Post by Perplexed on Sept 18, 2003 11:20:58 GMT
Well, I have had a few thoughts tonight about the whole situation.
If these things are true about the Beatles and Paul McCartney, there may have been many reasons why they chose this course of action. Since they created the entertainment franchise "The Beatles" then they had every right to maintain it. Many performing groups change personnel, as do sports team, and some on a regular basis. And after all, we loved the "product", The Beatles, a entity of 4 performers and numerous behind the scenes support components. All show business works this way. The folks behind the Beatles would not lightly disband or disable the biggest money music maker in the history of Europe while it was still in full swing. (Only ABBA and the Greek lady, what is it, Marlena Muskouri? have had such world wide earnings, I suspect.)
The producers continued making Beatles recordings and we still loved it.
As far as foul play goes:
They had every reason to make sure that Paul McCartney, as well as the other three, remained alive. There is no sensible motivation for all those involved in the Beatles to want otherwise. I'm sure every one near to the scene was shattered by the news as well. But, they made a business decision to continue. I surmise that certain of the Beatles "promoters" had no sentimental feelings about it; to them business is business. Replace him, move on.
Covert, someone has said to me, means "can not be proven." This is a term of status in an military operation. A covert operation is one that, by design, can not be proven. Everything is done early in the execution to insure that there are no loose ends. Plausible deniability.
The powers that be must have deemed to leave the clues, not necessarily Lennon. He may have come up with a few. The clues serve to leave the creative parties in total legal innocence; they give the creative parties an "out" in court if ever needed; they provide in a way answers to the skeptics and the sharp minded; and they create a smokescreen against the opposers, should there be any. The majority are blissfully unaware and uncaring. Thus, there is a veil between the general publc and the creative parties.
In certain cases, the clues even seem to "wink" off the album jackets at the perceptively inquisitive. I think it may be well to just wink back and move on...................
If these things are true about the Beatles and Paul McCartney, there may have been many reasons why they chose this course of action. Since they created the entertainment franchise "The Beatles" then they had every right to maintain it. Many performing groups change personnel, as do sports team, and some on a regular basis. And after all, we loved the "product", The Beatles, a entity of 4 performers and numerous behind the scenes support components. All show business works this way. The folks behind the Beatles would not lightly disband or disable the biggest money music maker in the history of Europe while it was still in full swing. (Only ABBA and the Greek lady, what is it, Marlena Muskouri? have had such world wide earnings, I suspect.)
The producers continued making Beatles recordings and we still loved it.
As far as foul play goes:
They had every reason to make sure that Paul McCartney, as well as the other three, remained alive. There is no sensible motivation for all those involved in the Beatles to want otherwise. I'm sure every one near to the scene was shattered by the news as well. But, they made a business decision to continue. I surmise that certain of the Beatles "promoters" had no sentimental feelings about it; to them business is business. Replace him, move on.
Covert, someone has said to me, means "can not be proven." This is a term of status in an military operation. A covert operation is one that, by design, can not be proven. Everything is done early in the execution to insure that there are no loose ends. Plausible deniability.
The powers that be must have deemed to leave the clues, not necessarily Lennon. He may have come up with a few. The clues serve to leave the creative parties in total legal innocence; they give the creative parties an "out" in court if ever needed; they provide in a way answers to the skeptics and the sharp minded; and they create a smokescreen against the opposers, should there be any. The majority are blissfully unaware and uncaring. Thus, there is a veil between the general publc and the creative parties.
In certain cases, the clues even seem to "wink" off the album jackets at the perceptively inquisitive. I think it may be well to just wink back and move on...................
