Jump to content
The Education Forum

Kirk Gallaway

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Kirk Gallaway

  1. LOVE THAT BOB! In 1966, there were a bunch of whiny Parisians who started complaining because Dylan took 5 minutes to tune his guitar...and counting! Dylan replied by cleverly insulting them. I think we can all agree- It serves them right!!! heh heh Dennis: I had heard he wanted to join the Dead, but I never heard that comment from Bob Weir---interesting! Also interesting about Lesh drawing the line on the Dylan addition. I do remember one time, when I think about it, it may have been a New Years weekend show in the 70's when Grace Slick unexpectedly came on stage drunk and took the mic I guess expecting to sing with the Dead. The Dead seemed surprised, but were kind of smiling, except for Phil Lesh who was pacing nervously behind her and resented the interruption. My friend told me he flipped her off behind her back as she was babbling on, but I didn't see that.. Then Bill Graham walks out on stage and puts his arm around her and dances with her as the Dead improvised a Waltz and he danced her offstage and they cleverly got rid of her.
  2. W: No Winterland SF. Jaco did die a year later, I believe.. The important thing is the reason for Dylan's God awful scowl in Robert's video is because he'd never done any open tunings and was just lost and didn't like being upstaged. For a long time, Dylan was not really that generous with other musicians. He sort of had his own little island. I actually have a story, hobnobbing with stars. I've seen clips of Joan Baez trying to harmonize with Dylan on his songs and Dylan just kept spontaneously changing his phrasing, making it impossible for her, and it sounded terrible.. I've done a lot of harmonizing and I thought it was really unprofessional. Then wouldn't you know it, a week later the power goes out on Sunday Night and I decide to go to a local bar where the power hadn't gone out and who was there but Joan Baez sitting alone. So I was standing talking to her in her seat, we talked about some local things. I told her I was also into music. At one point I said to her, "Boy singing with Dylan must be a real pain the ass, always deliberately changing his phrasing'. She didn't say anything, but I sensed I struck a chord with her. It was a few years later when I read the first piece I ever read where she was critical of Dylan. And she remarked about how tough he was to sing with at times. I'm finished. I think I'm going to end up pissing off some people here.
  3. That's a good link, Bob. She certainly is mean spirited. That video clip of Joni doing "Coyote" is great! Notice the scowl on Dylan's face. It's because he's way over his head and he's just sort strumming the root chord senselessly. Up to that point, I know I'd never heard Dylan in an open tuning so he's sort of up sh-t creek without a paddle in that video. But in the interview, when she's given the opportunity to redeem herself for her attack, she says : Musically, Dylan’s not very gifted.---That's actually true. But Dylan followers don't rave about Dylan for his musicality, but for his lyrics and poetry. A lot of the early Dylan melodies in the 60's were actually articulated in the public mind much better by the people/ groups that covered Dylan songs. He’s borrowed his voice from old hillbillies.He’s got a lot of borrowed things. Maybe not sensitively said, but that's undoubtedly true. He’s not a great guitar player. She actually understates it. At least up to that point when the video was made. Dylan was a mid level coffee house guitar player, and he'd been at it for a good part of 20 years! heh heh He’s invented a character to deliver his songs … it’s a mask of sorts.” That doesn't sound very kind, does it? But when you consider Joni Mitchell's music style was similar to Neil Young. Sort of a revealing, vulnerable catharsis. To her Dylan comes off as a guy whose afraid to get very real or personal, which is sort of true, but solely from her viewpoint. Most people don't get into the weeds about musicianship and musicality. I saw the Joni Mitchell "Hejira' concert, with no less than Pat Metheny and Jaco Patorius backing her up! I'll take that to a Dylan concert any day and know a minority of people who would but that's me. As Dennis said. She at least did have Morgellon's disease. And at one point, she would swear that tiny mites were crawling under her skin. So to partisans, some may say Dylan's not so penetrative approach won out!
  4. That's Abrams central point. He had no intention to kill Oswald initially because he left his dog in his car. and the timing of the Western Union receipt. Also he woke up late, and he wouldn't have been there had not for the fact that they brought out Oswald later than planned, never asking how he got in the basement.Never considering that he could be working with anyone else. Isn't it amazing how high profile TV people can write books exposing nothing new, but generate attention? Like this Jake Tapper book about Frank Sinatra being rebuffed by JFK through AG Bobby. But any kind of exposure by a high profile TV personality does shed more light on a figure like Ruby, and could bring on other books, so it doesn't matter what Abrams verdict is on Jack Ruby, it is actually helpful to the JFKAC just to draw attention to Ruby.
  5. JFK revisited: though the Looking Glass ? Wasn't Stone suppose to use Jim's title "Destiny Betrayed"? What am I missing here? https://ventsmagazine.com/2021/03/18/update-director-oliver-stones-kennedy-assassination-documentary-jfk-destiny-betrayed-headed-to-a-cannes-film-festival-premiere/
  6. Yes I also like to see JFK's headspace, knowing what we know now. Agreed, it was about issues, not about other politicians and personalities, which we've become use to with Trump. Matt: It seems clear to me that the goal of all the men in that room was that the good of the country and its people was being served. I sort of hear you because there was a spirit and consensus of the common national good at that time, as I said. Which is refreshing to think about in the context of now. But you like that collusion a lot primarily because you like all the principals involved, but you may not like the principals of a press Presidency collusion in the future. Huntley and Brinkley come off good, the questions were good questions about fear of a widening SE Asia conflict. I'm not sure JFK did any better the second time. In the end, JFK comes off like a politician trying to BS his way out of it, and even though that's sort of understandable. At least about SE Asia, It really ends up being sort of a skirting BS session that further perpetuated an illusion that we only started to sense the faintest tip of the iceberg a couple of months later.
  7. After the first 15 minutes, I'm not sure what was incredible or extraordinary Matt. It was completely boiler plate political. JFK starts out good pushing his test ban treaty , but when asked somewhat pointed questions at the time about SE Asia, He ducks, sort of tiptoes through the the tulips with the MIC. Reinstates his firm vigilant belief in the domino theory, even though we've heard so may testimonials as to JFK wanting third world countries to find their own path. As all politicians, forever putting the best face on SE Asia "Things up to recently have gone very well". What an illusion! Rhetoric wise, you know any Democrat at the time outside of a southerner like LBJ, would give lip service to the sound bite that ultimately "the South Vietnamese can find their own way, but we can help! What we know now as of I believe August 24, 1963,is that JFK bows to an edict by the U.S. military stating that they're going to back a military overthrow of Diem,which I assume meant an assassination toJFK. Right? Isn't that pretty much understood to be the way such a situation would have been handled at that time? And I think you can see the trouble in his face. Then of course, hohum , more boiler plate. The tax cuts. Thanks Matt, That is interesting to see. What was maybe the most enlightening for me, was the last 15 minutes. Outside of Fox news, if you're a politician, there's a lot more pressure to get it right the first time. Fox opinion makers just get around it by asking softball questions. Make no mistake, politicians these days could not get away with such media collusion. " Oh that was a rough take. I didn't answer it well enough, let's do it again". Yes that's done to some degree, but media Presidential relations are much more combative now. There's a much higher standard that interviews are fresh, spontaneous and not near as orchestrated as this was, and the bar is so much higher, and there's 100 times the prep. In this it's as if the press and the Presidency have made an agreement about what is the best way to portray a concept of America's interests at home and the best face to put on it abroad.
  8. Ben:No, I do not regard Trump as a saint. To be clear. I hardly said after acknowledging your adverbs, that you think Trump is a saint. I said your key premise that Trump is anti globalist is just false. Ben: I define my preferred US foreign-military policy as "non-interventionist." Well you might be surprised but from what I've gathered most people here want at least a much more non interventionist U.S. foreign policy. Ben:I would like Iraq and Afghanistan (or any other nation) to blossom into democracies, and even to have large private-sectors. What I want and what can be achieved... It's just like someone here mentioning the other day that the U.S. should have free health care. It's like a million things. We'd all like that. Ben:The multinationals love the CCP and China. The CCP? I think that's just another monolithic statement. I assume some sarcasm. I don't think there's any love, and probably a lot resentment among financial elites for the CCP. And on the other hand, there's some with great support for Hong Kong. And there's a sizable amount of world elites without great Chinese exposure.
  9. You're definitely the only here obsessed with that Brian Sicknick story, Benjamin. You've mentioned it a number of times even injecting into other detailed thesis of yours to the point that I was wondering. "How did this get here?" You are certainly sure of yourself about this.You certainly wanted this to be your "scoop" What are your sources? You've written a lot of stuff here. It would a long while to respond to every thing. I'm going to try to focus on a few things.I appreciate your scope. When I first came to the forum, The devil always seemed to be the exact same deep state government military industrial complex, often I thought perpetuated by Di Eugenio at the time. I thought it was very limiting in scope. It's since broadened a lot to include what you're talking about. I get the impression with some of the UK residents who have recently come to post here that the absolute worst thing, most evil slimy thing that any Brit could call another Brit is a"globalist". Would that make you all "isolationists" Ben? I certainly couldn't imagine a current world where Japan or the U.K., with rather limited resources, what some fossil fuels?, would ever take an isolationist tack toward the world. Wouldn't that just be suicide? I don't know. In the past, wasn't that why they built an empire? But I take your point. I do understand a lot of the sentiment behind anti globalism. But I think there's so much this willingness to believe that the experiences in the UK and the US are so identical, there's this naive belief that Trump is some knight in shining armor, and somehow not a globalist, when he's the most globalist, pro business President in American History. The first 2 years of his Presidency was the greatest "perfect storm' for the Republican party in at least 100 years of American history. But having said that, I think Trump's recognition of the China economic threat will be what he is singularly most remembered for. I think the world will be more wary of the Chinese economic dominance in the future, largely because of Trump. But in reality, he was also a horrible bungler. However strong a stand his economic people , (which were probably his most competent people) took against China, Trump actually tried to undo for his personal pursuits by offering favors to Xi to again, investigate the Bidens to aid his re election prospects! And that's just for starters. Just as the the world power focus has changed since the days of the JFKA. The elites you preach about aren't near as monolithic as you think. Just as people in the U.S. who could be said to be part of these elites could be say Democrats or Republicans, they're not all as freaked about Trump's policies as you project. Some honestly do see a nationalist threat from China. And there's already been a lot of shifting of supply chains. A lot of it is going to SE Asia and India. I've gotten the continual impression from you that all of them have been against Trump from the very beginning, and wanted him out. That belief is identical to the hard core Trumper's disenfranchised. The pairing off of the elites was really very gradual. Ben said: Trump, being Trump, entered the DC landscape in 2016, and immediately and bluntly, inarticulately, woefully, bombastically, and unskillfully warred with the global Deep State and its media minions. Well, and anybody else too. I might add "ineptly" and" corruptly" to your list of adverbs. And crediting Trump with intentionally focusing that on the "global deep state' is really overrated, but "anybody else too" is underrated. To use your words, bluntly, inarticulately, woefully, bombastically, and unskillfully and I'll add ineptly, corruptly are not really qualities anyone really wants from a leader, whether you're an everyday person or an elite. With exposure everyday to these Trump attributes, In this specific case I think there's just a bedrock of people, who didn't really need a persuasive media to brainwash them into wanting Trump gone, though I know that's always the prevalent projection here. Besides the elites like the great majority of people, of course want the preservation of the country as well.
  10. This to people who are curious about the U.S. political process, like I am is fascinating. And even more so because it comes from a quarter I don't like. If this was aired on PBS, I didn't see it, but I haven't watched a lot of TV lately. What can I say, as not necessarily a "dyed in the wool" Democrat, but always as the loyal opposition, I've always hated ace Republican poster Frank Luntz. A few years back when we had the latest incarnation of Democrats advocating that the super wealthy should pay more their fair share of taxes, they proposed a bump in the inheritance tax of taxpayers with estates of I believe over 10 million. Interestingly one of the proponents was Bill Gates father. "Oh how could it be so?' but then I think, well of course what difference could that really make to one of the richest people in the world, but then again, Bill Gates Sr. and the Gates family could have been just like 99% of the other super wealthy, and not advocate it, or even actively oppose it. Anyway I remember Luntz, with his polling was the source of the clever idea to brand the inheritance tax the "death tax." and spread it through the Fox network, so people with a few 100 thousand to pass onto their heirs got scared, and the idea went down the tubes. The topic Luntz talks about is the Trump campaign in 2016, and what a stir it caused in the Old Guard Republican Party and how it played out through Trump's administration through and after the Capitol riots. At one point he chokess up in what we're supposed to think is his future fear for his country. Even when he does this my skepticism about him is that they're crocodile tears or maybe it's just the usual sappy brand of Republican patriotism and I'm culturally misplaced. But Luntz is the quite the insider. Luntz talks of meetings he had with the alarmed Republican establishment in 2016, and talks in depth about Trump's relationship to Mitch Mc Connell, Kevin Mc Carthy, Nancy Pelosi, among others, and of course gives his insight into Trump himself. He talked with Mike Pence before Biden's inauguration, about his relationship with Trump after Trump incited some rioters to cry "hang Mike Pence" after the Capitol riots. A question Pence has not publicly fielded to this day and Pence says he was just part of "God's plan" and everything will work out the way God intended! Which of course Luntz doesn't raise an eyebrow about! I got to give it to Luntz , he does pack it with information and makes such a performance out of it, you almost get the impression, he's been rehearsing it for weeks! But that could be my innate distrust again!
  11. All very cool, Robert! I always wondered if Phil Ochs might have been the initial inspiration for that opening socially conscious Dylan stage.
  12. My cage is rattled Chris? I wasn't driven to call you a N-z-! It sounds like you're coming unglued again, like you've very embarrassingly done with Cliff and Kerry, hurling slurs, and then not owning your hostilities and in this case, trying to project them on me.
  13. No time for cuteness, Do you think you're fooling anybody including the mods, by calling somebody a "n-z-" here Chris?? You notice my comment was a joke. But most off us want to keep people from countries with dangerous variants who refuse to get a vaccine from entering our country. That makes sense. As I said earlier, the biggest expat populations are from 1)Mexico and 2.The U.K. and their most common destination is the U.S. And we can pick and choose, and what's in it for us? And for that, no one deserves name calling. What I see is earlier I brought up the fallacy and the natural consequences of your assumptions and you were unable to defend your points, and you're playing the "victim" now, and to take a page from your NYU professor you're trying to "crybully" your way out of it by calling somebody here a n-z-..
  14. Everyone has the right to refuse vaccination. (Just keep out of my country, you filthy slobs!..heh heh) And people who might be ashamed to disclose they're not vaccinated or fear some reprimand certainly don't have to reveal their choices under everyday circumstances. But if you're a public figure, that's out the window! If President or even non President Trump gets vaccinated, the public has a right to know and he's a bum for not revealing it when it happened! Similarly, we have a whole group of Fox newscasters who have now been eligible for vaccine who, for a year now have been poking fun at the covid mitigation efforts. Tucker Carlson, have you been vaccinated? Sean Hannity, Mark Levine, Ingraham, Brian Kilmeade (what a joke!), where are they at? If they don't have the courage of their convictions, they should be outed! Stop obfuscating and go on public record for all time!
  15. Wow Dennis, that was like a very delayed corona virus vaccine adverse reaction,(which I'm sure you're an expert about) but actually infinitely less clear.
  16. I know Paul, I was just trying to keep it somewhat informal. 😀
  17. Jim Di has never been one for nuance, grey areas or both sides of a story and at least use to push his narrative like inbox boner pills. How nice it must be to be so certain! Jim said: Those nutty neo Nazis we backed in Ukraine are about to light tinder to a conflagration they will lose in spades. Yes Jim and Ollie Stone, like Putin have been warning us about a fascist takeover for about 6 years. But what happened? The Ukranian people overwhelmingly elected a comedian no less, and overturned over 80% of their parliament. You got to admit, that sounds pretty cool! It would never happen here. But of course it's not the same. It sounds like Jim's chomping at the bit for a bloody fascist take over in Ukraine just so he could say that him and Ollie Stone after so many years, actually turned out to be right. Who can say if that is inevitable, but 6 years without the worst is 6 years without the worst! Jeff is generally more nuanced and is very astute about issues such as climate change and the covid pandemic. My criticism of both of them on this issue is this overwhelming desire to see as the devil incarnate in everything the U.S. does. Do we have to get sucked into the this super hero and super villain thing? U.S. economic imperialism is the next logical extension of exploitation following the complete rape of British colonialism, with a caveat that the U.S. have developed a much wider means of persuasion and coercion at their disposal, so there's a greater variety of abuses. Because after all, who has ruled the world yet who didn't utilize the means at their disposal? But of course, even though the U.S.safety net, though inadequate is much greater than Russia, somehow even an atrocious dictator with a greatly underachieving failed economy. (sorry to get economic with you guys, but to the vast majority of people, that does matter!) somehow comes out on top purely out of leftist rhetoric alone, with no regard for the working reality. Anybody whose followed Trump at all knows he's continually in debt making massive payments and is about to face payments in the hundreds of millions. But when explained the possibility of shady debts to Russian oligarchs, why would that be so hard to believe? And then holding up the Mueller report as some sort of witch hunt that lead to exoneration is just another "oh duh", moment for the Trumpies that Jim and Jeff have joined the ranks and count themselves part of, when in reality the report never delved into the true motive. As with every thing else with Trump, his emoluments violations, everything of course gets down to money and finance. And we find out at the end they never even investigated Trump's finances!. But this of course is where Jim and Jeff's investigative prowess miraculously falls off a cliff at what I can only assume is a complete lack of financial literacy. I've tried to appeal by using just logic on a very basic level as far as the computer hacking. As far as the extent of the damage that the U.S.could be claiming by Russian hacks, who really knows for sure? Certainly not the U.S. But that doesn't obscure the question, why wouldn't Russia hack us? I'm sure we hack them. It's the best kind of warfare, it's more abstract to every day people than dropping bombs. They can do a lot of damage relatively cheaply, with relative impunity. They'd be a fool not to do it. But somehow Putin's earned some sort of moral bona fides, that he would never stoop so low? I don't know if you guys are just stuck in a viewpoint that if you give just the slightest credence to any of these points, your argument starts quickly eroding away, and soon becomes indefensible, which is actually true, and I at least give you credit for realizing that.
  18. What I've always said about Yanukovych was, become elected as president. pilfer your Mother country to death of perhaps billions of dollars leaving behind an huge estate, and you get rewarded for it with................................................... an interview with Oliver Stone! Stone. normally a rather taciturn figure, have you ever seen him so happy?
  19. That's really funny Richard. i like those phone calls. Hey Pam, I tried to PM you.
  20. Boy, I'm not sure if this guy, Greenberg whose ratting on Matt Gaetz could be any more of a screw up. "Tiger King gets elected Tax Collector?" https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/11/us/politics/joel-greenberg-matt-gaetz.html?campaign_id=9&emc=edit_nn_20210412&instance_id=29131&nl=the-morning&regi_id=61798350&segment_id=55394&te=1&user_id=48552702f942aacb0810b9de5ca41c55
  21. Yeah, Sturgis was the first I had heard about that. Jim, you didn't know Sturgis was the inspiration for Secret Agenda? heh heh
  22. Police Say an Antifa Activist Likely Shot at Officers. His Gun Suggests Otherwise. This is about the antifa guy in an Aug. 29 shooting death of a supporter of the far-right group Patriot Prayer during the summer’s street protests over race and policing in Portland. Investigators said that Michael Reinoehl probably opened fire before officers killed him last year. But some key evidence raises questions about that conclusion. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/10/us/michael-reinoehl-killing-investigation.html?campaign_id=9&emc=edit_nn_20210411&instance_id=29113&nl=the-morning&regi_id=61798350&segment_id=55362&te=1&user_id=48552702f942aacb0810b9de5ca41c55
  23. Chris, You brought up some interesting stuff, which I'll address later. Dennis said:The next part of the propaganda will seek to blame non vaccinated people for the continuing “crisis”. Well of course, they will, and you'd be silly naive to think otherwise. Anybody who accepts any responsibility for their actions has to be aware of that. It's also fair to say, the great majority of people will neither sympathize with your feelings of victimization, nor find your defiant acts as courageous as you do. You're in a very low risk group who could still conceivably lethally infect someone from a high risk group, but you choose to do nothing for reasons of your own health!! I'm not sure in what alternative universe that you guys envision where that would be considered "noble". So what's a little ostracism? At least nobody's forcing you to get vaccinated. Maybe in your mind , you'll be a modern day LHO, but you'll live! Maybe the best of both worlds! Maybe because of this, you'll find others of like mind, who you'll be friends with the rest of your life!! heh heh Let's elevate this beyond anything petty, or personal. This isn't just a matter of polite/or even impolite disagreement. These are facts. When you error on the side of caution, the worst that can happen is that it will peeve Paul and I off, Paul because he won't be able to see the face of his date from an online dating service because she insists on wearing masks. I'd tell her to walk Paul. What is a woman like that doing in an online dating service? JMO . And I'm peeved because I dread the idea of wearing a mask indoors for at least the first few days I'm visiting my friend who just recently got his second vaccination. But these days when you bring up baseless allegations that you can't back up. And you're giving that license to others for that attitude, you kill people. Ok maybe you aren't killing people but how would you truly know the effects of your actions? It's not too far fetched to say this could be a whole group of peoples "real life moment". But of course, in the present, that's so disappointing to their high expectations, they'll never seize it. I've never seen anything like this in my life. The action of everyday people, and particularly some" influencers" are given the power of life and death. We see a lot of people who don't see the importance of things that may seem small to them. Some people are very selfish and careless. Some people just surrender to whatever they habitually do, no matter what the consequences. Some people are so much in fear, they just shut the world out, or escape in destructive behavior. I do wonder if approaching the pandemic as a conspiracy or a "plandemic" is just a nervous adolescent way of avoidance and not stepping up to the plate, because I'm certainly hearing no real substance to put any faith in, at a time when bul-s-it walks, and it's very important that people think clearly.
  24. Now we're getting our hopes up on this again. I'd say no chance it's going to happen, and I don't think there's anything left in them anyway. Though maybe Cliff's right that you might get some further clues to the coverup.
  25. I don't care what Joe Biden is saying now. My attitude toward using a vaccine passport or not. Speaking as a U.S. citizen, I would say do whatever it takes if it comes to it. I don't see that, under the circumstances as being Dystopian. Let's take someone from the U.K. For example. 1) The U.K..is the most shoddy covid under performer of the G8, the super industrialized nation with the highest covid death rate in the world! 2) The UK.has the most virulent covid variant now existing in the world! 3)The U.K's saving grace is that they are right up there with the U.S. as the 2 top nations dispensing the most vaccine to their population right now. That's good news! 4) But of course, what good does that do, if the person subscribes to pandemic conspiracy theories from Corbett and quacks like Yeadon, and massively underestimated the covid pandemic, and can never admit he's wrong, but cries that he's persecuted in any fact based argument with others, and refuses to get vaxxed because he fears he would be seen as "giving in" to the "deep state"by his peer group? It's not that the government doesn't want you, for example in the U.S. Chris. It's us, the American people.Why do we need that profile? Even apart from any attitudes of entitlement. You're not vaccinated. The 3 nations in the world with the most expats are :1) Mexico, 2) the U.K and 3) Canada.And we're the most frequent recipient to all 3! We have to take means to protect our borders from high risk people. What good could come out of it for us? Why take a chance?
  • Create New...