Lennon

Friday, May 14, 2010

I don't believe in Featles: CIAlebrity impersonator, "John Lennon" (updated)

 

 

 
The Beatles will exist without us.
~ George Harrison

 
Someone once asked, "OK, so Paul was against the Illuminati's dark agenda, but the other Beatles were OK with it?" This made me cringe, because no, I don't believe the other Beatles would have gone along with promoting war or a psycho-chemical, psychological warfare agent (LSD). Timothy Leary once said: "I declare that The Beatles are mutants. Prototypes of evolutionary agents sent by God, endowed with a mysterious power to create a new human species, a young race of laughing freemen." I do not know about the "mutants" part, but I do believe Leary had the rest of it pretty much right. I believe that the original Beatles were a powerful force of light and love. The Beatles were laughing men who were warm and funny. The music was amazing, and they had a great time playing live.

 

 
The dark forces had to take control of the music and the message, because the Beatles had the power to effect change. The dark ones do not want Light forces of truth and goodness to lift up the masses and wake people up. They had to stamp out the Beatles to suppress the positive energy and effects the Beatles were having. They had to wrest control of the juggernaut that was the Beatles since the lads were not going to play ball. Some of the personnel had to be "let go" so that the power and influence of "the Beatles" could keep the cash flowing and could keep manipulating the masses.

 
There were clues in "Yellow Submarine" and Sgt. Pepper that there were duplicate Beatles. For example, the "old" Beatles were shoved to the side on Sgt. Pepper, while the "new and improved" Beatles are front and center. The Beatles were dead, as the grave with "BEATLES" on it attests:

 
In "Yellow Submarine," there is a scene with a duplicate Beatles band playing in a bubble. It is interesting how the mustached Sgt. Pepper version of John is showing the Illuminati sign of allegiance to Lucifer ("Lucy in the Sky," "Bring on the Lucie").

 

 
All of this is old news as far as it relates to Paul McCartney. It should not come as a shock that Paul was not the only person to ever be impostor-replaCIAed in the history of the world. In Questions about John Lennon's assassination, I posted an interview with Dr. Stephen Lynn, the physician who attended to "John Lennon" after he had been shot on December 8, 1980. The interview raised some very troubling issues. The doctor and nurses did not recognize the man who had been shot as John Lennon. In addition, the doctor admitted to with-holding and even destroying evidence of the crime. I believe the simple answer to why they didn't recognize the man as John Lennon & why they destroyed evidence is that John Lennon was a victim of impostor-replacement.

 
Please click on image to see comp in its entirety.

 
In Montreal, May 1969, there was a confrontation between "John," Yoko and Al Capp. Capp remarks to "John" to his face that "at least the other three guys are English...." "John" responds: "what does that mean?" Al Capp replied, "You think about it." What was this all about? Perhaps Capp was onto the impostor?

 

 

In 1967, "John" starred in the movie, "How I Won the War," but in a 1966 interview, he said, "We all just don't agree with war. There's no need to kill anyone for any reason." [Source] It just seems a little strange that someone who was against war would star in a movie about war. Was this really John, or was it just his image being used to promote an agenda? This was 1967, and certain elements wanted to expand the war in Southeast Asia. When the powers that be are gunning for war, they will prep the masses with a spate of war-movies. It gets people "in the mood."


 
In my opinion, John Lennon's name and image were hijacked to make "him" an ineffectual "leader" of the anti-war movement. The double's interviews with the Illuminatus, Yoko Ono, while sitting in bags made the peace movement look ridiculous and the helped to discredit the peace movement. This would be an example of controlled opposition.

 

 
I will admit that the John-double is a better match than Faul, but if you study the following comparisons carefully, I believe you will be able to discern physical differences that betray the impostor. The main physical differences I have noticed are a square chin changing to a pointed chin, a straight nose turning into a beak, lips getting thinner, and the physique going from strong to thin and weak. There is also something about the eyes...

 
In this comp, the double's profile is more rounded than John's.

 


 

 

 
In this comp, the nostrils are noticeably different, and the nose on the right is a bit "sharper":

 

 
John Lennon had a particular idiosyncratic stance he assumed when he played live. The impostor failed to assume that position, which some consider to be a give-away.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
John at 1:00, impostor at 3:48:

 

 
John Lennon had a funny, cheeky sense of humor that the impostor just could not duplicate.

 

 

 

 

 
It is interesting that John was successful with his two books, "In His Own Write" and "A Spaniard in the Works," but never wrote another book.

 

 
In a 1965 interview, John said he wrote "all the time":

 
Q: "Have you been writing lately?"

JOHN: "I write all the time. I don't actually put it on paper so much these days, it goes on tape. I've got lots of tape... which, if I put down on paper it would be a book. Thoughts come, and end up in songs or films. It's just a matter of... do I want to make those tapes into paper, or make those tapes into records."

Q: "John, do you find your second book is doing as well as your first?"

JOHN: "I haven't asked anybody, you know. It did as well initially. It wont sell as many, but it's a better book so I don't care."

Q: "Do you plan another book in the near future?"

JOHN: "I don't really plan them, you know. They just sort of happen. The publisher plans them, and I just sort of scribble."

 
I find it a little sad that people just blindly accepted without question that John abandoned his beautiful wife and child for an Elite Japanese banker's daughter who passed herself off as an "artist."

 

 
John and Cynthia Lennon

 
There are conflicting stories by Julian and "John" about how much time Julian spent with his father. "John" says at 3:17 his son (Julian) spends every weekend with him:

 

 
At the beginning of this interview, Julian talks about how he saw his dad "8, maybe 10 times" between when he left Cynthia and before his death:

 

 
Mark David Chapman was carrying a copy of A Catcher in the Rye when he was arrested. Interesting that the book is about phonies...

 
At 0:38, the self-proclaimed witch, Yoko Ono, says "the last John I remember is a very gregarious, energetic, high-spirited guy." Does this not sound like the last "John" in a series of "Johns?"

 

 
~ Tina Foster
Join the discussion: Paul is Dead Miss Him Forum

 
UPDATE: A set of John Lennon's fingerprints that were being auctioned for at least $100,000 was seized by the FBI on October 6, 2010.

 
Peter Siegel, co-founder of GOTTA HAVE IT!, the shop selling the fingerprint card, said he was bewildered by the FBI action and interest during the week also by Homeland Security. He said
"This great icon has been deceased for 30 years," he said. "This is not a national threat."

[Source: FBI seizes John Lennonís fingerprints in N.Y.]

This recent occurrence bolsters the theory that John was replaced. Why would the Feds care if his fingerprints were in the public domain? Perhaps they are afraid people will compare the later set of fingerprints to the earlier set and prove John, too, was the victim of impostor-replacement.