The Grassy Knoll?
ILovTheNow
lyrics in the song from The Capeman, "Trailways Bus." It says something like.
We pull into downtown Dallas
By the side of the grassy knoll
Where the leader fell
And the town was broken
Away from the feel and flow of life
For so many years
He hears music playing and spanish spoken
Well the questions go: What town was broken? How was it broken? What leader
fell? Which grassy knoll? In other words; to what does it refer? I would love
some help with these questions. Please E Mail me. Your help will be much
appreciated.
Devon And Dan
Mel Pearce
I am tempted to answer this, but will leave it for one of our American
cousins, in case I miss something or come to the ridiculous conclusion
that evil forces were at work in the assassination of JFK. There -
I've given it away!
Over to you, cousins.
Mel
"Say what you mean, mean what you say".
Michael Tabor
>What town was broken?
Since it says "In Dallas" and "Where the town was broken" I'm going to take
a wild stab in the dark and say Dallas.
>How was it broken?
The leader fell.
>What leader fell?
John F. Kennedy was assasinated.
>Which grassy knoll?
There was a grassy knoll only route of the parade JFK was in and a gunman
was believed to have been there.
>In other words; to what does it refer
I wasn't alive when all of this happened, but I've answered them to the best
of what I've learned in school. But I know that it refers to the
assassination of John F. Kennedy.
Chris Stern
> Me and my friend Devon have run into some confusion when it comes to a set of
> lyrics in the song from The Capeman, "Trailways Bus." It says something like.
>
> We pull into downtown Dallas
> By the side of the grassy knoll
> Where the leader fell
> And the town was broken
> Away from the feel and flow of life
> For so many years
> He hears music playing and spanish spoken
>
> Well the questions go: What town was broken? How was it broken? What leader
> fell? Which grassy knoll? In other words; to what does it refer? I would love
> some help with these questions. Please E Mail me. Your help will be much
> appreciated.
>
> Devon And Dan
Nov 22 1963 JFK.
Chris
mmes...@mindspring.com
Are you in America? ("aol" means little anymore...) It seems hard to
believe that anyone here could fail to get this reference. We're still
so obsessed, after all this time... (Remembering Jackie's death, or the
hype when the Zapruder film was issued on cassette last year... There's
a Manic Street Preachers song that that calls it "The world's first
taste of grucified grace". And they're Welsh. And young.)
I grew up in Dallas, actually, too late to have been anywhere when it
happened. But I just recently watched a presentation, in connection with
a class I'm in, about the assassination and the Warren report (he
demonstrated that it was so much BS, but didn't try to advance any
theories of his own, leaving us to draw our own conclusions), complete
with a diarama and autopsy photos <shudder> So those lines have become
especially poignant, all of the sudden.
Anyway, yes, it's a reference to the assassination. Agron would have
been in prison when it happened, and his visit to Dallas after the fact
must have been devestating. At the same time, much of Texas is Spanish
speaking, and in some places there is a Latino majority. *That* must
have been a relief, to someone isolated for so long from his own
culture. Simon shows a remarkable sensitivity in imagining this so
well...
-Mary
--
"Quantum mechanics:|Have you ever experienced a period of grace
the dreams that |When your brain just takes a seat behind your face
stuff is made of." |And the world begins / The Elephant Dance?
-Reality is absurd.| Paul Simon "Think Too Much (a)"
BKawalec
>>fell? Which grassy knoll? In other words; to what does it refer? I would
>love
>>some help with these questions.
Oddly enough, you ask these questions on the eve of the thirty-fifth
anniversary of the leader falling...
Bill
Steal a little and they throw you in jail
Steal a lot and they make you King.
Dylan
BKawalec
>so obsessed, after all this time... (Remembering Jackie's death, or the
>hype when the Zapruder film was issued on cassette last year...
Well, to me "obsession" would imply that the majority stil cares. They don't.
Thirty-five years later, people think that it didn;t affect them personally,
and that it just doesn't matter. My feeling, however, is that if ANY of the
worst case scenario is true, it could still happen again.
BonsaiJoe7
shooter was (I beleive them)
ILovTheNow
That idea was lingering in my head. But I was thinking a little more
specific then an American President. Like a hispanic leader or Maybe an event
that dates back all the way to the Alamo in the Mexican-American war. But now
I am clear as too what it refers too. So allow me to ask this question. How
was JFK so important to the hispanic culture that paul would refer in his
musical as a "Leader"? Thank you all. Oh and a too Mary....Can you tell me
about the Denny Regrade? I am sure you must know about it. It was a big part
of american history.
Dan
Cathy Friedmann
BKawalec wrote in message <19981121113330...@ng86.aol.com>...
>> We're still
>>so obsessed, after all this time... (Remembering Jackie's death, or the
>>hype when the Zapruder film was issued on cassette last year...
>
>
>Well, to me "obsession" would imply that the majority stil cares. They
don't.
>Thirty-five years later, people think that it didn;t affect them
personally,
>and that it just doesn't matter. My feeling, however, is that if ANY of the
>worst case scenario is true, it could still happen again.
I feel that I have to disagree here. Assuming that the majority of the
present American population was around at the time of Kennedy's
assassination (w/ all of the baby boomers - of whom I am one, this is my
assumption), the event affected anyone & everyone at the time; and it was an
event that will always stay, vividly, in one's memory. I think it remains
an obsession partly because of JFK's charisma, partly because of the shock/
sadness of the event, and partly because of the controversy. As you alluded,
it also points out the fact that it could always happen again (no matter
which individual or group/ agency is responsible), even if not to an
American leader, but to another 'important' leader - as it did to A. Sadat,
for example. Cathy
mmes...@mindspring.com
>
> Thank You,
>
> That idea was lingering in my head. But I was thinking a little more
> specific then an American President. Like a hispanic leader or Maybe an event
> that dates back all the way to the Alamo in the Mexican-American war. But now
> I am clear as too what it refers too. So allow me to ask this question. How
> was JFK so important to the hispanic culture that paul would refer in his
> musical as a "Leader"?
While culture and group identity are very important, Latin-Americans are
still *Americans*. The President is as important a leader to them as to
European-Americans, African Americans, etc. Remember too that JFK was
the first Catholic President, and an important part of the civil rights
movement, which affected Latinos as well as blacks and other minorities.
> Thank you all. Oh and a too Mary....Can you tell me
Me Mary?
> about the Denny Regrade? I am sure you must know about it. It was a big part
> of american history.
Oh, sure, I can quote all kinds of figures off the top of my head about
that hill in Seattle that was dug up, one of the biggest engineering
projects in the west, except for the little bit that a family refused to
sell, until they did, and the area became a sort of working class
backwater...
Well, okay, I can't, but I can do an excite search for "Denny Regrade"
and read the Post-Intelligencer's brief history.
Still, I'd hardly put that on par with one of the most devestating
assassinations of the century, of Merkin history...
Joey Berger
>I feel that I have to disagree here. Assuming that the majority of the
>present American population was around at the time of Kennedy's
>assassination (w/ all of the baby boomers - of whom I am one, this is my
>assumption), the event affected anyone & everyone at the time; and it was an
>event that will always stay, vividly, in one's memory. I think it remains
>an obsession partly because of JFK's charisma, partly because of the shock/
>sadness of the event, and partly because of the controversy. As you alluded,
>it also points out the fact that it could always happen again (no matter
>which individual or group/ agency is responsible), even if not to an
>American leader, but to another 'important' leader - as it did to A. Sadat,
>for example. Cathy
>
>
weeps alone.
Joey Berger
joeyb...@hotmail.com
icq:14315467
RiminiRigg
The event that the lyrics refer to happened November 22, 1963, when president
John F. Kennedy was shot in downtown Dallas. There was some speculation about
the shots coming from a "grassy knoll" near the site . As for the toen being
"broken", well, I imagine that this tragedy has has many long-term effects on
the city of Dallas.
Hope that helps.....
Jo
Michael Aidulis
says...
Or John Lennon (enters "The Late Great Johnny Ace" into the
conversation). Also poignant is The Boy In The Bubble, as the line "The
way the camera follows us in slow-mo" is a reference in Paul's mind to
the surreal replays of the Zapruder film, slowed down, frame by ugly
frame. "Back and to the left...back and to the left" as Kevin Costner
would say.
That film also reminds me of these lines from Neil Young's "Natural
Beauty":
"We watched the moment of defeat
Played back over on the video screens
Somewhere deep inside of our souls"
Michael Aidulis
Brian William
: way the camera follows us in slow-mo" is a reference in Paul's mind to
: the surreal replays of the Zapruder film, slowed down, frame by ugly
: frame. "Back and to the left...back and to the left" as Kevin Costner
: would say.
Or Kramer would say in the Keith Hernandez episode of Seinfeld. :>
*Brian
--
Brian William
Calling Out Your Name
http://www.wsu.edu/~williamb/mullins.html
John Provine
best
>of what I've learned in school. But I know that it refers to the
>assassination of John F. Kennedy.
>
Speaking as one who *was* alive when it happened, it's difficult to express
the depth of emotion that ran through an entire nation, and still does.
Perhaps the death of Diana is comparable to UK citizens, although in the
American case we had to look in the mirror and face the blackness that
sometimes surfaces in the human soul.
Even now, thirty-five years later (can't be; are you sure it isn't FIVE
years?), I can barely speak of it, can barely look at the photos of little
John John saluting his dead father without ...
This was unquestionably one of the turning points of American culture in
this century. The United States has not been the same since. John Kennedy
was *born* to be president, it seems, and his murder sent our civilization
careening off into some weird political and social black hole. The process
was culminated in Watergate, in my opinion, to the extent that we are now a
nation of cynics, waiting for Godot, gasping in horror at the Zapruder
frames, wincing at every headline, holding our breath against the next
bullet.
This is sad almost beyond words. But remember the first S&G television
special, round about 1968 or so? This was the first time Bridge Over
Troubled Water was performed in public, I believe, and it was played over
scenes of JFK, the funeral, etc. Somehow, it fit. Paul was offering as much
condolence as one man could. In times of soul sickness, it is the poets that
speak to us.
We survived, of course. We will always survive. And, in time, we will
collectively get over it. Just not quite yet.
John
Josie Marie
John Provine wrote
>But remember the first S&G television
>special, round about 1968 or so? This was the first time Bridge Over
>Troubled Water was performed in public, I believe, and it was played over
>scenes of JFK, the funeral, etc. Somehow, it fit. Paul was offering as much
>condolence as one man could. In times of soul sickness, it is the poets
that
>speak to us.
>
Thanks for awakening something which has surely been lurking in my
subconciousness for many years. Although I was quite young, I do remember
the assassination. Caroline is just a few months older than me, and John Jr.
(John-John) is just a little older than my brother. As a child, THAT was
what affected me -- here were these two poor kids who lost their daddy. What
if it had been me and my brother? What was Caroline doing when she found
out? Was she at a school like mine?
This began a childhood fascination with the Kennedys, particularly the
Kennedy kids. Then Bobby was killed a few years later -- all those kids!
I also remember watching the S&G special. I was already a fan -- my older
brother had Bookends and SOS. Although my memories of the special,
especially the social messages conveyed, are a bit vague, I know I must have
been profoundly affected by the Kennedy funeral footage shown during BOTW,
because of my then-fascination with the family.
I always thought "Bridge" affected me so deeply because it came out just as
I was entering adolescence, and learning about all the pain and beauty in
the world. But now I realize there may be another level to the way this song
makes me feel, too.
I did outgrow my Kennedy fascination -- well, sort of. At least I can now
look at them more objectively. But I will never cease to be moved to tears
of that photo of Jackie and Caroline kneeling before the casket, with
Caroline's hand reaching out to touch it.
Josie
Michael Aidulis
says...
> The process
> was culminated in Watergate, in my opinion, to the extent that we are now a
> nation of cynics, waiting for Godot, gasping in horror at the Zapruder
> frames, wincing at every headline, holding our breath against the next
> bullet.
But it's alright, it's alright, for we live so well so long. I can't help
it - all this negativity is music to my soul. Thanks for those musical
thoughts, John. I think there *is* a black cloud - a harshness in the
world, a cynicism, an atmosphere of resignation. It seems that anyone who
tries to change things gets punished. JFK is probably a good example.
Paul Simon is still with us though. I do feel grateful for that.
Michael Aidulis
David F Ritter
where a second gunman was supposed to have fired the 4th shot.
Dave
ILovTheNow wrote in message <19981121024156...@ng77.aol.com>...
>Me and my friend Devon have run into some confusion when it comes to a set
of
>lyrics in the song from The Capeman, "Trailways Bus." It says > We
pull into downtown Dallas
> By the side of the grassy knoll
> Where the leader fell
> And the town was broken
>Well the questions go: What town was broken? How was it broken? What leader
>fell? Which grassy knoll? In other words; to what does it refer?
> Devon And Dan
>
>
SafariBoy1
was reading over all these posts, and someone brought up the song Late Great
Johnny Ace in connection to John Lennon......Personally, I have never been
completely convinced that that song is solely in reference to the death of John
Lennon. Maybe it's just me, but I thought Paul was talking about both John
Lennon and John F. Kennedy at different points in the song. Does anyone else
think that, as well?
Plus, on one of Paul's Saturday Night Live appearances, he sings the Late Great
Johnny Ace, but before he begins, they show a still black and white photo of
John F. Kennedy.
What do you all think?
Michel Couzijn
>Plus, on one of Paul's Saturday Night Live appearances, he sings the Late Great
>Johnny Ace, but before he begins, they show a still black and white photo of
>John F. Kennedy.
The song refers to THREE famous Johns who were blown away
by guns: Johnny Ace (who accidentally shot himself), JFK, and John
Lennon.
The three deaths, although similar in their being violent, took place
at three quite different stages in Paul's life: when he was a kid,
interested in music and to some extent inspired by Johnny Ace (the
news item may have been Paul's first experience with
death-in-real-life); when he had just acquired adulthood, probably his
democratic orientation, and definitely his admiration for John Kennedy
(and when he heard The Beatles' songs for the first time); and when he
had reached the status of worldwide renowned musician with a great
career behind him - just like Beatle John Lennon. And each of these
three icons was blown away by violence.
The three Johns were not chosen at random. The song is as much about
Paul as it is about those three inspirators.
Michel Couzijn
Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Michael Aidulis
> The three Johns were not chosen at random. The song is as much about
> Paul as it is about those three inspirators.
For songwriters, I think this song is a lesson in how to use
illustration. It opened my eyes to realise that you could write a song
about eg. mortality by telling the story of three deaths that affected
you personally. From interviews I've seen, that's exactly how Paul went
about it. No doubt this method also works for other themes, and not all
of them sad. Hmmm.
Michael Aidulis
Joey Berger
wrote:
>by guns: Johnny Ace (who accidentally shot himself), JFK, and John
>Lennon.
Didn't Johnny Ace die playing Russian Roulette? If so, I'd hardly call
accidently shooting oneself, I mean, if you put a gun in your mouth
and pull the trigger, there's not surprise at to what may very well
happen.
The version of Johnny Ace on Saturday Night Live is especially
haunting, especially with the short still of JFK that airs right
before it. One question, though: I've read that Paul broke a string
while playing the song. Is that correct? I've never been able to spot
it.
BKawalec
>while playing the song. Is that correct? I've never been able to spot
>it.
That happened on the Letterman show, not on SNL.
Michael Tabor
Interesting. How did he react when it broke, I mean, did he just keep
playing with five strings, or what?
Michel Couzijn
wrote:
>Didn't Johnny Ace die playing Russian Roulette? If so, I'd hardly call [it]
>accidently shooting oneself.
Well, this is a rather academic answer, but Johnny Ace a) shot himself
and b) it was an accident rather than purpose. That is why I called it
'accidentally shooting himself'. But your nuance is welcome and
accepted.
>I mean, if you put a gun in your mouth and pull the trigger, there's not
>surprise at to what may very well happen.
But if there is only one bullet in the cylinder of a six-shooter, then
for some - daring - people it IS a surprise that the bullet turns up.
(However, one hardly has the time to be surprised - so they say.)
Joey Berger
wrote:
>
>But if there is only one bullet in the cylinder of a six-shooter, then
>for some - daring - people it IS a surprise that the bullet turns up.
>(However, one hardly has the time to be surprised - so they say.)
>
>
>Michel Couzijn
>Amsterdam, The Netherlands
I disagree. If you're cleaning your gun, thinking its unloaded, and
for some reason, it goes off an shoots you - that's an accident.
There's a distinction between this type of incident and getting shot
while knowing that a potentially loaded weapon is in your mouth.
BKawalec
>>accidently shooting oneself.
>
>Well, this is a rather academic answer, but Johnny Ace a) shot himself
>and b) it was an accident rather than purpose. That is why I called it
>'accidentally shooting himself'. But your nuance is welcome and
>accepted.
But you did not answer the question. Was he, or was he not playing Russian
Roulette? If he was, that, indeed, is NOT "accidental".
BKawalec
>for some reason, it goes off an shoots you - that's an accident.
>There's a distinction between this type of incident and getting shot
>while knowing that a potentially loaded weapon is in your mouth
Uh huh. It's not even a valid debate. If one puts a gun in one's mouth, knowing
there is at least one live bullet in it, and pulls the trigger, this is not an
""accident.""
J...@suffolk.lib
>>>Didn't Johnny Ace die playing Russian Roulette? If so, I'd hardly call [it]
>>>accidently shooting oneself.
>>
>>Well, this is a rather academic answer, but Johnny Ace a) shot himself
>>and b) it was an accident rather than purpose. That is why I called it
>>'accidentally shooting himself'. But your nuance is welcome and
>>accepted.
>
>
>But you did not answer the question. Was he, or was he not playing Russian
>Roulette? If he was, that, indeed, is NOT "accidental".
>
I hadn't heard anything about _this_ shooting being Russian Roulette
until now. I did hear that Terry Kath (Chicago) died playing RR.
Jon
J...@suffolk.lib
wrote:
>On 29 Nov 1998 06:38:31 GMT, safar...@aol.com (SafariBoy1) wrote:
>
>>Plus, on one of Paul's Saturday Night Live appearances, he sings the Late Great
>>Johnny Ace, but before he begins, they show a still black and white photo of
>>John F. Kennedy.
>
>The song refers to THREE famous Johns who were blown away
>by guns: Johnny Ace (who accidentally shot himself), JFK, and John
>Lennon.
>
>The three deaths, although similar in their being violent, took place
>at three quite different stages in Paul's life: when he was a kid,
>interested in music and to some extent inspired by Johnny Ace (the
>news item may have been Paul's first experience with
>death-in-real-life); when he had just acquired adulthood, probably his
>democratic orientation, and definitely his admiration for John Kennedy
>(and when he heard The Beatles' songs for the first time); and when he
>had reached the status of worldwide renowned musician with a great
>career behind him - just like Beatle John Lennon. And each of these
>three icons was blown away by violence.
>
>The three Johns were not chosen at random. The song is as much about
>Paul as it is about those three inspirators.
>
>
>Michel Couzijn
>Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Very well said...
Jon
Cathy Friedmann
Michel Couzijn wrote in message <366131fc...@news.xs4all.nl>...>(Edited)
>>Plus, on one of Paul's Saturday Night Live appearances, he sings the Late
Great
>>Johnny Ace, but before he begins, they show a still black and white photo
of
>>John F. Kennedy.
>The song refers to THREE famous Johns who were blown away
>by guns: Johnny Ace (who accidentally shot himself), JFK, and John
>Lennon.
>Paul as it is about those three inspirators.
>Michel Couzijn
On an interview that was televised a few years ago, Paul said that this song
took the longest of all his songs - years & years - to write, because he had
the first 2 stanzas w/ Johnny Ace and JFK, but it wasn't finished. It
needed closure w/ a 3rd death, but nothing fit. However, when John Lennon
died, there was the 3rd stanza. Cathy
Cathy Friedmann
Cathy Friedmann wrote in message <36631...@nntp2.borg.com>...
rdmtimp
.
>>
>I hadn't heard anything about _this_ shooting being Russian Roulette
>until now. I did hear that Terry Kath (Chicago) died playing RR.
>
According to the liner notes for Chicago's "Group Portrait" box set,
the gun that killed Kath was an automatic, which precludes Russian
Roulette (which requires a revolver.)
tim...@gumby.futureone.com (remove "gumby." to reply)
J...@suffolk.lib
(rdmtimp) wrote:
>On Mon, 30 Nov 1998 11:04:07 GMT, J...@suffolk.lib wrote:
>.
>>>
>>I hadn't heard anything about _this_ shooting being Russian Roulette
>>until now. I did hear that Terry Kath (Chicago) died playing RR.
>>
>Not to nitpick, but..
>
>According to the liner notes for Chicago's "Group Portrait" box set,
>the gun that killed Kath was an automatic, which precludes Russian
>Roulette (which requires a revolver.)
>
No prob (isn't nitpicking what this group is all about? :) ). I've
actually read the "Russian Roulette" story in a couple of places,
including "The Illustrated History of Rock and Roll." But these
things do tend to be apocryphal. Maybe he had 6 automatics, one
loaded? :)
I also remember a reference to Kath in that scene from "One Trick
Pony" where the musicians are playing the "dead rock stars" game on
the bus. Paul pantomimes a gun to the head (but no spinning of a
chamber).
Jon
meyo
Cathy Friedmann heeft geschreven in bericht <36631...@nntp2.borg.com>...
>
>On an interview that was televised a few years ago, Paul said that this
song
>took the longest of all his songs - years & years - to write, because he
had
>the first 2 stanzas w/ Johnny Ace and JFK, but it wasn't finished. It
>needed closure w/ a 3rd death, but nothing fit. However, when John Lennon
>died, there was the 3rd stanza. Cathy
So, he's waiting years and years for somebody to die who is suitable to be
the third verse or stanza (what's the difference?) of his song to be. And
then: Yes!!! John Lennon gets murdered.
How lugubrious.
Michael Tabor
If anybody celebrates the death of John Lennon, they'll have to answer to
me, because they'll get a stern drawing and quartering. (Well, not really,
but I won't approve of that celebration!)
Candace R. Grant
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that was irony.
Cathy Friedmann
meyo wrote in message <741818$qfk$1...@reader2.wxs.nl>...
>How lugubrious.
>
Well, yes, that's pretty much what I thought. I'm just passing on the info
from the interview that I saw. And, it *does* work as a 3rd verse. Cathy
mmes...@mindspring.com
> >>So, he's waiting years and years for somebody to die who is suitable to be
> >the third verse or stanza (what's the difference?) of his song to be. And
> >then: Yes!!! John Lennon gets murdered.
> >How lugubrious.
> Well, yes, that's pretty much what I thought. I'm just passing on the info
> from the interview that I saw. And, it *does* work as a 3rd verse. Cathy
I don't think that was *quite* the process.
More along the lines of:
"This much is powerful, but it's too short to use. I'm not sure people
will get the connection. Still, I've been trying for months- Nothing
fits, nothing gives the right tone, it all sounds like the filler it is.
I give up." <shelves song>.
And then, after Lennon's death, something along the lines of "Oh God,
not again... Just like Kennedy. Just like what I was trying to say
then..." and the natural finish writes itself...
-Mary
--
"Quantum mechanics:|Have you ever experienced a period of grace
the dreams that |When your brain just takes a seat behind your face
stuff is made of." |And the world begins / The Elephant Dance?
-Reality is absurd.| Paul Simon "Think Too Much (a)"
freed...@my-dejanews.com
High Crimes and Misdemeanours
What are high crimes and misdemeanours? Is it too much to assume that
rational people would rise up in protest if the President defendant had
indeed committed high crimes and misdemeaners? Does anybody who is
reasonable and seeks to uphold the rule of law, actually believe that
the public would tolerate a President who is in fact guilty of perjury,
of obstruction of justice and of abuse of power? The standards of the
vast majority are clearly too high to dismiss the sort of abuse that is
alleged. Moreover, most of the charges have proved to be so utterly
preposterous that they collapsed on their own transparent frivolity.
The only thing that remains is the McCarthyite charge that crimes were
committed but details cannot be exposed. It's the old, perpetual,
pending investigation gimmick -keep the target under investigation,
claim phony secrecy privileges and he or she is always a suspect. And
that is the sort of suspended animation that produced the desperate
charge that President Clinton committed perjury -but who says?
That is the question and it not entirely facetious because it goes to
the heart of "specific intent". In particular, perjury is a specific
intent crime that relies upon the mindset of the defendant. When, for
example, Monica Lewinsky said that she hadn't had a sexual relationship
with Bill Clinton, she was telling the truth because Monica Lewinsky
made a clear distinction between what she called "fooling around" and
sexual intercourse. It is Linda Tripp who ultimately insists that
Monica committed perjury because she is the one who persistently
quarrelled with Monica, in effort to plant in her mind, the necessary
elements that are required by law, to expose a target to the charge of
perjury. It all sounds absurd and difficult to imagine but it's all on
tape and the charge cannot simply be dismissed. Blinded by the
mentality that the end justifies the means, criminal perpetrators do
not appreciate the scope of self-incrimination. On tape, Linda Tripp is
heard clearly insisting that Lewinsky and Clinton had sex, and she
aggressively disputes the "fooling around" characterization that
Lewinsky firmly believed. Indeed, she pushed and pushed and pushed to
the point where Linda Tripp claimed that if you have an orgasm, it's
sex. Can you imagine a grown woman, any grown woman, arguing with a
young girl, any young girl, about the definition of sex? Can you
imagine a grown woman, any grown woman, insisting that orgasm equals
sex? Is masturbation also sex? If they are willing to re-write the
dictionary to expose the President of the United States to the charge
that he committed perjury, is there anything that they are not willing
to do?
Like Linda Tripp, attorneys for Paula Jones were preoccupied by the
bizarre obsession to define sex. In the end, the tortured definition
they produced provided Bill Clinton a cover to deny a sexual
relationship -and the trap was sprung. But it was a trap with an
illusory bite. Perjury is not the failure or the reluctance to expose
a sexual play by play. It was a nice try, but it was a trap that lacked
substance and demanded the sort of zeal that reasonable prosecutors
reject. Moreover, if collusion between Linda Tripp, the Jones camp and
the Office of the Independent Council is responsible for the
parsimonious definition about sex, the astounding scope of the
behind-the-scenes set-up reflects unethical, clever lawyering, to
say the very least. Having deliberately limited their questions to
encourage Clinton to mislead, it certainly takes extraordinary contempt
for the law to turn around and call that perjury. There is indeed no
limit to the stretch of reason that Clinton's accusers claim. They even
have the unbridled arrogance to call Jones versus Clinton a Federal
civil rights action. Frivolous on merit, bogus on substance, Jones
versus Clinton was about abusing the court system to procure a perjury
charge about a non-criminal matter. Lawyers for Paula Jones essentially
betrayed the fact that they were more anti-Clinton crusaders than
advocates for Paula Jones when they claimed that Clinton was guilty of
perjury, obstruction of justice and abuse of power. Having oblitherated
the distinction between the Jones camp and Starr's Office, it is
essentially naive to deny the evident collusion. Indeed, the assault
was essentially treasonous, because Monica Lewinsky and the Jones case
were used in a manner which was tantamount to manufacturing
justification to criminally indict the President of the United States.
And when the Jones case was thrown out of court, even the inconsistent
Dick Morris, the very man whose rhetoric is selectively used to
demonize Clinton, claimed that Paula Jones owed the entire country an
apology. Isn't it ironic that Paula Jones owes Bill Clinton what she
in fact demanded from him? Indeed, isn't everything about a witch hunt
ironic, when the rule of law comes to bear? Isn't the effort to turn
Dick Morris into the John Dean of the Whitewater scandal, a laughable,
transparent fraud? Black is not white and white is not black. Service
justice my friend. Service justice well because if you do not, anybody
can call you a murderer, and instead of substantiating the charge,
they will simply compare you to other murderers and demand a confession.
Confess and die fast, defy and die slow. Guilty today, or guilty
tomorrow. You will be confined and the switch will be pulled. Your body
will convulse and your eyes will pop. Justice for one, justice for all.
Resist the temptation to label and destroy. To borrow Mary Bono's
repeated boast, this is not the work of lawyers. This is not a defense
for Bill Clinton. This is simply a reflection of every single,
reasonable person who is sick and tired of all the bullshit and you
can take that poll to the bank.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.angelfire.com/va/nsnews/news.html
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Andrew Bowman
the hands of injustice. He was "fooling around" with an intern to the point
that his semen was on her dress. Anyway you want to categorize that, it is
certainly a sexual relationship. If this had happened to a CEO of a major
corporation, he would be hanged in the court of public opinion and, most
especially, by the feminist movement in the country - as well as he should
have been. What does this action by the President say about his opinion of
Miss Lewinsky? In that setting, how can it be assumed that this was simple
consensual sex by two adults? Not only does the President hold power over
her as her ultimate boss, he also held the additional power of being her
President as well. This was not two equals encountering one another.
Further, that these exchanges happened at work simply compounds the crime.
On this alone, it would seem that the President is guilty of sexual
harassment.
Further, in depositions under oath, the president continued to
manipulate words to avoid disclosing any sexual relationship with Miss
Lewinsky. It is not as if he said, "Well, we didn't have sex. She just
gave me a blow job." He avoided stating the full truth in his statements to
the public, to the Paula Jones lawyers and to Starr's staff. This is what
is meant by his perjury. He mislead those who he was testifying to by
deliberately misrepresenting the truth. This is more than a confusion over
the semantic definition of what is meant by the word "sex."
Finally, it is clear that he used his power as President to encourage
others to continue this deception of the exact nature of his relationship to
Miss Lewinsky. That is an abuse of his power as President. He is using the
power of the office to prevent discovery of his potentially illegal
activity. This is what Watergate was all about. This is what the
Iran-Contra hearings were attempting to discover. And this should never be
accepted by any person holding public office. The office is not a shield to
protect them from being held responsible to the law.
What is amazing to me is the number of people that will admit that he
lied and yet still oppose his impeachment. This is the danger to our
justice, not in the looking for crime. I apologize that this is not in
conjunction with Paul Simon. I am responding to the public posting of a
opposing view, and do feel that this is the most significant issue involving
our country at the moment. Thank you for your graciousness in allowing me
to express my thoughts.
Andrew Bowman
freed...@my-dejanews.com wrote in message
<757hhk$m4d$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
> High Crimes and Misdemeanours
>
>What are high crimes and misdemeanours? Is it too much to assume that
>rational people would rise up in protest if the President defendant had
>indeed committed high crimes and misdemeaners? Does anybody who is
>reasonable and seeks to uphold the rule of law, actually believe that
>the public would tolerate a President who is in fact guilty of perjury,
>of obstruction of justice and of abuse of power? The standards of the
>vast majority are clearly too high to dismiss the sort of abuse that is
>alleged.
{snip}
In particular, perjury is a specific intent crime that relies upon the
mindset of the defendant. When, for
>example, Monica Lewinsky said that she hadn't had a sexual relationship
>with Bill Clinton, she was telling the truth because Monica Lewinsky
>made a clear distinction between what she called "fooling around" and
>sexual intercourse.
{snip}
Perjury is not the failure or the reluctance to expose
>a sexual play by play.
{snip}
Service
>justice my friend. Service justice well because if you do not, anybody
>can call you a murderer, and instead of substantiating the charge,
>they will simply compare you to other murderers and demand a confession.
>
Brian William
to hear about the mess with the president. What's really too bad is
that as you say, it's the "most significant issue involving our country
at the moment." Besides the fact that I think Americans are probably
the minority in this newsgroup, it sure doesn't reflect very well on
our current state of politics. We elected the lawmakers to do just that,
make laws. You'd think with all the problems that are out there, they
surely could be doing *something* besides dragging an impeachment process
out for months and months. Oh, well. Cue up "American Tune" and roll tape.
*Brian
: conjunction with Paul Simon. I am responding to the public posting of a
: opposing view, and do feel that this is the most significant issue involving
: our country at the moment. Thank you for your graciousness in allowing me
: to express my thoughts.
--
Brian William
Calling Out Your Name
http://www.wsu.edu/~williamb/mullins.html
BKawalec
>to hear about the mess with the president.
I think there should be an "alt.newsgroup.rant" where we can go and start a
debate about anything.
I just do want to make the observation, however, that what I read on the net
does not coincide with what the published "polls" keep telling us. And,
persoanlly, as if anybody should care, I think the only honorable thing Mr.
Clinton can do now is resign.
Bill
ninety nine, a hunnerd, hunnerd and one, hunnerd and two
your maw won't even recognize you.
Dylan