Tell Me :
Talk
No,better nobody dead.
That was an interesting read - thanks Edith.
A few things strike me on reading it. First - I had never heard that the Stones financed the Maysles, but the article says they did, and also says that the camera crew had "...no special access to the Stones personally at any time in the tour..." which seems a bit contradictory. If you're financing a film, wouldn't you be a bit more involved? Makes me wonder if the first comment was accurate. Someone will likely know.
Also, it doesn't mention something that I've read several times regarding Altamont, namely that the HA's seemed particularly concerned about anyone touching their bikes, which they lined up near or across the front of the stage, and they have been reported to have beaten the bejeezus out of anyone who went near them. I'm sure they were taken by surprise at by the events of the day, but I think they were maybe enjoying their role a bit, too.
All this apropos of what? Not much really. It was such a different, innocent time, nearly 40 years ago now. The idea of being confronted by a gun at a concert at that time must have been unthinkable to most who went. Whether it was innocence or negligence, I can't - from today's perspective - imagine the city not providing police coverage and insisting on better private security. When things started to go sideways, why didn't the few officers who were there not call for assistance (or if they did, where was it? Maybe impossible to get through?)
I would love to remember those times more clearly - was pre-occupied with swimming lessons and popsicles during the Summers of Love thru Woodstsock. We are more cynical now, and try to recapture some of what those days were like. But when we go to a large concert like that, we believe we are safer today. Here's hoping we're right.
Or, maybe even...Skynet.
Yeah, I agree on the latter.
About the Angels and their bikes, it's actually pretty normal for a biker to be highly protective of his bike.
But I wonder about the brain power involved in parking those bikes in front of a stage surrounded by 400K people.
I have a few friends who are bikers and, thankfully, they are not "clubbers."
They are very careful with their bikes, just like someone with a classic car, or anyone who has sacrificed much of their time and money into something.
Even if the Dead had played, there still would have been a gap because the Stones would still have made the crowd wait a long, long time before they went on. That was their thing, at the time, and to a lesser degree, they still do it. They like to make the crowd wait, to build up the tension, the frustration. Then, JJF, catharsis, release.
In this case, though, this kind of old-school show-biz razzmatazz was disastrous. If you've got 300,000 cranky children on your hands, you're not going to make them LESS cranky by making them WAIT a little longer for their cake.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008-03-09 16:24 by tatters.
I agree with the charmer's statement.
To even think that the 60's in America was non-violent is naive. One of the most violent periods in America since the Civil War in 1861 - 1865.
It is their fault, they hired the Angels. Its their show, they approved the setup. It was very disorganized and chaotic. Who else do you blame?
When the Romans brought lions into the Coliseum for entertainment you don't blame the lions for mauling and eating people do you?
That being said, they put on a hell of a show, one of the best sound wise of the 1969 era.
Is this an American thing? Coming from the English side of the Pond, I have to say I don't think there is any acceptable explanation for a civilian to carry a gun, loaded or unloaded, and it would be regarded as highly unusual, not to mention dangerous and criminal, behaviour today much less in the 60's to be brandishing a weapon at a rock concert.
I think the Dead decided not to play to get an obviously bad situation over with as quickly as possible. The Stones,the main attraction,would therefore get on and off stage sooner by the Dead abstaining.
But the Stones,selfish,money-whoring, #$%&suckers kept everybody waiting until long after dark so they film a movie and make a lot of$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.
Making money off of a movie being the raison detre for this 'free' concert anyway.
And the Stones hit a pot of gold with this WoodStock West gone awry because of the violence and death of Meredith Hunter.
Maybe they could have actually omitted images of this man's death out of respect for the family?
Nah!
Journalistic, and artistic integrity meant they had to tell the whole truth man
Or a cynic might be inclined to say they left the death scene in to $en$ationalize
it and make money.
Integrity and taste were sacrificed to wealth on the blood-altar of commerce.
Everyone wave to the plane flying off to Switzerland!
In fairness Mick and Keith did try to clam things, and Bill "The Fall Guy" was 'late in arriving' because he was shopping in San Fran. Sure.
Bill, you are not with the band anymore, come clean, what really happened?
Yes, I love the Stones, but that Altamont was fishy business.
____ thats about right jp, pretty simple ....... ive never read so many assinine/idiotic posts
here on iorr (well, that might not be true) especially from people who werent there or not even born yet. . probably all of you.. know wonder the population of this sight has diminished to such a degree that its like panning for gold in a dried up creek to find something of value..............
Slight exageration by Mathijs: 28 times would have left him a sliced ham. 5 stab wounds according to the coroner:
[www.rollingstone.com]
----------------------------
"Music is the frozen tapioca in the ice chest of history."
"Shit!... No shit, awright!"
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008-03-10 09:48 by Greg.
But I'm sure you know as well as I do, my well respected friend E. G,
that the angels smashed peoples heads in with pool sticks all along the
afternoon and evening. The atmosphere seem to have been such, that either
Hunter or someone else would be killed that fateful day.
Still, one could argue about the (maybe sometimes way too) heavy
symbol value that Altamont has been tucked into. There has to be
other violent acts on festivals, about contemporary.
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: Meredith Hunter
Posted by:
Edith Grove
()
Date: March 9, 2008 01:37
No sssoul , I understand your post, and the last thing I want is a confrontation with anyone on this board.
My rant was a result of frustration, not just for the Hunter case, but for a general feeling of sympathy that (I believe) too many people have for the perpetrators of violent crimes.
It seems to me that personal accountability is going out the window as time goes by.
In the Hunter case, the killing would not have happened if there had been a better atmosphere at Altamont, but that is not to say that Hunter is not responsible for his death.
Hunter had a choice, and he made the wrong choice. If he did not like what was going on at Altamont, he could have gone home like I'm guessing many others did that day.
There is no excuse for what he did (brandishing a concealed firearm) and anyone around him deserved to defend themselves with deadly force if need be.
My rant was a result of frustration, not just for the Hunter case, but for a general feeling of sympathy that (I believe) too many people have for the perpetrators of violent crimes.
It seems to me that personal accountability is going out the window as time goes by.
In the Hunter case, the killing would not have happened if there had been a better atmosphere at Altamont, but that is not to say that Hunter is not responsible for his death.
Hunter had a choice, and he made the wrong choice. If he did not like what was going on at Altamont, he could have gone home like I'm guessing many others did that day.
There is no excuse for what he did (brandishing a concealed firearm) and anyone around him deserved to defend themselves with deadly force if need be.
Re: Meredith Hunter : what was his purpose?
Posted by:
sweetcharmedlife
()
Date: March 9, 2008 02:10
Quote
fiftyamp
You carry a piece to a show, you're looking for trouble. And he found it. Better him dead than one of the boys.
No,better nobody dead.
Re: Meredith Hunter : what was his purpose?
Posted by:
angee
()
Date: March 9, 2008 02:13
From my reading of events leading up to the death, the Angels were acting beligerently well before that, riding through the middle of the crowd up to the stage. and, I think, going up to the stage. Aside from the issue of provocation, and I think melillo's comments are pertinant here, there is evidence that the Angels were performing more than routine security duties.
I think the Maysles brothers have a lot more footage from the event that would shed more light on what happened.
I think the Maysles brothers have a lot more footage from the event that would shed more light on what happened.
Re: Meredith Hunter : what was his purpose?
Posted by:
SomeTorontoGirl
()
Date: March 9, 2008 02:22
That was an interesting read - thanks Edith.
A few things strike me on reading it. First - I had never heard that the Stones financed the Maysles, but the article says they did, and also says that the camera crew had "...no special access to the Stones personally at any time in the tour..." which seems a bit contradictory. If you're financing a film, wouldn't you be a bit more involved? Makes me wonder if the first comment was accurate. Someone will likely know.
Also, it doesn't mention something that I've read several times regarding Altamont, namely that the HA's seemed particularly concerned about anyone touching their bikes, which they lined up near or across the front of the stage, and they have been reported to have beaten the bejeezus out of anyone who went near them. I'm sure they were taken by surprise at by the events of the day, but I think they were maybe enjoying their role a bit, too.
All this apropos of what? Not much really. It was such a different, innocent time, nearly 40 years ago now. The idea of being confronted by a gun at a concert at that time must have been unthinkable to most who went. Whether it was innocence or negligence, I can't - from today's perspective - imagine the city not providing police coverage and insisting on better private security. When things started to go sideways, why didn't the few officers who were there not call for assistance (or if they did, where was it? Maybe impossible to get through?)
I would love to remember those times more clearly - was pre-occupied with swimming lessons and popsicles during the Summers of Love thru Woodstsock. We are more cynical now, and try to recapture some of what those days were like. But when we go to a large concert like that, we believe we are safer today. Here's hoping we're right.
Re: Meredith Hunter : what was his purpose?
Posted by:
bikerboot
()
Date: March 9, 2008 04:03
Quote
baxlap
And Meredith Hunter would have lived and gone on to become a world-leading physicist who reinvented the wheel and built a better mousetrap.
Or, maybe even...Skynet.
Re: Meredith Hunter : what was his purpose?
Posted by:
Edith Grove
()
Date: March 9, 2008 04:15
Quote
SomeTorontoGirl
That was an interesting read - thanks Edith.
Also, it doesn't mention something that I've read several times regarding Altamont, namely that the HA's seemed particularly concerned about anyone touching their bikes, which they lined up near or across the front of the stage, and they have been reported to have beaten the bejeezus out of anyone who went near them. I'm sure they were taken by surprise at by the events of the day, but I think they were maybe enjoying their role a bit, too.
Yeah, I agree on the latter.
About the Angels and their bikes, it's actually pretty normal for a biker to be highly protective of his bike.
But I wonder about the brain power involved in parking those bikes in front of a stage surrounded by 400K people.
I have a few friends who are bikers and, thankfully, they are not "clubbers."
They are very careful with their bikes, just like someone with a classic car, or anyone who has sacrificed much of their time and money into something.
Re: Meredith Hunter : what was his purpose?
Posted by:
tramp66646
()
Date: March 9, 2008 09:01
A lot of people besides just gangster types carry gun's. Many practically every time they leave their homes, so who know's why this guy had one with him on this particular day? Seem's it shouldn't have been too hard to have found out at the time if he was somehow involved with anything slightly underground or just a kid with an attitude or what? Nobody ever seem's to have bothered to find out much about him.
Re: Meredith Hunter : what was his purpose?
Posted by:
Greenblues
()
Date: March 9, 2008 13:46
Yeah that's strange. Today you have features and books written about tragic figures like him. And yes, it might be wrong to carry a gun and draw it. But as this "black guy at a predominantly white concert with a white chick attended by lotsa bikers" did he really have a choice, when the Angels were getting at him (and they wouldn't let him go, would they?).
Doing what they did this day (beating people up, kicking them to pieces), I have no doubt that this wasn't "self defence" by any means. I think he just enraged them by pulling the gun. And sealed his own fate.
Doing what they did this day (beating people up, kicking them to pieces), I have no doubt that this wasn't "self defence" by any means. I think he just enraged them by pulling the gun. And sealed his own fate.
Re: Meredith Hunter : what was his purpose?
Posted by:
tatters
()
Date: March 9, 2008 15:54
Quote
melillo
and btw , crosby stills nash and young did not go on right before the stones , it was hours before the stones came on, thats why the dead left such a gap, and lets face it, they didnt have to stab him 28 times, the angels were badgering hunter all day because he was with a white women, the angels started screwing with him , thats why he took out the gun, and yes i agree he should not have had a gun with him and he was not an alter boy either but cmon man, 28 times, thats a disgrace
Even if the Dead had played, there still would have been a gap because the Stones would still have made the crowd wait a long, long time before they went on. That was their thing, at the time, and to a lesser degree, they still do it. They like to make the crowd wait, to build up the tension, the frustration. Then, JJF, catharsis, release.
In this case, though, this kind of old-school show-biz razzmatazz was disastrous. If you've got 300,000 cranky children on your hands, you're not going to make them LESS cranky by making them WAIT a little longer for their cake.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008-03-09 16:24 by tatters.
Re: Meredith Hunter : what was his purpose?
Posted by:
Lukester
()
Date: March 9, 2008 21:10
Quote
sweetcharmedlifeQuote
fiftyamp
You carry a piece to a show, you're looking for trouble. And he found it. Better him dead than one of the boys.
No,better nobody dead.
I agree with the charmer's statement.
Re: Meredith Hunter : what was his purpose?
Posted by:
mickschix
()
Date: March 9, 2008 21:11
I understand the mounting frustration on the part of fans, I've been at that point myself but it is STILL no excuse for that type of violence, sorry, and to blame the Stones for ALL OF IT is not really fair. Mick has said 1 million times that in hindsight, the hiring of the CALIFORNIA Hell's Angels was a mistake; he had knowledge of the British Hells Angels and apparently that group is not at all known for viloence! The Stones always want to wait until dark, and beyond, to come on for dramatic effect,but there was no way that they could have anticipated a murder was about to occur at that show. Yes, there were viloent outbursts during that day but can you imagine if they refused to play at all, leaving 500,000 drunk, frustrated and Stones fans with no performance?? Second point, Meredith Hunter must have had a mother or relative that was interviewed at some point after he was killed! How about the woman in the crocheted dress( his girlfriend perhaps?) ; was she ever interviewed, like RIGHT AFTER!? Why not? I sure am curious about this man and would love to have his name cleared if he really was just pulling the gun on the Angels for protection. UNLOADED? WOW! Murdered for nothing! I know, how could anyone KNOW if the gun was loaded or not. Based on the behavior of the Angels that day, it is my guess that he was not pointing the gun at the Stones. The Angels, in the state they were in,sure did not need much provocation. I wish that incident had never happened at a Stones concert!! I did a lot of defending after that one!
Re: Meredith Hunter : what was his purpose?
Posted by:
The Sicilian
()
Date: March 9, 2008 21:48
Quote
mickschix
I understand the mounting frustration on the part of fans, I've been at that point myself but it is STILL no excuse for that type of violence, sorry, and to blame the Stones for ALL OF IT is not really fair. Mick has said 1 million times that in hindsight, the hiring of the CALIFORNIA Hell's Angels was a mistake; he had knowledge of the British Hells Angels and apparently that group is not at all known for viloence!
To even think that the 60's in America was non-violent is naive. One of the most violent periods in America since the Civil War in 1861 - 1865.
It is their fault, they hired the Angels. Its their show, they approved the setup. It was very disorganized and chaotic. Who else do you blame?
When the Romans brought lions into the Coliseum for entertainment you don't blame the lions for mauling and eating people do you?
That being said, they put on a hell of a show, one of the best sound wise of the 1969 era.
Re: Meredith Hunter : what was his purpose?
Posted by:
Lady Jayne
()
Date: March 9, 2008 23:19
Quote
tramp66646
A lot of people besides just gangster types carry gun's. Many practically every time they leave their homes, so who know's why this guy had one with him on this particular day? Seem's it shouldn't have been too hard to have found out at the time if he was somehow involved with anything slightly underground or just a kid with an attitude or what? Nobody ever seem's to have bothered to find out much about him.
Is this an American thing? Coming from the English side of the Pond, I have to say I don't think there is any acceptable explanation for a civilian to carry a gun, loaded or unloaded, and it would be regarded as highly unusual, not to mention dangerous and criminal, behaviour today much less in the 60's to be brandishing a weapon at a rock concert.
Re: Meredith Hunter : what was his purpose?
Posted by:
Erik_Snow
()
Date: March 9, 2008 23:32
It's a very American thing, indeed, Lady Jayne. "The right to defend oneself."
Seems absurd here in Europe.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008-03-09 23:33 by Erik_Snow.
Seems absurd here in Europe.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008-03-09 23:33 by Erik_Snow.
Re: Meredith Hunter : what was his purpose?
Posted by:
nellcote'71
()
Date: March 9, 2008 23:39
It's absurd here in America too.
Re: Meredith Hunter : what was his purpose?
Posted by:
Edith Grove
()
Date: March 9, 2008 23:47
Quote
Lady JayneQuote
tramp66646
Is this an American thing? Coming from the English side of the Pond, I have to say I don't think there is any acceptable explanation for a civilian to carry a gun, loaded or unloaded, and it would be regarded as highly unusual, not to mention dangerous and criminal, behaviour today much less in the 60's to be brandishing a weapon at a rock concert.
I'm with you, Lady Jayne.
I happen to be American, and I'm disgusted with the gun culture over here.
The laws may vary from state to state, but apparently where I live, one does not even have to be able to read and write to purchase a gun.
I once spoke with a pawn shop manager who told me it is not unusual for her to have to fill out an application for a person wanting to buy a gun.
I would very much like to see the minimum standards ramped WAY up, and the waiting periods extended much longer for anyone who thinks he/she needs a gun, especially a handgun.
Re: Meredith Hunter : what was his purpose?
Posted by:
Elmo Lewis
()
Date: March 10, 2008 01:01
A couplr of pictures of Meredith:
[www.freehistoryproject.org]
[content.answers.com]
"No Anchovies, Please"
[www.freehistoryproject.org]
[content.answers.com]
"No Anchovies, Please"
Re: Meredith Hunter : what was his purpose?
Posted by:
Elmo Lewis
()
Date: March 10, 2008 01:04
Good post, Sicilian - plenty of blame to go around about Altamont, including some for our heroes, as well as the Angels, Meredith, poor planning, drugs, etc.
"No Anchovies, Please"
"No Anchovies, Please"
Re: Meredith Hunter : what was his purpose?
Posted by:
Tseverin
()
Date: March 10, 2008 02:51
"It is their fault, they hired the Angels. Its their show, they approved the setup. It was very disorganized and chaotic. Who else do you blame?"
um, how about Alan Passaro (think that was his name) the individual (as well as an Angel) who plunged a knife an inch into Hunter's brain!
um, how about Alan Passaro (think that was his name) the individual (as well as an Angel) who plunged a knife an inch into Hunter's brain!
Re: Meredith Hunter : what was his purpose?
Posted by:
timbernardis
()
Date: March 10, 2008 03:48
I think it just might be possible that we will learn a little more about all this at the next Maysles Institute Gimme Shelter unreleased footage event.
plexi
plexi
Re: Meredith Hunter : what was his purpose?
Posted by:
mickschix
()
Date: March 10, 2008 04:03
Sicilian, I pointed out that Mick accepted the blame for hiring the Angels but you missed my point, a rather BIG POINT, about the differences in the European Hells Angels and our local grown variety. Just to be sure that no one thinks I'm OK with gun use, I am totally NOT for guns of any kind,I do not even like hunting. I hate that America has such a large population of gun toting criminals. We are the Wild West all over again. Even small cities like the one I live in has a problem with viloence associated with gun use. I feel that the Stones were not the only ones to blame for the disater that we call Altamont. It was also symptomatic of the times...attention to detail and careful planning was not a part of this concert. MIck said years later that Altamont was one reason he became the one in charge of all aspects of planning their shows! He always feared another disaster like that one so he took charge and became a micro-manager, and a very good one at that!
Re: Meredith Hunter : what was his purpose?
Posted by:
deadegad
()
Date: March 10, 2008 04:48
Quote
Edith GroveQuote
melillo
ya know if the dead would have played theyre set instead of chicken shitting maybe things would not have turned out as bad
WTF??
If that ignorant SOB had not drawn a concealed firearm there may not have been a killing regardless of what band was playing.
I think the Dead decided not to play to get an obviously bad situation over with as quickly as possible. The Stones,the main attraction,would therefore get on and off stage sooner by the Dead abstaining.
But the Stones,selfish,money-whoring, #$%&suckers kept everybody waiting until long after dark so they film a movie and make a lot of$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.
Making money off of a movie being the raison detre for this 'free' concert anyway.
And the Stones hit a pot of gold with this WoodStock West gone awry because of the violence and death of Meredith Hunter.
Maybe they could have actually omitted images of this man's death out of respect for the family?
Nah!
Journalistic, and artistic integrity meant they had to tell the whole truth man
Or a cynic might be inclined to say they left the death scene in to $en$ationalize
it and make money.
Integrity and taste were sacrificed to wealth on the blood-altar of commerce.
Everyone wave to the plane flying off to Switzerland!
In fairness Mick and Keith did try to clam things, and Bill "The Fall Guy" was 'late in arriving' because he was shopping in San Fran. Sure.
Bill, you are not with the band anymore, come clean, what really happened?
Yes, I love the Stones, but that Altamont was fishy business.
Re: Meredith Hunter : what was his purpose?
Posted by:
whitem8
()
Date: March 10, 2008 05:36
One of the Stone's darkest hours.
Listen we love their music, and as people they seem a lot more mature and down to earth now with age.
But they have a very dark history of treating people very badly, narcasistic beyond belief, and questional morals towards eachother, their families, and to their fans...
Yes, they held a "free concert" knowing it was to be make into a film for a profit. By all acounts fiscal savy Jagger opted for the Hells Angles because all they wanted was a few hundred bucks and all the beer they could drink. Then they appeared like Nazi Storm troopers...and what an ugly scene. And the Stones hang out in their trailer partying as usual, oblivious of what is happening outside. I am actually shocked that they left in the film showing them watching the scene, and show the somewhat dejected facial expressions from Jagger, as if he is more embarressed than sad, and Charlie really seeming to be hit hard by it all.
Yeah, the boys owe a lot of responsibility to that one.
Listen we love their music, and as people they seem a lot more mature and down to earth now with age.
But they have a very dark history of treating people very badly, narcasistic beyond belief, and questional morals towards eachother, their families, and to their fans...
Yes, they held a "free concert" knowing it was to be make into a film for a profit. By all acounts fiscal savy Jagger opted for the Hells Angles because all they wanted was a few hundred bucks and all the beer they could drink. Then they appeared like Nazi Storm troopers...and what an ugly scene. And the Stones hang out in their trailer partying as usual, oblivious of what is happening outside. I am actually shocked that they left in the film showing them watching the scene, and show the somewhat dejected facial expressions from Jagger, as if he is more embarressed than sad, and Charlie really seeming to be hit hard by it all.
Yeah, the boys owe a lot of responsibility to that one.
Re: Meredith Hunter : what was his purpose?
Posted by:
soundcheck
()
Date: March 10, 2008 06:35
Quote
jp eddie
At the onset, that day's events seemed to be destined for a very peaceful experience. But, as the crowd inevitably wanted to converge onto the 'low' stage, tensions between the stage crew, the crowd, and ultimately the 'Angels' grew and eventually ran amuck leading to this very tragic moment in history.
____ thats about right jp, pretty simple ....... ive never read so many assinine/idiotic posts
here on iorr (well, that might not be true) especially from people who werent there or not even born yet. . probably all of you.. know wonder the population of this sight has diminished to such a degree that its like panning for gold in a dried up creek to find something of value..............
Re: Meredith Hunter : what was his purpose?
Posted by:
Greg
()
Date: March 10, 2008 09:45
Quote
The Worst.Quote
Mathijs
I thought from the court case it was clear that the gun wasn't loaded, but as the angel could not know this, stabbing Hunter 28 times is self defense.
Mathijs
Is this a fact? Was Hunter stabbed 28 times?
Slight exageration by Mathijs: 28 times would have left him a sliced ham. 5 stab wounds according to the coroner:
[www.rollingstone.com]
----------------------------
"Music is the frozen tapioca in the ice chest of history."
"Shit!... No shit, awright!"
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008-03-10 09:48 by Greg.
Re: Meredith Hunter : what was his purpose?
Posted by:
terraplane
()
Date: March 10, 2008 10:55
I wonder if Hunter's family were ever compensated by the Stones or the film makers.
Re: Meredith Hunter : what was his purpose?
Posted by:
terraplane
()
Date: March 10, 2008 11:02
Also, it is hard to believe that the Stones did not know (or were not told) of the reputation of the Angels (especially the Oakland chapter). Hunter Thompson had made them notorious throughout the US as early as 1966 with his novel/expose Hells Angels.
Re: Meredith Hunter
Posted by:
Baboon Bro
()
Date: March 10, 2008 11:04
Quote
Edith Grove
No sssoul , I understand your post, and the last thing I want is a confrontation with anyone on this board.
My rant was a result of frustration, not just for the Hunter case, but for a general feeling of sympathy that (I believe) too many people have for the perpetrators of violent crimes.
It seems to me that personal accountability is going out the window as time goes by.
In the Hunter case, the killing would not have happened if there had been a better atmosphere at Altamont, but that is not to say that Hunter is not responsible for his death.
Hunter had a choice, and he made the wrong choice. If he did not like what was going on at Altamont, he could have gone home like I'm guessing many others did that day.
There is no excuse for what he did (brandishing a concealed firearm) and anyone around him deserved to defend themselves with deadly force if need be.
But I'm sure you know as well as I do, my well respected friend E. G,
that the angels smashed peoples heads in with pool sticks all along the
afternoon and evening. The atmosphere seem to have been such, that either
Hunter or someone else would be killed that fateful day.
Still, one could argue about the (maybe sometimes way too) heavy
symbol value that Altamont has been tucked into. There has to be
other violent acts on festivals, about contemporary.
Re: Meredith Hunter : what was his purpose?
Posted by:
terraplane
()
Date: March 10, 2008 11:19
Quote
angee
From my reading of events leading up to the death, the Angels were acting beligerently well before that, riding through the middle of the crowd up to the stage. and, I think, there is evidence that the Angels were performing more than routine security duties.
Not to mention the fact that the Angels beat Marty Balin (Jefferson Airplane) into unconsciousness which is, as I understand, why the Grateful Dead refused to play. In hindsight, Keith Richards was lucky he didn't get done over.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008-03-10 11:20 by terraplane.
Re: Meredith Hunter : what was his purpose?
Posted by:
Tseverin
()
Date: March 10, 2008 16:13
"And the Stones hang out in their trailer partying as usual, oblivious of what is happening outside." - Hardly: Jagger had barely got off the chopper when a freak on acid screaming "I hate you, I hate you, I hate you" punched him in the face.
"Maybe they could have actually omitted images of this man's death out of respect for the family?" It was the Maysles film & they had artistic control. Anyway you would hardly expect anyone to leave out the most significant event of the concert/tour.
As for the blame re hiring the Angels in the first place I think some of this has to be shared by Rock Scully & the Dead who advised the Stones to hire them & coming from the West Coast they knew what the Angels were capable of. Having said that I believe the Dead had used them before as security with no problem so it wasn't necessasrily inevitable.
"Maybe they could have actually omitted images of this man's death out of respect for the family?" It was the Maysles film & they had artistic control. Anyway you would hardly expect anyone to leave out the most significant event of the concert/tour.
As for the blame re hiring the Angels in the first place I think some of this has to be shared by Rock Scully & the Dead who advised the Stones to hire them & coming from the West Coast they knew what the Angels were capable of. Having said that I believe the Dead had used them before as security with no problem so it wasn't necessasrily inevitable.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
1963luca0 , Asgard60 , bakersfield , danicarton , EJM , FeelslikeaGhost , HenrikBB , hockenheim95 , IsakSun , jason8903 , kater-v , letitloose6 , PaintMonkeyManBlack , RollingFreak , spikenyc , StonedRambler , StonyRoad , straycatuk , teleblaster , TooTight , TW2019 , willprefecture , Wolfgang , wolundamo , zubbid
Guests:
1968
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10