From: les@jmdl.com (JMDL Digest) To: joni-digest@smoe.org Subject: JMDL Digest V2003 #10 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 Tuesday, January 7 2003 Volume 2003 : Number 010 Sign up now for JoniFest 2003! http://www.jonifest.com ========== TOPICS and authors in this Digest: -------- Re: Chinese cafe lyrics etc... [SCJoniGuy@aol.com] Re: 'prepare' njc [sl.m@shaw.ca] Re: Magdalene sisters Coming to a cinema near you ( hopefully) ["Donna Bi] Netiquette [Scott Price ] Re: Chinese cafe lyrics etc... [=?iso-8859-1?q?Jamie=20Zubairi?= ] Re: 'prepare' njc [sl.m@shaw.ca] Re: Chinese cafe lyrics etc... [Jerry Notaro ] Ron Sexsmith [Steve Dulson ] Re: 'prepare' njc [colin ] Re: 'prepare' njc [sl.m@shaw.ca] Re: 'prepare' njc [sl.m@shaw.ca] Re: 'prepare' njc [sl.m@shaw.ca] Re: 'prepare' njc [colin ] Re: 'prepare' njc [colin ] Re: 'prepare' njc [sl.m@shaw.ca] Re: 'prepare' njc [sl.m@shaw.ca] more covers (njc) [anne@sandstrom.com] Re: Netiquette [Catherine McKay ] prepare (njc) [anne@sandstrom.com] Re: 2003 NAMM (SJC) [Catherine McKay ] Re: T'Log [Catherine McKay ] Re: 2003 NAMM (SJC) ["Happy The Man" ] Good article about faith, religion, history and Iraq njc [sl.m@shaw.ca] and speaking of covers ... questions about Don Juan's Reckless Daughter [Mags N Brei ] Re: 'prepare' njc [colin ] Re: prepare (njc) [colin ] Re: T'Log NJC [Mags N Brei ] Re: and speaking of covers ... questions about Don Juan's Reckless Daughter [SCJoniGuy@ao] Re: 'prepare' njc ["Mark Connely" ] Re: JMDL Digest V2003 #9 [BRYAN8847@aol.com] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2003 15:28:53 -0500 From: SCJoniGuy@aol.com Subject: Re: Chinese cafe lyrics etc... In a message dated 1/7/2003 3:18:19 PM Eastern Standard Time, steve@hatstand.org writes: > Yeah I always thought that line sounded a bit familiar. She > mentions the > name Carole in the song too! And Joni possibly chose this one because Joni & JT sang backup on Carole's recording of it. Bob NP: Ani, "pale purple" ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2003 14:31:54 -0700 From: sl.m@shaw.ca Subject: Re: 'prepare' njc Colin, do not attribute hatred of Arabs to me. Far from it - I want to see the Arab people liberated, not only in Iraq but in all the other countries in the Middle East where they languish under dictatorships. It is YOU, it seems, who wishes to see them left alone to sort out their own affairs. But the people of Iraq cannot overthrow Saddam without foreign help. So if you believe there should be no foreign intervention, you are as a matter of fact condoning the torture and the repression. You can't have it both ways - you can't be peace-loving and oppose just wars. Peace often requires war. That is a sad fact, but it's a fact nonetheless. Sarah From: colin Your hatred of the Arabs is based upon your ideas and interpretations, not Truth. In short, ideas are NOT truth. they are merely our ideas. There is no doubt that a small number of people who have power in the middle East are indeed as bad as theyare painted. That is fair comment. To label ALL of the people's of the ME as such is ignorant. The majority of them are trapped. Tho as with most situations, it could be different if people worked together and rose up and overthrew these people. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2003 14:37:21 -0600 From: "Donna Binkley" Subject: Re: Magdalene sisters Coming to a cinema near you ( hopefully) Does anyone have any info. as to when this movie will be in the United States? Or is it here already? I have not found any listings on it. db >>> 01/07/03 02:15PM >>> a little something for one and all. The Magdalene Sisters: A controversial winner of the golden Lion at the 2002 venice film festival, Peter mullan's Magdalene sisters establishes the Actor/director as a vital and potent force in british Cinema. Set in Ireland during the 1960's, the film dramatises the lives of three young women sent to a catholic Church/Irish government sanctioned Magdalene laundry for fallen women as a punishment for their 'sins'. Cut off from their families by the sadistic nuns who run the establishment, the young women enter a world of insufferable pain and torment. A savage indictment of a vicious and uncaring system that emphasizes religious dogma above all else. The Magdalene sisters is a powerful and profoundly humane statement and an essential viewing experience. Opens in Brighton on the 21st Febuary....elsewhere check press for details. xxx Clive This message has been scanned by the E250. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2003 12:34:51 -0800 From: Scott Price Subject: Netiquette Picking up Mr. Dulson's torch, I'm asking people to please trim messages they are replying to. Quoting back an entire message to add your own one or two lines isn't necessary. Thank you. Scott who left out the NJC on purpose ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2003 20:47:44 +0000 (GMT) From: =?iso-8859-1?q?Jamie=20Zubairi?= Subject: Re: Chinese cafe lyrics etc... I think there's a ruling where you have to use at least 8 consecutive words in the song before it needs a copyright permission. Of course, I could be wrong! Much Joni Jamie Zoob Stephen Toogood wrote:Yeah I always thought that line sounded a bit familiar. She mentions the name Carole in the song too! STEVE T. NP: 'Beautiful' ~ Carole King > Sorry if this has been mentioned before (it probably > has seeing I am new to the list) but anyway... > > I was listening to Chinese Cafe/Unchained Melody > today, and I noticed that in the second verse she > sings "you give your love so sweetly", which is > actually the second line from the Carol King song > "Will You Still Love Me Tomorrow" made famous by The > Shirelles - > > ---snip--- > > Tonight you're mine completely > You give you love so sweetly > Tonight the light of love is in your eyes > But will you love me tomorrow? > > ---snip--- > > I just wondered why the writers of Unchained Melody > are mentioned in the copyrights etc for the song, but > not Carol King? Maybe using one line isn't enough to > infringe on copyright? A lot more of Unchained Melody > was used, after all... > > Joseph > > > http://movies.yahoo.com.au - Yahoo! Movies > - What's on at your local cinema? - --------------------------------- With Yahoo! Mail you can get a bigger mailbox -- choose a size that fits your needs ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2003 15:53:57 EST From: FMYFL@aol.com Subject: Re: Netiquette In a message dated 1/7/2003 3:35:34 PM Eastern Standard Time, sp@olympus.net writes: > Quoting back an entire message to add your own one or > two lines isn't necessary. Thanks Scott, and if I may remind new (or old) listers another thing I've seen quite a lot of lately: 2) Watch your subject lines: When posting, make sure to check your subject line and insure that it is relevant to the post itself. We often see "Re: Joni Mitchell Digest V3#212" as the subject line or some other vague or outdated description. Jimmy (an occasional rule bender) :~) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2003 20:56:12 +0000 From: colin Subject: Re: 'prepare' njc > Peace often requires war. That is a sad fact, but it's a fact > nonetheless. is it? When have we had peace? When has a war brought peace? > > > Sarah ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2003 15:04:37 -0700 From: sl.m@shaw.ca Subject: Re: 'prepare' njc I believe the Second World War brought peace. It created new tensions, yes, with the Soviet Union, and arguably in the Middle East, and we see today some of the consequences of that. But it also defeated Hitler, liberated the Jewish and other victims in the concentration camps, and eventually created a united Europe, which is today merging into one nation. That has to count as peace of sorts. Had the war not been fought, Europeans might have lived under fascism for many years, and maybe still. Sarah At 8:56 PM +0000 01/07/2003, colin wrote: >When has a war brought peace? ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2003 16:07:50 -0500 From: Jerry Notaro Subject: Re: Chinese cafe lyrics etc... Of course, it is also possible that Joni used the lyrics with permission. Similar to music sampling which is so common nowadays. Jerry Jamie Zubairi wrote: > I think there's a ruling where you have to use at least 8 consecutive words in the song before it needs a copyright permission. > > Of course, I could be wrong! > > Much Joni > > Jamie Zoob > Stephen Toogood wrote:Yeah I always thought that line sounded a bit familiar. She mentions the > name Carole in the song too! > > STEVE T. > > NP: 'Beautiful' ~ Carole King > > > Sorry if this has been mentioned before (it probably > > has seeing I am new to the list) but anyway... > > > > I was listening to Chinese Cafe/Unchained Melody > > today, and I noticed that in the second verse she > > sings "you give your love so sweetly", which is > > actually the second line from the Carol King song > > "Will You Still Love Me Tomorrow" made famous by The > > Shirelles - > > > > ---snip--- > > > > Tonight you're mine completely > > You give you love so sweetly > > Tonight the light of love is in your eyes > > But will you love me tomorrow? > > > > ---snip--- > > > > I just wondered why the writers of Unchained Melody > > are mentioned in the copyrights etc for the song, but > > not Carol King? Maybe using one line isn't enough to > > infringe on copyright? A lot more of Unchained Melody > > was used, after all... > > > > Joseph > > > > > > http://movies.yahoo.com.au - Yahoo! Movies > > - What's on at your local cinema? > > --------------------------------- > With Yahoo! Mail you can get a bigger mailbox -- choose a size that fits your needs ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2003 21:11:28 +0000 From: colin Subject: oh Pigs njc oh Pigs. i waited eagerly today for our new suite to be deleivered. Finally got fed up with the crappy soaf we had and splashed out. the pigging thing would not fit thru our front door!!!!! It seems our front door is not standard width. So...it got sent back, i got a refund and I went and bought a futon which because of it's design came thru the door easily. It isalso long enough to lie on without having to bend my legs. Bliss! Oh pigs 2: Dayna was due to whelp tomorrow. it would appear she has lost her babies. I knew about 3 weeks ago that something wasn't righ tbut only time would tell. Dogs, rather abort, just reabsorb their babies. No known reason. it just happens soemtimes. It is possible she is carrying just one, but I doubt it. Kevin, the new stud, is a bit of a plonker when it comes to plonking. He gets it in but comes right out again istead of ramming home and staying 'stuck'. so next time he will have to come in an egg cup and I will have to use a syringe to squirt it up the girl. have a nice day colin ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2003 13:12:29 -0800 From: Steve Dulson Subject: Ron Sexsmith CNN has a profile of Canadian s/ser Ron Sexsmith at: http://www.cnn.com/2003/SHOWBIZ/Music/01/07/wkd.ron.sexsmith.ap/index.html It includes the sentence: "Some of his favorite artists are fellow Canadians: Neil Young, Joni Mitchell, Gordon Lightfoot, Rufus Wainwright." - -- ######################################################## Steve Dulson Costa Mesa CA steve@psitech.com "The Tinker's Own" http://www.tinkersown.com "The Living Tradition Concert Series" http://www.thelivingtradition.org/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2003 21:16:24 +0000 From: colin Subject: Re: 'prepare' njc > That has to count as peace of sorts. I agree. of sorts. My mind was on the terrorism this country has sufferedthe last 30 years. And also worldwide the wars that are always being fought. And Eurpoe as a whole has not experienced peace since the war. I still think ww2 could ahve been avoided if one the German people ahd not been so penailised after WW1 and also if people had not ignored the clear signs of what was happeneign in Germany long before war broke. But then it was 'only Jews' so who cared enough? As someone else pointed out, even the USA turned away German refguees. As a naive child, i could understand how the Holocaust happened. As an adult, it is clear. > Had the war not been fought, Europeans might have lived under fascism > for many years, and maybe still. > > Sarah > > At 8:56 PM +0000 01/07/2003, colin wrote: > >> When has a war brought peace? ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2003 15:20:08 -0700 From: sl.m@shaw.ca Subject: Re: 'prepare' njc That is an admirable sentiment, but I don't believe it's realistic. We can't and shouldn't believe the best of a Saddam Hussein, for example, or an Adolf Hitler, or a Joseph Stalin. These are people who have committeed truly evil acts. At a lower level, how can we have positive regard for a paedophile who rapes and kills very young children? We might want to look at his upbringing, and we might identify terrible things that were done to him that caused his violent feelings, but we still cannot have a positive regard for him - - to understand the cause of evil is not to condone it or excuse it. I disagree with the saying (was it Voltaire?) "to understand is to forgive". I think it's a hang-up of Christianity that we're expected to have positive regard for all in virtue of their humanity. What's so special about humanity that we're not allowed to condemn human beings out of hand? I happen to think we're a remarkably stupid species. On the one hand, we can send people to the moon, perform miraculous medical feats, write stunning literature, produce brilliant philosophy. But on the other hand, we dip people into acid baths because they don't agree with us. We condemn the Third World to poverty and terrible illness, because the Catholic God doesn't want them to use condoms or have abortions. We make women cover their entire bodies including faces lest any passing man be "corrupted" by their bare skin. We kill people because they're witches. And so on. This is all evidence of a profound lack of intelligence, in my view, made worse by our potential to be exactly the opposite. THIS is why I oppose Islam (not Arabs) - because it is non-progressive, and we need progressive ideas more than anything else, I believe. I don't like Christianity either, but at least it's now virtually powerless, at least in the West, with even many of its priests admitting they don't believe in god. Sarah At 8:59 PM +0000 01/07/2003, colin wrote: >I do believe that we ought to have positive regard for eveyone >regardless of anything other than their humaness. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2003 15:27:56 -0700 From: sl.m@shaw.ca Subject: Re: 'prepare' njc Yes, if ideas were just memories, how could newness ever come into the world? So you're not a fan of Platonic forms, Mark? ;-) Sarah From: "Mark Connely" . . . an idea is more than just a memory. It is a dynamic function of mind that allow new things to come to light. the mind (or brain, as you prefer) has this amazing ability to abstract the essence of things....from all blue things seen it creates the idea of blueness. This was Aristotle's great discovery, and it was how he turned Plato upside down. Thanks for this discussion. I love waking up to this stuff, starts the day on the right foot, ya know? ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2003 15:37:23 -0700 From: sl.m@shaw.ca Subject: Re: 'prepare' njc Colin, maybe the distinction you're getting at is between fact and value (rather than facts, ideas, beliefs etc). As philosophers put it, value judgements have no "truth value" - that is, they are neither true nor false. A value judgement would be, for example, a moral statement "stealing is bad" or an aesthetic one "this is a beautiful portrait" or a statement to do with personal taste or experience "this orange tastes good". The so-called "fact-value distinction" is a big topic in philosophy. Sarah Colin wrote: If there is no distiinction bewteen beliefs and ideas and facts, then we are well and truly stuffed. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2003 22:05:29 +0000 From: colin Subject: Re: 'prepare' njc sl.m@shaw.ca wrote: > That is an admirable sentiment, but I don't believe it's realistic. I am sure you didn't mean to patronize here. > We can't and shouldn't believe the best of a Saddam Hussein, for > example, or an Adolf Hitler, or a Joseph Stalin. These are people who > have committeed truly evil acts. At a lower level, how can we have > positive regard for a paedophile who rapes and kills very young > children? We might want to look at his upbringing, and we might > identify terrible things that were done to him that caused his violent > feelings, but we still cannot have a positive regard for him - to > understand the cause of evil is not to condone it or excuse it. I > disagree with the saying (was it Voltaire?) "to understand is to > forgive". I think you misunderstand what is meant by positive regard. it i does not mean to love or like. It means to treat with respect, as another human being. It means to treat humanely, for not to debases US! Having positive regard for people does not mean to condone their behaviour. it does mean not to hold hatred in our hearts for that debases us too.(and I speak as a long term childhood victim of peods and violence) > > > I think it's a hang-up of Christianity that we're expected to have > positive regard for all in virtue of their humanity. it isn't. Xtians do not teach this. Car Rogers, a pyshologist, was one person who put forward this as an idea tho iwas rather surprised it needed someone to do so! > What's so special about humanity that we're not allowed to condemn > human beings out of hand? > > I happen to think we're a remarkably stupid species. > > On the one hand, we can send people to the moon, perform miraculous > medical feats, write stunning literature, produce brilliant > philosophy. But on the other hand, we dip people into acid baths > because they don't agree with us. We condemn the Third World to > poverty and terrible illness, because the Catholic God doesn't want > them to use condoms or have abortions. We make women cover their > entire bodies including faces lest any passing man be "corrupted" by > their bare skin. We kill people because they're witches. And so on. I agree. > > > This is all evidence of a profound lack of intelligence, in my view, > made worse by our potential to be exactly the opposite. I don't think it is lack of intelleigence. i thinknit is fear based and a hunger for power(again fear based). > > I don't like Christianity either, but at least it's now virtually > powerless, excuse me? Have you heard of the USA? > at least in the West, with even many of its priests admitting they > don't believe in god. I ahve noit heard of a priest say this. i ahev heard some intelligent priests say the reject the virgin birth, the notion that Jesus was god, and all manner of other things. I have yet to hear one reject the idea of God. thos of course I ahve heard those who reject the idea of God as a 'big mand weilding a stick'. bw colin > > > Sarah > > > > > At 8:59 PM +0000 01/07/2003, colin wrote: > >> I do believe that we ought to have positive regard for eveyone >> regardless of anything other than their humaness. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2003 22:15:38 +0000 From: colin Subject: Re: 'prepare' njc sl.m@shaw.ca wrote: > Colin, maybe the distinction you're getting at is between fact and > value (rather than facts, ideas, beliefs etc). > > As philosophers put it, value judgements have no "truth value" - that > is, they are neither true nor false. > > A value judgement would be, for example, a moral statement "stealing > is bad" I think this is different to your next point. stealing can be demonstrated to have negative effects, and can be labelled as bad and as a truth. (tho of course we are putting meaning into everyhting even by judging what is negative) > or an aesthetic one "this is a beautiful portrait" or a statement to > do with personal taste or experience "this orange tastes good". these two points are personal and as you say, cannot be 'fact'. I think that although we cannot directly experience Truth for everything is filtered thru our mind/brain and coloured by our own meaning structures and experiences, we can come to an approximation of it. I think the further away from Truth we are, the more we suffer. Wrong thinking leads to pain and suffering. ( i am of course talkign about the personal directly hear. The Truthabout the Universe, physics etc is not what I am tlaking about except to say that all of that is also filtered thru our meaning structures and minds etc). We need to live according to our own consciences. we cannot live according to the consciences of others. people who say this is bad, that it is wrong for people to decide morals for themselves, are in essence saying we should follow their consciences. In the end we cannot know Aboslute Truth. we cannot step outside of ourselves. ibeliev we can gain an approximation of truth. I think that pain and suffering and joy are good indicators of how well we are doing. bw colin > > > The so-called "fact-value distinction" is a big topic in philosophy. > > Sarah > > > Colin wrote: > If there is no distiinction bewteen beliefs and ideas and facts, then we > are well and truly stuffed. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2003 16:21:07 -0700 From: sl.m@shaw.ca Subject: Re: 'prepare' njc I agree with Colin that we shouldn't forgive someone their evil acts just because they were treated badly as children, and that this has to apply to nations too. I also agree that to oppose the Israeli government is not to be anti-Semitic necessarily. Still, if anyone wants to understand the Israelis, a great book is Righteous Victims: A History of the Zionist-Arab Conflict, 1881-2001 by Benny Morris, a professor of history at Ben-Gurion University. Morris explains the mentality of the Israeli people - how Jews in the Middle East were always treated badly, always regarded as inferior and with suspicion, denied certain property and other civil rights. One example: any Jew who struck a Muslim child would be killed. So Muslim children, aware of this law, used to taunt Jewish people in the street, trying to encourage them to strike out. Respected Rabbis had to put up with being followed around by crowds of little bullying thugs, trying to provoke violence so that the Jew (who was always in the wrong) would get into trouble. There were numerous laws and practices like this against Jews throughout the entire Middle East. Then came the Holocaust, during which Jewish people cooperated with the Third Reich and its laws - cooperated with their own demise - because they saw themselves as German and could not believe they would be singled out in this way. And so afterwards came the awakening - a fierce determination that nothing like that should ever happen again. NEVER AGAIN, became the slogan. Not just "never again" to the Holocaust, but also to the centuries-long prejudice, oppression and superstition that laid the groundwork for it. And never again to the image of the weak Jew who would turn the other cheek. Henceforth, the Jews would defend themselves. Early Zionists took this idea so seriously that one of the things they promoted after WW2 was that Jews had to become physically fit - go to gyms, play sports, become strong - to get rid of the image of the ineffectual, intellectual Jew that anyone could attack with impunity. If, after the Holocaust, Europe's remaining Jews had wandered around the world as a powerless, poverty stricken diaspora, stateless and without resources - like gypsies - they would have the support of everyone on the Left, because they'd be victims. But because groups of Zionists decided this must never happen again, and they organized themselves and fought for the land Britain had earlier granted them, and became powerful, wealthy and educated in other countries in the West, as well as in Israel, we hate them! We hate them because they won't let themselves be victims again. Regarding the charge of anti-Semitism against anyone who doesn't support the state of Israel, I believe that most people in the West are NOT anti-Semitic. But the Arabs are, there's no question of that, and violently so - and always have been, which is an important point to note - not just because of Palestine. If the Arab countries that surround Israel had their way, with the possible exception of Jordan, there would be a second Holocaust. To fail to recognize this is to collude with anti-Semitism - to cleanse it by calling it something else (self-defence, fighting for Palestine etc). Also, there DOES appear to be a rise of anti-Semitiism in the West, using criticism of Israel as a kind of Trojan horse. There was a case in Saskatoon recently of an Indian chief saying in public that Hitler was right to "fry these guys", because "how else do you control a disease?" and "now look at them, killing Arabs." There does seem to be more of this stuff around these days, and this terrifies Jewish people, and rightly so. The Jews in Israel are scared they will face another Holocaust if they don't defend themselves, and therefore they defend themselves vigorously. Which is why Ariel Sharon got elected, as he is the number 1 practitioner of an eye for an eye. And when the Israelis hear the rest of the world failing to support them, it is not surprising that they see it as anti-Semitism, or Jew-hatred - as more of the same thing they've experienced for centuries. Sarah From: "kasey simpson" I have enjoyed reading this thread. It is easy to see the passion in each post. . . I have a great deal of respect and sympathy for the Jews. Look at their history. The blacks, Native Americans, and Hispanics have rallies, demonstrations, protest marches, and even violent outburst to be heard, counted, and treated with equality. When have you ever heard of Jews doing this? Not as slaves in Egypt, or during the holocaust, not even here in the states. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2003 16:31:34 -0700 From: sl.m@shaw.ca Subject: Re: 'prepare' njc Colin, I was thinking of Don Cupitt and his followers, and there are more of them within the Christian church than they will ever admit in public. I attended some of his lectures and heard him say explicity that he doesn't believe in god, and nor do many priests. He sees god as a "metaphor" as he puts it, a human creation. Cupitt is not just an academic - he was ordained in 1959. Sarah At 10:05 PM +0000 01/07/2003, colin wrote: >i ahev heard some intelligent priests say the reject the virgin >birth, the notion that Jesus was god, and all manner of other >things. I have yet to hear one reject the idea of God. thos of >course I ahve heard those who reject the idea of God as a 'big mand >weilding a stick'. >bw >colin ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2003 14:38:09 -0800 (PST) From: anne@sandstrom.com Subject: more covers (njc) With all this talk about covers, I just had to share an unusual one I heard while driving to Vermont on New Year's Eve. Richard Thompson does a cover of Brittney Spears' "Oops... I Did It Again." Oddly enough, it sounds like the song was made for him! lots of love Anne ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2003 18:00:22 -0500 (EST) From: Catherine McKay Subject: Re: Netiquette --- Scott Price wrote: > Picking up Mr. Dulson's torch, I'm asking people to > please trim messages > they are replying to. Quoting back an entire message > to add your own one or > two lines isn't necessary. Thank you. > > Scott > who left out the NJC on purpose If I could add my refrain, could people also please remember to include PC in the re: line for anything that's Political Content. Things are getting a mite busy around here lately. (If this has already been mentioned, it may have been in one of those PC e-mails that I deleted without reading, just by doing a sort on the re: line.) Merci. ===== Catherine Toronto ______________________________________________________________________ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2003 15:00:42 -0800 (PST) From: anne@sandstrom.com Subject: prepare (njc) I've read snippets of this discussion, so I apologize in advance for not being familiar with what everyone has contributed. Last Friday, Bill Moyer's program Now, on PBS, aired a panel discussion about religion and politics. It was articulate and thought provoking, with all participants showing respect for differing opinions without yielding their own beliefs. Following the panel discussion, Bill Moyers interviewed author and scholar Paul Woodruff, who has examined the notion of reverence in his book Reverence: Revewing a Forgotten Virtue. I'm still waiting for my copy of the book, but I thought it might be interesting to some to read a very brief excerpt. (My apologies for a bit of copyright infringement, but perhaps Mr. Woodruff wouldn't mind if it leads to others reading his work.) "Reverence begins in a deep understanding of human limitations; from this grows the capacity to be in awe of whatever we believe lies outside our control - God, truth, justice, nature, even death. The capacity for awe, as it grows, brings with it the capacity for respecting fellow human beings, flaws and all." By this definition, which I applaud, much organized religion does not seem to incorporate reverence as a primary element. If it did, religion would not divide humans into "believers" and "infidels." (And, honestly, is respect, nevermind awe, ever accorded an infidel?) The panel discussion's transcript is still on the PBS site (http://www.pbs.org/now/transcript/transcript_whosegod.html). My own view is that no one is chosen or special, or holy. That, or everyone is. I like this notion of reverence. It's like a prism that puts my jumble of beliefs into focus. lots of love Anne ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2003 18:05:29 -0500 (EST) From: Catherine McKay Subject: Re: 2003 NAMM (SJC) --- Happy The Man wrote: > Anyone attending the NAMM concert? > What is NAMM? ===== Catherine Toronto ______________________________________________________________________ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2003 18:18:13 -0500 (EST) From: Catherine McKay Subject: Re: T'Log --- Ron Greer wrote: > Hi > > first off happy christmas, new year, hannukah, eid, > whatever, etc to > everyone!!! :-) ( i had a dead pc at home so i > guess i missed all the > festive stuff!!) > Consider yourelf blessed - you didn't miss much. [...] > > so off i go to the somewhat distant major cd chain > which stocks quality cds. > i was most amazed to see that they have it in stock, > and at a reasonable > price. so i take a listen to it through the > headphones in the shop. > > strangely enough - "WATERLOG" is probably a very apt > name for the album... > :-) > > probably nice - but not my cup of tea. compare it > back to back with "hejira" > and its just not even in the same league. Oh, c'mon. In all fairness, one listen probably isn't a good way to judge. You're probably going to have to spring the cash and just buy the damn thing. No guarantees you'll love it and maybe it really isn't your cuppa tea, but give it a go anyway. It's not my favourite of all time, but the first time I heard it, it didn't do much for me either, with the exception of a few songs. Since then, on subsequent listens, it has got better, although there are still some that don't do it for me and maybe never will. (Wait 'til it goes on sale, though.) ===== Catherine Toronto ______________________________________________________________________ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2003 17:40:36 -0600 From: "Happy The Man" Subject: Re: 2003 NAMM (SJC) www.namm.com - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Catherine McKay" To: "Happy The Man" ; Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 5:05 PM Subject: Re: 2003 NAMM (SJC) > --- Happy The Man > wrote: > Anyone attending the NAMM concert? > > > > What is NAMM? > > > ===== > Catherine > Toronto > > ______________________________________________________________________ > Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2003 17:58:12 -0700 From: sl.m@shaw.ca Subject: Good article about faith, religion, history and Iraq njc A question of faith By challenging religious orthodoxy, Kanan Makiya has offended Left and Right, Jew and Muslim Nick Cohen Sunday May 12, 2002 The Observer Kanan Makiya has a good claim to be the Solzhenitsyn of Saddam's Iraq, if such a grand title can be given to a modest scholar who offers you coffee and digestives in his London flat. In the mid 1980s, he wrote Republic of Fear, a remorseless chronicle of murder and torture in a prison state. Seventy publishers returned the manuscript before the University of California Press accepted it. One of the best descriptions of state terror from the crowded twentieth-century field was met with silence. The West and the Arab dictatorships and monarchies supported Saddam and the Western Left was afflicted with a kind of Orientalism which indulged, and continues to indulge, Arab despotism. Very few outsiders wanted to know about Saddam's crimes until he suddenly grew horns when his troops invaded Kuwait. A consequence of the Gulf War was that Republic of Fear became a bestseller and turned Makiya from an obscure exile working for his father's architecture practice into something of a star. Makiya, who had once called himself a socialist, found new friends but was hated by many of his former comrades for insisting that America forces shouldn't leave Iraq with the worst of both worlds - bombed but with Saddam still in power - but carry on to Baghdad. He dates the schism between supporters of universal human rights and those on the Left and Right who regard any Western intervention as imperialism to the moment when the opponents of Saddam were denounced. Israel was built on the destruction of 400 Palestinian villages, Makiya says; Saddam destroyed at least 3,000 Kurdish villages. Makiya, like every other Iraqi democrat you meet in London, has lost patience with those who will oppose the former but not the latter and is desperate for America to support a democratic revolution. All in all, we have a man whose been on Saddam's death-list for years and has more than enough enemies. He has still found the time and courage to pierce the thin skins of religious fundamentalists. The dome of the Rock in Jerusalem is undoubtedly the first monument from the great flowering of Islamic culture. The rock of Haram al-Sharif is also, depending on your superstition, where Adam crash-landed after his fall from Paradise, where Abraham prepared to kill one of his sons, where David prayed to avert God's wrath, where Solomon's temple was built, where Jesus preached and where Mohammed stood before he ascended to Heaven. The disastrous second intifada began in September 2000 when Ariel Sharon, a man who has wasted his life and many others persecuting Palestinians, toured the rock. His visit wasn't a simple assertion of Israeli power. If you have access to an internet search engine, type in 'Third Temple' and you will find serious proposals from Jewish fundamentalists to demolish one of the holiest Islamic sites and replace it with a successor to Solomon's temple, levelled by the Babylonians, and the second temple, levelled by the Romans. Christian fundamentalists are as keen to get the bulldozers moving because they've been assured that Christ won't come again until the third temple is up. You may dismiss these plans for an anti-Muslim pogrom in East Jerusalem as babblings, a thought which is encouraged by the babblers' discussions of whether a red heifer needs to be found before a new temple can be built. But Sharon has brought into his government Effi Eitam, who wants drive all the Palestinians from East Jerusalem and all the other occupied territories into the Sinai Desert and Jordan, and Uzi Landau, who says that Israel should treat the Palestinians as Saddam treated the Kurds. Dick Armey, the majority leader of Bush's Republicans in the House of Representatives, said last week that he agreed with them and was 'content to have Israel grab the entire West Bank'. The lunatic fringe is moving to the mainstream with remarkable speed and Haram al-Sharif has the potential to be the most dangerous place on earth. Makiya's reply is The Rock: A Tale of Seventh-Century Jerusalem (Constable, #14.99.) It is a novel but, as the 60 pages of historical explanation at the end show, it is also an attempt to smuggle the latest research on the Prophet Mohammed to an Arab audience. Censorship and the appeasing of Islamic fundamentalism means that historians tend to hide their work in obscure academic journals for fear of receiving the Rushdie treatment. Makiya believes their conclusions deserve a wider readership. To simplify, as journalists must, the scholars have found that apart from the Koran, almost nothing is known about the life of the Prophet. The first biography did not appear until 800AD, 150 years after the beginnings of what became Islam. The earliest quotes from the Koran are not found from surviving copies from the seventh century - there aren't any, and the Koran may well have been complied long after Mohammed's death - but in the inscriptions from 692 in the Dome on the Rock. They, the accounts of contemporaries who witnessed the explosion of Islam and the internal evidence in the Koran itself, suggest that early Islam was a messianic alliance between Arabs and Jews against the Christian Byzantine Empire which held the Holy Land. These conclusions are, to put it mildly, unpopular in many quarters. To fundamentalist Jews and Christians, the Dome is a desecration of the site of the old Jewish temple. To fundamentalist Muslims, it commemorates the Prophet's night journey to Heaven. The idea that it may celebrate an alliance between Muslims and Jews from a time when the distinctions between the two were fluid offends just about everyone. Makiya is happy to do just that. He despairs of a Middle East where the right to slaughter is based on a pseudo-historical game of 'we were here first' - Jews claiming they have returned to a land their ancestors left a mere couple of millennia ago, Palestinians asserting that there never was a Jewish temple on the rock and that they are the descendants of the Biblical Canaanites. Makiya's hero is Ka'b al-Ahbar, a Yemenite Jew who advised Umar, the caliph who conquered Jerusalem in 635. Early Islamic sources treat him as a wise man. That he was castigated in the twentieth century as the 'first Zionist' by Islamic fundamentalists proved, yet again, that there is nothing quite as modern as a traditionalist. Makiya uses the findings of contemporary historians to show the Dome on the Rock being built as the third temple to overawe the Christian churches and announce Islam as a continuation of Judaism. The inscriptions on the Dome support him. There is no mention of Mohammed's night journey to Heaven from Jerusalem, which is almost certainly a myth invented after the Dome was built by twisting an ambiguous passage in the Koran. Rather, they denounce Christianity in terms that Muslims and Jews would have supported. 'Believe in God and His Messengers, and say not Three. Refrain; it will be better for you. God is one. Far be it from His glory that he should have a son.' Writing like Makiya's can lead to trouble. He points out that in the tenth century, when Islam was open to intellectual dispute, there were learned debates on whether God ordered Abraham to sacrifice Isaac or Ishmael. Now Muslims have to say the son was Ishmael because Jews say Isaac was the boy at risk. Egyptian feminist Nawal el-Saadawi was persecuted for saying that the pilgrimage to Mecca was a vestige of pagan practice. Fundamentalists tried to get the courts forcibly to dissolve her happy marriage. Meanwhile, Professor Nasr Abu Zeid and his wife went into exile rather than have their marriage broken up. His crime was to say that the Koran should be studied in its historical context. There was a small but revealing argument in Britain last year when my Observer colleague Martin Bright wrote in the New Statesman on the findings of the new historians of Islam. His bitterest critics weren't Muslims but the professors. Patricia Crone of Princeton University attacked him with the usual academic venom: 'As everyone knows [or used to know] modern historians are not interested in the truth or falsehood of the religion. Religion does not belong in the domain open to proof or disproof by scholarship or science.' This, I'm afraid, is nonsense. Most believers in sacred texts want to know if they are true or not and no amount of postmodern twittering about whether any fact can be truly established will console them if it turns out that the Koran or Bible or Talmud is wrong. Western Christianity was undermined not only by Darwin but by the nineteenth-century search for the real Jesus of history. When people are threatened by religious power, knowledge is liberating and a weapon they can use in their defence. Kanan Makiya knows this. He hopes that Islamic fundamentalism, which has failed to produce a society worth living in, is heading in the same direction as Saddam's secular tyranny, and that an understanding of what has been found out about early Islam will help it on its way. He is that rarity in the Middle East: an optimist who believes in the power of the enlightenment. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2003 16:52:32 -0800 (PST) From: Mags N Brei Subject: and speaking of covers ... questions about Don Juan's Reckless Daughter We were listening to DJRD tonight while eating dinner and pulled out the album so we could read the dates and have a look at the various musicians and such. Then we turned to the front cover to have a look at the art work and wondered.... Who is the little boy in the tux? I also wanted to know how this album was received when it was initially released. Mags np: Colours/Dance George Winston, Autumn. You open my heart, you do. Yes you do. - JM Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2003 01:02:02 +0000 From: colin Subject: Re: 'prepare' njc > But because groups of Zionists decided this must never happen again, > and they organized themselves and fought for the land Britain had > earlier granted them, after a terrorist war. and it wasn't Britains to give. > we hate them! We hate them because they won't let themselves be > victims again. bollocks is all i can think of to reply to this absurd statement. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2003 01:04:33 +0000 From: colin Subject: Re: 'prepare' njc sl.m@shaw.ca wrote: > Colin, I was thinking of Don Cupitt and his followers, and there are > more of them within the Christian church than they will ever admit in > public. I attended some of his lectures and heard him say explicity > that he doesn't believe in god, and nor do many priests. He sees god > as a "metaphor" as he puts it, a human creation. Cupitt is not just > an academic - he was ordained in 1959. I think he is probably right too. God is pretty much an inevntion of mankind, 'made in man's image'. I do not tho belive that there is not a Supreme Being or Force or whatever. I don't belive this is all an accident. I believe we are much more than we can imagine and that life, the universe and everything is much more than we can imagine. I cannot orove any of that of course but that is what i think for now. > > > Sarah > > > > At 10:05 PM +0000 01/07/2003, colin wrote: > >> i ahev heard some intelligent priests say the reject the virgin >> birth, the notion that Jesus was god, and all manner of other things. >> I have yet to hear one reject the idea of God. thos of course I ahve >> heard those who reject the idea of God as a 'big mand weilding a stick'. >> bw >> colin ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2003 01:07:59 +0000 From: colin Subject: Re: prepare (njc) >My own view is that no one is chosen or special, or >holy. That, or everyone is. > which is what i tend to think too. we have such amazing potential. > I like this notion of >reverence. > me too. human life is considered cheap by far too many, including thoseofus who think we are civilised. bw colin ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2003 17:17:53 -0800 (PST) From: Mags N Brei Subject: Re: T'Log NJC Ron Greer wrote: <<>> yea Ron, Waterlog has the song Don Juan's Shipwrecked Daughter on it ;-) Mags, inspired to write You open my heart, you do. Yes you do. - JM Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2003 20:36:03 EST From: SCJoniGuy@aol.com Subject: Re: and speaking of covers ... questions about Don Juan's Reckless Daughter Mags writes: > I also wanted to know how this album was received when it was initially > released. > Speaking for the general public...the reception was not good. After her commercial peak with C&S, she continued to slide downward and for most "AOR" fans bottomed out with DJRD. After all, it was TOTALLY out of step with the zeitgeist, it wasn't rock, punk, or disco, or the easy listening jazz of George Benson. Of course, being out of step with the zeitgeist is what Joni does best! Speaking for me...I felt like Hejira was a masterpiece, even then, in 1976 when I hadn't a clue as what a lot of it was about. I was starving for more, craving the followup. When it arrived, and the radio station played it in its entirety, I was in awe. She had taken the textures and lyrical grandeur of Hejira and raised the stakes. Cotton Ave? What an intro! Paprkia Plains? What the feck was this, an entire album side, 16 minutes? And it was awesome. The title track took me right back to Hejira, Jaco was still all over the place, and it closes up with Silky Veils of Ardor...man, I was speechless. So I was out of step with most, but marching in time to Joni! Didn't care for Tenth World then and still find it tedious. Bob NP: Sonic Youth, "Radical Adults Lick Godhead Style" (yet another cd John Calimee wouldn't be caught dead with!) :~) PS: The kid in the tux is Brei - I auumed you knew THAT! :~) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2003 18:49:32 -0800 From: "Mark Connely" Subject: Re: 'prepare' njc > No, I'm not. > Someone replied that "all thought is old". How dreary! And more important, > how untrue! > I am a fan of the human potential for growth and change.. It makes no > difference that we are so often wrong--it is the times we are right that > uplift the whole project. > Art and science build upon the old, and destroy it in the process. The > correct ideas (Democritus' atomism!) persevere and grow, while the chaff ( > Thales' H2O monism, much of Newtonian physics) is consigned to the dustbin > and rightly so. > We are but babes in our scientific and philosophical knowledge. When I see > the wars and pollution etc., I don't despair for the end of the world, I > just think, "Someday we will look back on this time and shake our heads in > disbelief at our ignorance." > > mc > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: ; ; > Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 2:27 PM > Subject: Re: 'prepare' njc > > > > Yes, if ideas were just memories, how could newness ever come into the > world? > > > > So you're not a fan of Platonic forms, Mark? ;-) > > > > Sarah ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2003 22:22:28 EST From: BRYAN8847@aol.com Subject: Re: JMDL Digest V2003 #9 In a message dated 1/7/2003 12:22:17 PM Pacific Standard Time, les@jmdl.com writes: > >Next year we'll see Joni on the nominee list. > Let's hope so, but whether it's acknowledged or not, sales have something to do with it, and so far T'log sales are minimal. > In the meantime maybe she can enjoy the nominations for Wayne Shorter (his > solo record) &Herbie, as well as Pat Metheny. (I wonder what her > relationship is with Pat these days...it would sure be nice to hear them > collaborate again.) > > I was glad to see Bruce &Elvis &Beck &Coldplay &Me'Shell and some others > get nods. But then again so did John Tesh, so there you go. Not a bad bunch of nominees overall. But for Pete's sake...more multiple nominations for Sheryl Crow? She's not untalented, but all she has to do is sneeze and she garners multiple nominations. Bryan ------------------------------ End of JMDL Digest V2003 #10 **************************** ------- 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)