Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

FBI thought Lennon was too stoned to start a revolution

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
emad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-23-05 09:43 AM
Original message
FBI thought Lennon was too stoned to start a revolution
FBI thought Lennon was too stoned to start a revolution
By David Usborne in New York
Published: 23 September 2005

It was apparently with much relief that the FBI had a sudden revelation about the former Beatle John Lennon, back in 1972. For months the agency had been fretting that the singer-turned-activist was preparing to disrupt the Republican National Convention in Miami. Then somebody said it: Lennon was far too stoned to be a real threat.

The moment when the FBI concluded that pot had got the better of the late rock star is recorded in one of a myriad of files on deceased celebrities released by the US government this week under freedom of information statutes.

The same collection of papers reveals how far the agency went to spy on other celebrities, ranging from Marilyn Monroe - supposedly a Communist - to Liberace, who apparently had a gambling problem.

There has never been any secret about the preoccupation of the US government with Lennon after his arrival in America from Britain with his second wife, Yoko Ono, in 1971. Their political views and high-profile activism - including the famous Montreal "bed-in" in which they expounded on world peace while wearing pyjamas - caused deep suspicion in the Nixon administration.
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/article314479.ece
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
stepnw1f Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-23-05 09:52 AM
Response to Original message
1. He Was Too Stoned and They Were Too Stupid (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
atomic-fly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-23-05 09:56 AM
Response to Original message
2. yet somehow Chapman killed him
And for some odd reason Chapman was a friend of the Bushes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-24-05 12:10 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. That connection is just too creepy.
I'm sure it is purely coincidental.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AntiCoup2K4 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-24-05 11:12 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. Say what?
Chapman was a friend of the Bush Criminal Empire??

What's your source on this? Or are you confusing him with Hinkley, the guy who shot Reagan?. The Hinkley family were old oil business buddies of the BCE, and Neil Bush was scheduled to have dinner with Stephen Hinkley, John's brother, the very day that Reagan was shot. (the dinner party was cancelled for obvious reasons of appearance)

But I never heard any such stories about Chapman. Though he certainly could have been an MK-Ultra programmed assassin, as Hinkley was.

Sirhan Sirhan was as well, though he never fired one bullet into RFK. (But that's a subject for an entirely different thread)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nvliberal Donating Member (618 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-24-05 11:49 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. I think people confuse Hinkley and Chapman.
I know I have to think very hard about which is which when writing about either Reagan or Lennon.

Of course, the shootings occurred within months of each other.

The one thing you can say about both people is they were crazies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hidden Stillness Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-24-05 02:52 PM
Response to Original message
6. Story Too Complicated for a Message Post, But, a Little Background
This article is a pretty third-rate description of a very complicated situation, that of John and Yoko, the almost-deportation, etc. I suggest anyone interested should read about it, because a whole huge background needs to be understood before you can understand why some of these things were happening or why these people were acting this way (the Pentagon Papers/Watergate scandals were just starting to be exposed, John and Yoko had just been arrested in England for drugs, the American population had turned angrily against the Viet Nam war and Nixon, Nixon was paranoid always, anyway, and the FBI under Hoover often infiltrated and tried to destroy liberal, even ordinary labor union, groups that critcized Republican governments). Remember, that Nixon was so paranoid and vicious as to have had an Enemies List that even had Tony Randall on it, and these people were persecuted by wiretaps, IRS and etc. investigations to find any dirt, etc. Tony Randall was an ordinary good Democrat who made jokes about and criticized Nixon, when Nixon was Pres., on TV talk shows--Johnny Carson, Tom Snyder, Merv Griffin, etc.--and that was all it took. Sounds like the little prick rich boy who is there now.

Remember how beautifully political John and Yoko were--the whole "Sometime in New York City" LP, all the rallies and protests, the donations to causes, the talk shows--Dick Cavett, Tom Snyder, a wild week on Mike Douglas, who hated them, etc.--the songs, "Gimme Some Truth" with its reference to "Tricky Dicky," Nixon's well-earned nickname, "Woman is the Nigger of the World," "Sister O Sisters," etc., and the "War is Over If You Want It"/Bagism protests in Canada, the billboard in N.Y.C., etc.; John and Yoko were very active, brave--and popular. At some point the Nixon Administration noticed them, (recall that the Watergate-indicted criminal John Mitchell was the Attorney General; remember the great American hero Martha Mitchell, the first one who ever blew the whistle on these bastards, and how she was treated, and forgotten?), and decided they were a threat. The drug situation in England was the ideal cover, but it was just the pretext to get them out. The real fear was that John especially was really going to start influencing millions, and "directing" them to disrupt and bring down Republicans, starting with Nixon. You have to remember how respected and popular John and Yoko were, and how active the non-corporate culture was.

Anyone old enough to remember, will recall how this active attempt to deport them went on for about four years, was very serious, very stressful, and it seemed they would not win. Slowly, support built up for them, with very prominent mainstream politicians now signing petitions that they be allowed to stay. Meanwhile, Nixon was going down, the Watergate hearings were on TV (with John and Yoko conspicuously attending them in Wash. D.C.), and finally as I recall, a Federal Judge in New York threw out the drug charges (1975, I think), and it was over. This was back when there were actual laws, and this was a threat; unlike now, when rich people do whatever they want--get illegal prescriptions from multiple doctors, or some such thing--and make the laws go away.

Also, Marilyn Monroe was always famously a Democrat, a liberal, campaigned for Adlai Stevenson and many others, and was friends with famous liberal Democrats such as Lauren Bacall and Humphrey Bogart. Marilyn Monroe always described herself as middle-class, identified with the audience/the people, and criticized the movie studios/big business all the time--known as a liberal Democrat ("The people made me, not some studio," etc.). Of course, conveniently, you now have "Kennedys killed her" bullshit, started by a Republican operatve by way of the Anthony Summers book, etc. etc., corporate media disinformation destroying her image after all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 23rd 2024, 02:05 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC