From: les@jmdl.com (JMDL Digest) To: joni-digest@smoe.org Subject: JMDL Digest V2003 #130 Reply-To: joni@smoe.org Sender: les@jmdl.com Errors-To: les@jmdl.com Precedence: bulk Unsubscribe: mailto:joni-digest-request@smoe.org?body=unsubscribe Archives: http://www.smoe.org/lists/joni Websites: http://www.jmdl.com http://www.jonimitchell.com JMDL Digest Friday, February 21 2003 Volume 2003 : Number 130 Sign up now for JoniFest 2003! http://www.jonifest.com ========== TOPICS and authors in this Digest: -------- Counting Crows - BYT [hell ] Re: politics NJC ["Lori Fye" ] Re: politics NJC ["Victor Johnson" ] Re: To Debra NJC [colin ] Re: politics NJC [colin ] Philip Larkin poem NJC ["Kate Bennett" ] Re: politics NJC ["Lori Fye" ] WORDMAPS NJC ["Kate Bennett" ] Re: politics NJC ["chuty001" ] Re: politics NJC ["Lori Fye" ] Re: Napalm etc NJC [AzeemAK@aol.com] Peace song NJC ["kerry" ] Re: politics NJC [hell ] Re: e-bomb (njc) [AzeemAK@aol.com] Re: politics NJC ["Lori Fye" ] RE: Naming names (NJC) ["patrick leader" ] Re: Napalm etc NJC [sl.m@shaw.ca] Re: politics NJC [AzeemAK@aol.com] Re: Naming names (NJC) [colin ] Re: Napalm etc NJC ["Lori Fye" ] Re: Napalm etc NJC [AzeemAK@aol.com] Re: e-bomb (njc) ["Lori Fye" ] Re: Re: politics NJC [hell ] what day is it? njc [RoseMJoy@aol.com] Re: what day is it? njc [FMYFL@aol.com] Re: Napalm etc NJC [sl.m@shaw.ca] Re: e-bomb (njc) [sl.m@shaw.ca] Re: Calling UK John Martyn fans, njc [colin ] njc democracy at work [vince ] Re: sjc / Beatles / Clifford T [Freddyb4@aol.com] On a more serious note - The Merm! - njc ["Jerry Notaro" ] Bryan Thomas' "Ones and Zeros" CD, njc ["Jim L'Hommedieu \(Lama\)" ] Joni on war ["Lori Fye" ] Re: e-bomb (njc) ["Lori Fye" ] Re: e-bomb (njc) [sl.m@shaw.ca] deb talan NJC [Mags N Brei ] Re: e-bomb (njc) ["kakki" ] Re: e-bomb (njc) ["kakki" ] RE: Ben Taylor Band njc ["Kate Bennett" ] Re: e-bomb (njc) [sl.m@shaw.ca] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 14:27:27 -0800 (PST) From: hell Subject: Counting Crows - BYT The Counting Crows are currently racing up the NZ singles chart (from the Recording Industry Association of NZ website) - currently at No. 22 (No. 34 last week, No. 43 the week before) in their third week in the Top 50. I've managed to catch the last 5 seconds of the video at least three times, but have yet to see or hear the whole thing! I like what I've seen so far, though. Also this, from Ticketek (the NZ version of TicketMaster), promoting their March concert: From the title track "Hard Candy", through to "Miami", "If I Could Give All My Love", "Richard Manuel Is Dead" ? all are on par with the glory of what clicked with "August?..". A non-listed cover of Joni Mitchell?s "Big Yellow Taxi" featuring Vanessa Carlton is a hidden jewel, which is currently flooding New Zealand radio waves. Hell ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 14:37:22 -0800 From: "Lori Fye" Subject: Re: politics NJC > I wonder a little bit what list I'm on. Why Victor, that would be ... "... the Joni Mitchell Discussion List - commonly called the JMDL - ... a(n) ... unmoderated discussion of anything and everything related to the life, art, music, and times of Joni Mitchell."* Oh these times, these times Oh these changing times Change in the heart of all mankind Oh these troubled times Lori *See http://www.smoe.org/lists/joni.info ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 17:42:57 -0800 From: "Victor Johnson" Subject: Re: politics NJC > "... the Joni Mitchell Discussion List - commonly called the JMDL - ... > a(n) ... unmoderated discussion of anything and everything related to > the life, art, music, and times of Joni Mitchell."* Thanks for clearing that up! 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: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 22:43:20 +0000 From: colin Subject: Re: To Debra NJC dsk wrote: > > > >>And this is where I have come to think there is a fundamental difference >>between some of the left and those on the right. My ideologies do not >>control my every move every waking minute. >> >> > >Yes, this is a fundamental difference in the way we see things. To me, >one's politics come from the inside, from one's deep-seated core >beliefs. > i believe our 'ideologies' DO instruct our evey waking minute. It cannot be otherwise. However, what we call our 'ideologies' and how we behave and really think, may not be the same.As has been said before, the personal IS politcla and it cannot be gotten away from. Each of us is the the productof our thoughts and idea, our emaning constructs. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 22:47:50 +0000 From: colin Subject: Re: politics NJC Victor Johnson wrote: >> >> > > >Since this is so clear, that most people are never going to agree, I'm left >kind of wondering what the incentive is for such in depth discussions all >relating to politics and war. > the world is teetering on a precipice. is it any wonder people are discussing it? I find the opposite, those not thinking about it or discussing it, to be hard to understand. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 15:00:00 -0800 From: "Kate Bennett" Subject: Philip Larkin poem NJC >Of each other, we should be kind While there is still time.< sarah, this is such a good reminder, thank you...i had a conversation with friends this weekend on this very subject, we all felt that kindness is so undervalued in our world & yet one of the most important things we consider in choosing our friends... to everyone, i have been reading some of the posts & contemplating what it is that seems to go off kilter here (or at least with me) from time to time & what might be the cause of this... communicating well is certainly an art & i hope this one small observation helps in some way...it has helped me in understanding myself so i share it in hopes it resonates with others... what has irritated me in the past is when generalzations are made by someone about a 'group' who they profess to have an understanding of, but who they do not identify with...a good example of some common words used here lately are 'right' & 'left'... i suppose these are valid terms to use when one is describing oneself but when used as a generalization to speak about others it can often be perceived as insulting, directly or subtlety... of course this works from both 'sides'...even if one might identify more with being 'left' or 'right' (or numerous other distinctions by which we attempt to define ourselves or others) nobody wants to be lumped in with someone else's perceptions of that group, especially if that someone else's perceptions are negative... i think we all want to be seen as individuals...we all want to be understood...& we all need to be concious of not making generalizations about any group of people whether it is ethinic background, religious affiliation, political affiliation, geographic location, sexual orientation etc etc...or any other ways is which people are grouped together... because as soon as anyone makes a generalization about 'others' (especially if those 'others' is perceived negatively by the person making the statement) someone who may identify in some way with that group is going to be offended... i hope this is not as perceived as something meant to restrain communications but rather to enhance them... peace, kate ******************************************** 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 ******************************************** "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful committed citizens can change the world, indeed it is the only thing that ever has." Margaret Mead ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 15:09:23 -0800 From: "Lori Fye" Subject: Re: politics NJC > the world is teetering on a precipice. is it any wonder people are > discussing it? I find the opposite, those not thinking about it or > discussing it, to be hard to understand. Whatever do you mean, Colin? People are very busy thinking about and discussing oil, inasmuch as they're trying to decide which gigantic SUV they're going to buy so they can take advantage of Bush's proposed tax break. Lori, who HATES Hummers, Navigators, Escalades, Excursions, Expeditions, Suburbans, and any of the "luxury" SUVs that are driven in cities and that will never be used for off-road adventure, and aren't even used to effectively get around in the piles of snow here in Maryland - god forbid the damn things get their paint scratched! ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 15:50:30 -0800 From: "Kate Bennett" Subject: WORDMAPS NJC wow lucy, your words carry such deep beauty, thank you for taking the time to express yourself... i agree with all that you said & am grateful for another here who sees with the same eyes... ******************************************** 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 ******************************************** "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful committed citizens can change the world, indeed it is the only thing that ever has." Margaret Mead ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 18:58:35 -0500 From: "chuty001" Subject: Re: politics NJC > Lori, > who HATES Hummers, Navigators, Escalades, Excursions, Expeditions, > Suburbans, and any of the "luxury" SUVs that are driven in cities and > that will never be used for off-road adventure, and aren't even used to > effectively get around in the piles of snow here in Maryland - god > forbid the damn things get their paint scratched! > I always hum while navigating on my expeditions and excursions to view the suburban in their lap of luxury. Please don't hate me for it.:-) Chuck ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 16:02:32 -0800 From: "Lori Fye" Subject: Re: politics NJC > I always hum while navigating on my expeditions and excursions to > view the suburban in their lap of luxury. Please don't hate me for > it.:-) Chuck!!! You made me "chuck"le right out loud!! Thanks. Lori ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 19:27:11 EST From: AzeemAK@aol.com Subject: Re: Napalm etc NJC In a message dated 20/02/2003 11:46:32 GMT Standard Time, sl.m@shaw.ca writes: << Just one point about not much footage being shown of bodies during the last Gulf War. There was footage taken, but it was not shown on television or used much in the newspapers. These were decisions taken by the news organizations - not wanting to upset viewers. >> I don't dispute that footage was taken that wasn't shown; I stand by my original point, though, that journalists' and TV reporters' access to what was going on was heavily circumscribed by limits imposed by the military - and I believe that this severely limited what could be accurately reported on. This belief is borne out by the wealth of information that only emerged months or years after the war. As to the squeamishness of the media in depicting the horrors of war, well, why is that exactly? TV stations in Portugal, for example, don't censor news footage at all, which means that some truly horrific stuff gets shown about wars and other types of strife. Could this be connected to the decidedly non-warlike nature of the Portuguese people (and yes I know that is a generalisation, but roughly speaking it holds water)? Conversely, consider how few people own the western mass media, especially in the USA and the UK and Italy, and, as a corollary, how many media outlets are owned by a single person or company (Rupert Murdoch's News International empire, for example, owns no fewer than 175 newspapers around the world). The agendas of *very* few people dictate what a huge number of people get to hear and read about. Then there is the quashing of dissenting voices, which in the case of individuals results in the vilification of people like Chomsky; there is an unfeasible amount of disinformation about this *great* man around, to the extent that it's hard to blame anyone who is taken in by the many lies that have become received wisdom: he supported the Khmer Rouge; he gave succour to Holocaust deniers; he is anti-American; he is anti-semitic (even though he is Jewish, this is a claim that has been made against him). None of these things can be substantiated by anything he's actually said, but it's easy to get away with repeating them because (in accordance with his belief in free speech) he refuses to sue anyone for libel. On a wider scale of silencing dissent, we get the curious case of the silencing of Al-Jazeera, which the USA somehow got away with, despite the brazen methods they used, ie bombing their HQ in Kabul. Again, it was widely reported that Al-Jazeera was little more than a mouthpiece for Osama bin Laden and other Islamic fundamentalist terrorists - indeed this is what I believed at the time, as I had not actually seen any of their broadcasts or read any detailed accounts of their editorial standpoints. However, it is another lie. There's a good article about the station at the link below. http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,890684,00.html Azeem in London NP: Bjork - Vespertine ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 18:40:14 -0600 From: "kerry" Subject: Peace song NJC The Indigo Girls closed their recent concert here with this song. I've been searching the internet for the words and finally found it. I thought it would be appropriate to share given the recent discussions: This is My Song Lyrics: Lloyd Stone Music: Jean Sibelius This is my song, O God of all the nations, a song of peace for lands afar and mine. This is my home, the country where my heart is; here are my hopes, my dreams my holy shrine; but other hearts in other lands are beating with hopes and dreams as true and high as mine. My country's skies are bluer than the ocean, and sunlight beams on cloverleaf and pine; but other lands have sunlight too, and clover, and skies are everywhere as blue as mine. O hear my song, thou God of all the nations, a song of peace for their land and for mine. Kerry ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 16:52:58 -0800 (PST) From: hell Subject: Re: politics NJC Victor wrote: > Since this is so clear, that most people are never going to agree, > I'm left kind of wondering what the incentive is for such in depth > discussions all relating to politics and war. I know when I get > together with friends in Atlanta we don't sit around and discuss > war and politics, or religion for that matter. Yes, I know I can > simply delete posts I don't want to read but when I'm deleting most > of them and reading only a few, I wonder a little bit what list I'm > on. And I bet the people on the "War and Politics" discussion list are getting really pissed off about all those annoying messages about Joni Mitchell! Personally I couldn't think of anything more boring than getting together with friends to discuss religion and politics. Sex might feature occasionally though...... ;o) Seriously, I'm all for freedom of speech, and an unmoderated list (and this is not a complaint, just a comment). I know this is a list for the "discussion of anything and everything related to the life, art, music, and times of Joni Mitchell", but I would almost put money on the fact that no one here looked at the JMDL home page, and thought, "Ooh, yeah, I'll sign up for that list so I can talk about Saddam Hussein!" My delete key is getting a good work-out these days as well! Hell ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 19:58:59 EST From: AzeemAK@aol.com Subject: Re: e-bomb (njc) In a message dated 20/02/2003 12:10:08 GMT Standard Time, kakkib@vzavenue.net writes: << I thought that the illness from depleted uranium in warheads was connected with the war in Bosnia. I had not heard about this in connection with the gulf war syndrome. Maybe you or Sarah can point me to the info. >> Kakki, it is widely believed (and that is putting it mildly) that depleted uranium was used in the gulf war as well; for a sample item, you could try the link below: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/362484.stm << Many people in the west, particularly in the U.S,. were shown it every night TV for about 10 years during the Vietnam war and I think it left most with an utter dread and abhorrence of war. Many of those same people also watched live on TV the mass murder and carnage of thousands of innocent people on 9/11/01 and were left with an utter fear and dread of it ever happening again. >> First question: are you suggesting that waging war on Iraq now will achieve this aim? I simply don't believe it. Second question: imagine how the people of Bagdhad will feel when bombs rain down from the skies and destroy their buildings, killing hundreds or maybe thousands of innocent civilians - no less innocent than those who lost their lives on September 11, let us remember. Imagine how the people of Khartoum felt when the US Air Force levelled a huge pharmaceuticals factory with 13 (yes, thirteen) cruise missiles in 1998. Not a shred of evidence was ever produced to substantiate claims that the factory was producing weapons of any sort; indeed the factory owner's Bank of America assets, which had been frozen by Washington, were subsequently released without condition, which was more or less an admission that the attack on the factory had been a catastrophic mistake. To people in Khartoum, this assault would have been terrifying and unforgivable - and we must remember that the attacks were authorised not by some crazed fanatics but by the US government [insert punchline here]. And I'm not trying to make a party political point here, I know it was Clinton who gave the go-ahead for this atrocity, although who's to say Bush wouldn't have done the same. So yes, many of us were left with a horror of war, and a horror of mass murder and destruction of civilian targets - I believe, though, that this applies to ALL countries, not just the USA. If you support war on Iraq, I believe that it is incumbent on you to consider these issues. Azeem in London ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 16:59:52 -0800 From: "Lori Fye" Subject: Re: politics NJC > And I bet the people on the "War and Politics" discussion list are > getting really pissed off about all those annoying messages about > Joni Mitchell! LOL, Hell! > I would almost put money on the fact that no one here looked at the > JMDL home page, and thought, "Ooh, yeah, I'll sign up for that list > so I can talk about Saddam Hussein!" I'm sure you're right about that, but ... well, in addition to the delete key there is always the option of sending an email to to say ... unsubscribe joni subscribe onlyjoni or unsubscribe joni-digest subscribe onlyjoni-digest : ) Lori ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 19:50:25 -0500 From: "patrick leader" Subject: RE: Naming names (NJC) i would like to say i do apologize for using kakki's real name. i had forgotten that there were real reasons why we've honored this. i will point out that: 1) kakki took the high road and didn't mention it. 2) lori was gentle with me 3a) jim took the low road by using my error to malign my other argument, and, even better; 3b) quoting my whole original post, thereby doubling the instances of her name on smoe.org. nice way to protect her from search engines! actually, i think smoe has some security that prevents search engines and other programs from accessing the archives. that doesn't excuse my lapse though. i'm sorry kakki. patrick np - dave matthews band - sleep to dream her ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 19:04:31 -0700 From: sl.m@shaw.ca Subject: Re: Napalm etc NJC Azeem, I agree with most of what you say, although not about Chomsky - - I've never seen him concede a single point to anyone: he's too much of an ideologue for me. Self-censorship is a problem too with war correspondents. When journalists are embedded in a unit they do get to see a lot, and the press briefings given by Schwartzkopf and Powell during the last gulf war were detailed and explicit. But the networks will only choose correspondents who can be trusted, and this boils down to, in part, being prepared to "tow the party line" but also in part to recognizing that not everything can be reported while the war is going on, for genuine security reasons. So news directors and editors choose very particular types of correspondents for these jobs - -- "responsible" ones -- and it's THEIR filters that obstruct the viewer/reader as much as, and perhaps more than, the military's. Robert Fisk wrote about how, when he wandered off on his own one day, it was the other journalists who had a go at him, not the military, because he risked "spoiling it for everyone". Although in fairness to the correspondents, it's impossible to judge in the heat of a battle whether what you report might harm people, so you can understand why they would err on the side of caution. I agree with the points made in Chomsky's The Manufacture of Consent - - that editors tend to employ people who are like them, which means there's an inherent conservatism in the way news organizations evolve. It applies as much to the left as to the right. Radical departures from a newspaper's ideology in search of truth are rare. The other problem networks have is access, which is all they care about. If one network or newspaper repeatedly does things the U.S. or British govt don't like, they get cut off or restricted. The viewers are a problem too because they don't want to see this stuff - when anything explicit i(i.e. warlike) is shown, they complain in droves. Do you remember the bombing of the al-Amiriya bomb shelter in February 1991 that housed the wives and children of Saddam's senior men? The aftermath of that was extensively filmed, but virtually none of it was shown in Britain or North America. Even the left-leaning newspapers in Britain didn't use it -- readers don't have the stomach for it. I agree completely with the points you made about ownership and the news agenda being controlled by a very small number of people. Sarah At 7:27 PM -0500 02/20/2003, azeemak@aol.com wrote: >. . . journalists' and TV reporters' access to what was going on was >heavily circumscribed by limits imposed by the military - and I >believe that this severely limited what could be accurately reported >on. This belief is borne out by the wealth of information that only >emerged months or years after the war. As to the squeamishness of >the media in depicting the horrors of war, well, why is that >exactly?. . . ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 20:08:13 EST From: AzeemAK@aol.com Subject: Re: politics NJC In a message dated 21/02/2003 00:45:43 GMT Standard Time, hell@ihug.co.nz writes: << Seriously, I'm all for freedom of speech, and an unmoderated list (and this is not a complaint, just a comment). I know this is a list for the "discussion of anything and everything related to the life, art, music, and times of Joni Mitchell", but I would almost put money on the fact that no one here looked at the JMDL home page, and thought, "Ooh, yeah, I'll sign up for that list so I can talk about Saddam Hussein!" >> Greetings Hell, Someone put it brilliantly recently (Catherine, was it?): there are specialist discussion groups for each and every subject that comes up on these pages; but I want to talk about stuff with THIS group of people, my cyber-friends and acqaintances, as these are people I care about and share a common bond with. Azeem in London PS New Zealand aren't doing badly in the world cup, hey? Worth a small wager, perhaps, so those in the know are saying... ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 01:08:36 +0000 From: colin Subject: Re: Naming names (NJC) >actually, i think smoe has some security that prevents search engines and >other programs from accessing the archives. > afraid not as i found tonight after Lori's post on this subject. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 17:17:04 -0800 From: "Lori Fye" Subject: Re: Napalm etc NJC Sarah wrote: > What you say about the E-bomb and the napalm is very interesting - > there are too many people suffering from Gulf War Syndrome for it to > be a cooincidence. Well then, why not do it all over again???? Disgusted, Lori ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 20:17:55 EST From: AzeemAK@aol.com Subject: Re: Napalm etc NJC In a message dated 21/02/2003 01:05:42 GMT Standard Time, sl.m@shaw.ca writes: << I agree with the points made in Chomsky's The Manufacture of Consent - that editors tend to employ people who are like them, which means there's an inherent conservatism in the way news organizations evolve. It applies as much to the left as to the right. Radical departures from a newspaper's ideology in search of truth are rare. >> I would take issue with your statement that it applies as much to left as right. Although that is true *in theory*, in practice, I think you would agree, the people who own these monstrous organisations are unequivocally to the right politically. Murdoch, Conrad Black, Berlusconi, etc etc. Azeem ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 17:20:42 -0800 From: "Lori Fye" Subject: Re: e-bomb (njc) Kakki wrote: > Many of those same people also watched live on TV the mass murder and > carnage of thousands of innocent people on 9/11/01 and were left with > an utter fear and dread of it ever happening again. All I can say is ... 9-11-01: 15 Saudis, 0 Iraqis. Lori "Justice Or Just Us?" ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 17:39:09 -0800 (PST) From: hell Subject: Re: Re: politics NJC Azeem wrote: > Someone put it brilliantly recently (Catherine, was it?): there are > specialist discussion groups for each and every subject that comes up > on these pages; but I want to talk about stuff with THIS group of > people, my cyber-friends and acqaintances, as these are people I care > about and share a common bond with. Fair comment, and like I said, I wasn't complaining, just commenting. I have no desire to discuss those things here, but I'd never try to stop anyone else. My delete key works just fine, and on the bright side, I don't have to spend hours responding to all those annoying posts about Joni and other music ;o) Note: I am joking, people! I don't need to change to digest, or Joni-only - I'm quite happy with the way I've been using the JMDL for the past 4 or 5 years. >PS New Zealand aren't doing badly in the world cup, hey? Worth a small >wager, perhaps, so those in the know are saying... Oooh, I'm not sure I'd go that far! We did amazingly well against South Africa (commiserations, Ron) and our Top 6 spot is looking a little more likely, but I'm not sure I'd put money on us to win! I would consider Sri Lanka or Australia a safer bet (much as I hate to admit it)! Hell ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 20:40:41 EST From: RoseMJoy@aol.com Subject: what day is it? njc The hell with all this politics, it's my feckin 50th Birthday!!!duh U r toast Jimmy!!! LMAO rosie Better ask questions before you shoot Deceit and betrayal's bitter fruit It's hard to swallow, come time to pay. That taste on your tongue don't easily slip away Let Kingdom come. I'm gonna find my way Through this lonesome day ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 20:50:09 EST From: FMYFL@aol.com Subject: Re: what day is it? njc In a message dated 2/20/03 8:41:43 PM Eastern Standard Time, RoseMJoy@aol.com writes: > The hell with all this politics, it's my feckin 50th Birthday!!!duh > U r toast Jimmy!!! LMAO > > Well since the *true* Bday fairy is now in the USA, I guess I best step in. Happy Happy Fucking Birthday Rosalita!!!! May all your dreams come true, and that means Bruce Springsteen will be knocking at your door any minute now. (He's been begging me for your address). I hope I'm still not toast :~( xoxox Jimmy ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 19:51:01 -0700 From: sl.m@shaw.ca Subject: Re: Napalm etc NJC No, what I meant is that radical departure from a news organization's ideology is rare, and that applies equally to left and right. This is why I admire Nick Cohen so much. He's arguing against his natural constituency and losing a lot of friends because of it, but he won't give up, which is brave, and journalists are rarely brave because they have a living to make. Yes, I agree that the big owners are to the right. But not everyone who supports the invasion is rightwing and everyone who opposes it left. (I don't like these terms much as I've said before.) Neo-nazis were marching against the war yesterday in Germany, and the London Times doesn't seem keen on it. Yet the Observer, which is leftwing, supports it. Sarah At 8:17 PM -0500 02/20/2003, AzeemAK@aol.com wrote: >I would take issue with your statement that it applies as much to >left as right. Although that is true *in theory*, in practice, I >think you would agree, the people who own these monstrous >organisations are unequivocally to the right politically. Murdoch, >Conrad Black, Berlusconi, etc etc. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 19:53:20 -0700 From: sl.m@shaw.ca Subject: Re: e-bomb (njc) They weren't Saudis supported by the Saudi government, Lori. You almost never find Iraqis personally involved in terrorism. Saddam is a paymaster, not a participant. Sarah At 5:20 PM -0800 02/20/2003, Lori Fye wrote: >All I can say is ... > >9-11-01: 15 Saudis, 0 Iraqis. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 01:55:32 +0000 From: colin Subject: Re: Calling UK John Martyn fans, njc recording completed and ready to be shipped..... Laurent Olszer wrote: >>Hi, just to let you know that John Martyn will be on 'The Whistle Test >> >> >Years' tonight (Thursday 20th). It's on BBC2 at 11.50 pm. and is a recording >from 1973. >If anybody manages to tape it, I'd be interested in a trade please. > >Laurent ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 17:57:52 -0800 From: Richard Goldman Subject: Re: Ben Taylor Band njc I'll let you know what I think, after tomorrow night, Kate. I'm seeing him in this teeny weeny club here in SF, Cafe DuNord. His hand movements on Leno... reminded me of ... Eminem, kinda sorta, but his words and music, more like his dads, kinda sorta. That voice definitely like his dads. Those abs and arms though: whoa! He is a hunk-o-la! It's gotta be hard to make it in the music industry no matter what...but famous parents definitely help. Richard >Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 >From: "Kate Bennett" >Subject: Re: Ben Taylor Band njc > >fipping to leno at the end of his show to see who the musical guest might be >& it only took one note & one look to know that it must be james's >son...wow...ben sounds & looks so much like his dad which in one way is a >very good thing but i wonder if it is hard for him to sound & look so >similar, as he makes his own way in the music biz... ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 21:01:13 -0500 From: vince Subject: njc democracy at work Hello there, > Anyone can go to this website http://www.house.gov/writerep/ and put in > your zip code to write to your Congressmember and urge them to sign on to > the House Joint Resolution 20 to take back the Congressional > responsibility of declaration of war, which was illegally given to Bush > last October. > > This is among the first signs of life from the opposition electeds and we > need to lend our voices to their small numbers, asking our Congressional > representatives to step forward. The 133 Congressmember who voted against > giving him war powers then should be among the first to step up and sign on >> to this legislation sponsored by Pete DeFazio and Ron Paul. >> >> Please write to your representative today and ask them to take a stand and >> listen to their constituency. >> >> Thanks, >> Shelly and Joan >> ------------------ >> Ultimately, only Congress has the power to stop Bush, so whatever else >> you do in the next week, please email your Congressperson and urge > > her/him >> to sign onto a bill sponsored Cong. Pete DeFazio (D-Oregon) and Ron Paul >> (R-Texas) -- House Joint Resolution 20 -- which repeals last October's >> resolution giving Bush a free hand to use military action in Iraq. >> >> DeFazio's statement and summary of his bill is pasted below. So is the > > list >> of Congressmembers who so far have agreed to cosponsor DeFazio's bill. >> (Check to see if yours is on the list. DeFazio filed this within hours of >> Colin Powell's speech to the UN, so could only round up about 30 > > cosponsors >> immediately, but the number will grow if you and others put pressure on > > your >> Congressperson. >> >> Please forward this to anyone who might be concerned about our pending >> invasion of Iraq. The basic message to your Congressperson is: >> >> "Please support HJR 20 cosponsored by Cong. Pete DeFazio and Cong. Ron >> Paul to repeal the October resolution giving President Bush a free hand to >> use military force against Iraq." >> >> For more about this, see Peter Dreier's article in The Nation,"Lobbying > > for >> Peace" (http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20030224 >> > >> Cosponsors of HJR 20 as of 2/13: >> DeFazio, Paul, Kucinich,McDermott,Sanders,Baldwin,Lee,Grijalva,Owens,Tubbs >> Jones,Oberstar,Waters,Schakowsky,J. >> Carson,Conyers,Towns,Farr,Olver,Norton,Serrano,Watson,Kleczka,D. >> Davis,Filner,Frank,Rush,Jackson Jr.,Capuano,Stark,William Lacy Clay >> >> > d108query.html> NEWS >> --------------------------------- >> from Representative PETER DeFAZIO >> Fourth Congressional District, Oregon >> >> February 5, 2003 >> >> FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE >> >> DeFAZIO, PAUL INTRODUCE BILL TO REPEAL BUSH'S BLANK CHECK FOR WAR >> >> WASHINGTON, DC- Reps. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.) and Ron Paul (R-TX) today >> introduced legislation to repeal the Iraq Use of Force Resolution passed >> by Congress and signed into law by the President last fall. Following is >> DeFazio's statement: >> >> "I heard no new evidence today from Secretary Powell's address to the > > United >> Nations, that would convince me that military action in Iraq >> is necessary to improve security of Americans. >> >> "Americans want the President to lay a clear case for immediate >> military action in Iraq, but the Administration's message keeps > > changing-six >> months ago, their case hinged on regime change, three months ago it was >> Saddam thwarting inspections, three weeks ago it was possible possession > > of >> chemical weapons, today its tenuous terrorist links. If the case was > > clear, >> it would have been clear from day one. >> >> "Our nation's immediate threat is still Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda >> terrorist network. We have full knowledge of North Korea's equally >> rapidly developing nuclear weapons program under the control of an equally >> diabolical leader. There's well-published accounts of several Mid-east >> governments aiding and funding known terrorists. Of America's imminent >> threats, Saddam Hussein is much lower on the list. >> >> "Saddam Hussein is a brutal untrustworthy tyrant, but he is being >> contained, and we should allow weapons inspectors to continue their work. >> >> "The President seeks war, this is clear. The Constitution grants the >> Congress sole authority to declare war, and I believe the President >> should come before Congress to seek that authority. Our resolution allows >> him that option." >> >> The legislation introduced today would repeal Public Law 107-243. >> The bill text reads in total: >> >> "Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United >> States of America in Congress assembled, Section 1. Repeal of Public Law >> 107-243. >> >> The Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution >> of 2002 (Public Law 107-243; 116 Stat. 1498) is hereby repealed." >> >> The legislation repeals the broad delegation of authority Congress >> gave to the President in October, to launch military action against Iraq. >> Under this legally-binding resolution, the President would have to return > > to >> Congress to seek authority to launch a preventive attack on Iraq. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 21:01:32 EST From: Freddyb4@aol.com Subject: Re: sjc / Beatles / Clifford T Evening all (DODG ?) Earlier I visited a James Taylor site and there was a picture of Joni on stage with James 1969 ? nothing grand, you will probably have seen it. The BBC have announced that next month they will screen footage shot for the Beatles Anthology, Paul and Ringo got together at Georges place and recorded more than an hour of songs, mainly from the early years. Someone mentioned "The Whistle Test Years" Clifford T Ward was included, gentle music, from a gentle man. Look out for Kris Kristofferson and Rita Coolidge singing "Help me make it through the night" it's a bit special. Oh, this is "Up In The World". by Clifford T You've come Up In The World, And it's all to your credit. You made something of your life Like you always said you would. But what ever happened to the girl I used to know and all those halcyon days of love? You've come Up In The World, And it's such a shame. You made success of a dream, But it seems so empty now With your weak excuses and your Condescending ways and Your all-too-frequent nights alone. Liked your poem Lucy "All about the war and the bloody changes !" FREDDYB4 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 21:21:15 -0500 From: "Jerry Notaro" Subject: On a more serious note - The Merm! - njc Some of you more astute listers may remember my post of joy that Ethel Merman's Disco album was finally being released on cd. This classic has had to endure bad reviews, but what a shock to read The Advocate's review this week. It is titled "Disco Wrecking Ball." Horrors!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Jerry ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 21:24:11 EST From: RoseMJoy@aol.com Subject: Re: what day is it? njc In a message dated 2/20/03 8:50:09 PM Eastern Standard Time, FMY FL writes: > Well since the *true* Bday fairy is now in the USA, I guess I best step in. Where is that Wallister? Boss-ton Bruce is in Sommerville,MA tonight!!! bring him to me Wally!!!!! > > Happy Happy Fucking Birthday Rosalita!!!! > May all your dreams come true, and that means Bruce Springsteen will be > knocking at your door any minute now. (He's been begging me for your > address). > > I hope I'm still not toast :~( maybe french toast deputy=0) I still love u Jimmy 15 more days till Boss-time!!!!!!!! NW: JAX > > Better ask questions before you shoot Deceit and betrayal's bitter fruit It's hard to swallow, come time to pay. That taste on your tongue don't easily slip away Let Kingdom come. I'm gonna find my way Through this lonesome day ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 19:14:37 -0800 (PST) From: anne@sandstrom.com Subject: apology I'm leaving off the NJC because I wanted to apologize to all for there being no NJC and no subject in a political post I made yesterday. (I hit Reply, but for some reason the subject line never got filled in.) And now for some Joni content. I saw a show about the American Music Awards a few weeks ago. Larry Klein was prominently featured, as he's been an integral part of producing the show for a number of years. I was wondering if what seems to be Joni's increased and more vocal criticism of the industry is in part due to seeing the adulation afforded other stars, especially surrounding this type of show. (Not that she's been exactly sheltered.) I'm not phrasing this well, but I'm wondering if others have observations about the Larry Klein/music award connection. lots of love Anne ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 22:21:03 -0500 From: Bruce Kimerer Subject: S&G/Grammys (NJC) I heard today that Simon & Garfunkel will perform together on the Grammys when they get their lifetime achievement award. My guess for their selections given current events: Scarborough Fair America Bruce ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 22:39:59 -0500 From: "Jim L'Hommedieu \(Lama\)" Subject: Bryan Thomas' "Ones and Zeros" CD, njc On Bryan Thomas' cd "Ones and Zeros", there's a song called "Shine". It's track #10. To me, he sounds like he "putting on" Sly Stone of Sly and The Family Stone from 2:50 mm/ss to 3:20 mm/ss. It's complete with funk organ and 60s distortion. "Tha-aa-t little light 'o mine. I'm gonna let it shine Oh, that light of mine I'm gonna let it shi-iii-ne" How 'bout it, Bryan? Am I right? Are you letting your influences shine, shine, shine? Lama ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 20:33:15 -0800 From: "Lori Fye" Subject: Re: what day is it? njc > The hell with all this politics, it's my feckin 50th Birthday!!!duh > U r toast Jimmy!!! LMAO No way, Rosie! I thought you were MAYBE 35! Have a happy one, honey!! Lori ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 20:45:38 -0800 From: "Lori Fye" Subject: Joni on war "I think that we should turn the United States Marines loose on that little island south of Florida and stop that problem!" Let's inject a little JC into the ongoing NJC discussion about war. Given the above lyric, does anyone want to venture an opinion about what Joni thinks of the proposed war against Iraq? Lori ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 20:49:06 -0800 From: "Lori Fye" Subject: Re: e-bomb (njc) > They weren't Saudis supported by the Saudi government, Lori. You > almost never find Iraqis personally involved in terrorism. Saddam is > a paymaster, not a participant. I'm sure there are volumes of material to support your statement, Sarah, but my heart and gut tell me something different. Can't explain why, just a feeling ... Lori, whose gut tends to be pretty damn accurate ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 22:51:25 -0700 From: sl.m@shaw.ca Subject: Re: e-bomb (njc) There are many people who would agree with you Lori, and the jury's still out on it. Sarah At 8:49 PM -0800 02/20/2003, Lori Fye wrote: >I'm sure there are volumes of material to support your statement, >Sarah, but my heart and gut tell me something different. Can't explain >why, just a feeling ... ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 20:52:39 -0800 (PST) From: Mags N Brei Subject: deb talan NJC i've just been given the heads up about singer / songwriter deb talan...anyone heard of her or know anything about her? i would appreciate any information you may have on her. thanks. mags. You open my heart, you do. Yes you do. - JM Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, and more ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 21:11:59 -0800 From: "kakki" Subject: Re: e-bomb (njc) Hey Lori, Thanks for your support recently. I appreciate it. Honest question by me. Why would the Saudis officially want to support terrorism against us? I'm not saying that aren't but why would they when they get most of their income from the West and have something like $500 billion in holdings in the U.S., including the majority part of AOL-Time Warner and CNN? Are they playing both sides of the fence here? But if they wanted the U.S. gutted, why, when they have too much $$ tied up there? I have read some opinions that the US are not attacking the Saudis because they have holdings on such a great piece of the US economy. But why has Saddam always been the target? Why did Clinton bomb Iraq relentlessly during his administration without either UN or Congressional approval? Why didn't people protest then? I ask not to be provocative - I am trying to figure it all out. Kakki ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 21:32:56 -0800 From: "kakki" Subject: Re: e-bomb (njc) Thanks Azeem, I did my own search today and read about the same types of hardened warheads used in the Gulf War. I never heard about such types of weapons until Bosnia. > First question: are you suggesting that waging war on Iraq now will achieve > this aim? I simply don't believe it. No. I'm just saying that the concern for loss of innocent life does not pertain to just one side. I'm also not convinced that warfare these days is about indiscriminately and randomly bombing hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians. Thta sounds more like a movie script than reality to me. > although who's to say Bush wouldn't have done the same. You have to admit Bush does not go off randomly bombing people without a whole lot of discussion and many months, now years, of attempted negotiations to avoid all out war. > If you support war on Iraq, I believe that it is incumbent on you to consider > these issues. I don't support it in the sense that I have always thought "let's go bomb them." I have been searching for answers all along. I am of two minds. One is that we go ahead with a coalition of countries in agreement to stop him. The other option is my wish that the US pull out of all foreign involvements completely tomorrow. That would satisfy at least some of the terrorist demands, although Bin Laden's demand that we also all convert to Islam is probably not going to happen. If we pull out, people will suffer, but at some point we should look after the security of our own country and allow others to look after the security of their own. Not saying my country right or wrong, but historically, the US was pulled into these conflicts which they did not initiate to begin with. Now they are trapped by history and the foreign policy decisions made years ago. People around the world resent us. What can we do in real action to change our ways so that those people are relatively happy with us? All I can see is to begin pulling out, sending aid as needed for the transition and spend our resources taking care of our own problems and issues at home. What are your ideas? Kakki ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 21:20:02 -0800 From: "Kate Bennett" Subject: RE: Ben Taylor Band njc yes! you are so right about his hands...he does kind of have that rapper swinging arm thing going on...i saw a bit of his mom in the shape of his face too (oh, colin is going to really be envious of you richard!)...& he is definately hunk-o-la!...i look forward to hearing your review! richard: >>I'll let you know what I think, after tomorrow night, Kate. I'm seeing him in this teeny weeny club here in SF, Cafe DuNord. His hand movements on Leno... reminded me of ... Eminem, kinda sorta, but his words and music, more like his dads, kinda sorta. That voice definitely like his dads. Those abs and arms though: whoa! He is a hunk-o-la!<<< ******************************************** 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 ******************************************** "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful committed citizens can change the world, indeed it is the only thing that ever has." Margaret Mead ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 23:44:42 -0700 From: sl.m@shaw.ca Subject: Re: e-bomb (njc) Kakki, the Saudis ruling family is in a difficult position. They want to hang onto their wealth and power -- to do that they have to stay friendly with the West, but at the same time not alienate the Muslim world. The two holiest places in Islam are in Saudia Arabia - Mecca and Medina- and Saudi Arabia is called "the keeper of the holy places". The ruling family's reluctant decision to allow American troops on their soil during the last gulf war caused a rise in Islamic radicalism inside the country. Places like Iran would love to see the Saudi people overthrow the monarchy and become an Islamic fundamentalist state. But so would countries like Syria and Iraq, not because they care about the Islamic side of things, but because they are socialist states and want to see the monarchy overthrown. So really the ruling family has few friends in the Middle East, apart from other ruling families, which is why they rely so heavily on Western support. In order to keep all the balls in the air, the ruling family gives generously to Islamic "charities" -- some of which are genuine, some of which are not. They don't want to know which is which. That way, they get to be seen to be helping the Islamic cause, but can also claim they had no idea how the donations are spent. It's notable that, for all his revolutionary talk of overthrowing the Saudi ruling family, Osama bin Laden seems happy to attack any other country in the world but Saudi Arabia. And to keep their friends in the West sweet, the Saudis have allowed American oil companies to develop Saudi oil, and have bought weapons systems from British and American companies. So the Saudis are literally caught between two opposing protection rackets. Successive American administrations have understood that the Saudis are in a difficult position, and haven't pushed the issue of Saudi support for terrorism, but I sense George Bush is going to, although it'll be done via diplomacy not war, and by trying to reduce the West's reliance on Saudi oil. So Lori's gut feeling may very well turn out to be right. Sarah At 9:11 PM -0800 02/20/2003, kakki wrote: >Honest question by me. Why would the Saudis officially want to support >terrorism against us? I'm not saying that aren't but why would they when >they get most of their income from the West and have something like $500 >billion in holdings in the U.S., including the majority part of AOL-Time >Warner and CNN? > >Are they playing both sides of the fence here? ------------------------------ End of JMDL Digest V2003 #130 ***************************** ------- 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)