From: les@jmdl.com (JMDL Digest) To: joni-digest@smoe.org Subject: JMDL Digest V2003 #121 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 Monday, February 17 2003 Volume 2003 : Number 121 Sign up now for JoniFest 2003! http://www.jonifest.com ========== TOPICS and authors in this Digest: -------- international contempt (NJC) [Bruce Kimerer ] Open email to the peace movement NJC [sl.m@shaw.ca] Re: Chomsky final (njc) [dsk ] Re: Open email to the peace movement NJC [David Marine ] Re: Joni's guitars/Now with 29 Skaters on Wolman Rink [Dan Olson Subject: international contempt (NJC) They tried to impeach Clinton for a blow job. Yet it's OK for Bush to start a war in which who knows how many thousands will be killed in direct fighting and many more will die in related terrorist reprisals. And we wonder why the rest of the world despises us. Our warped sense of morality IS despicable. Bruce ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2003 22:41:34 -0700 From: sl.m@shaw.ca Subject: Open email to the peace movement NJC This is from an open email to the peace movement written by Rania Kashi, the 19-year-old Iraqi student living in the UK. It was quoted by Tony Blair in his speech yesterday. The entire email can be read at http://www.opendemocracy.net/debates/article.jsp?id=2&debateId=88&articleId=983 "You may feel that America is trying to blind you from seeing the truth about its real reasons for an invasion. I must argue that in fact, it is you who are still blind to the bigger truths in Iraq. I must ask you to consider the following questions: * Saddam has murdered more than a million Iraqis over the past thirty years; are you willing to allow him to kill another million? * Out of a population of 20 million, 4 million Iraqis have been forced to flee their country during Saddam's reign. Are you willing to ignore the real and present danger that caused so many people to leave their homes and families? * Saddam rules Iraq using fear; he regularly imprisons, executes and tortures large numbers of people for no reason whatsoever. This may be hard to believe, and you may not even appreciate the extent of such barbaric acts, but believe me you will be hard-pressed to find a single family in Iraq which has not had a son/father/brother killed, imprisoned, tortured and/or ''disappeared" due to Saddam's regime. What then has been stopping you from taking to the streets to protest against such blatant crimes against humanity in the past? * Saddam gassed thousands of political prisoners in one of his campaigns to ''cleanse" prisons; why are you not protesting against this barbaric act? * This is an example of the dictator's policy you are trying to save. Saddam has made a law excusing any man who rapes a female relative and then murders her in the name of adultery. Do you still want to march to keep him in power? Throughout my life, my father and many other Iraqis have attended constant meetings, protests and exhibitions that call for the end of Saddam's reign. I remember when I was around 8 years old, I went along with him to a demonstration at the French embassy, protesting against the French sale of weapons to Saddam. I have attended the permanent rally against Saddam that has been held every Saturday in Trafalgar Square for the past five years. The Iraqi people have been protesting for years against the war: the war that Saddam has waged against them. Where have you been? * Why is it now - at the very time that the Iraqi people are being given real hope, however slight and however precarious, that they can live in an Iraq that is free of the horrors partly described in this email - that you deem it appropriate to voice your disillusions with America's policy in Iraq?. . ." ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2003 00:51:02 -0500 From: dsk Subject: Re: Chomsky final (njc) kasey simpson wrote: > > I watched these also, and I don't remember them saying that > Chaney was thinking about getting the oil from Iraq. That is > what you said. No, this is what I said: In my message last Thursday, 2:04 pm: "Right after 9/11, one of the first thoughts from Cheney was "Great. Now we can finally go after Iraq."" In my message last Friday, 4:55 pm, I said that my use of the word "thoughts" was incorrect and then wrote: "It does show there was already a plan in place regarding Iraq that they could latch onto, and that the WTC loss could be fit into that plan, and people's mourning about that played upon. And it has been." There's nothing about oil in those messages, is there? If you want to argue with my view that part of the reason for this war is to gain access to Iraq's oil, then do that. > I believe Kakki said she had read some of his works. From Kakki's Friday, 12:06 pm message: "I cannot think of any enlightenment I would personally get from reading him." Sounds very clear to me. Relying on reviews of Chomsky's work written by a right-wing think tank is not the same as reading his words. Of course right-wing writers would present his work in the worst possible way. Being aware of and honest about the bias of what one's reading and quoting does not seem as important to some other people as it does to me. So, this "Chomsky" point is not something to argue about anymore. > I realize you want to support everything Kakki (and Sarah) have to say, > and constantly needle me every chance you get. Both attitudes are a bit > simple-minded, don't you think? > > See again you assume. You realize nothing. Mind reading again? No, mind reading's not required here. All's obvious just by reading your unpleasant messages over the last few months since you joined the list, most of them full of sneering sarcastic remarks, with you making rambling comments about things you half remember and half understand. Your tone is usually so nasty I've never paid much attention to what you have to say (and have probably missed some of your needling), and will start completely ignoring your messages as soon as I send this. > I do agree with Kakki, and Sarah on many things, not all. I wasn't > trying to support Kakki as much as I was trying to hold up a looking > glass for you. Thanks for your offer to be my teacher. I think I'll pass on that. > You are doing much of what you accuse others of. Yeah, right. Attempted zinger duly noted. Now, move on, Kasey. Playtime's over. Debra Shea ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2003 21:55:18 -0800 From: David Marine Subject: Re: Open email to the peace movement NJC Hi Sarah -- Certainly when we hear about the conditions in Iraq, we feel compelled to take action. What if it is true, however, that a war with Iraq may increase the chances of a retaliatory terrorist attack? Am I willing to increase the risk that I may lose my family to biological terror so that Iraqis might be "liberated"? What about the treatment of women in other Arab countries? What about the various horrors in other countries? If the US are indeed the world police, and we are morally bound to take action when we see injustice, and war is the appropriate catalyst for change, then Iraq should be but the first of dozens of countries bombed. It unnerves me that we in the US are being fed from a lazy susan full of pro-war arguments. The issue is ultimately one of trust in the leaders of our own regimes. David on 2/16/03 9:41 PM, sl.m@shaw.ca at sl.m@shaw.ca wrote: > This is from an open email to the peace movement written by Rania > Kashi, the 19-year-old Iraqi student living in the UK. It was quoted > by Tony Blair in his speech yesterday. The entire email can be read > at > http://www.opendemocracy.net/debates/article.jsp?id=2&debateId=88&articleId= 98> 3 > > > "You may feel that America is trying to blind you from seeing the > truth about its real reasons for an invasion. I must argue that in > fact, it is you who are still blind to the bigger truths in Iraq. I > must ask you to consider the following questions: > > * Saddam has murdered more than a million Iraqis over the past > thirty years; are you willing to allow him to kill another million? > * Out of a population of 20 million, 4 million Iraqis have been > forced to flee their country during Saddam's reign. Are you willing > to ignore the real and present danger that caused so many people to > leave their homes and families? > * Saddam rules Iraq using fear; he regularly imprisons, > executes and tortures large numbers of people for no reason > whatsoever. This may be hard to believe, and you may not even > appreciate the extent of such barbaric acts, but believe me you will > be hard-pressed to find a single family in Iraq which has not had a > son/father/brother killed, imprisoned, tortured and/or ''disappeared" > due to Saddam's regime. What then has been stopping you from taking > to the streets to protest against such blatant crimes against > humanity in the past? > * Saddam gassed thousands of political prisoners in one of his > campaigns to ''cleanse" prisons; why are you not protesting against > this barbaric act? > * This is an example of the dictator's policy you are trying to > save. Saddam has made a law excusing any man who rapes a female > relative and then murders her in the name of adultery. Do you still > want to march to keep him in power? > Throughout my life, my father and many other Iraqis have > attended constant meetings, protests and exhibitions that call for > the end of Saddam's reign. I remember when I was around 8 years old, > I went along with him to a demonstration at the French embassy, > protesting against the French sale of weapons to Saddam. I have > attended the permanent rally against Saddam that has been held every > Saturday in Trafalgar Square for the past five years. The Iraqi > people have been protesting for years against the war: the war that > Saddam has waged against them. Where have you been? > * Why is it now - at the very time that the Iraqi people are > being given real hope, however slight and however precarious, that > they can live in an Iraq that is free of the horrors partly described > in this email - that you deem it appropriate to voice your > disillusions with America's policy in Iraq?. . ." ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2003 01:06:53 -0500 From: "Jim L'Hommedieu \(Lama\)" Subject: PBS special- April 02, 2003: an update! As I recall, we were all operating under the understanding that Joni was interviewed for Alison Anders' documentary on the making of "Travelogue" but she declined to be interviewed for the PBS "Masters Series" special. Ain't necessarily so. It seems that PBS was in Bel Air last summer. Simon's list of "Appearances" at www.jonimitchell.com/appearances.html#2000 shows that PBS shot video on June 26 and took audio on July 01, last year. Hmmm. The PBS website http://www.pbs.org/wnet/americanmasters/database/mitchell_j_homepage.html still says it's gonna be aired on April 02, 2003. "Steady as she goes, Mister Sulu. Kirk out." Lama np: the first few hours of listening to room-canceling fiberglass enhancements which are yielding..... uh.... disappointingly subtle improvements. "Telling Me Lies" with Linda singing lead, backed up by Emmylou and Dolly. Gees, these girls are among the finest female singers I could name. Not bad- for girls. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2003 08:30:13 +0200 From: "ron" Subject: taylor ham/flight tonight hi wally k wrote >>> Subject: Re: Joni's guitars/Now with 29 Skaters on Wolman Rink I saw her in Minneapolis on the S&L tour, and as I recall, she had 3? identical blond colored fat hollow-body guitars that were very similar (if not identical) to the one(s) I'd seen Pat Metheny play numerous times (including this concert). The guitar on ebay is sunburst (but otherwise similar). Okay, I located my incredibly bad dub of this video, and sure enough, she is playing 2? different blond guitars (at least one is an Ibanez, which is what the one on ebay is). Got that? So she had, by my reckoning, at least four similar guitars, maybe many more. Did she have one for every one of her distinct tunings? Did she choose to only play blond ones while touring with Metheny, so that all the guitars on stage (not including Pastorius' bass) would match? (Incidentally, Metheny's guitar was a Gibson, and simpler than Joni's electronically, a true "jazz guitar".) I encourage everyone to go to this site and look at the amazing pictures http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2508437444; I, for one, will keenly watch the bidding over the next week or so. At 01:13 PM 2/16/2003 -0500, you wrote: >I have never bought anything on e-bay, and am not a collector. But this >guitar has to be pretty much way up there on a JM fan/collector's wish list. >Is it one of the guitars that was used in the S&L video ? ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2003 00:29:15 -0700 From: sl.m@shaw.ca Subject: Re: Open email to the peace movement NJC Hi David, I take your points. America and Britain can't go around liberating everyone. The thing about Saddam is that he has killed roughly 5 per cent of the Iraqi population. I believe the population of America is around 290 million, so imagine being ruled by a president who has killed 14.5 million of your fellow countrymen because they disagreed with him. This is almost uniquely evil in the history of genocide. (Stress on 'almost'). And that's not to mention the Iranians and Kuwaitis he killed. So Saddam is seen to be a special case. The other reasons for invasion are that he has weapons of mass destruction (whatever Hans Blix says) and has shown a willingness to use them. And because the Iraqi people are suffering under economic sanctions, which can't be lifted because of the weapons, but also can't continue because of the suffering they cause. Plus Saddam is a major supporter of Islamic and Palestinian terrorism, even if you discount the al-Qaeda connection - he pays for many of the Palestinian suicide bombers, Abu Nidal was based there until recently, Hamas, the PFLP, PFLP-GC, DFLP are all funded by Baghdad and have been for decades. The other reason for going after Saddam is that he's the weakest link in the Arab world of dictators -- he's disliked in the Arab world as well as in the West, so no-one will miss him. I think some of the more idealistic people in the Bush adminstration are hopeful that there might be a domino effect in the Middle East, with other states leaning toward democracy or at least an opening up of their government as was recently announced in Saudi Arabia. The risk of another major terrorist attack is high with or without the war. Osama bin Laden will hang any attacks on the war with Iraq, but if we didn't go to war, he'd hang it on something else. What was September 11 in retaliation for? It was in retaliation for being American. People said there would be attacks after America liberated Kuwait. Do you remember the long flowery speeches Saddam made, in which he seemed to be instructing people to move forward with terrorist attacks - he said things like "Ahmed, go to the bank", "Mohammad, proceed with the plan" and on and on for hours, literally, wanting these messages to be played on CNN. But in fact, nothing happened. I know what you mean about trust. I can't say much about George Bush, but I trust Tony Blair. I don't see him as a puppet at all and he's not a warmonger. If Saddam has weapons of mass destruction, and if we don't go to war and he used them one day, think how high the number of casualties would be then. So I suppose we're risking some now, to save more later. Sarah At 9:55 PM -0800 02/16/2003, David Marine wrote: >Certainly when we hear about the conditions in Iraq, we feel compelled to >take action. What if it is true, however, that a war with Iraq may increase the chances of a retaliatory terrorist attack? ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2003 02:03:07 -0500 From: ljirvin@jmdl.com Subject: Today in History: February 17 1966: Chuck and Joni Mitchell perform at the Chess Mate in Detroit. 1970: During a concert at London's Royal Albert Hall, Joni announced that she was quitting live performance, - ---- For a comprehensive reference to Joni's appearances, consult Joni Mitchell ~ A Chronology of Appearances: http://www.jonimitchell.com/appearances.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2003 02:03:07 -0500 From: ljirvin@jmdl.com Subject: Today's Library Links: February 17 On February 17 the following items were published: 1973: "Roses and Kisses" - Sounds (Biography, with photographs) http://www.jmdl.com/articles/view.cfm?id=346 1995: "From Blue to Indigo" - Goldmine (Biography, with photographs) http://www.jmdl.com/articles/view.cfm?id=115 1995: "From Blue to Indigo (Part 2)" - Goldmine (Biography, with photographs) http://www.jmdl.com/articles/view.cfm?id=943 ------------------------------ End of JMDL Digest V2003 #121 ***************************** ------- 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)