 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
72.91.183.214
It warmed my heart to see him perform again, TV or whatever. The concert that I went to in '72 or '73 (America opened for him) was one of the most memorable I've ever witnessed. And this is an artist our Govt. is frightened of. What a fucking joke.
Follow Ups:
nt
c
expresses anguish and frustration and outcrying, part of the human condition (imo, apart from God). Clearly, the sound on the LP's are really great. My wife and I were marvelling not long ago about his talent and gifts. Thanks, kavakidd and Todd.
why should he repudiate islam?it's the radicals in every religion who cause the trouble.i'm more afraid of the christian radicals we have here in the us.all these people who think God gave them the inside track to the truth; that's where the trouble lies.people that try to indoctrinate you.as george carlin says"those people who go around killing people,because God told them it's the right thing to do" jews,christians,mormons,moslims and even atheists,as long as they practice their faith without trying to prosyletize,are fine with me .live and let live.
jim buck
Hey, dumbass, NONE of those Christians has ever hikacked a plane and flown it into a building killing 3,000 innocent souls. What an incredibly stupid thing to say...
-RW-
hey numbnuts..take those earphones off your ears and pick up some history books,the crusades were the biggest killing foray for the catholics.when they got their heads handed to them,they sent little kids out to fight and get killed too.what about the various inquesitions in france and spain?how many people were persecuted and died at that time?
seems like you have selected memory or you're just stupid..don't know you ,but suspect the latter.
jim buck
For examples of "Christian" (actually, just Catholic) "killing forays", this embittered man has to go back to... the Twelth Century! Or, much more minorly, the Fifteenth.
"You're just stupid." Wow. What a brilliant comeback.
clark
Couple of fine young Christians.
in service to their religions. Huge difference.
"Man is the only animal that blushes - or needs to" Mark Twain
thank you hcman...i'm tired of replying to the God/flag/bible people{aka neo cons].please tell them that the BUSH era is over.all republicans ,please report to anywhere south of the mason dixon line.i'm a yankee and all the repubs. in my area can't get elected for dogcatcher.
all the repubs. with half a brain are going against bush big time.the best thing move he can do ,is to resign before he gets impeached.
vox populi!!
jim buck
that which had been taken FROM them.
"Man is the only animal that blushes - or needs to" Mark Twain
x
"i'm more afraid of the christian radicals we have here in the us."
I realize to some people, waking people up at 8 am on a Saturday morning is a worse offense than blowing people up at 8 pm on a Saturday night, but to each his own.....
wish to convert everyone to their way of thinking - especially via suicide bombs.
These parallels are beyond disgraceful
"Man is the only animal that blushes - or needs to" Mark Twain
How about the Witnesses and the Born Agains. They don't use suicide bombs but they certainly ring a lot of doorbells and don't take no for an answer gently.
bgs
of born-agains plus a mother who was always devoutly religious. Mother never, ever pressured me and, after being asked politely, my sisters stopped saying "praise the lord" anytime anyone had any positive news.
As for the Witnesses", I just say not interested (before they can even open their mouths) and they are gone.
Big difference between proselytizing and blowing up innocent folks in any case.
"Man is the only animal that blushes - or needs to" Mark Twain
not around here. I wasn't talking about suicide bombs or terrorists anyway. Christianty has always been an Evangelical type religion. They went to South America, Africa etc. That's cool if the people dug it. I've always felt that one's spiritual beliefs were personal, you know, between the person and whatever or whomever.
Your house sounds like it was a very, very nice house.
You do know. I'm sure, that Amazing Grace was written by a Scottish slave boat captain who repented after one delivery. Slavery was also illegal in Great Britain but not the business of slave trading. Strange world.
Barry
said he was "more afraid of Christian Radicals in this Country". Sorta like Rosie O'Donnell.
"Man is the only animal that blushes - or needs to" Mark Twain
xoxo
s
... I had a business trip to Krakow (Poland). A village nearby is called Oswyecim or Oswiecym. I can't recall the right Polish spelling, but the corresponding German, Auschwitz, is rather well known.
I am much afraid that those running that camp and similar institutions throughout Europe were Christians, piously singing Bach chorales and proudly believing that God was on their side.
L.
P.S. May I recommend that debate on this lane is led back to it proper subject-matter? Thank you!
That's rich. Why certainly, after your misinformed/ignorant post, let's all get back to Music!
Sheesh.
.
*
"Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of truth and knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods." - Albert Einstein
.
not sure what you mean by that..but if you don't think that double play combo of cheney to bush to snow doesn't reek of fascism..better think again.
jim buck
.
speak for yourself my friend..i don't need any arcane superficial law to vent my observations.this is not 1962.you mention this "so called law" as if it were on a par with einstein and newtons physical laws...rubbish.this is right wing babble that tries to cancel any debate on the issues.me thinks you are the amateur sonny.
jim buck
. . . I said nothing resembling "it [was] on a par with einstein and newtons [sic] physical laws" nor revealed any intent to "cancel any debate on the issues" in my post, nor can any logical inference be made along those lines.
Meanwhile, we have heard that I "don't think that double play combo of cheney to bush to snow doesn't reek of fascism," that I think this is 1962 (were you even born by then? Doesn't sound like it, sonny ), none of which can be inferred by the plain language of my posts.
You seem to love to argue with points I haven't made. Please understand that I am not the source of the voices in your head. You must look elsewhere for them. Therapy?
FYI, "reductio ad hitlerum" is faux Latin meant to bring to mind "reductio ad absurdum" which, together with Godwin's Law explain an online phenomenon: that once any party raises naziism or Hitler in an argument, said individual has just lost that argument, for all rationality has been brushed aside.
Our good friend Luciano was the one who committed this logical fallacy, when he posited that because Hitler was (in theory at least) a Christian, therefore all Christians agree with Hitler.
Do you subscribe to this notion? If so, you commit the same intellectual fraud. Nothing to be ashamed of, I'm sure all your friends feel the same way.
But it is typical of those of his ideological persuasion to make such an absurd remark and then say "Let's move on now." The reason they do that is because once they've launched that arrow their quiver is empty, and it is they, in fact, who wish to stifle debate. That was, in fact, the sole point of my post--I guessed you missed it.
Meanwhile, my remarks were originally directed at Luciano. For some reason you have determined from them my ideology and have furthermore sought to associate them with things that have nothing to do with anything I have posted. While there is no intellectual profit to be gained by doing so, I hope it made you feel better about your (apparently) nonexistent debating skills. It's always much easier to win an argument if you change the subject, though the first flush of victory never lasts long under those circumstances.
If you want to play with the big boys, you have some work to do. I wish you the best of luck on your long journey into rationality.
..."Our good friend Luciano was the one who committed this logical fallacy, when he posited that because Hitler was (in theory at least) a Christian, therefore all Christians agree with Hitler."
THAT was how you read Luciano's post. OMFG. I'm pretty sure he was simply suggesting that "Christians" had, more recently than hundreds and hundreds of years ago, engaged in horrendous acts.
I have not disappeared, but I am merely engaged in a long business trip and I am presently posting from Tokyo. I am appreciative of criticism raised against my earlier posting, but it may be wise to recall that comments to any statement first require properly reading the statement, as SF did.
Incidentally, my statement deliberately failed to mention HH, but was rather mentioning just one of those, alas, widely supported mass movements we Christians cannot surely be proud of.
L.
P.S. Let me reiterate, out of any fanciful construction, my invitation to lead this lane back to its original intended purpose.
Which as I'm sure you know SE, is applicable to just about everyone except perhaps Quakers.
Sorry. Just had surgery and I'm sore and cranky, and I am so tired of intellectual lightweights with a penchant for publically demonstrating their inability to reason.
Present company very much excluded. ;-)
...where you were coming from. "Collaboration with the Nazis" is a net that is RIGHTFULLY cast widely. Way too many individuals, institutions, governments and leaders who "turned a blind eye" should have been "netted" for moral or ethical crimes, minimally, or outright complicity in the worst cases. Yes, guilt-by-association -- I see how you read it that way. Sorry about your pain. Good luck in your healing!:-)
as i suspected,this so called "law" eminated from chicago university..a known extreme conservative think tank especially the law school..rumsfeld and robt. bork come to mind...real progressive people.
jim buck
;)
bleep
Cat Stevens meant a lot to me when I was in college, and it was a shock when he threw it all over to become a Muslim - and give up music in the process. Richard Thompson is a Muslim and continued to make records, by the way. Cat did support the death sentence handed out to Rushdie, and while he has backed off this, I have been wary of him as a human being since. Having said that, I would love to listen to Tea for the Tillerman, Teaser and the Firecat, and the great Catch Bull at Four without guilt.
I heard (or saw) an interview with him and he said he never advocated violence toward anyone. Stevens said he was misquoted and basically slandered. He spoke in favor of peace. Having heard before that he supported the sentence given out toward Rushdie, I came away from the interview convinced of Stevens/Yusuf's sincerity in embracing Islam and his complete belief and acceptance of others, not his belief in or support of violence.
Celebrities are often misquoted and their words corrupted. Is this of any consolation? I had the same misgivings about listening to his music, but no longer have them after the interview. I listened to the man speak. Can't get much more direct than that.
"I came away from the interview convinced of Stevens/Yusuf's sincerity in embracing Islam and his complete belief and acceptance of others, not his belief in or support of violence."Depends on your interpretation of "violence", I suppose. Yusuf Islam has made clear that he did not support the 1989 Fatwa of any vigilante killing of Mr. Rushdie. However, he does support the death penalty for acts of blasphemy if one is convicted in a proper court of law. Under Islamic law, captial punishment is the penalty for one found guilty of blasphemy unless there are acts of repetence to justify the commutation of that penalty. Although Yusuf Islam condemned the Fatwa against Solomon Rushdie, he was not condemning his killing as long as he was giving due process and his day in court. He expressed this position on his own website and in interviews.
Is it still "violence" to kill an author for his writings even if properly tried in a court of law? Depends on your perspective. There are still many in this country that believe that the death penalty is an act of "violence", that is, the government has no right to take a life. Others, however, do not perceive captial punishment as "violent" when used to punish one who has violated a law of the highest moral order (eg., murder). In Islam, blasphemy is a crime of the highest moral order. This is true in the Judeo-Christian tradition as well; think of the Ten Commandments--Thou shalt not take the lord's name in vain.
I'm certainly not condemning of condoning Yusuf Islam's beliefs. I just want to clear up much misinterpretation of his position. He was misinterpreted as supporting the vigilante murder of an author for exercising his right to free speech as declared under the 1989 Fatwa. However, his own clarifications have been misinterpreted as not ever supporting the killing of an author for exercising his right to free speech. That is incorrect. He would support the killing of Solomon Rushdie as long as he is properly tried in an Islamic court of law and if his speech is guilty of blasphemy. Whether he is still a man of peace may depend on your view of the use of capital punishment and how appropriate it is for the crime.
In the interview I heard, the point of trial and due process was not brought up. It would seem that he is being true to his faith. While I can respect his devotion, I do not share his views, being a dyed-in-the-wool pacifist and convinced of the practicality of my position. True pacifism has probably never been tried. It needs great numbers, i.e. whole nations, to yield its potential and to my mind that has never been done.
My feeling is that no government has the right to take a human life, especially as a form of justice. We'll leave the issue of self defense, either personal or national, aside for the moment. That has some subtle philosophical ramifications that few can appreciate.
Again, thanks for the clarification.
on a suspect person list. He was denied entry due to that fact. It was later determined he was not the same whoever but apparentley he can't see any reason why we might want to prevent the other whoever from coming in... He's over. Whatever he was even he rejects it so i haven't listened to his old music for over 20 years and untill he repudiates islam it'll be another 20 bizillion.
The government never had such a problem with Muhammad Ali..... (The draft dodging was the biggest issue, but not a security issue.)
Could the difference be maybe the messages that were being said? .......
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
