From: owner-joni-digest@smoe.org (JMDL Digest) To: joni-digest@smoe.org Subject: JMDL Digest V2005 #247 Reply-To: joni@smoe.org Sender: owner-joni-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-joni-digest@smoe.org 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 Saturday, June 18 2005 Volume 2005 : Number 247 ========== TOPICS and authors in this Digest: -------- Re: njc what is wrong with this picture [Lori Fye ] Re: onlyJMDL Digest V2005 #175 [ROBMSTEEN@aol.com] Re: njc what is wrong with this picture [vince ] : Re: Michael Jackson, NJC [Lucy Hone ] RE: : Re: Michael Jackson, NJC ["Azeem" ] Re: njc what is wrong with this picture [Jenny Goodspeed ] Re: onlyJMDL Digest V2005 #175 [Catherine McKay ] Edith lyrics [Bob Muller ] Edith Wars [Bob Muller ] Re: onlyJMDL Digest V2005 #175 [Jenny Goodspeed ] Re: : Re: Michael Jackson, NJC [LCStanley7@aol.com] Re: Edith Wars now vljc [Catherine McKay ] Sean njc ["Kate Bennett" ] RE: : Re: Michael Jackson, NJC ["Azeem" ] Re: njc what is wrong with this picture ["Kate Bennett" ] Re: njc what is wrong with this picture ["Kate Bennett" ] Re: njc what is wrong with this picture [Randy Remote Subject: Re: njc what is wrong with this picture Kakki wrote: > Payback for Clinton seems mighty petty and small in the world we have come to know since > 9/11 where there is a lot more at stake. It may SEEM to be about payback for Clinton, but for me it's about distrusting this administration, who persists in treating thinking Americans - -- of all political parties -- as if we're in pre-school and can't yet form a complete and coherent adult thought. My latest favorite example of this can be found here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/express/pdfs/EXPRESS_06132005.pdf It's a free paper published by the Washington post, and it's handed out to Metrorail riders each morning. Be sure to read Cheney's comment on the front page, that says: "The important thing for people to understand is that the people that are at Guantanamo are bad people" How nice and simple. "They're bad people." Imprison them, deny them the rights they should have (because they're human beings, because we should treat them as we would treat ourselves) for 3 or 4 years or forever. Piss on their holy book; they don't pray to "our" god and it's not our bible, therefore it means nothing. Torture them. Hell, KILL them if they're not gonna believe the way "we" do. But I digress. As we're all aware, 9/11 wasn't the only terrorist act to occur in the U.S. It was simply the biggest, and it finally, truly got our attention. I personally don't think the world is any more dangerous today, in terms of terrorism, than it was pre-9/11, but that's just me. For all the efforts of the Department of Homeland Security (I work 3/4 of a mile from W's house and I have to use a key card to ride the elevator to my floor and even to get from my floor's lobby to the hallways), there are still HUGE, GAPING holes in our borders and in our security. Why not deploy U.S. armed forces to U.S. borders instead of spreading them out all over the world? Are there enough military troops in the States at this time to properly respond if an act of war bigger than 9/11 should occur on U.S. soil? One has to wonder. (And, as another example of a big ol' flaw in U.S. security, how easy is it to change someone's address for them? Visit your post office, get a pre-paid card, put on some gloves, fill it out and mail it. No one will be the wiser. You can get all the identity information you want and do all kinds of potentially terror-related things, in someone else's name and on their dime.) But hey, it makes Americans (at least the ones in those "red" states, who probably don't live anywhere near a terrorist target) feel better to send 10 zillion troops to "free" Iraq, because Brother Bush and Daddy Dick, et al, told us -- simply -- that Saddam had something to do with 9/11. I know what you're saying, Kakki, about all the years of intelligence, but ... where did those WMDs go?? They had to go somewhere! But no one has been able to find them. So we're killing all these people in the name of democracy, but are we sure the Iraqis really want it? Or is it maybe about finding a way to make money in Iraq and from its resources -- not for the Iraqis, but for us? Or is that just a happy byproduct of this "necessary" war? Or ... is this war, this conversion, just more of our Manifest Destiny complex playing out? Meanwhile, North Korea continues to build up its arsenal of nukes, but we don't bother with them because ... well, you can't make much money from rice, can you? Oops, I've digressed again. I guess that's because the whole thing is so complex, and not simple as the White House would like us to believe. Anyway, let me get this straight: the intelligence on Iraq was accurate because it's 12 years old, but the Downing Street memo is a bunch of hogwash and entirely made up because ... why? Because it's new? Because those darned Brits want to discredit Bush too? To paraphrase Joni, I think I don't understand. Meanwhile and just to digress once more, how does everyone feel about renewing the Patriot Act? How about that part where the feds can get your library and bookstore records without so much as a proper subpoena? The House just voted to strip that provision from the Act, but Bush is mighty upset about it. How about it? What do you think? Lori ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2005 03:51:45 EDT From: ROBMSTEEN@aol.com Subject: Re: onlyJMDL Digest V2005 #175 Hissing through the years Until last night, not being the most avid lyric-sheet peruser, I had been labouring under the impression, on Edith and the Kingpin, which is one of my my top five fave Jonis and which I have heard at least 1.75m times, that the line "Women he has taken/Grow old too soon" was in fact "Women he has taken/Though all too soon". I still prefer my original interpretation. Anyone out there heard the original demos of Hissing? Re-listening to the complete job last night reminded me the debt JM owes the musicians that, like Messrs Kay, Payne and Davis on Astral Weeks, transformed the bony blueprints into something absolutely unique. The extended fadeout to Edith and the Kingpin, and the way Boho Zone bleeds into Harry's House, struck me anew as utterly inspired. Cornish Rob ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2005 05:40:59 -0400 From: vince Subject: Re: njc what is wrong with this picture I was going to take a major pass until I read the conclusion. Kakki wrote: > > And it always seems this is payback for Clinton, isn't it? Payback > for Clinton seems mighty petty and small in the world we have come to > know since 9/11 where there is a lot more at stake. oh come one, give me a break. It is very possible to have a different view than the Bush one and it has nothinbg to do with "poayvack" but that is a tremendous way for to you to be dismissive of other viewpoints, to categorize everything so. > The drumbeat about Clinton made me equally ill because it was stupidity, you never once said anything like that in here > but what pissed me off was that he could have easily stopped or ended > it just by telling the freaking truth or at least being a grown up and > coming clean rather than letting it play out and go on and on. It was > sickeningly narcissistic - like he enjoyed the game and the attention > while he could play it. He was so popular that he would have been > loved even more if he had just owned up. But no. You are talking about Bush there right, Bush in relation to almost anything? > > > I say to those who want to throw our country into further chaos and > make our enemies ecstatic - go ahead - but then when the fallout comes > - live with your decision and take responsibility for what you have > done and do not try to blame the other side for it. > > And I incredibly resent your once again saying that those who disagree with you are want to throw our country into chaos. I really resent that anyone who disagrees with you and Bush is equated once again by you to being a danger to our country and your use of such close analogies to treason. I take the long view Kakki unlike those (*cough*cough*) who take the short view, and I pray that someday you will post on something political without your usual Kakki-is-on-the-only-wise-and-truth-side while everyone who disagrees with Kakki does-not-take-terrorism-as-a-threat-and-wants-to-throw-our-country-into-chaos-and-make- our-enemies-ecstatic side. Vince ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2005 12:59:05 +0100 From: Lucy Hone Subject: : Re: Michael Jackson, NJC Laura wrote in response to Mark......... >He is as he is >which is definitely unique, but why does it have to be seen as a problem? > Laura it has to be seen as a problem when young boys are involved and there is a query over the nature of the frienship. Forget who he is... its the situation... Regardless of whehter MJ was set up by the mother (who DOES NEED SERIOUSLY LOOKING AT BY VARIOUS CHILD PROTECTION AGENCIES TOO) what he has been doing is NOT OK. >In >my opinion, seeing it as a problem bears resemblance to what is said about >people who are different from heterosexual, like they need counseling for being different from the norm. > > So do you really think its ok then for 44 year old men to invite vulnerable children to share their beds? You really think that is totally acceptable?... it's acceptable in your world to demand that a child show you how much they love you by proving it by sharing a bed.??? You think that sort of manipulation is OK? Would you allow your 13 year old son to share a bed with any male (or female for that matter...) more than old enough to be his father (or mother..)? forget it being MJ (who I am sure that some people, merely because he is a celebrity, would think he could do no wrong) if it was the loner down the road ... would you let him take your kid to bed???? wouldn't you think it was strange? wouldn't you think that person needs help? I have no issues about children developing their sexuality in ways that make them feel calm, happy and confident about themselves and their future and their position in their peer group and society...... but I would be very very uncomforatble if someone 3 times their age, whose interest in young boys had ended in an out of court settlement, wanted to spend time in bed with my child. I would be seriously uncomfortable about ANY adult wanting to take either of my kids to bed......... There are no cirmcumstances in which MJs actions can be sanctioned.What he is doing is not OK under any circumstances. He is brilliant at music, he is a musical genius but his life is a total mess. Lets face the truth here... he is way beyond being patted on the head and called "innocent and childlike". I do think he is actually mentally ill and as such needs careful and long-term help. I do believe he had an abusive childhood and that has affected him. I doubt he has had penatrative sex with young boys but what is happening falls into "grooming". YOu may not have read my other post Laura but I have been trained in disclosure and childprotection issues and MJ was doing what was done to him....it happens.....it is a classic sign of people who have been abused...... I feel sad he has had that sort of distorted life but the behaviour has to be looked at and advised against. Where are the high profile friends he has. Is Liz Tayor still alive? what about Liza Minelli? what about all the rest of them? Diana Ross where were you to have some quiet words with MJ? What about the mothers of his kids??? what has happened to them? At some point reality has to pay MJ a visit and the Never Never land has to come to an end. I think that only then will MJ actually be free to be again the musical genius that he was. Sadly I think there are too many pockets that have been lined, too many people living high on the hog of his dwindling financial payroll and will do all they can to prevent the light ever being shone on them and the way they have milked the man dry.AS long as Never Never land can continue they can have the lives they enjoy...... To round this off, Suggesting MJ has therapy is nothing to do with homophobia or suggesting that those who are not hetero get counselling to "get over it". It is about making sure he is not likely to get himself in that position again.....That is about sorting out the triggering points that make a grown man spend all his time with pubescent boys... It is a kind and understanding suggestion as a partial answer to rid him of the probelms that beset him. In England regardless of the outcome he would be flagged up as someone not to leave your kids with. Celebrity or no, he has sought out young boys to befriend and spend the night with and that is not acceptable behaviour towards a minor. I hope he gets the help he needs and the understanding support of people who are prepared to treat him like a person who has problems. Too nice a day to stay in. lucy ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2005 14:17:02 +0100 From: "Azeem" Subject: RE: : Re: Michael Jackson, NJC Lucy wrote: << Laura it has to be seen as a problem when young boys are involved and there is a query over the nature of the frienship. Forget who he is... its the situation... Regardless of whehter MJ was set up by the mother (who DOES NEED SERIOUSLY LOOKING AT BY VARIOUS CHILD PROTECTION AGENCIES TOO) what he has been doing is NOT OK. [snip] There are no cirmcumstances in which MJs actions can be sanctioned. What he is doing is not OK under any circumstances. [snip] He is brilliant at music, he is a musical genius but his life is a total mess. Lets face the truth here... he is way beyond being patted on the head and called "innocent and childlike". I do think he is actually mentally ill and as such needs careful and long-term help. >> Lucy, I think you have hit every nail squarely on the head. Jackson has been indulged for far too long; there has to be a limit to how far anyone's celebrity can be allowed to buffer them against real life and what is acceptable behaviour. This is no harmless eccentricity: having his own zoo, sleeping in an oxygen tent, wearing a gas mask, making increasingly tawdry and colourless records, mutilating his own face - fine, let him get on with it (as long as the animals are looked after properly!). Having little boys over for "sweet innocent sleepovers" in which they share his bed is TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE. I also think he is BLOODY LUCKY to have got off this charge, with the accusers' motives and bona fides being called into question (perhaps with some justification) - I remember the Jordan Chandler business quite well, and I very much doubt Jackson would have been exonerated had that case made it to court. I wouldn't bet against there being further charges brought, perhaps by different (and more credible) parties. The biggest favour any of his friends could do him now would be to plead, insist, cajole or beg him to get some psychiatric help and good therapy. I can't understand how anyone who looks at this case dispassionately could argue that he doesn't need it or wouldn't benefit from it. And as a therapist myself, I can certainly say I couldn't work with him, not because he is a monster, but because he is so far gone, so damaged and so out of touch with reality - he'd need someone very, very experienced. Azeem in London - -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.7.7/20 - Release Date: 16/06/2005 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2005 06:42:27 -0700 (PDT) From: Jenny Goodspeed Subject: Re: njc what is wrong with this picture "Bad intelligence" "Bush lied" Neither statement reflects accurately what I think the record shows which is that though the administration was relying on the same intelligence reports, there was a shift in how those reports were interpreted and acted upon. In the beginning of the Bush adminstration Sadam was generally viewed as contained. There was a switch somewhere along the way. 9/11 being the obvious turning point. (part of this switch and the way intelligence was amassed and used is related to the Pentagon's creation of the Office of Special Plans that sort of circumvented or at least lessened the influence of the CIA and the DIA) The Downing St. memo is not suprising and contains no new information. During the time to the lead up to the war it was possible to look critically at the evidence (at least that which was made public) and see the case for war was far from soundproof. I think some people feel lied too because the main messages leading up to the war were 'Sadam has ties to Al Qaeda' and he has WMDs and the threat of his use of nuclear weapons is imminent (allusions to mushroom clouds, etc). The record shows that numerous agencies and government bodies warned the administration that the key bits of evidence they were using publicly to make these points - aluminum tubes, uranium cakes from Africa, harboring of Al Qaeda terrorists, Sadam's supposed ability to use his WMDs in 45 minutes - were weak. (that whole uranium cake debacle being the worst. Tenet took the fall for that one god bless 'im.) Did Bush lie? Probably - what President doesn't lie? (I know that's not good reasoning). It also dependes on how you define a 'lie'. Did the administration massage facts and cherry pick intelligence to portray Sadam as an imminent threat. Depends on who you ask. Though I think it's clear that they did and there are national security professionals who will tell you yes that is exactly what happened. At any rate, Congress has to be held equally responsible for whatever the outcome of this war is because they had access to this information and supported the administration's campaign anyway. Right, I mean there are at least some critically thinking senators and congress people - they can assess for themselves for e.g. that any information that Chalabi provided just might have to be taken with a grain of salt. Kakki, I'm afraid that you're statement that 'maybe people have researched this to death' is optimistic. Somehow I think the majority of Americans haven't taken the time to research anything. It would be nice if I was wrong. It also implies that if someone had done thorough research they would draw conclusions similar to your own, which of course is not the case. Jenny Kakki wrote: Randy, excuse me while I scream and it's nothing personal. How many times have we had this debate? How many endless times have I posted links here to the U.S./UN policy and general consensus on intelligence that occurred for OVER 12 YEARS BEFORE BUSH BECAME PRESIDENT? THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION ACTED ON THE SAME INTELLIGENCE AND REPORTS FROM THE U.N. THAT HAD BEEN RELIED UPON FOR YEARS BY THE PREVIOUS ADMINISTRATIONS AND THE U.N. IT'S ALL OUT THERE ON THE HISTORICAL RECORD AND IN THE 9/11 COMMISSION AND OTHER REPORTS. THAT IS WHY IT SEEMS TOTALLY CONCOCTED AND POLITICALLY MOTIVATED TO SUDDENLY THROW OUT THE LONG TIMELINE OF HISTORICAL EVENTS AS IF IT NEVER EXISTED AND SAY HE MADE IT UP TO MISLEAD PEOPLE. IT'S VERY SIMPLE. LOT'S OF PEOPLE KNOW THIS AS FACT THEY DO NOT HAVE TO LISTEN TO FOX NEWS TO INFORM THEM OF THE HISTORY FOR GOD'S SAKE! BUSH DIDN'T CONCOCT THESE REPORTS WRITTEN THROUGHOUT THE 1990s - THEY WERE ALREADY OUT THERE ON GOVERNMENT AND U.N. WEB SITES. Is is really that impossible for some people to understand that MAYBE people have researched this in depth and that is why they tune out to the constant drumbeat of "Bush lied to take us to war." How can anyone possibly hope to be "fair and balanced" or convince others if they pin this all on Bush? Here is how some people regard all of this - probably a lot of those people that you and others assume are brainless and only believe what Fox News tells them: The horse has expired. Not only has the horse been beaten to death, there is nothing left of the horse but dust. When they first starting beating the horse, people took notice and watched. They beat and beat and beat until the horse was no more. Then they stood there with there clubs everyday and beat the ground some more. At first, the people looked again, curiously, at why they were beating something that no longer existed. Then then looked in amusement. Then it became disturbing to look any longer. Then multi-millionaires made movies insisting that the horse was still alive. And a foreign billionaire who made his money manipulating international currency markets poured tens of millions into a political "grass roots"organization to help promote the message that the horse was still alive. Then the peopole poured a martini or a beer and escaped to watching "The Simple Life" with Paris Hilton and Survivor and The Batchelor and god knows what other mindless crap as comic relief and an antidote to the political insanity writhing all around them. The insanity has put them in the intellectual fetal position at this point and I can understand why. Kakki Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2005 09:46:58 EDT From: Dflahm@aol.com Subject: Re: njc what is wrong with this picture Sorry, Vince, but your post reads to me like a personal attack rather than part of a conversation. I refer to your words: "without your usual Kakki-is-on-the-only-wise-and-truth-side while everyone who disagrees with Kakki does-not-take-terrorism-as-a-threat-and-wants-to-throw-our-country-into-chaos- and-make- our-enemies-ecstatic side." ps The tragedy of Clinton's behavior was that he could have done good things for the country in the last two years and he threw away the opportunity. And without the Lewinsky scandal, it seems to me much less likely that Bush would have won in 2000. Personally, I find it hard to forgive Clinton for that. DAVID LAHM ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2005 06:46:01 -0700 (PDT) From: Jenny Goodspeed Subject: Re: onlyJMDL Digest V2005 #175 ROBMSTEEN@aol.com wrote:Until last night, not being the most avid lyric-sheet peruser, I had been labouring under the impression, on Edith and the Kingpin, which is one of my my top five fave Jonis and which I have heard at least 1.75m times, that the line "Women he has taken/Grow old too soon" was in fact "Women he has taken/Though all too soon". I still prefer my original interpretation. No way! I totally thought it was 'Grow old too soon'. How funny. I think I'll keep singing it that way. I think it's a better lyric too. Jenny Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2005 10:00:21 -0400 (EDT) From: Catherine McKay Subject: Re: onlyJMDL Digest V2005 #175 - --- ROBMSTEEN@aol.com wrote: > Hissing through the years > > Until last night, not being the most avid > lyric-sheet peruser, I had been > labouring under the impression, on Edith and the > Kingpin, which is one of my my > top five fave Jonis and which I have heard at least > 1.75m times, that the > line "Women he has taken/Grow old too soon" was in > fact "Women he has > taken/Though all too soon". I still prefer my > original interpretation. > Women he has taken grow old too soon He tilts their tired faces Gently to the spoon vs Women he has taken, though all too soon, He tilts their tired faces Gently to the spoon I can't imagine Joni saying, "Women he has taken". She tends not to use those inverted Yoda-like sentences. In fact, when I first read your post, I thought you were telling us that it really WAS "though all too soon" and I almost had a heart attack. (Maybe it's because I've had three cups of coffee so far this morning - I've just reached my caffeine limit!) There are certainly Joni-lyrics that I've mis-heard but managed to make my own kind of sense out of them, e.g. "hoarse with travel fever" vs "porous with travel fever." (It makes sense to me that a person who is sick and has a fever would be hoarse.) There are others, but I can't think of them just now. Catherine Toronto - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2005 07:16:43 -0700 (PDT) From: Bob Muller Subject: Edith lyrics Just to clarify, Rob was saying that he had mondegreened the "though all too soon" lyric. Joni's lyric is: "Women he has taken grow old too soon He tilts their tired faces Gently to the spoon" Which is the way, like you, that I've always heard it too. And either way works, but I would say that "grow old too soon" is more consistent with the line that follows and is more expressive. Anyway, it's the same with "leadfoot Melvin" from the same record, which I always sung as "liquid Melvin". Speaking of hissing summer lawns, mine is hissing at me for a cut. Bob NP: Kenny Wayne Sheperd, "Riverside" Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2005 07:23:43 -0700 (PDT) From: Bob Muller Subject: Edith Wars But wouldn't the "Yoda Version" be: "Taken women he has, too soon old they grow Gently to the spoon, he tilts their tired faces so" As opposed to the "Wookie Version" which would be: "ARRRRROOOOOOO Rrrrrrrrrr HMMMMrrrrrrrrrrrrrr RARRRRRRRRR" etc etc Bob NP: Ryan Adams, "Harder Now That It's Over" - --------------------------------- Yahoo! Sports Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2005 07:27:50 -0700 (PDT) From: Jenny Goodspeed Subject: Re: onlyJMDL Digest V2005 #175 oh geez, i misunderstood. (thanks bob). clearly i have not had enough caffeine this morning. jenny Catherine McKay wrote:--- ROBMSTEEN@aol.com wrote: > Hissing through the years > > Until last night, not being the most avid > lyric-sheet peruser, I had been > labouring under the impression, on Edith and the > Kingpin, which is one of my my > top five fave Jonis and which I have heard at least > 1.75m times, that the > line "Women he has taken/Grow old too soon" was in > fact "Women he has > taken/Though all too soon". I still prefer my > original interpretation. > Women he has taken grow old too soon He tilts their tired faces Gently to the spoon vs Women he has taken, though all too soon, He tilts their tired faces Gently to the spoon I can't imagine Joni saying, "Women he has taken". She tends not to use those inverted Yoda-like sentences. In fact, when I first read your post, I thought you were telling us that it really WAS "though all too soon" and I almost had a heart attack. (Maybe it's because I've had three cups of coffee so far this morning - I've just reached my caffeine limit!) There are certainly Joni-lyrics that I've mis-heard but managed to make my own kind of sense out of them, e.g. "hoarse with travel fever" vs "porous with travel fever." (It makes sense to me that a person who is sick and has a fever would be hoarse.) There are others, but I can't think of them just now. Catherine Toronto - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com - --------------------------------- Yahoo! Sports Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2005 10:52:56 EDT From: LCStanley7@aol.com Subject: Re: : Re: Michael Jackson, NJC Lucy wrote: So do you really think its ok then for 44 year old men to invite vulnerable children to share their beds? You really think that is totally acceptable?... it's acceptable in your world to demand that a child show you how much they love you by proving it by sharing a bed.??? You think that sort of manipulation is OK? Hi Lucy, It depends on what you mean by "share their beds." If the adult sleeps on the floor or somewhere else, as Michael Jackson said he did, then sure it is okay for the adult to share their bed with a teen. Concerning younger children, I can understand them sleeping with an adult in the same bed... even if the adult isn't related to them but is known and trusted by the parent. I let my seven year old son slept in the same bed recently with a friend of mine, and I didn't think a thing about it except worrying that he might kick her and break one of her ribs since she is as slightly built as Michael Jackson, and my son is built like a football player. As far as proving love by sharing a bed... I don't see where "proving" was part of Michael's goals, but we can all have our opinion over what he said. I heard his interviews about sharing his bed, and what he said was very poorly said but not taken in piece-meal but rather listened to through to the end, it was clear to me he wasn't talking about manipulating children. I wonder what his bed is like? I bet it isn't much like a bed in the typical sense of the word but probably more amusement park-like... not a particular place for being sexually intimate. Pedophiles don't need a bed to act in anyway but bed and sex seem equal terminology when beds are for so many other things than sex. I give him the benefit of the doubt, like the jury who heard much more than any of us did. There is so much conjecture in the media. And that sort of talk is either bordering on or out right slander. I'm not at all supportive of pedophiles. I was the victim of three pedophiles when I was a child and through my early teenage years. I had intensive counseling and have a good deal of recovery and can now help others. Love, Laura ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2005 12:05:13 -0400 (EDT) From: Catherine McKay Subject: Re: Edith Wars now vljc - --- Bob Muller wrote: > She > tends not to use those inverted Yoda-like > sentences.> > > But wouldn't the "Yoda Version" be: > > "Taken women he has, too soon old they grow > Gently to the spoon, he tilts their tired faces so" > > As opposed to the "Wookie Version" which would be: > > "ARRRRROOOOOOO Rrrrrrrrrr HMMMMrrrrrrrrrrrrrr > RARRRRRRRRR" > > etc etc > Oh noooo! Don't let's start THAT! We're going to have to do Yoda rewrites of Joni songs! It reminds me of Grade 10 Latin class. I've realized that if you were to record one of my cat's growling, then slooooowwww it down, she would sound exactly like Chewin' Tabacca. My lawn isn't exactly hissing and right now it's pissing. The grass can't make up its mind. Parts of it area still brownish and spindly as a result of last week's drought. Other parts are flourishing. I don't know whether to mow it or not but, since I hate mowing lawns, maybe I'll just let it make up its mind first. Catherine Toronto - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2005 09:25:45 -0700 From: "Kate Bennett" Subject: Sean njc I loved that sweet song that came out just after my own beautiful boy was born... my prayers for your wishes to soon come true vince, may your family be reunited soon... Never underestimate that power of a wife's influence on her husband... :~} myomi could be the best thing for all of you! ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2005 17:17:15 +0100 From: "Azeem" Subject: RE: : Re: Michael Jackson, NJC Laura, I am utterly bewildered by this post. I cannot imagine what would impel you to defend the indefensible, especially as someone who has survived abuse herself and used therapy to help the healing process (as have I, on both counts). << It depends on what you mean by "share their beds." If the adult sleeps on the floor or somewhere else, as Michael Jackson said he did, then sure it is okay for the adult to share their bed with a teen. >> Given that he admitted sharing his bed with young boys, his later gloss on this looks very much like prevarication. Why didn't he say before that he shared a bedROOM with the boys (not that I think that is healthy either)? It says something about his disconnect from life in the real world that he affects to be surprised that anyone could impugn his motives for engaging in such (at best) questionable behaviour. << Concerning younger children, I can understand them sleeping with an adult in the same bed... even if the adult isn't related to them but is known and trusted by the parent. I let my seven year old son slept in the same bed recently with a friend of mine, and I didn't think a thing about it except worrying that he might kick her and break one of her ribs since she is as slightly built as Michael Jackson, and my son is built like a football player. >> I would never claim that EVERY instance of a child sharing a bed with an adult is ipso facto child abuse. However, it is of no comfort to me how well these families may have thought they knew Jackson. As I'm sure you are well aware, Laura, the majority of cases of child sexual abuse are perpetrated by people who are known to and trusted by the families of the victims - or indeed actual members of that family. << As far as proving love by sharing a bed... I don't see where "proving" was part of Michael's goals, but we can all have our opinion over what he said. I heard his interviews about sharing his bed, and what he said was very poorly said but not taken in piece-meal but rather listened to through to the end, it was clear to me he wasn't talking about manipulating children. >> OF COURSE HE WASN'T TALKING ABOUT MANIPULATING CHILDREN!!!!!! Do you suppose he was going to admit actual abuse? The whole point is that he is so removed from reality that he thinks he's above the law. Comparing himself on his website to Nelson Mandela is one example of his messiah complex (although the most egregious was his performance of Earth Song at the Brit awards a few years ago). And need I remind you or anyone else that a lot of paedophiles don't believe they are harming the children at all? No wonder he denies abusing children. Even if he has (and I totally believe that he has indeed, although as Lucy said, it doesn't mean he actually penetrated them - there are degrees of sexual abuse), he is not necessarily *lying* in saying that he hasn't - the average paedophile is too far in denial to admit that he is harming his victims. That's why he needs help and treatment. << I wonder what his bed is like? I bet it isn't much like a bed in the typical sense of the word but probably more amusement park-like... not a particular place for being sexually intimate >> Oh come on! You wonder what his bed is like?? You speculate that it's "not a particular place for being sexually intimate." And you talk about conjecture in the media. This is conjecture too, and nothing more. At one point you say that maybe he didn't actually share his bed with the boys; now you seem to be saying that maybe he did, but it's probably a really big bed, so that's OK then. I don't understand why you are bending over backwards to defend this man, despite behaviour that would be deemed highly suspicious and totally inappropriate in any other grown man. << I'm not at all supportive of pedophiles >> Well I don't doubt that for a moment; it's your reluctance to believe that this man may well be one himself, and to dismiss all his extraordinary behaviour as of no consequence, and to make excuses for him, and to choose the most charitable interpretation for any dubious situation, that I can't understand. Azeem in London - -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.7.7/20 - Release Date: 16/06/2005 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2005 09:38:09 -0700 From: "Kate Bennett" Subject: Re: njc what is wrong with this picture We all know it is true... the tabloid news in this country far overtakes the substantial news on a daily basis... the media has changed radically from what it once was when it was the fourth estate... as to the memo I think I haven't paid much attention because this is old news to me (not the memo but the bsic contents) & I am thinking why has it taken so long for this information to be legitimized?... I don't know how it will play out.... is this akin to Watergate when it had to point all the way to the top before it was something that was able to topple the administration? I remember my parents who had been staunch Nixon supporters up until he was leaving office saying, 'well see our democracy works'... they were right.... I am not sure our democracy is still working as well... signed...cynical in santa ynez ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2005 09:06:25 -0700 From: David Marine Subject: Re: njc what is wrong with this picture Kakki wrote: > Is it really that impossible for some people to understand that MAYBE > people have > researched this in depth and that is why they tune out to the constant > drumbeat of "Bush lied to take us to war." How can anyone possibly > hope to > be "fair and balanced" or convince others if they pin this all on Bush? Hey list, Is it really impossible for some people to understand that maybe others have researched this issue in depth and come to differing, yet still valid and conscientious conclusions? The Policy for a New American Century advocated regime change in Iraq back in 2000, and earlier, and its signatories included Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, and Jeb Bush. As for "pinning" this on the President, well.........what ever happened to "the buck stops here"? Best, David ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2005 13:06:49 -0400 From: jrmco1@aol.com Subject: Re: njc what is wrong with this picture Thanks for stepping up, David Lahm. I'm always disheartened when these discussions go "ad hominem." Which is defined as: "A fallacy that attacks the person rather than dealing with the real issue in dispute." Let's not do that, please. I agree wholeheartedly agree about Bill, by the way. - -Julius - -----Original Message----- From: Dflahm@aol.com To: revrvl@comcast.net Cc: joni@smoe.org Sent: Sat, 18 Jun 2005 09:46:58 EDT Subject: Re: njc what is wrong with this picture Sorry, Vince, but your post reads to me like a personal attack rather than part of a conversation. I refer to your words: "without your usual Kakki-is-on-the-only-wise-and-truth-side while everyone who disagrees with Kakki does-not-take-terrorism-as-a-threat-and-wants-to-throw-our-country-into-chaos- and-make- our-enemies-ecstatic side." ps The tragedy of Clinton's behavior was that he could have done good things for the country in the last two years and he threw away the opportunity. And without the Lewinsky scandal, it seems to me much less likely that Bush would have won in 2000. Personally, I find it hard to forgive Clinton for that. DAVID LAHM ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2005 13:18:14 EDT From: LCStanley7@aol.com Subject: Re: Michael Jackson, NJC Azeem wrote: And need I remind you or anyone else that a lot of paedophiles don't believe they are harming the children at all? Hi Azeem, No need to remind me for sure. Oh come on! You wonder what his bed is like?? You speculate that it's "not a particular place for being sexually intimate." And you talk about conjecture in the media. This is conjecture too, and nothing more. Right. We are all entitled to our conjecturing. Smile. At one point you say that maybe he didn't actually share his bed with the boys; now you seem to be saying that maybe he did, but it's probably a really big bed, so that's OK then. I didn't say it's probably a really big bed. LOL I meant amusement park style, not size. I have no idea what his bed is like. I heard him say he slept on the floor when he was talking about teens. I'm not sure that he didn't sleep with younger boys and/or girls. I don't understand why you are bending over backwards to defend this man, I'm really not bending at all. It is just my opinion that has developed as time goes on and I have watched TV and read about the ordeal and discussed it with friends. despite behaviour that would be deemed highly suspicious and totally inappropriate in any other grown man. I see inappropriate behavior and pedophilia as being potentially as different as homosexual and pedophile. it's your reluctance to believe that this man may well be one himself, and to dismiss all his extraordinary behaviour as of no consequence, I separate the two, that's all. and to make excuses for him, How do you think I'm making excuses for him? and to choose the most charitable interpretation for any dubious situation, that I can't understand. To me, this is a compliment. Thank you. Love, Laura ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2005 09:59:41 -0700 From: Kate Subject: travelling journal Remember when I sent out an invitation to add your name to the list of people willing to add to the travelling journal? Well, I followed its progress along all way, until now. The journal was doing great things; one friend said it was such a treasure that he kept it in his safe when he wasn't poring over it. I looked so forward to seeing it again! But of course I always knew that losing it was a possibility. No matter what, someone somewhere is enjoying it. That's some comfort. There are three names on the list who should have received it by now, but I can't get my email to go through, can't reach them by phone, and have sent a letter by snail mail that has not come back to me. Still, no luck. If you recognize (or own!) one of these names, can you please get in touch with me offlist? Suzanne Settle of Springfield Ohio (apparently has moved, my email doesn't go through, and when I phone a stranger answers) Chris Silvey St. Charles, Mo Christy Price Bullard, Texas Thanks for your help if you have any, and pardon me for sending an off-topic post. Kate http://xoetc.antville.org Who does she think she is Anaos Nin? ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2005 11:04:46 -0700 From: "Kate Bennett" Subject: Re: njc what is wrong with this picture Kakki> But this is different from Vietnam in that the soldiers now have long since been voluntarily joining the military and many actually believe they are doing something that is noble, even knowing it may cost them their lives.< I agree in this difference- draft vs volunteer... I have no doubt that these kids (many who I know personally) feel that they are doing something noble for our country & I admire them for believing in this & doing something they believe in... however the situation is not entirely about doing something good for the country... it is about finding a career & the military makes it so easy upfront... if you ask my Conservative Christian Bush supporting sister why her son joined up (smart enough to chose the airforce where it is relatively safe) just as we were going to war in Iraq she'll tell you now (not then --- now some of that nobleness has worn off in the reality of the situation) that he was in a low paying job after high school & not knowing what to do with his life when a recruiter offered him a whole lot of upfront money to join up. >And it always seems this is payback for Clinton, isn't it? < Not if you believe bush is a liar too... then it is about comparing the lies & consequences each man has to pay... ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2005 11:12:50 -0700 From: "Kate Bennett" Subject: Re: njc what is wrong with this picture Kakki >The drumbeat about Clinton made me equally ill because it was stupidity, but what pissed me off was that he could have easily stopped or ended it just by telling the freaking truth or at least being a grown up and coming clean rather than letting it play out and go on and on.< My take on it from the start was this was a man with an addiction... meaning until he was willing to face his addiction he would be unable to tell the truth (to himself & to others) about his actions relating to the addiction ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2005 21:40:49 +0100 From: Lucy Hone Subject: re Michael Jackson NJC Laura I am very glad that you have made a full recovery from what you say happened in your early years.. I work for a youth charity who work with young people who are daily trying to put their lives back after having to put up with actions (in or out of bed) which involve inappropriate behaviour and interaction with adults who have something to offer to vulnerable young people. We will never ever agree on this matter and let it stand that you wholeheartedly by your own words support MJs actions and I don't. We are just very different that is all. LCStanley7@aol.com wrote: Lucy wrote: So do you really think its ok then for 44 year old men to invite vulnerable children to share their beds? You really think that is totally acceptable?... it's acceptable in your world to demand that a child show you how much they love you by proving it by sharing a bed.??? You think that sort of manipulation is OK? Hi Lucy, It depends on what you mean by "share their beds." If the adult sleeps on the floor or somewhere else, as Michael Jackson said he did, then sure it is okay for the adult to share their bed with a teen. Concerning younger children, I can understand them sleeping with an adult in the same bed... even if the adult isn't related to them but is known and trusted by the parent. I let my seven year old son slept in the same bed recently with a friend of mine, and I didn't think a thing about it except worrying that he might kick her and break one of her ribs since she is as slightly built as Michael Jackson, and my son is built like a football player. As far as proving love by sharing a bed... I don't see where "proving" was part of Michael's goals, but we can all have our opinion over what he said. I heard his interviews about sharing his bed, and what he said was very poorly said but not taken in piece-meal but rather listened to through to the end, it was clear to me he wasn't talking about manipulating children. I wonder what his bed is like? I bet it isn't much like a bed in the typical sense of the word but probably more amusement park-like... not a particular place for being sexually intimate. Pedophiles don't need a bed to act in anyway but bed and sex seem equal terminology when beds are for so many other things than sex. I give him the benefit of the doubt, like the jury who heard much more than any of us did. There is so much conjecture in the media. And that sort of talk is either bordering on or out right slander. I'm not at all supportive of pedophiles. I was the victim of three pedophiles when I was a child and through my early teenage years. I had intensive counseling and have a good deal of recovery and can now help others. Love, Laura ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2005 13:52:10 -0700 From: Randy Remote Subject: Re: njc what is wrong with this picture http://memoryhole.freedomunderground.org/downing/rycroft020723.html This is the Downing Street Memo itself. It is not 12 years old. It was written July 23, 2002 and became public only 6 weeks ago. It is minutes from a meeting of Britain's prime minister, defence secretary, attorney-general, and other high level officials. Head of British Intelligence Richard Dearlove recounted his recent talks with Bush's team in Washington, saying that the mood there had changed, and Bush had plans to attack Iraq, and that "intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy". The Foreign Secretary said "the case was thin" to justify war. The Attorney-General said there was no legal basis. Prime minister Tony Blair made it clear he was going to help Bush. It was mentioned that Bush had not given any thought to "the morning after". Which is today. Six more documents have been leaked in which officials discuss how they are going to sell this idea to the British people, and the difficult task of justifiying it legally. The British people were outraged enough to vote the labour party in as a majority. The horse isn't dead. In fact, it is just stirring from it's numb Survivor/ Bachlorette/Shock&Awe hangover. Yesterday an inquiry meeting was held by Congressman John Conyers, who presented a petition signed by over 120 members of Congress, and half a million citizens asking the president to answer questions about the Downing Street Memo (the authenticity of which, btw, has not been questioned by either Bush or Blair). On 3/18/03, Bush's letter to Congress said that military force was neccesary to "protect the United States from Iraq". Of course, no WMD's have been found, as experts had said all along. It's a felony to issue false statements to Congress. The I word is coming. "economically, we just had no choice in Iraq. The country swims on a sea of oil." -Paul Wolfowitz, when asked why military intervention was used in Iraq, but not North Korea. As David posted, the PNAC (which included most of Bush's cabinet). long ago argued for invading Iraq. Could it be any more clear? RR ps When Clinton was on David Letterman Thurs. night, Dave asked him about the Downing Street Memos, and Clinton said "what are those?" (Way to keep up to date, Bill). When the talk show host explained to the former president what they were, he said "oh, yeah, I heard something about that...then kind of dismissed them, and said that everybody knew that Bush and his crew were itching to invade Iraq. He then said that the important thing is that we are there now, and how to deal with that. pss I have recently met a young man who spent a year in the Army, stationed in Bagdhad. He says that most of the fighting is between the Iraqi factions themselves. He says that the people welcomed the US troops at first, but now have had enough. He says that if the military leaves, the country will devolve into civil war. Meanwhile, we are building permanent bases there...and the beat goes on..... Kakki wrote: > Randy, excuse me while I scream and it's nothing personal. How many times > have we had this debate? How many endless times have I posted links here to > the U.S./UN policy and general consensus on intelligence that occurred for > OVER 12 YEARS BEFORE BUSH BECAME PRESIDENT? THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION ACTED > ON THE SAME INTELLIGENCE AND REPORTS FROM THE U.N. THAT HAD BEEN RELIED UPON > FOR YEARS BY THE PREVIOUS ADMINISTRATIONS AND THE U.N. IT'S ALL OUT THERE ON > THE HISTORICAL RECORD AND IN THE 9/11 COMMISSION AND OTHER REPORTS. THAT IS > WHY IT SEEMS TOTALLY CONCOCTED AND POLITICALLY MOTIVATED TO SUDDENLY THROW > OUT THE LONG TIMELINE OF HISTORICAL EVENTS AS IF IT NEVER EXISTED AND SAY HE > MADE IT UP TO MISLEAD PEOPLE. IT'S VERY SIMPLE. LOT'S OF PEOPLE KNOW THIS > AS FACT THEY DO NOT HAVE TO LISTEN TO FOX NEWS TO INFORM THEM OF THE HISTORY > FOR GOD'S SAKE! BUSH DIDN'T CONCOCT THESE REPORTS WRITTEN THROUGHOUT THE > 1990s - THEY WERE ALREADY OUT THERE ON GOVERNMENT AND U.N. WEB SITES. Is is > really that impossible for some people to understand that MAYBE people have > researched this in depth and that is why they tune out to the constant > drumbeat of "Bush lied to take us to war." How can anyone possibly hope to > be "fair and balanced" or convince others if they pin this all on Bush? > > Here is how some people regard all of this - probably a lot of those people > that you and others assume are brainless and only believe what Fox News > tells them: > > The horse has expired. Not only has the horse been beaten to death, there > is nothing left of the horse but dust. When they first starting beating the > horse, people took notice and watched. They beat and beat and beat until > the horse was no more. Then they stood there with there clubs everyday and > beat the ground some more. At first, the people looked again, curiously, at > why they were beating something that no longer existed. Then then looked in > amusement. Then it became disturbing to look any longer. Then > multi-millionaires made movies insisting that the horse was still alive. > And a foreign billionaire who made his money manipulating international > currency markets poured tens of millions into a political "grass > roots"organization to help promote the message that the horse was still > alive. Then the peopole poured a martini or a beer and escaped to watching > "The Simple Life" with Paris Hilton and Survivor and The Batchelor and god > knows what other mindless crap as comic relief and an antidote to the > political insanity writhing all around them. The insanity has put them in > the intellectual fetal position at this point and I can understand why. > > Kakki ------------------------------ End of JMDL Digest V2005 #247 ***************************** ------- 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)