From: Digestifier To: Subject: Dead-Flames Digest #590 Dead-Flames Digest #590, Volume #48 Sun, 16 Oct 05 07:00:01 PDT Contents: Re: A Conservative viewpoint.... (Seth Jackson) Re: SCI's nershi gets balls grabbed ("frndthdevl") Re: (NDC) Attention Yankee fans (Seth Jackson) Re: (NDC) Attention Yankee fans (Seth Jackson) Re: which recordings do you save for "special moments?" (Seth Jackson) Re: 21 Years Ago -- Hartford '84 (Seth Jackson) Re: 21 Years Ago -- Hartford '84 (Seth Jackson) Santana has his own "Deborah" (NDC) ("band beyond description") Re: Finally... ("band beyond description") Re: Santana has his own "Deborah" (NDC) (Tim Donohoe) Re: GDTSTOO - 2 new RatDog shows: NC and CA/mail order update (Steve Lenier) Re: anyone going to check out CREAM? ("Tim Ujin") Re: Santana has his own "Deborah" (NDC) (Tom Beck) Re: regarding the Mermen's stolen gear ("Steve Terry") Re: Speaker advice (Mission) ("Nick's Picks") Re: Spanish jam 12/18/94 ("Bzl.") Re: which recordings do you save for "special moments?" ("Brian D.") Re: which recordings do you save for "special moments?" (JimK) Re: 21 Years Ago -- Hartford '84 (JimK) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Seth Jackson Subject: Re: A Conservative viewpoint.... Reply-To: hitmeister .at. mindspring .dot. com Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 05:21:00 GMT Spare me the bullshit. I'm not on trial here. You replied to an article with a bunch of name-calling and labeling while refuting none of the actual points made in the article. That's known as "ad hominem". All the pseudo-intellectual mumbo-jumbo in the world isn't going to change that. There's nothing condescending about my having pointed it out. If you want condescending, read your reply to me below. As to whether or not Stewart, in fact, received a fair trial, I honestly don't know. Roberts said she didn't. You said she did. If you want to make a convincing argument, provide a good reason why I should believe you over Roberts. On 14 Oct 2005 07:11:16 -0700, "Sparky the Wonder Dog" wrote: >Seth, if logic fails then logic fails. If reading fails then reading >fails. All I can do is repeat and repeat. The man's argument is founded >on a general ideological context that other people, if not yourself, >may be interested in. It is not accidental that he invokes >"Anglo-Saxon" law--nevertheless, that context is irrelevant inasmuch as >his prime example did break the law, and was not merely the poor victim >of prosecutors in jackboots. > >again, I wrote: >"[Robert's rhetoric of liberties fails] at least when used to defend >the actions of anti-Zionist stalwarts such as Lynne Stewart's client, >who used, prosectors alleged, Ms. Stewart not only for legal >representation but for operational assistance in hooking up with his >cell network on the far side of the prison walls." > >I clearly, no? pegged my general comments to a specific failure in >Robert's attempt to justify his rhetoric with an example, the so-called >suppression of Ms. Stewart. It was there. You didn't read it, or if you >read it, you had no recollection of the case, or simply didn't "see" >it. This is not my fault as a writer. The fact that Lynne Stewart was >not suppressed for activism WAS in my original post AND IT IS A FACT. >Fact, Seth, well-known. > >Not only were you condescending, therefore, in your post, but you >revealed, again, that you do NOT always read the posts (at least this >one) or that you do NOT understand the context of posts you respond to >(at least not this particular one.) Again, my original post was very >explicit as to what prosecutors alleged. You not only missed this the >first time, but, it would seem, on re-reading. > >So here's what's happened to date: you don't read an original post or >don't fully get its point, and offer a condescending note about "ad >hominem" and reading Roberts' argument. I point out that, no, I gave a >concrete example disproving Roberts' contentions by disqualifying his >central example. You re-read the original post, and, fail to see my >concrete example a SECOND time. > >Unfortunately, you have, my original point, been misled by Roberts >column and your commitment to civil liberties into accepting Roberts >malarky that George Bush somehow denied Ms. Stewart a defense. Again. >the prosecutors did not attempt to trap her or "bust" her for activism >or strip away her rights. They accused her of breaking laws against >aiding and abetting criminal activities--being a defense attorney >doesn't, for example, permit an attorney to make drug buys for a client >who is in jail. > >And, follow-up, fyi, this is no longer alleged. Ms. Stewart was tried >and convicted in a court with all the rights defendants have. The Fox >News report rose to the surface--if you want we can search google >together and come up with a more "politically-correct" source. But, you >know, facts are facts. > >As for the 2/71 run, get higher. > >------ > >N.Y. Lawyer Convicted of Aiding Terrorists > > >Friday, February 11, 2005 > >· >Prosecutor: Lawyer Helped Terror 'Jailbreak' >· >Lawyer Accused of Terror Defends Violence >· >Woman Accused of Aiding Terrorist to Testify >· >Prosecutors Rest in N.Y. Terror Trial >· >WTC Bomb Leader Making Himself Sick >· >Radical Lawyer to Go on Trial > > >NEW YORK - A veteran civil rights lawyer was convicted Thursday of >crossing the line by smuggling messages of violence from one of her >jailed clients - a radical Egyptian sheik - to his terrorist >disciples on the outside. > > >The jury deliberated 13 days over the past month before convicting >Lynne Stewart (search), 65, a firebrand, left-wing activist known for >representing radicals and revolutionaries in her 30 years on the New >York legal scene. > > >The trial, which began last June, focused attention on the line between >zealous advocacy and criminal behavior by a lawyer. Some defense >lawyers saw the case as a government warning to attorneys to tread >carefully in terrorism cases. ------------------------------ From: "frndthdevl" Subject: Re: SCI's nershi gets balls grabbed Date: 15 Oct 2005 22:56:06 -0700 Steve Lenier wrote: > best "fan on stage with SCI" moment for me was I believe at the Wiltern, the > band tried to do a song called Resume Man that they said they hadn't done > for awhile, might forget the words...sure enough they did...so they asked if > anyone in the audience knew them, a guy did, they pulled him on stage and he > sang it pretty damn well...I have it on CD, and someone on this board knows > that guy, I sent him a copy of the show > Daev ------------------------------ From: Seth Jackson Subject: Re: (NDC) Attention Yankee fans Reply-To: hitmeister .at. mindspring .dot. com Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 06:13:54 GMT On Fri, 14 Oct 2005 09:44:45 -0400, JimK wrote: >On Fri, 14 Oct 2005 06:39:04 GMT, Seth Jackson >wrote: > >>On Wed, 12 Oct 2005 17:21:17 -0400, Andy Gefen >> wrote: >> >>>On Tue, 11 Oct 2005 22:09:46 -0700, Kelly Humphries >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>>Too bad. So sad. Tell it to Jeffrey Maier. >>> >>>I loathe that child (yes, I know he's not a child anymore). >> >>He is blameless. It's Richie Garcia you should be mad at. > >Is that supposed to suffice for Dead content?? That umpire stole your face right off your head. ------------------------------ From: Seth Jackson Subject: Re: (NDC) Attention Yankee fans Reply-To: hitmeister .at. mindspring .dot. com Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 06:17:14 GMT On Fri, 14 Oct 2005 09:57:39 -0400, JimK wrote: >>> And if you look at the young players the Yanks have let go >>>during the last ten years, you'd be hard pressed to find many who have >>>become regulars in the majors, much less stars. >> >>Hard pressed? Right off the top of my head, I can think of Mike >>Lowell, Nick Johnson, Juan Rivera, Christian Guzman, Jake Westbrook, >>Yhency Brazoban, that Marte guy, Carl Pavano, Tony Armas, and Brad >>Halsey. And most of those are just in the last couple of years or so. > >Any stars in that group? You've brought up a bunch of guys who are >mostly fringe players and who would have never started for the >Yankees. And how does Pavano fit in there? He was originallysigned by >the Red Sox. You said regulars. And some of those guys have shown glimpses of stardom and are still young. I guess I goofed on Pavano. ------------------------------ From: Seth Jackson Subject: Re: which recordings do you save for "special moments?" Reply-To: hitmeister .at. mindspring .dot. com Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 06:34:56 GMT On 14 Oct 2005 09:01:42 -0700, bigchuck51@aol.com wrote: >for me it has always been 4/26/69, not the best sounding recording but >a lot of passion. The Dew is the best IMO, followed by a killer SOTOTW >and a whole buncha other good stuff that were left off DP26. Check it >out. SOTOTW? ------------------------------ From: Seth Jackson Subject: Re: 21 Years Ago -- Hartford '84 Reply-To: hitmeister .at. mindspring .dot. com Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 06:38:35 GMT On Fri, 14 Oct 2005 14:21:03 -0400, DB wrote: >Two killer shows on 10/14 and 15. > >The first night had an extremely long second set ending with the first >East Coast Bobby version of Lovelight. The boys played until just about >midnight, which was the curfew for the Civic Center, so there was no >encore. None needed, however, after this stellar second set. > >The Scarlet>Fire>Playing on 10/15 ain't too shabby either. Time to >break out the Sennheiser 441 FOB masters I made back then and give them >a whirl over the weekend. Woo-hoo. You forgot to mention that as good as the S/F was on 10/15, the Playin' was equally awesome. This certainly was an enjoyable two nights. The strange thing was that I had extra tickets, and I couldn't give them away. >DB > >10/14/84: > >One Alabama Getaway [5:04] > Greatest Story Ever Told [3:49] ; Dire >Wolf [3:16] ; Little Red Rooster [8:29] ; Dupree's Diamond Blues [6:35] >; My Brother Esau [4:28] ; Loser [6:47] ; New Minglewood Blues [8:52] ; >Row Jimmy [10:13] ; I Need A Miracle [4:03] > Might As Well [4:37] > >Two China Cat Sunflower [7:41] > I Know You Rider [6:30] > Samson And >Delilah [7:27] ; High Time [8:08] ; Estimated Prophet [11:37] > Eyes Of >The World [11:25] > Space [7:27#] > Drums > Space [10:18] > China Doll >[5:46] > Throwing Stones [10:38] > Not Fade Away [7:08] > Turn On Your >Lovelight [6:03] > >10/15/84: > >One Hell In A Bucket [6:32] > Sugaree [10:45] > El Paso [4:26] ; Bird >Song [13:08] ; C C Rider [8:09] ; Tennessee Jed [7:31] ; Jack Straw >[6:27] > Keep Your Day Job [4:26] > >Two Scarlet Begonias [11:20] > Fire On The Mountain [16:21] ; Playing >In The Band [20:47] > Drums > Space [5:19] > The Wheel [4:56] > Wharf >Rat [8:23] > Playing In The Band [2:30] > Sugar Magnolia [7:51] >Encore It's All Over Now, Baby Blue [6:33] ------------------------------ From: Seth Jackson Subject: Re: 21 Years Ago -- Hartford '84 Reply-To: hitmeister .at. mindspring .dot. com Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 06:43:40 GMT On Sun, 16 Oct 2005 06:38:35 GMT, Seth Jackson wrote: >>The Scarlet>Fire>Playing on 10/15 ain't too shabby either. Time to >>break out the Sennheiser 441 FOB masters I made back then and give them >>a whirl over the weekend. Woo-hoo. > >You forgot to mention that as good as the S/F was on 10/15, the >Playin' was equally awesome. Oops! It must be getting late...I reread your first sentence several times to be sure you really omitted the "Playin'" before I posted. And then, after I hit "send", I realized that you did include it, after all! ------------------------------ From: "band beyond description" <123@456.com> Subject: Santana has his own "Deborah" (NDC) Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 16:45:09 +0900 AFPENTERTAINMENT-US Santana fired me for lacking spirituality: suit SAN FRANCISCO, Oct 11 (AFP-Jiji) - A former personal assistant to Carlos Santana has sued the legendary musician claiming he was sacked because he was not spiritually evolved enough, court documents showed Tuesday. In a bizarre suit, Bruce Kuhlman, who worked for Santana for 16 years until last year, claims he was wrongfully fired and subjected to age, gender and religious discrimination by the Grammy-winning guitarist and his wife, Deborah. In the suit filed in Marin County, near San Francisco, Kuhlman, 59, alleged that Deborah Santana in 2003 arranged for him and other employees to be spiritually ``calibrated'' by a man known as Doctor Dan. ``Deborah's goal was for Dr Dan to improve (Kuhlman's) consciousness or awareness level that would bring him closer to God and make him a better worker,'' the suit obtained by AFP said. After the calibration session, Dr Dan determined that the aide's ``enlightenment/consciousness level'' was low but said he could raise the level, Kuhlman claimed. In the meantime, Deborah allegedly hired other employees who had undergone telephonic ``calibrations'' and who Dr Dan had declared to be at a high level of spiritual enlightenment, the suit claimed. Then, after a run-in with one of the new and enlightened employees, Kuhlman claims he was called into a meeting by the Santanas, during which Carlos Santana told him he was considering getting someone ``younger'' to do his duties. Kuhlman was then sacked from his 85,000-dollar-a-year job in April of last year and given a letter telling him that the Santanas were not happy with his management of a money-losing project, the suit claimed. Kuhlman is seeking more than 100,000 dollars in damages, 175,500 dollars in overtime pay, fees for licensing work from 2002 to 2004 and unspecified punitive damages. The Santanas and their attorneys could not be reached for comment on the suit, but they issued a statement through a representative denying all the allegations against them. ``Bruce was placed in a position of responsibility but was unable to perform his job at the level required,'' the statement quoted by the Los Angeles Times said. ``He was given support and every opportunity to succeed. Bruce was treated fairly and terminated only after it was clear that he could not perform the job he was given,'' the statement added. Mexican-American Santana, 58, has been known around the world since the 1960s for his command of the guitar and a wide array of genres including pop, salsa, rock, blues and jazz. He has sold around 80 millions discs including classics such as ``Black Magic Woman,'' ``She's Not There,'' and the instrumental ``Europa.'' tq-ml/kd AFPEntertainment-US-justice-people-music-Santana AFP 120308 GMT OCT 05 ------------------------------ From: "band beyond description" <123@456.com> Subject: Re: Finally... Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 16:46:23 +0900 wrote in message news:1129353239.540315.78900@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com... > Figured out how to download from Internet Archive AND burn said d/l's > to disc!!! > Damn, the 21st Century looks pretty good now. > First thing I downloaded/burned was 3.3.68 (my first GD show). Then I > did the featured show, 12.1.79. Now, as that is being burned to CD, I'm > downloading the SKB Dallas show that Krutchless Kelly raved about. > Fuck, I'm a genius. Only had this computer for 6 months...doh! > > Larry > you GO, Larry! -- Peace, Steve ------------------------------ From: Tim Donohoe Subject: Re: Santana has his own "Deborah" (NDC) Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 07:59:24 GMT band beyond description wrote: > > ``Bruce was placed in a position of responsibility but was > unable to perform his job at the level required,'' the > statement quoted by the Los Angeles Times said. > > ``He was given support and every opportunity to succeed. > Bruce was treated fairly and terminated only after it was > clear that he could not perform the job he was given,'' the > statement added. > Sounds like the Santanas have an open and shut case, too bad for them that they tried to give this incompetent boob a chance. > Mexican-American Santana, 58, has been known around the > world since the 1960s for his command of the guitar and a > wide array of genres including pop, salsa, rock, blues and > jazz. > I thought he was from Argentina. Never mind, I'll look it up now. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 02:20:38 -0700 Subject: Re: GDTSTOO - 2 new RatDog shows: NC and CA/mail order update From: Steve Lenier in article 3ras64Fioip6U1@individual.net, Andrew Murawa at amurawa@hotmail.comspamsucks. wrote on 10/14/05 4:07 PM: > "katrinka" wrote in message > news:fb58ae45c4d33bf23e1f3d3851994ded@localhost.talkaboutthemusic.com... > >> Saturday, December 10 at the Wiltern, >> Los Angeles, CA. >> Doors open at 7:30 PM. Show time is 8:30 PM. >> Please: no children under 5 years old. >> Mail order tickets are now available at $36.50 >> for both general admission on the floor, and >> seats in the balcony. Please specify. >> Tapers will need a GA ticket. > > Cool... I'm about due for a Ratdog show... It has been a couple years or > so... cool Andrew...swing by and pick me up on the way :) Steve ------------------------------ From: "Tim Ujin" Subject: Re: anyone going to check out CREAM? Date: 16 Oct 2005 05:10:45 -0700 I think with respect to this show the whole debate is moot. I got an e-mail this past week telling me that the only way for me to get my (20th row center, baby!) tickets was to show up at the will-call window the night of the show with two forms of picture ID. And once I buy them I must immediately enter the arena. It sounds like they are trying their best to make scalping impossible. ------------------------------ From: Tom Beck Subject: Re: Santana has his own "Deborah" (NDC) Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 08:10:59 -0500 Tim Donohoe wrote: > band beyond description wrote: > >> >> ``Bruce was placed in a position of responsibility but was unable >> to perform his job at the level required,'' the statement quoted by >> the Los Angeles Times said. >> >> ``He was given support and every opportunity to succeed. Bruce was >> treated fairly and terminated only after it was clear that he could >> not perform the job he was given,'' the statement added. >> > > Sounds like the Santanas have an open and shut case, too bad for them > that they tried to give this incompetent boob a chance. > >> Mexican-American Santana, 58, has been known around the world since >> the 1960s for his command of the guitar and a wide array of genres >> including pop, salsa, rock, blues and jazz. >> > > I thought he was from Argentina. Never mind, I'll look it up now. He's from the U.S. LA to be more exact. ------------------------------ From: "Steve Terry" Subject: Re: regarding the Mermen's stolen gear Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 08:22:13 -0500 "ck" wrote in message news:BdmdnXW9FLoPT8zeRVn-hg@adelphia.com... > > "Steve Terry" wrote in message > news:diseuo$f4t$1@news.iquest.net... >> >> "Schmoe" wrote in message >> news:1Og4f.1105$vV4.413@fe08.lga... >> > Carl Sparndan wrote: >> >> snipping the saga >> > >> > >> > Take the story to all manners of media (newspaper, TV News etc...) and > try >> > to get an ally in publishing the story. These days, it's the only thing >> > that "motivates" politicians and cops to do the right thing. >> >> Yeah, one of our local TV stations has a "Call 6 for Help" feature which >> would be perfect for this type of predicament. The problem is that you're >> talking about a sparsely populated state like Montana which is very >> conservative. If a tree falls in the woods and no one is there to hear it >> does it make a sound? >> >> > > > I hope you're not suggesting these conservative Montanites embrace or > otherwise tolerate grand theft and interstate trafficking in stolen > property. In my experience it would be emphatically the opposite as far as > i > define the term conservative. > Not exactly sure what I meant by that, other than longhair rock'n rollers might not get much sympathy from these folks. Too bad they weren't a Christian band whose stuff was stolen from a local church. Then there would be some serious hell to pay I'm guessing. ------------------------------ From: "Nick's Picks" Subject: Re: Speaker advice (Mission) Date: 16 Oct 2005 06:22:57 -0700 Tim Donohoe wrote: > JimK wrote: > > I'm looking to pick up some speakers for a home theater system, so I > > thought I'd seek out some advice from the rmgd audiophile contingent. > > I can get a real, real good deal on some British made Mission M34i > > floorstanding speakers ($350 a pair), or M35i's ($450 a pair). Anyone > > out there familiar with these, or the quality of Missions in general? > > > > Other brands I'm considering are Axiom M3ti's, Acoustech HT75's, > > Ascend Acoustics CBM170's, and Onix Rocket RS250's. These all run > > around $300 a pair, which is about what I'm looking to spend. I also > > like the Epos ELS-3's and the Magnepan MMG-W's, but they're 4 ohm > > speakers and I don't think my receiver HK AVR 430) will have quite > > enough power to drive them at the volume I need for music. I'm also > > very impressed by the Odyssey Epiphony's, but they run $600 a pair, a > > little over my budget....but I'm tempted anyway. > > > > Any advice on these or other speakers will be greatly appreciated. > > > > JimK > everything you are looking at is nice. the maggies are sweet, but you might be right about the 4ohm rating. check your reciever to see if it can swing it...and if so, i'm sure you'd be dazzeled w/their performance. the Epos els-3 get awesome reviews everywhere i ever see them mentioned, so i would't hesitate to spend the short money on those. the Odyssey's....that might be worth the extra cash. people rave about those on my audio groups. check out www.audiocircle.com as a resource. also, dont be afraid to buy used. www.audiogon.com the best part about buying used is that if you dont like what you got, you can always sell them for pretty much what you paid. not much depreciation after that innitial "new purchase". ------------------------------ From: "Bzl." Subject: Re: Spanish jam 12/18/94 Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 09:27:06 -0400 "Steve Lenier" wrote in message news:BF760F2C.32B49%slenier@comcast.net... > This run has been discussed as "not all that bad" considering how late it > was, and I enjoyed all 4 shows. 12/18, I took my bass player at the time, > Mike, for his intro to the Dead, and it was good enough for him to "get > it". > He was hooked then and there, too bad he only had a short time after to > enjoy them. Anyway, I downloaded this during my downloading binge awhile > back and just listened to it. Nice little Spanish jam during Space. > > Steve > I wish there were better sources out there for these shows. The audio quality of this show, and at least one other from this run, is so-so imo. Great run of shows, really. ------------------------------ From: "Brian D." Subject: Re: which recordings do you save for "special moments?" Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 13:45:51 GMT Seth Jackson wrote: >> On 14 Oct 2005 09:01:42 -0700, bigchuck51@aol.com wrote: >> >>> for me it has always been 4/26/69, not the best sounding recording >>> but a lot of passion. The Dew is the best IMO, followed by a killer >>> SOTOTW and a whole buncha other good stuff that were left off >>> DP26. Check it out. >> >> SOTOTW? Sitting On Top Of The World. ------------------------------ From: JimK Subject: Re: which recordings do you save for "special moments?" Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 09:49:26 -0400 Reply-To: jkezwind@comcast.net On Sun, 16 Oct 2005 06:34:56 GMT, Seth Jackson wrote: >On 14 Oct 2005 09:01:42 -0700, bigchuck51@aol.com wrote: > >>for me it has always been 4/26/69, not the best sounding recording but >>a lot of passion. The Dew is the best IMO, followed by a killer SOTOTW >>and a whole buncha other good stuff that were left off DP26. Check it >>out. > >SOTOTW? Sittin' On Top Of The World. JimK ------------------------------ From: JimK Subject: Re: 21 Years Ago -- Hartford '84 Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 09:50:34 -0400 Reply-To: jkezwind@comcast.net On Sun, 16 Oct 2005 06:43:40 GMT, Seth Jackson wrote: >On Sun, 16 Oct 2005 06:38:35 GMT, Seth Jackson >wrote: > >>>The Scarlet>Fire>Playing on 10/15 ain't too shabby either. Time to >>>break out the Sennheiser 441 FOB masters I made back then and give them >>>a whirl over the weekend. Woo-hoo. >> >>You forgot to mention that as good as the S/F was on 10/15, the >>Playin' was equally awesome. > >Oops! It must be getting late...I reread your first sentence several >times to be sure you really omitted the "Playin'" before I posted. >And then, after I hit "send", I realized that you did include it, >after all! Hallucinating again?? JimK ------------------------------ ** FOR YOUR REFERENCE ** The service addresses, to which questions about the list itself and requests to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, are as follows: Internet: dead-flames-request@gdead.berkeley.edu Bitnet: dead-flames-request%gdead.berkeley.edu@ucbcmsa Uucp: ...!{ucbvax,uunet}!gdead.berkeley.edu!dead-flames-request You can send mail to the entire list (and rec.music.gdead) via one of these addresses: Internet: dead-flames@gdead.berkeley.edu Bitnet: dead-flames%gdead.berkeley.edu@ucbcmsa Uucp: ...!{ucbvax,uunet}!gdead.berkeley.edu!dead-flames End of Dead-Flames Digest ****************************** .