Did Hoi attack MM?

Be the 1st to vote.

The entity known as Miles Mathis is severing links (literally) from septemberclues.info. Here’s why:

Finally, I have removed the link to the film , although I haven’t found any reason to disagree with its main points. I am severing any alliance with Clues Forum and Simon Shack simply because I am tired of being slandered on his forum, not just by anonymous posters, but by some of his closest buddies (like Hoi Polloi). I haven’t kept up with all the 911 research of the past five years, having moved on to others things, so this breaking of alliance doesn’t have anything to do with specific 911 disagreements with Shack. I honestly don’t know what his latest theories are. In my mind, the event had been proved to be a false flag a decade ago, and arguing about details of destruction seems counter-productive. It wasn’t destroyed in the way we were told by the people we are told for the reasons we are told, and it is clear it was destroyed with the complicity of our own government and its agencies. There has been enough evidence to go to trial for many years, and the reason it isn’t going to trial and won’t ever go to trial has nothing to do with planes or no-planes. I have never attacked Shack, his site, or the film, having a link to it and recommending it for many years. Therefore, any rational person would expect he would wish to form some sort of alliance with me, or at least keep his mouth shut. From what I can tell, my research on Nukes also folds in with his, as does my research on fake events. So I don’t really know what his problem is. Possibly he didn’t like the fact that I also linked to other early 911 films, films he didn’t fully agree with. But that seems a petty reason to attack me as he has. At any rate, I am attacked enough by paid trolls and don’t need to be attacked by those who should be friends. If Shack wishes to make me his enemy, I guess I will bow to that wish, but I don’t link to enemies. I also suggest that it is either a red flag or a foot-shooting on his part. You should ask why he is attacking me, and demand an answer. The reasons he has given don’t make any sense. The only substantive reason I have seen on that site is that some fear I am Jewish, or a protector of the Jews. I have admitted that my great-grandfather on my mother’s side may have been Jewish, but the rest of my family doesn’t believe it and it would never have been known if I hadn’t mentioned it myself.

Now I’ll have to look over at cluesforum.info to see what was said.

Update: Simon says MM is likely real.

No tags for this post.

26 thoughts on “Did Hoi attack MM?

  1. xileffilex

    OK, let’s rev this one up.
    No, hands up, I was deceived by Miles. The speaking accent was quite good, but on reanalysis I am not convinced.

    So the question remains, who is Mark Staycer? A youtube commentator says he was the DJ “Stayce the Ace” from Michigan, a DJ who leaves no other internet trace. Hmmmm

    What is there to hide, apart from Stace [and Miles?] being an intel asset?

    1. Tom Dalpra

      Fair play xileffilex,
      ‘though ‘not convinced’ is how I feel about the Margaret River shooting! In a world of uncertainty, I think we can be clear here that Mark Staycer whoever he is, is definitely not John Lennon (whoever he was!).
      I’m pretty sure Mark Staycer is English. I remember looking at him a bit at the time of this thread. He seemed to have some sort of online presence as a sort of ‘half decent’ if fairly low profile Lennon impersonator. There’s several videos of him playing live at conventions, I think. Seems quiet lately.
      An intelligence asset ?
      Well he certainly seems to have been used as one here, in a small way, at least.. The rumour ‘Staycer is Lennon’ made alternative theorists ‘look silly’ all over the world.

      This is an Interesting thread to read back the comments on, good shout.
      I had to smile reading Psyopticon(/EvilEdna/ReichstagFireman) and I exchanging tarty messages. The relationship was strained, he left around then, i think. Kinda miss him sometimes…As I said to him, he was like MM (an entertaining, nay informative, spinner of tales…)

      Oh the ‘old’ days!

  2. farcevalue

    Celebrities faking their deaths is a distraction at best, at worst a deliberate concoction of dead ends contrived keep researchers involved in the mundane.

    That said, the milespantloadmathis site is such a pathetic and obvious intel disinfo site that anyone who has spent more than five minutes in this community will immediately conclude that it does more to bolster his work than diminish it.

    It’s a curiously backward way of maligning his research: associating the sketchier pop idol fake death research with obvious and undeniable psyops like Boston and Sandy Hook as a way of dismissing all of it. Throw in 9/11 and NASA as “crazy conspiracy” and it may as well be a .gov.

    1. Joaquin Hermon

      Mathis himself associates celebrity “fake” deaths with “fake” killings at Boston and Sandy Hook. He seems to think almost everything and everyone is “fake”. Miles Pantload Mathis exposes Mathis’s contradictions and errors in science, math as well as conspiracy “research”. I don’t find any of the articles by Mathis on “fakery” at all convincing. The problem is his shoddy research, as in his false notion that Dresden was not firebombed. Or in his making a big deal about not being able to find Elon Musk on Intelius. Even a casual fact-checking of these two articles shows the error in his methodology. In his zeal to prove “fakery” at Dresden he ends up making errors which, when the facts are checked, only prove the firebombing did occur. By trying to prove Musk is “fake” or does not exist, he goads the reader into successfully locating Musk, and his children, on his own. So much for the non-existence of Musk. So much for the “faked” Dresden firebombing.
      So much for Mathis’s supposed skills as an investigator.

  3. Hoi Polloi

    Hi, everyone. Although I didn’t intend to “attack” Miles Mathis, I did want to create a space on CluesForum for people to allow questions about what he’s doing in the research. Most of his work seems to speak for itself; it’s interesting and often plausible. I really enjoy the awareness with which his writing is made.

    I respect and understand why he wouldn’t want to link to something that directly questions his legitimacy, though. Since we have never met and — as far as I know — Simon has never met him either, I don’t think maintaining a distance based on healthy distrust is wrong. Indeed, I think a mutual distaste is even a fine place to begin an honest relationship that acknowledges the initial importance of distrust or lack of understanding.

    None of us has made time to actually reach out to one another and communicate, and that’s a shame. But it’s not the end of the world, and I don’t think it reflects poorly on our research or his.

    Sorry I have not been present much lately. I just came on Fakeologist to announce Kham and I finished Issue 7 of The Clues Chronicle: septclues.com/theclueschronicl…

    Thanks. Be well, all.

    1. Hoi Polloi

      One more thing after re-reading what Ab posted, attributing to Miles; as far as why he seems to be taking stuff personally at this moment, or why he claims Simon or myself have a “problem” with him, I have no idea. I don’t think we’ve actually developed any sort of formal “problem” with Miles Mathis, and his point about failing to reach out is a two-way road.

      I want to personally invite Miles Mathis to join CluesForum.info, politely respond to the things he takes issue with, and at least let us move out of any illusory, looming animosity. Or, I am sure he could just Skype Simon and have a chat, as Simon has always simply and graciously invited anyone to do.

      To those who think I have been harsh to anyone including Miles, please forgive me and accept my apologies. I am just exploring this strange world of research which often tries our ability to discern enemy from friend from limited hangout from gatekeeper from dupe. I know that I have made many mistakes in my approach to figuring out which is which, and in trying to get people interested in new critical thinking about the media. Moderating and writing have also been a personal challenge and I have sometimes been too hard on well-meaning people. Or too soft on traitors. Nobody is perfect, least of all someone like me clumsily stumbling through matters of “intelligence” organizations.

      Anyway, Miles, don’t sweat anything. Simon loves to talk on Skype, too. No need to burn bridges. Please do try to reach out to us.

      Thanks again. Bye for now.

      1. ab Post author

        Of course this always devolves into personality differences. Even if I did not like you, which I do, Hoi, your vicsim report stands on its own, unchallenged and ignored. This is all serious researchers of this latest drama need to know. It’s the kryptonite that unravels psyops every time.

  4. psyopticon

    I dunno. I quite enjoy Mathis. As far as I know, he’s the only person who claims that Lincoln’s assassination was a hoax; and that he died of natural causes; from some pre-existing terminal disease. A unique, but highly plausible hypothesis.

    Mathis made a pretty good case for why Lincoln’s natural demise was dressed up as an assassination. Which, at least for me, led on to the possibility, nay, probability, that JF Kennedy died in similar circumstances. Kennedy was also critically ill, or so we’re told. Only to be written out of the script in equally dramatic fashion, for maximum theatrical effect. With that same script played out many times since, maybe?

    It’s a bit desperate that Mathis has had to defend himself; denying he’s Jewish; minimising his Jewish lineage to one great-grandparent at most. Who cares any way? It’s nothing to be ashamed of.

    Though it’s time he did call out 9/11 as a hoax, rather than just a “false flag“, which implies 3,000 really did die, but by another hand.

    He’s done a fair thing though, publicly jettisoning Alex Jones and NaturalNews. Though they were stepping stones on the road to discovery for many others, too.

  5. farcevalue

    What is it about MM that you cannot take seriously?

    CF stands on its own, but Hoi’s initial evaluation of MM was a bit harsh. Bon Jovi does not want to hear about how Richie Sambora is a better vocalist, even if it’s true.

    1. Tom Dalpra

      This was my take on his recent Elvis tale farcevalue.

      Ab said – ”Miles Mathis either writes a super tall tale or does some great research. I tend to believe the latter”.
      Tom says – I gently tend to believe the former.
      Elvis did have a Jewish connection it seems “…Nancy Burdine was married to Abner Tackett (Elvis’ great great maternal grandmother). Nancy was of particular interest to Gladys for her Jewish heritage, often remembering Nancy’s sons for their Jewish names Sidney and Jerome. Nancy and Abner had a daughter Martha who married White Mansell. The daughter which they named Octavia, nick-named Doll, who was Elvis’ maternal grandmother.”
      After his mothers’ death Elvis encouraged the inclusion of the symbol on her grave and does appear himself to have embraced his Jewish roots, certainly, to an extent.
      ”The very last display case, before you left the building ( Graceland ) to roam the grounds, featured the things Elvis was wearing the night he died. Included were his religious paraphernalia, which he “always wore,” the docent told me: a cross and a Chai pendant”

      That the Star of David on her original grave had ‘disappeared’ by the time Elvis had died and he and Gladys were given new graves, does not look that suspicious to me because Vernon, as rumor has it, was a bit of an anti semite and was in charge of the new grave designs.
      On the spelling of Aaron with a double ”a”, again there seems a fairly plausible explanation. Apparently Elvis himself had adopted the ‘correct’ spelling of the name Aaron and had been using it on legal documents in his later life.
      Billy Smith:” One day in late ’66, I was talking to Elvis about religion, and he bought up Aaron. I said, ‘That’s something I’ve always wondered, Elvis. How come you spell ‘Aaron’ with one ‘A’ when it’s two ‘A’s’ in the Bible? Because Elvis might have been named for Vernon’s friend Aaron Kennedy, but he always referred to it as a Hebrew name and how Aaron was the brother of Moses. And he said, ‘Well, back when I was growing up, a lot of people around Tupelo didn’t spell right’. Elvis looked over at Vernon and said, ‘As a matter of fact, Daddy, from now on, I want my name written with two ‘A’s, especially on legal documents’. That’s why it has two ‘A’s on the gravestone. (Below, Vernon Presley at Elvis’ grave at Graceland.”
      Elvis’ ‘ Jewishness’ is an interesting detail, and surely could have done no harm to the boys chances in the world of show business, but I’m not sure we should make the leap Mathis seems to, that Elvis was bred along with his not-really-dead twin brother, for stardom by the shadowy hand ? Really?
      Mathis seems to suggest that Elvis ran around with The Memphis Mafia in his pre-fame days. This isn’t what we are told by the official story. It was the media themselves that named Elvis’ gang which largely came together some time after his fame. It reads as if Mathis is trying to spin Elvis as some sponsored gangster from a young age and not the sweet and shy, housing project kid who sang in church that we have heard about from a multitude of witnesses over the years and which still seems a credible picture to me. But, hey, what do I know? I’m still open to anything.
      George Klein was a good friend from Eighth Grade who stayed with Elvis to the end.
      Outside of his family, Klein was Elvis’ oldest friend.
      It seems logical Elvis would have adopted some Jewish sympathy from his beloved mother who largely raised him on her own . For the distinctive odd-ball to have found a friend in Klein at that time is no surprise to me. So what, really ? It’s not so much evidence of some great contrivance , as evidence that Elvis was comfortable making friends with Jews at a time when perhaps being anti Jewish was more widespread and that this trait would have done him no harm in the world of Show Business.
      On Colonel Tom Parker, he always struck me as being a totally controllable rogue. As long as he was making money, he was happy.
      If the Colonel was really the Dutch connection for some great Phillips records con, why was he apparently so terrified of leaving the country?
      Elvis never toured Europe. The Colonels fear of leaving the country is often cited, and appears the only logical explanation. Why would such a powerful man be so nervous of his legal status, if he felt he was connected at a very high level? Or, maybe there’s another reason Elvis never left The States ?
      Did Elvis really die in 1977 ? I don’t know.
      What I do know is that there were performances of Elvis from 1977 that used to be on youtube which I can’t find anymore, which showed him to be completely out of it on some strong medication. There’s still plenty of footage from 1977 which shows him pretty darn stoned on some heavy shit, but there was some quite shocking stuff which I can’t find anymore.
      This wasn’t some sketchy mobile phone footage from a clip on the news. There was a whole show, a TV special, where he was actually unable to talk coherently. We really saw a shambles with Elvis at the very end. I think this tarnished his reputation somewhat and left a less than flattering memory of the man in the white jump suit to many of my generation. (I was ten years old in 1977 and a big Elvis 1955-1970 fan).
      I watched those pathetic, shambolic TV specials at the time and thought Elvis was past it.
      There is a lot of properly filmed concert footage from 1977 and I do remember there being, I think two, Elvis concert specials in 1977 on our televisions in the UK. Then he died. We have to ask, did someone know?
      Maybe it was a coincidence, maybe there were Elvis specials on all the time.
      It’s just my impression on review that there’s actually a disproportionate amount of concert footage from 1977 and that might be telling. More to explore..
      Elvis appeared extremely ill during some of his later appearances and this seems consistent with what appears to have been exposed about his legendary 15 year drug taking.
      It does seem quite likely he could have just died. We had plenty of time to watch quite a sick man.
      These are my meandering thoughts.
      Right now I tend to believe good friend Joe Esposito is honest here. 11-50 mins for Elvis’s death. I’ve been wrong before though. I’d have to look at it more.
      For me the weakest part of Miles’ essay are the photographic suggestions.
      He puts up a couple of black and white photos and says something to the effect of ”Same Dutch eyebrows!”
      Ha! No, I can’t tell. But what do I know?
      Maybe there’s a pair of Elvis’ running around still? ! Garon and Aron, double agents extraordinaire!
      It is possible, but it’s more possible to me that Miles Mathis is spinning a tall tale here.

      Read more: fakeologist.com/2015/12/18/a-t…

      1. farcevalue

        Evidently, Elvis’ Judaic genealogy is not could be called groundbreaking research, as they have laid claim to him some time ago:


        If his rise was indeed as inexplicably meteoric as MM claims, having the tribal connection to industry moguls would surely have helped. The twin thing, who knows.

        I find it easier to believe that culture creators take acts with a proven record of success and co-opt them. I don’t believe there is a formula per se, for creating pop phenomenons, regardless of how many bandwagon acts draft on the success of the latest sensations. Once a particular niche has been deemed passe, something different has to fill the void and I can’t see the controllers having the sort of creativity required to break paradigms. Being a musician and songwriter myself, and having played along side hundreds of others over the years, and seeing only achieving even a modicum of success, I can safely say that coming up with catchy material is a rare art.

        I can also safely say that if I had been approached by a label executive with a promise of fame and fortune in exchange for dancing in a pentagram while wearing baphomet horns and all seeing eye trousers, I wouldn’t have blinked. Probably still wouldn’t.

      1. xileffilex

        I’m not with you here, Tom. There was some brief discussion here about Stacer some months ago and I was amazed by his speaking voice. I don’t think the video you posted does Miles’ thesis justice. Here’s a more recent one I just found quickly, posted two or so months ago.
        Some of the comments sum it up for me. I think it’s a brilliant “impersonation” and I go along with Miles. What’s the big red flag you are seeing here?

        1. Tom Dalpra

          The big red flag I’m seeing here from the get-go, Felix, is that Mark Staycer seems obviously not John Lennon.

          Staycer doesn’t look old enough and he looks too tall to be John Lennon, for a start.

          Check him out coming on stage here.
          I’d put good money on Staycer being at least 6 feet tall.


          I’m guessing of course, but he really does look like a pretty tall guy here doesn’t he ? Well, Lennon was supposed to be 5′ 10. That alone should make you think, surely ? It took seconds to find that, but I think it’s pretty strong supporting evidence for my case.
          I say Staycer is 6 foot plus.

          If so, maybe Staycer/ Lennon had plastic surgery to make himself taller ? This may seem far fetched but surely he seems to have had fantastic plastic surgery to make himself look younger ?
          Born in 1940, is this really a 72 year old man ? It might be, but it really doesn’t feel like it to me.

          Staycer is just an ‘okay’ performer. Lennon had some real talent. He doesn’t really sing or speak like Lennon as far as I’m concerned and it also seems clear to me that he’s deliberately affecting Lennon mannerisms as part of his act.
          More to the point, what the hell would Lennon be doing anyway, going around pretending to play himself in some average tribute band ? Ha! This is a joke to me and many others, I’m sure.

          Miles Mathis seems clearly some kind of sophist.
          I remember Ab posting the article some time back and I just took one look at it and thought the idea was rubbish. I’ve not read any other Miles Mathis articles since until I read his Elvis one the other day.
          Again, I saw an article which appeared to be spinning bullshit. No change there, then.

          It’s interesting how compelling these ‘ celebrity doubles’ appear to people. It certainly seems to serve as a good method of disinformation. People appear to get excited by the possibility of them and take leave of their senses like screaming Beatles fans from back in the day. ”It’s John!!!”

          No it isn’t.

          Miles Mathis is a spinner of tales.
          Personally, I think Psyopticon, Reichstrag Fireman, Evil Edna is better at it, and more convincing, but then he’s our own. Maybe I’m biased?

          Mathis seems to have quite successfully found a little niche for his nonsense and got a bunch of quite intelligent people going a bit.

          I’m calling Mathis a sophist and a spinner of tales. A purveyor of some quite entertaining pulp fiction, but by definition, ultimately someone not to be taken too seriously.

          1. psyopticon

            Hmm.. especially flaky analysis from Tom! This is even worse that your theory of numerological foreshadowing to the Lee Rigby Hoax, in a soccer trailer from six years previous! Behave, Tom!

            Tom puts forward just two arguments against Staycer being Lennon. He doesn’t look old enough. And he’s too tall.

            Both issues – height and youthful appearance – are deeply subjective. Does McCartney look 73 today? And the footage you offer of Staycer — Abbey Road On The River — is from 2006, when Staycer/Lennon would have been 65 or 66. Very possibly the right age to be Lennon.

            Now to Staycer’s height. To be any sort of meaningful comparison of Lennon and Staycer’s heights, you first must explain how you gauged Staycer at “six foot plus”.

            Just explain. No need to over-emphasize with remarks like: “I put good money on that”. You haven’t met him, nor run a ruler up his inside leg. And it’s no good pointing at him, as he stands next to some unknown man – while saying “there’s ya proof”. Yes, the other fella happens to be somewhat shorter, but that’s quite irrelevant. With no yard-rule beside Staycer, these comparisons are just relative. Nor, before you try it, is there anything useful in guessing the height of an (extendable) microphone stand in front of him!

            John Lennon 5’10”

            Here’s Lennon standing next to McCartney. They look very, very similar in height, yes? John, just a touch shorter, maybe. And McCartney is or was officially 5’11” – 6’0″. Both Lennon and McCartney are tall; above average in height. So where’s the discrepancy?

            Photo from Jan 1965, of Lennon & McCartney, for height comparisons

            You’re also trampling over loads of magnificent research that Mathis did on this hoax – while homing in one, or maybe two, subjective points – which you’ve embellished yourself, with overblown emphasis.

            Many if not most of us here do think that the Lennon assassination was just another hoax. For whatever reason. Another one who joined the Dead Celebrity Programme. So that pretty much answers your charge that Lennon would never stoop to this. His death very likely was hoaxed. Get over it, as they say.

            “what the hell would Lennon be doing anyway, going around pretending to play himself in some average tribute band ? Ha!”

            What would YOU do, after decades of idle hands, and probably a greatly dwindled fortune? After all those years in the wilderness. Plunging overnight from worldwide fame to absolute obscurity. Wouldn’t you feel a touch of bitterness, and envy? Saddened that the whole world thinks you’re long dead?

            Wouldn’t you want the truth gently revealed about your supposed demise? A quarter century later, wouldn’t you throw caution to the wind? Disregarding the threats to stay silence? To say “fuck it, I’m coming out, in my own subtle way”? Lennon always came across as a strong-willed compulsive sort; not one to be brow-beaten, not even in “death” !

            Besides, by 1980, the year of his alleged assassination, the Beatles had disintegrated any way. Doubtless it was decided that sending Lennon out in a dramatic blaze of gunfire was far better — in terms of leaving an enduring musical legacy. The alternative was publicly fizzling him out, possibly in a downward spiral of drugs and depression.

            That seems especially pertinent — the state of Lennon’s mind towards the end of the Beatles era. It’s said that he spent the last two years in “serious addiction” to heroin. Quite incapable of performing publicly any more. With no recovery foreseen, isn’t that, in itself, a good enough reason to write him out permanently? You could call it an act of kindness, even.

            From Top 10 Unpleasant Facts About John Lennon by Edward Benjamin, 2012:

            Put simply, John Lennon made up his own life – exaggerating, embellishing, and outright lying when it suited him to do so. Usually, he did so out of pure egomania – a desire to make himself appear better than he actually was. Everyone does this to some extent, but in Lennon’s case, he rewrote almost every major event in his life to suit his tastes. He claimed he had been a working class lad from Liverpool before the Beatles; he was actually raised in a comfortable middle-class home. He denied being married during his early years of stardom. He claimed to have met Yoko Ono at an art show and their love blossomed spontaneously; in fact, Ono had stalked him for months before he gave in to her advances. He claimed to have lost interest in the Beatles due to Paul McCartney’s tendencies toward pop music and dominant role in the group, as well as his desire to do his more avant-garde work outside the band; in fact, he had all but left the band in its last two years as the result of a serious addiction to heroin. When he emerged back into the public eye shortly before his death, he claimed that he had been spending time baking bread and being a stay-at-home dad; in fact, he had been living in a drug-induced haze most of the time. The truth in all of these cases was embarrassing, but no more than the kind of behavior many rock stars acknowledged engaging in during the ‘60s and ‘70s; Lennon compulsively lied about it anyway.

            A compulsive liar. Ideal for the task of faking his own death, no?

            His (alleged) re-appearance as a Tribute Performer is as believable as anything else. If true, perhaps Lennon simply craved the limelight again. Don’t they all? He was an egotistical narcissist, for whom fame drew him to the performing arts in the first place. Wasn’t this – playing a Lennon tribute act – an ideal way to get himself back on stage, albeit clandestinely, to re-play those old Beatles tunes?

            Rather than create new music of his own, under the name of “Mark Staycer”, for which he would find no audience willing to listen to him; dismissed as just the amateur efforts of another unknown music rookie. That’s supposing that Lennon/Staycer is/was even capable of composing music of his own…

            Bottom line. Mathis’s research on Lennon/Staycer is extensive; and much of it is hard to dismiss. With due respect, Tom, we want better than the ad hominems – and better than the reductio ad absurdum. It’s no good distilling a response down to a crude charge of “too young; too tall.” We want more!

              1. psyopticon

                Hi Ab, yeah plausible. The Queen of England supposedly used a double; even letting her pose for portraits on coinage and postage stamps!

                A few months back, Miles Mathis was good enough to chat at length on the phone about Lennon, and other topics. Maybe I’m just very naive, but he (Mathis) comes across as sincere. Quite guarded, but sincere.

                In particular, we talked about Staycer’s Liverpool accent, and how, as a Canadian, he could feign it so well, and maintain it for hours at a time in both song and in casual chat. A very accomplished impressionist, or the real thing?

                Curiously, Staycer, like Lennon, both have an accent that is not quite what it seems. It’s not the really pronounced ‘scally‘ tongue that you hear in inner-city Liverpool. Both Lennon and Staycer have a more refined accent. More middle-class. More suburbian. Outlying Lancashire. St Helens, perhaps. That possibly belies more about the Lennon narrative: he wasn’t what he seemed. Did Staycer really pick up on, and then perfectly mimic, Lennon’s rather out-of-place accent? Instead of impersonating a generic inner-city Liverpudlian?

                I ordered the DVD — Let Him Be – on which Mathis based much of his research. It arrived days later from Toronto by express airmail. Dispatched perhaps by “Staycer” himself. I should have had it fingerprinted! It’s just oozing with clues. Even Staycer’s roadie in the DVD — Graham Wignall (1938-2012) supposedly attended the same school as Lennon — Quarry Bank High School in Allerton.


                Come on guys. Coincidences like that don’t just happen!

                Supposedly the producer of the movie – who had “never made a movie before” – telephoned the Liverpool FC Supporters Club in Toronto, and asked for someone to play a Scouser, in a movie about Lennon. And up pops Graham Bignall who – has “never acted in my life” but by extraordinary fluke only went to the same school as Lennon in Liverpool, 50 years earlier, and actually knew Lennon and Harrison, et al. Sorry, that’s a coinkydinky too far.

                This is Graham Bignall, Staycer’s roadie, from the Bonus DVD of Let Him Be.

                This hoax just keeps on giving!

                1. Tom Dalpra

                  John Lennon is said to have been 5′ 10”.

                  Here’s a video of Mark Staycer. I suggest it shows him to be quite ”lanky” – very likely over 6 feet tall ( just my firm impression ).

                  If Staycer IS over 6 feet tall, then he can’t be Lennon, can he, which appears to be the question here ?

                  1. ab Post author

                    I watched the movie. Download it here. The movie is awful, and Staycer does not look like Lennon at all to me. He doesn’t even cover him all that well. I am not obsessed with culture creator change agents CCCAs being switched, but more fascinated how they can move a whole population – even if they are switched out. People WANT to beLIEve and follow – telling them they are nutz to do so is why fakeologists’ message is often lost.

                2. xileffilex

                  Where are they now?

                  A rather empty FB page for “Staycer” abruptly ending in 2009. Project over.
                  There’s a photo of his face mask there

                  And Mrs Wignall has since migrated to Southern Spain, Lives in Benamargosa

                  It is with great sadness that the family of Graham Wignall announces his sudden and unexpected death on 24th March, 2012 in the CVICU at Toronto General Hospital

  6. khammad

    Hmm, first David Weiss and now Miles Mathis, they both have something negative to say about Simon Shack. Is a campaign starting or are these two incidences isolated events?

  7. Tom Dalpra

    Miles Mathis cannot be taken seriously – full stop.
    His job, it appears, is to make false connections and spin stories.

    Quite right that people should be calling his bullshit out and no loss to Cluesforum there, then ?

    1. Joaquin Hermon

      I quite agree. I’ve read a fair number of Mathis’s articles and not one of them has been convincing.
      Some points:
      He continually says numerous people are “spooks” and provides no corroboration.
      He references to the Constitution or to the law are often erroneous.
      He is sloppy and seems to be lazy in his research.
      Mathis tries to portray Bob Dylan as “fake” because, in part, his early bandmate Bobby Vee couldn’t possibly be so because he was only 15 y.o.
      Mathis writes:
      “… Vee’s career started in 1959 when he was chosen to fill in for Buddy Holly, etc. on ‘the day the music died.’ But that was in Moorhead, MN. Why would they choose a 15-year-old boy from Fargo to play in Moorhead, across state lines?
      Vee was a minor and couldn’t even get across state lines legally without someones help. He couldn’t drive himself, and anyone but his parents could be stopped for transporting a minor. ”
      There is no law against minors “crossing state lines”. Besides, Fargo, ND and Moorhead, MN are only two miles apart.

      Mathis could have discovered this for himself but apparently never bothered.
      On the subject of Vee, Mathis also said:
      “How does a 15-year-old boy from Fargo, North Dakota, sell a song to a record company, and then get a
      contract with the even larger Liberty Records in that same year? Do you really think the record companies were that desperate for talent?”
      The following list of singers and the age at which they got a recording contract was provided by a reader on the Miles Pantload Mathis site:
      Michael Jackson – age 6
      Stevie Wonder – age 11
      Leann Rimes – age 13
      Miley Cyrus – age 14
      Justin Bieber – age 15
      This is all just basic fact checking. So why couldn’t Mathis do this?
      At some point Mathis just starts making stuff up.
      He can’t be taken seriously.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.