[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Can we see the innocence of Jimi Hendrix?



>From: Keithjmoon70@xxxxxxx
>Subject: Re: Can we see the real Pete??
>
>And yes, there IS 
>a devil. You don't even need to ask for proof.  Just watch the 11:00 news.

Lemme guess, he's got a long pointy tail, little horns, carries a pitch fork, and sits in a fire filled cave going "moo-hoo-hoo-ha-ha".
Do you believe in Noah too?
How about Moses?
Adam and Eve?
The serpent?
Apples are evil?

>From: SicilianMother@xxxxxxx
>Subject: innocence
>
>There has never been any evidence, ever, that would lead one to 
>believe that Pete was up to something other then what he admitted to, doing 
>research to help him better understand the victims and the charities he helps out.

Wait, I thought his statement said he was doing research for his autobiography?
That he himself was abused as a child while in the custody of his grandmother?
Now I'm confused.
;-)

>I am not ashamed to say that I, like Jon's daughter

Lesbian alert!!!!!!
Oh, wait, there's a comma in there.
Rats!

>I never, ever, for one second thought Pete did anything wrong by his 
>research.  Never.  No one can ever convince me of it either.

Well, if he broke the law, would that convince you?

>Yes, Pete made a mistake, even Pete admits that.  But, the good works he has performed 
>far out weigh his error in judgment.

Damn, Jo, now I'm confused again.
I thought you stated above that Pete didn't do anything wrong?
Words like "mistake", and "error" imply doing something wrong.
;-)
:-)
See, it aint so cut and dry, is it?

Here's a question to all us "apology wanters"..."apology requesters"...."is the right thing to do-ers"....
Had Pete's initial statement been that he researched only a list of sites to heighten awareness of all these sites, would anyone here still have wanted Pete to apologize?

I can say I wouldn't have.

So, then, the remaining question is why it's all so different now?
I'm not asking anyone to answer, but just noting the reality of it all.
A puzzling reality at best.
I feel like someone who was plopped in a corn field by aliens, and am standing there thinking, "hey, what just happened?".

>From: Oust_the_pretender <bushchoked@xxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: Re: Re-Pete; Staying the downward spiral
>
>Examining them as if he's trying to hide or lie about
>something, yes.

I say examine, and let the chips fall where they may.
Otherwise, we make Pete a demigod.
Would Pete want that?
I don't *think* so!
Hawww!

>(Cousin Kevin Problem Child).

HEY!   :-|

Oh, you're talking about Tommy.
Carry on..

>From: SicilianMother@xxxxxxx
>Subject: never the mind
>
>My own post bothers me.  I am beating a dead horse and it doesn't feel good, 
>or right.  Let's drop the whole Pete is a ped thing and all that goes with it.

You are now officially dubbed "Flounder". 
I was going to say wishy-washy, but Flounder just seems to fit better.

Oh, and TOO LATE!

>From: Keithjmoon70@xxxxxxx
>Subject: Re: Can we see the real Pete??
>
>Oh Scott, there's not a shred of truth to any of this I'm saying. None at 
>all.  I just like to irritate you.

Oh great.  
Well, then, I dub you "Jo's Flounder Captain".
Can we please cut out the confusion!!!

>Magic bus rocks!

Thank you.

>From: Keithjmoon70@xxxxxxx
>Subject: Re: Can we see the real Pete??
>
>The reason that I let out this information is not to garner sympathy, but 
>rather to bring home what it is that Pete is actually fighting against.

Please.
There's no confusion on this point.
Pretty damn clear.

Speaking of being clear....and of Brian Wilson...and U.S. Pete.......
I'm somewhat confused as to why James M. Hendrix hasn't been listed as US Pete.
Ok, granted he rose to fame while living in the UK, but he's home-grown USA...all the way.
So, what gives?
Great lyrics.
Great mood.
Great guitar.
Auto-destruction (hey, imitation is the fondest form of flattery).

So, a bit late, since I was sidetracked by Brian Wilson (still a good call), but my entry in this long dead thread is.....Jimi H.

:-p

Kevin in VT