PsychSound by Steve Bergstein

Government spying did not start with 9/11

Sun, 01 Aug 2010 12:02:22 -0500

Long before 9/11, the government had maintained a comprehensive spying program to fend off any perceived threats to the American system. Except that the targets of this surveillance were not threats to anything except to the status quo. This was Cointelpro, short for counter-intelligence program, an FBI operation that began in the 1940s and ended in the mid-1970s, the post-Watergate era and Congress and the media began taking a hard look (for the first) time at the massive bureaucracy put in place by notorious FBI head J. Edgar Hoover. Cointelpro spied on thousands of Americans, and sometimes that surveillance went beyond tapped phone calls and intercepted correspondence. That kind of surveillance is bad enough, but the FBI also destroyed lives and played a role in domestic political assassinations in the name of "national security." Nearly all this surveillance and disruption was focused on left-wing Americans who strongly opposed the status quo through anti-Vietnam war protests, support for revolutionary movements around the world and advocacy against a U.S. economic system in favor of more egalitarian policies. Cointelpro is a dark period in American history, and this country is a much freer place without it. Why is all of this relevant, decades after Cointelpro shut down? Because Cointelpro records are still coming to light. Sometimes Cointelpro went after celebrities as opposed to local, anonymous leftists. A decade ago, it was revealed that the Nixon administration tried like the devil to deport former Beatle John Lennon. This time around, records show that the government was surveilling radical historian Howard Zinn, a hero to many progressives for his landmark book, A People's History of the United States, which examined American history from the perspective of civil rights and labor activists and the other social movements which stood up against unjustified war and economic policies. This book is a rite of passage for many college students who were force-fed stories about American exceptionalism for 12 years in grade school. As summarized by Raw Story:

On Friday, the FBI released a 243-page file on Zinn, who died in January at age 87. The release describes the historian as "radical." The documents show the bureau taking an active interest in Zinn since the late 1940s, when he was a student at New York University. The interest continued through the 1950s, as Zinn worked on his PhD at Columbia University. When the FBI again took an interest in Zinn in the 1960s, documents show the bureau evidently tried to have the historian fired from his job as professor at Boston University. In a document from the Boston FBI office (see PDF file here), an FBI "source," whose name was redacted from the publicly released documents, was quoted as being outraged over Zinn's comment at a protest that the US had become a "police state" and that prosecutions of Black Panther Party members were creating "political prisoners." The bureau's Boston office then indicated it wanted to help the source in his or her campaign to unseat Zinn. "[The] Boston [office] proposes under captioned program with Bureau permission to furnish [name redacted] with public source data regarding Zinn's numerous anti-war activities ... in an effort to back [redacted] efforts for his removal." The new Cointelpro records on Zinn show the government was obsessed with the Brooklyn-born university professor who served as a fighter pilot in World War II. He turned against the Vietnam war and led rallies in the 1960s and 1970s. One of his targets was government surveillance against anti-war activists. Did he know the government was spying on him? He probably suspected it.

So the FBI tried to have Zinn fired from his job, in part, because he criticized the FBI's repressive tactics. This may sound shocking to anyone not familiar with Cointelpro, but it's actually par for the course. That the government could go after high profile people like John Lennon and Howard Zinn for their left-wing activism shows how ruthless the so-called anti-communist crusade really was. Anyone could be a target, and many people were. This kind of surveillance was totally illegal, and it further confirms my view that the United States did not fully become a democratic country until the day that Congress shut down Cointelpro in the mid-1970s.

FCC's indecency standards struck down as unconstitutional

Wed, 14 Jul 2010 17:49:46 -0500

A Federal appeals court in New York City has struck down as unconstitutional the FCC's broadcast standards intended to get "fleeting expletives" and other foul-mouthed utterances off the air. The Court holds that the guidelines are too vague and have the effect of chilling First Amendment speech. The case is Fox Television Stations v. FCC, decided on July 13. The FCC has been trying to police vulgar language on television for decades, most famously in the 1970s, when it took George Carlin's 12-minute "seven dirty words" monologue all the way to the Supreme Court, which held in 1978 that the government had greater leeway to regulate speech on radio and television since these mediums were easily accessible to children. It was a different world in the 1970s, when cable television was in its infancy and there was no Internet. We only had a few channels back then, and it was much easier for children to watch objectionable programming. Despite the explosion of new media, though, over the last 10 years, the FCC stepped up enforcement of expletives on radio and television after celebrities like Bono and Cher (among others) proved themselves incapable of uttering even a public statement without using obscene language. These were called "fleeting expletives" in that the broadcasters did not know this language was coming and therefore could not prevent them. That did not stop the FCC from treating these incidents as violations of government policy, which could cost broadcasters thousands of dollars in fines. Adopted in 2001, the FCC's indecency policy punishes broadcasters for language that describes or depicts sexual or excretory organs or activities. It also prohibits "patently offensive" language as measured by "community standards." The Court of Appeals strikes down these standards as too vague to place broadcasters on proper notice of when they are going to be fined. In illustrating why this is so, the Second Circuit provides examples that necessarily require the Court to use foul language (like "fuck" and "shit") in fleshing out the opinion. In fact, I have never seen a Second Circuit opinion with so much potty language. The first problem arises in the FCC’s determination as to which words or expressions are patently offensive. For instance, while the FCC concluded that “bullshit” in a “NYPD Blue” episode was patently offensive, it concluded that “dick” and “dickhead” were not. The Court observes, "[t]hus, the word 'bullshit' is indecent because it is 'vulgar, graphic and explicit' while the words 'dickhead' was not indecent because it was 'not sufficiently vulgar, explicit, or graphic.' This hardly gives broadcasters notice of how the Commission will apply the factors in the future." While the FCC says it needs a flexible standard because broadcasters will try to subvert the censorship laws, that argument only further shows how vague the standards really are. The Court of Appeals notes that "If the FCC cannot anticipate what will be considered indecent under its policy, then it can hardly expect broadcasters to do so." The FCC does exempt expletives if they are essential to a particular program or part of a "bona fide" news broadcast. In light of the FCC's inconsistent application of this test (which protects foul language in moves like Saving Private Ryan but not gratuitous cursing during the Golden Globe Awards), this cannot work, the Court of Appeals says. "There is little rhyme or reason to these decisions and broadcasters are left to guess whether an expletive will be deemed 'integral' to a program or whether the FCC will consider a particular broadcast a 'bona fide news interview.'” Broadcasters are going to have to guess whether certain obscenities run afoul of the FCC's decency rules. The First Amendment cannot tolerate this. As the Second Circuit notes:

[W]hen Judge Leval asked during oral argument if a program about the dangers of pre-marital sex designed for teenagers would be permitted, the most that the FCC’s lawyer could say was “I suspect it would.” With millions of dollars and core First Amendment values at stake, “I suspect” is simply not good enough.

The zinger here is that there is evidence that the vague broadcast standards have, in fact, chilled free speech. There is no greater threat to free speech than evidence that vague rules will make broadcast and radio executives think twice about certain programming. For example, under the FCC's revised speech standards, some CBS affiliates were afraid to re-broadcast a documentary on 9/11, which included foul language from real footage of the World Trade Center attack. A radio station canceled a planned reading of a Tom Wolfe novel because it contained adult language. Bona-fide news programs are also being chilled, particularly political debates involving a politician who had previously used expletives on the air.

Ever hear of a Fourth Amendment scandal?

Mon, 05 Jul 2010 15:24:37 -0500

How would you like to be strip-searched? In New York, jails cannot strip-search inmates willy-nilly. Under the Fourth Amendment (prohibiting unreasonable searches and seizures), people arrested on misdemeanors, for example, cannot be searched this way. That rule more or less applies around the country. But it gets violated all the time. It even happened in Iowa. Some women in Iowa went to President Bush's campaign rally in September 2004. They were charged with trespassing because they were standing where they were not supposed to be. They showed up not to praise Bush but to condemn the Iraq war. The strange reality that First Amendment lawyers discovered over the last few years is that presidential rallies carry different free speech rules than other rallies and that Secret Service are given significant leeway in regulating these events in the name of security. So that when no one told these protesters they they could not stand in certain areas near the rally, they were arrested for trespass and sent to the County jail. As described by the federal appeals court which ultimately heard the case, here is what happened at the jail:

After being arrested and charged with simple misdemeanor trespass under Iowa law, the two women were taken to the Linn County jail. At the jail, despite the fact neither woman was suspected of hiding weapons or contraband and had only been charged with a simple misdemeanor, Linn County Deputy Sheriff Michelle Mais conducted a "full strip search" of the two women in violation of jail policy. The "full strip search" required the two women to strip naked and included a visual body cavity search. In a visual body cavity search, detainees must bend over and spread their buttocks and allow an officer to inspect their rectal area. The visual body cavity search also included an inspection of the women's vaginas. While Nelson was searched, the top half of a Dutch door to the room in which the search took place was open, and male jailers passed by the open door during the search.

The trespass charges were dropped, which means they were totally innocent. The strip-search was unauthorized and humiliating. When the case went to trial against jail officials for the illegal search, the women testified about what it felt like to be searched like this. So lets play a little game here: imagine your mother or your sister is testified as these women did at trial:

At trial, McCabe and Nelson described the humiliation and trauma they experienced as the result of being forced to stand naked in front of a complete stranger and expose intimate parts of their body. Barb Hannon bailed the two women out of jail and described them as being in "shock." Both spent the night crying. When describing the search, McCabe testified she was "horrified." She said it was "like it was happening to another person, like – like I was almost standing back watching this happen to me, because I just couldn't – I couldn't wrap my brain around what was going on." Nelson testified she was "humiliated, and I felt violated. I felt as though I had lost control of my own body. I couldn't imagine many things that would be worse." Nelson was diagnosed with depression following the arrest and search, and obtained medical treatment for her depression.

The jury, God bless 'em, ruled in the womens' favor on the strip searches, awarding them so much money that the trial court had to schedule another trial to ensure that the damages award was more in line with acceptable standards. The new is not that they won the case but that courts have placed clear limits on when jail officials can strip-search detainees -- particularly people who have not yet been convicted of anything -- but those rules are routinely ignored. Even in New York, which probably deems itself more enlightened than Iowa, strip-search rules are regularly ignored, to the embarrassment and humiliation of the victims of this municipal malfeasance. We often hear about sex scandals and bribery scandals and even environmental scandals. Ever hear of a Fourth Amendment scandal?

When are we going to start to care?

Mon, 17 May 2010 21:04:51 -0500

We watch in horror as the oil spewing through the Gulf of Mexico washes ashore New Orleans and the rest of the southern states. This was no natural disaster, this was a man-made disaster. It comes at a time when the country is debating the usefulness of regulations, as if the Wall Street meltdown in 2008 -- resulting from the go-go years of unrestricted investing -- did not put that debate to rest. The dirty secret of American politics is that both political parties are weak on regulatory policy. The Republicans may be worse than the Democrats, but both parties are beholden to corporate America and the view that it's all OK if someone is making money. The men with the money are the ones who donate to the political campaigns, but more broadly, capitalism is the national religion, and pro-regulation politicians and thinkers are still labeled as anti-business and even anti-American. The below article from the New York Times on May 14, 2010 confirms that this oil disaster did not have to happen. The government was not enforcing regulations intended to prevent this problem, and this omission was conscious, not negligent. I am reprinting the article in full. The ways in which profiteering is reasonably regulated to protect health, safety and environmental concerns remains an under-appreciated aspect of American government. But this ain't no Lady Gaga. It's the difference between a sustainable ecosystem and death. When are we going to start to care?

May 13, 2010 U.S. Said to Allow Drilling Without Needed Permits By IAN URBINA WASHINGTON — The federal Minerals Management Service gave permission to BP and dozens of other oil companies to drill in the Gulf of Mexico without first getting required permits from another agency that assesses threats to endangered species — and despite strong warnings from that agency about the impact the drilling was likely to have on the gulf. Those approvals, federal records show, include one for the well drilled by the Deepwater Horizon rig, which exploded on April 20, killing 11 workers and resulting in thousands of barrels of oil spilling into the gulf each day. The Minerals Management Service, or M.M.S., also routinely overruled its staff biologists and engineers who raised concerns about the safety and the environmental impact of certain drilling proposals in the gulf and in Alaska, according to a half-dozen current and former agency scientists. Those scientists said they were also regularly pressured by agency officials to change the findings of their internal studies if they predicted that an accident was likely to occur or if wildlife might be harmed. Under the Endangered Species Act and the Marine Mammal Protection Act, the Minerals Management Service is required to get permits to allow drilling where it might harm endangered species or marine mammals. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, or NOAA, is partly responsible for protecting endangered species and marine mammals. It has said on repeated occasions that drilling in the gulf affects these animals, but the minerals agency since January 2009 has approved at least three huge lease sales, 103 seismic blasting projects and 346 drilling plans. Agency records also show that permission for those projects and plans was granted without getting the permits required under federal law. “M.M.S. has given up any pretense of regulating the offshore oil industry,” said Kierán Suckling, director of the Center for Biological Diversity, an environmental advocacy group in Tucson, which filed notice of intent to sue the agency over its noncompliance with federal law concerning endangered species. “The agency seems to think its mission is to help the oil industry evade environmental laws.” Kendra Barkoff, a spokeswoman for the Interior Department, said her agency had full consultations with NOAA about endangered species in the gulf. But she declined to respond to additional questions about whether her agency had obtained the relevant permits. Federal records indicate that these consultations ended with NOAA instructing the minerals agency that continued drilling in the gulf was harming endangered marine mammals and that the agency needed to get permits to be in compliance with federal law. Responding to the accusations that agency scientists were being silenced, Ms. Barkoff added, “Under the previous administration, there was a pattern of suppressing science in decisions, and we are working very hard to change the culture and empower scientists in the Department of the Interior.” On Tuesday, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar announced plans to reorganize the minerals agency to improve its regulatory role by separating safety oversight from the division that collects royalties from oil and gas companies. But that reorganization is not likely to have any bearing on how and whether the agency seeks required permits from other agencies like NOAA. Criticism of the minerals agency has grown in recent days as more information has emerged about how it handled drilling in the gulf. In a letter from September 2009, obtained by The New York Times, NOAA accused the minerals agency of a pattern of understating the likelihood and potential consequences of a major spill in the gulf and understating the frequency of spills that have already occurred there. The letter accuses the agency of highlighting the safety of offshore oil drilling operations while overlooking more recent evidence to the contrary. The data used by the agency to justify its approval of drilling operations in the gulf play down the fact that spills have been increasing and understate the “risks and impacts of accidental spills,” the letter states. NOAA declined several requests for comment. The accusation that the minerals agency has ignored risks is also being levied by scientists working for the agency. Managers at the agency have routinely overruled staff scientists whose findings highlight the environmental risks of drilling, according to a half-dozen current or former agency scientists. The scientists, none of whom wanted to be quoted by name for fear of reprisals by the agency or by those in the industry, said they had repeatedly had their scientific findings changed to indicate no environmental impact or had their calculations of spill risks downgraded. “You simply are not allowed to conclude that the drilling will have an impact,” said one scientist who has worked for the minerals agency for more than a decade. “If you find the risks of a spill are high or you conclude that a certain species will be affected, your report gets disappeared in a desk drawer and they find another scientist to redo it or they rewrite it for you.” Another biologist who left the agency in 2005 after more than five years said that agency officials went out of their way to accommodate the oil and gas industry. He said, for example, that seismic activity from drilling can have a devastating effect on mammals and fish, but that agency officials rarely enforced the regulations meant to limit those effects. He also said the agency routinely ceded to the drilling companies the responsibility for monitoring species that live or spawn near the drilling projects. “What I observed was M.M.S. was trying to undermine the monitoring and mitigation requirements that would be imposed on the industry,” he said. Aside from allowing BP and other companies to drill in the gulf without getting the required permits from NOAA, the minerals agency has also given BP and other drilling companies in the gulf blanket exemptions from having to provide environmental impact statements. Much as BP’s drilling plan asserted that there was no chance of an oil spill, the company also claimed in federal documents that its drilling would not have any adverse effect on endangered species. The gulf is known for its biodiversity. Various endangered species are found in the area where the Deepwater Horizon was drilling, including sperm whales, blue whales and fin whales. In some instances, the minerals agency has indeed sought and received permits in the gulf to harm certain endangered species like green and loggerhead sea turtles. But the agency has not received these permits for endangered species like the sperm and humpback whales, which are more common in the areas where drilling occurs and thus are more likely to be affected. Tensions between scientists and managers at the agency erupted in one case last year involving a rig in the gulf called the BP Atlantis. An agency scientist complained to his bosses of catastrophic safety and environmental violations. The scientist said these complaints were ignored, so he took his concerns to higher officials at the Interior Department. “The purpose of this letter is to restate in writing our concern that the BP Atlantis project presently poses a threat of serious, immediate, potentially irreparable and catastrophic harm to the waters of the Gulf of Mexico and its marine environment, and to summarize how BP’s conduct has violated federal law and regulations,” Kenneth Abbott, the agency scientist, wrote in a letter to officials at the Interior Department that was dated May 27. The letter added: “From our conversation on the phone, we understand that M.M.S. is already aware that undersea manifolds have been leaking and that major flow lines must already be replaced. Failure of this critical undersea equipment has potentially catastrophic environmental consequences.” Almost two months before the Deepwater Horizon exploded, Representative Raúl M. Grijalva, Democrat of Arizona, sent a letter to the agency raising concerns about the BP Atlantis and questioning its oversight of the rig. After the disaster, Mr. Salazar said he would delay granting any new oil drilling permits. But the minerals agency has issued at least five final approval permits to new drilling projects in the gulf since last week, records show. Despite being shown records indicating otherwise, Ms. Barkoff said her agency had granted no new permits since Mr. Salazar made his announcement. Other agencies besides NOAA have begun criticizing the minerals agency. At a public hearing in Louisiana this week, a joint panel of Coast Guard and Minerals Management Service officials investigating the explosion grilled minerals agency officials for allowing the offshore drilling industry to be essentially “self-certified,” as Capt. Hung Nguyen of the Coast Guard, a co-chairman of the investigation, put it. In addition to the minerals agency and the Coast Guard, the Deepwater Horizon was overseen by the Marshall Islands, the “flag of convenience” under which it was registered. No one from the Marshall Islands ever inspected the rig. The nongovernmental organizations that did were paid by the rig’s operator, in this case Transocean. Campbell Robertson contributed reporting from New Orleans, and Andy Lehren from New York. This article has been revised to reflect the following correction: Correction: May 15, 2010 A previous version of this article misidentified the government agency where Kendra Barkoff is a spokeswoman. She is with the Interior Department, not the Minerals Management Service.

In Memory of Elizabeth Reed: the greatest live performance of all-time

Tue, 20 Apr 2010 10:23:10 -0500

I have been counting down the greatest live rock and roll performances of all time. Scroll down for numbers nine through two. We have now reached number one. The Allman Brothers are still around today, but it was only a brief run with the great guitarist, Duane Allman, who died in 1971 in a motorcycle accident. Another band member died a year later, also in a motorcycle accident. Praise the Lord that the Allman Brothers recorded the Fillmore concerts from 1971. That double album has not a wasted note. The highlight is this song, the greatest live performance of all time, In Memory of Elizabeth Reed, an instrumental that just goes on forever, and you wish it could go on forever, but it ends after 13 minutes. These boys could play, and I have never heard anything better. There are two ways to take in this performance. The full, uncut version is available from Grooveshark. The YouTube version is below.

A break from the concert coundown: concert memories

Mon, 19 Apr 2010 10:05:57 -0500

As we count down the greatest live performances in rock history -- only one to go! -- let's a take a moment, as they say in the new-age world, to reflect and review. Reflect on my own concert experiences over the last 28 years since the time, as a 15 year-old, that I walked into Nassau Coliseum for the first time to see the Police. It may not sound remarkable to say that my first concert was the Police at Nassau Coliseum, but it was. Seeing a great band in its prime is a rarity. Nowadays, bands and performers play live until they drop. The economics of the industry demand it. Royalties from album sales are dropping like a rock now that music fans are stealing music right and left and sharing files and listening to free music in YouTube and Grooveshark. Playing live is the best way for these bands to make any money. In 1982, there were fewer oldies acts. The Police had been making records for only 4 years, but their career was still on the upward trajectory. Their biggest album, Syncronicity, was still a year away, and during summer 1983 I saw the Police again at Shea Stadium. The Nassau show was better, more intimate. Shea is too large to see a concert. And the show was so big that two bands opened for them. The opening act for the opening act was an unknown band from Georgia that the rock critics loved and that I had barely heard of. I did not pay attention when they played a 20 minute set. I should have. R.E.M. was about to release one of the five best albums of the 1980's, Murmer. The New York metropolitan area is the most prominent market for rock concerts. So large that when I was in high school in the early-to-mid 1980s you could not see the top-shelf acts without paying a scalper. Tickets were less expensive back then. Tickets for the Police show at Nassau cost only $12 (we sat in the upper deck, behind the stage), and I paid my buddy, a scalper, $20. That buddy was responsible for the memorable shows I saw in high school: David Bowie; Genesis; the charity benefit at Madison Square Garden with Eric Clapton, Jeff Beck and Jimmy Page; The Who at Shea Stadium (the Clash opened the show). Sometimes you went to concerts just to see certain legendary performers, even if they were past their prime, like the Beach Boys, Moody Blues and Yes, all playing in the mid-1980s. They seemed old, but they were not much older than I am today. Maybe the concert highlight of the time was U2 at Giants Stadium promoting the Joshua Tree album, in 1987. I drove down from college with a guy who lived in my dorm (we sat in different areas). Little Steven from Bruce Springsteen's band opened up and taunted the Reagan administration with a profane tirade against Oliver North. Sometimes I got lucky. I saw the Grateful Dead in 1995 only a few weeks before Jerry Garcia died. We saw Jerry dying right there on stage, I guess. It was not a great show, and it was hotter than hell, I tell ya, but I always said I wanted to see the Dead at least once, and that's all I got. I also saw Stevie Ray Vaughn a few times in the mid-1980s. No one could know he'd die in a helicopter crash in 1990. Same goes for Frank Zappa, who left us in 1993. The coolest and strangest concert experiences come to mind. Bruce Springsteen at Giants Stadium in September 2009 included the Born to Run album in its entirety. I see now that Springsteen is religion in New Jersey. His shows resemble some kind of revival. Todd Rundgren playing in a cape and bare feet in Poughkeepsie in 1995. Some lunatic throwing an explosive into the moat at Jones Beach Theater during an Eric Clapton show in 1983. Lucinda Williams in 2009 stopping her show in Peekskill, N.Y., because she did not like the acoustics and making the audience wait a few minutes while she coordinated the sound system anew. Taking my 80 year-old mother-in-law to see K.D. Lang in Kingston, N.Y., last year. The best concert experience was seeing Yo La Tengo at Colony Cafe in Woodstock, N.Y., in 2007. Yo La Tengo is an alternative rock band that sometimes takes requests from the audience and tells stories between songs when it plays in small venues. I went because I was digging their new album at the time, which had a fantastic song, The Race is On Again, which blew my mind when I heard it for the first time one day on the road and I played it over and over like 20 times. I had to see Yo La Tengo at Woodstock! There is nothing like Woodstock in the autumn chill. The good wife came along, and we got a table one level above the stage, no more than 15 feet from the band. I couldn't see the guitarist finger the chords, but I got a great view of the drummer's head. When I realized that the band was not going to play the new album in its entirety, I gathered the nerve to shout out, "I have a request." The singer/guitarist was sitting down so he didn't turn around. He just responded, "which is ...?" I shouted, "The Race is On Again." They played it, a mesmerising performance, as cool as the album version. I felt like a little kid who got an autograph at Yankee Stadium. Good timing for me. The band then played its encores, incluing an NRBQ song that I had never heard, a great version of this mysterious song. The next day, I found the Yo La Tengo website and sent the band an email to request the name of that NRBQ song. I also told them I was the guy who made the request. The band responded right away! The NRBQ song was "Hit the Hay." And they thanked me for the request, said it was a good song to play live. Instant email communication from the band you saw the night before. The millionaire bands would never do this, and if they did it would be from a public relations intern. I'm pretty sure it was the band that responded to my question. How cool was this?

The second greatest live performance of all-time

Sat, 17 Apr 2010 06:09:28 -0500

Number 2. It's been quite a ride tracking the greatest concert performances of all-time. Number 10 was talking Heads' Once in a Lifetime. Number 9 was Grateful Dead's Bertha from 1978. Eight was the Beatles Rooftop Concert, from 1969, right before the breakup. Lucky number 7 was the Who's Young Man's Blues, from Live at Leeds. Number 6 could only be Joni Mitchell at the Last Waltz. U2 lands in fifth place, with Electric Co., from the 1983 live album. Springsteen's Rosalita is number 4. And Eric Clapton's 1971 performance at the Fillmore East is number 3. Scroll down below to see the videos. We are now at number 2. When you're number 2, you try harder. But there is no embarrassment in being number 2. Jimi Hendrix is number 2, his performance of Hey Joe, at the Monterey International Pop Festival, from 1967. Jimi only became a household name in 1967, after playing around with the Isley Brothers and Little Richard in the early-mid 1960s. His first album came out in early 1967, and his appearance at Monterey introduced him to the American rock community. What a performance! Jimi looked the part, wearing an outrageous outfit, wild hair and looking like no one that anyone had ever seen before. And he played with his teeth. Jimi was just getting started in 1967, but he only had a few years left. He died in September 1970. That's not a lot of time, but Jimi sure made the most of his time in the studio recording hundreds of hours of music that the record company is still releasing to this day. There are many live albums to play with, and they are all very good. But live Jimi is about seeing live Jimi. This clip may be number 2 on my list, but visually it's number 1 all the way.

The greatest live performances of all-time: Number 3

Wed, 14 Apr 2010 07:55:47 -0500

Eric Clapton has been around a long time. Forty years ago, he was considered the best guitarist in rock and roll. But Eric had a problem. He was in love with George Harrison's wife. George was Eric's best friend. This caused a lot of emotional problems for Clapton. Eric was also using hard drugs. From 1966 through 1970, he did release some great albums, first working with John Mayall's Bluesbreakers, then Cream, the Blind Faith, and then his solo career, calling his band Derek and Dominos. This concert was from 1970, when Derek and Dominos played the Fillmore East in New York City. No one knew that Clapton would go into seclusion shortly after this concert. He came back in 1974 playing much more laid back music, almost morphing into country rock with some blues solos to remind us that he still had it going on. No one knew that this performance was the absolute greatest moment of Clapton's career, and that the downhill slide that awaited him was right around the corner. This performance was as good as it was ever going to get. The intro alone makes it into the top 10 (for the top 10 so far, click on www.psychsound.com and scroll down the list).

The Fourth Greatest Live Performance of All-Time

Sun, 11 Apr 2010 08:40:15 -0500

Number 10 was Talking Heads. Number 9 was Grateful Dead. Number 8 was The Beatles' rooftop concert. The Who was Number 7. Six was Joni Mitchell at the Last Waltz. Five was U2's Electric Co. Scroll down for them all. We are now up to number 4. Number Four is Bruce Springsteen, maybe the greatest live performer of all-time. I have many, many Springsteen live CD's and Mp3's, some from the mid 1970's and some from the 2000's. I saw him at the Meadowlands for the first time in 2009. No one plays it like Bruce, a tireless performer. This one's Rosalita, a rave-up from 1978. Did you know that Springsteen's first two albums flopped? Greetings From Asbury Park and The Wild, The Innocent, the E Street Shuffle were both released in 1973. Rosalita was from the E Street Shuffle album. No one was buying. Then Bruce released Born to Run in 1975 and after Time and Newsweek threw him on the cover the same week, he became the superstar who helped bring rock out of the 1960s and into the 1970s. Hard to believe those first two albums did not sell. How can a song like Rosalita be a secret for so long? This video is a must-see. This is prime Bruce. This could have been my number 1 choice. But, it isn't. But I will say this: choices 3 through 1 all predate this Springsteen performance. Which means that Rosalita from 1978 is the greatest live performance of the last 30 years.

The Fifth Greatest Live Performance of All-Time

Fri, 09 Apr 2010 11:30:39 -0500

We are up to number 5 on the Greatest Live Performances List. Scroll down for numbers 10 through 6. Number 5 is U2's performance at Red Rocks in 1983, a show that became the live album that caused a lot of us to realize that the new decade had its own rock superstars who were going to be as good as their predecessors. U2 was getting off to a good start, and they were only going to get better.

The Greatest Live Performances of All-Time: Number 6

Wed, 07 Apr 2010 03:25:20 -0500

Almost halfway there! If you're a Johnny Come Lately, number 10 was Talking Heads' Once in a Lifetime. Number 9 was the Grateful Dead's Bertha. Number 8 was the Beatles rooftop concert. Number 7 was The Who's Young Man's Blues, from Live at Leeds. Scroll down to see videos of each song. Number 6 can only be Joni Mitchell's Coyote, performed at the Last Waltz in 1976. The Last Waltz was the final concert of The Band. If you didn't know, there was a band called The Band. Most bands break up quietly. Not The Band. They turned it into a federal case, inviting their friends to play along. See how they all got along during this song? So why did The Band stop performing together. I believe it was because they weren't getting along. That did not stop Joni from turning in a tour de force. Joni Mitchell is fantastic. I have never heard a bad Joni song. She played guitar like no one else, using alternate tunings, giving her a unique sound. Throw in her Canadian voice and you got the best performance from a great concert. It was The Band's concert, but Joni Mitchell stole the show.

The Greatest Live Performances of All-Time: Number 7

Sun, 04 Apr 2010 06:07:49 -0500

Lucky number 7. Scroll down for numbers 8 through 10. The Who could really shake it in their prime. Live at Leeds is one hell of a live album. Recorded just as The Who were hitting their stride, in 1970. The highlight of that album is Young Man's Blues, with a searing Pete Townsend guitar solo. You didn't know Pete Townsend was a great guitar player? Oh, yes he was. The Who were the great live band of the 1970's, Pete Townsend oozed rock and roll. You'll know that if you watch any concert footage from that period. The death of beloved drummer Keith Moon in 1978 was a real speed bump in the history of the band. Moon was replaced, but The Who skipped a beat. When I saw them in 1982 at Shea Stadium, The Who were good, but not great. You cannot turn back the clock. But there are no has-beens in rock music. Only high points. This one's a high point.

The greatest live performances of all time: number 8

Fri, 02 Apr 2010 06:44:41 -0500

We're at number 8 already? Number 10 was Talking Heads' Once in a Lifetime. Number 9 was Grateful Dead's Bertha. Number 8 is upon us. Beatles Rooftop Concert: Get Back (1969) When the Beatles stepped off the stage at Candlestick Park in 1966, only they knew it was their last concert. They took some time off and then went into the studio to record the Sgt. Pepper's album. Concerts were pointless by 1967. Their music was too sophisticated to play it live, and they needed the time to perfect the music in the studio. By 1969, the Beatles were not even getting along anymore, and it's a miracle that they agreed to the performance below. This is not really a concert. The Beatles were recording and filming the Let it Be album in early 1969 when they decided to set up on the roof of their office building in London. That's right, the Beatles had an office building for Apple Corps, the business they set up after their manager, Brian Epstein, died. The Beatles were not getting along, and the fact that they became businessmen made things worse. Playing a concert on the rooftop would liven things up, but it didn't last. Some killjoy called the police, and that was that. Don't you wish you were there?

The greatest live performances of all time: Number 9

Wed, 31 Mar 2010 06:26:03 -0500

We're at number 9. Click here for number 10. The Grateful Dead are known as one of the all-time great live bands, but when I saw them in 1995 for the first time (a few months before Jerry Garcia left the building) they were running out of gas. Still, weak Dead is better than no Dead at all. Bertha is shown below. This one's from 1978, a period that many Deadheads regard as their finest. This one's got a nice riff, I'll say that. Many of them did.

The greatest live performances of all time: Number 10

Mon, 29 Mar 2010 11:11:11 -0500

Thanks to YouTube, I can identify the greatest live performances in rock history. It occurs to me that nearly every rock and roller has released live albums, many of them sub-par. But there are some real gems, and some live versions are better than the studio versions. Over the next few weeks, I will list the greatest live performances in rock history, counting down to number 1. Comments, hate mail, suggestions and cash (especially cash) are welcome. Number 10: Once in a Lifetime -- Talking Heads (1983) The studio version is OK. But the live version is the highlight of Talking Heads' concert movie, Stop Making Sense. The song funks along for a few minutes, and David Byrne is not afraid to let it shake. Things pick up toward the end as the band reaches the climax. David brings it home with some gyrations that he's now probably too old to get away with today. Watch him chug his way back to his feet toward the end. Like body art.