From: les@jmdl.com (JMDL Digest) To: joni-digest@smoe.org Subject: JMDL Digest V2001 #481 Reply-To: joni@smoe.org Sender: les@jmdl.com Errors-To: les@jmdl.com Precedence: bulk Unsubscribe: mailto:joni-digest-request@smoe.org?body=unsubscribe Archives: http://www.smoe.org/lists/joni Websites: http://www.jmdl.com http://www.jonimitchell.com JMDL Digest Saturday, October 13 2001 Volume 2001 : Number 481 The Official Joni Mitchell Homepage, created by Wally Breese, can be found at http://www.jonimitchell.com. It contains the latest news, a detailed bio, Original Interviews, essays, lyrics and much much more. The JMDL website can be found at http://www.jmdl.com and contains interviews, articles, the member gallery, archives, and much more. ========== TOPICS and authors in this Digest: -------- Re: Hot and Hard? (njc) [colin ] Re: Killing of innocents (njc) [colin ] RE: gays are ok but non troppo njc ["Wally Kairuz" ] ten desert island movies (njc) ["Robert Holliston" ] Re: Killing of innocents (njc) ["Kakki" ] tit for tatNJC [colin ] [none] ["joseph tischner" ] Destert Flicks (njc) ["Suze Cameron" ] re: an odd trio (njc) [Anne Sandstrom ] movies, books, NJC [Yael Harlap ] a quote from another Binladin (njc) [Anne Sandstrom ] Re: Scripture posting NJC [colin ] Top 10 Movies NOT to take on a deserted island NJC! ["Steve Polifka" ] re: an odd trio (njc) [Les Irvin ] odd trio (njc) [Anne Sandstrom ] Re: bruce willis njc [colin ] RE: bruce willis njc ["Wally Kairuz" ] Re: Killing of innocents (njc) [Vince Lavieri ] Re:The delivery guy and the poet film [Chorando6@aol.com] Re: tit for tatNJC ["Kakki" ] Again, my (and Max's) thanks (sjc) [BigWaltinSF@aol.com] Re: War and ideology (njc) ["Kakki" ] Re: This gay thing [Chorando6@aol.com] Re: bruce willis njc [colin ] Re: tit for tatNJC [colin ] Re: tit for tatNJC ["Kakki" ] Re: War and ideology (njc) [colin ] Re: tit for tatNJC [colin ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2001 08:56:39 +0100 From: colin Subject: Re: Hot and Hard? (njc) BigWaltinSF@aol.com wrote: > Hey, Colin, > > You listed "Hot and Hard" in your top ten movies; sounds like it might be up my alley (so...very...sorry, but i figured if the gals can joke about "Bound",...). Was that a shakespearean play -to -movie thingy, or what? Oh i think it was a very liberal, all nujde version of a Shakespeare play. Just can't rememeber which one.... > > > :-) Walt > > p.s.: also, did anyone list Brazil in their top ten? And speaking of gay-themed movies, Prick Up Your Ears? I'm on digest, on my sis's computer, and having to race through. > > np: James Taylor, New Moon Shine - -- bw colin DAK,BRO GC, 950i, 940,860,864,890, 260,Silver 830,860, 580 and 270, Passap 6000, Duo80. colin@tantra-apso.com http://www.tantra-apso.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2001 09:00:59 +0100 From: colin Subject: Re: Killing of innocents (njc) Tit for tat is not moral. The killing of 7000 people at the wtc was appaling. the killing of inncent afghans is likewise. shifting the blame to the Taleban for the deaths of afghans doesn't wash. Kakki wrote: > Around 7, 000 innocent people were killed without warning and without any > justification on Sept. 11th. Due to one plane being brought down and > perhaps more that were grounded, the planned murder of other innocent lives > that day was thwarted. Innocent people are now contracting and being > exposed to Anthrax in the U.S. daily. I certainly and sincerely don't want > any innocent Afghanis to be killed but consider this - the U.S. gave them > almost a month of warning. Did the people ruling that country do anything > to shelter or protect the innocent people? They had no idea of what was > going on in the world because they are forbidden to have TVs or read news. > There is an American reporter in Afghanistan who just yesterday reported > that he'd shown the Northern Alliance photos of what was done in New York > and they were stunned - they had no idea. Here is a link if you are > interested regarding a report from the U.N. as to what the Taliban of have > been systematically doing to the innocent people of Afghanistan. I don't > think there is a moral equivalency here with the U.S. at all. > http://www.newsday.com/ny-wartali12.story > > Kakki - -- bw colin DAK,BRO GC, 950i, 940,860,864,890, 260,Silver 830,860, 580 and 270, Passap 6000, Duo80. colin@tantra-apso.com http://www.tantra-apso.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2001 05:29:05 -0300 From: "Wally Kairuz" Subject: RE: gays are ok but non troppo njc julius, it is always a pleasure to read your posts and to exchange ideas with you. i agree with you on most of your points and i think i'll leave it here. as you so wisely put it, this is not the ''who's more oppressed'' contest. let us concentrate our energies on fighting oppression and prejudice. wallyK ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2001 09:57:51 +0100 From: "Paul Castle" Subject: Judy Collins in Q (sjc) Spotted this review in the same edition of Q Magazine: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Judy Collins The Very Best of Judy Collins Rhino 8122 74374 / 65mins Her cover of Joni Mitchell's Chelsea Morning gave Bill Clinton's daughter her name Overshadowed by Joni Mitchell in the US and Sandy Denny in Britain, Seattle-born Judy Collins did amass a resplendent back catalogue, every highlight of which is included here. From her pre-Byrds cover of Pete Seeger's Turn! Turn! Turn! to her hits with Mitchell's Both Sides Now and Ian Tyson's rodeo lament Someday Soon, through to her definitive torch-ballad version of Send in The Clowns, this has something for everyone. It's also a reminder that Collins not only sang well, enunciating lyrics like an aristocrat reciting Latin, but also penned such minor classics as Since You've Asked and Song for Judith, while inspiring more tributes from her male counter- parts than even Patti Harrison Clapton. **** Sid Griffin Q Magazine (Nov 01) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ PaulC PS It includes BSN and Chelsea Morning but not one of my favourites - Randy Newman's 'I Think It's Going to Rain Today' - - that always makes me want to go and kick a tin can down an empty street - I was kicking leaves on the pavements of North London yesterday afternoon - good therapy!! ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2001 02:21:44 -0700 From: "Robert Holliston" Subject: ten desert island movies (njc) What a fun thread. I'll probably change my mind in an hour - it's too hard to pick just ten - but in any case I plan to cheat shamelessly. In no particular order: Tender Mercies (may well be Bruce Beresford's greatest film and Robert Duvall's greatest performance. Everything about it is good, especially a haunting performance by the young Ellen Barkin. It proves that even a great actor like Duvall benefits from having a perfect supporting cast) Moonstruck (can't help it, I love this movie. Cher is great, but even better is the ensemble of older and not well-known actors. Wonderful score - a friend of mine is in it for a few seconds! - and a wonderful love letter to Brooklyn) Parting Glances (made in 1986, it's still the top of the heap among gay-themed movies, imho. No famous names, except for Steve Buscemi and Kathy Kinney, neither of whom was famous then. The leading actor, Richard Ganoung, hasn't done much since but is extremely cute. Look up the word callypigous [sp?] and you'll know what I mean. Plus, it's a wonderful love letter to Manhattan) Enchanted April (worth having not only for the gorgeous Italian scenery, but for the reaction of Joan Plowright when a callow young girl asks her if she ever knew Keats [who'd died a good century earlier]: "No, I didn't. And I didn't know Shakespeare or Chaucer, either!) Bergman's film of Mozart's The Magic Flute (Everything I Ever Needed To Know About Life I Learned From This Opera. And Bergman's film, even though the singing is often imperfect and always in Swedish, continues to amaze and enlighten this often humble and always bewildered student of opera) Mitterand's film of Puccini's Madama Butterfly (A much more emotionally complex music drama than I'd previously thought, and a glorious film. Even people who never thought they'd like opera have been moved by it) The Best Years of Our Lives (What a great movie! The scene where Fredric March comes home from WWII to greet his wife, played to perfection by the underrated Myrna Loy, still chokes me up, and I've seen this countless times. Harold Russell, a non-professional but a real-life veteran and amputee, gives a restrained and beautiful performance) A Room With A View (the novel is light only on the surface; it has a sting that the movie doesn't really capture. But it's so opulent both in the Italian scenes and in the English ones, and the cast is so wonderful, and the music......) The Complete Works of John Sayles (OK, here's where the cheating begins. If I had to choose only one, it would be Passion Fish, but I want them all. Pauline Kael said that Sayles had "no cinematic sense". I have no idea what she meant by that, but cinematic or not, he creates marvellous roles, casts them perfectly, and then has the good sense as a director to let the actors fill them out.) The Sopranos (however many seasons are available on video when the shipwreck occurs. Hey, James Gandolfini has made it hip to be middle-aged, balding, and overweight. The least I can do is watch his show ;-) 1950 Best Actress Nominees (this is a real cheat, because these movies don't have anything in common except a release date. I don't need all five, just three: All About Eve [everything Mark Scott said, except he didn't gush over Margo's apartment enough] Sunset Boulevard [possible new thread, especially for we old queens: try to think of ANY actress today who could pull off that overripe performance the way Gloria Swanson did] Born Yesterday [with all due respect to Bette Davis and Gloria Swanson, Judy Holliday deserved her Oscar for this. Her comic timing is not only impeccable, it's razor-sharp. She'd played the role on Broadway for years, but she's completely fresh: part scented soap, part vinegar] I can't believe I left out The Grapes of Wrath and that there's no film on my list with Barbara Stanwyck in it. But this is a thread to be enjoyed and not pondered over to death, and in that spirit I submit my list. Roberto _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2001 05:46:31 EDT From: Gertus@aol.com Subject: Joni meets Phil There's a very strange piece of writing in today's Daily Telegraph (UK national). It describes a fictional meeting between Joni Mitchell and Phil Mitchell (soap character). Very weird. I don't know what the point is but at least the writer demonstrates a knowledge of Joni lyrics. Take a look if you have the chance. Jacky ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2001 12:02:53 +0100 From: "Marian" Subject: re: Books on that lonely desert island njc On Sat, 13 Oct 2001 00:06:39 EDT MGVal@aol.com wrote: > Joy of Cooking, (Marian, I think that > this is MUCH better than the Betty > Crocker one!) LOL!!! Joy is definitely a lot more comprehensive and probably more interesting just to read. I was thinking more in terms of functionality - that if I were stranded on a desert island it would be useful to have a good cookbook - and I like the conciseness of Betty Crocker, plus every recipe I've ever tried from it has worked and been good, although some of the sweets have too much sugar. I suppose realistically any kind of cookbook would be pretty useless, though, since probably cooking would revert to very basic grilling. Would there be garlic, ginger, refined sugar, basil, flour, vanilla? What about pots and pans? Probably a book on foraging would be a lot more useful. Marian marian@jmdl.com http://www.jmdl.com/guitar/marian/guitar.htm ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2001 02:21:27 -0700 From: "Kakki" Subject: Re: Killing of innocents (njc) I'm sorry if you really believe this is "tit for tat." Kakki ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2001 11:53:29 +0100 From: colin Subject: tit for tatNJC I'm sorry if you really believe this is "tit for tat." Kakki Kakki-I used the term because your post implied that is what it was. You seemed to imply that ebcasue Bin Laden and his men killed 7000 it was okay for us to kill innocents in Afghanistan. Tit for tat seemed the appropraite way to describe what you wrote. if you meant something else, I missed it. - -- bw colin DAK,BRO GC, 950i, 940,860,864,890, 260,Silver 830,860, 580 and 270, Passap 6000, Duo80. colin@tantra-apso.com http://www.tantra-apso.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2001 08:16:06 -0400 From: "joseph tischner" Subject: [none] AAAAAAARRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I forgot to include Beatty's Reds on my list!! (I knew I'd forget one, and there are possibly more...) This would be way near the top of the list. I'm a sucker for a good romance and Warren and Diane did it perfectly amid a complex and beautiful political revolution. The scene at the train station when she's FINALLY arrived in Russia after months travelling through the worst conditions imaginable, and she's walking the long platform to the end searching the train for her lover whom she didn't know if he'd be alive in the first place. Then she spots him/or he spots her. They fall into each others' arms, tears welling, and he says, "Don't leave me. Don't leave me." THAT'S a movie! And even more heart tugging for me is all the bittersweet narration at the end of the film of all their acquaintances who reminisce having known the couple. Simply beautiful; a perfect film. _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2001 09:03:32 -0400 From: "Suze Cameron" Subject: Destert Flicks (njc) Harold and Maude Play it Again Sam The Sting Passion Fish Blood Simple Gone With the Wind Strictly Ballroom Stand By Me The Year of Living Dangerously Picnic at Hanging Rock West Side Story The Big Chill Waking Ned Devine Saving Grace The Red Violin Looking for Mr. Goodbar Julia Oh shit was it only supposed to be 10? There is no way I can list just 10! What about the guilty pleasures? Risky Business Silence of the Lambs Search for the Holy Grail There's Something About Mary That Thing You Do The Night of the Living Dead Silverado True Grit And Now For Something Completely Different ET Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory The Neverending Story Sue Make a difference, help support the relief efforts in the U.S. http://clubs.lycos.com/live/events/september11.asp ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2001 09:53:12 -0400 From: Anne Sandstrom Subject: re: an odd trio (njc) Hi Les. Thanks for the correction (no pun intended.) I really thought the source of this info was reliable. Hmmm... since this was supposed to be a few years ago, I wonder if they were briefly in the same location, then transferred? Just a thought. lots of love Anne ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2001 10:21:57 -0400 From: Yael Harlap Subject: movies, books, NJC Hey- I don't think I'm going to do 10 of each because I have to write 4 papers this weekend... but here are a few of my favorites: MOVIES: Harold and Maude (!!!!) West Side Story Rushmore State and Main When Harry Met Sally The Breakfast Club Breakfast at Tiffany's (all except that horrible racist Japanese stereotype) Being John Malkovich There are lots of other movies I love, including The Miracle Worker, but I wouldn't put them on my all-time favorite list. BOOKS: Catcher in the Rye 1984 To Kill a Mockingbird The Last Unicorn Bridge to Terabithia The Very Persistent Gappers of Frip The Hotel New Hampshire Still Life with Woodpecker Alice in Wonderland/Through the Lookingglass (particularly the dormouse) The Great Gatsby OK, off to write papers, or something. - -Yael ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2001 11:28:19 -0400 From: Anne Sandstrom Subject: a quote from another Binladin (njc) This is from an article in last Sunday's Boston Sunday Globe. Abdullah Mohammed Binladin (that's the spelling many in the family use, apparently) lives in Cambridge, the city across the river from Boston. All of his local relatives returned to Saudi Arabia on Sept. 19, but Abdullah stayed. He denounces very clearly Osama's beliefs and tactics, calling him the "black sheep" of the family. He also describes a very normal family life, to which the family based in the Boston area hopes to return. He says he believes that Americans will come to understand the difference between the most famous Binladin and all the rest. [quoting from the article...] "I've been telling all my nieces and nephews, 'Believe me, if any society is going to understand your case, is going to differentiate between good and evil, it is here,'" he said. "I'm here, a member of my family is being accused, and still I'm being treated as a human being." [end of quote] I think this speaks volumes about our society. It's exactly what we're trying to preserve. And (you don't know how much I hate to admit this) in an odd sense, I think Bush's international naivete may actually serve us well during this. I didn't vote for him, and used to joke that I'd have to buy a new TV set every week or so, after putting my foot through the screen while watching him. But sometimes, when you don't know any better, you can actually accomplish more because you have no idea how daunting the task really is. And, as long as I'm offering an opinion, here's mine on the war. I support the bombing in Afghanistan. I believe it's the only way to start the real war; it's the only way to get to bin Laden. The Taliban and bin Laden have been using the Afghani people as a human shield. There aren't effective weapons to target individuals. War isn't that precise. It's not perfect by any means, But it's the best tool we've got for that phase. The bulk of the rest of this war will resemble a huge worlwide criminal investigation, with hundreds being arrested. Anyway, that's my opinion. I'm always trying to learn more, read more. And I'm always grateful that I live somewhere where learning and voicing opinions isn't banned, it's encouraged. lots of love Anne ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2001 10:41:55 -0500 From: "Steve Polifka" Subject: Scripture posting NJC >Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2001 13:26:16 -0700 m> >Ron wrote, >>>basically - the reason i see it as wrong is because of what i >understand the bible to say. thats it - no other reason. and i should have >made that clearer.i dont understand it - i dont understand the biblical >position either, but i do understand it to be the biblical position.< >Ron, I really appreciate your honest answer. (Just for background info my >personal belief is that love comes in many forms & it is no ones business >to judge anyone else for who they love.) I am no expert on the bible but do >know enough about it to know that there are many versions, interpretations & >that down through history, people in power (kings) have altered the bible to >suit there own needs. So maybe the biblical interpretation of homosexuality >being wrong is wrong. Heresy to some I know but that is the only way I can >explain it. As far as I can remember, I've always been this way. I thought I was the only one on the planet since I lived in a small town. I dove into religeon, then I cast it away. Sexuality is confusing on its own without adding guilt and psychological illness on top of it. I just wanted to share a song from the late Steven Grossman, one of the FEW, if not only openly gay artist to have an lp out on a major label. Here it is. I think it is self explainatory- Many Kinds of Love Steven Grossman Your message used to be my pillow My cover and my stand Your book was so familiar Like the lines upon my hand And they say that you're forgiving But that I've fallen from your grace I guess I'll never know for certain Until I meet you face to face Oh have the feelings you gave to me Become the sins I'm guilty of? Or are there many ways of reaching you As there are many kinds of love Your stories used to be my laughter My passion and my pain And though I never really spoke with you I believed them all the same And they say you're always with me At the alter and the bed But my sheets are cold and single There's desire in my head Oh have the feelings you gave to me Become the sins I'm guilty of? Or are there many ways of reaching you As there are many kinds of love Or are there many ways of reaching you As there are many kinds of love Many kinds of love. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2001 17:04:26 +0100 From: colin Subject: Re: Scripture posting NJC Thank you for the lyric Steven. they were very moving and hit the nail on the head for many I am sure. bw colin ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2001 10:56:24 -0500 From: "Steve Polifka" Subject: Top 10 Movies NOT to take on a deserted island NJC! Hi... We haven't done this yet, but as I was looking at my collection for something to watch, this just struck me... Here are my top 10 NOT to take: 1. Jaws 2. Cast Away 3. Tentacles 4. Titanic 5. The Abyss 6. 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea 7. U 571 8. Mysterious Island 9. Volcano 10. Any Gilligan's Island episodes... Steve, Still looking for a good film to watch to get som R&R... ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2001 09:37:55 -0700 From: "Mark or Travis" Subject: Re: ten desert island movies (njc) > Moonstruck (can't help it, I love this movie. Cher is great, but even better > is the ensemble of older and not well-known actors. Wonderful score - a > friend of mine is in it for a few seconds! - and a wonderful love letter to > Brooklyn) Arrggh! Another favorite I left out! Olympia Dukakis absolutely cracks me up in this one. And Cher really proves she can act. Great movie all the way around. The best romantic comedy made in the last 20 years, imo. > > Enchanted April (worth having not only for the gorgeous Italian scenery, but > for the reaction of Joan Plowright when a callow young girl asks her if she > ever knew Keats [who'd died a good century earlier]: "No, I didn't. And I > didn't know Shakespeare or Chaucer, either!) Lovely film and a nice choice. One of my friend Melanie's favorites. ) > > A Room With A View (the novel is light only on the surface; it has a sting > that the movie doesn't really capture. Maybe that's why I like 'Howard's End' better. You're absolutely right about the novel and I think the film, though wonderful, didn't qutie capture that sting. > 1950 Best Actress Nominees (this is a real cheat, because these movies don't > have anything in common except a release date. I don't need all five, just > three: > All About Eve [everything Mark Scott said, except he didn't gush over > Margo's apartment enough] > Sunset Boulevard [possible new thread, especially for we old queens: try to > think of ANY actress today who could pull off that overripe performance the > way Gloria Swanson did] > Born Yesterday [with all due respect to Bette Davis and Gloria Swanson, Judy > Holliday deserved her Oscar for this. Her comic timing is not only > impeccable, it's razor-sharp. She'd played the role on Broadway for years, > but she's completely fresh: part scented soap, part vinegar] I don't know how the academy managed to reach a decision that year. I've often wondered who I would have chosen. Bette's Margo Channing is one of my all-time favorite performances (and the decor in that apartment must have been cutting edge in 1950, btw, Roberto). And I agree that nobody else could have played Norma Desmond but Gloria Swanson (never seen the Andrew Lloyd Weber musical & probably never will). But Judy Holliday is an absolutely delight and practically defined the not-so-dumb blonde in 'Born Yesterday'. This was an ingenius bending of the rules, Roberto. Wish I'd thought of it. Mark E. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2001 12:49:37 -0500 From: "Dolphie Bush" Subject: bruce willis njc Catherine, I was thinking something very similar just two days ago. When I look through the guide for movies to watch if they have Bruce in them I won't even try them. One of his movies was on the other day and I was listening to it as I worked on the computer and thought to myself that he is pretty amusing and also thought of some other movies of his that I have enjoyed, by happenstance. Mack ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2001 12:08:49 -0600 From: Les Irvin Subject: re: an odd trio (njc) At 10/13/2001 07:53 AM, Anne Sandstrom wrote: >Thanks for the correction (no pun intended.) I really thought the source of >this info was reliable. Hmmm... since this was supposed to be a few years >ago, I wonder if they were briefly in the same location, then transferred? Very highly possible, Anne! My correction to your correction post may stand corrected. :-) Les ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2001 14:18:25 -0400 From: Anne Sandstrom Subject: odd trio (njc) Les, thanks for encouraging me to re-check the info on the 3 notorious criminals being in the same cell block. I found that there was indeed a time when they were in the prison. This time the source is CNN. http://www11.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/okc/stories/life.prison.html It looks like they were then moved. So I guess we're both right. (I like it when that happens.) lots of love Anne ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2001 21:04:38 +0100 From: colin Subject: Re: bruce willis njc Now that Brucie has grown up, he has become very appealing to me. Any idea how tall he is? He always seems short to me. Mind you so did Costner yet on Oprah he said he was 6ft 1". Dolphie Bush wrote: > Catherine, I was thinking something very similar just two days ago. When I > look through the guide for movies to watch if they have Bruce in them I won't > even try them. One of his movies was on the other day and I was listening to > it as I worked on the computer and thought to myself that he is pretty amusing > and also thought of some other movies of his that I have enjoyed, by > happenstance. > > Mack - -- bw colin DAK,BRO GC, 950i, 940,860,864,890, 260,Silver 830,860, 580 and 270, Passap 6000, Duo80. colin@tantra-apso.com http://www.tantra-apso.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2001 17:35:59 -0300 From: "Wally Kairuz" Subject: RE: bruce willis njc colin, check this out http://us.imdb.com/Bio?Willis,+Bruce wally - -----Mensaje original----- De: owner-joni@jmdl.com [mailto:owner-joni@jmdl.com]En nombre de colin Enviado el: Sabado, 13 de Octubre de 2001 05:05 p.m. Para: Dolphie Bush CC: joni Asunto: Re: bruce willis njc Now that Brucie has grown up, he has become very appealing to me. Any idea how tall he is? He always seems short to me ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2001 17:02:12 -0400 From: Vince Lavieri Subject: Re: Killing of innocents (njc) it was posted: > I certainly and sincerely don't want > > any innocent Afghanis to be killed but consider this - the U.S. gave them > > almost a month of warning. Did the people ruling that country do anything > > to shelter or protect the innocent people? They had no idea of what was > > going on in the world because they are forbidden to have TVs or read news. > > If one opposes the killing of innocents there is no "but" in the sentence. Germany took out an ad in the New York Times and said, if the Lusitana sails, we will sink it. It did and they did. Did that make it moral? Did that make it acceptable? And in reality: the Taliban repeatedly asked for proof on bin Laden. Our government refused to give it to them. We went to war instead of giving proof. The people in Afghanistan know what is going on. Radios are common and through Voice of America, among other sources, the ordinary people of Afghanistan are .informed as . But let's get real: if a nation where to announce that in several weeks they would wage war on lets say California, where would you go? Where would you go? Where would you go? Afghanistan is a land of desperate poverty and 20,000,000, yes, 20,000,000 land mines. The borders to Pakistan and Iran have been closed. Where would you go if it were you? Would the correct response to violence directed against our nation be to leave our homes and travel on foot to Mexico or Canada and live in utter poverty in refugee camps on the border? If that is not an option for us, don't expect it to be an option for the people in Afghanistan. In fact, we feel rather united and determined to not give in because we feel attacked. And thus what do you expect the people of Afghanistan to feel? Now that we have been told that there be more violence against us, shall we all take off on foot for the borders? Can future terrorists excuse themselves and blame our government if there are future American casualties because the US government did not "do anything to shelter or protect the innocent people?" If our understanding of "shelter" and "protect" is to wage war against the Taliban, then their understanding may be to wage war against us and that is ok by the above reasoning. Where does it end? (the Rev) Vince Kate Bennett wrote the wisest words and this post will end by quoting her, and I may every post the rest of my life by quoting Kate: "to me it is a pragmatic issue- violence is rarely effective ... if it were we would have had peace on this planet long ago..." ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2001 17:49:05 EDT From: Chorando6@aol.com Subject: Re:The delivery guy and the poet film The delivery guy and the poet film is 'il postino', about the exiled Chilean poet Pablo Neruda. The film is about his time on the italian island of Capri and the relationship he develops with the local postman. What makes this film particularly affecting is the fact that the actor Massimo Troisi who plays the postman was very ill during the filming with a congenital heart defect, delayed surgery to complete the film and died the day after filming was completed. It would be fair to say that for him the film was a labour of love and that fact coupled with the subject matter of the film centering around his character make for deeply moving cinema. Back to Pablo Neruda: he was awarded the Nobel Prize for poetry in 1971. His love poetry is particulary beautiful and profound. My favourite "If you forget Me" comes from a collection called ' 20 Poemas de Amor y una cancion desesperada'. I urge those who haven't seen the film or read Nerudas Poetry to do both.xx Clive ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2001 14:07:40 -0700 From: "Kakki" Subject: Re: tit for tatNJC Well, I'm sorry if you have been misinterpreting me. My perception of reality through all of this is that we are self defending. I think "tit for tat" is ridiculous and doesn't solve anything. However, taking our mountains full of weapons of mass desutruction aimed against us is not ridiculous. Kakki > Kakki-I used the term because your post implied that is what it was. You seemed to imply that ebcasue Bin Laden and his men killed 7000 it was okay for us to kill innocents in Afghanistan. Tit for tat seemed the > appropraite way to describe what you wrote. if you meant something else, > I missed it. > > -- > bw > colin > DAK,BRO GC, 950i, 940,860,864,890, 260,Silver 830,860, 580 and 270, > Passap 6000, Duo80. > > colin@tantra-apso.com > http://www.tantra-apso.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2001 18:44:40 EDT From: BigWaltinSF@aol.com Subject: Again, my (and Max's) thanks (sjc) Hi, all -- Again, I'm so grateful for all the notes of support and condolence from so many of you; I thank you, and Max the Wonderdog does. While i was out having lunch, my mother dug up an old picture of him when he was only 3 or 4, looking puzzled at a couple of party balloons. He never knew what to make of them. She picked some Peace (salmon and yellow) roses from the back yard, and placed them in a vace where she'd put the picture on the diningroom table. Sort of a mini-shrine. Again, thanks to all of you in my new cyber-family. Re: the Vanity Fair cover. Wouldn't you know, my subscription expired a month ago. I had to go to two stores -- VF was sold out at the first one -- to get the issue. She looks great, as I'm sure many of you have noticed (Kakki and Steve live, recently!) -- but I wish there was more about her in the issue. Did y'all catch the "contributors" section, where there's another picture including her (Lisa Robinson, a contributing editor is the focus of the picture, but Joni, Beck, Stevie W and Jewel are also visible. It's on page 98, on which same page is an ad for Carole King's new album. She looks great, too! God, I hope the O'Brien Joni bio gets available here (in U.S.) soon! Hugs and a (npimh) wagging tail, Walt ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2001 15:04:15 -0700 From: "Kakki" Subject: Re: War and ideology (njc) Vince wrote: >If one opposes the killing of innocents there is no "but" >in the sentence. It's curious to me that during the U.S., NATO, European engagement in the recents wars in Bosnia, Macedonia, etc. that nothing was said here by the active resistance pacifists about the killing of innocents there. In that case, the U.S. was not even defending itself, but now that it has been attacked and is defending itself, suddenly the U.S. is wrong and this is a burning issue. >And in reality: the Taliban repeatedly asked for proof >on bin Laden. Our government refused to give it to >them. We went to war instead of giving proof. Proof about Bin Laden? Please. The whole world and the Taliban knows it was Bin Laden. Now the proof is right out there in our faces with their broadcasts on Qatar TV almost daily taking full credit for it and calling on more acts of murder against us. This "proof" question is now moot. > But let's get real: if a nation where to announce that in >several weeks they would wage war on lets say >California, where would you go? Where would you go? > Where would you go? OK let's reverse the situation and assume California had been facilitating and harboring for years the most bloodthirsty terrorist group in the world who had attacked and murdered people in several countries. The entire world knew from its investigations and intelligence, including direct evidence from capturing members of the group, that the terrorists were being sheltered in California. Most of the countries of the world call on California to turn over the group and California refuses. Then a huge mass of armies consisting of representatives from around the world surround California for a month calling on it to turn over the group. I would say that most all of the people of California would be fleeing immediately. In fact, right now I have gathered together important papers and other things I may need to try to get out to Mexico or Canada if the terrorists succeed in devastating my area. Mexico may well shut us out but I think Canada would take us in. But in my case, I won't have any clear month-long warning that they are about to attack me. > Afghanistan is a land of desperate poverty and >20,000,000, yes, 20,000,000 land mines. The borders >to Pakistan and Iran have been closed. Where would >you go if it were you? The Afghanis have been fleely since before 9/11 to not only Pakistan, but many other countries. The problem now, which does tear at me, is that the Taliban is probably using innocent Afghanis for human shields at this point. The U.S. and other countries who are engaged in going after Bin Laden are not aiming at innocents. > In fact, we feel rather united and determined to not give >in because we feel attacked. And thus what do you >expect the people of Afghanistan to feel? The innocent people in Afghanistan, if they are aware of what's going on in the world, like you suggest, know that they are not the ones being attacked. They would know that their brutal oppresors are the ones the world is trying to stop. > Now that we have been told that there be more >violence against us, shall we all take off on foot for the >borders? Can future terrorists excuse themselves and > blame our government if there are future American >casualties because the US government did not "do >anything to shelter or protect the innocent people?" This is the attempt at "moral equivalency" or "moral relativism" that I am at a loss to understand. If the terrorists mass around L.A. for example and give a month long specific warning, yes, I will take off on foot. Also, if they were massed around L.A., I know that the US goverment WOULD do everything it could to shelter and protect me. I think here that some are arguing from a standpoint of ideology or personal philosophy while others are arguing from a point of reality and actual events. Ideology to some extent CAN be applied to actual events but a blanket ideology applied to actual events as they are happening without total knowledge of all the facts, past present or future, is both too restrictive and overbroad to be very well understood by many of us. Kakki ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2001 19:32:52 EDT From: Chorando6@aol.com Subject: Re: This gay thing Dear all here is my take on the validity of the argument for the wrongfullness of homosexuality. Firstly I would like to question those who question the actions of two consenting adults. Remember it is two consenting adults. The issue people have is with a sex act that differs from the supposed Norm. This has to be the focus for any argument that condems homosexuality as wrongful. Putting it bluntly what we're looking at is the act of anal intercourse. Now if as you read this you find yourself bristling and getting angry, flustered, offended or any other reaction that could be classed as uncomfortable, Stop. Try and follow your thoughts, see where they lead you. Do you want to walk away, stop reading, hit the computer screen, hit me? Are you offended? If so then think about that. Could it be that you are fearful of such thoughts, fearful of the images that spring to mind, fearful of the sensations coursing through your body as you try and get your head around such images. We are our own censors, whichever way we try to justify our opinions these justifications are merely shields and barriers we use to distance ourselves from our own desires and experiences and self concepts. Im not saying that everone who finds homosexuality abhorent is gay, that is far too simple and we are more complex than that, what i am saying though is that every kind of predjudice stems from ourselves. Gays are seen as different because we within ourselves feel different, feel alien, feel bad and to take that on board is sometimes too much to contend with. So what we do is push it onto others. What I would like to suggest is that most of us have found in one way or another members of the same sex attractive at some time in our lives. What determines our opinions is our response to those desires. So when someone comes onto the list stating the rightness or wrongness of something, it is important that they spend time looking to themselves rather than outside themselves for their reasons, for i assure you there are no answers outside of ourselves in these matters, only smoke screens. Finally I would like to state that our sexuality is only a small part of who we all are and anal intercourse is practiced by straights and gays alike but the issue 'straight' men(mainly) have is with this very specific sex act between two men. That is where it begins and where it ends. The alpha and the omega. Men have issues with buggery. Maybe you could say men have issues with being passive and vulnerable. Or rather the men who have issues with gays have issues with being seen as passive and vulnerable. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2001 00:50:45 +0100 From: colin Subject: Re: bruce willis njc well thank you. I was disappointed tho. As it came from you i was expecting a NUDE Brucie! Wally Kairuz wrote: > colin, > check this out > http://us.imdb.com/Bio?Willis,+Bruce > wally > > -----Mensaje original----- > De: owner-joni@jmdl.com [mailto:owner-joni@jmdl.com]En nombre de colin > Enviado el: Sabado, 13 de Octubre de 2001 05:05 p.m. > Para: Dolphie Bush > CC: joni > Asunto: Re: bruce willis njc > > Now that Brucie has grown up, he has become very appealing to me. Any idea > how > tall he is? He always seems short to me - -- bw colin DAK,BRO GC, 950i, 940,860,864,890, 260,Silver 830,860, 580 and 270, Passap 6000, Duo80. colin@tantra-apso.com http://www.tantra-apso.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2001 00:54:10 +0100 From: colin Subject: Re: tit for tatNJC > I think "tit for > tat" is ridiculous and doesn't solve anything. but that is not what you wrote. you implied it was okay to kill innocents becasue THEY killed 7000 of ours. i don't agree with that. that IS tit for tat. > However, taking our > mountains full of weapons of mass desutruction aimed against us is not > ridiculous. no it isn't. Except they do not have weapons of mass diatruction,. In fact they have very little of anything. I have said more than once I have no problem at all with taking out Bin Laden and The Taliban. however, I don't think killing innocents is the way to do it and is not justified no matter how many of ours were killed. > Kakki > > > Kakki-I used the term because your post implied that is what it was. You > seemed to imply that ebcasue Bin Laden and his men killed 7000 it was okay > for us to kill innocents in Afghanistan. Tit for tat seemed the > > appropraite way to describe what you wrote. if you meant something else, > > I missed it. > > > > -- > > bw > > colin > > DAK,BRO GC, 950i, 940,860,864,890, 260,Silver 830,860, 580 and 270, > > Passap 6000, Duo80. > > > > colin@tantra-apso.com > > http://www.tantra-apso.com > > - -- bw colin DAK,BRO GC, 950i, 940,860,864,890, 260,Silver 830,860, 580 and 270, Passap 6000, Duo80. colin@tantra-apso.com http://www.tantra-apso.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2001 16:04:50 -0700 From: "Kakki" Subject: Re: tit for tatNJC Colin, > but that is not what you wrote. you implied it was okay >to kill innocents becasue THEY killed 7000 of ours. i don't agree with that. that IS tit for tat. I hope you now understand that is not what I meant. All along I have been saying we have to defend ourselves and that striking back is self-defense. I have never said we should attack innocent people who killed 7000 of ours. That makes no sense. How are they innocent if they killed our people, rhetorically speaking? > no it isn't. Except they do not have weapons of mass >diatruction,. In fact they have very little of anything. That is not what our intelligence is telling us. They have bio and chemical weapons, "suitcase nukes" and who knows what else cached away in their mountain caves. Those are considered weapons of mass destruction, legally, by most of the countries in the world and that is while we are striking at the mountains there. > I have said more than once I have no problem at all >with taking out Bin Laden and The Taliban. however, I >don't think killing innocents is the way to do it > and is not justified no matter how many of ours were killed. You know we are not trying to kill innocent people. It's horrible that innocent people are being caught in the cross-fire but we are not aiming at them and you know it. Kakki ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2001 01:09:03 +0100 From: colin Subject: Re: War and ideology (njc) Kakki wrote: > Vince wrote: > > >If one opposes the killing of innocents there is no "but" >in the sentence. > > It's curious to me that during the U.S., NATO, European engagement in the > recents wars in Bosnia, Macedonia, etc. that nothing was said here by the > active resistance pacifists about the killing of innocents there. I don't think that is true. We(meaning USA and UK) had no business there. > > > > > > > OK let's reverse the situation and assume California had been facilitating > and harboring for years the most bloodthirsty terrorist group in the world > who had attacked and murdered people in several countries. I'd like to know why everyone forgets or refuses to acknowldege that the people of the USA provided the IRA with the means to kill us in Broitain. > I would say > that most all of the people of California would be fleeing immediately. with 20 million landmines for you not to trread on? > In > fact, right now I have gathered together important papers and other things I > may need to try to get out to Mexico or Canada if the terrorists succeed in > devastating my area. you are a woman of means and eductaion in a totally different circumstance. Have you seen or read what Afghanistan is like? > > > > Afghanistan is a land of desperate poverty and >20,000,000, yes, > 20,000,000 land mines. The borders >to Pakistan and Iran have been closed. > Where would >you go if it were you? > > The Afghanis have been fleely since before 9/11 to not only Pakistan, but > many other countries. The problem now, which does tear at me, is that the > Taliban is probably using innocent Afghanis for human shields at this point. > The U.S. and other countries who are engaged in going after Bin Laden are > not aiming at innocents. I am sure those inncents thought just that as they were blown apart. > > > > > The innocent people in Afghanistan, if they are aware of what's going on in > the world, like you suggest, know that they are not the ones being attacked. > They would know that their brutal oppresors are the ones the world is trying > to stop. Afghan man, woman or child: 'It's okay, i know you didn't mean to blow me up. i know you were aiming at Bin Laden. i am so sorry i got in your way. Your conscience is clear. Go in peace.' > > > > If McVeigh had planted his bomb in another country, I wonder if you would feel the same if that other country decide to attack the USA? Or indeed if those countries where the uSA had committted crimes, has supported terroists, decide to? Like the UK for instcne for your support of the IRA? Don't misundertsand, I am fully aware that it is our country too that is doing this in Afghanistan. I am at a loss as to why Mr Blair is going all over the world to rally support for the uSA while Bush stays safely at home. Also, his list, Bush's, of most wanted are only those that affect America. No Ira, no Basque, no anyone else. I hope you are not taking any of these different viewpopints as an attack on you personally. friends can disagree about things. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2001 01:21:23 +0100 From: colin Subject: Re: tit for tatNJC Kakki wrote: > Colin, > > > but that is not what you wrote. you implied it was okay >to kill innocents > becasue THEY killed 7000 of ours. i don't agree with that. that IS tit for > tat. > > I hope you now understand that is not what I meant. All along I have been > saying we have to defend ourselves and that striking back is self-defense. > I have never said we should attack innocent people who killed 7000 of ours. I know you didn't but you implied it was the fault of the Taliban or the fault of the people themselvesa(as in your reply Vince) for not running. > > > > > no it isn't. Except they do not have weapons of mass >diatruction,. In > fact they have very little of anything. > > That is not what our intelligence is telling us. They have bio and chemical > weapons, "suitcase nukes" and who knows what else cached away in their > mountain caves. I didn't know that. That is scary. The suitcase nuke! bloody hell! I knew about the bio's tho and am aware of the Anthrax cases in the uSA. veyr scary. > > > > > You know we are not trying to kill innocent people. It's horrible that > innocent people are being caught in the cross-fire but we are not aiming at > them and you know it. It makes no difference whether we are aiming at them or not, they will get killed and already have been and you know that and it seems to me you justify it. I am saying it cannot be justified. Look, this is not personal, this does not change my opinon of you one bit, we all have different views. however, i still feel it is right to express my differing view to you. I do not understand why govts do not nip things in the bud. As they could have with Hitler, as they could have with Hussien, as they could have with Bin Laden. no they wait until all hell breaks lose and innocnets get cought in the crossfire. Try and think about this from a more persoanl point of vieew. What if it was YOU or you loved ones in the line of fire when another country attacks for whatever reason. Come to think of it that has already happened and yet you seem to me to not get the link between you and your distress and the distress of the people of Afghanistan. It is about empathy, of being able to think yourself in anothers shoes. That is all. Thos people could easuily be you or me given different circumstances. One very obvious one;imagine the Fundies took control of America? then tell me you would have the freedom to flee as and when you felt the need to. It is far more complicated than you believe it to be. > > > Kakki - -- bw colin DAK,BRO GC, 950i, 940,860,864,890, 260,Silver 830,860, 580 and 270, Passap 6000, Duo80. colin@tantra-apso.com http://www.tantra-apso.com ------------------------------ End of JMDL Digest V2001 #481 ***************************** ------- Post messages to the list by clicking here: mailto:joni@smoe.org Unsubscribe by clicking here: mailto:joni-digest-request@smoe.org?body=unsubscribe ------- Siquomb, isn't she?