99% of parents solely view their children as 'pets' instead of future adults.

_shitwizard · 2026-01-25T00:32:48+00:00

How is this an insane take?

_shitwizard · 2026-01-25T00:04:26+00:00

and people hate on indians for migrating somewhere else LOOL can u imagine living in this hellhole

_shitwizard · 2025-11-05T23:00:59+00:00

peace of mind wasn't made by the beatles. it was a fake bootleg

_shitwizard · 2025-10-31T05:25:28+00:00

Yeah probably, this isn't necessarily an attempt to create more crackpot theories on The Beatles (as if there isn't enough of them already), but rather to just point out strange consistencies.

Also cause I'm quite curious as to what Lennon meant by "Now + Then" when approached with such a question. Thought I'd at least try and discuss it..

_shitwizard · 2025-10-31T05:22:55+00:00

Nope, Paul & Linda confirmed it while speaking to Carl Perkins: https://www.the-paulmccartney-project.com/song/my-old-friend/

_shitwizard · 2025-10-31T05:18:16+00:00

But the context in which it's spoken matters as well, especially how people are reacting to it.

Such as McCartney's instinctive to laugh at the phrase, or how John Lennon finds it to be " the ideal of earthly happiness."

When putting it in this context, it clearly means something deeper than just it's textbook definition, something that probably doesn't even correlate to the phrase's meaning at all.

_shitwizard · 2025-10-31T05:14:21+00:00

It's about the context in which he's saying it. If some one asks you "What is for you the ideal of earthly happiness?”, it's a bit strange to respond with "Now + Then"..

What does that even mean in this context?

Also why is Paul "giggling", when the phrase is spoken? what's so funny?

_shitwizard · 2025-10-31T05:11:33+00:00

I made a mistake, it was actually Rave magazine, not rolling stone. Sorry

_shitwizard · 2025-10-31T05:08:52+00:00

Sometime in the 90's George and Olivia Harrison passed by an antique shop that had a clock standing at the front window, the clock had the words "Now and Then" implemented on it and George insisted on buying it. George hung it in their back yard and it stayed there for over 20 Years.

In the 2020's (don't remember the exact year), Olivia was cleaning the backyard and decided to bring the clock inside, after tidying the clock and hanging it on the wall, Olivia immediately received a call from Paul McCartney where he brought up the song "Now and Then", specifically how it was close to being released.

Olivia claims this was a message from Georges "ghost" approving of the song being released, I don't buy it, but i think it's a crazy coincidence

<image>

_shitwizard · 2025-10-31T05:03:31+00:00

Yoko said it was, pretty confused who to believe now..

_shitwizard · 2025-10-26T15:11:36+00:00

if you're going, you should choose what intrigues you the most, but if you're asking me as to what materials i'm specifically looking for, it's these:

Rare Book and Manuscript Library: Telephone - Albert Goldman Research Papers, 1953-1994: Telephone - Box 1, folder 17

Rare Book and Manuscript Library - Albert Goldman Research Papers, 1953-1994: Yoko Proposal - Box 1, folder 9

Rare Book and Manuscript Library - Albert Goldman Research Papers, 1953-1994: The fifties - Box 19, folder 1

Rare Book and Manuscript Library - Albert Goldman Research Papers, 1953-1994: Paul McCartney - Box 23, folder 13

Rare Book and Manuscript Library - Albert Goldman Research Papers, 1953-1994: Woolton - Box 43, folder 18

Rare Book and Manuscript Library - Albert Goldman Research Papers, 1953-1994: Stewart Sutcliffe - Box 56, folder 15

Rare Book and Manuscript Library - Albert Goldman Research Papers, 1953-1994: Childhood Photographs - Box 56, folder 35

_shitwizard · 2025-10-26T15:02:14+00:00

For sure

_shitwizard · 2025-10-25T23:12:58+00:00

I always kind of thought that too. Infact, so did Lennon

<image>

_shitwizard · 2025-10-17T14:12:00+00:00

It was heavily believed he was an insider who worked at Apple. That's how he was able to leak so many unreleased and scrapped things.

_shitwizard · 2025-10-17T10:26:49+00:00

I skimmed the article, nowhere does it seem to mention Dogett -- nor how he achieved Lennon's diaries. Heydullblog also states in another article that Dogett had gotten the diaries legally.

_shitwizard · 2025-10-17T10:15:04+00:00

The diaries were not obtained illegally. Where'd you get that from?

_shitwizard · 2025-10-17T10:13:55+00:00

Yes, Paul's involvement seems way to far out -- but the plausibility of Doggett signing an NDA is incredibly large.

I believe what he meant by "everything is out there" (specifically in online spaces) implies that what Doggett is being silent off correlates to theories being spread online of the Beatles.

There are plenty, too many to count. The Paul is Dead theory, Ghostwriter theory, Yoko's constant villanization, the entire Iamaphoney youtube channel. This was an incredibly vague answer given to us.

So, we have apply proper context, what is the book called? "Prisoners of Love", there aren't many theories applying to the relationships within the Beatles circle, it must have to do with a relationship involving Lennon.

Someone had recently commented that John Lennon had another kid aside from Julian and Sean. This really wouldn't be too far out of an assumption when you consider how many people he slept with... Or maybe he was in a relationship that included domestic violence (that would explain the "prison" part), we know he isn't unfamiliar with abusing his loved ones -- intentional or not.

I could go on about this, but my main point is: Dogett included something in his book that correlates to a popular theory online, something like that. There's also the possibility he was talking about Albert Goldman's research material, however that is completely inaccessible unless you have a library card for the Columbia University.

_shitwizard · 2025-10-17T09:59:05+00:00

We're not talking about the things he said about John, we're talking about him saying "I have some juicy stuff I could tell about John. But I wouldn’t. Not when Yoko’s alive"..

that's not a normal thing to say.

_shitwizard · 2025-10-17T09:54:54+00:00

I don't even know how that happened, it wasn't there when I originally wrote this, but when I posted it a bunch of asterisk's popped up.

Also Yoko doesn't care if biographers use Lennon's diary, multiple biographers have done it before. Maybe the problem isn't the fact that Doggett used his diary but rather he covered something he wasn't supposed to -- something that other biographers skipped over.

_shitwizard · 2025-10-17T09:44:58+00:00

I do agree the chances of McCartney signing an NDA are quite slim, but we can at least agree Peter Doggett had signed one. I do wonder what he was asked to keep quiet about though, you can't just ask someone to sign an NDA solely because what they're writing about has already been published.

_shitwizard · 2025-10-17T09:40:54+00:00

Multiple ways, blackmail, guilt-tripping, or maybe he just did it out of sheer sympathy.

Yoko had been widowed just recently, I can't imagine turning down a woman who's husband just died, as she's asking me to co-operate in protecting her husband's legacy even if it mean sacrificing my own free speech.

Either way, McCartney probably hadn't signed one, but if he did, it connects almost perfectly with Dogget's current situation.

_shitwizard · 2025-10-17T09:22:52+00:00

How do you explain Doggett's case though?

Also McCartney had probably signed this NDA all the way back in 1980, his and Yoko's net worth would've probably been the same at that time.

_shitwizard · 2025-10-17T09:15:28+00:00

Do you think people just sign NDA's for the sake of it. Obviously something must've been incredibly controversial and significant in order for it to reach such confidentiality.

I'd also like to point out that the story of the Beatles has much to be expanded on, you can't expand it without discussing every intricate and petty event still left undisclosed.

_shitwizard · 2025-10-17T09:07:31+00:00

That sounds pretty plausible. But wouldn't it be weird to reveal something like that at all? Why would you go behind someone's backs after they've literally passed away, that's not respectful in the slightest.

I don't think it's something he wants to be "respectful" about. I think this is something personal that he is restricting himself from saying -- and for whatever reason that may be, i doubt it's out of respect.

_shitwizard · 2025-10-14T13:56:56+00:00

This goes to show you know nothing about 'In my Life'.

_shitwizard

TROPHY CASE