"...but it should"

[gemjack]

�Of course Yoko's not to blame. Any fan who thought so was just
someone who couldn't accept, as John Lennon put it on his first solo
album, that the dream was over,� he explained. �The blame won't
disappear because of this � just like Paul being alive doesn't stop
high school kids from looking for �Paul is dead� clues � but it
should.�

Read more:
http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2013/05/17/paul-mccartney-yoko-ono-didnt-break-up-beatles/#ixzz2TZ84Zfv9
-gj

[thewalruswasdanny]

> “Of course Yoko's not to blame. Any fan who thought so was just

YO was the sole reason for the demise of the Fabs.

Let's list ten reasons:
1) Heroin...thanks to YO for introducing (and pushing JL into this drug)
2) Taking the "laugh" out of the groove and turning JL into politics (Hanratty was guilty btw...and is some time in NYC a great album??)
3) Just being there..bringing the bed into the studio..being in apple meetings etc etc
4) Sapping the funds with the production of diabolical double albums such as Fly and AIU
5) Introducing Allen Klein and being pro him (and thus manipulation again)
6) GH hated the woman (and who can blame him)
7) manipulation and through such taking JL away from his family and his mates (which started to be allieved when May stepped in)
8) Alienating the public
9) Not shutting the fuck up
10) More manipulation - we all know how partners can manipulate (if they are nasty enough)..the evidence of manipulation of JL is overwhelming....the smoking thing..the none talking thing (in 79)..the I'll talk to Cyn about Julian and JL will talk to Cox about Kyoko..

YO split up the fabs..sure they were getting older ..but if YO hadn't appeared we'd be enjoying 70's and probably 80's beatle albums..to this day...

I say what most people think.

Danny

[jtees4]

On Fri, 17 May 2013 19:08:19 -0700 (PDT), thewalruswasdanny
<thewalru...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>> �Of course Yoko's not to blame. Any fan who thought so was just

I pretty much agree with your list, but I blame John for allowing it.
He was a grown man, yes...with flaws...but everyone has flaws and that
doesn't mean it becomes someone elses fault.
*************
Some of my music:
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/default.cfm?bandID=789610

[RichL]

"thewalruswasdanny" <thewalru...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:343b0e2f-3753-48d2...@googlegroups.com...

>
>> "Of course Yoko's not to blame. Any fan who thought so was just
>
> YO was the sole reason for the demise of the Fabs.
>
> Let's list ten reasons:
> 1) Heroin...thanks to YO for introducing (and pushing JL into this drug)

They had been into all sorts of drugs well before Yoko came along.

http://www.beatlesbible.com/features/drugs/

> 2) Taking the "laugh" out of the groove and turning JL into politics
> (Hanratty was guilty btw...and is some time in NYC a great album??)

John was increasingly unhappy with the group and his role in it before Yoko.
I think his not wanting to tour was a manifestation of this.

> 3) Just being there..bringing the bed into the studio..being in apple
> meetings etc etc

Why would this break up the Beatles? The other three tolerated it. Had
they hated it so much, they wouldn't have permitted it.

> 4) Sapping the funds with the production of diabolical double albums such
> as Fly and AIU

Those albums were after the Fabs broke up. C'mon, now!

> 5) Introducing Allen Klein and being pro him (and thus manipulation again)

So were George and Ringo. None of them liked Paul bringing in the Eastmans
(legitimately so; "nepotism").

> 6) GH hated the woman (and who can blame him)

So what? You think band members should have veto power on their bandmates'
choices of girlfriends?

> 7) manipulation and through such taking JL away from his family and his
> mates (which started to be allieved when May stepped in)

Ah, so it's OK if May takes John away from his family? Can you say "double
standard"? The truth is, John made the choices in both cases.

> 8) Alienating the public

WTF? He may have alienated some of the public but inspired another part of
the public. Overall, a good thing. You were just a wee lad running outside
in your knickers, you wouldn't understand.

> 9) Not shutting the fuck up

John didn't want her to shut up. Why should be simply because some
over-wrought fans thought she should?

> 10) More manipulation - we all know how partners can manipulate (if they
> are nasty enough)..the evidence of manipulation of JL is
> overwhelming....the smoking thing..the none talking thing (in 79)..the
> I'll talk to Cyn about Julian and JL will talk to Cox about Kyoko..

Ah, back to the evil witch "manipulating" the man-child Lennon. Somehow
that man-child managed to lead the greatest pop/rock group in history. Does
not compute.

> YO split up the fabs..sure they were getting older ..but if YO hadn't
> appeared we'd be enjoying 70's and probably 80's beatle albums..to this
> day...
>
> I say what most people think.

Utter nonsense. Paul and John had this rivalry/competitiveness thing going
well before Yoko, and it got out of hand, especially after Brian Epstein
died. Yoko was just more fuel for an existing fire. John was clearly
unhappy.

[Marcus]

On May 17, 10:08 pm, thewalruswasdanny <thewalruswasda...@gmail.com>
wrote:
)
> 2) Taking the "laugh" out of the groove and turning JL into politics.

Are you trying to say that John Lennon never said or did anything
controversial or political until he met Yoko?

Well, he did, such as:

1: Spoke against Vietnam War during 1966 American tour
2: Declared that Beatles would never play in South Africa because of
apartheid in 1966.
3: And, oh yeah, made a statement about The Beatles being more
popular than Jesus in 1966. As I recall many fundamentalist ultra-
right wing people in America reacted very badly to that.

All of the above, especially #3 almost caused the cancellation of
their 1966 American tour which would have really pissed me off since I
had tickets.

http://marccatone.webs.com/apps/photos/photo?photoid=106316011

And if that had happened I wouldn't have been able to take this really
crappy photo:

http://marccatone.webs.com/apps/photos/photo?photoid=106316012

Marc

*****************************************************

http://marccatone.webs.com

[Fattuchus]

On May 17, 11:50 am, gemjack <geminijackso...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> “Of course Yoko's not to blame. Any fan who thought so was just

> Read more:http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2013/05/17/paul-mccartney-yoko-o...
> -gj

It seems so strange that it took Paul so many years to say this. Me
thinks he is trying too hard.

[Fattuchus]

On May 17, 10:08 pm, thewalruswasdanny <thewalruswasda...@gmail.com>
wrote:

Yoko was not the sole reason, but she was a very big reason.

If you read the Philip Norman bio, John wanted to marry her, but she
hesitated. The thing that "sealed the deal" was when John told Yoko
that
it would work out great for her career: after all, she was a talented
artist and he was rich. So right from the start, the "deal" J & Y
struck was that she would marry him on the condition that he used his
wealth and fame to promote her and make her famous in her own right.

According to that same book, John tried to make Yoko the 5th Beatle.
He forced her on his band mates, and understandably, they did not like
it.

[Fattuchus]

True, but Yoko participated, right? If John said to Yoko," come to
the recording studio and sit in," she could have said, "No."

[dan...@realtime.net]

If Brian Jones couldn't split up the Stones by DYING, then Yoko couldn't possibly have broken up the Beatles by simply LIVING.

Anyhow, who gives a good gosh golly goddam about the Beatles breaking up? Lots of bands break up and get back together all the time ("We're like an amoeba." -- Derek Smalls, Spinal Tap). It's who or what prevented them from ever REUNITING (prior to 1980/MDC) that should be subject to all this angst 'n' anger.

And yes, I might even agree with those of you who are gonna say that Yoko was MORE active in keeping them apart. (Although FWIW, there are songs on AIU that I like better than half the stuff on that other bloated 2-LP set known as "The White Album".)

- dr s

[abe slaney]

Paul *didn't* say that.

[Mack A. Damia]

On Sun, 19 May 2013 11:43:06 -0700 (PDT), "who?"
<yourimag...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>6. Alienating the public so much that people start
>threads about her in newsgroups, though they
>claim they wish she would shut up.

Same could be said of you.

--

[yourimag...@gmail.com]

I don't recall any problems with you.

Jeff

[gemjack]

On Fri, 17 May 2013 19:08:19 -0700 (PDT), thewalruswasdanny

<thewalru...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>> �Of course Yoko's not to blame. Any fan who thought so was just

>
>YO was the sole reason for the demise of the Fabs.

..according to the 'fans', not the band members themselves. *Sole*
reason? Please.

>YO split up the fabs..sure they were getting older ..but if YO hadn't appeared we'd be enjoying 70's and probably 80's beatle albums..to this day...

Quantity is not quality.

>I say what most people think.

Actually, most people don't care at all.
-gj

[jtees4]

Yoko could have said no, sure. But she's not in the band, and the band
did have a no girlfriend policy between them, maybe unwritten. My
blaming John in no way means I am making excuses for Yoko. Didn't like
her, still don't like her. But she didn't break up The Beatles, and
even if that were her intention....John let it happen. I have to say
though...regardless of who's idea it was...bringing the bed into the
studio has to be up there as one of the most "in your face" moves
ever. And I can't believe the other Beatles allowed it.

[Fattuchus]

Not only did they tolerate Yoko lying in bed in the studio, John had a
microphone suspended over her so she could give the Beatles orders and
opinions, whether they wanted it or not.
Talk about gall . . . . . Yoko told Phillip Norman that John wanted
her to be the 5th Beatle.

[gemjack]

On Mon, 20 May 2013 08:45:54 -0700 (PDT), Fattuchus
<fatt...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>John had a
>microphone suspended over her so she could give the Beatles orders

lol. well, that's a first.
-gj

[Fattuchus]

On May 20, 12:43 pm, gemjack <geminijackso...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 20 May 2013 08:45:54 -0700 (PDT), Fattuchus
>

> <fattuc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >John had a
> >microphone suspended over her so she could give the Beatles orders
>
> lol.  well, that's a first.
> -gj

Can you imagine!! IMO, the fact that the other peoples tolerated this
crap is amazing. I think it shows that 1. they loved John like a
brother and 2. they were really concerned about pissing him off.

I recall one McCartney interview where Paul mentioned that at times
Yoko would say, "Beatle this and Beatle that" or "Beatle do this and
Beatle do that." Paul told her, "It's The Beatles, luv."

[RichL]

"Fattuchus" <fatt...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:351d79c5-90e6-4996...@y5g2000yqy.googlegroups.com...

Do you really think the microphone would have been there if John didn't want
it?

The bed was there because Yoko was sick, no?

None of these things would have happened without John's approval. Period.

[Fattuchus]

On May 20, 2:02 pm, "RichL" <rpleav...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> "Fattuchus" <fattuc...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

Back problems. She could have stayed home. And she was dressed in a
nightie, and she invited her friends/acquaintances to come in and
visit with her in the studio as if it were her home.
I mean . . . . c'mon.

>
> None of these things would have happened without John's approval.  Period.

Sure, John wanted Yoko there, in bed, but the others didn't. His
behavior, and Yoko's, was just plain rude, IMO. I think he was trying
to make Yoko the 5th Beatle. He was so smitten, so in love,
and he liked her so called art and music, he was forcing her on the
other Beatles.

[jtees4]

This one I agree with. I just don't think Yoko can be
blamed.....everything you said about her is true....only none of it
could happen without John's approval or even his insistence. And
George Martin was already the 5th Beatle in my book ;-)

[who?]

On Monday, May 20, 2013 6:49:39 AM UTC-5, gemjack wrote:
> On Fri, 17 May 2013 19:08:19 -0700 (PDT), thewalruswasdanny
>
> <thewalru...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> >
>

> >> �Of course Yoko's not to blame. Any fan who thought so was just

>
> >
>
> >YO was the sole reason for the demise of the Fabs.
>
>
>
> ..according to the 'fans', not the band members themselves. *Sole*
>
> reason? Please.
>
>
>
>
>
> >YO split up the fabs..sure they were getting older ..but if YO hadn't appeared we'd be enjoying 70's and probably 80's beatle albums..to this day...
>
>
>
> Quantity is not quality.
>
>
>
>
>
> >I say what most people think.
>
>
>
> Actually, most people don't care at all.
>
> -gj

No, and most of us realize it's a little late to care
about getting the Beatles back together in 2013,
unless they think of a reunion of Paul and Ringo
getting together as the Tootles?

Jeff

[topazgalaxy]

On May 20, 2:02 pm, "RichL" <rpleav...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> "Fattuchus" <fattuc...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

Perhaps none of these things would have happened without John's
dependency on Yoko, combined with her narcissism

[Stephen X. Carter]

On Fri, 17 May 2013 19:08:19 -0700 (PDT), thewalruswasdanny

<thewalru...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>> �Of course Yoko's not to blame. Any fan who thought so was just

>
>YO was the sole reason for the demise of the Fabs.
>
>Let's list ten reasons:
>1) Heroin...thanks to YO for introducing (and pushing JL into this drug)
>2) Taking the "laugh" out of the groove and turning JL into politics (Hanratty was guilty btw...and is some time in NYC a great album??)
>3) Just being there..bringing the bed into the studio..being in apple meetings etc etc
>4) Sapping the funds with the production of diabolical double albums such as Fly and AIU
>5) Introducing Allen Klein and being pro him (and thus manipulation again)

What's the source for your claim that YO introduced Klein?

All versions I've heard had Mick Jagger originally recommend him to John
(and then, when he - Jagger - realised that it was bad news, Jagger
tried to tell John about the change, but John would not listen.)

--
steve.hat.stephencarter.not.com.but.net
Nothing is Beatle Proof!!
Mr Kite posters and more at http://www.zazzle.com/mr_kite*
Mr Kite posters and more at http://www.zazzle.co.uk/mr_kite*