"Baby, you're a..."?

[Home Guard Chris]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fVtHztdkrnU

That's a link to the 2009 stereo master of Baby, You're a Rich man.
Using that specific video as a reference, at what time(s) do you hear
John alter his line to "Baby, you're a rich fag Jew"? I'm trying to
figure out whether we all hear it at the same point, or whether the
power of suggestion comes into play.

--
http://thehomeguard.bandcamp.com -
- new (and unusual) album out now

[jtees4]

On Thu, 15 Oct 2015 16:47:21 +0100, Home Guard Chris
<cont...@theSPAMTRAPhomeguard.info> wrote:

>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fVtHztdkrnU
>
>That's a link to the 2009 stereo master of Baby, You're a Rich man.
>Using that specific video as a reference, at what time(s) do you hear
>John alter his line to "Baby, you're a rich fag Jew"? I'm trying to
>figure out whether we all hear it at the same point, or whether the
>power of suggestion comes into play.

Nowhere....that is where he says it.

[poisoned rose]

Home Guard Chris <cont...@theSPAMTRAPhomeguard.info> wrote:

> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fVtHztdkrnU

How about this?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygavpxE0ib4

I don't hear it, though this isn't the entire song.

(Whew. This thread is a grim reminder of what a sub-par song this was,
compared with the best Beatles material of that period.)

[Nil]

On 15 Oct 2015, Home Guard Chris
<cont...@theSPAMTRAPhomeguard.info> wrote in rec.music.beatles:

> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fVtHztdkrnU
>
> That's a link to the 2009 stereo master of Baby, You're a Rich
> man. Using that specific video as a reference, at what time(s) do
> you hear John alter his line to "Baby, you're a rich fag Jew"? I'm
> trying to figure out whether we all hear it at the same point, or
> whether the power of suggestion comes into play.

I don't hear it at all.

[topazgalaxy]

I did not hear it on the video you posted; however if you play the same song on youtube in the mono versions towards the fade out at the end I think I hear it.

[hislop]

On 16/10/2015 2:47 AM, Home Guard Chris wrote:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fVtHztdkrnU
>
> That's a link to the 2009 stereo master of Baby, You're a Rich man.
> Using that specific video as a reference, at what time(s) do you hear
> John alter his line to "Baby, you're a rich fag Jew"? I'm trying to
> figure out whether we all hear it at the same point, or whether the
> power of suggestion comes into play.
>

Try and find the mono version, one of the more interesting mono mixes.

[RichL]

"Home Guard Chris" <cont...@theSPAMTRAPhomeguard.info> wrote in message
news:d8a04h...@mid.individual.net...

> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fVtHztdkrnU
>
> That's a link to the 2009 stereo master of Baby, You're a Rich man. Using
> that specific video as a reference, at what time(s) do you hear John alter
> his line to "Baby, you're a rich fag Jew"? I'm trying to figure out
> whether we all hear it at the same point, or whether the power of
> suggestion comes into play.

If it's there at all, it's at 2:49-2:50. I'm straining to hear it.
Something seems a bit off at this point, and I have to strain my own
credulity to get something meaningful out of it. Stretching things a bit, I
hear "fat" rather than "fag". I don't hear "Jew" very clearly at all.

I suspect this falls into the "I buried Paul" category, i.e., urban legend.

[P-Dub]

I've always kinda heard 'fat Jew' in this. Never noticed that it could be 'fag Jew'. But it does make sense.

This song was a combo song - taking two song fragments (one by Lennon, one by McCartney), and making one song. The lyrics seem to be regarding Brian Epstein. From the wiki...

It is thought that McCartney wrote the lyrics of his section of the song about the band's manager, Brian Epstein.[5] Walter Everett writes that the song "asks an unnamed Brian Epstein what it's like to be one of the 'beautiful people.'"[7] Another angle to the song is that the "Beautiful People" verses were meant as a "tip of the hat" to Epstein for finally dropping acid. The questions John raises in the verses, such as, "How often have you been there?" and "What did you see when you were there?" are roughly equivalent to Jimi Hendrix's "Are You Experienced?" Lennon claimed, however, that the meaning of the song was that everybody is a rich man, saying, "The point was stop moaning. You're a rich man and we're all rich men."[6]

Lennon liked to tease people in a harsh way. Thus - I think it's likely that he did say either 'fat Jew', or 'fag Jew' in there. It would fit the subject matter.

I don't think Lennon was anti-semitic. I think he was just being nasty. He enjoyed being nasty. He thought it was fun.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baby,_You%27re_a_Rich_Man

[Penis Delectii]

On Friday, October 16, 2015 at 8:11:39 AM UTC-4, P-Douche wrote:
>
>I've always kinda heard 'fat Jew' in this. Never noticed that it could
>be 'fag Jew'. But it does make sense.

So nice of you to agree.

>This song was a combo song - taking two song fragments (one by Lennon,
>one by McCartney), and making one song. The lyrics seem to be
>regarding Brian Epstein. From the wiki...

So?

Macca would never spew shit like this against his own tribe.

>Lennon liked to tease people in a harsh way. Thus - I think it's
>likely that he did say either 'fat Jew', or 'fag Jew' in there. It
>would fit the subject matter.

Even in the 1960's, that would not be considered teasing.

>I don't think Lennon was anti-semitic. I think he was just being
>nasty. He enjoyed being nasty. He thought it was fun.

Another person willing to excuse the racist Lennon. Lennon berated
Epstein non stop until Eppy's death over being a jew. And a fag. It was
not just a lark or "fun" as you say. It was mean, cruel and anti-
Semitic.

Lennon certainly got his buttocks up when Yokotards were braying over
her claiming it was racist. He's a big man when he is doing the
attacking but a thin skinned coward when on the receiving end.

Typical libtard hypocrite.

[Marcus]

When your mother isn't home, do you sneak out of your basement apartment in her home and steal panties from her bedroom.

Just wondered.

[Home Guard Chris]

On 15/10/2015 20:13, poisoned rose wrote:
> Home Guard Chris <cont...@theSPAMTRAPhomeguard.info> wrote:
>
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fVtHztdkrnU
>
> How about this?
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygavpxE0ib4

You've completely pre-empted my next move!

> I don't hear it, though this isn't the entire song.

Me neither. I'm sure the full version used to be out there, but I can't
find it right now).

[Home Guard Chris]

Me neither.

I've read books that state as fact the altered line is there; I've read
it stated as fact that it's an urban myth; I've read it's there, but
"fat" rather than "fag"; and I've even got a book that claims the line
was in an earlier take/demo, but not the final version.

It's certainly not an open and shut case...

[Home Guard Chris]

On 15/10/2015 22:01, topazgalaxy wrote:
> On Thursday, October 15, 2015 at 11:47:33 AM UTC-4, Home Guard Chris wrote:
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fVtHztdkrnU
>>
>> That's a link to the 2009 stereo master of Baby, You're a Rich man.
>> Using that specific video as a reference, at what time(s) do you hear
>> John alter his line to "Baby, you're a rich fag Jew"? I'm trying to
>> figure out whether we all hear it at the same point, or whether the
>> power of suggestion comes into play.
>

> I did not hear it on the video you posted; however if you play the same song on youtube in the mono versions towards the fade out at the end I think I hear it.

Thank you, that's interesting. Here's the mono version:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZDxZCKAkeM

At which point(s) do you hear the altered line?

[Home Guard Chris]

So that's one tentative vote for 2:49, and one as-yet unspecified vote
for later than that in the mono version only.

> I suspect this falls into the "I buried Paul" category, i.e., urban legend.

And it's another one where some people are so certain it's there, even
though it's not clear by any stretch of the imagination.

[Home Guard Chris]

On 16/10/2015 13:11, P-Dub wrote:
> On Thursday, October 15, 2015 at 11:02:44 PM UTC-4, RichL wrote:
>> "Home Guard Chris" <cont...@theSPAMTRAPhomeguard.info> wrote in message
>> news:d8a04h...@mid.individual.net...
>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fVtHztdkrnU
>>>
>>> That's a link to the 2009 stereo master of Baby, You're a Rich man. Using
>>> that specific video as a reference, at what time(s) do you hear John alter
>>> his line to "Baby, you're a rich fag Jew"? I'm trying to figure out
>>> whether we all hear it at the same point, or whether the power of
>>> suggestion comes into play.
>>
>> If it's there at all, it's at 2:49-2:50. I'm straining to hear it.
>> Something seems a bit off at this point, and I have to strain my own
>> credulity to get something meaningful out of it. Stretching things a bit, I
>> hear "fat" rather than "fag". I don't hear "Jew" very clearly at all.
>>
>> I suspect this falls into the "I buried Paul" category, i.e., urban legend.
>
> I've always kinda heard 'fat Jew' in this.

At the same point as RichL, or elsewhere in the song?

[Penis Delectii]

Why? Are you looking for tips on how to steal women's panties, perv?

BTW, people who speak English use a question mark at the end of a
question.

[topazgalaxy]

To answer your question, I am not sure, but I think I may here John singing it around 2:44 or 2:45 but I am not sure.

For those who are interested, I stumbled upon this old interview--it is not related you your question at all but it is a great interview and what is so terrible ironic is that this is a Rolling Stone interview that took place on December 8th in New York City (? 1970); I still remember the Rolling Stone cover when he died.

http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/lennon-remembers-part-one-19710121

[Nil]

On 16 Oct 2015, Home Guard Chris
<cont...@theSPAMTRAPhomeguard.info> wrote in rec.music.beatles:

The way I recall the story is, as you mention, that John may have said
those words while they rehearsed. I never got the feeling they appeared
on the released version.

[I Love My NezMonkee]

On 10/16/2015 12:49 PM, topazgalaxy wrote:

> To answer your question, I am not sure, but I think I may here John singing it around 2:44 or 2:45 but I am not sure.
>
> For those who are interested, I stumbled upon this old interview--it is not related you your question at all but it is a

>great interview and what is so terrible ironic is that this is a Rolling Stone interview that took place on December

>8th in New York City (? 1970); I still remember the Rolling Stone cover when he died.
>
> http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/lennon-remembers-part-one-19710121

Topaz, this is a very well known interview. You act like it's some kind
of new discovery.

[jtees4]

That's my feeling also. I have listened, and it's not there.

[Home Guard Chris]

On 16/10/2015 20:49, topazgalaxy wrote:
> On Friday, October 16, 2015 at 3:07:16 PM UTC-4, Home Guard Chris wrote:
>> On 15/10/2015 22:01, topazgalaxy wrote:
>>> On Thursday, October 15, 2015 at 11:47:33 AM UTC-4, Home Guard Chris wrote:
>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fVtHztdkrnU
>>>>
>>>> That's a link to the 2009 stereo master of Baby, You're a Rich man.
>>>> Using that specific video as a reference, at what time(s) do you hear
>>>> John alter his line to "Baby, you're a rich fag Jew"? I'm trying to
>>>> figure out whether we all hear it at the same point, or whether the
>>>> power of suggestion comes into play.
>>>
>>> I did not hear it on the video you posted; however if you play the same song on youtube in the mono versions towards the fade out at the end I think I hear it.
>>
>> Thank you, that's interesting. Here's the mono version:
>>
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZDxZCKAkeM
>>
>> At which point(s) do you hear the altered line?

> To answer your question, I am not sure, but I think I may here John singing it around 2:44 or 2:45 but I am not sure.

Right, thanks. I think you're describing the same point of the same
recording as RichL, just the mix is different.

The next question: did you hear it as "Baby, you're a rich fag Jew"
before you learned of the legendary altered line, or after?

[Home Guard Chris]

I always doubted, but now I'm close to convinced that it's not in the
final released recording.

[I Love My NezMonkee]

The fact that people think that would be something John would sing
(whether he sang it or not) is telling. George would never sing such a
thing, you know. George had a little class and respect for other people.

[blackpo...@gmail.com]

George plays guitar on "How Do You Sleep"...didn't complain or refuse.

[topazgalaxy]

Good question.
I knew, as part of legend or ?fact (whichever it is) that in this song, John did sing "rich fag Jew" and I knew that legend/fact for many years before I found this video on youtube.

But I also heard the song on original vinyl album years ago when it came out.

I just do not know if this youtube version is truly accurate to the vinyl record I heard years ago

Also, the mono version on youtube is a puzzle to me, because IIRC when Peppers came out, that was when record companies got rid of Mono and switched all LPs to stereo, or at least that is what I recall.

[I Love My NezMonkee]

So what? George was doing his job and doing what his boss (John) told
him to do. I don't see the equivalent of that to singing out "rich fag
jew!"

Another example that I see often is people thinking that John said Ringo
"wasn't even the best drummer in The Beatles!" OK, I know he didn't
really say that, but the fact that there are so many people who think it
was within Lennon's character to say that shows what a jerk he was.
Don't you see?

[blackpo...@gmail.com]

No, I don't. You write "George had a little class and respect for other people" but you say his "boss" told him to play so he played on a song bad mouthing Paul....Are you saying George was beholding to John (for some reason) and did as the "boss" ordered...you are mistaken..don't you see?

[Tim]

..........................................................

another slanted viewpoint:

http://www.realliberalchristianchurch.org/2009/11/17/homosexual-fascist-liberals-who-sang-baby-youre-a-rich-fag-jew.html

[RichL]

"Home Guard Chris" <cont...@theSPAMTRAPhomeguard.info> wrote in message
news:d8cvd4...@mid.individual.net...

> On 15/10/2015 20:13, poisoned rose wrote:
>> Home Guard Chris <cont...@theSPAMTRAPhomeguard.info> wrote:
>>
>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fVtHztdkrnU
>>
>> How about this?
>>
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygavpxE0ib4
>
> You've completely pre-empted my next move!
>
>> I don't hear it, though this isn't the entire song.
>
> Me neither. I'm sure the full version used to be out there, but I can't
> find it right now).

This does contain the beginning of the fadeout, where, stretching things, I
thought I heard "fat".
This clip clarifies it. What's going on is that the 'n' is chopped off,
making it sound more like a 't'.
Listen carefully at 1:24 of the clip that PR posted. I think that
corresponds to 2:49 in your original link.

Bingo!

[I Love My NezMonkee]

No, I don't see. George was doing his job playing on the Imagine album,
but that doesn't mean he didn't have respect for other people. "How Do
You Sleep?" was John's song, not George's. That's all I know. I you
totally lost me with what you wrote.

[blackpo...@gmail.com]

Lets start here....do you think John was the "boss" and George played on 'How do you sleep' because John told him to? Did George ever 'bad mouth' Yoko?

Yes, the song was John's...it was RINGO that said "John you've gone too far with this" not George, who played on a tune ripping Paul apart...now for me, if George would never sing such words because he was 'nice' but in fact played guitar to such words, is he just some puppet for John? You are wrong...and you still say John sang "Rich fag jew" when in fact no one has heard or can produce it on record.

To sum up, dear Nez...we all wipe...we are all human will human frailties...and quite frankly I don't give a fuck about the 'nasty' John or the 'good George'...their music had a good beat and I could dance to it....now please, go back to the monkees, where all those guy's were good decent folk.....(you do sound twelve)

all the best

BPJ

[WillyShears]

On 10/15/2015 10:47 AM, Home Guard Chris wrote:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fVtHztdkrnU
>
> That's a link to the 2009 stereo master of Baby, You're a Rich man.
> Using that specific video as a reference, at what time(s) do you hear
> John alter his line to "Baby, you're a rich fag Jew"? I'm trying to
> figure out whether we all hear it at the same point, or whether the
> power of suggestion comes into play.
>

Why would John sing "Baby, you're a rich cigarette Jew"?
Never happened.

[I Love My NezMonkee]

On 10/17/2015 5:13 AM, blackpo...@gmail.com wrote:

> Lets start here....do you think John was the "boss" and George played on 'How do you sleep' because John told him to?

In the movie about the making of the Imagine album ("Gimme Some Truth")
George is very quiet, mousy even, and basically did what he was told, no
matter how fiery and nasty John would get, which was often. At least
that is the impression that *I* get. Maybe George knew if he objected
it would start something ugly.

>Did George ever 'bad mouth' Yoko?

He did object to her being in the studio where she didn't belong; I
don't recall George bad mouthing her personally in public. (To the best
of my knowledge).

>You are wrong...

The concept that someone might actually disagree with you is bizarre to
you, isn't it?

>and you still say John sang "Rich fag jew" when in fact no one has heard or can produce it on record.

You misunderstood me. FTR I don't think he sang it. But the fact there
are people who think that it would be within John's character to sing
such a thing says something about John.

> To sum up, dear Nez...we all wipe...we are all human will human frailties...and quite frankly I don't give a fuck about

> the 'nasty' John or the 'good George'

Then I expect you to stop responding to me. :)

>...their music had a good beat and I could dance to it....now please, go back to the monkees, where all those guy's were

>good decent folk.....(you do sound twelve)

You must have missed my post about Davy and you must know many very
intelligent kids who have a good vocabulary and can present arguments
with facts and logic.

[BlackMonk]

On 10/17/2015 11:42 AM, I Love My NezMonkee wrote:

> You misunderstood me. FTR I don't think he sang it. But the fact there
> are people who think that it would be within John's character to sing
> such a thing says something about John.
>

You mean, like the way that there are people who think you're just
trolling this group says something about you?

[I Love My NezMonkee]

? Maybe, I don't know.

[jtees4]

Even though he didn't sing it in this particular instance....John
would absolutely have sung this, he never had a problem with saying
things like that....sometimes within earshot of Brian Epstein....he
did it all the time.

[poisoned rose]

I Love My NezMonkee <princes...@mail.com> wrote:

> But the fact there
> are people who think that it would be within John's character to sing
> such a thing says something about John.

This is the second time you've pulled this argument, and it still
doesn't make any sense. It's like saying because the "Paul is dead"
story swept around the world, there must be some truth to it.

[I Love My NezMonkee]

I've explained it as best I could. I don't *think* it's quite the same
as "Paul is Dead". Is there really anybody who believes Paul is dead?

[blackpo...@gmail.com]

I would like you to know that despite your foolish comments, I love you...now down the road some could argue "did he really said that" or is it just a fable to be resurrected and discussed...did he or didn't he. Well here is your proof, I love you even if you don't moisten hearing that...people who know me, love me...those that don't, make up stories..and please don't forget, Obama is not a citizen of the USA....proof is in the Republican hands, which will soon be divulged at the 2016 convention...although he has already served two terms, his nice guy persona will be revealed to be a nasty drunk...but as the George has said, all things must pass..

Our discussion on all things Lennon and monkey business are coming to a close now...so I will wish you happy days (don't forget Fonzie jumped the shark)...and remember, once a Beatles lover, always a Beatles lover, no matter the dirt thrown by those that have achieved basically nothing.

I do applaud your hanging in with us stubborn old folk but remember, you will get there as well, lord willing.


BPJ

[Home Guard Chris]

Well, it's beside the point, but yes: the word "fag" is nowhere near as
loaded here compared to the US. Also, if you're partial to eating
chopped liver:

http://burningkitchen.co.uk/Cooking/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/2220459531_b4e528d6f2_b.jpg

Sometimes things don't translate accurately, even when everyone seems to
be speaking the same language. :-)

--
http://thehomeguard.bandcamp.com -
- new (and unusual) album out now

[Home Guard Chris]

Crucially, though, we can't rule out the power of suggestion. Did
anybody here hear "Baby, you're a rich fag Jew" before they heard of the
legend? (Legends can be based in fact, incidentally.)

> Also, the mono version on youtube is a puzzle to me, because IIRC when Peppers came out, that was when record companies got rid of Mono and switched all LPs to stereo, or at least that is what I recall.

There were mono releases of all Beatles albums up to and including the
White Album, and a few other tracks besides.

--

[Home Guard Chris]

Yes, I think they do indeed correspond - and I'm more convinced than
ever that it's not the word "fag" at that point. Thank you. :-)

Now, to throw a spanner in the works, I've just realised that the mono
version actually goes round one extra time. So, does the altered line
appear after the 2:58 point here?:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZDxZCKAkeM

Turn your volume right up as it fades - there's an awful lot going on
there...

[Home Guard Chris]

On 17/10/2015 03:07, Tim wrote:
> On Friday, October 16, 2015 at 12:22:17 PM UTC-7, Home Guard Chris wrote:
>> On 16/10/2015 13:11, P-Dub wrote:
>>> On Thursday, October 15, 2015 at 11:02:44 PM UTC-4, RichL wrote:
>>>> "Home Guard Chris" <cont...@theSPAMTRAPhomeguard.info> wrote in message
>>>> news:d8a04h...@mid.individual.net...
>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fVtHztdkrnU
>>>>>
>>>>> That's a link to the 2009 stereo master of Baby, You're a Rich man. Using
>>>>> that specific video as a reference, at what time(s) do you hear John alter
>>>>> his line to "Baby, you're a rich fag Jew"? I'm trying to figure out
>>>>> whether we all hear it at the same point, or whether the power of
>>>>> suggestion comes into play.
>>>>
>>>> If it's there at all, it's at 2:49-2:50. I'm straining to hear it.
>>>> Something seems a bit off at this point, and I have to strain my own
>>>> credulity to get something meaningful out of it. Stretching things a bit, I
>>>> hear "fat" rather than "fag". I don't hear "Jew" very clearly at all.
>>>>
>>>> I suspect this falls into the "I buried Paul" category, i.e., urban legend.
>>>
>>> I've always kinda heard 'fat Jew' in this.
>>
>> At the same point as RichL, or elsewhere in the song?
>>
>

> another slanted viewpoint:
>
> http://www.realliberalchristianchurch.org/2009/11/17/homosexual-fascist-liberals-who-sang-baby-youre-a-rich-fag-jew.html

"John even gave the devil's hand sign on the cover of Yellow Submarine"
is my favourite bit. The fact that it's a drawing doesn't even seem to
enter into the equation...

--
http://thehomeguard.bandcamp.com -
- new (and unusual) album out now

[RichL]

"Home Guard Chris" <cont...@theSPAMTRAPhomeguard.info> wrote in message

news:d8i2ul...@mid.individual.net...

I don't hear it.

[zippl...@gmail.com]

On Sunday, October 18, 2015 at 12:18:50 PM UTC-5, Home Guard Chris wrote:
> On 17/10/2015 01:24, topazgalaxy wrote:
> > On Friday, October 16, 2015 at 7:02:04 PM UTC-4, Home Guard Chris wrote:
> >> On 16/10/2015 20:49, topazgalaxy wrote:
> >>> On Friday, October 16, 2015 at 3:07:16 PM UTC-4, Home Guard Chris wrote:
> >>>> On 15/10/2015 22:01, topazgalaxy wrote:
> >>>>> On Thursday, October 15, 2015 at 11:47:33 AM UTC-4, Home Guard Chris wrote:
> >>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fVtHztdkrnU
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> That's a link to the 2009 stereo master of Baby, You're a Rich man.
> >>>>>> Using that specific video as a reference, at what time(s) do you hear
> >>>>>> John alter his line to "Baby, you're a rich fag Jew"? I'm trying to
> >>>>>> figure out whether we all hear it at the same point, or whether the
> >>>>>> power of suggestion comes into play.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I did not hear it on the video you posted; however if you play the same song on youtube in the mono versions towards the fade out at the end I think I hear it.

I don't understand why you people are looking for this on a recording? It doesn't
exist and never has. John made some corny statement about using the words of
a rich fag jew to the others and/or George Martin his odd sense of humor.
If a version with the lyrics you are speaking of really existed, don't you think
we would have heard about it after all these years, with people being offended?
Who knows, it might exist with an alternate take of the song if it exists? John
also used the phrase "Everyone had a hard on" on an unreleased take of "I've
got a feeling". But it never made it onto the released take of the song

[hislop]

On 16/10/2015 6:13 AM, poisoned rose wrote:
> Home Guard Chris <cont...@theSPAMTRAPhomeguard.info> wrote:
>
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fVtHztdkrnU
>
> How about this?
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygavpxE0ib4
>

> I don't hear it, though this isn't the entire song.
>

> (Whew. This thread is a grim reminder of what a sub-par song this was,
> compared with the best Beatles material of that period.)
>

I so disagree with you.

[Home Guard Chris]

On 19/10/2015 02:32, zippl...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sunday, October 18, 2015 at 12:18:50 PM UTC-5, Home Guard Chris wrote:
>> On 17/10/2015 01:24, topazgalaxy wrote:
>>> On Friday, October 16, 2015 at 7:02:04 PM UTC-4, Home Guard Chris wrote:
>>>> On 16/10/2015 20:49, topazgalaxy wrote:
>>>>> On Friday, October 16, 2015 at 3:07:16 PM UTC-4, Home Guard Chris wrote:
>>>>>> On 15/10/2015 22:01, topazgalaxy wrote:
>>>>>>> On Thursday, October 15, 2015 at 11:47:33 AM UTC-4, Home Guard Chris wrote:
>>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fVtHztdkrnU
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That's a link to the 2009 stereo master of Baby, You're a Rich man.
>>>>>>>> Using that specific video as a reference, at what time(s) do you hear
>>>>>>>> John alter his line to "Baby, you're a rich fag Jew"? I'm trying to
>>>>>>>> figure out whether we all hear it at the same point, or whether the
>>>>>>>> power of suggestion comes into play.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I did not hear it on the video you posted; however if you play the same song on youtube in the mono versions towards the fade out at the end I think I hear it.
>
>
> I don't understand why you people are looking for this on a recording? It doesn't
> exist and never has.

It started in another thread - Poisoned Rose drew attention to the fact
that John's Wikipedia page, citing two sources, unequivocally states:

"During the recording of 'Baby, You're a Rich Man', he sang altered
choruses of 'Baby, you're a rich fag Jew'."

And so the question was raised as to whether or not the altered lyrics
can be heard on the released version or not. That's all.

[Home Guard Chris]

I don't, either. Anyone else?

[zippl...@gmail.com]

You snipped my explanation. Oh well.

[zippl...@gmail.com]

It's not there or we would have heard it within the past 40 years.

[BlackMonk]

It has sounded like that at some point in the fade to me. In fact, I
remember thinking "That's strange, I thought was only supposed to have
sung that on an outtake" the first time I heard it. I ascribed it to the
power of suggestion.

[Eric Ramon]

I guess I might as well go listen with headphones but I don't think it's there. The fact that we're discussing it, however, shows that Mike Nesmith had a personality disorder.

[poisoned rose]

Home Guard Chris <cont...@theSPAMTRAPhomeguard.info> wrote:

> It started in another thread - Poisoned Rose drew attention to the fact
> that John's Wikipedia page, citing two sources, unequivocally states:
>
> "During the recording of 'Baby, You're a Rich Man', he sang altered
> choruses of 'Baby, you're a rich fag Jew'."

This description of my position is inaccurate, as far as I can
see/recall.

You brought up Wikipedia first, not relating to "rich fag Jew" but to
the larger topic of Lennon's reputation allegedly being torn down by the
modern world:

"Or have a look at [Lennon's] Wikipedia page and see whether you think
it's balanced or whether there are revisionists at both ends of the
scale battling to fulfil their agenda."

Me:

"Specifically, what do you think is unfair about the Wikipedia page? The
only thing that jumped out at me is that it seems harsh to tersely write
off Double Fantasy as 'not well-received' without much further
elaboration."

You:

"If I had to pick only one section, I'd have to say the bit regarding
his personal relationship with Brian Epstein:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lennon#Brian_Epstein

The line "Lennon delighted in mocking Epstein for his homosexuality" in
particular, when read in conjunction with the examples provided, seems
misleading to the point of a smear to me."

Me:

"So I take it you don't believe he's really singing 'Baby you're a rich
fag Jew'? (I'm not sure where I stand on that question.)"

You:

"Good question. Honestly, I don't know. Has this ever been established
either way? (I may just start a new thread on the subject, see if it
gains any traction.)"

Where did I cite what Wiki says about the line?

[Home Guard Chris]

On 19/10/2015 20:11, zippl...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> I don't understand why you people are looking for this on a recording? It doesn't
>>> exist and never has.
>>
>> It started in another thread - Poisoned Rose drew attention to the fact
>> that John's Wikipedia page, citing two sources, unequivocally states:
>>
>> "During the recording of 'Baby, You're a Rich Man', he sang altered
>> choruses of 'Baby, you're a rich fag Jew'."
>>
>> And so the question was raised as to whether or not the altered lyrics
>> can be heard on the released version or not. That's all.
>

> You snipped my explanation. Oh well.

Sorry, Jeff - didn't mean to appear rude, I just thought my answer to
your first statement would cover everything.

> John made some corny statement about using the words of
> a rich fag jew to the others and/or George Martin his odd sense of
> humor.

Do you remember where you read this, by any chance?

> If a version with the lyrics you are speaking of really existed,
> don't you think
> we would have heard about it after all these years, with people being
> offended?

There really are people out there who state as fact that it *is* on the
released version. I've read books that say so, and books that say it's
an urban myth.

> Who knows, it might exist with an alternate take of the song if it
> exists?

It's definitely more than possible.

> John
> also used the phrase "Everyone had a hard on" on an unreleased take
> of "I've
> got a feeling". But it never made it onto the released take of the
> song

Although the "wet dream" line did. Funny how these things work out.

[Home Guard Chris]

On 19/10/2015 20:46, BlackMonk wrote:
>> It started in another thread - Poisoned Rose drew attention to the fact
>> that John's Wikipedia page, citing two sources, unequivocally states:
>>
>> "During the recording of 'Baby, You're a Rich Man', he sang altered
>> choruses of 'Baby, you're a rich fag Jew'."
>>
>> And so the question was raised as to whether or not the altered lyrics
>> can be heard on the released version or not. That's all.
>>
>
> It has sounded like that at some point in the fade to me. In fact, I
> remember thinking "That's strange, I thought was only supposed to have
> sung that on an outtake" the first time I heard it. I ascribed it to the
> power of suggestion.

Interesting. I don't suppose you can pinpoint where exactly, can you?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZDxZCKAkeM

[Home Guard Chris]

On 19/10/2015 21:33, poisoned rose wrote:
> Home Guard Chris <cont...@theSPAMTRAPhomeguard.info> wrote:
>
>> It started in another thread - Poisoned Rose drew attention to the fact
>> that John's Wikipedia page, citing two sources, unequivocally states:
>>
>> "During the recording of 'Baby, You're a Rich Man', he sang altered
>> choruses of 'Baby, you're a rich fag Jew'."
>
> This description of my position is inaccurate, as far as I can
> see/recall.

Many apologies - I didn't intend to misrepresent you, just giving Jeff
the background of what led to this thread in as brief a form as
possible. I brought up Wikipedia, you drew my attention to the line in
question and asked me my opinion (also stating you didn't know where you
stood on the matter), and I said I was unsure too, so started the new
thread on the subject.

> Where did I cite what Wiki says about the line?

You didn't, but you did draw my attention to the line. "Citing two
sources" refers to the Wikipedia article, not to you - reading it back I
can see that's ambiguous. I promise you there's no malice intended here.

[zippl...@gmail.com]

On Monday, October 19, 2015 at 3:36:47 PM UTC-5, Home Guard Chris wrote:
> On 19/10/2015 20:11, zippl...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>> I don't understand why you people are looking for this on a recording? It doesn't
> >>> exist and never has.
> >>
> >> It started in another thread - Poisoned Rose drew attention to the fact
> >> that John's Wikipedia page, citing two sources, unequivocally states:
> >>
> >> "During the recording of 'Baby, You're a Rich Man', he sang altered
> >> choruses of 'Baby, you're a rich fag Jew'."
> >>
> >> And so the question was raised as to whether or not the altered lyrics
> >> can be heard on the released version or not. That's all.
> >
> > You snipped my explanation. Oh well.
>
> Sorry, Jeff - didn't mean to appear rude, I just thought my answer to
> your first statement would cover everything.

No problem, Chris.

> > John made some corny statement about using the words of
> > a rich fag jew to the others and/or George Martin his odd sense of
> > humor.
>
> Do you remember where you read this, by any chance?

I read it many times years ago. Where? I don't remember.

> > If a version with the lyrics you are speaking of really existed,
> > don't you think
> > we would have heard about it after all these years, with people being
> > offended?
>
> There really are people out there who state as fact that it *is* on the
> released version. I've read books that say so, and books that say it's
> an urban myth.

The thing is, many of us have been posting here since the late 90's and
it doesn't make sense for this question to be asked in 2015. I haven't
seen one question about it until now. I would assume it's young people
starting these rumors. After 40 years, the truth gets twisted, and it
won't stop.

> > Who knows, it might exist with an alternate take of the song if it
> > exists?
>
> It's definitely more than possible.

Yep.

> > John
> > also used the phrase "Everyone had a hard on" on an unreleased take
> > of "I've
> > got a feeling". But it never made it onto the released take of the
> > song
>
> Although the "wet dream" line did. Funny how these things work out.
>
> --
> http://thehomeguard.bandcamp.com -
> - new (and unusual) album out now

It sure is, Chris.

[poisoned rose]

Right, I'm just clarifying....

Incidentally, I think there's some ambiguity to that line from
Wikipedia. It doesn't flat-out say "Lennon sings 'rich fag Jew' on the
track 'Baby, You're a Rich Man.'" It says he did it "during the
recording of 'Baby, You're a Rich Man.'" Those words seem carefully
chosen. It seems possible to interpret that quote as "During the
recording sessions for 'Baby, You're a Rich Man,' Lennon sang 'rich fag
Jew' on an outtake or two."

Incidentally#2, on the Wiki page devoted to that song alone
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baby,_You're_a_Rich_Man), there is no
mention of this issue at all.

[BlackMonk]

Exactly? No, since you're asking where I heard something that isn't
there. I'd guess around 2:55. As someone else suggested, it's probably a
result of John not really enunciating the beginning or end of "man." He
also hits the vowel in "too" harder than the consonant. My mind probably
worked it out as "A word with "a" in the middle where the ending is cut
off? If he sings "fag" at some point,that's it here. And he's supposed
to sing "Jew" after "fag," so that must be what he's singing after it."
I would have heard it on the stereo mix, though.

[Sarah Sheeney]

On Monday, October 19, 2015 at 3:11:11 PM UTC-4, zippl...@gmail.com
wrote:

>
> You snipped my explanation. Oh well.

That's because he is a moyle.

[I Love My NezMonkee]

On 10/19/2015 1:08 PM, Eric Ramon wrote:

> I guess I might as well go listen with headphones but I don't think it's there. The fact that we're discussing it,
>however, shows that Mike Nesmith had a personality disorder.

Someone has their Monkees and Beatles mixed up.

[blackpo...@gmail.com]

That would make The Beatkees :-)

[Eric Ramon]

On Monday, October 19, 2015 at 12:46:37 PM UTC-7, BlackMonk wrote:

> It has sounded like that at some point in the fade to me. In fact, I
> remember thinking "That's strange, I thought was only supposed to have
> sung that on an outtake" the first time I heard it. I ascribed it to the
> power of suggestion.

I finally got around to listening with headphones. I hear the "f" but not the "g" or the "j". It sounds like "baby you're rich fat, too". This, I think, tells me more about the people who seem to want it to be "rich fag Jew" than anything else. It's similar to "I buried Paul" only worse.

[thewalruswasdanny]

> John alter his line to "Baby, you're a rich fag Jew"? I'm trying to
> figure out whether we all hear it at the same point, or whether the
> power of suggestion comes into play.

The word fag as meaning a gay feller isn't what Brits say..especially in 67

Danny

[Tim]

Hmm - I'm not certain of this however it seems to me that cigarettes were sometimes referred to as fags, during the 60's, in England.

[Stephen X. Carter]

Not "sometimes" - but "usually".

As for Danny's point, it's been covered before. The concesus was that
it's definitely the case that in 1967 Brit's rarely referred to Gay men
as "fags", John moved in trendy hip uptotheminuteslang circles. Avante
Garde (sp?). So using the word "Fag" would have been unusual, but not
improbable for John's circle of friends.

--
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*

[topazgalaxy]

I have seen and heard John Lennon talking about Brian Epstein and he had said when he was alive that "we all knew he was a fag." So the word was in John's vernacular.

[blackpo...@gmail.com]

"I think the Rolling Stones are a lot of hype. I like ``Honky Tonk Women,'' but I think Mick's a joke with all that fag dancing; I always did. I enjoy it; I'll probably go and see his films and all like everybody else, but really, I think it's a joke"- John Lennon, Rolling Stone interview, 1970.

[BeatleEd]

>> As for Danny's point, it's been covered before. The concesus was
>> that it's definitely the case that in 1967 Brit's rarely referred to
>> Gay men as "fags", John moved in trendy hip uptotheminuteslang
>> circles. Avante Garde (sp?). So using the word "Fag" would have
>> been unusual, but not improbable for John's circle of friends.
>>
>
>

> "I think the Rolling Stones are a lot of hype. I like ``Honky Tonk
> Women,'' but I think Mick's a joke with all that fag dancing; I always
> did. I enjoy it; I'll probably go and see his films and all like
> everybody else, but really, I think it's a joke"- John Lennon, Rolling
> Stone interview, 1970.

1967 and 1970 were EONS apart culture-wise.

[blackpo...@gmail.com]

Agree...although my cousin in England, on a recent visit here in New York, wanted to go get a pack of "fags"..I did ask her to refrain from that at the 711 store.

But the point of my post was that..who really cares if Lennon said or didn't say "Rich Fag Jew" and for the discussion to go on for days, to me, is mind boggling....but what the hell...this group become a shadow of its once enlightening self.

We can always discuss the monkees I guess.

[Nil]

On 25 Oct 2015, blackpo...@gmail.com wrote in
rec.music.beatles:

> But the point of my post was that..who really cares if Lennon said
> or didn't say "Rich Fag Jew" and for the discussion to go on for
> days, to me, is mind boggling....

I'm boggled that you're boggled. Would you also be boggled if the
discussion were about whether John said "I buried Paul" or what the
runoff groove on Sgt. Pepper was about?

> but what the hell...this group
> become a shadow of its once enlightening self.

That may or may not be, but this discussion isn't evidence one way or
another.

> We can always discuss the monkees I guess.

Not me.

[Tim]

Got a problem with city Zoos, aye? :)

[Roag Cheddar]

On Saturday, October 24, 2015 at 4:31:39 PM UTC-7, thewalruswasdanny
wrote:

More worthless, inaccurate rubbish from the nebbish who thinks he knows
it all.

That is about as accurate as your Pete Best gossip.

[blackpo...@gmail.com]

On Sunday, October 25, 2015 at 1:56:58 PM UTC-4, Nil wrote:
> On 25 Oct 2015, blackpo...@gmail.com wrote in
> rec.music.beatles:
>
> > But the point of my post was that..who really cares if Lennon said
> > or didn't say "Rich Fag Jew" and for the discussion to go on for
> > days, to me, is mind boggling....
>
> I'm boggled that you're boggled. Would you also be boggled if the
> discussion were about whether John said "I buried Paul" or what the
> runoff groove on Sgt. Pepper was about?

Yep

>
> > but what the hell...this group
> > become a shadow of its once enlightening self.
>
> That may or may not be, but this discussion isn't evidence one way or
> another.

When it runs on for days, it is...

>
> > We can always discuss the monkees I guess.
>
> Not me.

nor I

The Beatles group has broken up into shards of nonsense....long live The Beatles....

[Nil Is A Douchebag]

On Sunday, October 25, 2015 at 1:56:58 PM UTC-4, Nil wrote:

> On 25 Oct 2015, blackpo...@gmail.com wrote in
>

> > but what the hell...this group
> > become a shadow of its once enlightening self.
>
> That may or may not be, but this discussion isn't evidence one way or
> another.

Well if Nil says it ain't than that is the final word isn't it?

Nil knows so much and is so much smarter than anyone else here at RMB.

At least according to him. The rest of us think he is a pompous
douchebag.

> > We can always discuss the monkees I guess.
>
> Not me.

Don't expect the rest of us to follow your lead, Nildo.

[I Love My NezMonkee]

On 10/25/2015 10:09 AM, BeatleEd wrote:
>>> As for Danny's point, it's been covered before. The concesus was
>>> that it's definitely the case that in 1967 Brit's rarely referred to
>>> Gay men as "fags", John moved in trendy hip uptotheminuteslang
>>> circles. Avante Garde (sp?). So using the word "Fag" would have
>>> been unusual, but not improbable for John's circle of friends.

blackpooljimmy wrote:
>> "I think the Rolling Stones are a lot of hype. I like ``Honky Tonk
>> Women,'' but I think Mick's a joke with all that fag dancing; I always
>> did. I enjoy it; I'll probably go and see his films and all like
>> everybody else, but really, I think it's a joke"- John Lennon, Rolling
>> Stone interview, 1970.
>
>
> 1967 and 1970 were EONS apart culture-wise.

I was going to post the obvious "That was three years later", but yeah.

[Nil]

On 25 Oct 2015, blackpo...@gmail.com wrote in
rec.music.beatles:

> On Sunday, October 25, 2015 at 1:56:58 PM UTC-4, Nil wrote:
>>
>> I'm boggled that you're boggled. Would you also be boggled if the
>> discussion were about whether John said "I buried Paul" or what
>> the runoff groove on Sgt. Pepper was about?
>
> Yep

Well, I probably wouldn't. I think that kind of thing is interesting. I
guess you disapprove of me, too.

> The Beatles group has broken up into shards of nonsense....long
> live The Beatles....

I get the impression that there is no discussion in the world that
would be of any interest to you.

[BlackMonk]

Why do those three years matter so much? Was John more cosmopolitan in
1970 than he was in 1967? Was he less likely to have been aware of an
American slang word that had existed since the 20s in 1967 than he was
in 1970?

[blackpo...@gmail.com]

On Sunday, October 25, 2015 at 6:50:55 PM UTC-4, Nil wrote:
> On 25 Oct 2015, blackpo...@gmail.com wrote in
> rec.music.beatles:
>
> > On Sunday, October 25, 2015 at 1:56:58 PM UTC-4, Nil wrote:
> >>
> >> I'm boggled that you're boggled. Would you also be boggled if the
> >> discussion were about whether John said "I buried Paul" or what
> >> the runoff groove on Sgt. Pepper was about?
> >
> > Yep
>
> Well, I probably wouldn't. I think that kind of thing is interesting. I
> guess you disapprove of me, too.

Who said that...are you paranoid?

>
> > The Beatles group has broken up into shards of nonsense....long
> > live The Beatles....
>
> I get the impression that there is no discussion in the world that
> would be of any interest to you.

Who said that..are you delusional? "No discussion in the world" sounds a bit silly....posting day after day whether Lennon said something or not is, in my opinion, stupid.

Now here is a discussion I'd rather have...The Beatles were great but I belive Paul was a match and John a blowtorch....discuss.

By the way...doesn't "Nil" mean zero? Inquiring minds would like to know...


your turn.

[blackpo...@gmail.com]

You post nothing but obvious nonsense....

[I Love My NezMonkee]

It just doesn't *prove* he used the word "fag" in that kind of way in
1967. It's possible that he learned it after "Baby You're a Rich Man"
and before the Rolling Stone interview. I do think Yoko introduced John
to new things, her circle of friends, etc. in the meantime.

[blackpo...@gmail.com]

ugh.

[Nil]

On 25 Oct 2015, blackpo...@gmail.com wrote in
rec.music.beatles:

> On Sunday, October 25, 2015 at 6:50:55 PM UTC-4, Nil wrote:
>>
>> Well, I probably wouldn't. I think that kind of thing is
>> interesting. I guess you disapprove of me, too.
>
> Who said that...are you paranoid?

Hardly. It seems a logical conclusion that you disapprove of some of
the things I like, so you will disapprove of my posts about those
subjects.

>> I get the impression that there is no discussion in the world
>> that would be of any interest to you.
>
> Who said that..are you delusional? "No discussion in the world"
> sounds a bit silly....posting day after day whether Lennon said
> something or not is, in my opinion, stupid.

What's not delusional is that you spend a lot of time grouching about
everyone else's posts. I can relate to that - there's a lot of obvious
garbage here. But you don't seem to distinguish between the trash and
the actual sincere posts and interested posters.

> Now here is a discussion I'd rather have...The Beatles were great
> but I belive Paul was a match and John a blowtorch....discuss.

I don't get it. Please expand.

> By the way...doesn't "Nil" mean zero?

Not in this case.

> Inquiring minds would like to know...

Did you make that up on your own, or did you have help? If on your own,
I'm disappointed. I thought you were smarter than that.

[blackpo...@gmail.com]

I'll expand on nothing...if you don't get the fact that for me..Lennon was the hot spark, McCartney, luke warm.

You seem to think that I don't like you, therefore anything you write...nonsense...my grief comes from coming to the RMB to see something refreshing...so I returned..but low and behold this place has gotten worse, with foolish comments and silly rumors, when if fact it should be about the music...come to think of it, here is my official RMB song, when days here were good...

https://soundcloud.com/blackpooljimmy-79344477/i-joined-the-rmb

I'll say goodnight, never to waste your time again, or you mine....much luck with finding inspiration in the dead zone.

BPJ

[Nil]

On 25 Oct 2015, blackpo...@gmail.com wrote in
rec.music.beatles:

> I'll expand on nothing...if you don't get the fact that for
> me..Lennon was the hot spark, McCartney, luke warm.

I still don't get it. But why even mention it if you don't want to
discuss it?

> You seem to think that I don't like you, therefore anything you
> write...nonsense...

I didn't think so either until recently. In fact, you've ignored me
until now.

> my grief comes from coming to the RMB to see
> something refreshing...so I returned..but low and behold this
> place has gotten worse, with foolish comments and silly rumors,
> when if fact it should be about the music...come to think of it,
> here is my official RMB song, when days here were good...

I suggested that some of the topics, specifically what lyrics may be
buried in the recordings, are in fact about the music. You then said
you disapproved of them. So, which is it?

> https://soundcloud.com/blackpooljimmy-79344477/i-joined-the-rmb

I've said it before and I'll say it again: good song and recording.

> I'll say goodnight, never to waste your time again, or you
> mine....much luck with finding inspiration in the dead zone.

I'm sorry you feel that way. I find inspiration in all kinds of
unlikely places. I try to not reject the source out of hand, at least
until they prove themselves unreliable. There are several people here
who fall into that category. I don't think you can tell the
difference. Killfiles are invaluable, and manual ignoring, such is the
only option with Google Groups, is possible but too much work IMO.

[Frank R Busby]

On Sunday, October 25, 2015 at 7:40:37 PM UTC-4, I Love My NezMonkee
wrote:
>

>I do think Yoko introduced John to new things, her circle of friends,
>etc. in the meantime.

Yoko introduced Lennon to her warm, wet and hairy vagina. Something he
could not get enough of over the next 12 years. Prior to Yoko's warm,
sweet snatcheroonie, he was busy sucking tons of caulk.

[WillyShears]

Entropy?
I wonder what Facebook will look like in 15 years.

[WillyShears]

Nil is short for Neil. Gotta save paper.
Also, shave in the dark.

[Nil]

On 26 Oct 2015, WillyShears <Br...@Wall.St> wrote in
rec.music.beatles:

> Nil is short for Neil. Gotta save paper.
> Also, shave in the dark.

Thanks, Pam!

[poisoned rose]

blackpo...@gmail.com wrote:

> But the point of my post was that..who really cares if Lennon said or didn't
> say "Rich Fag Jew" and for the discussion to go on for days, to me, is mind
> boggling....but what the hell...this group become a shadow of its once
> enlightening self.

Well, it's not helped by people like you whose favorite topic is their
own DIY music. And why is debating "28IF" any more weighty than debating
"Rich Fag Jew"? An identical type of issue, in my view.

[blackpo...@gmail.com]

Yes, you are right...I have been brainwashed...but when photographic proof is available, why not challenge the response by BeatleEddy?

The "rich fag Jew" can go on for years, with no conclusion...my 28IF has one.

BPJ


your turn

[zippl...@gmail.com]

This group has always been like this. The crowd has changed but not the topics.

[zippl...@gmail.com]

I'd be interested in knowing when you thought things were even close to perfect
here? Some things have always been nasty.

> https://soundcloud.com/blackpooljimmy-79344477/i-joined-the-rmb
>
> I'll say goodnight, never to waste your time again, or you mine....much luck with finding inspiration in the dead zone.
>
> BPJ

I hate to see you like this, but you weren't happy when you left this group last time.

[JEFFIE HE AINT REALLY LEAVING]

On Monday, October 26, 2015 at 4:25:22 PM UTC-4, zippl...@gmail.com

Jeffie like you this tard ain't leaving. He says lots of stupid shit
and sticks around.

Just like you!

[I Love My NezMonkee]

> Just like you.

Damn, I love your posts. No sugarcoating anything, just shoot straight
from the hip!

[WillyShears]

yeah Yeah YEAH!
Have you ever seen this, Nil?
There are some true fans. And
they do a fab job on that medley.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HkxI0e0tOM0
Willy

[thewalruswasdanny]

> I have seen and heard John Lennon talking about Brian Epstein and he had said when he was alive that "we all knew he was a fag." So the word was in John's vernacular.

Not in 1967 though..too American IMO. He referred to Mick Jagger as Mick Faggot..but it was the 70s by then..he lived in NYC by then.

Danny

[svetlana]

On Monday, November 2, 2015 at 7:37:56 AM UTC-5, thewalruswasdanny
wrote:

Wow dude that really adds a lot to the convo.

Don't know what we would do without it.

Maybe we should call Lewisohn and have him put in book, da?