider the gear almost as important as the player, without vox, the sound would have being way different.And by the way, I don't know if you realise it , but your whole channel makes Brian Wilson of the beach boys the winner.He admited using studio musicians and having the boys only singing the songs (apart from some lead guitar by Carl wilson), but he still composed all this.
Show ourselves up means embarrass ourselves
Yes. I have covered this a number of times in the comments. Paul said: We didn't have to play. We didn't have to show ourselves up (embarrass ourselves) AGAIN on *RECORD* (the exact quote). In the US, it would be interpreted as being absent. So, either way, Paul is stating he and his mates were not on the recording of Yesterday.
Where's the complete interview, please?
See the description box.
I think this great songwriter will come out in time Mike like everything else is coming out slowly
I think Donovan was referring to Adorno.