[FairfieldLife] Re: Fidel Castro and TM / Bob Dylan
Dear faste37, jim, and all others who appreciated my analysis. In my opinion there can be little doubt that Dylan had the Vietnam war in mind, whatever he may have said afterwards, he wouldn't have admitted it if someone had confronted him with this interpretation anyway. It fits perfectly only with the antiwar theme. Can you think of any woman who would have asked her lover to close his heart for her? And do you have any doubt what the prevailing opinion about the song would have been in the sixties had even one person thought of this interpretation? Somehow that had to be far beyond the frame of reference of those living in the United States at the time, and maybe it's no coincidence that it had to wait to be deciphered by someone who was not born here. And a couple of things of secondary I didn't include in the analysis that I think you may find interesting: Someone who will die for you *and more*. What more would a lover ask? The ultimate ideal of romantic love is the self-sacrifice for one's lover. But there is something more than a soldier is asked to do in war: to kill, sometimes even innocent women and children (collateral damage). Being asked to risk your life for your country is one thing; being asked to kill women and children, something done regularly in a war, is another. Many who wouldn't object to the first would certainly object to the second. Another point: Go melt back in the night. This seems to be a direct reference to another song written for the American flag: Oh, say can you see, by the dawn's early light But then it was the dawn, by 1964 it was dark... Also: The album came out on May 2, 1964 (I may be a day off). By coincidence, on that same day the largest until then antiwar demonstration took place at the UN (http://lists.village.virginia.edu/sixties/HTML_docs/Resources/Primary/Manifestos/PL_M2d_manifesto.html) So the antiwar sentiment was in the air during the previous few months, and Dylan, who was so much in tune with his times, was certainly well aware of it; I would even bet that he knew some of the participants of the demonstration, and no doubt some they were among his audience. So, I am happy I helped you appreciate the song in a fresh light, If only I could decipher more Dylan songs... But that is not something you pursue, it just comes to you when you least expect it. Peace, Eustace --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Excellent analysis. That this was an anti-war song had never occurred to me before, but seems obvious now. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Eustace [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (From http://www.geocities.com/itaintme_babe/itaintme.html) _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ LITERARY CRITICISM IT AIN'T ME, BABE by Bob Dylan Go 'way from my window, Leave at your own chosen speed. I'm not the one you want, babe, I'm not the one you need. You say you're lookin' for someone Who's never weak but always strong, To protect you an' defend you Whether you are right or wrong, Someone to open each and every door, But it ain't me, babe, No, no, no, it ain't me, babe, It ain't me you're lookin' for, babe. Go lightly from the ledge, babe, Go lightly on the ground. I'm not the one you want, babe, I will only let you down. You say you're lookin' for someone Who will promise never to part, Someone to close his eyes for you, Someone to close his heart, Someone who will die for you an' more, But it ain't me, babe, No, no, no, it ain't me, babe, It ain't me you're lookin' for, babe. Go melt back in the night, Everything inside is made of stone. There's nothing in here moving An' anyway I'm not alone. You say you're looking for someone Who'll pick you up each time you fall, To gather flowers constantly An' to come each time you call, A lover for your life an' nothing more, But it ain't me, babe, No, no, no, it ain't me, babe, It ain't me you're lookin' for, babe. Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Need Help? Get Help! Tools and Strategies for Healthy Drug-Free Living/a. http://us.click.yahoo.com/wI.OUB/dbOLAA/d1hLAA/0NYolB/TM
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fidel Castro and TM / Bob Dylan
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Eustace [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ... And, of course, as a result of the works of anti-war, anti-American people like yourself, America pulled out of Vietnam and then the REAL killing and suffering started in SouthEast Asia: more people died in the 2 years following the U.S. pullout than during the entire 14 years of American involvement. Dear shempmcgurk. Impossible to argue with you! How many hours a day do you watch FOX? Never mind, forget it, it doesn't really matter, only a fool would ever expect to change your political, and historical, views without looking for root causes, and you are taking good care of that yourself by meditating regularly. But maybe you would find edifying this literary analysis I wrote years ago. Jay Guru Dev, Eustace (From http://www.geocities.com/itaintme_babe/itaintme.html) _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ LITERARY CRITICISM IT AIN'T ME, BABE by Bob Dylan Go 'way from my window, Leave at your own chosen speed. I'm not the one you want, babe, I'm not the one you need. You say you're lookin' for someone Who's never weak but always strong, To protect you an' defend you Whether you are right or wrong, Someone to open each and every door, But it ain't me, babe, No, no, no, it ain't me, babe, It ain't me you're lookin' for, babe. Go lightly from the ledge, babe, Go lightly on the ground. I'm not the one you want, babe, I will only let you down. You say you're lookin' for someone Who will promise never to part, Someone to close his eyes for you, Someone to close his heart, Someone who will die for you an' more, But it ain't me, babe, No, no, no, it ain't me, babe, It ain't me you're lookin' for, babe. Go melt back in the night, Everything inside is made of stone. There's nothing in here moving An' anyway I'm not alone. You say you're looking for someone Who'll pick you up each time you fall, To gather flowers constantly An' to come each time you call, A lover for your life an' nothing more, But it ain't me, babe, No, no, no, it ain't me, babe, It ain't me you're lookin' for, babe. IT AIN'T THAT , BABE! In July 1992, while driving back to Hartford with a friend after the Tribute to Woody Guthrie concert in Central Park and listening to Bob Dylan, my companion made some comment about the song It Ain't Me, Babe. It seems that somehow his remark and the lingering inspiration from the concert set me thinking, because a few days later I suddenly came to an startling insight into the meaning of the song's lyrics. The song has been understood variously as a cynical love song or as referring to Dylan's relationship with his audience; however, it is actually a political song. It clearly refers to the war in Vietnam and to the American flag, which the poet lets go from his window (Go 'way from my window), subsequently falls on the ledge (Go lightly from the ledge, babe), and finally to the ground (Go lightly on the ground); the verse Leave at your own chosen speed is a poetic description of the swinging motion of the falling flag. The lines To protect you and defend you/Whether you are right of wrong refer to actual battle situations and to the then raging dirty war; the same theme of the unjustness of the war we find again later: Someone to close his eyes for you, Someone to close his heart (a rather unusual request coming from a woman, to say the least). The verses Someone who will die for you and more and Who'll pick you up each time you fall should be construed literally and not metaphorically. To come each time you call refers to calls to arms, not to phone calls. The promise never to part implies court-martial, not divorce court. Only the flowers in the verse To gather flowers constantly should be understood metaphorically, as referring to military medals. Finally, the beginning of the third stanza: Everything inside is made of stone./There's nothing in here moving denotes the absence of patriotic sentiments in the heart of the poet, something, however, shared by draft resisters and others with
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fidel Castro and TM / Bob Dylan
Excellent analysis. That this was an anti-war song had never occurred to me before, but seems obvious now. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Eustace [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (From http://www.geocities.com/itaintme_babe/itaintme.html) _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ LITERARY CRITICISM IT AIN'T ME, BABE by Bob Dylan Go 'way from my window, Leave at your own chosen speed. I'm not the one you want, babe, I'm not the one you need. You say you're lookin' for someone Who's never weak but always strong, To protect you an' defend you Whether you are right or wrong, Someone to open each and every door, But it ain't me, babe, No, no, no, it ain't me, babe, It ain't me you're lookin' for, babe. Go lightly from the ledge, babe, Go lightly on the ground. I'm not the one you want, babe, I will only let you down. You say you're lookin' for someone Who will promise never to part, Someone to close his eyes for you, Someone to close his heart, Someone who will die for you an' more, But it ain't me, babe, No, no, no, it ain't me, babe, It ain't me you're lookin' for, babe. Go melt back in the night, Everything inside is made of stone. There's nothing in here moving An' anyway I'm not alone. You say you're looking for someone Who'll pick you up each time you fall, To gather flowers constantly An' to come each time you call, A lover for your life an' nothing more, But it ain't me, babe, No, no, no, it ain't me, babe, It ain't me you're lookin' for, babe. IT AIN'T THAT , BABE! In July 1992, while driving back to Hartford with a friend after the Tribute to Woody Guthrie concert in Central Park and listening to Bob Dylan, my companion made some comment about the song It Ain't Me, Babe. It seems that somehow his remark and the lingering inspiration from the concert set me thinking, because a few days later I suddenly came to an startling insight into the meaning of the song's lyrics. The song has been understood variously as a cynical love song or as referring to Dylan's relationship with his audience; however, it is actually a political song. It clearly refers to the war in Vietnam and to the American flag, which the poet lets go from his window (Go 'way from my window), subsequently falls on the ledge (Go lightly from the ledge, babe), and finally to the ground (Go lightly on the ground); the verse Leave at your own chosen speed is a poetic description of the swinging motion of the falling flag. The lines To protect you and defend you/Whether you are right of wrong refer to actual battle situations and to the then raging dirty war; the same theme of the unjustness of the war we find again later: Someone to close his eyes for you, Someone to close his heart (a rather unusual request coming from a woman, to say the least). The verses Someone who will die for you and more and Who'll pick you up each time you fall should be construed literally and not metaphorically. To come each time you call refers to calls to arms, not to phone calls. The promise never to part implies court-martial, not divorce court. Only the flowers in the verse To gather flowers constantly should be understood metaphorically, as referring to military medals. Finally, the beginning of the third stanza: Everything inside is made of stone./There's nothing in here moving denotes the absence of patriotic sentiments in the heart of the poet, something, however, shared by draft resisters and others with similar antiwar sentiments (And anyway I'm not alone). When I realized that It Ain't Me, Babe was an antiwar and not a love song, I first imagined that I had rediscovered by myself something every young person in America in the sixties had known. But when I asked friends, and then when I checked the Dylan bibliography, I realized to my surprise that no one before had considered the most obvious, once of course you think of it, interpretation: Anthony Scaduto thinks that Dylan tells Suze and all women that the search for an illusory Hollywood-romantic love, ... has turned him into stone (Bob Dylan: An Intimate Biography, 1971, pp.110-111). Robert Shelton, the influential columnist whose report on Bob Dylan in the New York Times on Sept. 28, 1961 was a significant
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fidel Castro and TM / Bob Dylan
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Excellent analysis. That this was an anti-war song had never occurred to me before, but seems obvious now. A viewing of Scorcese's No Direction Home and a read of Dylan's autobiography might be in order. :-) One can read almost anything one wants *into* his songs, but that doesn't mean that *he* intended for those things to be there. It was a love song then and it's a love song now, no matter how creatively one attempts to interpret it otherwise. It's the oldest problem in creation -- how to tell the difference between reality and what we project onto reality. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Eustace [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (From http://www.geocities.com/itaintme_babe/itaintme.html) _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ LITERARY CRITICISM IT AIN'T ME, BABE by Bob Dylan Go 'way from my window, Leave at your own chosen speed. I'm not the one you want, babe, I'm not the one you need. You say you're lookin' for someone Who's never weak but always strong, To protect you an' defend you Whether you are right or wrong, Someone to open each and every door, But it ain't me, babe, No, no, no, it ain't me, babe, It ain't me you're lookin' for, babe. Go lightly from the ledge, babe, Go lightly on the ground. I'm not the one you want, babe, I will only let you down. You say you're lookin' for someone Who will promise never to part, Someone to close his eyes for you, Someone to close his heart, Someone who will die for you an' more, But it ain't me, babe, No, no, no, it ain't me, babe, It ain't me you're lookin' for, babe. Go melt back in the night, Everything inside is made of stone. There's nothing in here moving An' anyway I'm not alone. You say you're looking for someone Who'll pick you up each time you fall, To gather flowers constantly An' to come each time you call, A lover for your life an' nothing more, But it ain't me, babe, No, no, no, it ain't me, babe, It ain't me you're lookin' for, babe. IT AIN'T THAT , BABE! In July 1992, while driving back to Hartford with a friend after the Tribute to Woody Guthrie concert in Central Park and listening to Bob Dylan, my companion made some comment about the song It Ain't Me, Babe. It seems that somehow his remark and the lingering inspiration from the concert set me thinking, because a few days later I suddenly came to an startling insight into the meaning of the song's lyrics. The song has been understood variously as a cynical love song or as referring to Dylan's relationship with his audience; however, it is actually a political song. It clearly refers to the war in Vietnam and to the American flag, which the poet lets go from his window (Go 'way from my window), subsequently falls on the ledge (Go lightly from the ledge, babe), and finally to the ground (Go lightly on the ground); the verse Leave at your own chosen speed is a poetic description of the swinging motion of the falling flag. The lines To protect you and defend you/Whether you are right of wrong refer to actual battle situations and to the then raging dirty war; the same theme of the unjustness of the war we find again later: Someone to close his eyes for you, Someone to close his heart (a rather unusual request coming from a woman, to say the least). The verses Someone who will die for you and more and Who'll pick you up each time you fall should be construed literally and not metaphorically. To come each time you call refers to calls to arms, not to phone calls. The promise never to part implies court- martial, not divorce court. Only the flowers in the verse To gather flowers constantly should be understood metaphorically, as referring to military medals. Finally, the beginning of the third stanza: Everything inside is made of stone./There's nothing in here moving denotes the absence of patriotic sentiments in the heart of the poet, something, however, shared by draft resisters and others with similar antiwar sentiments (And anyway I'm not alone). When I realized that It Ain't Me, Babe was an antiwar and not a love
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fidel Castro and TM / Bob Dylan
Still seems to me that Eustace's interpretation is just as valid as yours. It makes me engage with an old song in a new way, which is what good criticism of any poem or song should do. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Excellent analysis. That this was an anti-war song had never occurred to me before, but seems obvious now. A viewing of Scorcese's No Direction Home and a read of Dylan's autobiography might be in order. :-) One can read almost anything one wants *into* his songs, but that doesn't mean that *he* intended for those things to be there. It was a love song then and it's a love song now, no matter how creatively one attempts to interpret it otherwise. It's the oldest problem in creation -- how to tell the difference between reality and what we project onto reality. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Eustace [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (From http://www.geocities.com/itaintme_babe/itaintme.html) _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ LITERARY CRITICISM IT AIN'T ME, BABE by Bob Dylan Go 'way from my window, Leave at your own chosen speed. I'm not the one you want, babe, I'm not the one you need. You say you're lookin' for someone Who's never weak but always strong, To protect you an' defend you Whether you are right or wrong, Someone to open each and every door, But it ain't me, babe, No, no, no, it ain't me, babe, It ain't me you're lookin' for, babe. Go lightly from the ledge, babe, Go lightly on the ground. I'm not the one you want, babe, I will only let you down. You say you're lookin' for someone Who will promise never to part, Someone to close his eyes for you, Someone to close his heart, Someone who will die for you an' more, But it ain't me, babe, No, no, no, it ain't me, babe, It ain't me you're lookin' for, babe. Go melt back in the night, Everything inside is made of stone. There's nothing in here moving An' anyway I'm not alone. You say you're looking for someone Who'll pick you up each time you fall, To gather flowers constantly An' to come each time you call, A lover for your life an' nothing more, But it ain't me, babe, No, no, no, it ain't me, babe, It ain't me you're lookin' for, babe. IT AIN'T THAT , BABE! In July 1992, while driving back to Hartford with a friend after the Tribute to Woody Guthrie concert in Central Park and listening to Bob Dylan, my companion made some comment about the song It Ain't Me, Babe. It seems that somehow his remark and the lingering inspiration from the concert set me thinking, because a few days later I suddenly came to an startling insight into the meaning of the song's lyrics. The song has been understood variously as a cynical love song or as referring to Dylan's relationship with his audience; however, it is actually a political song. It clearly refers to the war in Vietnam and to the American flag, which the poet lets go from his window (Go 'way from my window), subsequently falls on the ledge (Go lightly from the ledge, babe), and finally to the ground (Go lightly on the ground); the verse Leave at your own chosen speed is a poetic description of the swinging motion of the falling flag. The lines To protect you and defend you/Whether you are right of wrong refer to actual battle situations and to the then raging dirty war; the same theme of the unjustness of the war we find again later: Someone to close his eyes for you, Someone to close his heart (a rather unusual request coming from a woman, to say the least). The verses Someone who will die for you and more and Who'll pick you up each time you fall should be construed literally and not metaphorically. To come each time you call refers to calls to arms, not to phone calls. The promise never to part implies court- martial, not divorce court. Only the flowers in the verse To gather flowers constantly should be understood metaphorically, as referring to military medals.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fidel Castro and TM / Bob Dylan
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Still seems to me that Eustace's interpretation is just as valid as yours. It makes me engage with an old song in a new way, which is what good criticism of any poem or song should do. I think you misunderstand. I think it's *OK* to think of a song or a poem or a novel or a film any way you want, and interpret it any way you want. But that's a little different from making a statement that the original author clearly meant it that way. In the case of this song, Dylan is on record in several places as to what -- and who -- this song was about, and her name was not 'Vietnam War.' :-) Bowing out of this discussion now, before the crit really starts to hit the fan. :-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Excellent analysis. That this was an anti-war song had never occurred to me before, but seems obvious now. A viewing of Scorcese's No Direction Home and a read of Dylan's autobiography might be in order. :-) One can read almost anything one wants *into* his songs, but that doesn't mean that *he* intended for those things to be there. It was a love song then and it's a love song now, no matter how creatively one attempts to interpret it otherwise. It's the oldest problem in creation -- how to tell the difference between reality and what we project onto reality. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Eustace [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (From http://www.geocities.com/itaintme_babe/itaintme.html) _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ LITERARY CRITICISM IT AIN'T ME, BABE by Bob Dylan Go 'way from my window, Leave at your own chosen speed. I'm not the one you want, babe, I'm not the one you need. You say you're lookin' for someone Who's never weak but always strong, To protect you an' defend you Whether you are right or wrong, Someone to open each and every door, But it ain't me, babe, No, no, no, it ain't me, babe, It ain't me you're lookin' for, babe. Go lightly from the ledge, babe, Go lightly on the ground. I'm not the one you want, babe, I will only let you down. You say you're lookin' for someone Who will promise never to part, Someone to close his eyes for you, Someone to close his heart, Someone who will die for you an' more, But it ain't me, babe, No, no, no, it ain't me, babe, It ain't me you're lookin' for, babe. Go melt back in the night, Everything inside is made of stone. There's nothing in here moving An' anyway I'm not alone. You say you're looking for someone Who'll pick you up each time you fall, To gather flowers constantly An' to come each time you call, A lover for your life an' nothing more, But it ain't me, babe, No, no, no, it ain't me, babe, It ain't me you're lookin' for, babe. IT AIN'T THAT , BABE! In July 1992, while driving back to Hartford with a friend after the Tribute to Woody Guthrie concert in Central Park and listening to Bob Dylan, my companion made some comment about the song It Ain't Me, Babe. It seems that somehow his remark and the lingering inspiration from the concert set me thinking, because a few days later I suddenly came to an startling insight into the meaning of the song's lyrics. The song has been understood variously as a cynical love song or as referring to Dylan's relationship with his audience; however, it is actually a political song. It clearly refers to the war in Vietnam and to the American flag, which the poet lets go from his window (Go 'way from my window), subsequently falls on the ledge (Go lightly from the ledge, babe), and finally to the ground (Go lightly on the ground); the verse Leave at your own chosen speed is a poetic description of the swinging motion of the falling flag. The lines To protect you and defend you/Whether you are right of wrong refer to actual battle
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fidel Castro and TM / Bob Dylan
Yes, your point is a valid one, and I don't know what Dylan said about this song. But I don't always take at face value what authors say their work is about, since high-quality work often contains levels of meaning of which the author himself was largely unaware. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Still seems to me that Eustace's interpretation is just as valid as yours. It makes me engage with an old song in a new way, which is what good criticism of any poem or song should do. I think you misunderstand. I think it's *OK* to think of a song or a poem or a novel or a film any way you want, and interpret it any way you want. But that's a little different from making a statement that the original author clearly meant it that way. In the case of this song, Dylan is on record in several places as to what -- and who -- this song was about, and her name was not 'Vietnam War.' :-) Bowing out of this discussion now, before the crit really starts to hit the fan. :-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Excellent analysis. That this was an anti-war song had never occurred to me before, but seems obvious now. A viewing of Scorcese's No Direction Home and a read of Dylan's autobiography might be in order. :-) One can read almost anything one wants *into* his songs, but that doesn't mean that *he* intended for those things to be there. It was a love song then and it's a love song now, no matter how creatively one attempts to interpret it otherwise. It's the oldest problem in creation -- how to tell the difference between reality and what we project onto reality. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Eustace [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (From http://www.geocities.com/itaintme_babe/itaintme.html) _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ LITERARY CRITICISM IT AIN'T ME, BABE by Bob Dylan Go 'way from my window, Leave at your own chosen speed. I'm not the one you want, babe, I'm not the one you need. You say you're lookin' for someone Who's never weak but always strong, To protect you an' defend you Whether you are right or wrong, Someone to open each and every door, But it ain't me, babe, No, no, no, it ain't me, babe, It ain't me you're lookin' for, babe. Go lightly from the ledge, babe, Go lightly on the ground. I'm not the one you want, babe, I will only let you down. You say you're lookin' for someone Who will promise never to part, Someone to close his eyes for you, Someone to close his heart, Someone who will die for you an' more, But it ain't me, babe, No, no, no, it ain't me, babe, It ain't me you're lookin' for, babe. Go melt back in the night, Everything inside is made of stone. There's nothing in here moving An' anyway I'm not alone. You say you're looking for someone Who'll pick you up each time you fall, To gather flowers constantly An' to come each time you call, A lover for your life an' nothing more, But it ain't me, babe, No, no, no, it ain't me, babe, It ain't me you're lookin' for, babe. IT AIN'T THAT , BABE! In July 1992, while driving back to Hartford with a friend after the Tribute to Woody Guthrie concert in Central Park and listening to Bob Dylan, my companion made some comment about the song It Ain't Me, Babe. It seems that somehow his remark and the lingering inspiration from the concert set me thinking, because a few days later I suddenly came to an startling insight into the meaning of the song's lyrics. The song has been understood variously as a cynical love song or as referring to Dylan's relationship with his audience; however, it is actually a political song. It clearly refers to the war in
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fidel Castro and TM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 12/9/05 7:38:45 P.M. Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Several years ago TMO had considered Fidel Castro the personification of the Invincibility principle, or something like that. It was quite appropriate given the more than 400, if I remember correctly, assassination attempts against his person organized by the CIA and the Miami mafia... Too bad they didn't get him like they did that other mass- murderer Che Guevara. Castro is responsible for about 50,000 deaths and enslaving 11 million Cubans. Could you imagine the out cry had they been successful? Ramsey Clark could have jump started his hate America carrier in the early sixties! Castro was small potatoes compared to Saddam who killed maybe 2 million and enslaved 24 million Iraqis under slightly similar circumstances. However no Invincibility awards for Mr. Hussein. Yet ! Alot of the anti-Bushies on this forum would just LOVE to have the pre-U.S.-invasion status quo back so that Saddam and his kinder would be free to murder more. I am very firmly anti-Bush because he is so anti-American. Having said that, we sure cherry pick our dictators to get outraged over don't we? There were enough in the collective consciousness of the US who, following 9/11, resisted their ability to determine why we were attacked, primarily by Saudi Arabian radicals, and instead decided that they were angry, and it was someone's fault in the Middle East. The Bushies, wanting to take over Iraq for awhile due to its strategic oil value, and to finish a war that Bush the first began, decided Iraq was the target. This high handed crap about removing an oppressive dictator and setting the Iraqis free is politically self-serving, and defames the true ideal of liberty which this country was founded on. That oil was a major factor in which dictator we chose to depose is one I will readily acknowledge. And what's wrong with that? I use gas on a daily basis, don't you? So what's so wrong about factoring in that as part of our decision- making? Nothing is wrong with securing our interests and putting our efforts towards that end. And per your last post, maybe people meditating is the answer. It certainly can't hurt. However, we have all of this legal, diplomatic and economic leverage at our disposal (the US I mean), and it just seems so cynical, inhumane and lazy to me to try it out a little bit whenever conflict is brewing, then declare it unworkable, and as long as our adversary doesn't have nuclear capability, just say f*ck it and start a war on them. I don't know if you are referring above to the Iraq invasion, but how do you feel about the fact that there were no less than 17 U.N. resolutions asking Iraq to comply to WMD inspections, all of which came about because Iraq was NOT complying? Yes, as you say above, we have alot of diplomatic arsenal at our disposal to use and benefit from BEFORE we go to war, but when is time to say enough is enough? 10 years and 17 resolutions seems, to me, to be WAY more than enough. And, hey, did the U.S. really just say fuck it and start a war? No, they give such incredibly AMPLE warning. Iraqis -- and the rest of the world for that matter -- KNEW that the U.S. was going to invade. In wasn't in the middle of the night like Germany marching into Czechoslovakia or the Soviet Union into Afghanistan. Sure there are inefficiencies and lack of coherence and great difficulties in reaching a diplomatic consesus and/or enforcing economic sanctions, but going the extra mile is well worth the lives spared. To have created all of our alternatives to war, and then so easily be willing to kill in this supposedly modern age is just such an affront to all of us. ...so easily be willing to kill Thanks to the wonderful, incredible military technology of the United States, the killing of civilians were kept to a minimum. You spoke of Maharishi earlier. He has a great expression: Whatever you put your attention on, grows. Perhaps if we put our attention on cooperation between countries vs more military might, it could happen. And
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fidel Castro and TM
In a message dated 12/9/05 7:38:45 P.M. Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Several years ago TMO had considered Fidel Castro the personification of the Invincibility principle, or something like that. It was quite appropriate given the more than 400, if I remember correctly, assassination attempts against his person organized by the CIA and the Miami mafia...Too bad they didn't get him like they did that other mass-murderer Che Guevara.Castro is responsible for about 50,000 deaths and enslaving 11 million Cubans. Could you imagine the out cry had they been successful? Ramsey Clark could have jump started his hate America carrier in the early sixties! Castro was small potatoes compared to Saddamwho killed maybe 2 million and enslaved 24 million Iraqis under slightly similar circumstances. However no Invincibility awards for Mr. Hussein. Yet ! To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "FairfieldLife" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fidel Castro and TM
In a message dated 12/9/05 8:08:00 P.M. Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Castro is responsible for about 50,000 deaths and enslaving 11 million Cubans. So, about the same as some of our recent Presidents? Johnson with his ~73,000 Vietnam War dead (American deaths only) came to mind. Though I don't recall specifically the dictators he supported under his administration so I can't correlate the 11 million enslaved.And Bush the first killed roughly 100,000 Iraqis during the first war, and then allowed Sadaam to remain in power, enslaving roughly 25 million.Oh, and Reagan propped up quite a few central american dictatorships during his terms, easily surpassing the '11 million enslaved' number. Let's give credit where it is due in Vietnam. Starting with Eisenhower who sent advisors , Kennedy who actually sent fighting troops and pulled off the coup and murder of Diem, Johnson who escalated the mess to it's peak. Nixon and Ford at least committed themselves to a withdrawal of troops although it wasn't the cut n run tactic the democrats have come to embrace. I think the more accurate combat death figure was about 58,000. Bush 41led a coalition which may have killed 100,000 Iraqis,in order to expel Iraq from Kuwait,but it was the UN that left Saddam in power, who had already enslaved 25 million Iraqis. As for Reagan propping up central American dictators who enslaved their people, I can't think of any that confiscated massive amounts of private property, or prohibited their people from leaving their country or made people work for the state or had mass executions. Seems like Jimmy Carter is about to escape this mess. Didn't he prop up or at least recognize the Pol Pot regime that murdered 2 million Cambodians and enslaved the rest just to keep the newly reunified government of Vietnam in check? To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "FairfieldLife" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fidel Castro and TM
And Bush the second gone beat them all. Just give him some more time. I am quite happy that the german government is to weak to mes up like this (today). Well at least we provide some of the best equipment for wars etc... Mr Satva - What's wrong with this guy's spelling? He is german, trying his best. Don´t wast time thinking about it... - This message isn´t ment to offend annybody. - This message isn´t ment 100% seriously. Mr Satva Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Ever feel sad or cry for no reason at all? Depression. Narrated by Kate Hudson. http://us.click.yahoo.com/YbEMxA/ubOLAA/d1hLAA/0NYolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fidel Castro and TM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Eustace [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Several years ago TMO had considered Fidel Castro the personification of the Invincibility principle, or something like that. It was quite appropriate given the more than 400, if I remember correctly, assassination attempts against his person organized by the CIA and the Miami mafia... Too bad they didn't get him like they did that other mass- murderer Che Guevara. Castro is responsible for about 50,000 deaths and enslaving 11 million Cubans. So, about the same as some of our recent Presidents? Johnson with his ~73,000 Vietnam War dead (American deaths only) ...deaths sacrificed in order to prevent greater suffering and deaths by the spread of communism... And, of course, as a result of the works of anti-war, anti-American people like yourself, America pulled out of Vietnam and then the REAL killing and suffering started in SouthEast Asia: more people died in the 2 years following the U.S. pullout than during the entire 14 years of American involvement. came to mind. Though I don't recall specifically the dictators he supported under his administration so I can't correlate the 11 million enslaved. And Bush the first killed roughly 100,000 Iraqis during the first war, and then allowed Sadaam to remain in power, enslaving roughly 25 million. That is such a silly comment that I won't even comment upon it. Oh, and Reagan propped up quite a few central american dictatorships during his terms, easily surpassing the '11 million enslaved' number. Right-wing dictators are horrible people...BUT when the choice was between communism and right-wing dictators, the latter were ALWAYS the better choice. Care to look at the score card? Damn, you're making Castro out to be some kind of wimp or something! No wonder we hate him so much, he doesn't even kick ass like we do! You really need to learn your history. And so un-American of him to unilaterally kick out the US corporations and Mafia who were actually enslaving his country. Again, you really need to learn your history and not the bullshit and propaganda that the mass-murderer CAstro would have you believe. Pre-Castro Cuba was a place that had a VERY high immigration and, relative to the rest of Latin America, a very high standard of living and socio-economic indicators. Now they are near the bottom...and any successes that they have is actually due to the little capitalism that they allow on the Island as well as the U.S. dollars Miami relatives send them. Bastard! At least he could've allowed them by proxy as Sadaam and the South African apartheid governments did! Geez! I am happy to see that you join MMY in praising this dictator. Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Dying to be thin? Anorexia. Narrated by Julianne Moore. http://us.click.yahoo.com/abEMxA/sbOLAA/d1hLAA/0NYolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fidel Castro and TM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 12/9/05 7:38:45 P.M. Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Several years ago TMO had considered Fidel Castro the personification of the Invincibility principle, or something like that. It was quite appropriate given the more than 400, if I remember correctly, assassination attempts against his person organized by the CIA and the Miami mafia... Too bad they didn't get him like they did that other mass- murderer Che Guevara. Castro is responsible for about 50,000 deaths and enslaving 11 million Cubans. Could you imagine the out cry had they been successful? Ramsey Clark could have jump started his hate America carrier in the early sixties! Castro was small potatoes compared to Saddam who killed maybe 2 million and enslaved 24 million Iraqis under slightly similar circumstances. However no Invincibility awards for Mr. Hussein. Yet ! Alot of the anti-Bushies on this forum would just LOVE to have the pre-U.S.-invasion status quo back so that Saddam and his kinder would be free to murder more. Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Dying to be thin? Anorexia. Narrated by Julianne Moore. http://us.click.yahoo.com/AQDrNC/sbOLAA/d1hLAA/0NYolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fidel Castro and TM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Eustace [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Several years ago TMO had considered Fidel Castro the personification of the Invincibility principle, or something like that. It was quite appropriate given the more than 400, if I remember correctly, assassination attempts against his person organized by the CIA and the Miami mafia... Too bad they didn't get him like they did that other mass- murderer Che Guevara. Castro is responsible for about 50,000 deaths and enslaving 11 million Cubans. So, about the same as some of our recent Presidents? Johnson with his ~73,000 Vietnam War dead (American deaths only) ...deaths sacrificed in order to prevent greater suffering and deaths by the spread of communism... A lousy story in my opinion. Ironic that now that China has learned to exploit much of its population to serve our interests, we have firmly shut up, except for a couple of platitudes about democracy that we trot out when we visit, which they firmly ignore. Yes, what a beacon of anti-communism we are! And, of course, as a result of the works of anti-war, anti- American people like yourself, America pulled out of Vietnam and then the REAL killing and suffering started in SouthEast Asia: more people died in the 2 years following the U.S. pullout than during the entire 14 years of American involvement. And ironically we supported much of it, by our defacto support of the genocide in Cambodia, because of our stubborn unwillingness to back the enemies of Cambodia, the Vietnamese. came to mind. Though I don't recall specifically the dictators he supported under his administration so I can't correlate the 11 million enslaved. And Bush the first killed roughly 100,000 Iraqis during the first war, and then allowed Sadaam to remain in power, enslaving roughly 25 million. That is such a silly comment that I won't even comment upon it. Please refute it if you can. Oh, and Reagan propped up quite a few central american dictatorships during his terms, easily surpassing the '11 million enslaved' number. Right-wing dictators are horrible people...BUT when the choice was between communism and right-wing dictators, the latter were ALWAYS the better choice. Care to look at the score card? Please see previous comment about China. Damn, you're making Castro out to be some kind of wimp or something! No wonder we hate him so much, he doesn't even kick ass like we do! You really need to learn your history. And so un-American of him to unilaterally kick out the US corporations and Mafia who were actually enslaving his country. Again, you really need to learn your history and not the bullshit and propaganda that the mass-murderer CAstro would have you believe. Pre-Castro Cuba was a place that had a VERY high immigration and, relative to the rest of Latin America, a very high standard of living and socio-economic indicators. Now they are near the bottom...and any successes that they have is actually due to the little capitalism that they allow on the Island as well as the U.S. dollars Miami relatives send them. Bastard! At least he could've allowed them by proxy as Sadaam and the South African apartheid governments did! Geez! I am happy to see that you join MMY in praising this dictator. The point I am attempting to make through all of this is not some Castro praising, anti US diatribe. Rather that there is a middle ground, and that our country has much blood on its hands, leads to a huge amount of killing and suffering due to its massive military machine, and that by not recognizing this, we are perpetuating the thinking, such as you have implied, that the only way to deal with those who oppose us, or who we oppose is to kill them, while killing many of ourselves in the process. Don't you see the senselessness in such an approach? Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Ever feel sad or cry for no reason at all? Depression. Narrated by Kate Hudson. http://us.click.yahoo.com/CQDrNC/ubOLAA/d1hLAA/0NYolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fidel Castro and TM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 12/9/05 7:38:45 P.M. Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Several years ago TMO had considered Fidel Castro the personification of the Invincibility principle, or something like that. It was quite appropriate given the more than 400, if I remember correctly, assassination attempts against his person organized by the CIA and the Miami mafia... Too bad they didn't get him like they did that other mass- murderer Che Guevara. Castro is responsible for about 50,000 deaths and enslaving 11 million Cubans. Could you imagine the out cry had they been successful? Ramsey Clark could have jump started his hate America carrier in the early sixties! Castro was small potatoes compared to Saddam who killed maybe 2 million and enslaved 24 million Iraqis under slightly similar circumstances. However no Invincibility awards for Mr. Hussein. Yet ! Alot of the anti-Bushies on this forum would just LOVE to have the pre-U.S.-invasion status quo back so that Saddam and his kinder would be free to murder more. I am very firmly anti-Bush because he is so anti-American. Having said that, we sure cherry pick our dictators to get outraged over don't we? There were enough in the collective consciousness of the US who, following 9/11, resisted their ability to determine why we were attacked, primarily by Saudi Arabian radicals, and instead decided that they were angry, and it was someone's fault in the Middle East. The Bushies, wanting to take over Iraq for awhile due to its strategic oil value, and to finish a war that Bush the first began, decided Iraq was the target. This high handed crap about removing an oppressive dictator and setting the Iraqis free is politically self-serving, and defames the true ideal of liberty which this country was founded on. Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Drugs Don't Discriminate. Get help for yourself or someone you know. http://us.click.yahoo.com/0I.OUB/ZbOLAA/d1hLAA/0NYolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fidel Castro and TM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 12/9/05 8:08:00 P.M. Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Castro is responsible for about 50,000 deaths and enslaving 11 million Cubans. So, about the same as some of our recent Presidents? Johnson with his ~73,000 Vietnam War dead (American deaths only) came to mind. Though I don't recall specifically the dictators he supported under his administration so I can't correlate the 11 million enslaved. And Bush the first killed roughly 100,000 Iraqis during the first war, and then allowed Sadaam to remain in power, enslaving roughly 25 million. Oh, and Reagan propped up quite a few central american dictatorships during his terms, easily surpassing the '11 million enslaved' number. Let's give credit where it is due in Vietnam. Starting with Eisenhower who sent advisors , Kennedy who actually sent fighting troops and pulled off the coup and murder of Diem, Johnson who escalated the mess to it's peak. Nixon and Ford at least committed themselves to a withdrawal of troops although it wasn't the cut n run tactic the democrats have come to embrace. I think the more accurate combat death figure was about 58,000. Bush 41 led a coalition which may have killed 100,000 Iraqis,in order to expel Iraq from Kuwait, but it was the UN that left Saddam in power, who had already enslaved 25 million Iraqis. As for Reagan propping up central American dictators who enslaved their people, I can't think of any that confiscated massive amounts of private property, or prohibited their people from leaving their country or made people work for the state or had mass executions. Seems like Jimmy Carter is about to escape this mess. Didn't he prop up or at least recognize the Pol Pot regime that murdered 2 million Cambodians and enslaved the rest just to keep the newly reunified government of Vietnam in check? I agree completely with you. Except that Reagan did support the right wing dictatorships in El Salvador, Chile and Argentina if memory serves, all who killed many, many people through death squads. And we go around acting high and mighty towards the dictator of a carribean island? Laughable, huh? Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Does he tell you he loves you when he hits you? Abuse. Narrated by Halle Berry. http://us.click.yahoo.com/HcoraC/rbOLAA/d1hLAA/0NYolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fidel Castro and TM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Eustace [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Several years ago TMO had considered Fidel Castro the personification of the Invincibility principle, or something like that. It was quite appropriate given the more than 400, if I remember correctly, assassination attempts against his person organized by the CIA and the Miami mafia... Too bad they didn't get him like they did that other mass- murderer Che Guevara. Castro is responsible for about 50,000 deaths and enslaving 11 million Cubans. So, about the same as some of our recent Presidents? Johnson with his ~73,000 Vietnam War dead (American deaths only) ...deaths sacrificed in order to prevent greater suffering and deaths by the spread of communism... A lousy story in my opinion. Ironic that now that China has learned to exploit much of its population to serve our interests, we have firmly shut up, except for a couple of platitudes about democracy that we trot out when we visit, which they firmly ignore. Yes, what a beacon of anti-communism we are! And, of course, as a result of the works of anti-war, anti- American people like yourself, America pulled out of Vietnam and then the REAL killing and suffering started in SouthEast Asia: more people died in the 2 years following the U.S. pullout than during the entire 14 years of American involvement. And ironically we supported much of it, by our defacto support of the genocide in Cambodia, because of our stubborn unwillingness to back the enemies of Cambodia, the Vietnamese. came to mind. Though I don't recall specifically the dictators he supported under his administration so I can't correlate the 11 million enslaved. And Bush the first killed roughly 100,000 Iraqis during the first war, and then allowed Sadaam to remain in power, enslaving roughly 25 million. That is such a silly comment that I won't even comment upon it. Please refute it if you can. Oh, and Reagan propped up quite a few central american dictatorships during his terms, easily surpassing the '11 million enslaved' number. Right-wing dictators are horrible people...BUT when the choice was between communism and right-wing dictators, the latter were ALWAYS the better choice. Care to look at the score card? Please see previous comment about China. Damn, you're making Castro out to be some kind of wimp or something! No wonder we hate him so much, he doesn't even kick ass like we do! You really need to learn your history. And so un-American of him to unilaterally kick out the US corporations and Mafia who were actually enslaving his country. Again, you really need to learn your history and not the bullshit and propaganda that the mass-murderer CAstro would have you believe. Pre-Castro Cuba was a place that had a VERY high immigration and, relative to the rest of Latin America, a very high standard of living and socio-economic indicators. Now they are near the bottom...and any successes that they have is actually due to the little capitalism that they allow on the Island as well as the U.S. dollars Miami relatives send them. Bastard! At least he could've allowed them by proxy as Sadaam and the South African apartheid governments did! Geez! I am happy to see that you join MMY in praising this dictator. The point I am attempting to make through all of this is not some Castro praising, anti US diatribe. Rather that there is a middle ground, and that our country has much blood on its hands, leads to a huge amount of killing and suffering due to its massive military machine, and that by not recognizing this, we are perpetuating the thinking, such as you have implied, that the only way to deal with those who oppose us, or who we oppose is to kill them, while killing many of ourselves in the process. Don't you see the senselessness in such an approach? Not complete senselessness. As much as I have criticism of MMY and the TMO, I most readily acknowledge that the way to bring peace to the world and minimize killing is to have more and more people meditating and raising consiciousness. That, ultimately, is the best way to ensure peace and prosperity for all throughout the world. Until that utopia is achieved, the agenda of the USA has proven itself to be the most successful in
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fidel Castro and TM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 12/9/05 7:38:45 P.M. Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Several years ago TMO had considered Fidel Castro the personification of the Invincibility principle, or something like that. It was quite appropriate given the more than 400, if I remember correctly, assassination attempts against his person organized by the CIA and the Miami mafia... Too bad they didn't get him like they did that other mass- murderer Che Guevara. Castro is responsible for about 50,000 deaths and enslaving 11 million Cubans. Could you imagine the out cry had they been successful? Ramsey Clark could have jump started his hate America carrier in the early sixties! Castro was small potatoes compared to Saddam who killed maybe 2 million and enslaved 24 million Iraqis under slightly similar circumstances. However no Invincibility awards for Mr. Hussein. Yet ! Alot of the anti-Bushies on this forum would just LOVE to have the pre-U.S.-invasion status quo back so that Saddam and his kinder would be free to murder more. I am very firmly anti-Bush because he is so anti-American. Having said that, we sure cherry pick our dictators to get outraged over don't we? There were enough in the collective consciousness of the US who, following 9/11, resisted their ability to determine why we were attacked, primarily by Saudi Arabian radicals, and instead decided that they were angry, and it was someone's fault in the Middle East. The Bushies, wanting to take over Iraq for awhile due to its strategic oil value, and to finish a war that Bush the first began, decided Iraq was the target. This high handed crap about removing an oppressive dictator and setting the Iraqis free is politically self-serving, and defames the true ideal of liberty which this country was founded on. That oil was a major factor in which dictator we chose to depose is one I will readily acknowledge. And what's wrong with that? I use gas on a daily basis, don't you? So what's so wrong about factoring in that as part of our decision- making? Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Ever feel sad or cry for no reason at all? Depression. Narrated by Kate Hudson. http://us.click.yahoo.com/YbEMxA/ubOLAA/d1hLAA/0NYolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fidel Castro and TM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 12/9/05 7:38:45 P.M. Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Several years ago TMO had considered Fidel Castro the personification of the Invincibility principle, or something like that. It was quite appropriate given the more than 400, if I remember correctly, assassination attempts against his person organized by the CIA and the Miami mafia... Too bad they didn't get him like they did that other mass- murderer Che Guevara. Castro is responsible for about 50,000 deaths and enslaving 11 million Cubans. Could you imagine the out cry had they been successful? Ramsey Clark could have jump started his hate America carrier in the early sixties! Castro was small potatoes compared to Saddam who killed maybe 2 million and enslaved 24 million Iraqis under slightly similar circumstances. However no Invincibility awards for Mr. Hussein. Yet ! Alot of the anti-Bushies on this forum would just LOVE to have the pre-U.S.-invasion status quo back so that Saddam and his kinder would be free to murder more. I am very firmly anti-Bush because he is so anti-American. Having said that, we sure cherry pick our dictators to get outraged over don't we? There were enough in the collective consciousness of the US who, following 9/11, resisted their ability to determine why we were attacked, primarily by Saudi Arabian radicals, and instead decided that they were angry, and it was someone's fault in the Middle East. The Bushies, wanting to take over Iraq for awhile due to its strategic oil value, and to finish a war that Bush the first began, decided Iraq was the target. This high handed crap about removing an oppressive dictator and setting the Iraqis free is politically self-serving, and defames the true ideal of liberty which this country was founded on. That oil was a major factor in which dictator we chose to depose is one I will readily acknowledge. And what's wrong with that? I use gas on a daily basis, don't you? So what's so wrong about factoring in that as part of our decision- making? Nothing is wrong with securing our interests and putting our efforts towards that end. And per your last post, maybe people meditating is the answer. It certainly can't hurt. However, we have all of this legal, diplomatic and economic leverage at our disposal (the US I mean), and it just seems so cynical, inhumane and lazy to me to try it out a little bit whenever conflict is brewing, then declare it unworkable, and as long as our adversary doesn't have nuclear capability, just say f*ck it and start a war on them. Sure there are inefficiencies and lack of coherence and great difficulties in reaching a diplomatic consesus and/or enforcing economic sanctions, but going the extra mile is well worth the lives spared. To have created all of our alternatives to war, and then so easily be willing to kill in this supposedly modern age is just such an affront to all of us. You spoke of Maharishi earlier. He has a great expression: Whatever you put your attention on, grows. Perhaps if we put our attention on cooperation between countries vs more military might, it could happen. And I don't have my head in the sand. Some of our adversaries probably need to be treated like very recalcitrant children. So be it. But let's stop this karmic building cycle of killing our enemies. Even before utopia happens. Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Dying to be thin? Anorexia. Narrated by Julianne Moore. http://us.click.yahoo.com/abEMxA/sbOLAA/d1hLAA/0NYolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fidel Castro and TM
In a message dated 12/10/05 11:08:44 A.M. Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: No, MDixon...if we want to give credit where credit is due, we can look at all those who participated in the anti-war movement in the '60s and '70s in this country who through their actions successfully got the U.S. to pull out of vietnam. More people in southeast asia were killed in the 2 years following the U.S. retreat than in the entire 14 years of U.S. involvement.Everything -- and more -- that the so-called right-wing fanatics predicted would happen in southeast asia happened. And it happened in spades. We were warned that if communism were allowed to spread there that it would result in death and destruction and suffering in very high numbers, just as it had in pretty well every place that communism takes hold.And even worse happened.So let's give credit where credit is due. I can't argue with these facts. As it is said today. Battles are won on the battlefield by our troops and wars lost in Washington by our politicians. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "FairfieldLife" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fidel Castro and TM
You are probably right. World government and raja rhetoric certainly wouldn't do. But a research project to evaluate the benefits of a simple alternative medicine technique might be another story. -Eustace --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Castro wouldn't let SSRS in the country several years ago. I doubt he'd let the TMO with its world government and raja rhetoric into the country for anything. --- Eustace [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Several years ago TMO had considered Fidel Castro the personification of the Invincibility principle, or something like that. It was quite appropriate given the more than 400, if I remember correctly, assassination attempts against his person organized by the CIA and the Miami mafia... Anyway, if you do a search on a recent speech he gave: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/WO0512/S00120.htm you will find that he uses several time the verb meditate, once meditation, and once transcendental (in a context where the use of the word was kink of artificial and certainly not necessitated). A reasonable explanation would be that the efforts of TMO to reach him had, after all, some effect, at some (conscious or unconscious) level. I think people in the TMO should know about this. I don't think that suggesting that Cuba organize a group of yogic flyers would be such a good idea... It takes a lot of believing for the uninitiated and has not worked even in much richer countries. But Cuba has excellent medicine. Maybe some research project could be proposed that the Cuban doctors would be interested to participate in or carry out... It would be great if they would couple their El pueblo/ unido/ jamas sera vencido! (The people united will never be defeated) with Yogastah kuru karmani. JGD, Eustace Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Dying to be thin? Anorexia. Narrated by Julianne Moore. http://us.click.yahoo.com/abEMxA/sbOLAA/d1hLAA/0NYolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fidel Castro and TM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Eustace [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Several years ago TMO had considered Fidel Castro the personification of the Invincibility principle, or something like that. It was quite appropriate given the more than 400, if I remember correctly, assassination attempts against his person organized by the CIA and the Miami mafia... Too bad they didn't get him like they did that other mass-murderer Che Guevara. Castro is responsible for about 50,000 deaths and enslaving 11 million Cubans. Anyway, if you do a search on a recent speech he gave: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/WO0512/S00120.htm you will find that he uses several time the verb meditate, once meditation, and once transcendental (in a context where the use of the word was kink of artificial and certainly not necessitated). A reasonable explanation would be that the efforts of TMO to reach him had, after all, some effect, at some (conscious or unconscious) level. I think people in the TMO should know about this. I don't think that suggesting that Cuba organize a group of yogic flyers would be such a good idea... It takes a lot of believing for the uninitiated and has not worked even in much richer countries. But Cuba has excellent medicine. Maybe some research project could be proposed that the Cuban doctors would be interested to participate in or carry out... It would be great if they would couple their El pueblo/ unido/ jamas sera vencido! (The people united will never be defeated) with Yogastah kuru karmani. JGD, Eustace Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Ever feel sad or cry for no reason at all? Depression. Narrated by Kate Hudson. http://us.click.yahoo.com/YbEMxA/ubOLAA/d1hLAA/0NYolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fidel Castro and TM
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Eustace [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Several years ago TMO had considered Fidel Castro the personification of the Invincibility principle, or something like that. It was quite appropriate given the more than 400, if I remember correctly, assassination attempts against his person organized by the CIA and the Miami mafia... Too bad they didn't get him like they did that other mass-murderer Che Guevara. Castro is responsible for about 50,000 deaths and enslaving 11 million Cubans. So, about the same as some of our recent Presidents? Johnson with his ~73,000 Vietnam War dead (American deaths only) came to mind. Though I don't recall specifically the dictators he supported under his administration so I can't correlate the 11 million enslaved. And Bush the first killed roughly 100,000 Iraqis during the first war, and then allowed Sadaam to remain in power, enslaving roughly 25 million. Oh, and Reagan propped up quite a few central american dictatorships during his terms, easily surpassing the '11 million enslaved' number. Damn, you're making Castro out to be some kind of wimp or something! No wonder we hate him so much, he doesn't even kick ass like we do! And so un-American of him to unilaterally kick out the US corporations and Mafia who were actually enslaving his country. Bastard! At least he could've allowed them by proxy as Sadaam and the South African apartheid governments did! Geez! Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Ever feel sad or cry for no reason at all? Depression. Narrated by Kate Hudson. http://us.click.yahoo.com/YbEMxA/ubOLAA/d1hLAA/0NYolB/TM ~- To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
