|
Post by joshferrell on Dec 10, 2009 2:28:34 GMT -5
ok this is going to be a contoversal thread and I'm not trying to open a can of worms but I just watched "the U.S. Vs John Lennon" and something struck me,Yoko said "THEY killed him" does that mean that Yoko thinks that the government killed him?so what do you think of the theory that MDC was sent to kill Lennon by the CIA?is that what Yoko is saying there? any thoughts on that?did the CIA order lennon to be killed or was yoko just being paranoid?
|
|
|
Post by ursamajor on Dec 10, 2009 7:04:02 GMT -5
I think that Yoko knows that MDC was a patsy and I don't think Yoko is suggesting that the CIA sent MDC to kill John, I think Yoko is suggesting that someone else was the killer.
|
|
|
Post by joshferrell on Dec 10, 2009 11:49:05 GMT -5
that's interesting..if only we knew who she was talking about...
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Dec 10, 2009 12:30:05 GMT -5
I don't know what Yoko was implying but Sean has come out and said that he believes the U.S. government killed his father.
We have argued this point at least twice since November 2001 and I still am in the camp that believes that Yoko and Sean should not flatter themselves by thinking John was that important to the U.S. government by 1980.
John had largely bailed out of overt, radical politics by 1973(I'm not saying that he wasn't still politically minded, just not so overtly) and was back to being a rock superstar from 1973 to October 9, 1975. Then he goes on a five year hiatus where he all but disappears. He comes back in 1980 and makes a family-oriented album about love, a 5 year old son and some of the hardships of an eleven year old marriage that was often in the spotlight(except the last five years).
The world had changed in those years. John was even invited by new President Jimmy Carter to inauguration parties in January of 1977. President-elects like Ronald Reagan don't have any power or control over the CIA and Reagan had met John on Monday Night Football and explained American football to John. While Reagan would have disagreed to the end with John's politics and John did not like Reagan's politics, old Ron would not order a hit, even if he could, on a guy he had met and amicably chatted with. That was not his style. Some communist dictator in Central America he had never met, yes, but not a guy Reagan had talked football with. Reagan was oddly sentimental that way.
John Lennon was very important to us fans in 1980 but not to anyone else. John himself disavowed his "radical" years calling Hoffman and Rubin phonies.
I see no plausible reason why any government would want John murdered by 1980. He was a rock star wanting to make music again so we fans were pumped but I remember an adult world(those adults who weren't Beatles/Lennon fans) back then that shrugged its shoulders at the news of John's comeback album.
There were other artists who had picked up John's lead for social change. Why weren't several other cultural icons besides John murdered all at once?
Why not Mick Jagger? He was still more culturally potent in 1980 than John Lennon? Why not Bob Dylan? Oh, because he had turned Christian by then? Wait a minute, that meant then that the CIA had read his new lyrics to know that. Why had they not then read John's new lyrics to see that he was turning inwards to family and personal issues?
It is still my opinion that John was murdered by a lone man who emerged emotionally damaged from the very culture John helped to create. The man had been a huge Beatles' fan at one time. The man was not so deranged to avoid criminal culpability but he was disturbed to a degree to be obviously very dangerous to anything or anyone he set his sights on.
|
|
|
Post by stavros on Dec 10, 2009 14:51:14 GMT -5
Who knows the truth? Wasn't MDC in possession of the novel "Catcher in the Rye" which has been rumoured to be a "trigger" in brainwashed individuals.
|
|
|
Post by ursamajor on Dec 10, 2009 16:57:42 GMT -5
I don't know what Yoko was implying but Sean has come out and said that he believes the U.S. government killed his father. We have argued this point at least twice since November 2001 and I still am in the camp that believes that Yoko and Sean should not flatter themselves by thinking John was that important to the U.S. government by 1980. John had largely bailed out of overt, radical politics by 1973(I'm not saying that he wasn't still politically minded, just not so overtly) and was back to being a rock superstar from 1973 to October 9, 1975. Then he goes on a five year hiatus where he all but disappears. He comes back in 1980 and makes a family-oriented album about love, a 5 year old son and some of the hardships of an eleven year old marriage that was often in the spotlight(except the last five years). The world had changed in those years. John was even invited by new President Jimmy Carter to inauguration parties in January of 1977. President-elects like Ronald Reagan don't have any power or control over the CIA and Reagan had met John on Monday Night Football and explained American football to John. While Reagan would have disagreed to the end with John's politics and John did not like Reagan's politics, old Ron would not order a hit, even if he could, on a guy he had met and amicably chatted with. That was not his style. Some communist dictator in Central America he had never met, yes, but not a guy Reagan had talked football with. Reagan was oddly sentimental that way. John Lennon was very important to us fans in 1980 but not to anyone else. John himself disavowed his "radical" years calling Hoffman and Rubin phonies. I see no plausible reason why any government would want John murdered by 1980. He was a rock star wanting to make music again so we fans were pumped but I remember an adult world(those adults who weren't Beatles/Lennon fans) back then that shrugged its shoulders at the news of John's comeback album. There were other artists who had picked up John's lead for social change. Why weren't several other cultural icons besides John murdered all at once? Why not Mick Jagger? He was still more culturally potent in 1980 than John Lennon? Why not Bob Dylan? Oh, because he had turned Christian by then? Wait a minute, that meant then that the CIA had read his new lyrics to know that. Why had they not then read John's new lyrics to see that he was turning inwards to family and personal issues? It is still my opinion that John was murdered by a lone man who emerged emotionally damaged from the very culture John helped to create. The man had been a huge Beatles' fan at one time. The man was not so deranged to avoid criminal culpability but he was disturbed to a degree to be obviously very dangerous to anything or anyone he set his sights on. John still had great power and it was only that the Carter administration was in that THEY stopped bugging him in the house-husband years. Once the Reagan administration was back , it was the same people again. I hope Yoko speaks out about this at some point but I guess she's just protecting Sean now.
|
|
|
Post by OldFred on Dec 10, 2009 17:29:15 GMT -5
I totally agree with John D. on this. In his last interviews Lennon stressed his music and his family life more than his political views, most of which by that point he had disavowed.
Yoko and Sean are trying to draw attention to themselves with the anti-government crowd, since they're certainly not going to get much attention through their own music and it's kind of sad that they have to drag in John's name just to get noticed, something Yoko has been doing the past 29 years and Sean is now carrying on.
|
|
|
Post by ursamajor on Dec 10, 2009 19:06:19 GMT -5
I totally agree with John D. on this. In his last interviews Lennon stressed his music and his family life more than his political views, most of which by that point he had disavowed. Yoko and Sean are trying to draw attention to themselves with the anti-government crowd, since they're certainly not going to get much attention through their own music and it's kind of sad that they have to drag in John's name just to get noticed, something Yoko has been doing the past 29 years and Sean is now carrying on. No way are they trying to draw attention to their music. Their music has never had any kind of exposure so why would Yoko at 70+ want exposure now ? John was more of a threat in the 80's as media with advances in technology meant that he could get his messages out much more easily to a wider audience. Think the George Michael video Shoot the Dog where George W Bush is shown walking Tony Blair as the dog, this sort of stuff could have been done by someone like John in the 80s and caused public opinion to go against the government for all their BS wars.
|
|
|
Post by OldFred on Dec 10, 2009 19:30:27 GMT -5
It just seems that Yoko and Sean are trying to get some media exposure by once again latching onto John's coat tails. Olivia and Dhani don't try and gain attention to themselves through George because George didn't really seek out attention to himself.
I always felt that John made the error of over-exposing himself to the public and it momentarily backfired on him. Olivia so far has been respectful of George's legacy while Dhani is seeking to advance his own career while not calling attention to who his father was.
|
|
|
Post by ursamajor on Dec 10, 2009 21:28:40 GMT -5
I agree , John should have just left it at peace and love, I don't like that he became political and got branded a radical by the US govt and they made life tough for him. He should have been making great music in the latter 70's but I respect he wanted time off from being famous and being harrassed.
But I don't think that Sean or Yoko defending John means that they are using his name to promote their own artistic endeavours and even if they are, I wouldn't have a problem with it and it doesn't make their statements any less credible to me.
|
|
|
Post by OldFred on Dec 10, 2009 22:54:33 GMT -5
John's political period was my least favorite of his career. 'Sometime In New York City' is recognized as his worst album and is the most terribly dated of the solo Beatles albums. There's no inspiration in it, just rhetoric. The only song from it I could bear listening to is 'New York City' because it's a great rocker if you ignore the lyrics. The 'John Lennon Live In New York City' album of the One To One concerts at Madison Square Garden would have been a great live album if he had dropped most of the songs from 'STINYC' from the set list. (And if he had gotten a better band than Elephant's Memory). I briefly lost interest in John until he started getting back to just music again with 'Mind Games' and 'Walls And Bridges', which is my favorite album of his. I liked 'Rock And Roll' and enjoyed John's songs off 'Double Fantasy' (and yes, some of Yoko's too).
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Dec 11, 2009 0:06:43 GMT -5
John still had great power and it was only that the Carter administration was in that THEY stopped bugging him in the house-husband years. Once the Reagan administration was back , it was the same people again. I hope Yoko speaks out about this at some point but I guess she's just protecting Sean now. But John was dead before the Reagan Administration took power. The Reagan Administration thus never bugged or harassed John Lennon. John Lennon was killed by a deranged fan. The enemy is in the mirror.
|
|
|
Post by ursamajor on Dec 11, 2009 0:59:54 GMT -5
John still had great power and it was only that the Carter administration was in that THEY stopped bugging him in the house-husband years. Once the Reagan administration was back , it was the same people again. I hope Yoko speaks out about this at some point but I guess she's just protecting Sean now. But John was dead before the Reagan Administration took power. The Reagan Administration thus never bugged or harassed John Lennon. John Lennon was killed by a deranged fan. The enemy is in the mirror. Reagan was elected one month before John was killed and true there is no direct evidence linking Reagan to John's death but these are the same people that John protested loudly against in the late 60s and early 70s and who were about to embark on more war missions in the middle east. Additionally, MDC changed his plea from not guilty to guilty at the last minute so the chance for the case to be heard was gone. The autopsy report with the description of the wounds and the exit points of the bullets contradicts the position that MDC was supposedly standing when he allegedly shot John. There is so much to this case which was never investigated when MDC changed his plea. Even the first cop on the scene did not think that MDC was the killer when he first saw him and the situation. This evidence is all out there.
|
|
wooltonian
Very Clean
"Football isn't a matter of life and death - it's much more important than that." Bill Shankly.
Posts: 796
|
Post by wooltonian on Dec 11, 2009 3:21:45 GMT -5
When Yoko says that ' They killed him' she might as well have been talking about the little green men from Mars as far as I'm concerned. Conspiracy piffle. Next subject please.
|
|
|
Post by OldFred on Dec 11, 2009 6:08:28 GMT -5
When Yoko says that ' They killed him' she might as well have been talking about the little green men from Mars as far as I'm concerned. Conspiracy piffle. Next subject please. I forget which track it is, but on 'Season Of Glass', the album Yoko recorded immediately after John's death, there's a song where Yoko screams at the listener blaming the fans for what happened. In part of her rant she screams "Hate us, Hate ME!". Because a 'fan' had killed John, in essence, I felt Yoko blamed all of us for what happened.
|
|
wooltonian
Very Clean
"Football isn't a matter of life and death - it's much more important than that." Bill Shankly.
Posts: 796
|
Post by wooltonian on Dec 11, 2009 6:58:33 GMT -5
When Yoko says that ' They killed him' she might as well have been talking about the little green men from Mars as far as I'm concerned. Conspiracy piffle. Next subject please. I forget which track it is, but on 'Season Of Glass', the album Yoko recorded immediately after John's death, there's a song where Yoko screams at the listener blaming the fans for what happened. In part of her rant she screams "Hate us, Hate ME!". Because a 'fan' had killed John, in essence, I felt Yoko blamed all of us for what happened. In a way, Fred, I understand that viewpoint a bit better. If she was saying that Lennon was killed because of his fame, then in a very general sense, we are all part of that fame -- and in the irrational rage that comes with grief and shock I can almost understand the tirade in 'season of glass' as you describe it. The CIA delusion is pure piffle, however.
|
|
|
Post by OldFred on Dec 11, 2009 7:49:15 GMT -5
I forget which track it is, but on 'Season Of Glass', the album Yoko recorded immediately after John's death, there's a song where Yoko screams at the listener blaming the fans for what happened. In part of her rant she screams "Hate us, Hate ME!". Because a 'fan' had killed John, in essence, I felt Yoko blamed all of us for what happened. In a way, Fred, I understand that viewpoint a bit better. If she was saying that Lennon was killed because of his fame, then in a very general sense, we are all part of that fame -- and in the irrational rage that comes with grief and shock I can almost understand the tirade in 'season of glass' as you describe it. The CIA delusion is pure piffle, however. I quite agree, Woolie. Please give our regards to the Missus and all the little Woolies.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Dec 11, 2009 10:58:45 GMT -5
If Chapman is the wrong man in Yoko and Sean's opinion, why does Yoko stongly champion against his early release from prison?
|
|
|
Post by OldFred on Dec 11, 2009 15:45:36 GMT -5
If Chapman is the wrong man in Yoko and Sean's opinion, why does Yoko stongly champion against his early release from prison? Excellent point, John. Have an M.B.E., Mate! ;D And I found the Yoko song from 'Season Of Glass' where Yoko rants against the fans (though I know it's really directed at the jerk of all jerks). It's called 'I Don't Know Why'. Here's the remixed version. Yoko's rant comes up around 4:15 into the song.
|
|
|
Post by ursamajor on Dec 11, 2009 16:56:48 GMT -5
If Chapman is the wrong man in Yoko and Sean's opinion, why does Yoko stongly champion against his early release from prison? Hold on you're a lawyer yet you are able to accept John's murder without : 1. a trial, testimony or witnesses 2. a police report of little value 3. an autopsy report suppressed from public view 4. MDC has never been declared insane by any government body - federal or local, so this "deranged fan MDC " that you always hear in reports is used to fuel public perception of MDC a a loony You should do some research and look at the events *immediately* following the shooting, who was interviewed and what they said. It's more than obvious that this was a setup. BUT I can see how it is difficult to criticise the official explanation of John's death as a universally accepted one doesn't exist due to there being no trial or witnesses to the shooting.
|
|
|
Post by ursamajor on Dec 11, 2009 17:02:52 GMT -5
If Chapman is the wrong man in Yoko and Sean's opinion, why does Yoko stongly champion against his early release from prison? Yoko was there, why has she never spoken out about the events ? What did she see ?
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Dec 11, 2009 17:09:38 GMT -5
If Chapman is the wrong man in Yoko and Sean's opinion, why does Yoko stongly champion against his early release from prison? Hold on you're a lawyer yet you are able to accept John's murder without : 1. a trial, testimony or witnesses 2. a police report of little value 3. an autopsy report suppressed from public view 4. MDC has never been declared insane by any government body - federal or local, so this "deranged fan MDC " that you always hear in reports is used to fuel public perception of MDC a a loony You should do some research and look at the events *immediately* following the shooting, who was interviewed and what they said. It's more than obvious that this was a setup. BUT I can see how it is difficult to criticise the official explanation of John's death as a universally accepted one doesn't exist due to there being no trial or witnesses to the shooting. There was a very long criminal trial for Amanda Knox in Italy yet that verdict is being widely condemned and many feel the truth there is no clearer than before the trial. Please give me your citations of authority so I can better understand your position. I have never, ever read that there is a controversy as to whether Chapman actually did the shooting. I have for years read that he was programmed to do the shooting by the CIA or hired by Yoko herself. You are the first person, ursa, that I have heard argue that Chapman wasn't even the shooter.
|
|
|
Post by joshferrell on Dec 11, 2009 17:54:21 GMT -5
Hold on you're a lawyer yet you are able to accept John's murder without : 1. a trial, testimony or witnesses 2. a police report of little value 3. an autopsy report suppressed from public view 4. MDC has never been declared insane by any government body - federal or local, so this "deranged fan MDC " that you always hear in reports is used to fuel public perception of MDC a a loony You should do some research and look at the events *immediately* following the shooting, who was interviewed and what they said. It's more than obvious that this was a setup. BUT I can see how it is difficult to criticise the official explanation of John's death as a universally accepted one doesn't exist due to there being no trial or witnesses to the shooting. There was a very long criminal trial for Amanda Knox in Italy yet that verdict is being widely condemned and many feel the truth there is no clearer than before the trial. Please give me your citations of authority so I can better understand your position. I have never, ever read that there is a controversy as to whether Chapman actually did the shooting. I have for years read that he was programmed to do the shooting by the CIA or hired by Yoko herself. You are the first person, ursa, that I have heard argue that Chapman wasn't even the shooter. here's a sight I foud that claims that his doorman worked for the CIA and that HE was the real shooter.. onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_300.shtml
|
|
|
Post by OldFred on Dec 11, 2009 18:24:15 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Dec 11, 2009 18:44:21 GMT -5
There was a very long criminal trial for Amanda Knox in Italy yet that verdict is being widely condemned and many feel the truth there is no clearer than before the trial. Please give me your citations of authority so I can better understand your position. I have never, ever read that there is a controversy as to whether Chapman actually did the shooting. I have for years read that he was programmed to do the shooting by the CIA or hired by Yoko herself. You are the first person, ursa, that I have heard argue that Chapman wasn't even the shooter. here's a sight I foud that claims that his doorman worked for the CIA and that HE was the real shooter.. onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_300.shtmlThat article gets more and more absurd as one reads on. There is a suggestion that EMI killed John and there are ridiculous claims about the American "Revolver" album. Even Fred Seaman is accused as a shooter. I think Yoko had John murdered and the proof is playing "Kiss Kiss Kiss" backwards as well as the extended single of "(Just Like) Starting Over." I have done it and there is a confession in Yoko's own voice. Courtney Love offed Kurt Cobain, that's a fact. I think Yoko got there first.
|
|
|
Post by OldFred on Dec 11, 2009 19:42:59 GMT -5
Lennon's murder unfortuantely was one of the first instances of dangerous celebrity stalkers that attacked Teresa Saldana, Rebecca Schaeffer and Selena, the former survived, the latter didn't. It's a sad fact that there are crazies in all areas of fandom. The movie 'King of Comedy' with Robert De Niro, Jerry Lewis and Sandra Bernhard delves into the insanity of some fans. I seriously doubt the lunatic who attacked George Harrison had a link with British Intelligence.
Sandra Bernhard's rant at the 4:48 point of this scene is very frightening.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Dec 13, 2009 1:15:37 GMT -5
Lennon's murder unfortuantely was one of the first instances of dangerous celebrity stalkers that attacked Teresa Saldana, Rebecca Schaeffer and Selena, the former survived, the latter didn't. It's a sad fact that there are crazies in all areas of fandom. The movie 'King of Comedy' with Robert De Niro, Jerry Lewis and Sandra Bernhard delves into the insanity of some fans. I seriously doubt the lunatic who attacked George Harrison had a link with British Intelligence. I agree. The unhealthy fascination and worship of celebrity started taking a wicked turn with John's murder. Even that man who attacked George: why wasn't he getting spooky, witchy signals from his average man neighbor next door? Why did the target of his insanity just happen to be ex-Beatle George Harrison, one of the most famous men in the Western World? Even the nuts want their own fame and fortune and will kill a celebrity for it.
|
|
|
Post by ursamajor on Dec 13, 2009 1:48:09 GMT -5
[quote author=jsd board=john thread=1484 post=15209 time=1260569378
You are the first person, ursa, that I have heard argue that Chapman wasn't even the shooter.
[/quote]
Ok Mr JSD.. now this is just me based on the people who have written books about the murder being a setup ..
I want the following questions answered ..
first where is the murder weapon ? what kind of gun was it ? were there prints on the gun ? were they MDC's ? where was John standing when he was shot ? where was MDC standing ? How is this proved ? based on the glass doors into the concierge desk having bullet holes in them does the above corroborate ? did someone actually see the shooting ? there were 3 other people, Yoko, the doorman at the entrance and the concierge clerk .. what did they see ? what did they hear ?
The above has never been answered .. also in carr and tyler's book along with most reports.. MDC called to John , John turned to face MDC and then that's when MDC started to fire .. where did anyone get the info that MDC called out to John ? MDC said he did not call John, he just heard voices in his head saying do it do it etc..
When John was pronounced dead outside the hospital .. a *witness" was interviewed on tv .. his name was Sean Strub.. this is a transcript of that interview...
STRUB: …I kind of waited for a minute and started to walk on; a police car drove by very fast. And so I followed it on down, I thought it was something in the park, but it was at the Dakota on Seventy-Second Street and Central Park West. As I got there, there were about a half-dozen people there, and very shortly there were that many squad cars.
JD: Did you see Mr. Lennon at that time?
STRUB: Yeah, they were just bringing Lennon out of the, sort of an entryway, the driveway between the sidewalk and the courtyard, and he was limp; there were about six officers carrying him. He had a little bit of blood coming out of his mouth.
JD: And Police tell us they do have a suspect. Did you see anyone?
STRUB: Yeah, they scuffled with a guy and arrested him; he was about thirty-five, he was white, brown hair.
JD: Was he alone?
STRUB: He was the only person I saw. Yoko was there.
JD: She was?
STRUB: And they put him in a squad car and took off.
JD: Was there any kind of an exchange, do you know, between Lennon and the suspect?
STRUB: That’s what the doorman [Jose Perdomo] said that there had been some sort of altercation or argument; I heard the cops say that Lennon was hit twice in the back. I heard someone else say that the guy had apparently been hanging around all evening, and another person said he’d been there all week, and he was just kind of like waiting for him.
JD: Thank-you very much, Sean, who is a witness who at least heard the shots surrounding the shooting and apparent death of John Lennon….
this guy's explanation was so thorough, so detailed, but virtually all of it was second-hand. In other words, whether it was intentional or accidental, he planted the seeds of what could be an official cover story (as opposed to the actual events) to the media just minutes after the crime had been committed, but with virtually no accountability, since he didn't see anything other than blood on Lennon's mouth.
too much inconsistency in this case.. we still do not know what really happenned .. unlike the George case where it was cut and dried.. Olivia smashed the guy with a lamp.. she was a real witness ..
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Dec 13, 2009 12:37:11 GMT -5
too much inconsistency in this case.. we still do not know what really happenned .. unlike the George case where it was cut and dried.. Olivia smashed the guy with a lamp.. she was a real witness .. Thank you for that information, ursa. I am still convinced that John was killed by a mentally disturbed (but not mentally insane for purposes of eluding culpability) fan based on what I have heard or read since December 8, 1980. I am fascinated by this topic and will read any academic source not associated with the internet fringe. My parents' and my first question on December 9, 1980 was how could MDC afford to make the repeated trips he did from Hawaii to NYC on the income of a sporadically employed security guard? It was reported early on that he was found with a lot of cash on him but I have not seen that confirmed in subsequent years. What was the MDC money trail? As to George's attack, how can you of all people, ursa, say that it was "cut and dried?" Sure, there is little doubt on the I.D. of the attacker but what motivated him? Witches? Really. How did this relatively unsophisticated, unemployed man break into the second most secured residence in the UK, second only to Buckingham Palace? No way does that happen by luck. In the least it was an inside job by a disgruntled employee but darker yet it could go to the highest realms within the Clinton/Blair governments who wanted to harm the next most subversive Beatle. George's attack injuries did not immediately kill him but they greatly weakened a man fighting cancer. John turned Western youth onto drugs and radical politics and George turned them onto exotic Eastern religion and philosophy. The good news is that Paul and Ringo are safe as milk as Ringo is, well just Ringo the luckiest man in history, and Paul, as the Prince of candy pop, has nothing to fear from the powers that be.
|
|
|
Post by ursamajor on Dec 13, 2009 15:48:46 GMT -5
too much inconsistency in this case.. we still do not know what really happenned .. unlike the George case where it was cut and dried.. Olivia smashed the guy with a lamp.. she was a real witness .. Thank you for that information, ursa. I am still convinced that John was killed by a mentally disturbed (but not mentally insane for purposes of eluding culpability) fan based on what I have heard or read since December 8, 1980. I am fascinated by this topic and will read any academic source not associated with the internet fringe. My parents' and my first question on December 9, 1980 was how could MDC afford to make the repeated trips he did from Hawaii to NYC on the income of a sporadically employed security guard? It was reported early on that he was found with a lot of cash on him but I have not seen that confirmed in subsequent years. What was the MDC money trail? As to George's attack, how can you of all people, ursa, say that it was "cut and dried?" Sure, there is little doubt on the I.D. of the attacker but what motivated him? Witches? Really. How did this relatively unsophisticated, unemployed man break into the second most secured residence in the UK, second only to Buckingham Palace? No way does that happen by luck. In the least it was an inside job by a disgruntled employee but darker yet it could go to the highest realms within the Clinton/Blair governments who wanted to harm the next most subversive Beatle. George's attack injuries did not immediately kill him but they greatly weakened a man fighting cancer. John turned Western youth onto drugs and radical politics and George turned them onto exotic Eastern religion and philosophy. The good news is that Paul and Ringo are safe as milk as Ringo is, well just Ringo the luckiest man in history, and Paul, as the Prince of candy pop, has nothing to fear from the powers that be. Also with MDC, didn't he buy a gun from Hawaii ? If he did how did he get it into the US ? Did he say to customs "that's not a gun in my pocket, I'm just hapy to see you" and they let him through ? With George what I mean by cut and dried is that the case was not a white wash like John's. What happenned can be proved because there were real witnesses to the stabbing ie George and Olivia. As for the attackers motivations ... a real nutjob.
|
|