PDA

View Full Version : Jagger assassination target back in 60's


ohdear
3rd March 2008, 01:15 PM
Those biker gangs in the sixties really were mental wern't they??.

Some of them had the national guard following them around all the time as they were that out of hand.

This could be an interesting series on the FBI.Not that you'd get to hear the really juicy stuff mind.


http://uk.news.launch.yahoo.com/dyna/article.html?a=/080303/340/huplm.html&e=l_news_dm


Mick Jagger escaped an assassination attempt by a gang of Hells Angels in the '60s, it has been claimed.

The Rolling Stones' frontman was apparently targeted by the infamous group following their tragic 1969 Altamont show.

The news is revealed in a new radio documentary about the history of the FBI, with a former agent explaining how Jagger became a target.

Tom Mangold claims The Stones' disastrous San Francisco concert, in which one man was killed by a Hells Angel, prompted the death threat.

Jagger was said to be furious about the uprising in the crowd, blaming the biker group, who had been employed to quell any trouble.

Mangold explained: "The Hells Angels were so angered by Jagger's treatment of them that they decided to kill him."

A boatload of gang members set-off to attack the rock icon at his holiday home in the Hamptons, New York City, but were thwarted by bad weather.

"They planned the attack from the sea so they could enter his property from the garden and avoid security at the front", explained Mangold.

"The boat was hit by a storm and all of the men were thrown overboard. All survived and there was not said to have been any further attempt on Jagger's life."

"The FBI at 100" is to be aired on BBC Radio 4 later today.

Evs
3rd March 2008, 01:21 PM
They should've waited until '85 and the release of 'Dirty Work', they would've been well within their rights to kill him after listening to that.

Matt R
3rd March 2008, 01:37 PM
They should've waited until '85 and the release of 'Dirty Work', they would've been well within their rights to kill him after listening to that.

But then we might never have seen the video for Dancing in the Street which is possibly the unintentionally funniest music video ever.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7y-x2fWKbmo

RED CORNER
3rd March 2008, 01:40 PM
Should've gone for Keef.

Comes across as an utter cunt.

Evs
3rd March 2008, 02:09 PM
Should've gone for Keef.

Comes across as an utter cunt.

I'm glad we agree on something!

He isn't half precious about the Stones position in the rock pantheon considering their first five singles were cover versions and everything they did album-wise in the Sixties ripped off the latest Beatles one.

Whenever I read an interview with him he hasn't a good word to say about anyone.

If it wasn't for Andrew Loog Oldham's business savy they'd probably still be a Chuck Berry covers band in Richmond.

'Exile on Main Street' is brilliant though.

Sevcan
3rd March 2008, 05:44 PM
But then we might never have seen the video for Dancing in the Street which is possibly the unintentionally funniest music video ever.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7y-x2fWKbmo

:D

We'll be dancing in the street, will we? Not like that we wont.

Kid of the Kop
3rd March 2008, 06:31 PM
Should've gone for Keef.

Comes across as an utter cunt.

It was him who convinced Johnny Marr to leave The Smiths also. Cunt.

RED CORNER
3rd March 2008, 06:38 PM
I'm glad we agree on something!

He isn't half precious about the Stones position in the rock pantheon considering their first five singles were cover versions and everything they did album-wise in the Sixties ripped off the latest Beatles one.

Whenever I read an interview with him he hasn't a good word to say about anyone.

If it wasn't for Andrew Loog Oldham's business savy they'd probably still be a Chuck Berry covers band in Richmond.

'Exile on Main Street' is brilliant though.



I may be wrong but, wasn't Oldham the manager who ripped them off big time, to the point where everything they recorded before 1969/70 they only receive 0.5p per song in royalties and he gets the rest of the royalties? Fuckin' savvy all right!:D

Evs
3rd March 2008, 06:54 PM
I may be wrong but, wasn't Oldham the manager who ripped them off big time, to the point where everything they recorded before 1969/70 they only receive 0.5p per song in royalties and he gets the rest of the royalties? Fuckin' savvy all right!:D

Yeah :D

He's entitled to that though 'cause he got them to where they were, that headline 'Would You Let You're Daughter Go With A Stone?" or something like that.

He cleverly set them on the way by portraying them as the 'anti-Beatles' so they owe him big time.

It's all about money with the Stones. They've sucked the big corporate willy for decades.

Psychoticmonkey
3rd March 2008, 07:21 PM
But then we might never have seen the video for Dancing in the Street which is possibly the unintentionally funniest music video ever.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7y-x2fWKbmo

Someone posted this gem a little while back:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kA5GkLM5C7M

redrule
3rd March 2008, 08:48 PM
I may be wrong but, wasn't Oldham the manager who ripped them off big time, to the point where everything they recorded before 1969/70 they only receive 0.5p per song in royalties and he gets the rest of the royalties? Fuckin' savvy all right!:D


Are you not thinking of Allen Klein ?

Rolling Stones were brilliant

The relationship between Beatles and Stones was probably healthy competition that gave us a lot of good music.

Evs
3rd March 2008, 09:01 PM
Are you not thinking of Allen Klein ?Rolling Stones were brilliant

The relationship between Beatles and Stones was probably healthy competition that gave us a lot of good music.

Oh yeah.

It was him, not Oldham, wasn't it?

Didn't he also try to tuck The Beatles up but McCartney saw through him (Klein)?

redrule
3rd March 2008, 09:25 PM
Oh yeah.

It was him, not Oldham, wasn't it?

Didn't he also try to tuck The Beatles up but McCartney saw through him (Klein)?

Paul wanted Eastman I think , but I think Klein did get to work for them, with how much control I dont know.

probably one of the reasons why the fab 4 split up.

John for Klein
Paul for Eastman

Something like that ...