From: les@jmdl.com (JMDL Digest) To: joni-digest@smoe.org Subject: JMDL Digest V2002 #478 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 Sunday, November 10 2002 Volume 2002 : Number 478 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: remembering (again) now njc [TerryM2222@aol.com] RE: Oil/war (njc) (pc) ["Kate Bennett" ] Cowbells, Madonna, Influence ["Kate Bennett" ] RE: Oil/war (njc) (pc) ["Victor Johnson" ] Re: Fw: Oil/war (njc) (pc) [Susan Guzzi ] quickie on motor city NJC [Yael Harlap ] Re: P. Gabriel interview on BBC2 Oct. 16th 2002 - Joni mention ["Music Is] Re: Joni, "an original" ["Mark or Travis" ] Re: Joni, "an original" [SCJoniGuy@aol.com] Re: Evian's trip down memory lane NJC [SCJoniGuy@aol.com] Re: Joni, "an original" [SCJoniGuy@aol.com] RE: Joni, "an original [Jenny Goodspeed ] Re: Evian's trip down memory lane NJC [SCJoniGuy@aol.com] re: out original visual concept-sjc ["Bree Mcdonough" ] Re: Joni, "an original" [SCJoniGuy@aol.com] joni & sting ["Kate Bennett" ] Re: Oil/war (njc) (pc) ["Kate Bennett" ] welfare stuff njc ["Kate Bennett" ] Re: Travelogue question (again) [TerryM2222@aol.com] Re: Joni, "an original" [Murphycopy@aol.com] Re: Oil/war/UN resolution (njc) (pc) [ewwt@juno.com] njm pc [Franklin Shea ] Re: Oil/war (njc) (pc) ["kakki" ] Re: Oil/war/UN resolution (njc) (pc) ["kakki" ] Re: Oil/war (njc) (pc) ["Bree Mcdonough" ] Nonesuch.com site: What the hell ? NJC ["Jim L'Hommedieu \(Lama\)" Susan Chalomer and La Vierge de Huile bring back such memories! Any one > have > contact with these former JMDLers? ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 08:55:38 -0800 From: "Kate Bennett" Subject: RE: Oil/war (njc) (pc) kakki >>Sorry if I misread you. It didn't seem general when you followed it with the next sentence which seems like you were saying Bush and Cheney are so motivated<< yes, it was general in the sense that i think most wealthy folk of a certain age are motivated towards other things than accumulation of more money- perhaps a legacy of some kind, or power of some kind...it is an individual thing...& i would not exclude gwb or cheney from this idea as they are human beings...i don't claim to know who either of them are really (on the inside) & so my thought was that reading their bios might clarify what their motivations are...i was tying to ideas together based on a post from anne & a post from you...i hope this is clearer... kakki >>Maybe I am reacting too much and reading too much into it all but this seems to follow along the U.S.'s equivalency with terrorists statements made here a number of times. I do see a difference between the U.S. conducts itself on many levels and the way that terrorists conduct themselves. I see now that you are including both political parties in the equation as far as the problem and the solution. I apologize if you have included other political parties before as having accountability.<< apology accepted my friend... i have a strong philisophical bent...i can usually see the similarities of human nature regardless of the culture & in order for us (humans) to create solutions i believe that we (humans) must work harder at understanding each other on the cultural level in order to come to accept that we (humans) are all truly more similar than different...this is just the way i see the world... also what i see is that it is always the young who are sent to fight the wars & often those who fight believe that their side is right & that the other side is wrong & they can justify it...both believe in an enemy that they perceive to be so different when really they are more similar than not...both sides demonize the other side which makes it easier to go & kill them ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 08:55:45 -0800 From: "Kate Bennett" Subject: Cowbells, Madonna, Influence >>but Joni is only ragging on Madonna because Joni envious of Madonna's commercial success. True, Madonna is only modestly talented<< from what i understand about joni's views over the years it doesn't seem like she'd rag on anyone out of envy over their commercial success...more likely it is because of the fact that someone can have commercial success when they are modestly talented... ******************************************** Kate Bennett: www.katebennett.com Sponsored by Polysonics/Atlantis Sound Labs Over the Moon- "bringing the melancholy world of twilight to life almost like magic" All Music Guide ******************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 12:5:14 -0800 From: "Victor Johnson" Subject: RE: Oil/war (njc) (pc) > also what i see is that it is always the young who are sent to fight the > wars & often those who fight believe that their side is right & that the > other side is wrong & they can justify it.. I was reading something that was comparing modern day war to ancient civilizations who sacrificed young humans to appease/please the gods. It really seems like the same mindset exists today in those who are so eager to send these young people off to war...you immediately think of the ancient people as barbaric but for some reason that same association is not made so easily to leaders today...but I don't see that its so different... Victor - --- Victor Johnson - --- waytoblu@mindspring.com Visit http://www.cdbaby.com/victorjohnson Look for the new album "Parsonage Lane" in March 2003 Produced by Chris Rosser at Hollow Reed Studios ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 09:31:42 -0800 (PST) From: Susan Guzzi Subject: Re: Fw: Oil/war (njc) (pc) Sweet Colin, I wish I could add something to your right-on statement here but this is just perfect - thank you! PEACE! Susan - --- colin wrote: > War does not determine who is right but who is left. U2 on LAUNCH - Exclusive greatest hits videos http://launch.yahoo.com/u2 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 12:45:07 -0500 From: Yael Harlap Subject: quickie on motor city NJC Bobsart said. about Detroit: > I think Joni has been there, done that, and does not need to get mugged. :-) > Maybe there are other places less dangerous that would help her get her > creative juices flowing again. i've said it before and i'll say it again... detroit is a cool city! it has problems, serious problems - as do many cities - but imho the fear factor re detroit has none too little to do with the fact that it is the Blackest city in the nation. just consider that, go see michael moore's bowling for columbine, and read william upski wimsatt's 'no more prisons' or 'bomb the suburbs' (he's talking grafitti not nukes). peace out, yael ps: maybe i'll do a little santa barbara joni tribute report but for now i think i'll just catch up on joni digests, give props to detroit, shower, and try not to be sad that i am no longer in california. no matter what props i give to motown, i'd rather be in LA. NP: kate bennett - over the moon ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 11:53:51 -0600 From: "Music Is Special" Subject: Re: P. Gabriel interview on BBC2 Oct. 16th 2002 - Joni mention Interesting comments about all the musicians complaining about being dropped once past 50. I do not disagree. But, it should be noted that they aren't really being treated much differently than most other people on the planet. Increasingly nobody over 50 gets jobs that fully utilize their abilities. The age 65 retirement thing is a myth in that downgrading starts much sooner now despite the rise in lifespans eric ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 10:11:13 -0800 From: "Mark or Travis" Subject: Re: Joni, "an original" > << when is an artist ground breaking - when an artist truly comes up with > something new or combines influences in a way that has never been done > before? >> > > I think this happened when Joni heard the Dylan song that made her realize > that lyrics could be about anything. (I forget what song it was, but someone > will know.) This lead to her "confessional" period, which was terrific, and > then she was off and running . . . out-writing and out-composing everyone, in > my opinion, for many years. > I think Murphy hit the nail right on the head. My take on it is that until Joni came along, you had Dylan, Leonard Cohen, Paul Simon and a few others who were writing songs with lyrics that were approaching the level of poetry in their depth and quality. In my mind, Dylan was lauded mostly because his songs dealt with social issues. Cohen & Simon's writing was more personal and in some cases, interesting musically but not particularly daring or innovative. Then along comes Joni. Her lyrics are personal, poetic, beautifully descriptive, complex and precise. Added to that, she is writing melodies that the others have not begun to approach in their intricacy and beauty. Plus the lyrics and melody fit together in such a way that one is the perfect expression of the other. She pushed the boundaries of pop music from the very start both lyrically and musically. She continued to develop and then in 1975 she released 'The Hissing of Summer Lawns' and almost left the realm of pop music completely, imo. There may have been other artists who had combined pop & jazz before her, but I have never heard it done in quite the same way. And lyrically she put herself in a class by herself with that album. The poetic imagery, the analytical depth and the intelligence of those lyrics set a standard that few could aspire to then or now. The amazing part is that she kept going and continues to amaze me to this day. Mark E Marcus Aurelius in Seattle ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 13:20:33 EST From: SCJoniGuy@aol.com Subject: Re: Joni, "an original" In a message dated 11/10/2002 9:35:45 AM Eastern Standard Time, jrgoodspeed@yahoo.com writes: > Specifically - when do you think Joni broke some ground? And what was her > contribution - lyrical...musical. Well, I may not be the right one to answer, as I didn't really pick up on Joni until C&S, but having listened to her complete works now for awhile and being able to trace the sequence, I would say that her composing in unique tunings was ground-breaking. Not that she was the first one to do it, but that she ONLY wrote in alternates...created such different sounding chord shapes & patterns! Even looking back to when "Help Me" came out on the radio, it was SO unique and fresh-sounding. Also the way she multi-tracked her own vocals; again she didn't invent it but it was the first time I remember hearing it. Her approach to playing the piano also sounds 'groundbreaking' to me - not being a musician I can't say why, it might just be her chordal combinations. Her sampling of and inclusion of world music in her work - certainly a tired cliche now but remember when you heard "Jungle Line" for the first time? Then of course there are the words. She came right out of the block writing in her own blood..."I had a king in a tenement castle..." This was obviously autobigraphical, BUT it was so genuine, so purely real that it became universal - something we could all relate to. And the images she stirs up with her words...also groundbreaking I think. Nary a cliche to be found (which is probably why "one big boo hoo" resonates so awkwardly with some of us). Additionally, her vocabulary, imagery, & metaphor are unprecedented, Dylan notwithstanding. And her business sense is also groundbreaking in her way...firstly she retained total control over her publishing; rarely if ever done from what I understand. And career-wise, where contemporaries find a commercial niche and stay there (and nothing wrong with doing so), Joni constantly turns her back on commerciality, reinventing herself and following her own direction instead, confusing the industry & her casual fanbase, and even confounding most of the hardcores like us! Again, I don't know that she is the FIRST to do any of these, I can only say that she is the BEST. Bob ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 13:22:03 EST From: SCJoniGuy@aol.com Subject: Re: Evian's trip down memory lane NJC In a message dated 11/10/2002 9:40:40 AM Eastern Standard Time, revrvl@chartermi.net writes: > Interesting the Bob Muller is the first and or only one to remember the > hooker > links... > Hey, if someone adverts a website, I'll go check it out. Some are forgettable, but HERS I remember! ;~) Bob ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 13:23:12 EST From: SCJoniGuy@aol.com Subject: Re: Joni, "an original" In a message dated 11/10/2002 9:49:33 AM Eastern Standard Time, Murphycopy@aol.com writes: > I think this happened when Joni heard the Dylan song that made her realize > that lyrics could be about anything. (I forget what song it was, but > someone > will know.) Positively 4th Street, when she heard the line "You've got a lotta nerve, to say that you're my friend..." Bob ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 10:26:38 -0800 (PST) From: Jenny Goodspeed Subject: RE: Joni, "an original Yes! In fact, that is one of the reasons I'm pondering this stuff because I was struck by the similarity between STAS and Five Leaves Left. They both use unusual open tunings and chord progressions and especially Nick - unconventional finger picking. Also Bruce C.'s first album came out close to these two also showcasing stellar though more blues-based open-tunings finger pickin'. So I'm wondering, what was in the water these guys were drinking at the time? i.e., who were the predecessors, if any? Dylan, Cohen, blues? Jenny U2 on LAUNCH - Exclusive medley & videos from Greatest Hits CD ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 13:26:28 EST From: SCJoniGuy@aol.com Subject: Re: Evian's trip down memory lane NJC In a message dated 11/10/2002 10:03:01 AM Eastern Standard Time, Murphycopy writes: > http://www.mullerhookers.com Speaking of bogus websites & memories, remember when the newbie asked for links to help her in the music business, Marcel responded with a string of obviously bogus links like www.sell-your-soul-to-a-lawyer.com, she thought he was serious and came back madder than a wet hen? Jeez, I thought I'd split a gut. Bob NPIMH, "We'll have these moments to remember..." ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 13:27:03 -0500 From: "Bree Mcdonough" Subject: re: out original visual concept-sjc >I remember hearing Eric Carmen of the Raspberries on the AM radio when I >was probably in the 2nd or 3rd grade. After hearing his voice, I fell in >(puppy)love with this man. I pictured him as being incredibly sexy and >good-looking. I have no idea why. Even to this day, I do not know what the >man looks like nor have I purchased any albums either. (sounds a little >dated in my head now). You pictured him correctly, Mia. He is the sensual and the quite type.... A cutie...I could switch for him! Not drop- dead gorgeous...but something about him... Nice chops too! Bree >Mia > > >_________________________________________________________________ >The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE* >http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail _________________________________________________________________ MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 10:31:48 -0800 From: "Brenda" Subject: Re: Travelogue question (again)/Grammy (NJC) On 8 Nov 2002 at 23:50, Victor Johnson wrote: > > You're right Jimmy, it won't be eligible for a Grammy until 2004. I > > don't know if that's true, but at least now you have a resonse! :~) > > I think if the proper paperwork was already filled out and sent to > NARAS in advance then it may indeed be eligible for the coming grammy > awards. But I don't know if that is the case or when the deadline is. > You can actually get by with getting the entry forms in late, but the release has to make the September 30th cutoff. I've seen two instances where a record was even released early (shipping a small number of copies) to make the cutoff but the real release happened a few weeks later. B - -------------------------------------------- "Radio has no future" - Lord Kelvin, 1897 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 11:01:00 -0800 (PST) From: Jenny Goodspeed Subject: Re: Joni, "an original" You know it just dawned on me today that I can't distinguish between the two Bobs in an email by referring to one of them as Bob M. Geez can't you guys do something about this? You're so right BOB who does not channel Ethel, - maybe not the first, but the *best*, I like that. She raised the bar sky high. I'm reminded of a quote by Tom Petty, when an interviewer asked him about how he wrote lyrics, what he does when he struggles with a line, and he replied, "It's only rock 'n' roll. It's not supposed to be *that* good" With her work, Joni made a statement, it *can* be that good and isn't it great when it is? (As a non-genius songwriter myself, however, I prefer Petty's quote). I had been seeing every record up until Hejira as incredibly creative and beautiful and original, but not necessarily ground-breaking. Well, in the realm of pop music, she was original out of the gate, but sometimes the way Joni talks, it's as if she invented a whole new kind of music, not just in the realm of pop. But when I heard Hejira - it was a new sound. Actually, it wasn't it! I had spent a few years collecting Windham Hill samplers just before that and when I heard the timeless Hejira, it was like oh wow -not that she'd be proud - but I think Hejira spawned the genre of new age music! Her and Jaco I should say. Thanks for your thoughts - and I am anxious to other's opinions. Jenny SCJoniGuy@aol.com wrote:In a message dated 11/10/2002 9:35:45 AM Eastern Standard Time, jrgoodspeed@yahoo.com writes: > Specifically - when do you think Joni broke some ground? And what was her > contribution - lyrical...musical. Well, I may not be the right one to answer, as I didn't really pick up on Joni until C&S, but having listened to her complete works now for awhile and being able to trace the sequence, I would say that her composing in unique tunings was ground-breaking. Not that she was the first one to do it, but that she ONLY wrote in alternates...created such different sounding chord shapes & patterns! Even looking back to when "Help Me" came out on the radio, it was SO unique and fresh-sounding. Also the way she multi-tracked her own vocals; again she didn't invent it but it was the first time I remember hearing it. Her approach to playing the piano also sounds 'groundbreaking' to me - not being a musician I can't say why, it might just be her chordal combinations. Her sampling of and inclusion of world music in her work - certainly a tired cliche now but remember when you heard "Jungle Line" for the first time? Then of course there are the words. She came right out of the block writing in her own blood..."I had a king in a tenement castle..." This was obviously autobigraphical, BUT it was so genuine, so purely real that it became universal - something we could all relate to. And the images she stirs up with her words...also groundbreaking I think. Nary a cliche to be found (which is probably why "one big boo hoo" resonates so awkwardly with some of us). Additionally, her vocabulary, imagery, & metaphor are unprecedented, Dylan notwithstanding. And her business sense is also groundbreaking in her way...firstly she retained total control over her publishing; rarely if ever done from what I understand. And career-wise, where contemporaries find a commercial niche and stay there (and nothing wrong with doing so), Joni constantly turns her back on commerciality, reinventing herself and following her own direction instead, confusing the industry & her casual fanbase, and even confounding most of the hardcores like us! Again, I don't know that she is the FIRST to do any of these, I can only say that she is the BEST. Bob U2 on LAUNCH - Exclusive medley & videos from Greatest Hits CD ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 14:15:03 EST From: SCJoniGuy@aol.com Subject: Re: Joni, "an original" In a message dated 11/10/2002 2:01:16 PM Eastern Standard Time, jrgoodspeed@yahoo.com writes: > You know it just dawned on me today that I can't distinguish between the two > Bobs in an email by referring to one of them as Bob M. Geez can't you guys > do something about this? > > OK, from now on I'm going to go by "Victor"! :~) ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 11:53:31 -0800 From: "Kate Bennett" Subject: joni & sting sting has acknowledged joni's influence on his music (ladies of the canyon in particular) & joni has acknowledged stings (police era) music on her music ******************************************** Kate Bennett: www.katebennett.com Sponsored by Polysonics/Atlantis Sound Labs Over the Moon- "bringing the melancholy world of twilight to life almost like magic" All Music Guide ******************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 11:53:30 -0800 From: "Kate Bennett" Subject: Re: Oil/war (njc) (pc) anne >>but we could have taken that first small step towards inclusion and understanding. We didn't.<< kakki < Subject: welfare stuff njc >>I understand that you would have a more intricate take on this whole welfare and irresponsible parenting issue because of your line of work. I wonder if you, as someone who works with people in need of welfare, realize when certain individuals are using the system.<< of course i do, people in all walks of life at all levels of income are using the system to their benefit at the expense of taxpayers & hard working people...i get tired of people dismissing the welfare system as one place that is so rife with fraud...if you want to take on fraud, i suggest there are other places where much more money being misapprpriated... btw, will the following paragraph is NOT aimed at you in particular but you brought up a topic that i am now adding my 2 cents to, okay? so don't take it as a personal attack...if the shoe doesn't fit, then just don't wear it... it is easy for some to take on the poor because, well they are poor...why not criticize those who are wealthy who are committing fraud?...perhaps because its more difficult & dangerous? ... is there a word to use, like sexism or racism or homophobia that can be used to describe a prejudice some have towards the poor? there can be an insidious ignorance & prejudice among many educated, hardworking & successful people when they talk about those who are on welfare, homeless, etc. btw, there have been massive changes to the welfare system over the past 3 or so years...i don't know how much overall budget cuts this has created & i'm pretty sure the system works in all states pretty much the way it works in this state (california)...i'm no longer working with all the details of this complex system but i remain on a committee (with some of our towns most wonderful philanthropists) that raises extra funds to help single parents who are working really really hard to get out of the system...these funds are neccessary because the social service funds they receive just don't add up to enough for them to have & roof, food, transportation, childcare & the cost of education...so that they can climb out of the poverty level that makes them relay on welfare in the first place...there is now a requirement of working/education hours, in order for someone to receive welfare funds in this country...& welfare is only available to an individual for about 2 years...in that time it is expected that the single parent will be able to join the workforce... i have been very much in support of the incentives & requirements for those receiving welfare to be going to school to earn a skill so that they can have a good career...however, the system is highly flawed & was designed by people who have no clue as to the realities of what it takes to get off the system...i could go on, but i think i've made my point...btw, in the past, i have seen how the fraud division works quite well, they are pretty on top of things to the point of bringing in & questioning someone who is not being fraudulent at all... btw, if anyone has seen Bowling for Columbine, there is one incident that touches on the flaws of how this reformed welfare system is actually working in reality...i highly recommend this movie to everyone... >>Let me add that there are a lot of people that would not be having such a difficult time with job losses if they did not overextend themselves while they had a job. A lot(not all) of Americans are very big on overextending themselves with expensive toys instead of saving their money for an emergency.<<< the above statement shows little understanding of the fact that their are a vast number of people who live from paycheck to paycheck...who have never had the kind of income to allow them to buy expensive toys... >>My aim is to those that plan to make a living off of living on welfare. Some families have been doing this for generations.<< you need to educate yourself as to how the welfare system is currently working...i've given you some basic understanding of how different things are now, i'd encourage you to learn more... >I assume your cold and cruel comment was specifically towards castrating sex offenders and murderers(or maybe I'm not quite sure what that was in reference to since I think it was a general oneliner type of reply).< yes it was both of your comments regarding sterilization or castration that triggered my cold & cruel comment... i stated my reasons but you have missed this point as well- i'll say it again- our judicial system is very flawed (well human's are flawed)...innocent people can & have been accused & convicted of things they did not do...i do not believe in such harsh actions as you have proposed because i want to defend the guilty...it is my intention to protect those who may be innocent (& wrongly charged)..clear? >>As to this thread, I'm tired already. It is very difficult to get people to see a point clearly through a medium such as this one.<<< yes it is, but the challenges others make when we state our views here can be very helpful in learning how to express ourselves more clearly...& if we are willing, to sometimes even rethink some of our beliefs...life is for learning... ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 14:56:29 EST From: TerryM2222@aol.com Subject: Re: Travelogue question (again) In a message dated 11/9/2002 11:59:31 PM Eastern Standard Time, evian@sk.sympatico.ca writes: > > > Dr. SigMondegreen ; ) > > Terry www.addconsults.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 15:08:27 EST From: Murphycopy@aol.com Subject: Re: Joni, "an original" The other Bob writes: << OK, from now on I'm going to go by "Victor"! :~) >> And I'll be Ashara! --Ashara ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 15:10:13 -0500 From: ewwt@juno.com Subject: Re: Oil/war/UN resolution (njc) (pc) "kakki" wrote: << I don't think people are not afraid of the consequences of bombing Iraq. I think most everyone is scared s***less. The million dollar question is what happens if we don't try to stop him soon. >> What really gets me about all of this is the fact that Reagan/Bush sold Iraq scores of deadly biological agents during the 1980s, including histoplasma capsulatum ~ a substance that resembles tuberculosis and influenza, causing enlargement of the liver and spleen and can also infect the brain, lungs, heart and spinal column. Senate testimony confirmed that Iraq received at least 72 U.S. shipments of clones, germs and chemicals ranging from substances that could destroy crops, give children and animals the bone-deforming disease rickets, to a nerve gas rated a million times more lethal than Sarin! This reminds me of a joke: A guy walks into his favorite bar and sees two familiar faces in the corner booth. He asks the bartender, "Isn't that President Bush and Secretary of State Powell sitting over there?" The bartender says, "Yep, that's them." So the guy walks over and says, "Wow, this is a real honor. What are you guys doing in here?" Bush says, "We're planning World War Three." And the guy says, "Really? What's going to happen?" Bush says, "Well, we're going to kill 25 and a half million Iraqis and one beautiful blonde with big boobs." Powell nods in agreement. The guy exclaimed, "A beautiful blonde with big boobs?! Why would we have to kill a beautiful blonde with big boobs?" Bush turns to Powell, punches him on the shoulder and says, "See? I told you no one would worry about the 25 and half million Iraqis!" ET ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 14:13:21 -0600 From: Franklin Shea Subject: njm pc >JMDL Digest Sunday, November 10 2002 Volume 2002 : Number 476 > > > >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: Oil/war (njc) (pc) ["kakki" ] > Re: Oil/war (njc) (pc) [colin ] > [none] [Franklin Shea ] > Fw: Fw: The art of misreading. NJC ["kasey simpson" Content [Franklin Shea ] > Re: Fw: Fw: The art of misreading. NJC [colin ] > Meriwether Lewis(NJC) ["Darice(darice@mindspring.com)" Grammy cut off date [KLCass21@aol.com] > Re: njc 8 Mile [TerryM2222@aol.com] > Re: Oil/war/UN resolution (njc) (pc) ["kakki" ] > Re: Madonna, Eminem NJC ["mack watson-bush" ] > Re: Oil/war (njc) (pc) ["kakki" ] > DED njc ["mack watson-bush" ] > No messin' ["William" ] > Requesting help from Joni fans... [Jesika Nisly ] > Re: NJC - What do Bush and Madonna have in common? ["kakki" RE: Travelogue question (again) [Rob Procyk & Tracy Tolley Evian takes us down the memory trail [vince ] > Re: Travelogue question (again) ["Mark or Travis" ] > Re: Oil/war (njc) (pc) ["kakki" ] > ouch! njc ["Jim L'Hommedieu \(Lama\)" ] > Re: Evian takes us down the memory trail - njc [Murphycopy@aol.com] > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >Date: Sat, 9 Nov 2002 14:13:02 -0800 >From: "kakki" >Subject: Re: Oil/war (njc) (pc) > >Jenny wrote: > >> A couple more thoughts: >> I think the humanitarian argument for initiating a war doesn't fly because >it is selective. If we were driven by this, >then we would intervene far >more often in the world than we do. kakki wrote: >It's a matter of numbers and resources - more people and countries, >including the U.S,. are in direct immediate danger from Saddam at this time. >If he can be stopped, it is ultimately a humanitarian "win" and may possibly >make other despots around the world think twice. Franklin responds: Come on kakki! Us being in immediate danger of Saddam Insane is about as plausible as Mike Tyson being in immediate danger of a grade school bully. And as far as humanitarian wins, the U.S. regime is incapable of honoring the word "humanitarian". How many innocent Iraqi citizens, children have died, starved - sure partly because of Saddam, but they can't get the medical supplies (funny, you'd think the wacky "scientists" over there could plagiarize our medicines if they are so talented at making those BIG BAD BOMBS they "supposedly" have, specifically aimed right at your (OUR) living room TV entertainment centers. Now that's enough to get any ignorant, self-indulgent, "scared" (of what, I might rhetorically ask) plebeian riled to the rafters. BTW, I heard they were thinking of bombing the main Budweizer, Miller, Pabst, Coors and Schlitz breweries simultaneously, but quickly realized after closer evaluation that this would most assuredly cause WORLD WAR III, faster than a major drug-riddled, bimbo-boinking, back-slapping O.J. bash gets thrown after a double murder acquittal by a jury composed of shear rabble!!! > >kakki writes: > >That was back when Iran was attacking U.S. citizens and avowing itself as an >enemy of the U.S.. Not to say it wasn't completely boneheaded to have been >so quick to support Saddam. I think the reasoning at the time was to let >both of them focus on each other rather than other countries. I've seen >this question and heard it answered that the U.S. was also an ally of Stalin >in WWII but then that all changed very quickly after that war as we all >know. Franklin responds: kakki, kakki. The entire Iraq/Iran war was a military industrial boondoogle which made hundreds and hundreds of billions for the SFGBC (Shadow fascist government billionaire's club). After all, we had kept the dictator - Mr. Shah of Iran in power by selling him all the military hardware his oil bank accounts could handle (hmmmm, seems he hi-tailed it out of there with, what was it, 25 Billion in pocket change before the I-A-TOl-a-So arrived on with his camel caravan. So he did keep a little "pocket" change set aside for rainy days and unforseen emergencies, like losing your DICTATOR job. Gotta have something stored back to keep the kids in AMERICAN colleges - you know how much THAT costs.) Anyway, the diabolically brilliant SFGBC supplied both sides, ala the non-copyrighted Rothschild philosophy that worked for so many centuries - PROXY. You know, one party supplying both combatants with the weapons to destroy each other. The Rothschild's did that with enormous, gargantuan financial success in Europe for centuries. There's PLATINUM in them thar' hills. It is the surest, most dependable bet in town. Just got to keep fomenting em' up. Bless the CIA stooges, er, I mean "operatives". Just what would we do without them? BTW - are you aware that the bullets in the AK-47's used by the NVA in Vietnam to kill our kin were sold to them by the trainload from a manufacturing plant in Czechoslovakia owned by - you guessed it - the SFGBC. Pure proxy, pure proxy, supplying both sides in the age old tradition. >kakki writes: > >I'm still waiting for someone to explain how not trying to stop him will >make us safer. If we don't do anything and are attacked in the U.S. with >anthrax and smallpox and dirty nukes, which they probably already have in >place here, then what do we say? I know a lot of people will say it's all >Bush's fault, either way. That will make some people happy because they can >feel they were right all along but what a pyrrhic victory for them. What >suggestions do you have to stop the threat? I don't mean that facetiously >but it seems no one has any better ideas. Franklin responds: What threat? Do you mean the threat of the "Cheney/Bush" Regime assaulting Iraqi with a few hundred thousand troops, and a few hundred billion bucks worth of perfected murder/mayhem gadgets thrown in? (I can smell the Military Industrial side of the Cartel's total glee even as I write). The idea of assaulting Iraqi to defend our "homeland" is equivalent to immediate open heart surgery for acid indigestion after a teenager has just eaten too many Happy Meals. Try Rolaids instead, or if you prefer your calcium compliments of another branch of the pharmo side of the cartel, Pepcid AC. BTY: Bush IS big enough to stand-up and take the heat (blame), after all, he has no alternative - he is under direct orders to do so from his "handlers" and will be well-taken care of when the dust settles. >Jenny asks kakki: > >>Has our intervention and involvement in the middle east *ever* made us >safer? kakki's reply: >Yes, for years we've stopped a lot of terrorist groups in the mid-east from >attacking us more than they would have if we had just let them go unchecked. >However, a lot of our interventions and how they stopped us from harm will >never be detailed on TV or universally disseminated. I know this for a >fact, and I know that many people in the U.S. who have worked in the >government or military also know this for a fact, but are constrained from >giving out the details to the public. I'd like to give my own personal >knowledge of such instances but I think classified security clearances are >in effect forever. Franklin responds: Ya, they're constrained alright. There would be too many criminal prosecutions and jail sentences handed out for international crimes that have been committed, in direct violation of U.S. laws and statutes. Just why do you think we've had terrorist groups to "stop". It is DIRECTLY a reaction to all the ridiculous, exploitive, manipulative, underhanded, conniving, Dictator-picking and supporting the US Regime has done for the GFGBC for decades over there. While I think terrorism is a dispicable reaction reserved for lunatics and brain-washed, false religious indoctrinated morons, just how do you think that a cabal of bitter, brutalized, betrayed bedouins feel about all this? A little peeved perhaps? (By the way, do you/did you, work for the government kakki? Just curious as per your last sentence.) kakki says: > >Has George Tenet presented us with a better alternative plan? I haven't >seen any, other than to not do anything. Tenet is a bona fide, order-taking lackey. You don't get the "heralded" position of head of the CIA without such clearance. No way. Any arguments he has posited differing from the "Administration's" position are merely "plants", directly dictated to him, to make it look like "meaningful" dialogue is occurring. kakki says: > >With all this said, I would still like more details released to the public >as to why Saddam is an imminent threat. Donald Rumsfeld and Condoleeza Rice >both gave interviews on TV back in September stating unequivocally that >there is hard evidence linking Iraq and Saddam with Bin Laden and Al Qaeda. >I am surprised that more people did not notice this but a lot gets lost in >the news coverage. I'd like to hear more about the direct evidence to help >myself and others understand the threat better. Although, it's not much of >a stretch for me for me to think they are involved with each other. I think >we are between a rock and a hard place. All we can do is hope that Saddam >agrees with the UN resolution and agrees to the start complying again with >the UN rules in his country. Franklin comments: What kind of Regime "details"? Would you prefer false (the prevalent variety) or true (don't hold your breath)? The only "hard" evidence I see "linking" Saddam and Osama is that the SFGBC created, trained, funded, and backed them both when it suited their needs. Now they are both "dead" men - having no "practical" purpose anymore while alive to create "economic growth". But wait there's still hope: do you actually think that the SFGBC didn't have this covered from both angles from the start? Come on now! These guys are the original experts at exploiting situations at "every" angle. Always planned that way from the start in fact, every step, every plan. Now "going after them", (killing them as well as everyone else in the vicinity) with as much high-ticket military industrial product as the taxpayers will allow) is going to be the next step in paving the way to the SFGBC members bulging-at-the-seams, elephantile bank accounts. Man, they just get ya' coming and going, don't they? What a bunch a' guys. Ya gotta hand it to them, they sure are "creative" in their own little proxy/foxy ways. Franklin ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 10:05:49 -0800 From: "kakki" Subject: Re: Oil/war (njc) (pc) Jenny wrote: > I'm not sure how that has been determined. Direct immediate danger? I don't think so. I base my statements in what I've read and observed for a number of years now. There is evidence and connect the dots evidence out there. It is not illusory to me. > More like potentional future danger to those we've considered our allies (Israel, Saudi Arabia) - not necessarily >more people in danger, but more people who are important to us. Them, too. > Yes, I agree. My point is our humanitarian concerns shift according to what is perceived as in our best interest at >the time. I look at it that we simply do not have enough resources to save each part of the world 24/7. We do, however, try to help regions through diplomatic avenues and of course, by sending billions in aid around the world. The way I see it, it that it is in our best interest at this particular point secure our safety. > I think the Bush administration has succeded in blurring the distinction between Al Qaeda and Saddam. I *wish* >they focused as much attention on how they are planning to dismantle Al Qaeda in this country and in others as they >do on taking out Saddam. I think they are. > Whether Bush is blamed either way doesn't concern me. Alternatives - I haven't seen any offered except for >beginning inspections again. Some people believe these are foolish, others believe they are quite effective. I can't say how effective they have been because there have been so many conflicting reports. There is a case made that he has been able to greatly escalate his stockpiles and capabilities since the inspectors were thrown out in the 90s. There are others who say that the country is so large and that he is so crafty, that even with inspectors there, they can't ever find all the weapons. But at this point, the return to inspections is being given as the only alternative to invading the coutnry. > Because someone is against unilateral action - an unprecedented first-strike attack -based on evidence that is either >weak, or they are not able to share or confirm - it does not mean he/she wants nothing at all to be done. I have a definite problem with unilateral action, too. If a strong case were made to you with specific evidence, would that change the way you consider it? > Well, I can't comment on what I know nothing about, but these attacks that we've stopped - would they have even >existed were it not for our involvement and presence in the Middle East? Who knows? That's almost like saying if we never existed on this earth, would they then not think to attack us. There's a big blur between what actions the U.S. directly took that made people want to attack us and how much is because we haven't done anything to warrrant attack - they've just been indoctrinated to hate and attack us. The situations I know about happened 20 years ago and were connected to the terrorists blowing us up and taking hostages in Lebanon. I can't recall the specific group name but the focus back then for concern was Iran and Syria. The U.S. supported the Shah of Iran and then let him fall because we thought that is what the people wanted essentially. We all know where that led - worse repression and misery than before, with a huge migration of the people who could get out coming to the U.S. And the ones who took over did nothing but promote "death to America." At any rate, I'll say that there were almost daily threats of attacks right here in the U.S. To my knowledge the general public in the U.S. were never made aware of what was going on behind the scenes. > If we topple Saddam's regime and install an American administration of Iraq for a year (or more?) as has been >most recently offered as a post-war plan by the adminstration, I can only see the number of terrorist attacks here >and abroad go up. That is a possibility. Bottom line is that I wish we were not at all involved in the ME and never were, but that is not reality. We are already in too deep and have been for 60 years. How do you undo that overnight? > I think they noticed it - it's that it didn't go any further than this. They seem to abandon that line of persuasion. I don't think they abandoned it as a line of persuasion. I've read and seen enough independently to believe them more than discount them so I tend to think maybe there are strategic considerations involved. > Amen to that - and thank goodness for Colin Powell who got us to this point. But we are preparing for war - and I >fear it is has already been decided. We have to wait and see it play out. I have no clue as to what is going to happen next. > Kakki, thanks very much for your knowledgeable and thoughful views on the matter. Thanks to you, too, Jenny. This all causes me to think things out and I like that. Kakki ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 10:10:17 -0800 From: "kakki" Subject: Re: Oil/war/UN resolution (njc) (pc) ET (is that you Eric Taylor?) wrote > What really gets me about all of this is the fact that > Reagan/Bush sold Iraq scores of deadly biological agents during the > 1980s, including histoplasma capsulatum ~ a substance that resembles > tuberculosis and influenza, causing enlargement of the liver and spleen > and can also infect the brain, lungs, heart and spinal column. Senate > testimony confirmed that Iraq received at least 72 U.S. shipments of > clones, germs and chemicals ranging from substances that could destroy > crops, give children and animals the bone-deforming disease rickets, to a > nerve gas rated a million times more lethal than Sarin! Can you direct me to an original cite for this? Not that I don't believe you but a lot of shit is going around the internet and a lot gets refuted later but by then the myth is already out of the bag so to speak. Thanks, Kakki ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 15:55:01 -0500 From: "Bree Mcdonough" Subject: Re: Oil/war (njc) (pc) >Franklin has had me engaged offlist explaining his case for the world wide >conspiracy of billionaires who >control everything. Would these billionaires be: William Buffet.. per chance Bill Gates? Oil sheiks? WHo...I want names! Maybe...Ray Kroc's widow? Ted Turner? CEO of Proctor & Gamble? Bree _________________________________________________________________ MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 15:55:30 -0500 From: "Jim L'Hommedieu \(Lama\)" Subject: Nonesuch.com site: What the hell ? NJC A few days ago, it wouldn't load at all. Today I noticed it calls the new album "Travelogue". I thought it had "A" at the beginning so I did some digging. JJ's official site called it "A Travelogue" on 9/16 when the track list was announced. By 10/16, it was just "Travelogue". I'm using the Lo bandwidth version and the "scroll down" button doesn't work. The site is kinda pretty, I guess but isn't it more important that it actually *WORK*? Maybe it's optomized for the poor saps who fell for Macs. heh heh. Anyway, Raffaele said >>>>I was browsing a monthly magazine here in London today and saw an ad for Travelogue. It's official: it'll be released in the UK on the 25 Nov. And there's more! The collector's edition has an hard back booklet plus a CD Rom with a virtual gallery of Joni's paintings.>>>>> Now Lama again. What the hell? If there's more than one edition in the USA, (not America, okay?) the Nonesuch.com site doesn't say it. Is the set a pair of those "Enhanced CD" dealies with graphics or 2 CDs and a CD-ROM besides? In USA Today on September 5, they said of "A Travelogue" (sic) 'Mitchell designed the packaging, which features examples of her paintings, a book and extensive liner notes.' What exactly is the packaging on the Advance Release? Thanks. Jim ------------------------------ End of JMDL Digest V2002 #478 ***************************** ------- 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? (http://www.siquomb.com/siquomb.cfm)