By Terry Ott

Roight.

Just wot the bloody 'ell and all is going on at the Dakota these days like these?

Unless a recent gossip column in the NYPost was a gag, it appears that 30 year old Sean Lennon has used the paper as his very own Lonely Hearts Club confab, evidently announcing that he would like to meet an eligible mate through a write in campaign.

Sound crazy or even a little sad to you? Does to me, but then again what the heck is the eventual heir to a billion dollar fortune, plus the Lennon legacy to do when he finds himself babe-less?

Hasn't Sean ever heard of the Internet?

Jesus H Christ-who by the way has still not vanished-there are plently, and I mean plenty of online dating services where you can be anon, and not expose yourself as desperate, daft, or whatever.

Man, poor Sean will now have every crazed and not so crazed fan and gold-diggers claiming to be his sole, and lunch ticket, mate.

So, given that I have never considered Sean's mom to be a dummy, methinks this is but a publicity stunt, that may be more worthy as performance art, staged at The Pretentious Gallery, Soho, rather than in and around NYC, the dating capitol of the whole wide fricken world.

Christ, you know it ain't easy, but it also ain't rocket science, this business of love/lust, etc.

According to the Post column, Sean does not want any females over 45, nor any with over 5 nipples. Geez, does the poor lad know what he is missing?

Now, if this really is a gag, then methinks it could have been made better by Sean if he had taken a page from mum and dad's book and staging a "bed-in" for babes.

Sean would vow to stay in bed-in front of the world's press, if they cared-until he scored a date for New Years, with someone who had an IQ of at least, say, 65 or so.

Now THAT, would really be something.

Well, now that we have the Christmas hysteria past us, how about a short trip back through 2005, Beatle wise, starting with a wish list for 2006, cuz we were short-changed in '05.

Make sense?

In the wacky world of Fabdom, ANYTHING makes sense Beatle peeple.

So, in that spirit, I think we-the fans with Beatle bucks in our pockets-want this:

If we can't get a back catalogue 5.1 remastering this year, we MUST have, at the very least, the complete Hollywood Bowl concerts.

Great hook to hang it on, as '06 makes 40 years since the boys decided to ix-nay touring.

It may also be the easist way for Apple to milk the Beatles franchise once again. Nothing "big-time" resting on this, say like a reissue of Let it Be/Rot, as the Cor. can always say, "hey, it is what it is."

And most fans would eat it up. I know I would!

Or, how about a remastered with extras and in 5.1, Help!

This would be good, and once again, maybe easier that other options.

Plus, unless the Apple/EMI legal wankfest gets right out of hand, we will most likely get the Capitol Albums Vol. 2, becasue I suspect that the whole serious may have already been prepared and just waits for all the beatles "committee" to approve it.

My prediction is we may get Vol. 3, maybe even by the end of 2006.

But then again, I have predicted a lot of things, some coming true, some coming to shit, so don't bet the farm, or even the bike or aptartment.

Yet as in any coming new year, hope springs eternal.

Yeah, yeah,yeah, and yeah.

Yes Beatle bros and babes-or is that babes and bros?- it has come down to this; the day before Christmas, the year of Our Lord, 2005.

I hope things have gone, and will continue to go well for you, and yours.

Every X-Mas, I think of my two fave D 25th's, and both include, of course, the Fabs.

In late December 1964, the family spent the first Christmas outside Canada, visiting relatives in Santa Monica, CA.

It was there that I got a copy of Beatles 65 at the then legendary Farmer's Market, of which we had nothing of the kind at the time in the Great White North.

I recall the long rows of LPs, and Beatle promo stuff on display.

But perhaps the most Beatle Christmas was 1965, when just about everyone I know got Rubber Soul as a gift. In fact, me and my cousin snuck down to the tree in the middle of the night, and opened up RS, and played it low on the stereo, before finally going back to bed about 4:30AM.

Great memories.

I would also like to use this space today to thank AbbeyRd (Coach) Steve for all his support and understanding in ' 05. Hope you get another job, coach, besides handling complaints about me!

And some of the regular readers and e-mailers, like Gotham Johnny, Hawaii Ann, Cleveland Matt, Berkeley Lissa, Rutles Tim, MM Barb, and many many more, I'm sorry if I left out.

YOU are the ones that make this labour of love just that, and your support, humour and enouragement are very much appreciated as I sometimes navigate the seas of stormy discontent, wading through a polluted ocean of souls that would scarcely get one's feet wet.

I'm sure it was Woody Allen who said, "Always go for the joke and hope for the best."

And well, I'm not sure who said this: "If they can't take a joke, well then, f**k 'em," but I certainly agree, and live by it.

MERRY CHRISTMAS EVERYBODY!!!!!!!!

You know, since I first started seeing posts on various Beatle Internet forums about a month ago-and usually from the same group of posters-that sought to undermine Bruce Spitz's The Beatles, even before it was published, something seemed really wrong.

I can not recall an instance when a book on the Beatles-even Albert Goldman's widely loathed tome-was attacked pre publication, and by a organzied group of protestors at that.

One nut apparently even stood in a major book seller outlet, warning people aloud not to buy Spitz's book.

Does this sound "normal" to you?

So that is why this whole thing has caught my attention, and in my craw.

Up to this point, I have been making fun of these "Internet wankers," but there may be something more to this pissfest than meets the eye.

The publishing business, like the music industry is a cut throat one, and getting an edge is all important.

Seeing that there were at least 5 John Lennon and/or Beatles books coming out in late 2005, getting off to a good start would be important for the authors, who are also ultra competitive.

Now most of us know by now that the fanzine Daytrippin approached Spitz early on in this process, complaining about all the "errors" in his book.

When Spitz advised the publisherest of Daytrippin to have an "enema," shortly thereafter a jihad began aginst Spitz, which spilled from Daytrippin to the Beatles Collectors Forum on Yahoo!

This is what caught my attention, when the same posters were posting the same things week after week, merclessily attacking Spitz, and anyone who dared to say, hey wait a minute, what's the real story here?

Certain posts to the forum were censored by the moderator, who obviously agreed that Spitz should be taught a lesson in Beatle fact checking.

It was then that I started poking fun on Beatle Bits, and it was also then that the same people who started the Beatle Collectors forum attacks on Spitz, then shifted to me, threatening AbbeyRd that they would boycott the site, if I continued to write "vicious" attacks.

However, the one actually making the "vicious" personal attacks- and naming names was Daytrippin- which posted on their website a long diatribe against AbbeyRd and me, much of what was not factual, and some of which was unintenionally hillarious, "shocked and stunned" in a Rutles-like way.

But is there actually something more to this than plain stupidity?

Spitz has been attacked for "errors," and there certainly were a few, of which the author and publisher has agreed, and will be corrected for the second edition.

However, Larry Kane's new book, Lennon Revealed, was given a warm-no, love licking- review by Daytrippin, and is in fact given a nod in the forward to Kane's book.

But did Daytrippin really read Kane's book?

I started to, and within 10 pages found a "glaring" error that I would bet would have got Spitz crucified.

Kane writes that John Lennon was shot 6 times in the back.

However, that would have been difficult, as Lennon was murdered with a 5 SHOT Charter Arms .38 snub nose special.

In additon, any report that I read said that John was struck first in the side or front of his body, and then spun around where 3 more shots struck his back, with one round missing.

Funny how a mistake of fact like this only 10 pages in could go un-noticed, or un-punished.

Never saw this error puffed up on the Internet forums, and a subsequent attack of the book as trash. Yet that is a fairly substantial error for a book that purports to be the real story on Lennon.

Here is a fact of life and literature: authors and people make mistakes!!!!

In that regard, Kane is no different from Spitz, Bramwell, Goldman et al.

Yet why was Spitz singled out?

Could some of the Internet "wankers" and fanzine queens been used to carry out a hit on the Spitz book?

And why exactly, and directed by whom?

After all, it is not every day that a non news story like the mistakes in a Beatle book get made fun of on a network talkshow, or placed in a New York City daily gossip column.

What is REALLY up here?

After some thought, I felt it would be better if I explained the joke here.

If you have not been following the ongoing conspiracy to take down Bob Spitz's book, The Beatles, you may not get the gag.

In NUTshell, a number of individuals, but most notably-or not!-the editor of a Beatles fanzine mag and website, have led a poison media and Internet campaign to discredit Spitz, and anyone who gave his book a positive review.

Rest assured that my name is being taken in vain as we read, and for that I am greatful.

So I thought the best way to deal with these poor misguided souls-one of whom Spitz advised to have an enema-was to have some fun.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------


And so this is Christmas
And what have you done?

The Dayfibbin' enemas
Are they up yer bum?

Another obsessed fan
I couldn't give a damn.
A liar and a nut one
Yes, it's been so much fun.

Yes, this is Christmas
For bright and for dumb

If you believe Dayfibbin,
Then sumthin's up yer buns

Have a merry day Christmas
And a happy new year
Let's hope little fibber Tina has a good one
Trying a colonic with beer.

Oh yes this is Christmas
Even for Bob Spitz

Perhaps the nutbars
Have given, Bobby a lift.

And so Happy Christmas
We hope you have fun
And don't need an enema
For all the wanking you have brung

Yea!

Happy Christmas everyone!!!!!!

Yes, even for the nuts....

NB: Please note, this is satire!!!!! Lighten up.

Twas 4 days before Christmas
And all the through the Internet house
Some Fab wanker creatures were stirring
With brains the size of mouse

Voodoos dolls of Spitz
Were all hung from their beds
Who the bloody 'ell
Can figer wot goes on in their pea heads

From the great beyond
John and George looked down
"What ass wipes,"
They both frowned

Instead of a celebration
At Christmas
What we git instead
Is a royal and retarded pissfest, thus

The Daytipper enemas were all wrapped
And placed by the tree
With hopes that all deserving twits
Would get one for free

And the Macca Madhatters
We've heard from for sure
To them we wish the best, but
Too bad their minds are so little, and poor

So as 2005 draws to close
We can surely look around and pray
Some crazy Beatle fans
Take a long walk on a short pier, soon, or even today.

But there is a positve note
In all this crap
AbbeyRd is 10 years olde
And no one can subtract from that!

Merry Crimble!
Happy Christmas
And anything else you'se wish

Well children, do we have the smoking gun, the lipstick on the collar, the creme on the pudding, or have the press just grabbed hold of the wrong end of the stick, and begun to beat around the bush with it?

Yesterday brought the news that the surviving Beatles and heirs and therefore Apple/Rutle Corpy were suing their recording company EMI to the tune of 30 mill of lbs., for "unpaid royalties."

Everywhere, fans with even half a brain were going,"Ah-ha!, now we know why there has been no Capitol Albums Vol, 2, Let it Be/Rot, or anything else Fab for that matter in 2005."

But is it that simple minded?

The UK's Telegraph newspaper has a Dec. 17/05 story claiming-perhaps publicly for the first time-that the Beatles first 4 songs recorded in 1962-including the eventually charting Love Me Do-were actually cut for HMV, not EMI.

And there may even be a dodgy bit of Beatle HMV/NEMS business circa 1962 that has also not seen the light of day, that when it does, may shock a lot of fans.

This is a real piece of Beatle news, and some insiders are still scratching their heads wondering how it took so long for this to come out.

In any event, what does it all mean?

Is it a sly negoitating tactic by the post-Fab Four to get more moola out of EMI?

Were the four songs in question the 4 that Pete Best played on, and that eventually made it on to the first Anthology? If so, Merry Christmas, Pete!

Or were they the versions that were used on album and single since 1962, thus making them very valuable indeed?

The Telegraph story esitmated Paul McCartney's net worth at about 1. 7 BILLION BUCKS, so one wonders what he would actually do with 10 mill or so more. Hell, even Ringo Star is said to be up to $250 million US bucks.

Well, I guess it is true that there is NO such things as TOO much money, but this latest brass pissfest may be but the tip of the old iceberg in that what we don't see and hear, may be the real story.

Will EMI merge with Sony/BMG?

Will the Beatles get their songs back in such a deal?

Will Let it Be/Rot ever be released?

Will you care?

Will the fans ever stop buying whatever Apple is selling?

Will there be snow for Christmas?

Well, kiddies, your trusty and always humble correspondent has burning ears-eyes?-once again, after a pitiful twit by the handle of Mack Knobosect over on another Beatles Internet related site posted-twice- a needy tome about what it is I have written about said poor pitiful twit and his lot, and Beatle author Bob/Bruce Spitz.

Mack sez I am "vicious." Last time I was called that was by Sweet Jane Lou.

Of course this is a piss-fest and really much about nothing, but since poor, pitiful wanker Mack feels that he must run at the mouth in public, what the hell, I will too, except that I shall insert a weed up the poor, pitiful little twits' arse, because, well, it is good sport.

(Plus the moderator-most likely Mack- of the site usually censors my posts, being the poor pitiful twit(s) that they are.Otherwise, I wouldn't bother to bore you.)

In any event, all this wonky wanking started when I dared to caution about taking the piss out of Spitz before all the "facts" were in.

For this, I am personally attacked by this poor, pitiful twit, who obviously has very little better to do, and as I understand it, is a media whore/flack to boot and spends most of his time slobbering over his collectibles. Probably does not get peanut butter on his Beatle bubble gum cards, cuz he most likely won't handle anything without gloves, such is his silly nostalgic sickness and possible homo erotic fixation with all things Fab.

(Hey, I've got a notion: Mack should apply for a gig at Apple, where he could Neil and Bob to his tiny little heart's content.)

Like, oh wow! We got an anti-Spitz missive in a gossip column in an NYC newspaper. Whoopee! We have found our calling in life, slagging others!!!! Get a life, twit(s)!

And I told these poor, pitiful twits that I would be writing a review of Spitz's book for Canada's Globe and Mail, which is sort of the national Canuck version of the NYTimes, and as a working journalist-not a needy nut- I have to take these kinds of reviews seriously, and I did.

I pointed out the question of mistakes in Sptiz's book in my review, as well as the delicious comment he made to another Beatles Internet wankette fanziner, who was told to have an enema, although the readers of that forum never got to see my review, because it was not allowed to be posted by Mack and the twits.

Spitz may have have screwed up a bit, but at least he has a fricken sense of humour, which these poor, pitiful twit(s) do not have, or even a hint of same.

Perhaps Mack should also try a Dr. Pepper high colonic, and flush out what he can, before he is so full of it and himself, he'll think he is bigger than Rod.

As for me, I have consulted with Leggy, and I apologise for being, and acting like a human being, because now we have all this.

Finally, as for Mack, I wish him a speedy and successful journey through the mental health system, and a complete recovery as well anything else the little shit wants.

Finally, finally, remember children, all you need is love, not "facts."

PS: Mack, thanks for all the free publicity!

PPS: Please note that I am NOT calling everyone on the Beatles Collectors site, poor pitiful twits, but rather only the actual poor, pitiful twits, who already know, or should suspect, who they are.

It is, after all, all about the music.

And although the Beatles recorded about 200 songs, many ask for a top 10.

So here is my VERY SUBJECTIVE list, based on merit, sales, and impact.

1/ Hey Jude

The biggest selling Fabs single, number 1 for about 2 months, and the absolute anthem of 1968. The best since Schubert.

2/ Strawberry Fields Forever

Never made number 1 in the UK. What were they thinking?

3/ Help+A Hard Day's Night (tied)

Defined 1964 and '65.

4/ A Day In The Life

Acid brilliance.

5/ I Am The Walrus

Ditto

6/ Yesterday

And now for Mr. Paul McCartney, opportunity knocks.

7/ Let it Be

Theme song for the dream is over.

8/ Something

George equals John and Paul

9/ Ticket to Ride

Very neat song.

10/ I Feel Fine

Feedback and brightness.

--------------------------------------------
That's it.

I await your bitching and/wanking or even agreement.

NOTE TO MMs: yes, the final tally was Nasty 6, Dirk 3, Stig 1, but McQuickly DID make number 1 overall, so there.

I hope that many of you got a chance to check out my radio interview with Cynthia Lennon, broadcast this last weekend on AM 900 CHML, Hamilton, Ont.

Cynthia was a great interview, and I felt that she was not only articulate but sincere, which is not always the case with big time celebs when they decide to yak.

Of course, the first Mrs.Lennon is also out literally across the world promoting her book, John, and I'm sure she has endured her share of dumb questions. Although I doubt anyone has asked her why she "broke up the Beatles."

Cynthia is definately a trooper, and at 66, still young at heart as well, and as she told me, "hurdled," a lot of things in her life.

I got a kick out of her relaying what happened at a Barnes and Noble book signing in new York City. Cynthia said she was informed by store staff that Paul McCartney had been in earlier signing copies of his new children's book, and that he had autographed far few copies of his book then did Cynthia did hers.

Geez, it's still John vs. Paul even if it's by proxy!

Cynthia also said son Julian is doing well, and will soon be releasing a new record, which I'm sure will be of interest to many Beatle fans.

So, in the last 5 years, I have been lucky enough to interview both of John's wives-Yoko Ono in 2000-and both women have helped me-and I hope the listeners and readers-to have a greater understanding of John Lennon.

Cynthia's book is doing very well, and I would have no problem recommending it to anyone interested in learning more about John, the Beatles, and the times they lived through.

The horror. The horror.

OH MY GOD!

Are the Macca Madhatters aware that someone has stolen my gig?

That they have a new Public Enemy Number 1?

Someone called Rip Rense has upon this dark, dastardly day, posted a blasphemous document from Mark Haefeli Productions, entitled, "Paul's Silly Treatment."

This post is simply terrible. Terrible, but true.

You can sample the evil document at AbbeyRd.

Now the MMs will become enraged with a righteousness that shall surely bring down the world, or close.

How could anyone spoof the great Sir P. McCartney?

Don't they have better things to do, like, say, make fun of Yoko?

Personally, I am bed sides myselfs, and I surely shan't sleep a wink tonight.

Perhaps these buggers are Communists, or even sick comedians, who have nothing left to do but to poke fun at the great SPM, who only spends his another day spreading joy and syrup throughout this round world of ours.

This is a man who has devoted his life to being the junior partner in the great song writing team of Lennon and McCartney, and He should be give the respect due such an achievement.

Especially since he's almost 64.

But regular reader Barb said it best.

"I love the guy, but can't stand him at the same time. He's just so full of himself. It's 'The Paul McCartney Show' all the time. You get the feeling he is always 'on.'
But I guess I'm a sap just like all the rest."

Couldn't have said it any better meself.