|
17 Dec 98 - 02:14 AM (#49869) Subject: From: BSeedKratz I posted this song six months ago in a thread--Movement Songs. It seems appropriate to repost it at this tail-wag-dog time, rather than revive the thread.
"That Wrong Road Again"
(chorus) (G7) (two,three)We're (C)goin' down that (G)wrong road a-(C)gain
(verse)
(chorus)
|
|
17 Dec 98 - 11:07 AM (#49914) Subject: RE: From: Art Thieme Seed, Might be the wrong road. Might, also, be the correct road. Time'll tell----but maybe not. Art |
|
17 Dec 98 - 03:42 PM (#49945) Subject: RE: From: That's one thing I like about Art--He's so positive in his vaccilations. |
|
17 Dec 98 - 05:47 PM (#49953) Subject: RE: From: Art Thieme Seed, is that you, old anonymous friend? Whatever. Whoever. I love vassilating !! Sure does beat window putty! Easier to use. (But your windows'll fall out, or worse, if you mix 'em up.) As P.D. Trad says, "Freckles come from walking behind a cow that has eaten bran." ART THIEME (aka j. hancock)
|
|
17 Dec 98 - 10:31 PM (#50001) Subject: RE: From: BSeed Not me, Art. I would have spelled it vascillating. A few relevant quotes: "Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent," Harry Callahan in Asimov's Foundation Trilogy; "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall inherit the earth," Jesus in the Beatitudes; "a politician is an arse upon which everyone has sat except a man," e. e. cummings; "Bill Clinton has given a whole new meaning to the phrase "wag the dog,'" --seed in the threads. |
|
17 Dec 98 - 10:36 PM (#50002) Subject: RE: From: BSeed By the way, Art, yesterday morning I sent an email to my congressman opposing the impeachment and emails to my relatives and to the members of my music group, asking them to do the same. I was planning to attend an anti-impeachment rally in San Francisco last night until I heard the news. Now I'm sick, angry, depressed, rebellious, and hopelessly confused. I now think the bastard should be impeached, but on the charges of crimes against humanity (of course, Congress, being guilty of the same crimes, wouldn't be interested in pursuing such charges). --seed |
|
17 Dec 98 - 10:40 PM (#50004) Subject: RE: From: northfolk A bayonet is a tool with a worker at both ends. Saddam and Bill are the focus, but the children that die in the poverty of sanctions depressed Irag are the reality. If it is a question of feeling good, and taking sides, count me on their side. |
|
18 Dec 98 - 01:29 AM (#50024) Subject: RE: From: BSeed Amen, Northfolk. --seed |
|
18 Dec 98 - 08:06 AM (#50042) Subject: RE: From: Steve Parkes Seed, I'm being picky, but ... wasn't it Hari Seldon in 'Foundation'? And I thought it was George Bernard Shaw who said it, but it doesn't really matter if it was Harry Ramsden or Harry Corbett or Sooty and Sweep; I think it's meant as a description of the incompetent rather than a definition of violence. 'Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel' (Dr Johnson) - there's another one: not all patriots are scoundrels (and vice-versa). Here's another: 'don't throw out the baby with the bath-water'. I don't know which side is right and which is wrong, and I don't think there's an answer to that question; if the answer doesn't make sense, it's usually because you're asking the wrong question. Don't ask me what the right question is, although it might be on the lines of 'is there a solution that doesn't involve people having to suffer?'. Steve |
|
18 Dec 98 - 08:32 AM (#50044) Subject: RE: From: Tim Jaques tjaques@netcom.ca Isn't there a song along these lines called "Collateral Damage"? The collateral damage, as it is now put, is the sad part about any such operation. Few people have any sympathy for Saddam and his minions. |
|
18 Dec 98 - 11:16 AM (#50057) Subject: RE: From: Art Thieme And then there's the guy on the cover of an old Lenny Bruce LP on Fantasy Records reading a book titled "Pigs Ate My Roses". I fear we're all learning what that meant. "ROSEBUD!" Art |
|
18 Dec 98 - 06:36 PM (#50118) Subject: RE: From: Bill D from "Also Sprach Zarathustra" "...of course it was a just war, my son died in it." The great paradox of humanity is, that the same complex mind that allows us to contemplate truth also allows us to deny and obfuscate those truths we do not like. "Theology is the finding of dubious reasons for what the theologian has believed all along.... " Walter Kaufmann |
|
18 Dec 98 - 07:16 PM (#50123) Subject: RE: From: Al of course if we didnt have the revolutinary war you would be singing God save the Queen If we didn't have the civil war we could all have a few slaves. If we didnt have WW2 Hitler could have killed all the Jews, Poles, THose who were insane, handicaped, Gypsy Russians. NOt bad for the master race. and depending on your ethnicity or European background none of you would be alive now Get a life |
|
18 Dec 98 - 07:33 PM (#50124) Subject: RE: From: murray@mpce.mq.edu.au Seed. I think issues shouldn't be confused. One should attend rallys against the impeachment of the president for the reasons they are doing it. On the other hand there should be some rallys to get him impeached for his crimes against humanity. Murray |
|
18 Dec 98 - 08:02 PM (#50129) Subject: RE: From: BSeed Steve, right you are, and thank you for finding the error before Gargoyle did. I went off half-cocked again, but as for the assertion that it was a description of the incompetent, rather than of violence, I think you're off there. Seldon (Asimov) was making a statement about violence, not about competence--while he perhaps wasn't excluding all possible uses of violence, he was certainly saying that for the competent can generally find many options short of violence. The first Gulf War, for those of you who feel the second is justified, was sold to us as necessary for the overthrow of the "Hitler of the Mideast," with specific denials of the opposition's contention that it was just a war over oil. Shortly before the end of that war, I was shocked to hear an analyst on public radio say that our goal was not the overthrow of Saddam, because that would open the region for domination by Iran. At least I was prepared when the war ended as soon as the Iraqis were driven from the Kuwait oil fields. The Shiites and Kurds who were encouraged to rebel against Saddam by promises of protection certainly were surprised when the war ended and they were given no protection other than the belated enforcement of no-fly zones. So the Hitler of the Mideast was still in power (as he probably will be after the current bombing ends), the roads and waterworks of the nation destroyed, and the genocidal sanctions begun. Of course we can blame the sanctions on Saddam--they were to be lifted when he met the conditions of the cease fire--disarming, allowing the weapons inspectors access to all sites, paying reparations, etc. But since Saddam and his family and cronies and the Republican Guard were not suffering from the sanctions, they became merely another ineffective use of violence, affecting only the innocent. Starvation is a weapon of mass destruction; the sanctions are a weapon of mass destruction, and a million children are dead because of them. |
|
18 Dec 98 - 09:20 PM (#50142) Subject: RE: From: BSeed Murray, I agree--but I couldn't do it last night. A rally clearly defined as against the articles of impeachment would certainly draw me, but I didn't feel like defending Bill Clinton. --seed |
|
19 Dec 98 - 07:06 AM (#50167) Subject: RE: From: Ewan McV I have deeply held opinions on the situation, and find some of the above contributions almost unbearably patronising and righteous (on more than one side of the argument), but this site was I thought in part about some tolerance and seeking of common ground and common love for songs. We all know we disagree deeply about some things. If the Mudcat Cafe is to be a site for that most sterile of all debates - Our Side Is Right, Your's Is Therefore Wrong - well, it's been good to know you, but ---- |
|
19 Dec 98 - 09:00 AM (#50175) Subject: RE: From: The Shambles My Dear Ewan (not meant to sound patronising-*grins*) One of the refreshing things about The Mudcat, unlike the Newsgroups is that there are no tiresome debates on what is or is not appropriate to discuss. If a thread is posted that interests people, they enter in to the debate or if not, the threads die. Can we leave it like that please? The thread started with the posting of a song, comments followed, and we go, where ever we will, which is the pattern that most threads take. If you disagree with those comments let us know why, let’s not question people’s right to express them here. I for one would be interested to know what your opinions are on the subject, though which one, Impeachment or Iraq, you do not say. I have valued the contributions you have made in the past and would welcome those you would make now and in the future. Can we please set a example and show a little tolerance in these troubled times? |
|
19 Dec 98 - 02:31 PM (#50196) Subject: RE: From: Ewan McV Dear Shambles (hope you don't mind if I leave your title off?)
I take your points. However, I ws not questioning other people's right to their viewpoints so much as wondering if I wished to encounter them in a context that I'd (wrongly, I now understand) assumed to be about other purposes.
However, you asked that I indicate something of my position.
Re impeachment, I only lived in the USA 1965-67. I don’t understand the political system and values enough to have any informed view. In general, I subscribe to the French view on these matters – your president like nearly every very (far too) powerful man has a high sex drive and too tempting opportunities for gratification. You know that. Why on earth place him in a position where he is forced to lie about what he does? What is it you want him to do, anyway? Be a good political leader or a saint?
WAR IN THE GULF
CHORUS
If you slaughter in the name of strategy
If you slaughter in the name of ‘justice’ |
|
19 Dec 98 - 03:24 PM (#50198) Subject: RE: From: The Shambles Ewan I'm very glad I asked. I couldn't agree with you more on both points, not that, that matters, but I am glad that you expressed them here and I hope that you will stick with us. On the Impeachment issue, I think the most worrying aspect of it is the long and expensive campaign that has been waged against the democratically elected administration that has tried every avenue to bring it down. |
|
19 Dec 98 - 03:34 PM (#50202) Subject: RE: From: Big Mick Interesting discourse here. Ewan, I too value and am enlightened by your thread postings. To all, while I am not in total agreement with any of the sentiments (big surprise, eh?), I would like to hear some opinions on the following premises. We know that Saddam is committed to gaining an edge in the MidEast. We know that he produces chemical, biological and nuclear weapons. We know he uses them against neighbors, and his own citizens. We know, based on the oilfield fires, that he has no problem with harming the environment. It is apparent from the above postings, what you are against. Time for the other side of the coin. I would like to hear what you would do with this man. Do we live and let live, given what he has done in the past? Do we just trust that he would live within his borders, and at peace with his neighbors? Despite the tone of the above comments, I want to make it clear that I have not really developed much of a position on this issue. I am torn by both sides. I know what you are against, what I am interested in is what would your thoughts be on dealing with despots. All the best, Mick |
|
19 Dec 98 - 04:52 PM (#50205) Subject: RE: From: Tim Jaques tjaques@netcom.ca What's wrong with singing God Save The Queen? We still sing it here and our headhoncho manages to keep his pants on, no matter what his many other faults. Besides, you guys kept the tune and put other lyrics to it. What would you do if we started singing the original lyrics to the tune of the Star Spangled Banner?:) (Posted by Bruce O sometime in the past, IIRC.) If you still had a Parliamentary form of government, you wouldn't need an impeachment process. The Bossman could get chucked out on a vote of non-confidence in the house, although it is likely that his own caucus would have booted him out long before that came to pass. Plus in a Parliamentary system the Bossman or Bosswoman has to sit in the House like any other elected member, reply to questions personally, and be insulted and vilified to his or her face during Question Period. |
|
19 Dec 98 - 06:37 PM (#50214) Subject: RE: From: murray@mpce.mq.edu.au To tell the truth Seed, I wouldn't have gone either. Disgust tends to drain a lot of one's energy. I was speaking from the high moral ground of somebody who is too far away to be able to go anyway. The trouble with the Parliamentary form of government, Tim--at least here--is that there is no independence of the executive, legislative and judicial. For example the MPs have voted to give themselves a hefty raise and a gererous superannuation pension and there was nothing to stop them. There have been cases of the prime minister interfering with the high court. The extreme case, of course was in '75 when the Queen of England fired our elected prime minister! That is not a problem with the form of government, I'll admit--more with being a colony
|
|
19 Dec 98 - 10:06 PM (#50238) Subject: RE: From: BSeed And now that the bombing's over, wasn't it a grand and glorious victory? --seed |
|
19 Dec 98 - 11:08 PM (#50255) Subject: RE: From: rich r I dunno Seed, I think they are just gonna move all the destruction over to the Senate rich r |
|
20 Dec 98 - 04:33 AM (#50283) Subject: RE: From: Ewan McV I would happily hold coats and let the generals and the bosses slug it out toe to toe. It's the way they fight bloody and economic wars with and over the bodies of other people that annoys and insults me. Further, politics, like emptying dustbins and unclogging toilet pipes, is a filthy job, and it is great that those we delegate the task to seem actually to enjoy it, but it is clearly very bad for them. We should do as some ancient Greeks did, and elect only protesting citizens with better things to do, excluding all who actually want the job and power. I don't object to to others singing God Save The Queen. But I am a republican anarchist and an atheist. Why must I lie by joining in a song? Further, the song has a verse about 'crushing rebellious Scots', and was made (or rather remade) to encourage the terrified mob in London in early 1746, awaiting the arrival of Charlie. I personally do not have the right to stand to be a member of our parliament, because I would refuse to take an oath of allegiance to the Queen. I would take an oath of allegiance to the people and the rights of humanity any time, but a figurehead in a fur-and-diamond-trimmed hat - come on! The foregoing is a very partial and half-hearted response to queries raised to me above. I lack desire or motivation to write the thousands of words that would try to define my position and how it arises. And anyway, it's only my personal position - so what? But the topic is too important to me for simplistic point making and scoring. I'm taking a break from Mudcat. Maybe I'll be back sometime. Keep on keeping on. |
|
20 Dec 98 - 05:58 AM (#50290) Subject: RE: wrong road again From: Pete M Hi Seed, thanks for raising an important issue. I refrained from commenting initially because I felt that I did not know enough about the US political system to make a valid judgement. However as others have joined in I'll add my tuppence. It's probably no surprise that I can find something to agree with in virtually all the above. On impeachment, I cannot see how lying about having dropped your trousers is a "high crime or misdemeanour" as I believe the US constitution has it, but I agree with Tim, if it had been Tony Blair, or the previous Prime Minister of NZ, he would have been forced to resign within 24hrs by his own party. I'm not sure which I find more disturbing (because of the President's power) and cringe making, the Republicans sanctimonious determination to "get" Clinton based on a sanctimoniuos morality, or Clintons smarmy performances with pseudo hand ringing, asking for forgiveness. On the Iraq issue, I believe that given the situation as it was on Thursday, the US and UK had, politically, little choice but to go ahead BUT they should never have let President Hussein manoeuvre them into that position in the first place. They are now in a position which is untenable militarily and unjustifiable morally. President Hussein can only emerge politically stronger at home and amongst the other Muslim nations for having stood up to the forces of "the imperialist West", no amount of military action can achieve the declared aim, and more friends of the US/UK will be alienated by the inevitable civilian dead and the more and more transparent fact that the Pax Americana is implemented in direct correlation to the interests of Wall Street, not the human suffering or morality of the case. I have no truck with President Hussein, nor the methods he employs, but if the US were so concerned over his development and use of "weapons of mass destruction", surely the intervention should have come when they were being used against Iraq? Similarly why was Israel’s nuclear plants not hit by cruise missiles when it was clear to even amateur analysts that they were developing a weapon capability? There are no easy answers, and I certainly have none, I can only echo the sentiments of Ewan McV’s song, if they must do it, so be it, but do not try to justify your actions by invoking my name or the name of my country. Which brings us back to impeachment "I did not have a relationship with Wall Street."??? Yes I would impeach him for that lie! Pete M |
|
20 Dec 98 - 02:01 PM (#50333) Subject: RE: From: Tim Jaques tjaques@netcom.ca Well, there is a republican stir in Canada right at the moment. I suspect that it will come to nothing. Of course, if we were setting things up anew there would be no question that a republic would be the way to go. But while I am no monarchist I think that the change would cause more trouble and expense than it is worth. The Queen does nothing here but grace the coinage (and she's off most of the bank notes now) and she comes and cuts a few ribbons once in a while to awe American tourists. Other than security when she comes to visit, she costs us nothing and has no power anyway. When you change the head of state, you have to figure out an alternative system and I don't trust the present aging elite to come up with something good. I'll keep the old girl in her job for a while yet, until there is a real pressing reason to get rid of her. We certainly have more serious and pressing constitutional problems in Canada to address. Apart from who is the carved figure to be head of state, I like the parliamentary idea of the prime minister sitting in the house and being berated every day by his or her opponents. Interference in matters where his or her nose shouldn't be stuck is a different issue altogether -- not being in a parliamentary system hasn't stopped American presidents from doing that. And it would seem to me to be harder to get away with such abuses of power if you had to face your opponents every day in Question Period. For instance, if Clinton was a Prime Minister he'd have to go into the house and face questioning about his alleged perjury and his bombing of Iraq. (I am not worried in the least about the judges being interferred with, because here in Canada at least they are independent to the point of being out of touch with reality, and they have self-defined constitutional roles zealously to fulfill.) Actually, God Save The Queen is not sung or played here as often as it once was. One hears it on Remembrance Day, and some TV stations still play it on sign off. Most people under forty wouldn't sing it if they were paid to do so. Incidently, the present British royal house has impeccable Scottish ancestry. People like to emphasize the German aspect but the Queen has Scottish ancestry on both her mother's and her father's side, including the House of Stuart.
|
|
22 Dec 98 - 07:43 PM (#50553) Subject: RE: From: Richard McD. Bridge Gosh, all very heartfelt. 1. We will never know the real reasons for any war. The people who make the decisions are not fully open with their reasons. I particularly disliked the Clinton speech's habit of speaking of President Hussein (whom I detest) as "Saddam". It was unjustifiably presumptuous and an intellectually dishonest attempt to diminish Hussein. Heaven knows there must have been enough honest possible methods. 2. Democracy, too, has problems as a form of government. The existence of a majority necessarily implies the existence of a concomitant minority - who may turn out to have been right all along, if it is ever possible to say who was right. 3. I have recently found that "With God on our side" and "Come away Melinda" cover what I want to say about the second Gulf war. 4. "Vaccillating" is so spelt. |
|
22 Dec 98 - 08:41 PM (#50562) Subject: RE: From: BSeed Actually, all of our spellings were wrong, according to my Webster's New World Dictionary. The correct spelling is vacillating. I will grant you the point about the name: I would hereafter call him Hussain, but most people in the U.S. wouldn't know who the heck I was talking about, so--while granting you the point--I'll continue to call him Saddam. (or the Marquis de Saddam?) --seed |
|
22 Dec 98 - 09:22 PM (#50571) Subject: RE: From: Art Thieme It's not vacillating anyway---it's K-Y Jelly!! K-Y, if confused with window putty, makes your "windows fall out"--among other things. (That's how the joke went when I first heard it.) And "Sodom" is exactly what George Bush wanted Hussein's name to sound like here in the U.S.A. Those tactics are well-kknown to be one of many ways to manipulate and dehumanize someone you want to shun (or bomb). It's part of "manfacturing consent"--as Noam Chomsky has said so well. It was George in charge when Saddam should've been neutered or neutalized ar assassinated or, as some would have it, been asked politely to be nicer to everybody. All I do know for sure is that asking a bad apple to be nice never got us anywhere with the schoolyard bully. Two or three of us had to isolate him and rub his face in the gravel during recess. Later in life, it took 2 or 3 cops to "convince" the same guy. Then the judge---and then the warden. Now he's on death row--makin' delay after delay... Keep ya posted!
|
|
22 Dec 98 - 11:47 PM (#50596) Subject: RE: From: harpgirl with Hilary's most coherent political activity to be on behalf of children, it disappoints me greatly that she has not had more influence on this monstrous US aggression given that it is so horrible for Iraqui children, not to mention how they suffer for sanctions...harp (makes me ashamed to be an American) |
|
23 Dec 98 - 02:34 PM (#50687) Subject: RE: From: Pete M The Oxford also gives vacillate Seed, but I must agree with Art, the attempts to demonize the latest "Baddie" by the US establishment with the connivance of the press is a well established procedure. Whilst no one doubts that President Hussain's methods are less that admirable, they are no worse than those practiced by many other leaders which the US has actively supported for years. Secondly, whilst acknowledging that there are, as everywhere, groups within Iraq actively opposed to President Hussain, all non partisan reporting indicates a high level of support for him by the general populace, a feeling which can only be strengthened by the US/UK action. Remember Art, that to the vast majority of the world it is the US that is the bully. Pete M
|
|
24 Dec 98 - 01:39 AM (#50780) Subject: RE: From: BSeed Pete and Art, I agree with everything you say, even when you're contradicting yourselves. Of course the US government, slave that it is to corporate interests, needs an enemy to justify the defense budget (Hughes Missiles just got a half a billion dollar windfall--they'll get to manufacture replacements for all those smart cruise missiles that managed to find their targets about 12 percent of the time. --seed |
|
24 Dec 98 - 12:17 PM (#50810) Subject: RE: From: Art Thieme Mr. seed, I know I do contradict myself here---and often. That's simply because there ar ALWAYS shades of gray involved. Not much is black or white---good or evil in this best of all possible worlds or lives. I can oppose the death penalty when there's the SLIGHTEST chance that someone was not guilty--but not innocent either. And I can, as George Burns used to say, "Say goodnight, G(r)ACEY"! when the city I'm living in at the time digs up body after body after body after body under the house of some fat clown & moron & horror like John Wayne G. I'll even inject the guy myself, if they'd only let me. (And I give what I can to support and be a member of Amnesty International which opposes the death penalty.--No inconsistency to me at all there.) One man's (person's, individual's, human's, homo sapien's, caucasion's, Negro's, Oriental's, gays's or lesbean's or whatever's) vassssilation is another man's Buddhism. Every coins has two sides---at least. The rainbow has many colors & no shades of gray---unless the dark cloude of chaos flow effortlessly in to rain on our parade. I'd've gladly killed Hitler, but, like Hamlet, few are certain enough to take those steps early the game when all we've got to go on are the voices is our heads (or dreams in Hamlet's case)--voices which, for us are often officially or media generated. Good reasons to "vas-ilate"---There's a "VAS DEFERENS" 'tween gettin' screwed & gettin'n pregnant. One's fun--the other's, at least, 9 months long. To some that's like a 9-month sentence. And at the end of every sentence ya get a period! (again) And Harp, you're beautiful when you're angry! You do mellow me right out! ;-) Art |
|
24 Dec 98 - 12:24 PM (#50812) Subject: RE: From: Art Thieme SO SORRY for all the typos folks. Art |
|
11 Oct 06 - 02:01 PM (#1856008) Subject: RE: "That Wrong Road Again"--about bombing Iraq From: Ebbie Here is an interesting thread from a few years back. Seems ages ago. Then I just read this: AP - 1 hour, 20 minutes ago BAGHDAD, Iraq - More than 2,660 Iraqi civilians were killed in the capital in September amid a wave of sectarian killings and insurgent attacks, an increase of 400 over the month before, according to figures from the Iraqi Health Ministry. The increase came despite an intensified U.S.-Iraqi sweep of Baghdad that was launched in mid-August to try to put down the wave of violence that has swept over the capital. And Counting... |