|
|
Post by sayne on Sept 22, 2008 19:33:31 GMT -5
Duck, incoming!  Not to worry. It'll be so long winded, by the time it gets here no one's going to care.  ;D ;D ;D That is sooooo funny. I think I'll nominate this post of yours for the Board's Hall of Fame. |
|
|
|
Post by gottafeelin on Sept 22, 2008 19:54:35 GMT -5
"The majority of the muslim population in Britain support suicide bombings as being justified." I take exception to this statement, especially from someone who lives in Indiana and not Britain - where's your evidence? Any muslim that is against murder for faith must not believe in the authority of the quran, which commands it. |
|
|
|
Post by ursamajor on Sept 22, 2008 20:35:58 GMT -5
I don't agree with Paul playing in Israel.
|
|
|
|
Post by Steve Marinucci on Sept 22, 2008 23:01:57 GMT -5
I don't agree with Paul playing in Israel. Why? |
|
|
|
Post by sexysadie on Sept 23, 2008 4:25:43 GMT -5
What a charming bunch here. It's kinda sad that you have to insult someone for daring to write more than a snarky one-liner here and there. Are you all being treated for the ADHD? At least there is treatment for that. The rudeness is another matter.
Interesting, rich, that I post an article countering your claim that Paul hasn't said anything about his concert bringing peace to the Middle East, and the only response you can manage is that I "hate McCartney." That's quite a rebuttal. Let me guess--you were a prize debater in school.
So I presume, being such a Paul worshipper and all, that you believe he CAN turn everything around there with a couple of lovey-dovey songs? Maybe he should have said something like this:
"I'm no expert on the Middle East but understand that the conflicts in the region run deep and have no easy answers. I'm just an entertainer looking to give people a couple of hours of fun and great music. The message of the Beatles was always one of peace and love, and it would be great if some of the audience takes that message away from the show and tries to work for positive change. But all I'm really looking to do is give everyone a great evening and some great memories."
He really does use the word "great" a lot. Maybe we should take up a collection for a Thesaurus.
Actually, I give Paul credit for going ahead with the concert, whether or not there have been threats. But I feel that if he really wanted to "spread a message of peace and love," he would have shown sensitivity to other people's circumstances by doing the show for free. Everything I've read indicates that his ticket prices are a major burden for the Israelis. But then I have friends here in the US, some of whom have been diehard fans for decades, who did not see any of his recent tours because they couldn't afford to go. Whenever he was challenged on his prices he would say he looks at what everyone else charges and goes from there. Well, that's Paul the busine$$man, not Paul the "let's spread around a little peace and love" idealist. I won't accuse him of hypocrisy--although I suspect many people would--but he is, at the very least, being disingenuous. (Oh, is that more Paul hate?) Unlike some artists, Springsteen for example, he has never expressed any concern over the problem of brokers buying up huge blocks of his tickets and driving the prices into the stratosphere, closing out even more fans. Or taken on the Ticketmaster monopoly, as Pearl Jam did. I think he deliberately chooses to be blissfully unaware of what his fans sacrifice financially to see him perform, and that they sometimes even endanger their personal well being. It's a miracle no one was seriously injured in Quebec; lots of people did become physically ill. His willingness to drag out the divorce, despite the emotional toll, solely to minimize the eventual payout, and now his relationship with a wealthy woman, show just how mercenary he has become. Bring out the tar and feathers if you want, but I truly do believe that the relationship with Nancy is, first and foremost, about money. I wonder if down-to-earth Linda would have looked at the situation in Israel and pushed Paul to perform gratis. We'll never know. But I do know that living in Nancy World isn't going to make Paul more sensitive to how average people live. After all, he and Nancy will be sleeping on satin sheets in a five-star hotel while he goes out to sing about peace and love and change the entire course of human events! There is an expression about putting your money where your mouth is. And supposedly this is a "friendship concert?"
Meanwhile, Heather shelled out a million of her own bucks to buy fake food for poor children in the Bronx, and spent her weekend personally cooking and distributing it. You may question her motives, but this round of PYMWYMI goes to....Heather. Thanks for playing, folks.
SO sorry that I don't have time to write more. You do know about waving a red flag in front of a bull--er, cow--don't you?
|
|
|
|
Post by ursamajor on Sept 23, 2008 6:26:22 GMT -5
I don't agree with Paul playing in Israel. Why? What if a suicide bomber somehow gets into the crowd , blows himself up and kills 10 or 20 Israelis. Terrorists will see this concert as a big opportunity to make a statement. For this reason it is impossible to have both Israeli's and Palestinians attend this concert, therefore it's not really a friendship concert. It's just Paul playing somewhere he has never played before. |
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Sept 23, 2008 7:52:10 GMT -5
What a charming bunch here. It's kinda sad that you have to insult someone for daring to write more than a snarky one-liner here and there.....The rudeness is another matter. I cannot argue with that sexysadie. I am hoping that our posting community here will discuss with you the issues and why they agree or disagree with your points and not attack or mock the poster herself. Isn't that the Message Board "Golden Rule?" Your writing shows that you know this topic of Paul McCartney and/or The Beatles very well and nothing in your writings make you less a fan of the band's music(the reason, I presume, why we are all here) or your opinions any less valid than the rest of ours. Of course, you have proven the ability to hold your own so I will not write any more least I appear to be pandering. |
|
|
|
Post by sayne on Sept 23, 2008 8:02:13 GMT -5
What's fake about it? It's not like it's soylent green. It's more real and healthier than the food most kids eat. Look at the ingredients and get back to me about it being fake. Also, Paul is NOT a person who has NOT put his money where his mouth is. He historically is a giver. This is not about Paul not being able to do no wrong. Boy, can he lay eggs! It's about being fair. |
|
|
|
Post by alltouttt on Sept 23, 2008 11:27:39 GMT -5
There's no way I'm gonna get involved here with politics in general and specialy the Middle East conflicts in particular but since I live near Québec city and saw Macca's concert, I have to question this statement:
"It's a miracle no one was seriously injured in Quebec; lots of people did become physically ill."
A link to some articles confirming this would be nice!
Of course some people may have injured themselves in the mad dash to get to the stage after they opened the gates but with more than 200 000 people in attendance - all close friends of mine I should add - Ü - a few incidents had to be expected.
As a matter of fact, it was a GREAT concert
and I can garantee you a *Splendid time was had by all* ...
Carry on!
|
|
|
|
Post by sexysadie on Sept 24, 2008 12:16:52 GMT -5
Discussion is all I'm looking for, John. I don't dismiss those who enjoy firing off one-liners, jokes, sexual innuendo, or whatever, and I don't know why they feel the need to dismiss me, and in such unnecessarily snide and juvenile ways. Apparently it's more satisfying to slam me for "hating Paul"--although I have made favorable comments about him and his music--than to consider anything I say. Which, of course, no one is required to do in the first place.
"Fake food" was meant to be funny, although I've never understood why vegetarians are driven to fashion "chicken" and "burgers" out of plant product. I don't see meat eaters creating stalks of celery out of ground beef. Seems a bit defensive to me. There are plenty of delicious bonafide vegetarian dishes, so why the need to do this? BTW, I don't eat meat, and haven't for over ten years, so I've got no ax to grind.
Paul and Nancy are staying in the luxurious Royal Suite, with a 24-hour butler and a personal chef coordinating their fake food needs with the hotel culinary staff. Paul's personal staff is occupying another 21 suites in the same hotel, with more staffers staying in other locations. Not that there is any reason to question why The Princess is chasing after Sir Old Fart, if one can indeed "chase after" from a subservient ten feet behind. Already Paul has been spotted doing a silly dance in the lobby--in his ever-present trainers, of course. My condolences to the Israelis.
The concert is not a sell out. One comment: "With the price tags of the ticket, this can only be expected. It`s a shame. I and many people I have spoken to would have loved to have come to this concert, but cannot afford the ticket price."
A couple more: "Singing to the end of social equality in Israel? The `cheap` seats are only 500 NIS a shot while thousands hardly have enough to put out a proper meal in honor of Yom Tov." "The TV news is full of items on those people with empty fridges who dont know how or if they will be able to put food on the table for the hagim, with focuses on the various wonderful Amutot which are working flat out to help, and yet Haaretz is surprised that not all the overpriced tickets for Paul McCartney have been sold."
Some comments are even more--ahem--to the point. "Paul McCartney thought that by having a no-body "Muslim preacher" threaten him publicly, then he`ll attract hundreds of thousands of Israeli`s to his concert. But the fact is that his fame is only recognized as having been part of the Beatles. [He] should retire soon, but I guess he wants to make a buck or two before that."
"The threats are fakes from the settler lobby. No one is interested in killing him, except perhaps another American loser like the one that shot John Lennon. McCartney is a political non-entity. The only thing that is clear from this unhappy episode is his ignorance in what is going on in the world and his stupidity except in the areas of his expertise: money and music."
"He can test how much he`s really loved and admired for his "courage" by declaring that his next stop will be a Gaza concert. Would YOU still admire his courage then?"
I guess some people really do hate Paul. I'm actually not one of them, although I suspect there's no percentage in my saying so at this point.
As for an accounting of some of what happened in Quebec, check Steve's site. There were also bad situations being discussed on another message board--people who were saying they would never do it again. I'm old enough to remember 11 people getting trampled to death at a Who concert, which led to wholesale banning of "festival seating." Anytime you have a massive number of people trying to get to the front of a stage there is potential for disaster. Paul obviously wasn't responsible for crowd management in Quebec. I'm just saying he should be cognizant of what his fans sacrifice to see him perform, and I don't think he is.
|
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on Sept 24, 2008 12:37:19 GMT -5
What a charming bunch here. It's kinda sad that you have to insult someone for daring to write more than a snarky one-liner here and there. Are you all being treated for the ADHD? At least there is treatment for that. The rudeness is another matter. Interesting, rich, that I post an article countering your claim that Paul hasn't said anything about his concert bringing peace to the Middle East, and the only response you can manage is that I "hate McCartney." That's quite a rebuttal. Let me guess--you were a prize debater in school. So I presume, being such a Paul worshipper and all, that you believe he CAN turn everything around there with a couple of lovey-dovey songs? Maybe he should have said something like this: "I'm no expert on the Middle East but understand that the conflicts in the region run deep and have no easy answers. I'm just an entertainer looking to give people a couple of hours of fun and great music. The message of the Beatles was always one of peace and love, and it would be great if some of the audience takes that message away from the show and tries to work for positive change. But all I'm really looking to do is give everyone a great evening and some great memories." He really does use the word "great" a lot. Maybe we should take up a collection for a Thesaurus. Actually, I give Paul credit for going ahead with the concert, whether or not there have been threats. But I feel that if he really wanted to "spread a message of peace and love," he would have shown sensitivity to other people's circumstances by doing the show for free. Everything I've read indicates that his ticket prices are a major burden for the Israelis. But then I have friends here in the US, some of whom have been diehard fans for decades, who did not see any of his recent tours because they couldn't afford to go. Whenever he was challenged on his prices he would say he looks at what everyone else charges and goes from there. Well, that's Paul the busine$$man, not Paul the "let's spread around a little peace and love" idealist. I won't accuse him of hypocrisy--although I suspect many people would--but he is, at the very least, being disingenuous. (Oh, is that more Paul hate?) Unlike some artists, Springsteen for example, he has never expressed any concern over the problem of brokers buying up huge blocks of his tickets and driving the prices into the stratosphere, closing out even more fans. Or taken on the Ticketmaster monopoly, as Pearl Jam did. I think he deliberately chooses to be blissfully unaware of what his fans sacrifice financially to see him perform, and that they sometimes even endanger their personal well being. It's a miracle no one was seriously injured in Quebec; lots of people did become physically ill. His willingness to drag out the divorce, despite the emotional toll, solely to minimize the eventual payout, and now his relationship with a wealthy woman, show just how mercenary he has become. Bring out the tar and feathers if you want, but I truly do believe that the relationship with Nancy is, first and foremost, about money. I wonder if down-to-earth Linda would have looked at the situation in Israel and pushed Paul to perform gratis. We'll never know. But I do know that living in Nancy World isn't going to make Paul more sensitive to how average people live. After all, he and Nancy will be sleeping on satin sheets in a five-star hotel while he goes out to sing about peace and love and change the entire course of human events! There is an expression about putting your money where your mouth is. And supposedly this is a "friendship concert?" Meanwhile, Heather shelled out a million of her own bucks to buy fake food for poor children in the Bronx, and spent her weekend personally cooking and distributing it. You may question her motives, but this round of PYMWYMI goes to....Heather. Thanks for playing, folks. SO sorry that I don't have time to write more. You do know about waving a red flag in front of a bull--er, cow--don't you? What do you have against rich people-- especially those who made their money on shear talent and did it legitimately and legally. And you don't know all the charities Paul (and Nancy) give to. Remember a million pounds to tsunami relief? |
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on Sept 24, 2008 12:48:17 GMT -5
Sexysadie: Some people think "Imagine" is saccharine and formulaic, but it's positively teeming with deep and thought-provoking ideas compared to "Freedom," which sounds like something a high-school gym teacher might have composed for her cheerleading squad.
RTP:
Imagine is ridiculously left wing - one world - one government. Its everything I wouldn't want politically and it is virtually impossible on a practical basis. The whole world will never agree on the flavor of a popsicle let alone one government unless everyone is on anti-anxiety narcotics or something. The whole world would never join together with no boundaries and no religions and no possessions. Its the ultimate communist manifesto. Nice tune though.
As for Freedom, it echoes our Declaration of Independence and before that Thomas Jefferson's writings. I guess the ideas in the Declaration of Independence were simple minded.
|
|
|
|
Post by richforman on Sept 24, 2008 12:56:25 GMT -5
How did the song "Freedom" pop into the discussion in the first place? SS it seems to me like you just sidetracked onto it out of the blue as something else in your long list of things about Macca to point out that you don't like and don't approve of. Of course you're allowed to do that, goes without saying
richforman
|
|
|
|
Post by ursamajor on Sept 24, 2008 19:58:19 GMT -5
He can test how much he`s really loved and admired for his by declaring that his next stop will be a Gaza concert. Would YOU still admire his courage then? I would have loved it if Paul did a concert in Gaza as well !! That would be truly historic. I think he should have done something for the Palestinian side too. It just seems that this concert is a publicity stunt and you shouldn't be doing that in this part of the world. I know there's probably alot of security concerns but you either go all the way or you don't go at all. |
|
|
|
Post by sayne on Sept 24, 2008 21:31:15 GMT -5
"Fake food" was meant to be funny Amazing how two little quotation marks can turn a cynical term into a funny one, and how the use of an emoticon can be disarming |
|
|
|
Post by sexysadie on Sept 29, 2008 4:34:28 GMT -5
Yes, "Freedom" is positively Jeffersonian. After Paul finishes healing the centuries of hate in the Middle East, he can move on to creating political prose that will inspire and endure for as long as man shall inhabit the earth. Like the foot-stomping jingoism of "We will fight for our right to live in freedom." Very deep. Heather helped with it, you know. And I wasn't the one to mention the song in the first place, rich. So come after me for something else, please.
I've never said I hate the rich, but I don't like wealthy people who are phony and/or entitled. Like Nancy--who obviously doesn't really "work" for daddy, and who blew off her responsibilities to NYC to go play in Israel. From one of the City's newpapers: "Fun and frolic won out over public duty...for MTA board member Nancy Shevell, who skipped a controversial vote at the agency's monthly meeting to jet off to Israel with Fab boyfriend Paul McCartney. Shevell, a veteran Metropolitan Transportation Authority board member, traded a chance to save the city from having to pay bridge and tunnel tolls for emergency vehicles to sun with Sir Paul in Tel Aviv and visit the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem."
As I said, I don't need "excuses" to question what kind of person Shevell is, and to be suspicious of her motives--she provides plenty of ammunition. (The unflattering picture of Paul included with the article really underscores the latter concern.) She didn't show much in the way of brains or good judgment by dressing in tight jeans and a flimsy sleeveless top for an outing to one of the holiest of churches, in a region with a Muslim population that was already spoiling for a fight with her boyfriend. She knew she'd be videoed and photographed--she should have shown some respect for their culture and beliefs by dressing more modestly.
As for Paul, he reportedly took away $2 million from this concert, while charging $150 (SRO) to $1500 a ticket. Someone has to pay for the private jet, luxurious suite, 24-hour butler, personal chef, 100-strong entourage and all that security, right? Now there's a real "message of love" for the Israelis. I don't know how much charity work Nancy does, but she damn well should do plenty considering her family's wealth and all the time she has on her hands--or did have, until she decided to dedicate herself to becoming the next Lady McCartney. And Paul, considering his enormous wealth, should do more. I think he has accomplished something incredibly wonderful in LIPA, preserving his old school, and giving personally of his time to raise funds and interact with the students. Financially, he gave $1 million of his own money to get the project going. Same as for the tsunami relief. But is that really a lot for a billionaire? Someone who is a millionaire a thousand times over?
To his credit, it appears that Paul hit all the right notes--both musically and politically--with his trip. He wasn't looking to be controversial, and did his homework so as not to make an already volatile situation any worse. But I still have reservations about all the naivete and puffery about the power of music, and particular his concert, to turn around the situation in the Middle East. And I do wish he would have have dispensed with the self-aggrandizing "I get criticized wherever I go"--umm, for WHAT? Sorry, people don't take him that seriously, and his trying to elevate his own importance was cringeworthy. There was a lengthy debate in one of the British papers about whether he should have boycotted Israel, and the almost universal conclusion was that it was a discussion not worth having, because Paul is a political nonentity--"bland," "banal," "apolitical," "irrelevant," an "old guy who hasn't put out a decent record in 25 years." A few people elected to get nasty, one even took a swipe at his sexual predelictions. And a couple used humor to make their point, with remarks like, "Haven't the Jews suffered enough?"
One of the young Israelis guarding Paul said that he had never heard of him, or of the Beatles. So, on balance, it was good that he went. But ONLY as an entertainer, which is all he is. The political angle got embarrassingly out of hand. John's bed-in for peace looked positively dignified by comparison.
|
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on Sept 29, 2008 14:46:10 GMT -5
Regarding the song Freedom, maybe we can agree it is somewhere between a high-school gym teacher and Jefferson. A song like that doesn't have to be loaded with words. In fact too many get in the way of such a song. Less is more in this case. It also applies to Give Peace a Chance. No one remembers all the chatter of the verses. They remember the simple directness of the chorus or refrain. A simple but powerful and eloquent idea. That applies to both songs. If you wouldn't fight for your principles when physically threatened, what does that say about how dearly you hold them? Some ideals are worth fighting for and our freedom is definitely one of them. Othewise we would all be speaking German and living under a freedom hating dictatorship. Don't think it couldn't happen again.
|
|
|
|
Post by richforman on Sept 29, 2008 15:18:57 GMT -5
Moreover: to those who say "Freedom" is jingoistic compared with Lennon's more (supposedly) enlightened political lyrics, let's compare these:
"I will fight for the right to freedom." - McCartney
"Me must all fight for freedom." - Lennon
richforman
|
|
|
|
Post by sayne on Sept 29, 2008 15:34:33 GMT -5
. . . Othewise we would all be speaking German and living under a freedom hating dictatorship . . . . . . or in a country whose citizens barely know basic skills after 12 years of compulsory education and whose government has just practically nationalized its economy.    |
|
|
|
Post by jimc on Sept 29, 2008 23:02:18 GMT -5
Regarding the song Freedom, maybe we can agree it is somewhere between a high-school gym teacher and Jefferson. A song like that doesn't have to be loaded with words. In fact too many get in the way of such a song. Less is more in this case. It also applies to Give Peace a Chance. No one remembers all the chatter of the verses. They remember the simple directness of the chorus or refrain. A simple but powerful and eloquent idea. That applies to both songs. If you wouldn't fight for your principles when physically threatened, what does that say about how dearly you hold them? Some ideals are worth fighting for and our freedom is definitely one of them. Othewise we would all be speaking German and living under a freedom hating dictatorship. Don't think it couldn't happen again. Uh, why pick on the Germans? It was the Japanese who actually attacked us. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by sayne on Sept 29, 2008 23:52:30 GMT -5
. . . whose government has just practically nationalized its economy. What a difference a few hours makes. |
|
|
|
Post by superhans on Sept 30, 2008 2:19:11 GMT -5
Othewise we would all be speaking German and living under a freedom hating dictatorship. Don't think it couldn't happen again. Yeah, yeah......and you'd all be eating sauerkraut and walking round in lederhosen listening to Kraftwerk!  |
|
|
|
Post by sayne on Sept 30, 2008 8:58:16 GMT -5
Othewise we would all be speaking German and living under a freedom hating dictatorship. Don't think it couldn't happen again. Yeah, yeah......and you'd all be eating sauerkraut and walking round in lederhosen listening to Kraftwerk! Don't forget goose-stepping to Trio, Silver Convention, and Nena!  |
|
|
|
Post by superhans on Sept 30, 2008 10:00:04 GMT -5
Yeah, yeah......and you'd all be eating sauerkraut and walking round in lederhosen listening to Kraftwerk! Don't forget goose-stepping to Trio, Silver Convention, and Nena! Ahhhh.....the German culture is so wonderfully high camp! |
|
|
|
Post by sayne on Sept 30, 2008 10:15:50 GMT -5
Ahhhh.....the German culture is so wonderfully high camp! Ya wohl! ;D |
|
|
|
Post by superhans on Sept 30, 2008 10:54:48 GMT -5
Ahhhh.....the German culture is so wonderfully high camp! Ya wohl! ;D Don't even get me started on thigh-length boots and leather breeches! |
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Sept 30, 2008 11:18:50 GMT -5
Don't even get me started on thigh-length boots and leather breeches! Ouch, maybe we better go back to breast milk as we did elsewhere. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by sayne on Sept 30, 2008 14:12:54 GMT -5
Don't even get me started on thigh-length boots and leather breeches! Ouch, maybe we better go back to breast milk as we did elsewhere. ;D You're a scamp!  |
|
|
|
Post by sayne on Sept 30, 2008 23:38:46 GMT -5
Don't forget goose-stepping to Trio, Silver Convention, and Nena! Ahhhh.....the German culture is so wonderfully high camp! But seriously, I just went to a career retrospective of German artist Martin Kippenberger at the Museum of Contemporary Art in Los Angeles. Heard of him? If so, what do you think of his work? |
|
|
|
Post by superhans on Oct 2, 2008 9:18:24 GMT -5
Ahhhh.....the German culture is so wonderfully high camp! But seriously, I just went to a career retrospective of German artist Martin Kippenberger at the Museum of Contemporary Art in Los Angeles. Heard of him? If so, what do you think of his work? I only know what most people know about him: 1. He liked to party hard 2. He was always getting into trouble with the Church in Germany, mainly because... 3. ...one of his more contentious works depicts a frog on a Cross. His work strikes me as quite cerebral, as opposed to someone like Rothko who impacts more at a mood level - which I prefer. |
|
