From: les@jmdl.com (JMDL Digest) To: joni-digest@smoe.org Subject: JMDL Digest V2002 #116 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 Friday, March 15 2002 Volume 2002 : Number 116 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: -------- Gorka is God ["Kate Bennett" ] Re: VG8 - njc [M.Russell@iaea.org] Today's Articles: March 15 [les@jmdl.com] Today in History: March 15 [les@jmdl.com] Re: Bush (NJC) long ["Kate Bennett" ] Re: Bush (NJC) Long ["Kate Bennett" ] New Nukes njc [FredNow@aol.com] Re: nuclear weapons NJC [Julius Raymond ] Re: Bush (NJC) Long ["Bree Mcdonough" ] nuclear weapons NJC ["Kate Bennett" ] Re: Alternative energy (NJC) ["Kakki" ] Re: Bush (NJC) long [colin ] Re: Bush njc [colin ] US involvement, NJC ["Laurent Olszer" ] Re: Me too!, njc [colin ] Re: Bush (NJC) long [Julius Raymond ] NJC Re: JONI: CBC-TV and PBS/American Masters [SCJoniGuy@aol.com] Re: Cover of "Passion Play" [SCJoniGuy@aol.com] Re: nuclear weapons NJC ["Blair Fraipont" ] Joni poster of TTT ["Laurent Olszer" ] Re: Cover of "Passion Play" (NJC) ["Brenda" ] Re: thanks julius njc ["Bree Mcdonough" ] Re: Robin Williams NJC [Gil Lamont ] Re: Gorka is God NJC [Alison E ] Re: Cover of "Passion Play" [Reuben3rd@aol.com] Re: Robin Williams NJC ["Bree Mcdonough" ] Bass Playing Women NJC [Tyler Hewitt ] Re: Alternative energy (NJC) ["gene mock" ] RE: Alternative energy (NJC) ["Kate Bennett" ] Re: Me too!, njc ["Bree Mcdonough" ] Re: Bush NJC [w evans ] Re: JMDL Digest V2002 #114 [w evans ] Re: Bush NJC [SCJoniGuy@aol.com] Re: nuclear weapons NJC [Alison E ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 00:07:56 -0800 From: "Kate Bennett" Subject: Gorka is God Just got back from his show here in SB. He is coming to McCabe's in LA this Saturday night. Two shows. Don't miss him! As Rose & Gregg Cagno can attest he is one of the greatest performers, singer-songwriters out there. He doesn't tour that much anymore. He had me in tears one minute, laughing out loud the next. ******************************************** Kate Bennett www.katebennett.com sponsored by Polysonics Discover the Indies at Taylor Guitars: http://www.taylorguitars.com/artists/awp/indies/bennett.html ******************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 09:04:18 +0100 From: M.Russell@iaea.org Subject: Re: VG8 - njc On Fri, 15 Mar 2002 0:5:36 -0800 Victor Johnson wrote: > Actually, when I played one at Jonifest 2001 what > threw me off was how "little" I heard or felt from > the strings. All I noticed was the sound from the > amp...I couldn't feel any of the dynamics or the > natural swell and decay of the strings that are so > much a part of the acoustic guitar. It was that > absence that I noticed and it was very unsettling. > I agree that they are amazing instruments but I > think I would find it hard to get used to playing > one. > Victor I think I understand what you mean, Victor. I noticed in the recordings from Jonifest 1999 where I was playing Michael's e-guitar hooked up to the VG-8, that compared to his silky sounds - well it seemed like my e-guitar playing technique needed some work! But I was trying to play it like an acoustic and I think maybe the string sensitivity settings of the patches I used were not the acoustic ones. I think it's possible to change the settings of any patch so that the sounds produced are more controlled by the actual force used by your fingers on the strings - it's one of the things I hope to learn more about from Michael at his VG-8 workshop in August at Jonifest. It could have been that the setting you were using when you played was one where the sensitivity of the strings was not turned up very high. Since I've had my VG-8 for awhile now, I've had time to discover that most (maybe all) of the factory acoustic guitar settings are such that if I try to play in the same way that I play my acoustic, I get the expected dynamics. Marian ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 03:06:03 -0500 From: les@jmdl.com Subject: Today's Articles: March 15 On March 15 the following articles were published: 1998: "Dylan, Mitchell, Morrison coming" - Vancouver Sun (News Item) http://www.jmdl.com/articles/docs/980315vs.cfm 1998: "Hittin' The Road" - Jam! Website (News Item) http://www.jmdl.com/articles/docs/980315j.cfm 1998: "Morrison May Join Dylan / Mitchell Tour" - Ticketmaster Live Daily website (News Item) http://www.jmdl.com/articles/docs/980315tl.cfm - ------------------------ http://www.jmdl.com/articles ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 03:06:03 -0500 From: les@jmdl.com Subject: Today in History: March 15 On March 15 in Joni Mitchell History: 1969: Joni performs in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan 1995: Today, Reprise released "Sunny Sunday" as a single. - ------------------------ Search the "Today" database at http://www.jmdl.com/today ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 00:20:23 -0800 From: "Kate Bennett" Subject: Re: Bush (NJC) long I couldn't agree with you more Colin... >>>I find it difficult to undertsand people getting offended when negative comments are made about governents. It is done here all the time about the UK govt and it doesn't bother me at all. They are not attacking me.I don't see the conenction with patriotism. i think it is quite possible to love your country and not feel peronally attacked when the govt is criticised.<<< ******************************************** Kate Bennett www.katebennett.com sponsored by Polysonics Discover the Indies at Taylor Guitars: http://www.taylorguitars.com/artists/awp/indies/bennett.html ******************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 00:42:01 -0800 From: "Kate Bennett" Subject: Re: Bush (NJC) Long >>I don't know if this will make anyone feel better, but everything I've read on the right hand side of the political fence is vehemently opposed to the Patriot Act and thinks it is totally fascist. With such a cross-section of opposition, there should be enough voices to keep it in check, or have it modified or amended.<<< It makes me feel better so thank you for posting this Kakki... >>IS very expensive to convert over to alternatives. Part of the reason for the huge finanical debt California is in right now is because of the mandate for alternative energy sources. Its just that You can't just snap your fingers and wish it and all will be O.K. There is a huge price to pay. However, I'm sure with all the talent in the U.S. some people could come up with some good ideas. <<< I don't buy this argument. To whom is it expensive? Alternative technologies have been around for a very long time. The oil companies have a huge stake in the status quo. The longterm price for not allowing the development of alternative energy will be very expensive & not just in terms of money. >>>Toyota now has the part gas/part electric car on the market at a reasonable price. I'm glad to see that at least start to happen.<<< My friends who I recently visited in Kauai have this car & we rode around in it a lot. They love it. Thinking of my husband who loves fast acceleration, I asked about that...they told me someone they knew tested one out on the airport runway (?) & it was very good. ******************************************** Kate Bennett www.katebennett.com sponsored by Polysonics Discover the Indies at Taylor Guitars: http://www.taylorguitars.com/artists/awp/indies/bennett.html ******************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 03:38:56 EST From: FredNow@aol.com Subject: New Nukes njc "Kakki" wrote: >As for Bush throwing around threats, >he did not do that - he and Congress reviewed that Pentagon report to >*discuss* all their weaponry options but there have been no reports that >everyone privy to it had agreed or voted on nuking a number of countries >ad hoc. Once the discussion was leaked, what was he supposed to say, other >than "if you nuke us, we will leave our options open" which has been the >policy of all the administrations I can remember. >That said, most of us here have thankfully lived our lives without the >deployment of a nuclear weapon. Let's pray that continues. Yes, it has long been the stated public policy of each President and his Secretary of State that the USA will never strike first with nuclear weapons, and only use them in retaliation to another state's nuclear attack. But within the Pentagon it's a different story. There has always been a plan to attack the USSR/Russia with nukes if deemed necessary, and this new study commissioned by the Bush administration asks the Pentagon "to be prepared to use nuclear weapons against China, Russia, Iraq, North Korea, Iran, Libya and Syria. It says the weapons could be used in three types of situations: against targets able to withstand nonnuclear attack; in retaliation for attack with nuclear, biological or chemical weapons; or 'in the event of surprising military developments.'" This is from an article in the LA Times reporting on the secret report given to congress in January, and can be read in full here: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-030902bombs.story - -Fred ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 00:44:05 -0800 From: Julius Raymond Subject: Re: nuclear weapons NJC The fact is that the U.S. has poured trillions into developing the nuclear missile program. It seems to me that the only sane way to garner any kind of return on investment is to rattle the nuclear saber every now and then as a deterrent to those rogue governments would who threaten to use weapons of mass destruction, be they chemical, biological, radiological or nuclear against us. It's as if the Bush administration is saying, if you anthrax/small pox us, nerve gas us, or explode a dirty bomb in, say, L.A. and force us to evacuate a vital urban area for possibly hundreds of years, it may well be that the next sound you hear will be the shrill whistle of incoming nuclear warheads over Baghdad. Don't fuck with us. You've been warned. God forbid we should ever actually launch though. By the way, a distinction should be made between those "suitcase nuclear bombs" and so called "dirty bombs." The suitcase bombs do exist, but it takes a helluva lot of special nuclear material (plutonium) to make one, and that shit is not easy to come by. Plus, the mere handling of that type of material would kill any would-be user from exposure pretty quickly if they're not really, really careful. The mechanisms in these devices are intricate and volatile. You'd have to know exactly what you're doing to use one "successfully." But they would cause a devastating nuclear fission explosion if detonated. Some that were made in the former Soviet Union are known to be missing. Scary. On the other hand, a dirty bomb is more likely to be used by a terrorist organization. These types of devices can be any manner of explosive, like a few sticks of dynamite, bundled with cheap, relatively stable and more easily obtainable radioactive isotopes, like cesium, americium or cobalt. The idea is to widely disperse the radioactive material with the explosive and spread terror and fear. No one dies immediately unless you're at ground zero and are done in by the explosion, but you'd have to evacuate the entire area for many, many years due to the elevated risk of thyroid cancer to the populace over time. Obviously, such a scenario would be devastating to the economy, not to mention the fear factor and panic that would ensue. Attempting something like this is more in keeping with the modus operandi of terrorist organizations like al Qaeda. - -Julius > gene mock wrote: > > > to all concern, i don't care if your a communist, capitalist, socialist, > > imperialist, democrat, or republican-----to advocate use of nuclear weapons of > > any yield is fucking INSANE! > > I think the capitalized words much describe the Pentagon planning under > Rumsfeld, and as well captures the essense of this entire administration. > > Not since the days of Barry Goldwater advocating the use of nuclear bombs in > Vietnam has there been such an asinine comment , other than Reagan's advocating > the possibility of the same ("low yield" nuclear weapons) in Europe back in what, > 1982? Every 20 years the horrid spectre of nuclear weapons use is raised in this > country and we wonder why the rest of the world looks at us as crazed. > > (the Rev) Vince ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 00:59:21 -0800 From: "Bree Mcdonough" Subject: Re: Bush (NJC) Long >I also feel - that yes - some of the airport security is out of line. I >hope no one here will >take this and blow it out of proportion. But some of the cavity searches, >shoe removals and >extensive bag checks will and are leading to the government's knowing just >too much about our >personal business. Well unfortunately,this is the way of the world now. There is no turning back. Not to be a pessimist:But things will only get more stringent. Have you ever heard about Israel's airport security? And the people are pretty tolerant because their very survival depends on this tight security. (they understand all their neighbors want to annihilate them and remove their state from the map) Traveling last week with my brother he was searched.. also asked to remove his shoes, socks,belt. I wasn't and we laughed later that he looked more the terrorist because of his long hair and mustache. Either that or the chick security guard had the hots for him. (I told him don't flatter yourself.. you look like a member of the IRA) My purse and bags were searched extensively though. (I heard Barbara Walters recently speak about this because she was body searched,had to remove her shoes etc...and said it was done to her simply because of her celebrity status) >For awhile thereafter, late 70's >early 80's, we took to cars that were highly gas efficient. But in the >past 15 years or so we >drifted away and are now hooked on cars/SUVs with terrible gas mileage once >again. While research >has not been pursued as much with a more permanent solution. Although some >have seen the light, >and as Bill Mahr has often pointed out on his show. Why hasn't there been >the hot pursuit of the >hybrid car's perfection? Americans plain and simple love their fast cars and big SUVs. These electric cars that only go 50mph are not feasible and are ugly to boot. And believe me, if I had children I would have a SUV because they are safe. More steal around,higher off the ground means added safety. I'm all for funding for alternate fuel sources, but at the same time I think we could drill in Alaska without disturbing too much. There is enough crude for the next 500 years. This is taking into consideration population,consumption expectations multiplied xxxx. Enjoying the political discussions,and will try to remain tolerant and open. Bree > >Peace >Susan >Yahoo! Sports - live college hoops coverage >http://sports.yahoo.com/ _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 01:41:06 -0800 From: "Kate Bennett" Subject: nuclear weapons NJC >>to advocate use of nuclear weapons of any yield is fucking INSANE!<< right on gene. ******************************************** Kate Bennett www.katebennett.com sponsored by Polysonics Discover the Indies at Taylor Guitars: http://www.taylorguitars.com/artists/awp/indies/bennett.html ******************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 01:42:36 -0800 From: "Kakki" Subject: Re: Alternative energy (NJC) Kate wrote: > I don't buy this argument. To whom is it expensive? Alternative technologies > have been around for a very long time. The oil companies have a huge stake > in the status quo. The longterm price for not allowing the development of > alternative energy will be very expensive & not just in terms of money. I said it was expensive to convert not to develop and was thinking of power generation for electricity, etc. That is not an argument but a fact. I'm all for it but people should be realistic and consider the cost and not think it can just happen immediately overnight seamlessly. Think about converting over all the present generating facilities throughout the U.S. that now operate on fossil fuels. I don't have the engineering expertise to elaborate on all the technical aspects of it but it is a major "re-tooling" operation for each plant. And despite everything, most alternative plants still require a certain degree of oil in order to run. In California alone it cost tens and hundreds of millions of dollars for many plants for which the investors were then given free reign to recoup on the backs of the people through wildly out of control charges. The example set in California has turned off a lot of other states who were considering mandating alternative energy generation. For years the people who have certain technology, such as for home solar generators, have charged an enormous amount for installation and maintenance of the units. Either the conversion technology/engineering has to become a lot more cost effective or some financial geniuses need to figure a better way to fund it. Nonetheless, I've heard many in the federal government and the Bush administration advocating moving forward towards alternatives. Kakki ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 10:18:57 +0000 From: colin Subject: Re: Bush (NJC) long > About supporting regimes in the past that are now > enemies - lots of people in Europe and around the world supported Hitler, > too, support is not the right word. But yes, something could have been done about him beforee the war. It had to do with anti semitism. > or looked the other way in the beginning, until they saw the light. Like the USA did. > > > > The anti American sentiment is widespread and it is real and it is there > for > > good reasons. Stating this fact is not an attack on you personally or > anyone > > else, except those people that have the power in your country. The UK too > has > > equally stained hands. > > The UK or former British Empire controlled a lot of the Middle East and set > up a lot of the countries where there are problems today. They , the UK, certainly helped create the Palestine problem. They gave in to terrorists. > However, do the > Americans rant and rave about this and put it all on them to this day? I > find a lot of the anti-American sentiment in the U.K. and Europe just > mindboggling. As if they can just ignore the fact that it is their national > corporations that are some of the most largest and powerful in the U.S. The > biggest oil corporations in the U.S. are not named "Bush" but rather British > Petroleum and (Dutch) Shell Oil Company. Most of the major record companies > are foreign-owned. The German and British have the lock on the luxury car > market in the U.S. The largest pharmaceutical company is German and several > of the largest scientific concerns are also German. I heard at one time > that the largest personal landholder in the U.S. is Queen Elizabeth. Yet > their newspapers and citizens spit in our faces and we are suppose to be > intellectually above it all and demur cooperatively. I really don't see what the above has to with anything we are discussing. we are discussing the USA interfering with foreign powers, supporting terrorists when it suits them, supporting dictators when it suits them toppling othjer countries govts when it suits them etc etc etc and then wondering why they piss people off in these countries! ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 10:20:13 +0000 From: colin Subject: Re: Bush njc Kate Bennett wrote: > >>>Accordng to Dubya, anyone who uses drugs is helping fund terrorists to > fund their wars & agendas.<<< > Is it muy imagination or was Bush a drug user? ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 11:11:11 -0000 From: "Laurent Olszer" Subject: US involvement, NJC > Right. I want to learn more about the why the U.S. has been involved in the > middle east, at great expense of lives, money and political fall-out all > these years. Has it really been primarily to protect Europe's access to the > oil and shelter Israel? About supporting regimes in the past that are now > enemies - lots of people in Europe and around the world supported Hitler, > too, or looked the other way in the beginning, until they saw the light. > Kakki I think initially it was because the USSR was supporting militarily the arab regimes (Syria, Egypt, Palestinians' Fatah, Lybia, etc). Later on the US became a whore and gave money to both sides, just as corporations finance both presidential candidates' campaign. One thing I'm sure of: notwithstanding all the good talk, it's all about power and money, they don't give a s..t about Europe nor Israel nor anybody else. Another thing that is clear when you look at the tens of millions of displaced persons in the 20th century (my family included) that all became citizens of their host country: The only reason why a few hundred thousands Palestinians refugees were never integrated by their arab brothers was to keep the fire alive so the superpowers would be needed to supply weapons. (I'll give you an example: from 1948 to 1967, while Gaza was under Egyptian rule, Palestinians lived in tents, for 19 years! After 67 the Israelis built hard houses). Anyway, just follow the old principle: show me your weapons and I'll tell you who backs you up. Perhaps one area to look at for a possible comprehensive explanation is the relationship between the weapons industry and the government. Laurent ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 10:32:27 +0000 From: colin Subject: Re: Me too!, njc > Colin, > ----- > Hey, sorry I kinda jumped on you. I guess it's what > you and I do, eh? no it is what you do. persistently misinterpret what i write. > It's okay with me if you have a > love/hate thing going with America. I do not have any hate whatsoever for America. America is a land mass. Stupid to hate it. The American people are no different t any other humans. i do not hate them. I have strong reservations about your Govts policies as I do about my govts policies. That is not hating. America is the the most beautiful country I have ever visited,(at least the states i was in-VT, NYS, Maine and NH and CT) and I have visted about 30 countries. > Almost all > Americans do too!!! (Not that you need permission > from ANYONE for your opinions.) > > Sue Mac, > ------- > Are you coming to the Catskills? I'd like to meet > you. You and Simon may be the most elusive of > JMDLers. > > Simon, > ----- > Wow! You stay in the background most of the time, but > when you post, you always, and I mean > > ********** > ALWAYS > ********** > > bring along something great. > > To all, > ------ > I recently got 7 classic CDs from Columbia House for > $50, even after including all the ridiculous shipping > charges. That's a deal when you can select stuff that > defines some of the high points of Western Civ like a > re-mastered "Kind Of Blue", and the original cast > recording of "West Side Story", some Monk, and J.T.'s > single-cd "Live". > > Remember to set aside some funds for the New Orleans > JoniFest CDs, ya'll. > > Lama > Yahoo! Sports - live college hoops coverage > http://sports.yahoo.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: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 03:22:00 -0800 From: Julius Raymond Subject: Re: Bush (NJC) long > colin wrote: > > > I understand your objection to anti American sentiment. I don;t undertsand > > your obnjection to the reporting of Bush's statement that he is prepared to use > > nukes. He said ti. It is not a lie. To reprot it is not fearmongering. it > > is something we all need to know. Kakki wrote: > To report it fourth hand, embellished, before Bush made his own statement, > from a classified Pentagon report leak given to a commentary writer at the > L.A. Times is what I objected to. I can see how, generally speaking, hearsay and embellishment are objectionable. And, clearly, it's not cool to preempt the President. But excerpts from these reports are often *intentionally* leaked as a test balloon to determine how public opinion will shake down. They want the debate to begin to see how the various political forces will react, but in a way that affords the Administration plausible deniability in the event that the nuke ideas meet mass denunciation. The L.A. Times article is a good example of just that phenomenon. Note the organizations whose experts were quoted for the piece. The game's afoot. Anyway, be assured that the whole report won't see the light of day in our lifetimes. Notice how there's no condemnation of the leak from the Administration like there was when someone from Congress leaked sensitive war policy earlier in the Bush administration? That's an earmark of a leak by design. Clinton used the leak technique masterfully during the Lewinski debacle. It's about managing expectation. But let's assume for a moment that the leak did come from a fourth hand source though. As a matter of law, the First Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that "Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom...of the press." This provision now protects the press from all government, whether local, state or federal. The government can't impose prior restraints on the press. The media are at liberty to print anything at all. A well-known precedent for this is "Pentagon Papers" case during the Viet Nam war, U.S. v. The New York Times, where the U.S. Supreme Court decided that the Times could continue to publish the then-classified Pentagon Papers. Leaking portions of the nuke report can be construed as unethical (although my sense is most people would concur with colin's viewpoint), but it ain't illegal. Interestingly, the founders of the United States are said to have enacted the First Amendment to distinguish their new government from that of England, which had long censored the press and prosecuted people who criticized the Crown. The purpose of the First Amendment was "to create a fourth institution outside the government as an additional check on the three official branches" (the executive branch, the legislature and the judiciary). I think that's pretty cool and I'm psyched when the press ferrets these things out. Remember Watergate? Not to come off cynical, but I've gotta think Rumsfeld, et al figured the time is ripe for this type of nuclear defense thrust. Since 9/11 there is an underlying sense that the very existence of the country is at stake . The gloves are off and massive retaliation is getting to be a household word. Plus, the "Powell Doctrine" has always been to go into military engagement with "overwhelming force" or don't go at all. This whole is issue is a bit of a conundrum to me and I welcome the national debate before Bush makes some fool official policy. On the one hand, I pray that no nuke weapons of any kind are ever assembled again, and that we go about the business of dismantling all existing nukes worldwide with dispatch. But I fear that the reality is that nuclear technology applied to warfare scenarios is here to stay. So, doesn't it make sense to make smaller, more "tactical" nukes that would cause less collateral damage, that is to say, kill fewer and fewer people? Is making the smaller ones the only way to get the powers that be to get rid of the God-awful super-destructive ones, the ones whose effects would cause "nuclear winter" and the end of the world as we know it? Surely, that's the worse of two evils. With Bush's current job approval ratings in the polls, he could conceivably work new nukes onto the budget and into the public consciousness favorably. We'd better deal with this. - -Julius ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 08:03:39 EST From: SCJoniGuy@aol.com Subject: NJC Re: JONI: CBC-TV and PBS/American Masters << Still, if a better copy is not available I'll be glad to offer mine up for a video tree. >> A low-end copy that I can have & enjoy is much preferred to a high end copy on someone else's shelf. Thanks for showing the ol' JMDL spirit, Rick! :~) Bob NP: Kasey Chambers ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 08:08:49 EST From: SCJoniGuy@aol.com Subject: Re: Cover of "Passion Play" << There was a woman who played bass for the B52's who was pretty cool too. >> Of the "formal" members of the band, Kate Pierson played keyboard bass, so maybe you're referring to Sara Lee, who played on their studio recordings. Sara rules, she's also worked with Ani & got her first recognition with Gang of Four, who had that great debut mentioned here a week or so ago. When it comes to great women bass players, how about Me'shell? Michael Y, what's the scoop on her upcoming project, the follow-up to her "Bitter" masterpiece? Bob ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 09:03:23 -0500 From: "Blair Fraipont" Subject: Re: nuclear weapons NJC My friend Litza was telling me about a great professor she had at Sarah Lawrence. She told me that the professor told her something that stuck with her, "IN History, we have always eventually used the weapons that we have created, they never go untouched" It makes sense and it scares me thinking of the newer more powerful, pointless weapons that we and other countries have. When trying to argue about not having these type of weapons to some people I usually get the response, "What are WE going to do if they hit us? We HAVe to have the biggest for our defense..etc etc.." and "What! How can you be so unpatriotic!" SO if blowing up other countries because they lie in an "axis of evil" is patriotic, I want to move to Canada. These events sadden, frighten, anger me because initially, I felt that our retaliation to the Taliban was in the right direction, but as the lesson of what happens when power takes over, we just went over the edge with the "axis of evil" and becoming the sole fighters against terroism, when a year ago, we didnt care about fighting such cause... It is as if, the events unfurl and the possibility of "getting the bad guys opens up" and the politicians eyes get big and they drool and go head first without thinking.. Okay, I am proabably over reacting, and I must apologize, I am not a great political speaker and my thoughts are somewhat unorgainzed. Lastly, I was talking to a co-worker the other day and we were listening to NPR which eventually prompted him to say, "You know, its our goal to get rid of the bad guys, its called SUrvival". I didnt say anything.. because that to me isnt Survival at all.. To me the real survival will come if we are attacked because our country couldnt keep their private parts in their pants. The real survival will come when ocean waters rise and just THEN will the president be worried about the environment. I guess that what ticks me off the most, NO one thinks ahaed for the betterment of the human race. It is all about instant gratification. Blair If any of you want to respond and or angry about what I said you can always email me privately. Again, I am just frustrated and felt prompted by everyone's discussions to say my own piece. I had no intent to insult anyone, but if I did, please tell me. :) NP: Accidents will Happen, Elvis Costello > >to all concern, i don't care if your a communist, capitalist, socialist, >imperialist, democrat, or republican-----to advocate use of nuclear weapons >of >any yield is fucking INSANE! if history has taught us anything you build a >gun, the other side will build a better gun and sooner or later some >fanatic >will use one of those guns. >nuclear weapons will poison mother earth beyond our and our children's >children's lifetimes. you might as well believe in the "good fairy" if you >believe that a "clean" nuclear weapon exists. >we, the u.s.a. already have the most powerful military force ever seen on >this >earth. why do we need more? >i fought in the fields of nam and eventhough we had overwhelming fire >power-------we never killed the spirit of the north Vietnamese and you guys >know the rest of the story. >so it doesn't matter if bush, clinton, eisenhower, or whoever said it. THE >USE OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS WILL KILL US ALL. >if joni was on this list, i'm sure she would voice the same concerns. >thanks gene _________________________________________________________________ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 16:56:47 -0000 From: "Laurent Olszer" Subject: Joni poster of TTT Last year I purchased a promo poster of TTT album cover for $9.99. I don't know if they still have them but it's worth a try at: webmaster@turnabout-records.com item description: Taming the Tiger promo-A Beautiful Joni Self-Portrait, SKU: P63 Laurent ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 08:12:03 -0800 From: "Brenda" Subject: Re: Cover of "Passion Play" (NJC) On 14 Mar 2002 at 22:36, chiaroscuro@SNET.Net wrote: > I'm assuming Gail Anne Dorsey has a CD or two? > She has two, both of which are out of print. She is working on a new one now, but doesn't have a record deal. In the interview portion of the program she talks a bit about the challenge of being a working side musician while trying to write and record your own music. You can find the interview (and her some of her original songs) here: http://www.kcrw.org/cgi-bin/db/kcrw.pl?show_code=mb&tmplt_type=Program Brenda n.p.: Boz Scaggs - "I Just Go" ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 08:34:37 -0800 From: "Bree Mcdonough" Subject: Re: thanks julius njc Very sweet Mack. Have you ever been to Dollywood in the Smokies? A friend use to have a time-share down there.....so beautiful. She was also a big,big country music fan and loved Dolly in particular. Two of her favorites that she would play for me was... "Coat Of Many Colours" and "Candy Coated Christmas" CCC a bit corny,but sweet sentiment I have to admit. I just never let her know that. ;-) Take care, Bree > > >Tears flow, even now. Bittersweet, as I said. Dolly has never been >better. >K. McCord wrote those words, Dolly brought it to life. > >mack _________________________________________________________________ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 08:54:31 -0800 From: Gil Lamont Subject: Re: Robin Williams NJC Bree wrote: >Well,Robin Williams is just bursting with these creative juices/energy Robin Williams is "on" *all* the time. Well, almost. I had the amazing experience of dinner with Robin Williams many years ago. We (party of 6) ate at a restaurant in Sherman Oaks. My buddy Arthur put his face in his ice cream, he was laughing so hard at Robin's imitation of Gabby Hayes giving head to John Wayne. ("Put it here, Pilgrim!" cries Wayne.) On another occasion I shot a game of pool with Robin. He acted quite normal, actually, although his shtick was always just below the surface ready to spring forth. (It was a close game, but I think he won.) Gil ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 09:17:51 -0800 (PST) From: Alison E Subject: Re: Gorka is God NJC well, i could certainly atttest to this as well. i've been a HUGE john gorka fan forever. when i got my first very own guitar at the ripe old age of 16, the guy at the local music store gave me two tickets to see gorka live at a small club in salt lake. my mom and i went, and we were just blown away. it let me into the whole world of contemporary folk, christine lavin, patty larkin, david wilcox, and so on. it was an invaluable experience, and i will always love john gorka. its funny, because i was unpacking a box of old photo albums last night, and came across a picture of me grinning cheesily with john and christine lavin after a show at the bottom line in nyc, like 11 eleven years ago when i moved out there the first time. its a great picture, with christine lavin making this goofy face. on another note, i saw john gorka on the world trade center plaza, just a couple of weeks before the shit went down. lucy kaplansky opened up, and came out and sang with him later in the show. i was amazed at how a man can still move me to tears and laughter, just as you said kate, after having seen him a million times and knowing every song by heart. his live performances are just...incredible. and this was a very special one, a special memory. alison e. in slc. - --- Kate Bennett wrote: > Just got back from his show here in SB. He is coming > to McCabe's in LA this > Saturday night. Two shows. Don't miss him! > > As Rose & Gregg Cagno can attest he is one of the > greatest performers, > singer-songwriters out there. He doesn't tour that > much anymore. He had me > in tears one minute, laughing out loud the next. > > ******************************************** > Kate Bennett > www.katebennett.com > sponsored by Polysonics > Discover the Indies at Taylor Guitars: > http://www.taylorguitars.com/artists/awp/indies/bennett.html > ******************************************** Yahoo! Sports - live college hoops coverage http://sports.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 12:25:05 EST From: Reuben3rd@aol.com Subject: Re: Cover of "Passion Play" The best track for me from the B52's (fabulous) "Cosmic Thing" album was the last one...an instrumental called "Follow Your Bliss". Sara Lee is WONDERFUL on this song. Reuben In a message dated Fri, 15 Mar 2002 8:09:38 AM Eastern Standard Time, SCJoniGuy@aol.com writes: > maybe you're referring to Sara Lee, who played on their studio recordings. > Sara rules, she's also worked with Ani & got her first recognition with Gang > of Four, who had that great debut mentioned here a week or so ago. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 09:44:01 -0800 From: "Bree Mcdonough" Subject: Re: Robin Williams NJC >I had the amazing experience of dinner with Robin Williams many years ago. >We (party of 6) ate at a restaurant in Sherman Oaks. My buddy Arthur put >his face in his ice cream, he was laughing so hard at Robin's imitation of >Gabby Hayes giving head to John Wayne. ("Put it here, Pilgrim!" cries >Wayne.) Amazing I bet!!! Oh Shite, this is too funny!! I want to see his new movie, somebody mentioned in a post recently. Me thinks that you probably whipped his ass at pool......and you are just being humble. ;-) Bree >Gil _________________________________________________________________ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 10:03:12 -0800 (PST) From: Tyler Hewitt Subject: Bass Playing Women NJC The bassist for the B-52's name is Sara Lee. Before the B-52's she played with Gang of Four (she wasn't an original member-she first appeared, I think, on the Gang of Four's Songs of the Free lp). RE: Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 22:36:38 -0500 From: chiaroscuro@snet.net Subject: Re: Cover of "Passion Play" I find women who play the bass very interesting. The one who often stands out is Tina Weymouth from Talking Heads and Tom Tom Club. There was a woman who played bass for the B52's who was pretty cool too. I'm assuming Gail Anne Dorsey has a CD or two? Heather Yahoo! Sports - live college hoops coverage http://sports.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 10:06:49 -0800 From: "gene mock" Subject: Re: Alternative energy (NJC) we have to start sometime, how about now? then again, maybe the one's who are advocating the use of nuclear weapons know something we don't. like we're not going to last long enough to exhaust the worlds fossil fuels. if we can't big steps in the right direction let's start with baby steps. on a lighter note. dick clark has given the world a forum to settle one's differences-------------celebrity boxing. can you see the headliners? bush vs. osama, al qaida vs n.y.firefighters, arafat vs sharon, enron execs vs lower level enron employees-------the list can go on and on. and no collateral damage. as john lennon said, "IMAGINE." take care gene - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kakki" To: "Kate Bennett" ; Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 1:42 AM Subject: Re: Alternative energy (NJC) > Kate wrote: > > > I don't buy this argument. To whom is it expensive? Alternative > technologies > > have been around for a very long time. The oil companies have a huge stake > > in the status quo. The longterm price for not allowing the development of > > alternative energy will be very expensive & not just in terms of money. > > I said it was expensive to convert not to develop and was thinking of power > generation for electricity, etc. That is not an argument but a fact. I'm > all for it but people should be realistic and consider the cost and not > think it can just happen immediately overnight seamlessly. Think about > converting over all the present generating facilities throughout the U.S. > that now operate on fossil fuels. I don't have the engineering expertise to > elaborate on all the technical aspects of it but it is a major "re-tooling" > operation for each plant. And despite everything, most alternative plants > still require a certain degree of oil in order to run. In California alone > it cost tens and hundreds of millions of dollars for many plants for which > the investors were then given free reign to recoup on the backs of the > people through wildly out of control charges. The example set in California > has turned off a lot of other states who were considering mandating > alternative energy generation. For years the people who have certain > technology, such as for home solar generators, have charged an enormous > amount for installation and maintenance of the units. Either the conversion > technology/engineering has to become a lot more cost effective or some > financial geniuses need to figure a better way to fund it. Nonetheless, > I've heard many in the federal government and the Bush administration > advocating moving forward towards alternatives. > > Kakki ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 10:23:31 -0800 From: "Kate Bennett" Subject: RE: Alternative energy (NJC) Hi Kakki, I appreciate your thoughts on this, its just that I don't agree with you. I am sure some of my anger seeps through regarding this issue so I just want to be clear that this isn't aimed at you personally at all. I believe we could & should have been converting decades ago & I also believe that the money is always there for whatever is considered a priority. There has been a short sightedness, a status quo- ness that have kept things as they are. If alternative energy truly was a priority we'd be up & running with it by now. There has been money to help the auto industry when needed, money for space exploration, etc. The money is there, the technology is there but the mindset has not been there. I do see that things are slooooowly creeping towards alternative energy but imo, its been a long time coming.... ******************************************** Kate Bennett www.katebennett.com sponsored by Polysonics Discover the Indies at Taylor Guitars: http://www.taylorguitars.com/artists/awp/indies/bennett.html ******************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 10:52:29 -0800 From: "Bree Mcdonough" Subject: Re: Me too!, njc >America is the the most beautiful country I have ever visited,(at least >the states i was in-VT, NYS, Maine and NH and CT) and I have visted >about 30 countries. > Well Colin.. when you come back you must visit the south and the west. My favorite states in no particular order are:Kentucky,Tennessee,Arizona,Nevada,California,Colorado. Kentucky is a definite because it is close to my heart. And of course Ky has one of the seven (natural)wonders of the world:Mammoth Cave. Oh and so much more!! You have the Lexington area when at times the grass really does look blue and time does really seem to have stood still. And you can see the horses grazing and running knowing there are potential Kentucky Derby winners behind those white wooden fences. And in the distant you can see these beautiful estates that resemble Tara. Also,Ky has more natural lakes than any other state. In the capital, Frankfort, where I visited many times as a child (my aunt and uncle lived there along with their seven daughters)you have Civil War museums. IF you travel into Frankfort the old state route and not the highway you can see the stone walls that the slaves built with their blood,sweat and tears. Quite a place to stop and reflect. Daniel Boone and wife,Rebecca, are buried high up in a cemetery that overlooks the capitol and Ky river. Quite Picturesque! (great place to picnic) Oh yeah!! The place smells of whiskey......Kentucky bourbon that is. There are several distilleries right outside of town. I'll leave it here. How many years ago were you in the states? Any surprises? Or were things just as you thought they would be? Bree _________________________________________________________________ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 14:20:57 -0500 (EST) From: w evans Subject: Re: Bush NJC > Speaking of Bush, I about did a Danny Thomas coffee take this AM when I read in the paper that Dubya is not going to recognize Mr. Mugabe, the President of Zimbabwe, because the ELECTION WAS FLAWED!!!! > > GEORGE BUSH?? Not acknowledging an elected official because **their** election was flawed???? As Paul Simon would say..."who do you think you're fooling?" > > Luckily I didn't have a mouthful of java, because I was laughing so hard I almost coughed up a lung. This is the second time in the last few days someone's said something like this (and I'm not attributing the quotes because I happen to like the posters very much and don't want any debating to get personal) and if it were still Dec-00 or Jan-01 I could see saying this, but last summer there were multiple reports about recounts, including one in the New York Times (hardly a big supporter of the GOP) declaring that under every conceivable recount scenario in Florida Bush would have wound up with the most votes, regardless of what the Supreme Court decided. (and no, I am not a Republican) There aren't any facts left under which to claim that anyone stole the election--- a year ago, maybe, but not now. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 14:26:00 -0500 (EST) From: w evans Subject: Re: JMDL Digest V2002 #114 > << It's chilling enough to see the broken New York skyline as it > is today without the memory of this horrible attack lighting up the skies > over lower Manhattan for decades to come. >> We need that memory to be reinforced as often as possible in order to maintain our resolve to prevent this sort of thing from ever happening again. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 14:53:16 EST From: SCJoniGuy@aol.com Subject: Re: Bush NJC << There aren't any facts left under which to claim that anyone stole the election--- a year ago, maybe, but not now. >> Which is cool, because I didn't claim that anybody stole anything. But it would take a true ostrich with head totally in sand to say the election wasn't *flawed*. That was what got me chortling. Don't worry about me taking any of this personally, Ken. I don't. Bob NP: Ryan Adams, "Mara Lisa" (how can EVERY song this dude writes be so good?) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 13:07:28 -0800 (PST) From: Alison E Subject: Re: nuclear weapons NJC and for those of you who didn't know before, julius has just blown his cover for his real job, CIA special tactics nuclear expert. nice job, fucko. you're fired. love, alison e. in slc (and no, i don't work for the government, as far as YOU know...) - --- Julius Raymond wrote: > The fact is that the U.S. has poured trillions into > developing the nuclear > missile program. It seems to me that the only sane > way to garner any kind > of return on investment is to rattle the nuclear > saber every now and then as > a deterrent to those rogue governments would who > threaten to use weapons of > mass destruction, be they chemical, biological, > radiological or nuclear > against us. > > It's as if the Bush administration is saying, if you > anthrax/small pox us, > nerve gas us, or explode a dirty bomb in, say, L.A. > and force us to evacuate > a vital urban area for possibly hundreds of years, > it may well be that the > next sound you hear will be the shrill whistle of > incoming nuclear warheads > over Baghdad. Don't fuck with us. You've been > warned. > > God forbid we should ever actually launch though. > > By the way, a distinction should be made between > those "suitcase nuclear > bombs" and so called "dirty bombs." The suitcase > bombs do exist, but it > takes a helluva lot of special nuclear material > (plutonium) to make one, and > that shit is not easy to come by. Plus, the mere > handling of that type of > material would kill any would-be user from exposure > pretty quickly if > they're not really, really careful. The mechanisms > in these devices are > intricate and volatile. You'd have to know exactly > what you're doing to use > one "successfully." But they would cause a > devastating nuclear fission > explosion if detonated. Some that were made in the > former Soviet Union are > known to be missing. Scary. > > On the other hand, a dirty bomb is more likely to be > used by a terrorist > organization. These types of devices can be any > manner of explosive, like a > few sticks of dynamite, bundled with cheap, > relatively stable and more > easily obtainable radioactive isotopes, like cesium, > americium or cobalt. > The idea is to widely disperse the radioactive > material with the explosive > and spread terror and fear. No one dies immediately > unless you're at ground > zero and are done in by the explosion, but you'd > have to evacuate the entire > area for many, many years due to the elevated risk > of thyroid cancer to the > populace over time. Obviously, such a scenario > would be devastating to the > economy, not to mention the fear factor and panic > that would ensue. > Attempting something like this is more in keeping > with the modus operandi of > terrorist organizations like al Qaeda. > > -Julius > > > > gene mock wrote: > > > > > to all concern, i don't care if your a > communist, capitalist, socialist, > > > imperialist, democrat, or republican-----to > advocate use of nuclear > weapons of > > > any yield is fucking INSANE! > > > > I think the capitalized words much describe the > Pentagon planning under > > Rumsfeld, and as well captures the essense of this > entire administration. > > > > Not since the days of Barry Goldwater advocating > the use of nuclear bombs > in > > Vietnam has there been such an asinine comment , > other than Reagan's > advocating > > the possibility of the same ("low yield" nuclear > weapons) in Europe back > in what, > > 1982? Every 20 years the horrid spectre of > nuclear weapons use is raised > in this > > country and we wonder why the rest of the world > looks at us as crazed. > > > > (the Rev) Vince Yahoo! Sports - live college hoops coverage http://sports.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ End of JMDL Digest V2002 #116 ***************************** ------- 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?