The Beatles Bible - Topic: Question about John's assassination

greghumphreysART on Question about John's assassination

Sun, 10 Mar 2013 23:10:36 +0000

Funny Paper said

greghumphreysART said

But there is of course the famous pic of Lennon signing for a smiling Chapman, happily obliging him.. on the day of the murder.. which I always find very haunting.

I thought I read somewhere that, although John did sign it for Chapman, Chapman felt like John had somehow slighted him in some subtle way, and that triggered a resentment in him. Of course, we also know that he had planned to kill him and had flown to NYC from Hawaii for that purpose, but you never know with schizophrenics like Chapman: ...

Funny Paper on Question about John's assassination

Sun, 10 Mar 2013 21:25:45 +0000

greghumphreysART said

But there is of course the famous pic of Lennon signing for a smiling Chapman, happily obliging him.. on the day of the murder.. which I always find very haunting.

I thought I read somewhere that, although John did sign it for Chapman, Chapman felt like John had somehow slighted him in some subtle way, and that triggered a resentment in him. Of course, we also know that he had planned to kill him and had flown to NYC from Hawaii for that purpose, but you never know with schizophrenics like Chapman: had John treated him with ...

greghumphreysART on Question about John's assassination

Sun, 10 Mar 2013 16:38:02 +0000

He (Chapman) also had a copy of Catcher In The Rye by J D Salinger, in which the boy in the book, Holden Caulfield, hates 'phonies,' and was influenced heavily by it.

He was reading it when the police arrived at The Dakota, I believe.

But there is of course the famous pic of Lennon signing for a smiling Chapman, happily obliging him.. on the day of the murder.. which I always find very haunting.

mja6758 on Question about John's assassination

Tue, 12 Feb 2013 20:07:03 +0000

I doff my imaginary cap. Have an

Zig on Question about John's assassination

Tue, 12 Feb 2013 19:44:17 +0000

mja6758 said

Zig said

mja6758 said

I'm also someone who calls him "him" or "he" unless the conversation dictates otherwise.

My term is "the a_ _hole in the orange jump suit".

I can go for that. I also like the nickname he was given in his teens and hated so much, "Nemo", the Latin word meaning "no man" or "no one".

How appropriate - Nemo also wears an orange jump suit.

mja6758 on Question about John's assassination

Tue, 12 Feb 2013 19:20:30 +0000

Zig said

mja6758 said

I'm also someone who calls him "him" or "he" unless the conversation dictates otherwise.

My term is "the a_ _hole in the orange jump suit".

I can go for that. I also like the nickname he was given in his teens and hated so much, "Nemo", the Latin word meaning "no man" or "no one".

Zig on Question about John's assassination

Tue, 12 Feb 2013 18:30:03 +0000

mja6758 said

I'm also someone who calls him "him" or "he" unless the conversation dictates otherwise.

My term is "the a_ _hole in the orange jump suit".

LongHairedLady on Question about John's assassination

Mon, 11 Feb 2013 16:31:42 +0000

Exactly.

mja6758 on Question about John's assassination

Mon, 11 Feb 2013 03:24:59 +0000

LongHairedLady said

unknown said
Refusing to say his name doesn't make a difference.

Makes all the difference to me.

I'm also someone who calls him "him" or "he" unless the conversation dictates otherwise. It may not make a difference to what happened, but if he was only ever referred to as "the thing who fired the gun", if "the murderer" became how he was referred to, if that was how we chose to place him, then his name would be less carved in history than he would like.

LongHairedLady on Question about John's assassination

Sun, 10 Feb 2013 03:27:07 +0000

unknown said
Refusing to say his name doesn't make a difference.

Makes all the difference to me.

meanmistermustard on Question about John's assassination

Sat, 09 Feb 2013 21:13:39 +0000

unknown said
Refusing to say his name doesn't make a difference. You still know what his what name is, who his is, and what he did. If he wanted fame, he got that, though I don't understand why anybody would want so many people to dislike them.

He felt he was a nobody and wanted to become a somebody, thru killing John he has. His name will always be known, passed down the ages. For as long as John is highly-esteemed and remembered then Chapman will also be remembered as the man who killed him. Bad publicity in this case is better than no ...

unknown on Question about John's assassination

Sat, 09 Feb 2013 16:43:35 +0000

Refusing to say his name doesn't make a difference. You still know what his what name is, who his is, and what he did. If he wanted fame, he got that, though I don't understand why anybody would want so many people to dislike them.

LongHairedLady on Question about John's assassination

Sat, 09 Feb 2013 09:11:30 +0000

I've dipped into this a little in the past, but I don't anymore. It's just giving him the fame that he wanted, and I'm not going to feed into it anymore. I don't even like to speak or type his name. "He" can piss off.

mja6758 on Question about John's assassination

Tue, 08 Jan 2013 01:04:29 +0000

He definitely does not say "would" he says "if". If Mandela had walked out of prison and when he gave his speech called for the violent overthrow of South Africa as it stood what might have happened? But who could imagine him doing that?

Funny Paper on Question about John's assassination

Tue, 08 Jan 2013 00:51:00 +0000

mja6758 said

Funny Paper said

And more to the point, what pacifist followers would go out and follow his orders to kill and destroy property? Of course, there are lunatics like that -- but Sean was simultaneously implying that they would do that, and that it would be immoral for the government to try to stop them to protect innocent citizens. In fact, Sean's mentality is precisely why violent movements get started -- you know, "the road to hell is paved with good intentions" -- starry-eyed pacifists ending up putting thousands of people in mass graves. The 20th century is ...