From: owner-joni-digest@smoe.org (JMDL Digest) To: joni-digest@smoe.org Subject: JMDL Digest V2006 #127 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 Website: http://jonimitchell.com JMDL Digest Wednesday, April 5 2006 Volume 2006 : Number 127 ========== TOPICS and authors in this Digest: -------- Re: Conspiracy theories (njc) [JRMCo1@aol.com] Re: njc, about 9/11 [dsknyc05 ] Re: Conspiracy theories (njc) [JRMCo1@aol.com] car audio question njc ["ron" ] New Joni covers album by Ian Shaw [John Sprackland ] Re: onlyJMDL Digest V2006 #99 [ROBMSTEEN@aol.com] wednesday, njc ["Marianne Rizzo" ] Re: Conspiracy Theories (njc) [Em ] Re: Netflix - NJC [Jerry Notaro ] Re: Politics? NJC [Jerry Notaro ] RE: My kid is going to art school!!! njc ["Cindy Vickery" ] Chris Thomas King Does Joni [michael@thepazgroup.com] Re: Conspiracy Theories (njc) ["mack watson-bush" ] Politics? NJC ["Kate Bennett" ] Re: Conspiracy Theories (njc) ["Lama \(Jim L*Hommedieu\)" ] Re: Conspiracy Theories (njc) ["Lori Fye" ] Re: My kid is going to art school!!! njc ["Lori Fye" ] RE: time, njc ["mike pritchard" ] Re: Conspiracy Theories (njc) ["mack watson-bush" ] Re: time, njc [dsknyc05 ] Re: time, njc [Randy Remote ] Re: time, njc [LCStanley7@aol.com] Re: Conspiracy Theories (njc) ["mack watson-bush" ] Re: time, njc ["gene" ] Subject: time, njc ["Jim L'Hommedieu, Lama" ] Re: Politics? NJC [JRMCo1@aol.com] Re: Politics? NJC ["Lori Fye" ] RE: Politics? NJC ["Kate Bennett" ] My kid is going to art school!!! njc ["Kate Bennett" ] Re: Politics, njc [LCStanley7@aol.com] It's The End of the World As We Know It (NJC) [Michael Paz This is the most amazing timeline. Beware it is immense & detailed & often > fascinating. I suspect the loose change documentary makers got a lot of > their information from this site. Truly there are about 10 different > documentaries you could make from all of this information. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 00:27:34 -0700 (PDT) From: dsknyc05 Subject: Re: njc, about 9/11 - --- Lori Fye wrote: > Debra, I know it will be beyond painful for you to > watch the video, but if > you're up to it, please watch. I'll be thinking of > you (and everyone else). That's very kind of you, Lori. Thank you. I am glad I waited until this morning to watch it. Curiosity gets me through a lot! The first part engaged my head so much that I felt okay, intrigued really, especially when looking at the information about the Pentagon, which I have no emotional connection to. And the start of the info about NYC was intriguing, too. It was the quiet shots of the ash cloud dispersing and papers floating that sent me instantly back. All of a sudden I could taste the grit again, and feel the eeriness of walking on that ash. It was so quiet. It was dead and grey and silent. No sparkle anywhere even though the sun was shining. I think if I live to be a hundred I will still remember the desolation I felt walking through that wasteland, not being able to breathe and thinking 100,000 people had just died. Bad. I didn't miss any of the video, though, and got intrigued again pretty quickly by all the technical stuff they were showing. But I sure was an edgy bitch for the rest of the day. It was either that or burst into tears, so I just tried to make note of those unhappy extremes and aim for the quiet middle (with some private tears) and wait for the distress to pass. It took a very long time, through my work day. You're right about the video being very disturbing, apart from my emotional memories. It's packed with so much information it's tough making sense of it. Very thought provoking and well done. I'm glad I watched. Thanks, Lori, for bringing it to our attention and gently urging us all to watch. Tomorrow I'll think about it all again. Debra Shea, in NYC Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 03:31:40 EDT From: JRMCo1@aol.com Subject: Re: Conspiracy theories (njc) I believe in the following conspiracies, don't you?: Examples of 'confirmed' illegal political, corporate, and government conspiracies: - - Watergate, - - FBI's Counterintelligence Program (COINTELPRO) of illegally spying - - Iran/Contra scandal - - The systematic looting of the savings and loan industry in the U.S. - - The institution of Slavery in the U.S. - - Nestle Corporation Third World "bottle babies." History recalls plenty more... - -Julius ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 08:40:56 +0200 From: "ron" Subject: car audio question njc hi i just bought a car (only 16 years old!!!) & now i want to install a sound system. my question is - do i really need a head unit? cant i just install an amp & speakers & use my i-pod as the head unit? i guess i'd need a separate switch to turn the amp on & off as well. i tried asking at a local retailer - when the guy told me i couldnt 'cause i-pods dont have rca outs i realised i was wasting my time with them :-) ron np - bill chambers - big river village records now has streaming audio of selected tracks - f(&*^ng awesome tracks - not a dud amongst them ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 22:02:02 +0100 From: John Sprackland Subject: New Joni covers album by Ian Shaw Don't know whether anyone has already flagged this one up... I switched on BBC Radio 3's Jazz Line-up on Saturday to hear introduced a track (Jericho) from the forthcoming album of Joni covers by Welsh jazz singer, Ian Shaw. (Ian has on previous albums covered Furry Sings the Blues, Goodbye Pork Pie Hat and This Flight Tonight) Artist: Ian Shaw CD Title: Drawn To All Things Label: Linn Catalogue No: AKD 276 Full track listing: 1. Jericho 2. Moon At The Window 3. Night In The City 4. Edith And The Kingpin 5. Harlem In Havana 6. A Case Of You 7. Barangrill 8. Chelsea Morning 9. Love Or Money 10. Talk To Me 11. River 12. Night Ride Home 13. Both Sides Now 14. Stay In Touch The programme can be heard now by going to http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio3/jazzlineup/?focuswin and the track is the second in the programme (after a track by Ralph Towner). From Ian's website www.ianshaw.biz Exciting new album on Linn Records www.linnrecords.com ... Ian's brand new studio album, "Drawn to All Things, The Songs of Joni Mitchell" is currently being mastered and is due for release in April. This is his most ambitious work to date. Watch this site for further news. See On Tour for dates currently scheduled. Featuring guest contributions from Claire Martin, Guy Barker, Nigel Hitchcock, Lea De Laria and the legendary Jim Mullen, this collection of Joni songs produced by Richard Cottle, not only showcases Ian's voice to its full, but also his long-term devotion to Mitchell's remarkable compositions. A musical Easter Saturday treat with Ian and Joni Mitchell! On 15th April in concert at the Bloomsbury Theatre Ian performs his new Linn release, "Drawn to All Things, The Songs of Joni Mitchell" with very special guests. www.thebloomsbury.com, tel: 020 7388 8822. ...I'm not 100% sure about Ian's voice but the version of Jericho is great arrangement... Think I'll have to check out the album! best wishes all John (Southport, UK) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 18:32:33 +1000 From: Mark-Leon Thorne Subject: Re: Sheila chandra and joni Sheila Chandra is an Indian/British singer who had some minor hits in the '80s as the singer of the dance band, Monsoon. Most notably, Ever So Lonely and a wonderful Indian style cover of the Beatles song Tomorrow Never Knows. She later tried to get back to her roots with some more traditional Indian music but also experimented with more ambient styles. Hope this helps. Mark in Sydney. NP Ever So Lonely (Remix) - Monsoon ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 04:35:24 EDT From: ROBMSTEEN@aol.com Subject: Re: onlyJMDL Digest V2006 #99 Re: Favorite among Joni's guitar licks Possibly a bit late on the uptake here, but I can't help but laud the most versatile of Joni's "licks" (such a scurrilous word to describe something so stirring!). Namely, the one that first shuffled tentatively into view on Help Me (quite possibly filched from Melanie's Center of Your Circle), picked up speed and meat to fuel the soaring Black Crow, then found its apotheosis of expression on Don Juan's Restless Daughter (the song). Jimmy Page eat your hat! Love and peace Rob xx ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2006 07:00:47 -0400 From: "Marianne Rizzo" Subject: wednesday, njc On Wednesday of this week, at two minutes and three seconds after 1:00 in the morning, and again in the afternoon, the time and date will be 01:02:03 04/05/06. ~ _________________________________________________________________ Dont just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 04:49:33 -0700 (PDT) From: Em Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories (njc) Lama, you're assuming that I completely accept the video as the TRUTH ! Damn, cut me some slack man. It simply made an impression is all. You think I'm a sheep, and I am not. I'm not a sheep for the right or a sheep for the left. But that little flick was worth paying attention to. Yes the info is out there in bits and pieces on the internet where a person could have researched it on their own. But the video put the pieces together in a way that piqued interest. It was a good little flick. Not sarcastic or marginally irritating like a Michael Moore flick. I'd still like to see it proved wrong in a well made documentary. (because yes I am lazy and a child of the late 20th century and I like stuff fed to me in video form) But that can't happen, due to the "proof" being secret. Maybe Oliver Stone will make a movie in 15 years or so. Em - --- "Jim L'Hommedieu, Lama" wrote: > Em said, > >I'd like to see, say, Anderson Cooper investigate, and tell us to > our > collective face, that its not true and spell out the concrete > reasons.> > > I think you should reject the conspiracy film makers until they can > "spell > out concrete reasons" of their own. But then, it would be a > real > short film. Apparently they made a ghost story. There's no > intellect > there, but everyone leaves thinking, "Ooooh, that's soooo scary!" > > The Fundamentalists manipulate their flock with fear. Micheal Moore > and > others use exactly the same technique on the Left. Michael Stipe > said, "I > decline." > > We all saw those aircraft hit WTC1 and WTC2. > > Kakki challenged, "Wouldn't a really > good documentary provided answers, not questions?" > > Exactly. Kakki girl, you've still got it. > > Jim ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2006 08:12:32 -0400 From: Jerry Notaro Subject: Re: Netflix - NJC And also please read the book if you get a chance. It is wonderful. Jerry > --- Bob Muller wrote: > >> > "Everything is illuminated." > >> >> Thanks for the tip - not only did I add it, I >> moved it to the top of cueue, so it'll ship to me >> tomorrow. > > Synchronicity strikes again. I'm sitting at the > computer and Sarah is watching MuchMusic on TV. She > calls me to come in quickly, and I do, and who are > they interviewing on TV but Eugene Hutz, the young > Ukrainain guy who plays the translator in > "Everything..." He also did the whacked-out music for > the film, as front man for Gogol Bordello, a group > that has been described, pretty accurately IMO, as > gypsy punk. > > Catherine > Toronto > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------> - - > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2006 08:32:16 -0400 From: Jerry Notaro Subject: Re: Politics? NJC Not anywhere near as kooky as Iraq's weapons of mass destruction or Hussein's direct involvement in 9/11. Jerry > Her question to me was: IF democrats would have been in power at the time > of 9/11... and having the same facts you have now.... would you believe the > possibility of government involvement credible, or just a far out Kooky > idea? ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2006 07:53:18 -0500 From: "Cindy Vickery" Subject: RE: My kid is going to art school!!! njc yippppeeee! congrats to sarah, and to you! c -------------------------------------------------------------------- My daughter just got an acceptance letter from the Ontario College of Art and Design. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Get MSN Messenger with FREE Video Conversation - the next best thing to being there! ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2006 09:09:31 -0400 From: Jerry Notaro Subject: Re: car audio question njc I'm sure you can find an amp with the proper input. Try Crutchfield. Jerry > hi > > > i just bought a car (only 16 years old!!!) & now i want to install a sound > system. > > my question is - do i really need a head unit? cant i just install an amp & > speakers & use my i-pod as the head unit? i guess i'd need a separate switch > to turn the amp on & off as well. > > i tried asking at a local retailer - when the guy told me i couldnt 'cause > i-pods dont have rca outs i realised i was wasting my time with them :-) > > > > ron > np - bill chambers - big river > village records now has streaming audio of selected tracks - f(&*^ng awesome > tracks - not a dud amongst them ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 09:43:31 -0500 (CDT) From: michael@thepazgroup.com Subject: Chris Thomas King Does Joni Hi Joni Fans. In last friday's Lagniappe Section of the Times Picayune there was an article about Chris Thomas King (actor musician from Oh Brother Where Art Thou and son of Baton Rouge Blues Man Tabby Thomas). In the article it mentions the following: The week before Katrina, King had recorded the Joni Mitchell standard "Big Yellow Taxi" at Ultrasonic Studios. He planned to finish mixing the track the following week, but floodwater in the Washington Avenue studio ruined the master tape. King had left with a CD containing a rough mix of the song. When his family made their last-minute dash to the airport, he forgot it in the glove compartment of his SUV which remained at his house. The SUV filled with water, but the CD survived. King realized such lyrics as "don't know what you got till it's gone" now had fresh significance. Best Paz ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 09:41:05 -0500 From: "mack watson-bush" Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories (njc) Em wrote: I'd still like to see it proved wrong in a well made documentary. > (because yes I am lazy and a child of the late 20th century and I like > stuff fed to me in video form) But that can't happen, due to the > "proof" being secret. - --Well written Em. It amazes me that some will, still, purport that there is nothing to discuss, nothing to think about. We are simply a few crazies that have nothing better to do than to be fooled by a video, that some haven't even seen yet. IIt would seem to me that (everyone) would want these questions answered. But I suppose it is much easier to bury the head in the sand after denouncing all in that video to be untrue, a statement that can't possibly be made with any validity because of all the information that is secret and hidden under the guise of national security. The Rush Limbaugh crowd will, to this day, not admit that this administration has done anything wrong. Just close your eyes and follow behind, like a robot. Constantly bombarded with catch phrases created by the right to define anyone that disagrees with them. The liberal left is wacko, the Democrats have no direction, they are unpatriotic, etc. Hogwash! I found parts of this video that I couldn't quite believe, such as totally discounting all eyewitness statements, but there is so much more unanswered. And anyone that doesn't believe or cannot see how George W. Bush has profited from this war simply doesn't want to see it. The man is a murderer from where I sit. And I am completely disgusted as well with the majority of Democrats in office that continue to allow him more or less free will. I am now waiting for him to somehow subvert the Constitution to get another term or two out of it all. Mack ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 09:39:23 -0700 From: "Kate Bennett" Subject: Re: Conspiracy theories (njc) > The president served, just like you did. He flew jets< Reality Check. He was TRAINED to fly at the expense of the tax payers then left the guard before his commitment was up. Coincidently his departure was concurrent with the start up of drug testing. All of this was during a time when many less fortunate kids were dying over in Vietnam. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 10:15:58 -0700 From: "Kate Bennett" Subject: Politics? NJC >Her question to me was: IF democrats would have been in power at the time of 9/11... and having the same facts you have now.... would you believe the possibility of government involvement credible, or just a far out Kooky idea?< In a nutshell, the folks who came to power in the bush administration were not that long ago considered powerless, outsider wackos by many in Washington for their world domination ideas. So those are the people we are talking about. Forget the republican/democrat debate cuz like Lori said there isn't much difference between many of them these days. These world domintation folks (in their own words) needed something big (like a pearl harbor) to implement their plans (if it sounds like a movie plot to you, it does to me too). In reviewing a lot of the information leading up to 9/11 I was reminded of how much information there was about these attacks & how the information was ignored (we didn't know that then but we - meaning the public- know that now). Clarke must have been out of his mind trying to get people to listen. He was the most knowledgeable of all & was demoted & not allowed to communicate to the president directly. As to the 9/11 report, there was a lot of information left out & anyone following that fiasco remembers how unwilling the administration was to be involved. Personally, I don't see enough evidence to believe that a plane did not hit the Pentagon, & I've found conflicting evidence of a deep crater in PA which goes against what the video claims. Finally, the bush family involvement with the Carlyle group & with the bin laden family point towards loyalties that can appear rather blurry. Then there are cheney's business ties. Just my random thoughts this rainy morning. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 10:01:24 -0700 (PDT) From: "Lama \(Jim L*Hommedieu\)" Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories (njc) Fair enough, Em. I think I had too much caffeine and adrenaline going yesterday, but I stick by my analogy to a "ghost story". I looked at some conspiracy sites that proported to show "white flashes" as the towers fell. Curiously, in all of the ones I saw, the video started a few seconds after the collapse began. I guess they saw "flashes" *as* the towers fell. Two thoughts: 1. I didn't see anything I'd describe as a "flash" from an expolosion. As a photographer, I saw a few "specular highlights", shiny bits flying off the towers, escaping the smoke. I'm thinking it was chrome from office furniture, cell phones, etc. Flying garbage. Nothing looked like a secondary explosion to me. 2. If these "flashes" happened as a tower was falling, they couldn't have be charges which *caused* the tower to fall. Think about a demolition: the charges go, the structure begins to fold, it drops a bit, then crumples over time. I'm not a demo expert but I don't think you take down a building by blowing charges *in the future*. Deferred explosions do nothing. :) Rational and like it that way, Jim - --- Em wrote: > Lama, > you're assuming that I completely accept the video > as the TRUTH ! > Damn, cut me some slack man. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 10:50:33 -0700 (PDT) From: Em Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories (njc) - --- "Lama (Jim L*Hommedieu)" wrote: > but I stick by my analogy > to a "ghost story". I completely agree that is has a creepy "what if" feel to it. Too bad we have a regime in power that lends itself to those kinds of thoughts. Or maybe its just me. "there's an *if* on what you say" < Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories (njc) > Rational and like it that way, One man's rationale is another man's lie. I'm not sure if you're being rational, Jim, or ... wait ... is that Melissa Manchester I hear singing? "I don't want to hear it anymore." Yep, I think that's it! Lori ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 11:29:41 -0700 From: "Lori Fye" Subject: Re: My kid is going to art school!!! njc That ROCKS, Catherine!! Congrats to Sarah, and to you and your family!! Lori ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 20:33:48 +0200 From: "mike pritchard" Subject: RE: time, njc >>On Wednesday of this week, at two minutes and three seconds after 1:00 in the morning, the time and date will be 01:02:03 04/05/06. That won't ever happen again. << Not even in a thousand years, when it will (also) be 01:02:03 04/05/06? I don't know if that will be a Wednesday or not, is that what you meant, Laura? mike in bcn with time on his mind np Jayhawks - rainy day music ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 13:15:15 -0500 From: "mack watson-bush" Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories (njc) > Two thoughts: 1. I didn't see anything I'd describe > as a "flash" from an expolosion. As a photographer, I > saw a few "specular highlights", shiny bits flying off > the towers, escaping the smoke. I'm thinking it was > chrome from office furniture, cell phones, etc. > Flying garbage. Nothing looked like a secondary > explosion to me. > - --How many explosions have you photographed? > 2. If these "flashes" happened as a tower was > falling, they couldn't have be charges which *caused* > the tower to fall. Think about a demolition: the > charges go, the structure begins to fold, it drops a > bit, then crumples over time. I'm not a demo expert > but I don't think you take down a building by blowing > charges *in the future*. Deferred explosions do > nothing. :) - --Not true. According to the information at http://science. howstuffworks.com/building-implosion1.htm buildings are brought down with explosives set in different areas and set to go off at different times. Also, they set off explosions at the bottom beforehand to weaken the building, just like the witnesses in that video said they heard and/or felt before the planes hit the buildings. Just as I can't discount what the witnesses said about the Pentagon I can't do so with these witnesses. To believe that fire and those planes hitting those massive steel-concrete structures and bringing them down, to the total destruction they did, is too far a stretch. Illogical to believe otherwise. Mack ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 12:15:47 -0700 (PDT) From: dsknyc05 Subject: Re: Politics? NJC - --- Bree Mcdonough wrote: > Her question to me was: IF democrats would have > been in power at the time > of 9/11... and having the same facts you have > now.... would you believe the > possibility of government involvement credible, or > just a far out Kooky > idea? Interesting question! After imagining the situation for a short while, the word that kept flashing in my head like a neon sign was "secrecy". Secrecy has been a characteristic of the Bush administration from the very beginning, before 9/11 (even though now they give 9/11 as their excuse for their secrecy, and coverup of every illegal thing they're doing). The most clearcut example of such secrecy is Cheney's energy commission that he organized during the Spring of 2001. He and government attorneys have spent lots of time in court, even up to the Supreme Court, defending against challenges from groups who want to make what happened in those meetings public. Seems like a no brainer to me -- elected official -- talking about something basic to Americans lives -- of course we should know what was discussed there -- but the Supreme Court agreed with Cheney that he could keep it all secret. That kind of secrecy didn't exist in the Clinton years. The Bushies try to blur this, but their secrecy started BEFORE 9/11! Add to that secrecy the Bushies' arrogance and thinking they can do anything to get what they want, and not be held accountable for the results... well, so far it's been working pretty well for them. Listen to all the die-hard Repubs making excuse after excuse after excuse for everything the Bushies do! Even die-hard Democrats such as myself were angry about some of what Clinton did. It is bizarre to me the way Repubs twist themselves into knots in order to rationalize what this administration is doing. So my answer is that if Clinton was in office when 9/11 happened, I would believe what he said about it. And, for more reasons I would trust what Clinton said - -- he was listening to Richard Clarke (who the Bushies did not want to hear anything from even though Richard Clarke was the expert on terrorism and bin Laden), Clinton had tried to target bin Laden a couple of times (and whatever he did the Repubs claimed it was just to distract from his harrassment from the Repubs), and when Clinton speaks it feels like a person with a mind and a heart is speaking, not as though it's a robot repeating lines he'd memorized. So, I'd be a little skeptical and want to hear the same info from different sources (as I do about any news story), but all those things would add to my trust of whatever Clinton said if 9/11 had happened on his watch. The extreme right wing would have plenty of conspiracy theories, even if Clinton was in office, because they're anti-government and paranoid and they exist no matter who's in charge. It doesn't surprise me to learn that there are now right wing theorists re: 9/11 conspiracy. But I doubt there would be so many left wingers wondering about what the government has told them. Debra Shea, in NYC Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 12:27:01 -0700 (PDT) From: dsknyc05 Subject: Re: time, njc - --- gene wrote: > "That whenever any Form of Government becomes > destructive of these ends, it > is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish > it, and to institute new > Government, laying its foundation on such principles > and organizing its > powers in such form, as to them shall seem most > likely to effect their > Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate > that Governments long > established should not be changed for light and > transient causes; and > accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind > are more disposed to > suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right > themselves by abolishing > the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a > long train of abuses and > usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object > evinces a design to reduce > them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it > is their duty, to throw > off such Government, and to provide new Guards for > their future security" > anybody remember where this passage was taken from? Sounds like Thomas Jefferson to me. He advocated overturning the government if it wasn't serving the people well. And, even if the government was doing okay, he thought a shakeup every 20 years or so was a good idea. He, and all the other founders of this country, must be shaking their heads in horror at what's happening now. Debra Shea, in NYC Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2006 12:31:59 -0700 From: Randy Remote Subject: Re: time, njc From: "mack watson-bush" > And I am completely disgusted as well with the majority of Democrats in > office that continue to allow him more or less free will. Hear, hear! - ----- Original Message ----- From: "gene" > anybody remember where this passage was taken from? > no, it's not one of joni's songs. This smacks of Thomas Jefferson. Declaration of Independence. > "That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, > it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute > new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing > its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their > Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long > established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and > accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to > suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing > the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses > and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to > reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, > to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future > security" ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 15:33:36 EDT From: LCStanley7@aol.com Subject: Re: time, njc In a message dated 4/4/2006 1:47:10 P.M. Central Standard Time, ink08@hotmail.com writes: Not even in a thousand years, when it will (also) be 01:02:03 04/05/06? I don bt know if that will be a Wednesday or not, is that what you meant, Laura? mike in bcn with time on his mind np Jayhawks b rainy day music Hi Mike, Maybe it is a prediction of the end of the world... Love, Laura ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 13:54:53 -0500 From: "mack watson-bush" Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories (njc) Jim, haven't seen whether or not you have seen the video. If not, debating what is in it with those that have is irrational. Rational is defined as: governed by, or showing evidence of, clear and sensible thinking and judgment, based on reason rather than emotion or prejudice. I haven't read, or maybe I missed it, anyone post that they think Georgie was involved, directly, in a major conspiracy to pull off 911. I have no idea whether or not he was or not. As this point I have little idea what happened on that day but I am reasonably sure it isn't what was reported and/or widely believed by the worker ants. That is the whole point of watching the video and discussing it, trying to find out. I don't find the inability, or refusal to try, to attempt to answer those questions put forth in that video as rational. Probably the video is far off base in some areas and very close to the truth, if not wholly, in others. And the tragic part of it all is that we will probably never know. Mack ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 13:22:37 -0700 (PDT) From: dsknyc05 Subject: Re: Politics? NJC - --- Kate Bennett wrote: > ... Forget the republican/democrat > debate cuz like Lori said > there isn't much difference between many of them > these days. NOOO! Can you hear me screeching! This is Republican propaganda! That they started in 2000 in order to get Bush elected! Why are so many people repeating the Republicans' garbage, even to the detriment of Democrats? It's just plain wrong to say there's no difference between the parties. If that was the case, then why do people choose and feel passionate about one party over the other? For the 2000 election, Bush was positioned by his handlers as a moderate, which he never was, and the Repubs blurred the differences between him and Clinton's policies in order to get Bush elected. It worked. And they still blur the differences when it's to their advantage. They call the Abramoff scandal something that effects both parties. NO, WRONG. It's a Republican scandal. The fact that a Senator like Harry Reid gets contributions from Indians, and always has because they are in his state! he's their representative! doesn't have anything to do with the payoffs and huge amounts of money, for votes, that Abramoff was funneling to Repubs. It's a Republican scandal! It makes me crazy to hear people now repeat the Repubs' garbage! So to get the similarities out of the way, and maybe this is what people are talking about when they say there is no difference... members of both parties raise huge amounts of money for their campaign from contributors, individuals, businesses, and most likely anyone who gives money wants something in return. If I gave millions, I'd want a lot in return. And the Democrats, of course, compromise, sometimes way too much. Their "trying to along" with the Repubs during this corrupt administration is just not working, to put it mildly. They've added to the fuzziness about the differences instead of being proud of and making clear what the Democrats have traditionally stood for. So I don't think the Democrats' behavior or the party's ideals are perfect, not by a long shot, and they never will be perfect (which I guess means, exactly the way I would like them to be). But I choose to be with the party I agree most with. I remember reading the written platforms of both parties that were presented at the 2000 conventions and being struck at how different the parties' attitudes and goals were. It was as stark a contrast as I'd ever seen, and I remember being amazed that anyone was falling for the "moderate" label being put on Bush. Unlike other years where it's page after boring page of writing, in 2000 the differences were listed as bullet points. Very clear. Some differences, off the top of my head: Democrats / Republicans - -- Rights reside in the group / rights reside in the individual (To hear Repubs talk, you'd think no Democrat was ever successful since the Democrat would be so incredibly hindered by "the group", but many top money people, such as Soros and Buffet are passionate Democrats.) - -- Importance of workers' rights / importance of business's rights (This is the main difference between the parties, and within this there are many things, such as valuing (or not) labor unions, wanting (or not) workers to have a decent wage, wanting (or not) workers to be in safe environments, wanting (or not) the right to sue if a business has done a person or worker harm, wanting (or not) the right to speak out honestly about what a company or government is doing.) - -- Pro-choice / anti-choice - -- No forced prayer in public schools / get group prayer back into schools - -- Value social services / think individuals shouldn't ever need government help, and if they do it's that person's choice or lack of character - -- See the value of anti-discrimination laws / think such laws get in the way of the rights of individuals - -- Think working people should get the tax breaks (if there are any) / think businesses should get the tax breaks (Businesses have always gotten big tax breaks; the Repubs always want them to get more, and to have roads and policemen and all the other things government provides to be paid for mostly by the middle and lower classes.) - -- Staying out of people's bedrooms and health decisions / being way too concerned about people's private lives (This one is specifically about the Bushies' behavior, and strange considering the traditional Repubs worship of the individual.) - -- Strong federal government / strong state government (Segregation in the South was rationalized by that "strong state government" idea. The current Repubs use that traditional idea whenever it's convenient, such as "oh it won't be so bad when Roe v Wade is overturned because then each state can have their own laws about reproductive rights." I wonder how a poor woman in Mississippi will feel about that. And they ignore it when it's to their advantage, such as the federal No Child Left Behind law, which turns out to be more punitive than helpful, and that includes a sneaky requirement that high schools let the military recruiters know all about their students.) So why do people keep saying there is NO difference between the parties? That's it for my rant today. (And, Kate, you know, I hope, this is not directed specifically to you or Lori or anyone else here, but my goodness, why do ya'll keep saying that?!) Debra Shea, in NYC Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 14:34:29 -0700 From: "gene" Subject: Re: time, njc Debra, give me you address and you just won yourself a cd. This if from the Declaration of Independence, you know, the reason why we are suppose celebrate the 4th of July. Of all our founding documents this is the most important----and yet it has been regulated to a wall hanging in our classrooms. I guess it was just too much of a revolutionary document--------inciting demonstrations, anarchist behavior, and disruption of our society. Things our present corporate government frowns upon. You are right------------I can hear Jefferson's bones turning in his grave now. Helpless in Loomis, gene - ----- Original Message ----- From: "dsknyc05" To: "gene" ; Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2006 12:27 PM Subject: Re: time, njc > --- gene wrote: > >> "That whenever any Form of Government becomes >> destructive of these ends, it >> is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish >> it, and to institute new >> Government, laying its foundation on such principles >> and organizing its >> powers in such form, as to them shall seem most >> likely to effect their >> Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate >> that Governments long >> established should not be changed for light and >> transient causes; and >> accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind >> are more disposed to >> suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right >> themselves by abolishing >> the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a >> long train of abuses and >> usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object >> evinces a design to reduce >> them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it >> is their duty, to throw >> off such Government, and to provide new Guards for >> their future security" >> anybody remember where this passage was taken from? > > Sounds like Thomas Jefferson to me. He advocated > overturning the government if it wasn't serving the > people well. And, even if the government was doing > okay, he thought a shakeup every 20 years or so was a > good idea. > > He, and all the other founders of this country, must > be shaking their heads in horror at what's happening > now. > > Debra Shea, > in NYC > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > > !DSPAM:144,4432c88a16298257413471! ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 18:45:42 -0400 From: "Jim L'Hommedieu, Lama" Subject: Subject: time, njc Just as Nostradamus predicted. :) Jim L'Hommedieu npimh: time isn't after us/time isn't holding us/same as it ever was From: LCStanley7@aol.com >On Wednesday of this week, at two minutes and three seconds after 1:00 in the morning, the time and date will be 01:02:03 04/05/06. That won't ever happen again.> ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 18:47:35 EDT From: JRMCo1@aol.com Subject: Re: Politics? NJC Brilliant, Debra! Thank you so much for that. I couldn't agree more. So real, so real... - -Julius In a message dated 4/4/06 1:53:18 PM, dsknyc05@yahoo.com writes: > So why do people keep saying there is NO difference > between the parties? > > That's it for my rant today. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 16:44:37 -0700 From: "Lori Fye" Subject: Re: Politics? NJC I have to echo Julius's thank you, Debra. Thank you for setting me ... left, again. : ) You're correct about the differences between the parties, and you just made me proud to be a Democrat again. Lori ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 16:57:37 -0700 From: "Kate Bennett" Subject: RE: Politics? NJC LOL I hear you loud & clear. Hi debra, don't worry I'm not going to vote 3rd party on you & I do agree with most of the dem platform but I ain't sending them any $$ these days... I am disgusted with a lot of them (not all) & you've mentioned some of the reasons... again I said "there isn't much difference between many of them these days"... not 'no difference'... anyway I am still disgusted with how many voted for this war & for the patriot act & feel like a lot of them are just sleepwalking in their jobs ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 17:06:30 -0700 From: "Kate Bennett" Subject: My kid is going to art school!!! njc Awesome, congratulations to you both!!!!! ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 19:44:46 -0400 From: "Richard Flynn" Subject: Subject: time, njc It happened in 1906 and it'll happen again in 2106. If you use the European DD/MM/YY it'll happen this year at 2 minutes and three seconds after 1 a.m on May 4th, 2006 - -----Original Message----- From: owner-joni@smoe.org [mailto:owner-joni@smoe.org] On Behalf Of Jim L'Hommedieu, Lama Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2006 6:46 PM To: JMDL; Laura Stanley Subject: Subject: time, njc Just as Nostradamus predicted. :) Jim L'Hommedieu npimh: time isn't after us/time isn't holding us/same as it ever was From: LCStanley7@aol.com >On Wednesday of this week, at two minutes and three seconds after 1:00 in the morning, the time and date will be 01:02:03 04/05/06. That won't ever happen again.> ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 20:40:01 EDT From: LCStanley7@aol.com Subject: Re: Politics, njc A fish's sister asked the following fishy question: IF democrats would have been in power at the time of 9/11... and having the same facts you have now.... would you believe the possibility of government involvement credible, or just a far out Kooky idea? Hi Bream, Great opportunity for me to shoot some bull here, my .357 in my pocket just ready to go. Let's see... if a wonderful Democrat had been in office would I have thought it was a cookie or an incredible edible when the cons struck? Only a baker could accurately predict an outcome, but there are several places the cow chip could land as I see shit. One way to look at it through the eyes of history is, if a demo c rat was in office then the album would never have played because even on the scratchiest of demos there isn't a c side. Another point of view could be there are only two directions on a Cartesian plane unless z highjacks it, so it is conceivable that a conspiracy chip would have landed on a cookie sheet and all the other kooky shit could have taken place regardless of who was in office at the time. However, the most politically correct logical deduction might be that it is totally irrelevant to try to think of who was in office, even if tempted to conjecture about somebody like Ross Perot, because the question comes from the point of view that 9/11 would have occurred even if nothing fishy was going on in the bushes. But, we will never know if it would have baked or if incredible edibles would have spontaneously generated without heating the primordial ooze. What we do know is that terrorists love cookies and democrats in the past have known just how to bake them. We cannot be sure however that terrorists actually ate them because what goes on in the Oval office is hush hush. No bottle in a re-PUB lickin', Laura ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2006 20:02:49 -0500 From: Michael Paz Subject: It's The End of the World As We Know It (NJC) This Thursday, at two minutes and three seconds after 1:00 in the morning, the time and date will be 01:02:03 04/05/06. OH MY GAWD RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!!!!! Paz (no medication today) ------------------------------ End of JMDL Digest V2006 #127 ***************************** ------- Post messages to the list by clicking here: mailto:joni@smoe.org Unsubscribe by clicking here: mailto:joni-digest-request@smoe.org?body=unsubscribe -------