Re: Paul Mccartney died in the 60's

On Jul 5, 8:35=A0pm, Edvado <Edvadoj...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> "Aich" <ai...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > Hi Edvado,
> > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 You perhaps. new users may not.
=A0=
The header is self
> > explanitory. =A0Don't go there. =A0Easy really.
>
> Actually, it's even easier for new users to Google the facts instead of
> reading your version only here.
>
> If what you're doing by bringing up the topic is to try to educate new
> users, why should the rest of us sit back and let you lead them astray?
>
> If you have any NEW evidence, anything that hasn't been thoroughly
> discredited, then bring it on and we'll ALL discuss it.
>
> Meanwhile, I encourage all the new users out there to visit the three
lin=
ks
> I originally posted:
>
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_is_dead
> =A0 =A0 =A0http://www.recmusicbeatles.com/public/files/faqs/pid.html
>
=A0http://www.ewisdom.org/secrets/The%20History%20of%20Paul%20is%20Dead.h=
tm
>
> brennen Sie nicht Rauch mein Freund durch
>
> -Edvado

Why does everyone get so defensive with this subject?

As morbid as it all is, especially in light of John's death, why can
this be viewed as something The Beatles did as an artist exercise
where they clever planted clues to enhance the intellectual game that
was their entire phenomena?

"I dig a pallbearer."