How Yoko Got John Back From May Pang
White Shadow
because she details exactly how Yoko got John back from May Pang in
late January 1975:
By that time, Yoko had already had a failed solo tour of Japan with
her screeching antics, and knew that she would never have a successful
recording/performing career on her own. She knew that her future lay
with John's millions, and that if she hoped to go on living the easy
life, she had better get him away from May.
So she basically kidnapped John and subjected him to mind
control/hypnosis/drug therapy during a weekend-long marathon session
that originally started out as just a one hour "stop smoking hypnosis"
session that Yoko had promised John would break him of his smoking
habit (she lied, of course, and said it had worked for her).
Anyway, May's book provides some really interesting background
information about this sorry episode. Yoko then got pregnant that
weekend or during that week. I have no evidence to back this up, but
my guess is that she had been going to a fertility clinic to boost her
fertility so she could get pregnant and then finally and forever suck
John back to her permanently.
John had become quite bored with Yoko and had stopped taking calls
from her in December 1974/January 1975, and was looking at houses to
buy for him and May Pang to live in, so he was very serious about May
after having lived with her for 18 months at Yoko's insistence.
Yoko resorted to some really ugly stuff to get John back. He was,
after all, her meal ticket.
More about that in a future post.
Frank from Deeetroit
"White Shadow" <wam...@maximus.com> wrote in message
news:2aq8o2paaj49dha32...@4ax.com...
Sounds like a reasonable scenario.
BlackMonk
> control/hypnosis/drug therapy during a weekend-long marathon session
> that originally started out as just a one hour "stop smoking hypnosis"
> session that Yoko had promised John would break him of his smoking
> habit (she lied, of course, and said it had worked for her).
>
A person would have to either be a lunatic or know absolutely nothing about
mind control/hypnosis/ drug therapy to believe this was possible.
Which are you?
Frank from Deeetroit
"BlackMonk" <Blac...@email.msn.com> wrote in message
news:em1uv7$6gd$1...@aioe.org...
I know several people who sucessfully used hypnosis to stop smoking.
As easily John seemed to be led around by Yoko, the scenario seems possible.
BlackMonk
"Frank from Deeetroit" <dadur...@voyager.net> wrote in message
news:KpOdnTQ0ao8uHhnY...@comcast.com...
And from that you conclude that it would be possible to make John go back to
Yoko even though he really wanted to stay with May Pang?
First of all, hypnosis is far from 100% effective. Look at how many people
try to use it to stop smoking and fail.
Second, those people who successfully used it WANTED to stop smoking and
were willingly hypotized.
> As easily John seemed to be led around by Yoko, the scenario seems
> possible.
To someone who knows nothing about hypnosis and wants to believe the worst
about Yoko (as evidenced by your use of "led around by Yoko"), perhaps.
Frank from Deeetroit
>
> "Frank from Deeetroit" <dadur...@voyager.net> wrote in message
> news:KpOdnTQ0ao8uHhnY...@comcast.com...
>>
>> "BlackMonk" <Blac...@email.msn.com> wrote in message
>> news:em1uv7$6gd$1...@aioe.org...
>>>
>>> "White Shadow" <wam...@maximus.com> wrote in message
>>> news:2aq8o2paaj49dha32...@4ax.com...
>>>> So she basically kidnapped John and subjected him to mind
>>>> control/hypnosis/drug therapy during a weekend-long marathon session
>>>> that originally started out as just a one hour "stop smoking hypnosis"
>>>> session that Yoko had promised John would break him of his smoking
>>>> habit (she lied, of course, and said it had worked for her).
>>>>
>>>
>>> A person would have to either be a lunatic or know absolutely nothing
>>> about mind control/hypnosis/ drug therapy to believe this was possible.
>>>
>>> Which are you?
>>>
>>
>> I know several people who sucessfully used hypnosis to stop smoking.
>>
>
> And from that you conclude that it would be possible to make John go back
> to Yoko even though he really wanted to stay with May Pang?
Well, it seems obvious that Yoko tickled John in the wright places and she
is a control freak. Once she reeled John in, they remained together until
he passed. Not the first time in history that a women used her power to
reel a guy in.
>
> First of all, hypnosis is far from 100% effective. Look at how many people
> try to use it to stop smoking and fail.
I agree with you 100% on the effectiveness of hypnosis, however, I used
hypnosis to quit smoking in 1981 as well as about five other friends of mine
and it worked for us. Far from a control group to study.
>
> Second, those people who successfully used it WANTED to stop smoking and
> were willingly hypotized.
100% fact for sure.
>
>
>> As easily John seemed to be led around by Yoko, the scenario seems
>> possible.
>
> To someone who knows nothing about hypnosis and wants to believe the worst
> about Yoko (as evidenced by your use of "led around by Yoko"), perhaps.
Well, from personal experience, I know a little about hypnosis. I had a
late aquantance who had a hypnosis practice (she is dead, so I do not know
what college degree she possessed in hypnosis, buy she did have a degree in
hypnosis) for law enforcement. We used her sucessfully for recruits to
focus on their ability to improve on their marksmanship skills and to
concentrate on their studies for promotional exam testing. All persons
chose to use hypnosis as a tool to acheive a goal. Hypnosis is not as
commonly depicted on tv or in the movies. No one can swing a pocketwatch in
front of a person and make the person quack like a duck.
Yoko pussywhipped John, his choice. Not a negative comment towards Yoko, a
lot of us guys get 'whipped over a women, no big deal.
BlackMonk
>>>>> A person would have to either be a lunatic or know absolutely nothing
>>>> about mind control/hypnosis/ drug therapy to believe this was possible.
>>>>
>>>> Which are you?
>>>>
>>>
>>> I know several people who sucessfully used hypnosis to stop smoking.
>>>
>>
>> And from that you conclude that it would be possible to make John go back
>> to Yoko even though he really wanted to stay with May Pang?
>
> Well, it seems obvious that Yoko tickled John in the wright places and she
> is a control freak. Once she reeled John in, they remained together until
> he passed. Not the first time in history that a women used her power to
> reel a guy in.
>
Not the first time in history a man stayed with a woman because he wanted
to.
> Well, from personal experience, I know a little about hypnosis. I had a
> late aquantance who had a hypnosis practice (she is dead, so I do not know
> what college degree she possessed in hypnosis, buy she did have a degree
> in hypnosis) for law enforcement. We used her sucessfully for recruits to
> focus on their ability to improve on their marksmanship skills and to
> concentrate on their studies for promotional exam testing. All persons
> chose to use hypnosis as a tool to acheive a goal. Hypnosis is not as
> commonly depicted on tv or in the movies. No one can swing a pocketwatch
> in front of a person and make the person quack like a duck.
>
Exactly, which is why I find the suggestion that John walked into a hypnosis
session in order to stop smoking, then walked out with his feelings for Yoko
and May reversed, absurd. Especially since it was supposed to happen over a
weekend. I'm guessing that your experience with using hypnosis to stop
smoking, where you were a willing subject and the goal was arguably simpler,
took longer than that.
I can understand May Pang believing it. People convince themselves of lots
of things in order to make the reality of a lover leaving them for someone
else more palatable. That doesn't make those things any more realistic,
though.
> Yoko pussywhipped John, his choice. Not a negative comment towards Yoko,
> a lot of us guys get 'whipped over a women, no big deal.
Do you consider a wife who does what her husband wants to be cockwhipped?
What's the alternative? That spouses oppose each other at all times? That
doesn't sound like a recipe for a successful marriage.
Frank from Deeetroit
My guess, is if Yoko suggested to John to go and have his long weekend, and
he left, he may have wanted to be with her all along. My guess only.
>
> I can understand May Pang believing it. People convince themselves of lots
> of things in order to make the reality of a lover leaving them for someone
> else more palatable. That doesn't make those things any more realistic,
> though.
True, but we have all witnessed John and Yoko's relationship through the
good and rocky times. Seems plausible that she looked at John as a cash cow.
they sure liked the sucurity of each other.
>
>> Yoko pussywhipped John, his choice. Not a negative comment towards Yoko,
>> a lot of us guys get 'whipped over a women, no big deal.
>
> Do you consider a wife who does what her husband wants to be cockwhipped?
By definition, yes.
> What's the alternative? That spouses oppose each other at all times? That
> doesn't sound like a recipe for a successful marriage.
How far off do you want to go with this?
BlackMonk
>
>>>
>> Exactly, which is why I find the suggestion that John walked into a
>> hypnosis session in order to stop smoking, then walked out with his
>> feelings for Yoko and May reversed, absurd. Especially since it was
>> supposed to happen over a weekend. I'm guessing that your experience
>> with using hypnosis to stop smoking, where you were a willing subject and
>> the goal was arguably simpler, took longer than that.
>
> My guess, is if Yoko suggested to John to go and have his long weekend,
> and he left, he may have wanted to be with her all along. My guess only.
>
So why would hypnosis and mind control be required to get him to choose her
over May?
Goldman's book uses as evidence a description of John being out of it after
that weekend. Isn't it reasonable to assume that John didn't get much sleep
because of more mundane reasons, that because he and Yoko were reconciling,
they stayed up either talking things out or "celebrating" their
reconciliation?
>>
>> I can understand May Pang believing it. People convince themselves of
>> lots of things in order to make the reality of a lover leaving them for
>> someone else more palatable. That doesn't make those things any more
>> realistic, though.
>
> True, but we have all witnessed John and Yoko's relationship through the
> good and rocky times. Seems plausible that she looked at John as a cash
> cow. they sure liked the sucurity of each other.
>
We haven't really witnessed their relationship through all those times.
We've had occasional glimpses both from them and from third parties, all of
which was distorted by whoever was providing those glimpses.
>>
>>> Yoko pussywhipped John, his choice. Not a negative comment towards
>>> Yoko, a lot of us guys get 'whipped over a women, no big deal.
>>
>> Do you consider a wife who does what her husband wants to be cockwhipped?
>
> By definition, yes.
>
>> What's the alternative? That spouses oppose each other at all times? That
>> doesn't sound like a recipe for a successful marriage.
>
> How far off do you want to go with this?
>
If agreeing with one's spouse makes that person pussy/cockwhipped, then
that's the only alternative. But why can't someone just think the other
person is right?
fatt...@yahoo.com
Good post.
I always found it interesting that JohnandYoko spread the PR that Yoko
decided "to take John back" when she saw him perform at the Elton John
concert and he looked so "lonely" and "lost" without HER. But the fans
didn't think so. They LOVED John, and they LOVED him more when he
finally threw off The Yoke. He was finally having success in his
career, doing well with Walls and Bridges and having two hit singles
off that album. And he was socializing again.
The fact is, IMHO, Yoko heard the thunderous applause at the Garden,
thought about her own failed career and said to herself, "Shit, this
guy can get on stage, sing while stoned, look lonely and miserable and
bring 25,000 screaming fans to their feet. I go on a tour of Japan and
flop like lead balloon. I better sink my talons into him before he
wakes up and gets away."
Then she made sure that JohnandYoko told the whole world what a
terrible failure John was without his Yoke. And how John said "I hope
I die before Yoko because I can't live without her." And she's been
telling that same bullshit story over and over and over.
Well, at least she got her wish. (sarcasm)
fatt...@yahoo.com
There are many possible reasons why John would return to The Yoke. That
doesn't mean he really loved her or that she loved him. Perhaps John
realized he had a serious drug or alcohol problem and needed to be with
a strong, domineering person. Perhaps he was very insecure and
paranoid, and Yoko convinced him that he NEEDED her to run his
business, to protect him, etc. and that May was not so experienced in
the world. Perhaps John realized if they divorced, it would be an ugly
and very expensive public fight (look at the hell Paul and Heather are
going through. There is some press that poor Paul has been physically
SICK) John may have thought to himself "I could not survive that."
As I said, there are many reasons why people stay married besides love.
Of course, with Yoko getting pregnant, that would be another reason
John would be pulled into her orbit. Plus Yoko went on record as saying
she wanted an abortion; she has said she told John point blank she
wanted an abortion unless he promised to raise the baby. John probably
was thrilled at the thought of being a father again, and decided to
tough it out for the sake of the baby.
fatt...@yahoo.com
Frank from Deeetroit wrote:
> "BlackMonk" <Blac...@email.msn.com> wrote in message
> news:em244a$h54$1...@aioe.org...
> >
> > "Frank from Deeetroit" <dadur...@voyager.net> wrote in message
> > news:KpOdnTQ0ao8uHhnY...@comcast.com...
> >>
> >> "BlackMonk" <Blac...@email.msn.com> wrote in message
> >> news:em1uv7$6gd$1...@aioe.org...
> >>>
> >>> "White Shadow" <wam...@maximus.com> wrote in message
> >>> news:2aq8o2paaj49dha32...@4ax.com...
> >>>> So she basically kidnapped John and subjected him to mind
> >>>> control/hypnosis/drug therapy during a weekend-long marathon session
> >>>> that originally started out as just a one hour "stop smoking hypnosis"
> >>>> session that Yoko had promised John would break him of his smoking
> >>>> habit (she lied, of course, and said it had worked for her).
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> A person would have to either be a lunatic or know absolutely nothing
> >>> about mind control/hypnosis/ drug therapy to believe this was possible.
> >>>
> >>> Which are you?
> >>>
> >>
> >> I know several people who sucessfully used hypnosis to stop smoking.
> >>
> >
> > And from that you conclude that it would be possible to make John go back
> > to Yoko even though he really wanted to stay with May Pang?
>
> Well, it seems obvious that Yoko tickled John in the wright places and she
> is a control freak. Once she reeled John in, they remained together until
> he passed. Not the first time in history that a women used her power to
> reel a guy in.
True.
>
> >
> > First of all, hypnosis is far from 100% effective. Look at how many people
> > try to use it to stop smoking and fail.
>
> I agree with you 100% on the effectiveness of hypnosis, however, I used
> hypnosis to quit smoking in 1981 as well as about five other friends of mine
> and it worked for us. Far from a control group to study.
>
> >
> > Second, those people who successfully used it WANTED to stop smoking and
> > were willingly hypotized.
>
> 100% fact for sure.
>
>
> >
> >
> >> As easily John seemed to be led around by Yoko, the scenario seems
> >> possible.
> >
> > To someone who knows nothing about hypnosis and wants to believe the worst
> > about Yoko (as evidenced by your use of "led around by Yoko"), perhaps.
>
> Well, from personal experience, I know a little about hypnosis. I had a
> late aquantance who had a hypnosis practice (she is dead, so I do not know
> what college degree she possessed in hypnosis, buy she did have a degree in
> hypnosis) for law enforcement. We used her sucessfully for recruits to
> focus on their ability to improve on their marksmanship skills and to
> concentrate on their studies for promotional exam testing. All persons
> chose to use hypnosis as a tool to acheive a goal. Hypnosis is not as
> commonly depicted on tv or in the movies. No one can swing a pocketwatch in
> front of a person and make the person quack like a duck.
>
> Yoko pussywhipped John, his choice. Not a negative comment towards Yoko, a
> lot of us guys get 'whipped over a women, no big deal.
While there are men out there who get whipped over a woman, I guess it
is a matter of degree. I believe that sometimes when someone submerges
themselves too much, it suggests a sick relationship. A number of
insiders have suggested that John lost himself when he was with Yoko.
(read Paul and Linda's Playboy interview; read Julian's comments that
when Dad was with Yoko he was a "manipulated lost soul"; read Pete
Shotton's comments that John wanted to be dominated.)
I think the whole thing is sad. Sometimes there is a fine line between
being "whipped" and overly dependent or even mentally ill.
fatt...@yahoo.com
BlackMonk wrote:
> >
>
> Exactly, which is why I find the suggestion that John walked into a hypnosis
> session in order to stop smoking, then walked out with his feelings for Yoko
> and May reversed, absurd. Especially since it was supposed to happen over a
> weekend. I'm guessing that your experience with using hypnosis to stop
> smoking, where you were a willing subject and the goal was arguably simpler,
> took longer than that.
SNIP
I don't think we must necessarily conclude that John's feeling were
"reversed." He may have had feeling for both women at the same time.
While in Western culture we are taught over and over that true love
means a one on one relationship, I believe it doesn't always work like
that.
You may wish to read Larry Kane's wonderful book Lennon Revealed . . .
toward the end of the book, Larry writes about the time John traveled
by himself to Philadelphia in about 1975
to help with a local charity fundraiser. Larry met John at the train.
John told Larry that he had returned home (to Yoko) for a few months
and it was time for him to get out again. John commented that he loved
May. Larry asked him why did he return to Yoko then, and John said
something to the effect of I love her too; sometimes you have to make a
decision of where you belong.
BTW, in that chapter Larry also comments that John did not look well.
(others such as May have commented that after John returned to Yoko,
when they would meet him he appeared thin, gaunt and physically sick)
Larry also comments in that chapter that while John was in Philadelphia
and staying at a hotel, it appeared that someone had made arrangements
for John to be "visited" by a woman. (the implication is that John was
on the prowl, even after he returned to his so called beloved Yoko)
As I said, people get married and stay married for many different
reasons besides love.
John may have realized that he had a personality disorder or some other
emotional problem where if he was with a sweet, gentle woman, he would
sometimes get drunk and beat the crap out of her. He did that to May
several times, and was very remorseful. John may have cared very
deeply for May and realized that without a strong woman dominating him,
he might hurt his woman.
John seemed say in his Playboy interview that he was still very much
into his peace and love schtick; IMHO he kept pushing peace and love,
not only as a message to the world, but as a message to himself. I
believe he lacked confidence in himself, was driven by guilt and
insecurities, and retreated to The Yoke because on some level he
thought she could take care of things. In some ways, John was a very
weak man dominated, controlled and taken advantage of by a strong,
conniving, selfish woman.
fatt...@yahoo.com
BlackMonk wrote:
>
> Do you consider a wife who does what her husband wants to be cockwhipped?
> What's the alternative? That spouses oppose each other at all times? That
> doesn't sound like a recipe for a successful marriage.
I agree with you there. However, as I said before, it is a matter of
degree. All things in moderation.
Joel Steinberg and Hedda Nussbaum are a prime example. Sometimes one
spouse or the other is very weak due to drugs, a damaging childhood,
etc. and the other overly dominates them.
If one overly dominates the other, IMHO it is not a healthy or
desirable relationship. And it is not always physically apparent.
Frank from Deeetroit
You seem to have all the answers, what is your take on the John/Yoko/May
thing?
terra
16g2000cwy.googlegroups.com:
And at least your unbridled imagination and the need to slag off Yoko
remains undimished. (no sarcasm)
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
BlackMonk
<fatt...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1166353761.4...@16g2000cwy.googlegroups.com...
>
> > As I said, people get married and stay married for many different
> reasons besides love.
> John may have realized that he had a personality disorder or some other
> emotional problem where if he was with a sweet, gentle woman, he would
> sometimes get drunk and beat the crap out of her. He did that to May
> several times, and was very remorseful. John may have cared very
> deeply for May and realized that without a strong woman dominating him,
> he might hurt his woman.
>
That's armchair psychology from someone not qualified to pracitice
psychology. You even quote John as saying he loved Yoko. Why do you have a
need to believe that he really didn't?
BlackMonk
>
> You seem to have all the answers, what is your take on the John/Yoko/May
> thing?
John left Yoko becaue he wanted to. He spent time with May because he wanted
to. He went back to Yoko because he wanted to. He stayed with Yoko because
he wanted to.
BlackMonk
<fatt...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1166352173....@16g2000cwy.googlegroups.com...
>>
> I always found it interesting that JohnandYoko spread the PR that Yoko
> decided "to take John back" when she saw him perform at the Elton John
> concert and he looked so "lonely" and "lost" without HER. But the fans
> didn't think so. They LOVED John, and they LOVED him more when he
> finally threw off The Yoke. He was finally having success in his
> career, doing well with Walls and Bridges and having two hit singles
> off that album. And he was socializing again.
>
The "fans" didn't love John. John was a complete stranger to them. If
anything, they loved the imaginary John in their heads. They wanted John to
be that imaginary John for them. Can you guess how little that would have
meant to the real John?
> The fact is, IMHO, Yoko heard the thunderous applause at the Garden,
> thought about her own failed career and said to herself, "Shit, this
> guy can get on stage, sing while stoned, look lonely and miserable and
> bring 25,000 screaming fans to their feet. I go on a tour of Japan and
> flop like lead balloon. I better sink my talons into him before he
> wakes up and gets away."
>
That's not a "fact." That's another imaginary person in your head.
terra
news:em3v9u$9nm$1...@aioe.org:
All the "perhaps" and "maybes" and fevered imaginings from fatt's
constant barrage of fiction is depressing. She squawks because others
criticize her daily litany of imagined complaints yet she simply will not
(or cannot) stop herself from constantly posting nothing but false
accusations against Yoko.
I suppose all that's left is to killfile her because she offers nothing
anymore but frustration. Of all the people (and there have been MANY)
who have commented on her bizarre and unhealthy obsession those of us who
continue to criticize her are simply tilting at windmills. She ignores
(like most people who's minds are made up, regardless of how they may
prefer to present themselves as 'fair-minded')every and any suggestion
that she has a problem or at the very least is simply winding everyone
up. She holds herself to a standard no one else (especially YO!) is
entitled to, because, well, FATT has rights.
I could continue to follow her around and point out the inconsistencies,
the bald lies and dubious sources she attempts to paint Yokes with but
it's just wanking, and annoying to the rest of the group. I would far
prefer to engage her in actual discussions about anything else and have
in the past. But she returns, again and again (like the biblical dog to
its vomit) to her one-note pretend symphony. So wtf...
Of course Yoko is disliked by many, many people, especially Beatle fans,
and there are compelling reasons for some of the complaints, but when one
takes it so far beyond reality into a Twilight Zone of hatred it just
becomes an exercise in trolling, whether it's meant to be or not (and
since -many- others have told her they see her behaviour this way and she
stonewalls and ignores them all I guess it's not benign at all, she can't
be unaware of how she is perceived).
I would guess she has some severe personal problems of her own, but then
I would be doing what she does, speculating, and so there's no real use
in it. It's just too bad that someone who presumably could add something
to this place beyond the usual uninformed hate-filled trolls and flames
(with what looks like false 'manners')is so single-minded and stubborn as
to spend her whole day doing nothing more than trashing someone she's
never met, doesn't know, and holds some deeply held grudge against.
I can understand the usual 'fuck Yoko' sentiment from the mental midgets
who populate places such as these, but she doesn't seem to have any real
excuse. Just a singular and bizarre mission.
I know you are much more aware of Yoko's work and are much more of a fan
than I, and it it refreshing that someone still takes the time to display
the other side of her one way mumblings. I can't argue her work or art,
I have little use personally for most of it. I just find fatt's
desperate need to put her down so annoying after, what, 2 years now? that
I can't NOT respond to her yet doing so doesn't do any good. So why
bother anymore?
Anywho, keep up the good fight if you must, someone should present
reality and the other side of the allegations and slurs, not that it will
matter much.
fishandchips
My lips are sealed.................:-)
BlackMonk
"fishandchips" <Chippa...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1166384755.2...@73g2000cwn.googlegroups.com...
>
> BlackMonk wrote:
>> "Frank from Deeetroit" <dadur...@voyager.net> wrote in message
>> news:_audnYZJw5EnyxjY...@comcast.com...
>> >
>> > You seem to have all the answers, what is your take on the
>> > John/Yoko/May
>> > thing?
>>
>> to. He went back to Yoko because he wanted to. He stayed with Yoko
>> because
>> he wanted to.
>
> My lips are sealed.................:-)
Considering where you get your information from, they should be.
White Shadow
I thought her original analysis above was right-on. Sorry you don't
see it that way.
fishandchips
You have NO idea where I get my information.........who is it?, who is
it?
BlackMonk
May Pang, the originator of the loopy "John was hypnotized" theory.
fishandchips
BlackMonk wrote:
> "fishandchips" <Chippa...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:1166393134.4...@l12g2000cwl.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > BlackMonk wrote:
> >> "fishandchips" <Chippa...@aol.com> wrote in message
> >> news:1166384755.2...@73g2000cwn.googlegroups.com...
> >> >
> >> > BlackMonk wrote:
> >> >> "Frank from Deeetroit" <dadur...@voyager.net> wrote in message
> >> >> news:_audnYZJw5EnyxjY...@comcast.com...
> >> >> >
> >> >> > You seem to have all the answers, what is your take on the
> >> >> > John/Yoko/May
> >> >> > thing?
> >> >>
> >> >> John left Yoko because he wanted to. He spent time with May because he
> >> >> wanted
> >> >> to. He went back to Yoko because he wanted to. He stayed with Yoko
> >> >> because
> >> >> he wanted to.
> >> >
> >> > My lips are sealed.................:-)
> >>
> >> Considering where you get your information from, they should be.
> >
> > You have NO idea where I get my information.........who is it?, who is
> > it?
> >
>
> May Pang, the originator of the loopy "John was hypnotized" theory.
Wrong..........It was Dick Cheney and you know how reliable he is :-)
BlackMonk
> >>
>> May Pang, the originator of the loopy "John was hypnotized" theory.
>
> Wrong..........It was Dick Cheney and you know how reliable he is :-)
>
Now it all makes sense. You're afraid he'll shoot you if you don't agree
with him.
Can't argue with that. Carry on.
terra
>>
>
> I thought her original analysis above was right-on. Sorry you don't
> see it that way.
Well, since all she did was create inner dialogue John never said to
himself I suppose you could just create me seeing it that way.
terra
$yC5...@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net:
> terra <smoker...@myway.com> wrote:
>
>> I suppose all that's left is to killfile her
>
> But you won't.
I will again for now. Her on topic posts (beyond Yoko) just dwindled
down to a immeasurable rate.
>
>> takes it so far beyond reality into a Twilight Zone of hatred it just
>> becomes an exercise in trolling, whether it's meant to be or not
>
> All trolling is "meant to be," by definition. Another example of how
> grossly you overuse this term.
And of course I knew you'd make your usual post. You and I do the exact
same thing. Critique someone we totally disagree with. The only
difference between us is I can admit when I'm wrong, and I do not hold
myself above nearly everyone else in the newsgroup(s). You're a
legend...in your own room.
>
>> It's just too bad that someone who presumably could add something
>> to this place beyond the usual uninformed hate-filled trolls and
flames
>> (with what looks like false 'manners')
>
> I don't know why you keep attacking her "manners," of all things --
> it's a positive trait, and an area where you yourself fall short
> most of the time.
Because they're false, a put-on. Not that you are familiar with manners.
>
> F.'s Yoko fixation is exasperating and deeply weird, but she never
> loses her cool and always writes grammatical, well-phrased,
> well-formatted posts -- that's a big plus.
It's meaningless in the big picture of trolling. Something you know a
lot about.
Yes, I did pontificate too much on that post, I should have said it in
much fewer words, as I've said it before (you know all about that too).
But what I said is true and whether you feel it gives you an in to
critique me is irrelevant to the point. One you yourself complain about
in regular intervals. Or have you forgotten?
terra
> terra <smoker...@myway.com> wrote:
>
>> >> I suppose all that's left is to killfile her
>> >
>> > But you won't.
>>
>> I will again for now.
>
> All right. Then I'll expect to see no comments from you about her
> posts for awhile.
>
>> > All trolling is "meant to be," by definition. Another example of
>> > how grossly you overuse this term.
>>
>> And of course I knew you'd make your usual post. You and I do the
>> exact same thing. Critique someone we totally disagree with. The
>> only difference between us is I can admit when I'm wrong, and I do
>> not hold myself above nearly everyone else in the newsgroup(s).
>> You're a legend...in your own room.
>
> A lot of "attitude" here, but nothing which actually counters what I
> wrote above.
No, it makes an entirely different point. That's actually allowed!
>
>> > I don't know why you keep attacking her "manners," of all things --
>> > it's a positive trait, and an area where you yourself fall short
>> > most of the time.
>>
>> Because they're false, a put-on.
>
> Whether "true" or "false," her calm conversational tone is not
> responsible for any of the group's major flamewars. Her posts are
> very steady emotionally, so she doesn't "escalate" battles.
That's purely untrue. Anyone can say something inflammatory in a soft
voice. Arguments are started and fought over ideas as much as delivery.
You only confuse content with delivery because it suits your argument at
the moment.
>
>> > F.'s Yoko fixation is exasperating and deeply weird, but she never
>> > loses her cool and always writes grammatical, well-phrased,
>> > well-formatted posts -- that's a big plus.
>>
>> It's meaningless in the big picture of trolling. Something you know
>> a lot about.
>
> You really need to figure out a way to start arguing *content* with
> people, instead of just trying to generally demonize them.
LOL....right. Again, wonderful sounding and totally irelevant
statements. Delfection of a high magnitude.
>
>> Yes, I did pontificate too much on that post
>
> Well, actually, it was a lot more "controlled" than many of your
> posts, so...good.
So let me get this straight. *I* am not allowed to complain when she
posts 9 posts in the overnight hours, every one a ridiculous stretch to
yet again indict Yoko for some imagined crime, and yet *you* are
perfectly right to complain about my posts for your own criteria (and
only yours...since you create issues just to complain)...
I am NOT alone in attacking her gossip and imagination laden posts, and
yet not only do I see *you* also complaining to her about her posts but
you are not chastising a *single other person* who tries to let her know
how fattuous she really is being. If my post was, as you say,
"controlled", then what excuse do you have for bursting the usual
complaint about it?
Any excuse in a storm, eh, Eric?
fatt...@yahoo.com
Thanks.
fatt...@yahoo.com
poisoned rose wrote:> But you won't.
>
> > takes it so far beyond reality into a Twilight Zone of hatred it just
> > becomes an exercise in trolling, whether it's meant to be or not
>
> grossly you overuse this term.
>
> > to this place beyond the usual uninformed hate-filled trolls and flames
> > (with what looks like false 'manners')
>
> it's a positive trait, and an area where you yourself fall short
> most of the time.
>
> loses her cool and always writes grammatical, well-phrased,
> well-formatted posts -- that's a big plus.
Thank you . . . . I think. :-)
And happy holidays to you too.
bessie
dlarsson
>> Yoko resorted to some really ugly stuff to get John back. He was,
>> after all, her meal ticket.
This is clearly a distortion.
First of all, John wanted to get back with Yoko and several of
the people that John hung out with in L.A. said that he continued
to talk about that.
The song "Bless You" was written during his separation about Yoko.
Secondly, the idea that Yoko tricked John into pregancy is nonsense.
John wanted to have a family again and he focused on that.
Finally, all this stuff about Yoko stealing John's money is ignorant.
Yoko grew up in a home with wealthy Japanese bankers as her parents.
She had plenty of money in her family - but she rejected that and wanted
to be an artist. She did not revolve her life around money, in fact she
went
in the opposite direction. Her interest in John was an intellectual
one
and their shared interest in art and being 'outcasts' in different ways
of society. However flawed and failed her own career may have been,
she wasn't ever looking for either "safety" or "money" for the sake of
it.
Some of her business decisions may be debated and she has had some
bad relationships along the way, but almost all cases (Fred Seaman,
etc.)
it was some other party trying to rip off from her and pirate away from
Lennon.
Most of her own dealings have involved funds going to charity
organizations
and various causes.
The only straight-up profiteering scheme was "The Beatles Anthology"
trifecta ( CDs, TV-DVD, Book, etc.) in which people had to pay $30 for
inferior
versions (in most cases) of existing Beatles songs and without John even
being there to participate. She and George were talked into -that-
project
by McCartney.
- Derek
UsurperTom
> She and George were talked into -that- project by McCartney.
Oh please. The project was in the works while John was still alive and
George was the one who had the title changed from "The Long and Winding
Road."
fatt...@yahoo.com
What is the matter with you? I think you need your tea.
fatt...@yahoo.com
dlarsson wrote:
> >> Yoko resorted to some really ugly stuff to get John back. He was,
> >> after all, her meal ticket.
>
>
> This is clearly a distortion.
> First of all, John wanted to get back with Yoko and several of
> the people that John hung out with in L.A. said that he continued
> to talk about that.
>
> The song "Bless You" was written during his separation about Yoko.
I believe there were times during the Lost Weekend that John wanted to
get back with Yoko, but I also believe he was wavering as shown by
May's book and other source. He did love May.
Further more, your comments do not change the fact that Yoko saw John
as her meal ticket.
.>
> Secondly, the idea that Yoko tricked John into pregancy is nonsense.
> John wanted to have a family again and he focused on that.
>
> Finally, all this stuff about Yoko stealing John's money is ignorant.
>
> Yoko grew up in a home with wealthy Japanese bankers as her parents.
> She had plenty of money in her family - but she rejected that and wanted
> to be an artist. She did not revolve her life around money, in fact she
> went
> in the opposite direction. Her interest in John was an intellectual
> one
> and their shared interest in art and being 'outcasts' in different ways
> of society. However flawed and failed her own career may have been,
> she wasn't ever looking for either "safety" or "money" for the sake of
> it.
Oh, plleeassseeee. You can't possibly believe that!! She had been a
struggling artist for more than 5 years years, first with Toshi and
then with Cox. Even if Yoko initially rebelled against her parents,
she was tired of being poor, ridiculed and not famous. John WAS her
mealticket and she knew it.-
Yoko said in interviews something like "At first I didn't like money;
then I learned to like it."
Plus, just read her Playboy interview. She says right there she saw
herself as the breadwinner. Being successful meant the world to her,
more so than John. That's why she threw him out of the house. John
was merely a stepping stone to her as were her past husbands.
> Some of her business decisions may be debated and she has had some
> bad relationships along the way, but almost all cases (Fred Seaman,
> etc.)
> it was some other party trying to rip off from her and pirate away from
> Lennon.
> Most of her own dealings have involved funds going to charity
> organizations
> and various causes.
I don't think most of Yoko's funds go to charity; however she has done
some admirable charity work.
Rhonda
> My lips are sealed.................:-)
Apparently not.
terra
"poisoned rose" <closeupthe...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:dtVhh.10794$hI....@newssvr11.news.prodigy.net...
> terra <smoker...@myway.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> LOL....right. Again, wonderful sounding and totally irelevant
>> statements. Delfection of a high magnitude.
>
\
Once again your armchair psychoanalysis is as laughable as nearly every
stance you take.
And increased typos, indicating
> unthinking "heat of the moment" key-pounding.
It indicates I have a keyboard with keys that stick. More Eric Broome
Bullshit (patent pending). Typo flames are the absolute weakest, indicating
even you have spun so far out of ideas that you cannot sustain an actual
point.
>
> Deflection from *what*? More aimless talk about "trolling"?
>
> You don't argue content.
I do with those who deserve it. I spent -years- debating with derek, a few
less years debating seriously and in good faith with fatt and others, using
cites and common sense. At some point one simply stops banging their head
against the wall and kicks them in the ass for being obvious troublemakers,
not someone interested in discussing anything. Like you.
Your most common way of arguing with people
> is to ignore their debate points; call them "sick," "psychotic,"
> "stalker," "troll," etc.; and announce that, generally, nothing they
> ever say should be taken seriously.
Nope, more of your gross hyperboilc exaggerations, in your psychotic (yes,
psychotic) trolling and stalking attempt to brand me every chance you get.
Because they're "not one of us."
Never, ever have I said that. Prove I did (good luck).
> In particular, you've cried "Troll!" so often that it became the
> stuff of self-parody ages ago.
Because you say so? You're the joke here, Eric, not I. You project your
faults onto others then rail against them as if you are saying profound and
truthful things. The funny part is all you're doing is describing yourself.
Over and over. And readers can see it quite clearly. So you're not fooling
anyone but yourself.
Why you think this constitutes a
> solid counterargument, I'll never know.
Why you think ANYthing you say constitutes a post I'll never know.
And the lamest thing is that
> someone can eyeroll about how formulaically you resort to empty
> "LOL" swagger and "troll"-esque namecalling, and you'll generally
> respond to this with...empty "LOL" swagger and "troll"-esque
> namecalling.
Ever hear of sarcasm? Look it up. Good word to learn, especially for a
"writer". LOL
>
>> I am NOT alone in attacking her gossip and imagination laden posts, and
>> yet not only do I see *you* also complaining to her about her posts but
>> you are not chastising a *single other person* who tries to let her know
>> how fattuous she really is being. If my post was, as you say,
>> "controlled", then what excuse do you have for bursting the usual
>> complaint about it?
>
> I made three brief objections to a lengthy character-attack post.
> Percentagewise, that's a good showing for you.
YAWN
(Another tactic of mine, don't forget).
Eric you really are a bitter bore. You accuse me of doing everything you
do, except I still was able to discuss things in a friendly and normal way
with fatt when she wasn't spewing her Yokobsession. You are pitiful in your
attempts to condescendingly and very rarely post about anything to do with
music. Most of your posts are stalker's complaints.
And again, the definition of insanity is doing something continually even
knowing the result will never change. Therefore, your decade of abuse has
not made a whit of difference in the way I post or will it ever, yet you
persist. The question you snipped and failed to answer from my last post:
what exactly do you expect from your constant badgering of me and marcus?
Gratitiude? Change? Agreement?
The fact is you are a pretty rotten person who contributes nothing but noise
here, and you have the gall to critique others, especially given that what
you are most loudly proclaiming to be their faults are in fact your own.
A hypocrite as well as a bitter third generation malcontent. Yes, you
certainly do bring a lot of sunshine wherever you go. And you have proudly
declared you are right to do it and will do it whenever you feel like it.
The very definition of troll.
LOL!
terra
Now, be sure to create more "issues" to assail others with:
LOL's
Number of posts
Quick replies
Yawns
Plonks
etc. etc.
Oh wait, you only assail two posters.
Hypocrite. You 'get' it, you simply refuse to acknowledge it. Same with
fatt.
terra
> "terra" <smoker...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> what exactly do you expect from your constant badgering of me and
>> marcus? Gratitiude? Change? Agreement?
>
> Easy answer: Change. Oh, and a shard of self-awareness.
Wow. Breathless self-deception. It's never going happen, Gondola.
Insanity is still trying to force me or anyone to do it. Guess you must
be a psycho then, huh?
You ignored (as you usually do) my very simple question from the other
thread:
Why out of 3 lame jokes did you only choose Marcus to compalin
about?
Be honest, both with us and yourself for a change.
> Incidentally, one of the most central traits of a Usenet "stalker"
> is straining to push outside-Usenet personal information into the
> newsgroup to "damage" the target -- and NO ONE here does this as
> anywhere near as much as you. Whether it's me, Chewbop, Sal or
> whoever else.
More lies & hyperbole. My name, *address and phone number* have been
splashed all over this newsgroup for years, by both Sal and Chew and
others. More EB misinformation tactics.
Your name IS Eric Broome. You certainly had no problem putting it up on
your web page honoring your juvenile trolling skills. Why are you
ashamed of it now?
It's no strain, trust me. And so long as you feel it is your duty to
harrass me and select others I see no reason why you should need to hide
behind a user name to do it.
As to 'damage'? You damage yourself every time you post your tripe far
more effectively than I ever will.
Let's see if you actually answer the simple question posed now or if you
snip and ignore it as you usually do. You cannot control yourself, you
WILL answer this, so I will allow you the last word yet again. Even if
it is deceptive, repetitive and useless.
TAR
>
> "terra" <smoker...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > what exactly do you expect from your constant badgering of me and marcus?
> > Gratitiude? Change? Agreement?
>
LOL! OMG, I just had to stop here because I'm laughing so hard! It even
caused a coughing fit. Eric Poisoned Rose, the man who should be
turning his pointer finger inward, is looking for others to find
self-awareness??! Oh, this is too much!
Well, Charlie, at least Eric doesn't deny his constant badgering. I
suppose that's a step in the right direction.
terra
"TAR" <tom....@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:458883...@ix.netcom.com...
Not really.
He gives a high minded spin to his trolling but he only targets few lucky
folks and he has done so now for ten years (for marcus and I). Think he'll
ever get a clue and stop? I don't, he enjoys it.
And if he talks music to someone, it is usually in the most condescending
manner, as if he is imparting great taste and wisdom to us lucky people.
He is just a major tool who wants to act as if he is above all this but is
in fact in the thick of it.
TAR
No need to explain any of this. It's all quite obvious. I'm getting a
kick out of some of the things he wrote on this thread. The guy is so
clueless to his own faults, and a major snob for no good reason.
BlackMonk
<fatt...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1166509557.9...@a3g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
>
> dlarsson wrote:
>> >> Yoko resorted to some really ugly stuff to get John back. He was,
>> >> after all, her meal ticket.
>>
>>
>> This is clearly a distortion.
>> First of all, John wanted to get back with Yoko and several of
>> the people that John hung out with in L.A. said that he continued
>> to talk about that.
>>
>> The song "Bless You" was written during his separation about Yoko.
>
>
> I believe there were times during the Lost Weekend that John wanted to
> get back with Yoko, but I also believe he was wavering as shown by
> May's book and other source. He did love May.
>
His ex-girlfriend says he really wanted to be with her, and you consider
that a good source?
Yet when he says he'd rather be with Yoko, you make excuses why he couldn't
really mean what he said?
> Further more, your comments do not change the fact that Yoko saw John
> as her meal ticket.
>
Not fact. Opinion. Yours.
TAR
>
> > >> > what exactly do you expect from your constant badgering of me and
> > >> > marcus?
> > >> > Gratitiude? Change? Agreement?
> > >>
> > >> Easy answer: Change. Oh, and a shard of self-awareness.
> > >
> > > LOL! OMG, I just had to stop here because I'm laughing so hard! It even
> > > caused a coughing fit. Eric Poisoned Rose, the man who should be
> > > turning his pointer finger inward, is looking for others to find
> > > self-awareness??! Oh, this is too much!
> > >
> > > Well, Charlie, at least Eric doesn't deny his constant badgering. I
> > > suppose that's a step in the right direction.
> >
> > Not really.
> >
> > He gives a high minded spin to his trolling but he only targets few lucky
> > folks and he has done so now for ten years (for marcus and I). Think he'll
> > ever get a clue and stop? I don't, he enjoys it.
> >
> > And if he talks music to someone, it is usually in the most condescending
> > manner, as if he is imparting great taste and wisdom to us lucky people.
> >
> > He is just a major tool who wants to act as if he is above all this but is
> > in fact in the thick of it.
>
> screaming, irrational clown he makes of himself, Mommy TAR will
> trail behind him, assuring him he's A-OK.
If it makes you feel more comfortable to believe that, Eric, rather than
facing your own demons, then by all means go right ahead.
- Donna
Sixties Gen
Is Toxic Rose still around?
I thought he was posting over at alt.pompousass
terra
"Sixties Gen" <sixti...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1166633506....@t46g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
He never leaves. His mission is to chastise his personal victims forever,
with no reaon. You, I and Donna. Then to everyone else he talks down to
like a retarded child.
We're all so lucky to be allowed to live in Eric's little world!
TAR
That's not Eric Poisoned Rose's mission. His mission is to boost his
own self-confidence level. That's why he puts on an air of superiority,
and continuously criticizes people on a public newsgroup. He's hoping
that he'll make himself look better by comparision. Unfortunately, it
backfires.
terra
terra
Frank from Deeetroit wrote:
> "White Shadow" <wam...@maximus.com> wrote in message
> news:2aq8o2paaj49dha32...@4ax.com...
> >I wanted to suggest that everyone read May Pang's book "Loving John"
> > because she details exactly how Yoko got John back from May Pang in
> > late January 1975:
> >
> > By that time, Yoko had already had a failed solo tour of Japan with
> > her screeching antics, and knew that she would never have a successful
> > recording/performing career on her own. She knew that her future lay
> > with John's millions, and that if she hoped to go on living the easy
> > life, she had better get him away from May.
> >
> > So she basically kidnapped John and subjected him to mind
> > control/hypnosis/drug therapy during a weekend-long marathon session
> > that originally started out as just a one hour "stop smoking hypnosis"
> > session that Yoko had promised John would break him of his smoking
> > habit (she lied, of course, and said it had worked for her).
> >
> > Anyway, May's book provides some really interesting background
> > information about this sorry episode. Yoko then got pregnant that
> > weekend or during that week. I have no evidence to back this up, but
> > my guess is that she had been going to a fertility clinic to boost her
> > fertility so she could get pregnant and then finally and forever suck
> > John back to her permanently.
> >
> > John had become quite bored with Yoko and had stopped taking calls
> > from her in December 1974/January 1975, and was looking at houses to
> > buy for him and May Pang to live in, so he was very serious about May
> > after having lived with her for 18 months at Yoko's insistence.
> >
> > after all, her meal ticket.
> >
>
Semantics.
terra
fatt...@yahoo.com wrote:
> Frank from Deeetroit wrote:
> > "BlackMonk" <Blac...@email.msn.com> wrote in message
> > news:em244a$h54$1...@aioe.org...
> > >
> > > "Frank from Deeetroit" <dadur...@voyager.net> wrote in message
> > > news:KpOdnTQ0ao8uHhnY...@comcast.com...
> > >>
> > >> "BlackMonk" <Blac...@email.msn.com> wrote in message
> > >> news:em1uv7$6gd$1...@aioe.org...
> > >>>
> > >>> "White Shadow" <wam...@maximus.com> wrote in message
> > >>> news:2aq8o2paaj49dha32...@4ax.com...
> > >>>> control/hypnosis/drug therapy during a weekend-long marathon session
> > >>>> that originally started out as just a one hour "stop smoking hypnosis"
> > >>>> session that Yoko had promised John would break him of his smoking
> > >>>> habit (she lied, of course, and said it had worked for her).
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>> about mind control/hypnosis/ drug therapy to believe this was possible.
> > >>>
> > >>> Which are you?
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> I know several people who sucessfully used hypnosis to stop smoking.
> > >>
> > >
> > > And from that you conclude that it would be possible to make John go back
> > > to Yoko even though he really wanted to stay with May Pang?
> >
> > Well, it seems obvious that Yoko tickled John in the wright places and she
> > is a control freak. Once she reeled John in, they remained together until
> > he passed. Not the first time in history that a women used her power to
> > reel a guy in.
>
>
> True.
>
>
> >
> > >
> > > First of all, hypnosis is far from 100% effective. Look at how many people
> > > try to use it to stop smoking and fail.
> >
> > I agree with you 100% on the effectiveness of hypnosis, however, I used
> > hypnosis to quit smoking in 1981 as well as about five other friends of mine
> > and it worked for us. Far from a control group to study.
> >
> > >
> > > Second, those people who successfully used it WANTED to stop smoking and
> > > were willingly hypotized.
> >
> > 100% fact for sure.
> >
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >> As easily John seemed to be led around by Yoko, the scenario seems
> > >> possible.
> > >
> > > To someone who knows nothing about hypnosis and wants to believe the worst
> > > about Yoko (as evidenced by your use of "led around by Yoko"), perhaps.
> >
> > Well, from personal experience, I know a little about hypnosis. I had a
> > late aquantance who had a hypnosis practice (she is dead, so I do not know
> > what college degree she possessed in hypnosis, buy she did have a degree in
> > hypnosis) for law enforcement. We used her sucessfully for recruits to
> > focus on their ability to improve on their marksmanship skills and to
> > concentrate on their studies for promotional exam testing. All persons
> > chose to use hypnosis as a tool to acheive a goal. Hypnosis is not as
> > commonly depicted on tv or in the movies. No one can swing a pocketwatch in
> > front of a person and make the person quack like a duck.
> >
> > Yoko pussywhipped John, his choice. Not a negative comment towards Yoko, a
> > lot of us guys get 'whipped over a women, no big deal.
If you met this woman (I have), maybe then youd understand. I met her
and I quite humbly offered my moist hand. And I dont hate.
>
> While there are men out there who get whipped over a woman, I guess it
> is a matter of degree. I believe that sometimes when someone submerges
Thats your opinion not fact
> themselves too much, it suggests a sick relationship. A number of
> insiders have suggested that John lost himself when he was with Yoko.
> (read Paul and Linda's Playboy interview; read Julian's comments that
> when Dad was with Yoko he was a "manipulated lost soul"; read Pete
> Shotton's comments that John wanted to be dominated.)
Thats his opinion not fact
> I think the whole thing is sad. Sometimes there is a fine line between
> being "whipped" and overly dependent or even mentally ill.
terra
fishandchips wrote:> > news:_audnYZJw5EnyxjY...@comcast.com...
> > >
> > > You seem to have all the answers, what is your take on the John/Yoko/May
> > > thing?
> >
> > John left Yoko becaue he wanted to. He spent time with May because he wanted
> > to. He went back to Yoko because he wanted to. He stayed with Yoko because
> > he wanted to.
>
> My lips are sealed.................:-)
Thats your opinin not fact.
I met this woman.
Nuff said
terra
It has for ten years. He still doesn't get it, which doesn't say much about
his intelligence level.
terra
"terra" <smoke...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1166637085.3...@a3g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
> Thats your opinion not fact.
terra
--
terra
--
terra
--
fatt...@yahoo.com
BlackMonk wrote:
> "Frank from Deeetroit" <dadur...@voyager.net> wrote in message
> news:_audnYZJw5EnyxjY...@comcast.com...
> >
> > You seem to have all the answers, what is your take on the John/Yoko/May
> > thing?
>
> John left Yoko becaue he wanted to. He spent time with May because he wanted
> to. He went back to Yoko because he wanted to. He stayed with Yoko because
> he wanted to.
All possibly true . . . but that is not the same thing as love.
fatt...@yahoo.com
Read Larry Kane's book Lennon Revealed. Toward the end of the book is
a chapter about John visiting Philadelphia to do charity work. John
had been reunited with Yoko for a few months. Kane met John at the
train in Philadelphia. John told Larry he had been home a few months
and it was time to get out of the house. That suggests to me that John
and Yoko could tolerate each other in small doses. (this is supported
by the fact that Yoko frequently sent him on directional trips; even
though they were supposedly reunited, she was trying to get rid of him
here and there )
John told Larry he loved May and she made him very happy. Kane asked
him why did he return to Yoko. JOhn said he loved Yoko too . . . he
remarked sometimes you have to make up your mind where you belong.
Cynthia commented in her book John that she believes John and Yoko had
a lovehate relationship. From what I have seen, I think that is true.
All that I am saying is I believe John had feelings for both May and
Yoko . . . John's return to Yoko may have been for practical reasons,
financial reasons, etc. Also, by the time John went to visit Larry, I
believe Yoko was pregnant.
There are many reasons why a couple stays together. It isn't always
just love.
fatt...@yahoo.com
Is there really anyone here who has NO demons?
He who is absolutely without demons, let him cast the first stone.
fatt...@yahoo.com
I have a proposal to you and everyone here . . . in the spirit of
Christmas and the New Year, from now on, no poster (incluidng me) will
address another poster in an disrespectful way. No name calling, no
foul words, no sarcasm, etc.
Deal??
TAR
That's exactly the point. That's why it's annoying to watch Poisoned
Rose continually pointing his condescending finger at posters... as if
he is above it all. Fattuchus, I know you're trying to help here, but I
think you're just making it worse.
F Parella
fatt...@yahoo.com wrote:
> dlarsson wrote:
> > >> Yoko resorted to some really ugly stuff to get John back. He was,
> > >> after all, her meal ticket.
> >
> >
> > This is clearly a distortion.
> > First of all, John wanted to get back with Yoko and several of
> > the people that John hung out with in L.A. said that he continued
> > to talk about that.
> >
> > The song "Bless You" was written during his separation about Yoko.
>
>
> I believe there were times during the Lost Weekend that John wanted to
> get back with Yoko, but I also believe he was wavering as shown by
> May's book and other source. He did love May.
At one point during Lennon's time away from Ono, he & some friends went
into a club. Someone shouted out, "Hey John, where's Yoko?" He shot
back: "Suckin' Ringo's cock!"
fatt...@yahoo.com
Yes, I heard that.
During the Lost Weekend, I think John, like any husband who was tossed
out and knew that his wife was running around with other men, would
have many emotions: heartbreak, anger, bitterness, self doubt, etc. To
me it shows how heroic May was. She gave John love, support and comfort
during a turbulant period in his life.
UsurperTom
> Poisoned Rose continually pointing his condescending finger at posters... as if he is above it all.
Charlie pointed his condescending finger at Fatt first.
F Parella
I agree about May. Here was this extremely young woman, forced into
this incredibly difficult relationship (she did fall in love with
Lennon, but I think it's fair to say he was at first forced upon her)
and look at the improvement she brought about in Lennon. He began to
look healthy again, he began to have friends again, and there was a
huge improvement in his music (over his previous solo albums).
"Heroic" is right, though it's not just the presence of good influences
that helped Lennon; it was also the relative absence of bad influences.
But May must be given tons of credit.
Sixties Gen
What are you talking about, he was drinking like a fish when he lived
in LA.
Sixties Gen
fatt...@yahoo.com wrote:
"John told Larry he had been home a few months
and it was time to get out of the house. That suggests to me that John
and Yoko could tolerate each other in small doses."
You're not married, are you? ;-)
F Parella
As opposed to snorting heroin like a junkie back in NY?
He got drunk a few times in LA, but eventually stopped. I've seen
interviews with Lennon during his time with May where he specifically
says he quit drinking.
Sixties Gen
TAR wrote:
> That's not Eric Poisoned Rose's mission. His mission is to boost his
> own self-confidence level. That's why he puts on an air of superiority,
> and continuously criticizes people on a public newsgroup. He's hoping
> that he'll make himself look better by comparision. Unfortunately, it
> backfires.
He probably thinks he's on a mission from God.
Sean Carroll
> I wanted to suggest that everyone read May Pang's book "Loving John"
That's nice. I wanted to suggest that everyone read Edward Gibbon's
'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' straight through.
Strangely enough, no one seems to be interested.
--
--Sean
http://spclsd223.livejournal.com/
'I love the smell of pus in the morning. It smells like ... victory.'
--Dr Gregory House
Sean Carroll
> John left Yoko becaue he wanted to. He spent time with May because he wanted
> to. He went back to Yoko because he wanted to. He stayed with Yoko because
> he wanted to.
*gasp* You mean John, having had a mind of his own for 28 years that was
so strong it led to conflict with everyone in his life, didn't suddenly
turn into a mindless zombie drone doing whatever he was told the instant
he started going out with Yoko?
The HELL you say!
terra
> fatt...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>
>> Is there really anyone here who has NO demons?
>>
>> He who is absolutely without demons, let him cast the first stone.
>
> That's exactly the point. That's why it's annoying to watch Poisoned
> Rose continually pointing his condescending finger at posters... as if
> he is above it all. Fattuchus, I know you're trying to help here, but
> I think you're just making it worse.
I only saw fatt's comment in your reply (k/f'ed) but I think she is
correct, and I personally have no problem with her statement.
UsurperTom
> What are you talking about, he was drinking like a fish when he lived in LA.
John had calmed down by the time he and May moved back to New York a
few months later.
TAR
Charlie doesn't pretend to be above anyone. And not that I always agree
with him, but he justifies his reasons for his finger pointing. PR is
smug and does it merely for the sake of criticism and acting superior.
PR is condescending toward many people here each and every day, and he
especially goes out of way to target certain posters even when it isn't
warranted. As an example, Charlie pointed out that several people
posted jokes here, but PR only had something belittling and sarcastic to
say when Marcus posted one.
And on a personal note, I have to admit that I've grown to see Eric
Poisoned Rose as a big baby.... a pathetically insecure man child... and
the complete opposite of anything masculine, in my opinion.
- Donna
TAR
>
> terra <smoker...@myway.com> wrote:
>
> > You certainly had no problem putting it up on
> > your web page honoring your juvenile trolling skills.
>
> Troll...sick...psychotic...stalker...the usual histrionic
> namecalling. Lordy, what a broken record.
He's referring to your own website where you have a picture of yourself
or someone else who is fishing, with a caption saying that you are
"trolling". Obviously, you're that proud of it.
Sixties Gen
I just read the rather long post by Toxic Rose. How can one person
have so much time on their hands that they can post condescending
comments to specific posters on various newsgroups, and still have
enough time to defend those stalking comments when called on it?
It is so blatantly obvious that Toxic Rose follows me, you, and Charlie
like a male dog following the scent of a female dog in heat...how can
he deny it...and yet, he does.
What a waste of time for someone who really isn't all that stupid, but
keeps behaving in that manner anyway.
TAR
>
> TAR wrote:
> > UsurperTom wrote:
> > >
> > > Charlie pointed his condescending finger at Fatt first.
> >
> > Charlie doesn't pretend to be above anyone. And not that I always agree
> > with him, but he justifies his reasons for his finger pointing. PR is
> > smug and does it merely for the sake of criticism and acting superior.
> > PR is condescending toward many people here each and every day, and he
> > especially goes out of way to target certain posters even when it isn't
> > warranted. As an example, Charlie pointed out that several people
> > posted jokes here, but PR only had something belittling and sarcastic to
> > say when Marcus posted one.
> >
> > And on a personal note, I have to admit that I've grown to see Eric
> > Poisoned Rose as a big baby.... a pathetically insecure man child... and
> > the complete opposite of anything masculine, in my opinion.
> >
> > - Donna
>
> I just read the rather long post by Toxic Rose. How can one person
> have so much time on their hands that they can post condescending
> comments to specific posters on various newsgroups, and still have
> enough time to defend those stalking comments when called on it?
>
> It is so blatantly obvious that Toxic Rose follows me, you, and Charlie
> like a male dog following the scent of a female dog in heat...how can
> he deny it...and yet, he does.
>
> What a waste of time for someone who really isn't all that stupid, but
> keeps behaving in that manner anyway.
Well, he's condescending to most, if not all, but I can't really say
that he stalks me since it seems he'd rather play with men. However, he
definitely does cyberstalk Charlie and you, Marcus. 'Tis a strange
obsession.
- Donna
octopussy's garden
TAR wrote:
> Well, he's condescending to most, if not all, but I can't really say
> that he stalks me since it seems he'd rather play with men. However, he
> definitely does cyberstalk Charlie and you, Marcus. 'Tis a strange
> obsession.
Eric's so brilliant he doesn't want his posts archived.
TAR
> "airs of superiority"? She'd never admit it, but do you think she
> secretly read the recent thread where a totally above-board poster
> (Frank from Detroit) made the mistake of trying to debate a hard
> issue with you while entirely avoiding personal insults, and you
> ended up just lazily sneering that he wasn't worth your time and
> that he should "take his medication"...only because he happened to
> disagree with you about Iraq? That was the most unearned, obnoxious
> "air of superiority" I've seen here in ages. How do you rate your
> demeanor in that thread, Marc?
>
> Aren't you glad TAR's double standards are so laughably blatant?
Didn't see the thread. Earthlink's newsserver was down for more than a
week. Still, I probably wouldn't have read anything political even if I
could. If he was engaged in a heated debate, it's a bit different from
someone who continually cyberstalks people and puts them down just for
the sake of doing so... or rather, so that he can somehow appear
superior. But if you feel this way about him, Eric, and if it's a trait
you dislike, why do you do it yourself?
BlackMonk
<fatt...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1166696459.3...@73g2000cwn.googlegroups.com...
According to John, he loved Yoko. Are you saying that you know John's
feelings better than he did?
According to Yoko, she loved John. Are you saying that you know Yoko's
feelings better than she does?
BlackMonk
<fatt...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1166699723.3...@48g2000cwx.googlegroups.com...
>
> Read Larry Kane's book Lennon Revealed. Toward the end of the book is
> a chapter about John visiting Philadelphia to do charity work. John
> had been reunited with Yoko for a few months. Kane met John at the
> train in Philadelphia. John told Larry he had been home a few months
> and it was time to get out of the house. That suggests to me that John
> and Yoko could tolerate each other in small doses.
Like I said, your opinion.
(this is supported
> by the fact that Yoko frequently sent him on directional trips; even
> though they were supposedly reunited, she was trying to get rid of him
> here and there )
>
Are you Yoko? If not, then your guesses as to her motivations are just that.
Nothing more
> John told Larry he loved May and she made him very happy. Kane asked
> him why did he return to Yoko. JOhn said he loved Yoko too . . . he
> remarked sometimes you have to make up your mind where you belong.
>
Sounds like he loved May as a girlfriend and Yoko as a wife.
> Cynthia commented in her book John that she believes John and Yoko had
> a lovehate relationship. From what I have seen, I think that is true.
>
You haven't seen anything. You've never met John or Yoko.
As for Cynthia, don't you think she might be a bit biased? and he
perceptions a little colored by those biases?
BlackMonk
<fatt...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1166716639.6...@79g2000cws.googlegroups.com...
> >
> During the Lost Weekend, I think John, like any husband who was tossed
> out and knew that his wife was running around with other men, would
> have many emotions: heartbreak, anger, bitterness, self doubt, etc. To
> me it shows how heroic May was. She gave John love, support and comfort
> during a turbulant period in his life.
>
Oh yeah. She slept with a rich ex-Beatle. Very heroic.
BlackMonk
"F Parella" <f_pa...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1166717170....@48g2000cwx.googlegroups.com...
> > I agree about May. Here was this extremely young woman, forced into
> this incredibly difficult relationship (she did fall in love with
> Lennon, but I think it's fair to say he was at first forced upon her)
It's actually stupid to say that, but someone who'd belive John was
hypnotized into going back to Yoko will believe anything.
> and look at the improvement she brought about in Lennon. He began to
> look healthy again, he began to have friends again,
You mean, he began to hang out with the people you think he should have hung
out with. Be honest. What you're really getting at is that John began to act
the way you think he should have acted. He became more like the John in your
head.
and there was a
> huge improvement in his music (over his previous solo albums).
Right, "Whatever Gets You Though The Night" is such an improvement over
everything on POB and Imagine.
White Shadow
Ummm....I think she was referring to Yoko-influenced disasters like
"Sometime in New York City" and "Mind Games", not to mention putrid,
Yoko-influenced singles like "Power to the People" and "Woman is the
Nigger of the World".
So yeah, "Whatever Gets You Through the Night" is a very definite
improvement over that stuff.
TAR
Well, now was that necessary? It doesn't take away from the statement
that May gave him love, support, and comfort. Yoko slept with a rich
ex-Beatle, too, you know.
BlackMonk
"TAR" <tom....@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:458B6F...@ix.netcom.com...
Yes, and you see how often she's attacked for it. If it's a bad thing when
Yoko did it, how can it be a good thing when May did it?
I'm just turning Fatt's argument back on her.
F Parella
BlackMonk wrote:
> "F Parella" <f_pa...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1166717170....@48g2000cwx.googlegroups.com...
> > > I agree about May. Here was this extremely young woman, forced into
> > this incredibly difficult relationship (she did fall in love with
> > Lennon, but I think it's fair to say he was at first forced upon her)
>
> It's actually stupid to say that, but someone who'd belive John was
> hypnotized into going back to Yoko will believe anything.
Coming from some 'tard who believes Yoko was the original punk rocker?
May gives her account of how her relationship with Lennon began in her
book Loving John. I believe her account.
> > and look at the improvement she brought about in Lennon. He began to
> > look healthy again, he began to have friends again,
>
> You mean, he began to hang out with the people you think he should have hung
> out with.
No. I meant what I said. He began to have friends again.
> and there was a
> > huge improvement in his music (over his previous solo albums).
>
> Right, "Whatever Gets You Though The Night" is such an improvement over
> everything on POB and Imagine.
It's an improvement over "My Mummy's Dead" and "I don't wanna be a
soldier." And other songs, such as "Old Dirt Road" and "# 9 Dream" are
vastly better than anything on those albums, Mind Games, and Sometime
in NYC.
F Parella
Absolutely, and "Whatever..." isn't even one of the stronger songs on
W&B, in my opinion.
F Parella
Why are you talking like that? Do you believe it was sinful for May to
have sex with Lennon?
BlackMonk
I don't think it was heroic.
BlackMonk
>
> BlackMonk wrote:
>> "F Parella" <f_pa...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:1166717170....@48g2000cwx.googlegroups.com...
>> > > I agree about May. Here was this extremely young woman, forced into
>> > this incredibly difficult relationship (she did fall in love with
>> > Lennon, but I think it's fair to say he was at first forced upon her)
>>
>> It's actually stupid to say that, but someone who'd belive John was
>> hypnotized into going back to Yoko will believe anything.
>
> Coming from some 'tard who believes Yoko was the original punk rocker?
>
> May gives her account of how her relationship with Lennon began in her
> book Loving John. I believe her account.
>
But that's because you're an idiot.