Fred Seaman "The Last Days of John Lennon"

Exactly, and any dope with AOL could access USENET claiming to be Fred Seaman to get some attention.

 

Because he was just brainstorming, he never said he believed she was responsible. Isn't it understandable that somebody in his position would let that thought cross his mind, Seaman having witnessed closeup her neurotic paranoia and cold selfishness?

 

In this era, people would quickly usurp Seaman's identity, some seeking to discredit him.

 

Fixed.

 

yes

Seaman's story just falls into the category of things that numerous people just want not to believe so they insist on not believing any of it.

 

You can read the old posts anyday but not many people were on that forum at the time they were made, compared to Hoffman now.
The old forum looks like a dinosaur, anyone care to post a sample to see?

 

Like Yoko's cousin "Matthew"

 

I think Matthew did admit he has never read the book but has read a newspaper piece and comments from Seaman on the internet. But never his book.

 

As I said previously, helter, I've read the book. I don't have a copy of it anymore.

Have fun with your thread, guys.

 

It was him and it was proven.

 

Who cares what it looked like? I don't know how old you were in the late Ninties, but there were so many people on that good groups like RMB were destroyed by 2000. Of course there are more people on now...more people driving too.

 

by the internet cops?

 

Heh...no.

 

by Dragnet?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gxhuUdZzGYw&feature=related

 

I think it's spelled netkkops.

 

That's the kind of black and white thinking that is making this discussion extremely silly. Seaman is a questionable source. Matthew has cited a lot of evidence demonstrating he is a questionable source. The fact that you feel his book has "the ring of truth" doesn't change any of the facts that Matthew has cited.

At the same time, I have not seen Matthew claim that Yoko is 100% reliable, or that the "hearts and flowers" portrait of their relationship John gave in 1980 interviews is completely accurate. It is quite possible to believe Seaman is an unreliable source yet also acknowledge that Lennon and Ono's relationship had problems and that Lennon was dysfunctional in many ways. To reduce this discussion to "if you don't believe Seaman then you must be a 'Yoko-ite'" is ridiculous. As is dismissing any factual evidence which contradicts what "feels" right to you.

 

Robert Rosen's book supports the troubled relationship between John and Yoko at least until August of 1980 when John stopped leaving detailed entries in his diary because he was busy making Double Fantasy.

Most Lennon insiders were employees who cannot speak out about this. Seaman did and got in trouble for it.

We do have other sources such as Sam Green and Lennon's diaries which should prove a lot of things. However most/all of us will probably be dead when they are finally released according to Rosen.

 

I'm amazed there is this strange vortex I occasionally fall into, in which people are either Yoko-ites or TruthSeekers...

In my opinion, Yoko is just as annoying, petty, rude and flaky as she is giving, caring, loving and talented. I think she played a major role in breaking up the Beatles, and I also believe she was in love with Lennon and loved in return. Complex and not easily categorized, just like most people.

But when I hear people accuse others of being "apologists" in her "camp" because they fail to believe hearsay that sounds highly improbable, I find myself a lot more suspicious of those people's motivations. Remember the thread in which one of these cats was trying so hard to prove that Yoko Ono arranged to have Paul McCartney jailed in Japan, and did so by phone from New York? "Yes, this is Yoko, and I must tell you that Paul McCartney is trying to smuggle marijuana into the country...that is all." That one was a laugh riot...but also a lot of wasted time and energy on a wildly speculative thread.

Ah, but now I must be "one of them", wink wink. Ze Dragon Lady...she has great powers, and many spies, and she seduces the unwitting men, no?

 

agree with this coment - actually the "Yoko-haters" offends Lennon, creating him an image of a helpless idiot.

 

You mean me?

Yes, it is funny however the information was supported by several John and Yoko insiders including the man who read Lennon's diary Robert Rosen.

So we shall see who has the last laugh on this one.



Regarding Lennon's diaries information not mentioned in Robert Rosen's book

Interviewer: How much information is still missing?

Robert Rosen: Some of the stuff about McCartney being busted in Japan, I couldn’t quite tell that story the way I wanted to. (for legal reasons)

 

Even if he was an "unreliable source" which I don't believe, Matthew apparently dismisses every single idea or anecdote Seaman ever uttered which is extreme. On top of that his wayward description of the book reminds me of George Costanza trying to fake it as Art Vandelay.

 

Well you sound balanced to me with a personal need to rule out the possibility of anything too scandalous. Considering how much evidence there is that Yoko often interfered in matters of Paul, it's really not that farfetched that Yoko might have been involved in that arrest. Seaman said it was because Yoko found out that Paul and his wife were going to be staying in a suite that they favored, that was used special for the Lennons. Sure there's some chance this may not be true, but "laugh riot"? If you were a betting man and could find out the actual answer to the question, I hate to tell you but you might lose.

 

John sort of created that image for himself, by posing like he did on the cover of that one Rolling Stone with Yoko, by going around calling her Mommy all the time, by turning all his money over to her control and letting her date other men while depicting himself as the "jealous guy", and by allowing her to set him up with Mae Pang and then coming back the second she snapped her fingers.

 

True

 

Perhaps you're right - may be partly he himself created that image, but I don't think he actually was a helpless idiot.