Adnan Khashoggi, a notoriously shady Saudi businessman who was labelled ’the richest man in the world’ and who, back in the 2000s, was implicated in some highly salacious UK tabloid Press allegations along with the-then wife of a former Beatle, died a couple of weeks ago whilst being treated for Parkinson’s disease. He was in his early eighties, according to reports.
If you have a keen interest in anything Beatles-related I’ll hazard a guess you know who the aforementioned ex-wife is, and you’ll also perhaps be aware of the allegations that were made. However, if you’re still in the dark at this point, the woman I’m referring to is Heather Mills, former spouse of Sir Paul McCartney. He married her in 2002, just four years after his first wife Linda succumbed to cancer. In 2006, they separated, and an acrimonious divorce soon followed, during which time, the now-defunct UK weekend tabloid the ‘News of the World’ published allegations that the onetime-Beatle’s estranged other-half, before he’d met her, used to be a high-class call-girl in the pay of Khashoggi.
“We have a naughty background,” Denise Hewitt, an alleged former escort-girl and friend of Heather’s is quoted as saying in 2008 about their days together during the 1980s/‘90s. According to the 2007 book, ‘The Unsinkable Heather Mills: The Unauthorized Biography of the Great Pretender’ by Neil Simpson, the two women met when they were both young models, a pair of working-class girls trading on their looks to escape poverty although, it’s said, Mills struggled to get hired for shoots, a lot of which was seemingly centred on swimsuit and lingerie assignments. Together, it’s claimed, they both moved on from “modelling to something with a harder edge” tempted, it’s said, by stories told by escort-girl pals of “wads of cash… private jets and villas and yachts.”
Hewitt is reported to have expressed no regrets for her former life as a high-class escort. “I don’t look on it as sleazy,” she’s quoted as saying. “I mean, working-class women wouldn’t get £10,000 a night. We used to get a lot of jewellery as gifts – rings, watches, Bulgari bracelets, cars. The world was our oyster. We enjoyed it.”
The intention of this article isn’t to shower moral condemnation upon prostitution. And neither is it to provide a blow-by-blow report on the spicy ‘tit’-bits of the allegations directed towards Mills. No, none of that is of any relevance here.
What does interest me though is the fact that Khashoggi was an arms-dealer and, apparently, an opulently wealthy one who spent his reported billions on sumptuous, glamorous parties attended – it’s said – by stars of music and movies. He was also embroiled in the Iran-Contra scandal of the 1980s. So, once again, we find the worlds of the military-industrial complex and popular-culture co-existing.
But the issue here isn’t to do with his reportedly close proximity to the icons of screen and sound (as fascinating as it is), but his alleged customer-client relationship with Mills who, it’s claimed, attended (as far as I’ve been led to understand) at least one of Khashoggi’s lavish soirees as his paid guest. In other words, or, to be precise, the words of a man by the name of Abdul Khoury, who’s said to have worked as Adnan’s private-secretary between the 1970s and 2000s, “one of my duties was to look after Mr. Khashoggi’s guests, which would include looking after vice-girls who were invited to see him. One was Heather Mills.” In fact, it’s reported that, in a 2001 media-interview the-then Lady McCartney (as she was officially known) admitted to attending the party which was held at a residence Khashoggi owned in Marbella, Spain, but denied having sex with him – paid or otherwise. According to this particular version of events, she was invited to the get-together after flying in from the UK for a modelling assignment. She had no idea many of the other girls who’d been jetted in as guests were high-class hookers. “I have met Adnan Khashoggi… but I haven’t had sex with him. I have never sold sex and I am not an escort-girl,” she’s quoted as saying of that episode. Khashoggi, when reportedly asked in a 2006 TV-interview whether any money had been exchanged between himself and Mills for sexual activities at his Spanish property, replied, “who cares?” He couldn’t be pressed to give a ’yes’ or ’no’ answer, or so I‘m led to understand, you see, I’ve never watched it myself because no footage of it seems to be available any more, so I have to rely on second-hand accounts from MSM-media sources. Any way, according to Khoury’s claims in the News of the World‘s self-proclaimed ‘expose‘ of 2006, the initial Marbella meeting between the notorious arms-dealer and the future wife of an ex-Beatle was the first of a few. She was alleged to have met him for paid sex on four other occasions during the early 1990s in top-star London hotel-rooms. I’m not aware of any claims to suggest the pair met beyond this although the allegations attributed in the UK tabloid to the individual we’re led to believe is Khashoggi’s ex-private-secretary have, in one shape or form, been echoed by others, including Denise Hewitt. Unfortunately, much of what she’s reported to have said and that’s of relevance to this website, was broadcast in a 2008 TV documentary that, to my knowledge, hasn’t been screened since, and although I did watch it on its original airing back then, my memory of it is hazy. I’ve failed to find it online to refresh myself with it so, as a result, I’ll have to rely on what various news-media sources quoted from it either before or after its transmission. According to the ‘MailOnline’ for example, the aforementioned television-programme, which was titled ‘Heather Mills: What Really Happened,’ quoted Hewitt as saying Khashoggi was “classed as” Heather’s ‘sugar daddy,’ as was “one of the royal princes of Saudi.” She’s also reported as saying, “we went into high-class prostitution behind closed doors and nobody knew about it.” Maybe nobody (or almost nobody) knew what Khashoggi, a life-long friend of the Saudi royal family, was up to then, but there’ve been glimpses since if we’re to believe what’s been printed and published in the mainstream media. In its obituary to the recently-departed arms-dealer, the UK tabloid ‘The Sun’ (a Rupert Murdoch-owned relative of the News of the World) states that many of the lucrative contracts Adnan won and that led to his vast financial wealth, “were won by impressing clients with… the services of high-class prostitutes.” So, sex sold weapons. (That wouldn‘t surprise me).
In a clandestine world such as that, what else could the amorous charms of an attractive high-class hooker win from her satisfied conquest? What about information? Information of value (or career-crushing consequence) not only to dealers of arms for example, but their high-flying friends and associates in the military, government and intel-services?
Most intriguingly for me, Hewitt has reportedly claimed in the aforementioned documentary that Mills has the power to enchant men to her will. She’s reported to have said, “Heather knows how to play people, she’s very clever… They just fall madly in love with her and… she manipulates people and they’re besotted.” She’s also quoted as saying Heather “was a honey trap for men.”
What exactly is a ‘honey trap’? Well, according to one dictionary definition I’ve read, it’s “a stratagem in which an attractive person entices another person into revealing information…”
Khashoggi, in some shape or form, was a player within the military-industrial complex and at least one or two US Government administrations, we’re told. His role, for example, in the Iran-Contra affair had him embroiled in an international scandal back in the 1980s and that then-American President Ronald Reagan was eventually forced to publicly accept responsibility for. It involved the covert selling of military hardware to Iran, which was under a US arms embargo, and then using those proceeds to secretly fund the White House-backed Contra rebels in Nicaragua who were fighting the Left-wing government there. Khashoggi has been described as the ‘middle-man’ in these arms dealings. A couple of decades or so earlier, a young Adnan is said to have had a hand in paving the way for Richard Nixon’s 1968 US Presidential-election win. In his early 2010’s book ‘Prophets of War,’ author and think-tank head-honcho William D. Hartung states that, during Tricky Dicky’s“political exile” following his 1960 electoral defeat to JFK, “Khashoggi cultivated connections with key American officials” including “Richard Nixon… by wining and dining him in Paris and smoothing the way for him to be received in style in major Arab capitals. Khashoggi’s ’generosity’ paid off when Nixon was elected President in 1968. Although it was never made clear what the American President did for his Saudi friend, the two men had several private meetings during the Nixon presidency, suggesting a level of access and influence that could only help Khashoggi rack-up new clients, whether or not Nixon lifted a finger on his behalf. Khashoggi was suspected of funnelling millions of dollars to Nixon’s 1972 re-election campaign.” Jonathan Aitken, former British Tory cabinet MP and author of the book ‘Nixon: A Life’ (and who we’re going to get a little more detail on later), claims the former President once said to him that Khashoggi “was a highly intelligent and serious man who gave me many original insights into Mid-East politics.” Adnan, it’s said, was also of value to the Pentagon. William D. Hartung, in his book, reports that, in a 1974 speech, “the assistant-director of the Pentagon’s international sales office… noted the benefits of using agents like Khashoggi to buy influence, ranging from ‘normal friendships… to the payments of substantial sums of money to individuals in high government positions.’” Look into Adnan’s life and you’ll find his name linked in some form to the CIA as well. For example, in his book ‘The American Deep State: Big Money, Big Oil, and the Struggle for US Democracy,’ Canadian-born former diplomat and academic, Peter Dale Scott states that the arms-dealer’s PR guy in Washington used to be Edward K. Moss, a “man with CIA connections.”
It’s here we see a connection being laid out by Scott involving the alleged machinations of Ross the so-called CIA asset alongside big business and the role of call-girls.
He goes on:
Back in November 1962, the CIA, as part of its planning to get rid of (Fidel) Castro, decided to use Moss for the Political Action Group of the CIA’s covert Action (CA) staff. This was more than a year after the FBI had advised the CIA that Moss’s mistress Julia Cellini and her brother Dino Cellini were alleged to have long been associated with the narcotics and white slavery rackets in Cuba.
This FBI report suggests an important shared interest between Moss and Khashoggi: sexual corruption…
Khashoggi himself was said to have “used sex to win over US executives.” The bill for the madam who supplied girls en masse to his yacht in the Mediterranean ran to hundreds of thousands of dollars. Khashoggi made a practise of supplying those he wished to influence with dollars as well as sex.
This is a world where, in the words of Scott, “sexual corruption” can not only win big business contracts but, potentially, power and political influence either by subtly wrestling valuable top secrets from the lips of the call-girl’s victim, or instead by blackmailing the target into submission with the aid of, let’s say, incriminating photographs of them in, as it were, action.
This is a world ripe for the ‘honey trap.’
In the late 1980s, Khashoggi’s name was linked to the UK’s so-called ‘House of Commons Sex Scandal,’ a scandal that called in to question the security of the country (similar in some respects to the Profumo affair a quarter of a century earlier). At the centre of this was Indian-born former beauty-queen Pamella Bordes (real name, Pamela Chaudry Singh) who claims she was Adnan’s call-girl whilst she was working as a researcher for a Tory MP within the Houses of Parliament. An extensive article in the British tabloid the ‘Daily Mail’ in 1989, and published with her co-operation, quotes her as saying she “was used as sexual bait” by the arms-dealer. The newspaper claimed at the time it had compiled a dossier revealing “Khashoggi’s widespread use of bribery and sexual favours in return for business deals involving arms, technology and property.” It included “the names of prominent businessmen in Britain, France and the United States and those of senior French politicians and Arab leaders and government officials.” The tabloid stated that Khashoggi was involved with an “organisation” that Bordes worked for and she “was flown around the world to give sexual favours at his behest to a number of important business and political clients.”
Pamella’s double-life as a House of Commons researcher and call-girl “gave her an added cachet for her clients… At least three Asians with whom she had sexual relations wanted to be assured that she worked in the Commons and she showed them documents to prove it. The arrangements with her clients were made by ‘agents’ who specialised in arranging ‘sex for business liaisons.’” Bordes told the Daily Mail, “Khashoggi has all these deals going and he needs a lot of girls for sexual bribes. I was just part of an enormous group.” The question of UK security was brought to the fore when it was revealed that Pamella had also been involved with Ahmed Gaddaf Al-Dam, a cousin and reputed close aide of then-Libyan leader Colonel Muammar Gadaffi. He was also, according to one Press report from 1989, “a top-ranking arms buyer in the Libyan security service.” The ‘Daily Express’ newspaper claimed Bordes was “said to have made a number of visits by private-jet to the Libyan capital Tripoli. Reports of Pamella’s trips to see him in Paris were given to a senior official at the Foreign Office in early January (1989). By then she was working as a research-assistant for Tory MP David Shaw.” She was also at this time, as noted before, on the Khashoggi payroll, working for – in the Daily Mail’s words – his “network, operated by his sub-contracted ‘madames’…” It’s around this period or thereabouts that Heather Mills will have met Khashoggi at his party at his Marbella home where, Bordes claims, she herself stayed for a time and where, she’s reported as saying, male guests of one of his infamous soirees “evaluated” her in order to see if she “passed their tests.”
In 2007, and as you’ll no doubt know, Mills claimed during a live interview on UK breakfast TV that she had “a box of evidence” incriminating McCartney her then soon-to-be ex-husband. From what she said on that programme, it’s pretty clear the aforementioned ‘box’ was (is?) her insurance-policy against alleged threats on her life, threats that the former Beatle, she claimed, didn’t respond to protect her from. She declared that should she be ‘topped off,’ the damning ‘evidence’ would be unleashed to the public by “a certain person” that she was planning on giving it to for safe-keeping.
How she attained this box of yet-to-be disclosed content isn’t publicly known for sure (as far as I‘m aware). Whether it was acquired through accident or, indeed, deception of some form and, with or without the help of old friends and associates with a knowledge of covert tactics perhaps, is a matter of pure conjecture I’d suggest.
Incidentally, and as a side-note, it’s ironic (perhaps) that, in 2002, it was reported that Khashoggi was said to have been at the receiving end of a £30,000 blackmail attempt after a set of photos of him somehow went mysteriously missing. This was, apparently, according to Soraya Khashoggi his ex-wife and also mother of a daughter whose father is none other than the previously-mentioned Jonathan Aitken. Oooh! It’s a small world isn’t it?
A couple of little Beatles-related links here with regards to Aitken a former Tory cabinet-member in British PM John Major’s government of the early ‘90s and who was later jailed after admitting perjury and perverting the course of justice in a libel-hearing he launched against a national newspaper that revealed he’d allowed the Saudi royal family to pay his hotel bill at the Paris Ritz in 1993 when he was minister in charge of Defence Procurement and, as a result, barred from taking such hospitality. In 1967, during his days as a young journalist, he signed his name to the famous full-page advertisement in the UK’s ‘Times’ broadsheet that called for a relaxing on the laws on cannabis. Titled, ‘the law against marijuana is immoral in principle and unworkable in practise,’ it was paid for by John, Paul, George and Ringo and included their signatures alongside those of their manager Brian Epstein as well as R.D. Laing, George Melly, Graham Greene, Tom Driberg MP, Francis Huxley, established British TV veteran of politics David Dimbleby and many more.
Aitken claims he met McCartney on a couple of occasions during the 1960s and had been in close, regular contact with The Beatles’ faithful PR-man Derek Taylor when they were both immersed in the counter-cultural scene of Haight-Ashbury in 1967. The future Conservative politician was working as an overseas reporter there, writing articles for London’s ‘Evening Standard’ newspaper on the burgeoning ‘Summer of Love.’ By 1972, when he claims to have first met Khashoggi, he was an investment-banker working for a man by the name of Jim Slater whose partner was a member of the notorious and so-called ‘elite’ Goldsmith dynasty (A.K.A. Goldschmidt/Rothschild). Quite a career-jump there! Basically, he’d gone from, in his own words, “sharing a joint with Jim Morrison of The Doors, the Beat poet Allen Ginsberg and Ron ‘Pigpen’ McKernan of The Grateful Dead” in San Francisco in 1967 to rubbing shoulders with arms-dealers just five years later. Once again I see here the worlds of the military-industrial complex and the 1960s music-scene blurring into each other, and in a quite bizarre fashion if you ask me. Maybe it’s what they call a ‘coincidence,’ a happening of chance, right? Any way, I’m not aware if Aitken ever met Heather Mills in all the years he’d known Adnan, but he was, he claims, at the former arms-dealer’s hospital bedside before he died.
What top secrets of devastation Khashoggi has taken with him with his passing and that he and only he alone knew about is any ones’ guess.
June 2017 of course marks the 50th anniversary of the release of The Beatles’ oft-hailed ‘masterpiece,’ ‘groundbreaking’ album, ‘Sergeant Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band.’ As such, I think I’ve been given a timely-enough excuse here to dedicate a little blog-post space to some of the details behind the creation of its controversial front-cover sleeve, a sleeve which, of course, over the years, has given birth to any number of theories of a conspiratorial and esoteric nature from those who believe it to feature clues pertaining to the ‘death’ of Paul McCartney in 1966, and those who accuse The Beatles of ‘Satanism’ due to the inclusion of ‘the Great Beast’ Aleister Crowley in the cardboard cut-out crowd of illustrious and famous people staring at us from behind the band.
We’ve been told by those closely and intimately involved in the album-cover’s concept and design that all if not some of the renowned and/or notorious figures included on the sleeve were chosen either by John, Paul and George (although – reportedly – not Ringo). Recalling the making of the album-cover in the 1997 book ‘Paul McCartney. Many Years from Now,’ the former-Beatle tells author and long-time friend Barry Miles that he “asked everyone in the group to write down whoever their idols were… folk-heroes like Albert Einstein and Aldous Huxley… William Burroughs, and of course John, the rebel, put in Hitler and Jesus, which EMI (Records) wouldn’t allow, but that was John. We were starting to amass a list of who everybody’s favourites were…” It’s, I think, fair to assume that the ‘Beatles Satanist’ tag that’s been levelled against the band with regards to this album is perhaps largely due to the fact that, as McCartney states, the group-members themselves are said to have chosen who would appear in the cardboard cut-out collage.
Now, the question I have found myself asking here on the eve of the 50th anniversary of the album’s release is, which member of the band specifically asked for the inclusion of Crowley in the mix? Of course, I’m open to the possibly that it might have been a joint decision to add him in but, for some reason, that scenario doesn’t quite satisfy my curiosity. Sure, in the scheme of things, I suppose it might matter little as to who in the group in particular plumped for Aleister. However, I am intrigued to know, especially as very few if any sources on the internet appear to have looked into this, instead often choosing to conclude that it was a collective choice. Personally, I’ve seen no proof or reasonable enough evidence to corroborate this conclusion, but I have read noteworthy accounts that others close to the Beatles’ camp at that time – in other words, non band-members – might have had a hand in the collage’s selection process too. For example, George Harrison – decades after the album’s release and during the making of the band‘s official 1990s documentary/biography ’The Beatles Anthology’ – recalled that although he himself chose a number of people for inclusion on the cover, he also “had no idea who chose some of” the others adding that it was the sleeve’s co-designer, the 1960s Pop-artist, Peter Blake who was largely responsible for putting “a lot more of the confusing people on there.” We’re not told who the “confusing people” in the collage are, but it wouldn’t be too much to assume, would it, that Crowley might be one of them? After all, his presence on the sleeve has resulted in a never-ending stream of head-scratching debate, theorising and investigation on countless websites, blogs and in printed literature too.
In the book ‘The Beatles: Off the Record,’ by Keith Badman, Blake is quoted as saying that he did indeed “also make a list” of names for the collage during the development stages, although he doesn’t reveal who his choices were. Is it likely that he was the one who opted for Crowley? Well… not according to Jann Haworth it seems. She’s Peter’s ex-wife and she was co-designer of the Sgt. Pepper cover. Apparently, she’s stated also that it was indeed a Beatle who chose Aleister. Unfortunately, at this moment in time, I can’t confirm this conclusively due to the fact that the interview in which she makes these claims is only available on the news-website ‘Boston.com,’ and it requires you to pay a fee of at least ten dollars to read it! I’ve been unable to locate an exact copy of this info from any other web-source, including ‘WayBackMachine‘…. A most un-agreeable predicament… and made all the more frustrating because Haworth, in the article from 2007, also reveals which Beatle chose Crowley for Pepper… or at least that’s what I’ve been led to understand after having perused the ’LashTAL’ internet-forum belonging to the ‘Aleister Crowley Society.’ It’s there I found the web-link to the Boston.com article in the first place – and also – thankfully – where the Society’s moderator, who appears to have read the article in full, informs us which member of the band Haworth is referring to…
Can you guess who it is?
Yup. But of course, there’s evidence out there to show that Lennon isn’t the only Beatle that’s given a passing nod in public to Crowley over the years. As I noted earlier, I suppose it matters not a jot who in the band wanted this notorious occultist on the album-cover, but it is quite satisfying nonetheless to have at least one known former Pepper insider giving us some scrap of info with regards to this question.
‘Paul McCartney: Many Years from Now’ by Barry Miles (pg. 305)
Please pardon me if the following information is already known to you, I wouldn’t want to waste your time reading it, but it really is new to me…
Just a couple of weeks ago whilst I was search-engine surfing in an altogether random and loose nature, I happened to stumble quite accidentally upon a YouTube video dated from 2014 and titled ’John Lennon and the Truth Movement.’ Upon closer inspection I discovered that it was a radio-interview with Chris Everard, the author and documentary-maker who’s known for his reports into UFOs, secret societies, the so-called ‘paranormal,‘ and the alleged dark deeds of the British Royal Family – including the death of Diana, Princess of Wales. Appetite suitably whetted by the prospect of listening to – I presumed – a one hour-plus commentary and analysis of Lennon’s long-documented stand against the malevolent machinations of The Establishment, I pressed ‘play’ and sat back. Unfortunately, twenty five or so minutes into the interview, and with no mention yet of anything in the slightest related to ‘Beatles,’ I realised that it probably wasn’t going to happen. In an increasingly impatient manner I must confess, I skimmed through the remaining forty or so minutes of Everard’s chatter in a bid to locate any reference to the actual title of the video, but still, nothing. Admittedly, it could be that, in my impatience, I missed something along the way, but even if that was the case, it certainly wouldn’t have been lengthy enough to warrant the interview being billed as, ‘John Lennon and the Truth Movement’…
I was promptly inspired to dig a little deeper to discover why Chris Everard was being so closely aligned to John Lennon in that video-title… Surely it wasn’t just a random happening?
Well… apparently not. Everard, according to his official website, is planning to make a film titled ’John Lennon & the Truth Movement’ – with our help that is. Yes, chuck in a donation from between $5 to a whopping $5,000 and you can assist in turning this project into a reality. Your financial contribution “will be spent on principle photography, post-production, editing and distributing this film.”
A trailer for the proposed documentary has been available on YouTube, via Everard’s ‘EnigmaTV’ banner, since 2014 and features a clip, first seen in 1988’s motion-picture retrospective ’Imagine: John Lennon,’ in which the outspoken Rock-star reads a letter sent to him from an individual who claims to have, through the use of a ouija board, been warned by the spirit of dead Beatles manager Brian Epstein that an attempt will be made to assassinate the singer. “But that is just the start of this chilling and unusual feature-length documentary,” claims the website ’EnigmaChannel.Wordpress.com’…
“The film shows, and proves through testimonies, that the occult forces were at work in the DAKOTA apartment building – and that the lives of Yoko Ono and John Lennon have been heavily influenced by ancient Ley Lines, hauntings and spirit activity which was deliberately ‘designed-into’ the building. The British director, CHRIS EVERARD has made a large number of feature length documentaries investigating the Paranormal…
JOHN LENNON & THE TRUTH MOVEMENT is more than just a film about how the most famous man of the 20th century was assassinated- it’s about J. EDGAR HOOVER, the FBI spying on John Lennon, and how his death was pre-planned as part of the COINTELPRO espionage & assassination program.
JOHN LENNON invested his own money in a global campaign for ‘PEACE’. He kicked off a global PEACE MOVEMENT which has grown and morphed into today’s TRUTH MOVEMENT. Many people have ‘Awoken’ to the fact that many members of Congress, members of the Senate and Houses of Parliament own SHARES in companies which manufacture Weapons of Mass Destruction. The reason that the world is often thrown into WAR is because every time war is declared, or a drone bombing mission is announced, the value of these shares increase. JOHN LENNON inspired today’s Truth Movement with a campaign for Peace.
John Lennon was assassinated after being the target of a spying campaign. Because the killer admitted his crime and was apprehended at the scene, no official investigation took place… Until now. This film thoroughly investigates the SATANIC RITUAL and PARANORMAL elements surrounding John Lennon’s life – and his death…
This film presents new evidence and examines the motives of senior White House, FBI & CIA officials who admit in FOIA documents that they wanted JOHN LENNON shunted out of the USA, and some of these people wished he was DEAD. Help us to finance this awesome movie about his life, expose who really assisted the killer, and give us a donation towards the production and marketing so that the message of JOHN LENNON lives on and we expose the WAR MACHINE and the glove-puppet politicians who perpetuate this terrible situation just so they can earn illicit riches.”
Below, the aforementioned trailer for the proposed film:
All the above information has, I would assume from my own brief investigations, been in circulation since at least 2014 / 2013 and is, it would appear, all there is. No subsequent updates have been added it seems. As a result, I’m intrigued to know how far – if at all – Everard has come in the making of this film in the last four years or so. I did attempt to contact him via his website and his FaceBook page so that I could ask him directly but no means of communication are available on either.
My guess is as good as most people’s, but the fact that Everard’s website is asking for donations towards the making of the film suggests that, as projects go, it’s still on the table but, unless any one reading this knows any better, we can only wonder when – or if – this documentary will ever see the light of day.
If you’re familiar with the work of the author and researcher, David McGowan you’ll almost certainly be aware of his theory that America’s counter-culture of the 1960s was actually a creation of the so-called ‘Powers That Be’ and not born in San Francisco as is widely peddled by the mainstream but, instead, Laurel Canyon, the LA neighbourhood which was not only home to a covert military installation but also a significant majority of the music-stars who became voices of that scene, and who themselves were almost all linked intimately in one way or another either to the US intelligence-services, armed-forces, upper echelons of Government, politics and banking as well as some of the country’s wealthiest, most powerful families.
If such a plot did indeed exist and did take place then I’m of the view that it probably happened in Britain too. I mean, over in London at the very same time, there were folk immersing themselves in and influencing the UK’s equivalent of the counter-culture who, also, were connected in one way or another to notoriously malevolent organisations such as the Tavistock Institute or Cambridge University and the LSE (‘London School of Economics‘), and/or had links to the British military and defence industry, banking, top-tier government and old moneyed families, such as the Guinness brewing dynasty whose heir in the 1960s was Irish-born Tara Browne, a regular fixture on the London scene and a friend of The Beatles. He’s the guy who gave McCartney his first Acid Trip. “Tara was taking Acid on blotting-paper in the toilet. He invited me to have some,” Paul has claimed, adding that, “I’d not wanted to do it, I’d held off like a lot of people were trying to, but there was massive peer pressure. And that night I thought, ‘well, this is as good a time as any,’ so I said, ‘go on then, fine.’” That was in 1966. Months later, in June 1967, just days after the release of ‘Sgt. Pepper,’ and at the height of the Acid-drenched ‘Summer of Love,’ the musician was extolling the virtues of the drug to the mainstream mass-media and, as a result, to millions of his fans and admirers. “After I took it, it opened my eyes,” he said at the time. “We only use one-tenth of our brain. Just think what we could accomplish if we could only tap that hidden part! It would mean a whole new world. If the politicians would take LSD, there wouldn’t be any more war, or poverty, or famine.” Tara, by then, was dead. He’d been killed, aged just 21, in a car-crash in December ‘66, a tragedy that was immortalised in the line, “he blew his mind out in a car, he didn’t notice that the lights had changed” on ‘A Day in the Life,’ the closing track on the Sgt. Pepper album. A new book charting his colourful yet short life has just been released. Titled, ’I Read the News Today, Oh Boy,’ it’s written by award-winning journalist, author and comedy-writer, Paul Howard. He’s also composed a short article for the newspaper/wesbite, ‘MailOnline’ in conjunction with the publishing of the biography. Here’s some excerpts…
Just after midnight on December 18th 1966, in a London festooned with Christmas lights, 21-year-old Tara Browne, a Dublin-born brewery heir, music lover, style icon, racing car driver and sometime ‘Vogue’ model, lost control of his light-blue Lotus Elan in South Kensington, London and collided with a black van. His passenger girlfriend, Suki Potier, later claimed that Browne wasn’t going particularly fast – although that would have been wildly out of character for the speed-obsessed young aristocrat. In her version of events, a white car – either a Volvo or an E-Type Jaguar, never traced – emerged unexpectedly from a side street and forced Tara to swerve.
A month after that fatal crash – and the day after Browne’s mother, Oonagh, won custody of her late son’s two small children in the High Court – John Lennon, suffering from writer’s block during the making of The Beatles’ ‘Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band’ album, propped a copy of the ‘Daily Mail’ (newspaper) on his piano music-stand and turned over the front page. There, in the middle of page three, was an article headlined: ‘Guinness Heir Babies Stay with Grandmother.’
John had heard about Tara’s death, though unlike McCartney, he hadn’t known him well. The two Beatles had just been discussing whether or not Browne, son of Lord Oranmore and Browne, would have inherited his father’s seat in the House of Lords had he lived.
Lennon touched the piano-keys and out came the opening line of the song:
‘I read the news today, oh boy
About a lucky man who made the grade…’
Fifty years on, Tara Browne is familiar to many as the man in the first verse of The Beatles’ ‘A Day in the Life,’ who ‘blew his mind out in a car’ and then drew a curious crowd of onlookers who wondered whether he was ‘from the House of Lords.’
Rich, handsome and effortlessly cool, Tara was the living, breathing quintessence of Swinging London – a dandy with the air of a young prince, always right on the heartbeat of the moment in everything he did, whether introducing Paul McCartney to the mind-expanding possibilities of LSD in his Belgravia mews, turning heads in his psychedelic AC Cobra or gadding about London’s West End with Peter Sellers or Roman Polanski.
Browne thrilled to danger of any kind – experimenting with the newest drugs, shooting the breeze with the East End villains who popped into his motor repair shop in Chelsea, and tearing up the King’s Road in a low-slung sports-car, a record-player built into its dash, the needle skipping across the vinyl as he weaved through the traffic.
Born in 1945, Tara was the younger son of Dominick Browne, the fourth Lord Oranmore and Browne, and Oonagh Guinness, a glamorous society beauty and member of the sixth generation of the brewing dynasty, whose surname was as famous as Ireland itself. His parents divorced when he was young, and Tara rarely saw the inside of a classroom, forming his personality at the feet of his mother’s coterie of writers, intellectuals and aristocratic black sheep, including the painter Lucian Freud, film director John Huston and writer Brendan Behan.
By the time he was 18, having already travelled the world with his vivacious mother, Browne was married with a child, but that didn’t stop the charming, well-connected young man finding his true purpose at the centre of a suddenly swing London.
He became a central character at a club near Leicester Square called the ‘Ad Lib,’ the hippest of London hotspots, where Britain’s once-sacred class structure was being shaken like a snow-globe, as Pop-stars and criminals mingled with debutantes, aristocrats and – it was rumoured – royalty, in the form of Princess Margaret.
“Tara was absolutely central to it,” remembered Sixties socialite Jane Ormsby-Gore. “We were meeting people from different walks of life, but we needed somebody in the middle saying, ‘oh, so-and-so, have you met such-and-such?’ and that was what Tara did.”
In the great social switchyard of the Ad Lib, it was inevitable that Tara and McCartney would meet. One had a ravenous curiosity about the world; the other, the assured air of a privileged young man who had seen and done it all. Introduced by McCartney’s brother Mike, they bonded over clothes, cars, music and drugs. From that moment on, Tara took Paul into his circle of high-born friends.
Tara and his wife Nicki’s mews house in Eaton Row, Belgravia, became the centre of an after-hours scene. Every Friday morning, Nicki bought five-dozen eggs to make breakfast for whichever guests had improvised beds for themselves on the living-room floor.
“The house was always strewn with bodies,” she remembered. “You never knew who was a Beatle, who was an Animal, who was a Trogg and who was a Pretty Thing.”
Tara didn’t impress both of the chief Beatles. Nicki remembered John Lennon being at Eaton Row, drunk, with (Peter) Sellers. Tara gave John a copy of ‘Pygmalion,’ George Bernard Shaw’s 1913 play lampooning, of all things, Britain’s rigid class-system.
But John was still too class-conscious to ever warm to Tara, according to Nicki, “I think he really sneered at people from Tara’s background,” she said.
With Paul, it was a different matter, and the pair would share dangerous adventures that would alter the course of the band.
Tara quickly picked up on the arrival in London of psychedelic drugs. LSD changed the landscape of Swinging London utterly, and it was Browne who introduced McCartney to the drug.
Tara himself soon came to wider attention. In 1965, he appeared in the fashion-magazine ‘Gentleman’s Quarterly,’ and the following year posed with Brian Jones for a ‘Vogue’ spread on how men’s clothes had become informed by women’s fashion.
By the end of the year, however, Tara’s life was in chaos. His marriage was unspooling. And his two tiny children were in Ireland, where his mother had taken them, dismayed by how her son and daughter-in-law were behaving as parents.
“I said to him, ‘Tara, we need to go and get the children back right now. They’re our children – not hers,’ remembered Nicki, who died in 2012. “And that’s when he said the strangest thing to me. He said, ‘what’s the point? I’m not going to live very long anyway.’”
The night he died, he had a date with new girlfriend Suki, and they left a restaurant on Abingdon Road in South Kensington just before midnight, driving west just for the hell of it, with no particular place to go. Neither alcohol nor drugs were a factor – Tara had consumed less than one pint of beer – though speed may well have been a cause.
Several witnesses claimed he flew past them, accelerating and braking fast, while the car made a loud noise. Seconds later, there was a bang and the sound of the engine stopped.
Sixties London wasn’t one single scene – it was a collection of different ones. Yet, somehow, Tara Browne had seemed to be at the centre of most of them, a first-hand witness to the events and trends that shaped and coloured the decade.
You can read the article in full here (which also – incidentally – makes references to P.i.D.):
For quite a time now, I’ve been rather fascinated by what I consider to be an intriguingly-high number of show-business paedophiles, alleged or otherwise, who’ve been connected personally and/or professionally to The Beatles. I’m sure I’m not the only one who thinks this, hence one of the reasons why I’ve never raised this issue in public before either on my website/blog, ‘Conspiro Media’ or its accompanying ‘YouTube’ page, ‘ConspiroTV.’ Sure, if I’d had something of a revelatory or unique nature to bring to the subject, I would‘ve wasted little time in sharing it online. But, unfortunately, I haven’t had such a rush of inspiration. So far, my interest in this is merely based on little else but ‘a feeling.’ As a result, I‘ve kept my thoughts to myself. Be that as it may though, the number of show-biz/entertainment folk with child-abuse connections and also relations to one or more members of The Beatles has continued to grow in the meantime. Just a couple of weeks ago there were reports of a woman informing jurors in a trial in Britain that a prominent London-born music-promoter by the name of Mervyn Conn had “bragged” about knowing the band before raping her at a festival in the UK back in the 1970s when she was fifteen.
According to the UK newspaper/website ‘The Sun’ (September 29th 2016)….
The “arrogant” impresario had hired the teenager to dress as a cowgirl at a Country & Western music-festival he promoted at Wembley Arena in the 1970s, a jury heard.
Conn, now 81, name-dropped the Fab Four and US singer Crystal Gayle to the schoolgirl before forcing himself on her…
He sexually assaulted her while she wore the cowgirl outfit and her school uniform and then raped her in his marital bed with a picture of him and his wife on the bedside, it is alleged.
Conn is accused of flaunting his Rolls Royce and expensive home to show how he “could control, manipulate and do anything he wanted.”
The woman, now 56, broke down in tears and became extremely distressed as she recalled the alleged abuse in a video recorded police interview played to jurors.She said she was employed by Conn as a hostess in 1976, and was made to hand out brochures to festival-goers while dressed in a cowgirl uniform.
She said: “I went to an interview at his head office and was short-listed. He asked if my parents knew. I gave him my date of birth definitely.” The teen was then called back to his office for a uniform fitting, where Conn asked her to “give him a twirl.”
The woman went on: “I was working at this festival for a long weekend at Easter that year. I was standing near the entrance handing out brochures and he just appeared out of nowhere with a cloth bag and said ‘I need you to look after this for me and bring it back to my dressing room’, and gave me a time. I was by far the youngest member of staff.
When the time came I took the money and found the dressing-room. He was doing a Press-conference so I sat down and quietly waited.”
After the photographers left, Conn is said to sexually assaulted the youngster in his dressing room for two or three minutes.
She said: “It felt like an eternity. He just sort of dismissed me and said he will contact me again about the job. I stumbled out and felt in a daze and in turmoil. I remember seeing the stage, it was brightly lit. I just remember being in a complete daze. Then I saw him standing in the VIP box with his wife in black tie.”
The alleged victim said she was telegrammed and asked to go to Conn’s head office in Charing Cross, central London, on multiple occasions.
On the second visit to his office, the teen had taken a train to London after school, still dressed in her school uniform.
She said: “There was a wad of money, he took some from that and the rest he put in a wall safe like he was showing it off. And he was talking about all these people he’s promoted like he’s the big ‘I am.’”
She said Conn made her wait in his office as the rest of the staff left the building. She added: “He poured himself a big drink and talked about many people like Crystal Gayle.”
Conn then ushered the girl to “see what his desk chair felt like” and forced himself upon her yet again, the court heard.
She broke down in tears as she recalls him unbuttoning her school blouse and sexually assaulting her. She said: “He put his hands up my skirt. He was forceful and aggressive. I felt slightly bruised and shocked. It seemed to happen quite quickly.”
She said she told him she felt sick, adding: “It would have been really obvious I didn’t want it. I was not responding to anything he was doing. It was obvious I wasn’t reciprocating or enjoying it. I don’t know what I said, I think ‘I don’t like this, please stop.’ I was completely mystified as to why I was called there at all.
On her third visit to his office she said Conn insisted on taking her home so he could show off his Rolls Royce.
The woman said: “I sat in the back thinking how ostentatious and showy it was. I hated it. It was like he was showing off his castle. I remember thinking it looked expensive but not classy – tacky.”
Instead of driving her home he took her to his gated house in Wimbledon, South West London, where he ordered her to lie in a “star shape” and raped her in his marital bed, it is alleged.
So, what exactly was (is) the impresario’s relationship with the so-called “Fab Four”? Well, according to the item from The Sun, the woman making the allegations against him informed the court that “he told me stuff about people, how he owned the rights to The Beatles songs.” This is, quite frankly, most confusing. To my knowledge, no one by the name of Mervyn Conn has ever owned the rights to The Beatles’ songs. I might be wrong of course, but, I doubt it. That then means that someone hasn’t been entirely truthful here, doesn’t it? Could it be that we’ve been spun one by the writer responsible for the above news-article? I can’t see why, quite personally. So, maybe, back there in ’76, it was the 15-year-old who was lied to before she was allegedly assaulted? Or perhaps she’s the one making it all up? If you do feel tempted to question her integrity, be aware before you do that she’s not the only woman who’s accusing Conn of sexual assault in this court-case. In 1985, nine years on from his reported attacks on her, he’s said to have “raped a 16-year-old girl at his London office.” According to a recent news-item reporting on the trial, “Conn had met her in a grocers… and gave her his number, promising concert tickets if she gave him a call. When she went to collect the ’tickets’ she was raped – but Conn would still visit her and tell her to come to his office. When questioned by police, Conn made no comment about the 16-year-old, but admitted kissing the 15-year-old after she had asked for Johnny Cash tickets.” Meanwhile, “another woman… told police Conn plunged his hands down her top and groped her breasts during a job interview in the 1970s when she was in her early 20s. She told police, ‘he was really the big guy who used to bring all the American Country-music acts over to Wembley.’ Explaining why she didn’t report the incident to the police, she added, ’I think it was because he was powerful.’”
And that’s not all… In 1989, he was sentenced to eight weeks in prison for “groping” his 19-year-old receptionist.
Interestingly, one of the above Press-cuttings states that Conn “was once guest of the US President at the White House.” In fact, he’s said so himself. He’s also claimed to have been a dinner-guest of Margaret Thatcher’s during her time as Prime Minister. He’s reported as saying, “I’m the only man I know who’s dined at the White House, Kremlin and Downing Street. Not bad for a music-promoter from the East End.” And for an alleged paedophile, not entirely surprising either. This reminds me of that no-talent radio disc-jockey, Jimmy Savile who was said to have been a friend and/or confidante, not only of top-level politicians both in the UK and abroad, but British royalty too of course. Same as Conn, he’s connected to The Beatles – as you‘re most likely aware. What you might not know is, the links that tie the band and both these men all together doesn’t stop here in the realms of randomness. Well, that’s the impression I’ve been left with after a bit of trekking on the internet, and it’s as a result of this search that I’ve also discovered what Mervyn’s said association with the group is. It seems he was responsible for helping organise their first series of live Christmas variety stage-shows in London in 1963 when he was working with theatrical-agent, Joe Collins, the father of famous novelist, Jackie and veteran actress, Joan who, you might be interested to learn, is the former wife of Ron Kass, one-time head of John, Paul, George and Ringo’s ‘Apple Records’! Small world, eh?! (Yeah… right!). Any way… who was the compere of the December 1964/ January ’65 follow-up dubbed ‘Another Beatles Christmas Show’ but none other than Jimmy Savile. A regular cast-member of the previous year’s bill was Australian-born music-artist, painter, TV-host and fellow paedophile, Rolf Harris – currently serving a five-year nine-month prison sentence for – in the trial judge’s words – “committing 12 offences of indecent assault on 4 victims who were variously aged between 8 and 19…” Further still, another star of the ‘64/’65 line-up was Cilla Black the recently-deceased British television-hostess, Sixties music-performer, Beatles buddy and ex Cavern Club coat-check girl who was also a close friend of the much-maligned singer, Cliff Richard who, in recent years, has been questioned by police over historic child-sex abuse allegations.
All just a coincidence?
Well, here’s the thing; The more I delve into these connections, the more captivated I become, not only by the significantly sizeable number of known and/or alleged sexual predators and paedophiles linked to the band, but these ‘coincidences’ – if that‘s what you want to call them. Me, personally, I‘m not so sure that’s the description I’d go for. Yeah, I know, it’s a given that, back in the 1960s, the breathtakingly famous Beatles would’ve been booked to work alongside Jimmy Savile and Rolf Harris because of the fact that both men were very well-known TV and radio-personalities of the time. There’s nothing unusually suspicious in that, necessarily – although you could argue as to why a pair of sex-predators such as these would have been chosen for elevation to the heights of fame and wealth in the first place. No. The band’s connections to one or two of the UK’s most famous paedophiles and sex-offenders (alleged or not, convicted or not) goes beyond the parameters of the show-biz circle, and so – in my opinion – deserves further inspection.
For the first time, I’m going to think this out loud, as it were, even though, as I noted earlier, I’ve nothing particularly Earth-shattering to disclose to you. All I have is a list of famous figures from the world of entertainment who’ve either been convicted of, or alleged or accused to have been involved in sex offences/paedophilia and who’ve also been friends of and/or worked with The Beatles.
Below, is that list. The first name in it intrigues me the most I think, because it’s the one that deviates entirely from that ‘show-biz circle’ scenario…
* Jimmy Tarbuck
Liverpudlian stand-up comedian and sometime TV-host who first shot to fame in the UK in the early 1960s when, at the age of 23, he became the youngest British comic to land his own television-series. In 2013 he was arrested over allegations of sexual-assault on a young boy dating back to the 1970s, but was released almost a year later without charge.
Tarbuck – who for a time back in the day was, I’m led to understand, dubbed a ‘fifth Beatle’ because of his mop-top haircut, Liverpool accent and trendy attire – had actually attended primary (elementary) school with John Lennon and George Harrison, both of whom were friends. “I always got on well with John,” he once recalled. “I remember him kicking a ball around with him in the playground, shouting and being daft.” After they’d all made it big and moved to London from Liverpool, there’d be parties. “John had a great party-piece,” Tarbuck has revealed. “He’d put Speed in your drink. When I was about 24 I nodded off one night at someone’s house and he stuck some in my drink. I was like a rabbit in the headlights for four days!”
Police are investigating a second sex-assault against Jimmy Tarbuck, The Sun can reveal.
The alleged victim, a man now aged 32, has told detectives he was abused by the comedian.
He made the new claims after reading of Tarbuck’s arrest in The Sun.
The alleged incident is said to have happened on a golf-course near his home…
Police said: “We received an allegation…”
Similarly, contributors to the David Icke forum claim that these same allegations were also ’pulled’ from the newspaper/website ‘The Express.’ The accusations live on elsewhere. Take a look at this page from ‘Capitalbay.news’:
It might interest you to know that in recent years, Tarbuck is said to have been an active supporter of a children’s home, the ‘Refugio Aboim Ascensao.’ It’s based in Portugal – location of the Madeleine McCann incident and Cliff Richard’s overseas residence.
* Freddie Starr
Another famous Liverpudlian comedian hailing from the Beatles’ generation who’s been pulled over by police over sex-abuse allegations. In fact, between November 2012 and February 2014, he was arrested a total of four times. Then, after 18 months on bail, prosecutors announced that there was “insufficient evidence to prosecute Freddie Starr in relation to allegations of sexual offences made by 13 individuals. In relation to one further complainant, we have decided that although there is sufficient evidence for a realistic prospect of conviction, a prosecution would not be in the public interest.” Errrr…. Why wouldn’t it be?
The aforementioned “complainant” was a woman by the name of Karin Ward. She claims the comedian molested her in Jimmy Savile’s BBC dressing-room in 1974 when she was just 14 years of age. She was there to participate in a television-show the DJ was hosting and that Starr was guesting on – although the comedian initially denied ever having appeared on it when the allegations were put to him in late 2012. However, footage of the programme then surfaced, clearly showing him taking part and standing within close proximity to Ward who was in the audience. His lawyers hit back, stating, “this does not detract away from the fact that Freddie vigorously denies the awful allegation that has been made by Karin Ward.” Indeed, Starr launched a libel and slander case against Ward – which he went on to lose. In dismissing the comic’s claim, the presiding High Court judge reportedly said Karin’s “words were true. She proved that it was true that he groped her – an underage schoolgirl.”
Although Starr was a popular comedian of the ‘70s and ‘80s, his career in show-biz began as a singer in Liverpool in the early 1960s. Similar to fellow Liverpudlian Jimmy Tarbuck, it’s claimed that Freddie was also once looked upon as a possible ‘fifth Beatle’ – quite literally! Here’s an article from The Express from 2012 that ran under the title, ‘The Day Freddie Starr nearly became a Beatle’:
In the early Sixties, a young singer was at the forefront of the Merseybeat revolution. Charismatic, good-looking and with a great voice, he regularly topped the bill at venues such as The Cavern Club.
Today he is better known as a madcap comedian and impressionist. Back then, however, Freddie Starr and his various bands including The Midnighters, were the biggest draw in and around Liverpool.
Freddie and The Beatles used to hang out together and, according to a schoolboy friend who later became his manager, Starr was once approached by Lennon to join The Beatles.
His boyhood friend and neighbour, Tony Cartwright recalls:
“Freddie was the first real Rock and Roll star in Liverpool…”
When The Beatles started out, Starr was already established. For being the headline act, he and his band would get £25 – in those days a small fortune…
Further down the bill were The Beatles, one of scores of bands in Liverpool at the time. According to Cartwright, The Beatles supported The Midnighters on about 100 occasions and they all became good pals.
“Liverpool was like one big Rock and Roll family and John Lennon especially loved Freddie,” says Cartwright.
“Freddie had a great sense of humour. There were lots of pranks, which Lennon found hilarious. There was never any jealousy. In those days when The Beatles came on, people would drift off to the bar because they were there to see Freddie.”
Starr’s incredible appeal didn’t escape Lennon’s notice and John once asked Freddie to join The Beatles, reveals Cartwright.
“Freddie just laughed,” reveals Cartwright.
“He told John, ‘listen, I’ve got my own band and I’m bigger than you.’ John also offered Freddie some of the songs he had written but Freddie didn’t like them.
“Freddie was very talented but I don’t think he could ever have become a Beatle. It would never have gelled.”
Then, a year later… The Beatles had a problem, says Cartwright.
Their drummer Pete Best fell out of favour and Lennon began looking for a new recruit. At the time, Ringo Starr was a session-drummer who performed with several bands including Freddie Starr and The Midnighters. He was a close friend and it’s claimed that Freddie even let Ringo – whose real name is Richard Starkey – share his stage surname.
When The Beatles eventually rose to national music-stardom in Britain, Freddie and The Midnighters became their support act, as the nearby picture advertising a 1963 UK concert clearly shows.
According to the Express article, “when The Beatles first toured the US in 1964 there was an approach for Freddie to join them” there too. However…
He wasn’t interested, says Cartwright…
He says: “I think he got bored of the music-business. He went solo in the mid-Sixties. By then he was doing a lot of impressions. He was a variety-act in a Rock ‘n’ Roll era.”
At the height of his fame, Freddie met Elvis Presley and charmed The King with his impressions. Starr still kept in touch with Lennon and McCartney and it wasn’t unusual for Freddie to receive a telegram from the two Beatles wishing him luck before a big show.
In later years, Starr would have his Public Relations handled for him by a notorious individual by the name of…
* Max Clifford
Until fairly recently, the UK’s best-known PR guru. He’s said to have worked with anyone and everyone from Frank Sinatra and Marlon Brando to Z-listers such as Rebecca Loos, whose main claim to fame was embarking on an extra-marital affair with David Beckham. Clifford is currently serving an eight-year prison term for a string of indecent assaults on females ranging in age from 15 to 19. Furthermore, in his sentencing remarks, the judge presiding over the trial stated that he was sure the Public Relations maestro had also sexually abused a 12-year-old girl whilst on holiday in Spain, but that this allegation could not be pursued in the British courts even though evidence for it was presented to the jury during the case.
Clifford’s career in PR began in the early Sixties when he accepted an offer of a job as a Press-publicist at record-company, ‘EMI.’ He’s since recalled, “the first task I was given when I joined EMI in October 1962 was to promote a new group whose first single was about to come out. The single in question was called ’Love Me Do’ by a then unknown group called, The Beatles.” He also claims to have been with the band on their historic maiden-journey to the US for their first ever concert-tour there. “It was in February 1964,” he states. “I accompanied The Beatles to the United States. As we were touching down at New York’s John F. Kennedy Airport, we saw hundreds of kids waiting below. George Harrison turned to me and said, ‘look at all those people down there. There must be someone famous flying in.’ It turned out of course, that they were all screaming for them. I felt incredibly lucky to be there and see The Beatles adventure evolve.”
* Michael McCartney
Younger brother of Beatle Paul, he achieved a modicum of Pop-music success himself during the 1960s with The Scaffold, a band in which he performed under his alternative name, Mike McGear. In 2006, he was cleared of sexually assaulting a 16-year-old waitress at a family party. She’s said to have accused him of placing his hand over her trousers and then moving it from her thigh to her bottom. He’s reported to have denied this, arguing that he merely touched her back in a “fatherly gesture.”
* Rolf Harris
Already mentioned, he appeared onstage with The Beatles during their Christmas show of ‘63 / ‘64 which was, according to the book ‘The Beatles Diary Volume 1’ by author and Paul McCartney’s very old friend, Barry Miles, “designed for children.” Harris also found the time during a BBC radio-interview at the tail-end of 1963 to record an impromptu musical collaboration with the group – a re-working of an earlier hit novelty-single of his, ‘Tie Me Kangaroo Down Sport’…
* Wilfrid Brambell
Actor who is best-known for his role as Harold Steptoe in the hugely successful British TV sit-com of the 1960s and ‘70s, ‘Steptoe and Son.’ In 1964 he took on the role of Paul McCartney’s fictional grandfather in The Beatles’ debut movie, ‘A Hard Day’s Night.’ One thing I certainly recall from my pre-teen years in the late 1970s and early ‘80s is the little mutterings I’d hear in the classroom from my school-mates every now and again about ‘Steptoe the kiddie-fiddler’ and such-like. In 2012 came this article from ‘The Telegraph’ centring on Brambell‘s alleged activities on the island of Jersey, situated between France and Britain…
Brambell… allegedly abused two boys in a theatre in Jersey at the height of his fame in the 1970s.
One of the alleged victims was a resident at the notorious Haut de la Garenne children’s home which was at the centre of a high-profile police investigation into historical child-abuse on the island in 2008.
He claimed to have been taken to the island’s main theatre, the Opera House, as a “treat” before being taken backstage to meet Brambell, who he accuses of molesting him in a back-room.
The second victim, who had not been a Haut de la Garenne resident, also claimed to have been abused by Brambell at the theatre. The alleged victims were aged 12-13 at the time.
Brambell, who died in 1985, was homosexual and had a criminal-record for “persistently importuning for an immoral purpose” in a public lavatory dating from 1962.
Brambell became a household name in the 1960s and ‘70s when he appeared alongside Harry H. Corbett in ‘Steptoe and Son,’ in which he played a scruffy rag and bone man constantly derided by his on-screen son as a “dirty old man.”
He also appeared in The Beatles A Hard Day’s Night, playing Paul McCartney’s grand-father, after being hand-picked for the role by the singer.
The allegations were made to former Jersey health minister, Stuart Syvret, the most outspoken critic of the island’s failure to deal with child-abuse when the Haute de la Garenne scandal erupted…
He was contacted by dozens of people who had been abused on the island, some of whom named Jimmy Savile as one of their abusers.”
Which brings us rather neatly back onto the man himself…
* Jimmy Savile
A couple of years or so prior to the Beatles’ Christmas shows – when the band were still relatively unknown – Savile had booked them to perform at a nightclub he ran in Manchester. Or so he claimed. He’s reported to have said, “the first time they travelled over from Liverpool and got a fiver (five pounds) for the whole gig, and they went down well. So they came back (and) got £15.”
In the wake of the Savile revelations breaking into the mainstream back in 2012, McCartney went public about his and The Beatles’ relationship with the paedophile. “It’s very difficult to talk about it,” he said in an interview that year. “The thing is, we knew Jimmy and we worked with him, he was a DJ, an MC on some of the shows. We were working in Yorkshire and we were still living in Liverpool. And we were coming back from a gig and he came in our van over the Pennines. We gave him a lift. He told us all these stories about his wartime exploits how he had been buying chewing-gum and nylons and all that, and selling them. He had all sorts of stuff going on. He was the older hustler guy, and we were very amused by these stories because he was a great entertainer, but we dropped him off at his place outside his house and we said, ‘can we come in for a coffee?’ and he said, ‘oh no, not tonight lads.’ When he’d gone we thought, ‘why doesn’t he let us in, what is it, because most people would have let us in that we gave a lift to?’ So we always thought there was something a little bit suspect.” The former Beatle then said, “more generally, then, the whole sort of scene was not so PC… that post-war boom, girls and guys, it was a much more open scene… free love and the Pill had just come in, so it was a completely different scene. The other aspect, of course, is that we, though not quite Jimmy, we were of the age of the girls, we were all young. So if you’re now talking about a 17, 18-year-old boy with a 15-year-old girl, we all knew that was illegal, so we didn’t do it. We tried to make sure. We couldn’t always be sure but there was a definite no-no involved in under-age kids. Hey, listen, we didn’t have to worry. There were plenty of over-16-year-olds.”
McCartney, ever the publicist and PR-conscious guy that he is, looks to be protesting too much there – or have I read it wrong? I get the impression from that interview that maybe he’s trying to justify his and The Beatles’ past sexual exploits for the benefit of easing his own conscience – let alone to prevent any potential mud of a particularly nasty nature from sticking to the band’s public reputation. Back in 1964 a sum of $10,000 was said to have been paid by the group’s management to the mother of two underage teenage girls in a bid to stop her from going to the American Press after she complained that both her daughters had been “detained” in John Lennon’s hotel-suite in Las Vegas during the first – and crucially-important – concert-tour of the US by The Beatles. According to Ivor Davis a British journalist who accompanied them on that trip in his capacity as reporter for The Express newspaper, “the road-managers working with The Beatles on the tour were supposed to vet the girls before letting them in, and they did for the most part. But when a pretty girl came along nobody asked, ’do you have a passport?’ So these underage girls were allowed through with the mother’s consent. She came back a bit drunk from a casino sometime later, and demanded to be let up to the suite. When she was refused by security, the woman got royally pissed off, called the cops and said, ’my daughters are being held against their will in The Beatles’ suite.’ The cops came to investigate and they did find the underage girls with John Lennon. John insisted to them that nothing untoward had happened.”
The same incident in that Las Vegas hotel was recounted by veteran American broadcast-journalist, Larry Kane in his book, ‘Lennon Revealed.’ Same as Ivor Davis, he travelled beside The Beatles on their ‘64 tour of America. He states:
The Beatles, carefully watched by manager Brian Epstein and fiercely protected by road-managers Neil Aspinall and Malcolm Evans, plus travelling Press-manager Derek Taylor, were usually prudent in their selection of after-hours playmates. I never once saw an underage girl brought to The Beatles’ rooms. Except for the leaders of local fan-clubs, who cheerfully greeted them in the dressing-rooms in most cities for autographs or pictures, underage girls were never allowed near The Beatles. The band scrupulously avoided situations that might compromise their image and their success. But on one sultry night, or early morning depending on your own body-clock, that strict code of avoiding underage women was violated in a most dangerous way. And John was at the centre of it.
A heavy knock sounded on my door around 5 am, startling me out of sleep. The face in the doorway was that of Malcolm Evans… his eyes showed concern, and his features were contorted in anguish. I will never forget his words:
“We need you down in the lobby. There’s been a spot of trouble with John. Can you put on a tie and a jacket?”
What could it be? I couldn’t figure it out, but I knew that whatever it was, the stakes were high.
In the hallway, Evans was joined by Derek Taylor and Neil Aspinall. They explained that a dangerous situation was afoot. Twin sisters were in John Lennon’s room, catching autographs and posing for pictures with Lennon. They were part of a group of fans that had penetrated security. Most of the visitors had left, but these girls were sleeping on the second bed in John’s room.
“It’s all quite proper,” Derek Taylor said. “Not a damn thing happened in there.”
Derek added, “their mother is in the lobby, demanding to know what they’re doing up there, and we need you to go and tell her everything is proper.
“Where are the girls?” I asked. Malcolm winced. Neil said nothing. Derek gave me the answer with a finger that pointed down the hallway.
The door to John’s room was not locked. Derek opened it. John was dozing on the bed, his eyes half-open. The twin sisters rested on the edge of the second bed, their eyes glazing at the TV on the bureau.
It was then I understood the magnitude of the potential problem.
“Why me? I’m not going to be part of any lying,” I said.
“There’s nothing to lie about. They just came in to visit,” Derek insisted.
I turned and asked, “why me?”
Derek answered, “you’re a reporter. You look trustworthy.”
I made it clear that I would trust his word, but refused to play any part in a whitewash.
Mal Evans and I took the elevator to the lobby. We approached a woman in her mid-thirties who appeared to be shaken with worry. Where had she been while her daughters were sneaking past security to join a party with a Rock and Roll band upstairs? The casino-chips in her hand provided the most likely answer. Still, this woman also held in her hands the power to destroy the good-guy image of The Beatles.
Taking Taylor’s word, I identified myself to the mother and explained the girls’ visit as an innocent quest for pictures and autographs. Even though I declared my independence as a journalist, she wasn’t convinced. But when the elevators opened a minute later, a police officer emerged with her daughters, both of them smiling broadly and chatting excitedly about the details of John’s kindness. I was convinced. After all, how could two young girls look so innocent if a sexual encounter had taken place?
Still, there was an oddity to this episode. How did the police officer get to the room? The role of that officer has always been a mystery to me. But I do know this – a brief investigation into the matter was launched by the Las Vegas police-department. There was no follow-up.
As dawn was breaking, mother and daughter left the premises. Malcolm Evans grinned, Derek Taylor called up Brian Epstein with a status report, and then Derek and Malcolm thanked me warmly. Epstein was furious about the incident. And I still didn’t feel good about it.
“Was John messing with those kids?” I asked.
Derek said, “no.”
Was I naïve or uncaring? Neither. I just couldn’t believe that a Beatle would risk his future by getting involved with young girls in that way. But then again, John sometimes walked a fine line between earnest friendship and deceptive debauchery. Still, I was convinced this was a case of mistaken intentions.
To this day, I don’t know exactly what happened in that hotel-room. My instincts tell me it was pure innocence. The real story will never be known
In 1965, during another Beatles US tour, allegations of a similar nature popped-up again, but this time they made it straight to the Press. As the newspaper piece below and dated from August that year states, The Beatles were branded “the worst people ever” to visit Minneapolis by the city’s police-inspector, Donald R. Dwyer. Much of his criticism was focused on a party that was said to have taken place at the hotel where the band was staying. According to the article, “several members of the Beatles’ touring-party were threatened with arrest… in connection with alleged morals incidents at Leamington Motor Hotel… Dwyer said the visitors were warned after members of the party coaxed young girls from nearby sidewalks into fifth-floor hotel rooms. One of the girls, a young blonde, emerged from McCartney’s night-chain-locked room after police informed the tour-manager that McCartney would be jailed unless the girl was out of the room within two minutes. Dwyer said the girl produced identification to prove she was 21… ‘I doubt she is older than 16,’ Dwyer said. In all, more than 10 girls ranging from 15 to 20 years of age, were flushed out of the 20 rooms reserved for the Beatles’ entourage.”
So, there you have it for now; a list of names, a few ‘coincidences,’ and some rather questionable episodes in the Beatles’ touring schedules. What to make of all this – well, I wish I knew of course. I don’t have a theory, I don’t have a conclusion – just a bunch of info and ‘a feeling.’ I don’t know what to make of it.
At best, I suppose, this article will serve as a useful reference-point for folk who’re looking for information relating to this kind of subject-matter. It might even unlock some mysteries for some, or point others in the direction they need to go to find answers they’re looking for in regards to something that’s maybe unrelated. If it achieves any of that, I’ll be satisfied.
As you may very well be aware, these last few days has seen the rolling-out of ‘The Beatles: Eight Days A Week – The Touring Years,’ a new movie-documentary directed by Oscar-winning Ron Howard. It follows the band’s live-performance career starting from their days in the Cavern Club in Liverpool in 1962 through to their final concert in San Francisco four years later. What you might not know about though are the reports of a factual feature-film currently in the making that’ll focus – it’s said – on John Lennon’s ‘Beatles bigger than Jesus Christ’ statement in 1966 and its repercussions. Details are sketchy at the moment although, from what I’m being led to understand via a couple of sources on the internet, it’ll be titled, ‘Bigger Than Jesus. The Controversy That Changed America,’ and will feature new contributions from Maureen Cleave the journalist who was interviewing the Beatle when he made the comment, and Tony Barrow, the band’s PR-man at the time, and who recently passed away aged 80.
Just for the sake of context, here’s what we’re told happened back then by the mainstream (although I reckon the majority of readers here are well drilled on this)… During a casual interview with Cleave for the newspaper the ‘London Evening Standard,’ Lennon was quoted as saying, “Christianity will go. It will vanish and shrink. I needn’t argue about that; I’m right and I will be proved right. We’re more popular than Jesus now, I don’t know which will go first – Rock ‘n’ Roll or Christianity. Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. It‘s them twisting it that ruins it for me.” These comments went by without a fuss from readers in Britain, but when they were reprinted in a teen magazine in the US, all hell (pardon the pun) was let loose, especially in the so-called ‘Bible-belt’ of the country. A number of radio-stations there banned The Beatles’ music as a result, and their records were thrown onto bonfires by angry teenagers at designated ‘burn-in’ points. When the band arrived in North America for a concert tour in amongst all this controversy, they were subjected to disturbances and threats, most notably from the Ku Klux Klan. So tense was the atmosphere during this time that there were concerns for John’s life when, at a concert in Memphis, Tennessee, a firecracker was set off on the stage prompting members of The Beatles to look towards Lennon’s direction in fear he’d been shot. At Press conference after Press conference on the tour, he repeatedly insisted his comments to Cleave had been wildly misunderstood; He wasn’t claiming he and his band-mates were better than Jesus Christ, only that Christianity and church attendances in Britain had been dwindling to alarming levels, especially amongst the young who were instead turning to Pop-culture for their nourishment. In one exchange with a journalist, he claimed his comments were “expressions on things that I’d just read and derived about Christianity.”
Let’s pause at this point to consider briefly what he was said to have been reading around the time of his interview with Cleave, namely the book, ‘The Passover Plot.’ Published in 1965, the author, Hugh J. Schonfield, is credited as one of the first scholars to have worked on the Dead Sea Scrolls. Lennon’s quoted as saying, “my views on Christianity are directly influenced by… The Passover Plot… The premise in it is that Jesus’ message had been garbled by his disciples and twisted for a variety of self-serving reasons by those who followed, to the point where it has lost validity for many in the modern age.” The book claims that Jesus orchestrated his own martyrdom by planning his arrest, crucifixion – and – his resurrection. This he did by arranging to be drugged on the cross thus giving the impression that he was dead. Once being taken down and revived from his unconsciousness it would appear to those not in the know that he‘d come back to life. Well, that was the plan. It backfired however and he did indeed end up dying. There’ll be plenty of time to analyse the book and the purported influence it had on Lennon (and possibly, The Beatles) in future articles. What is worth pointing out here though is that what we have in ‘The Passover Plot’ is a false-flag of sorts – a staged event in order to manipulate the masses. Some might argue that John’s ‘bigger than Christ’ statement was itself a Passover plot designed to degrade Christianity amongst the younger population in preparation for the oncoming New Age-heavy One World religion, a movement that will have been largely instigated in the western-world thanks to the huge influence of The Beatles and their public endorsement of the Indian guru, the Maharishi Mahesh Yogi in August 1967, a point in time when mainstream popular media, music and movies was embracing the LSD-soaked psychedelia of the so-called ‘counter-culture’ – yet another alleged ingredient in the globalists’ plot to destabilise and corrupt the minds of the youth of that era – and of course With A Little Help from The Beatles. If that’s the way you see things then you might very well find some interest in the following caption from the official FaceBook page of the documentary-makers. They make note of the “strange coincidence” regarding the band’s last ever concert that took place at San Francisco’s Candlestick Park…
The Beatles’ so-called ‘cute’ and ‘lovable mop-top’ image was largely representative of their touring years which, of course, came to an end in August 1966 in San Francisco, the city that, within less than a year from then, would be the focus of the Acid-drenched counter-cultural movement that John, Paul, George and Ringo would become global figureheads of and provide a soundtrack to with the ‘Sgt. Pepper’ album. ‘Coincidence’ or not, there is something rather symbolic in that and in what the documentary-makers are pointing out in their FaceBook caption.
But what do they mean exactly by “strange coincidence”? Surely they’re not implying that it was too coincidental to be true – that the transition from the era of adorable, delightful mop-tops to counter-cultural revolutionaries was too smooth, too perfect to have been an organic, natural occurrence and that it was, in actual fact, not accidental, but orchestrated to happen in that way? Is that what they’re suggesting? Well, personally, I don’t know. Maybe they are? But, does that then mean their forthcoming film will follow that route of inquiry as well? In my opinion?… No, I don‘t think so. Well, certainly not based on what I’ve read on their FaceBook page, with the exception of the above caption of course. As far as I can see, there’s nothing there to indicate that these guys will be seriously challenging the official version of events – especially when you take into account another factor, one that takes us back to the subject of false-flags again. You see, it turns out the producer of the upcoming film is Dave Long, a man whose credits include almost half a dozen mainstream media-friendly documentaries about 9/11, and mainstream enough it seems to have guaranteed most if not all of them screenings on ‘The History Channel’ in the US and on the UK’s official narrative-spewing ‘Channel 4.’
All’s not so bad though. Having watched the majority of these films myself, I must point out that there’s very little to nothing in any of them that I, as a ‘conspiratorially-minded’ individual, find to be truly offensive. Yes, they toe the line with regards to the well-worn US/UK Governments-backed version of events, but only as a backdrop to deeply personal, human stories that tell of heroic New York fire-fighters risking life and limb, or of the frightened people they’re trying to save from the burning, teetering twin towers – as well as the relationships sometimes forged between the two. There’s absolutely no mention of or reference in any of the films I’ve seen to Islamic terrorists, men on hijacked planes with box-cutters, Osama Bin Laden, Al Qaeda, Afghanistan, Iraq, Saddam Hussein, George W. Bush, the so-called ‘War on Terror’ or anything else of a geo-political nature. One of the documentaries, ‘The Man Who Predicted 9/11’ for example, focuses solely on Rick Rescoria. He was the director of security of ‘Morgan Stanley’ at the World Trade Center at the time of the attacks and he’d been warning for years in the wake of the original bombings in the underground garage of the twin towers in 1993 that should there ever be a strike on either of the two buildings in future, it would only be possible to achieve successfully from the air, not the land. As a result, we’re told, he spent much of his time working on and implementing evacuation procedures that are credited with saving many lives during the 9/11 attacks. He himself died that day as he was helping people out to safety.
So, while we shouldn’t expect a radically shocking Alternative view from Dave Long and his forthcoming Beatles documentary, I don’t think we should anticipate anything of an inferior or, for whatever reason, offensive quality either – In fact, on the contrary I think. Here’s a teaser-video for it:
It can also be seen on the documentary-makers’ FaceBook page:
And in the meantime, whilst we wait-on for its release, here’s a ‘Beatles bigger than Jesus’ film that was made earlier – back in 1966 in fact, right in the middle of that controversy that followed the band as it toured through the United States. From what I can gather, it was produced and transmitted by the British TV news-provider, ‘ITN’ (‘Independent Television News’)…
An article posted on the UK’s ‘MailOnline’ mainstream news website yesterday (September 4th 2016) draws attention to a new book by Leon Wildes, the lawyer who successfully defended John Lennon during the 1970s when he was facing deportation from the US by the then-President Nixon and his cohorts.
Published by the American Bar Association last month, ‘John Lennon vs. The USA’ is, the MailOnline piece states, an explanation of…
“theNixon administration’s battle to deport Lennon purportedly for an old conviction in the UK for possessing hashish.
But behind the façade of wanting to deport Lennon on the 1968 drug conviction, was the reality that the Government feared the musician’s influence on young voters in the 1972 election.
Lennon had tremendous sway with 18-20-year-old voters, just after the election age had been lowered.
Federal agents with the FBI feared Lennon was heading to the Republican National Convention in Miami that year and warned that he and Yoko Ono would be arrested for ‘interstate travel in the furtherance of conspiracy to incite a riot’ if they tried to attend.
The couple moved from London to the Greenwich Village on a temporary visa after Lennon’s drug arrest.
They attended a rally for MC5 band-manager John Sinclair, who was serving ten years in prison for selling two marijuana joints.
Lennon performed the song, ‘John Sinclair’ for a crowd of 15,000 people and urged them to stay involved.
Sinclair, who had served two years, was released by the end of that week.
And it was this kind of influence that frightened the Government.
Sinclair was involved in the White Panther Party and ‘obtain(ed) guns and dynamite, (to) blow up the CIA office in Ann Arbor (Michigan) and la(id) plans for guerilla actions in northern Michigan,’ according to Wildes.
In light of this, anxious South Carolina senator Strom Thurmond warned US Attorney General John Mitchell, who oversaw the Immigration and Naturalization Service that Lennon’s new ally could be dangerous.
Days later, Lennon’s visa was revoked citing Lennon’s previous drug conviction.
Wildes then became Lennon’s immigration attorney.”
The article quotes Wildes as stating, “the Nixon administration made life intolerable for John Lennon and Yoko Ono. Alleged phone repairmen came to ‘check’ the Lennons’ telephone but left promptly when ID was requested.” Also, there were “two men” just across the street who “seemed to be fixing a bike interminably. When John and Yoko got into an automobile, the same two men appeared in a car behind them, making certain the Lennons knew they were being followed.” This, of course, is by no means revelatory, a fact that, incidentally, the MailOnline doesn’t acknowledge in its article. For some reason or another the piece has been tailored and billed as some form of ‘exclusive.’ Be that as it may, the reality is, from as far back as the early 1970s, Lennon was making no secret of his belief that he was being secretly monitored, although he couldn‘t corroborate it. He spoke about it to any one who’d listen be that on a TV chat-show or any other form of media-interview. In 1974, he’s reported to have said, “we knew we were being wire-tapped. But how do you prove that? There was a helluva lot of guys coming in to fix the phones.” Then, decades after his death, his suspicions were confirmed somewhat when the historian and author Jon Wiener was eventually given access to hundreds of intelligence-files from the FBI and CIA that proved the ex-Beatle was being monitored. All this is set-down in the book, ‘Gimme Some Truth: The John Lennon FBI Files’ published in 1999, and, to a lesser extent, in the 2006 movie-documentary, ‘The US vs. John Lennon.’
The former Beatle eventually won his deportation battle in 1976, meaning he was permitted to stay in the US. By this time, Nixon had resigned from the Presidency following Watergate, the scandal that resulted in the imprisonment of the aforementioned John Mitchell. Four years later, Lennon was shot dead – assassinated as he was staging, to all intents and purposes, a comeback to not only the music-biz after a lengthy period away, but the protest cause as well. The Republicans, in the wake of Democrat Jimmy Carter’s exit from the Whitehouse, made a return at this time too interestingly enough. In January 1981, just a little over 40 days on from John’s shooting, Ronald Reagan was inaugurated and George H.W. Bush, former CIA head and reported friend of John W. Hinckley Jr.’s family, became his vice-President.
‘John Lennon vs. The USA’ is available to buy at all the usual outlets as you might expect. I haven’t had the chance to purchase or read a copy myself, but I’ll hazard a guess there’s very little in there that’s contributing anything radically new to the topic. However, I’d also dare to suggest that it might be worth a close look purely for the fact that one of the book’s main protagonists is, let’s not forget, also the author. That in itself should be of interest – if not regarded as something unique too.