Pearl Jam next Fools on The Hill

#21 Postby **wx247** » Thu Apr 03, 2003 3:33 pm

Never mind. :roll:

I was trying to critique the article. I hope in no way I implied you were Anti-American, because I did not mean to. I understand what you are saying perfectly, but I think what I am trying to explain you do not understand. I should have clarified. This article has a couple of assumptions that need to be backed up by fact or thrown out of the article.

j · #22 Postby j » Thu Apr 03, 2003 3:46 pm

You know what the hell sickens the living **** out me? It's all these so-called "Freedom of Speech" champions who get up on their soapbox and show their hatred for NOT the War itself...but for the President, our country, our government. Then, just so they can be politically correct, they sneak in how they "support out troops". They are so damn transparent. Every single one of them thinks as long as they throw that in, they have done their part. I ask....why is it they support our troops? Do they even know what they are saying? Our troops are their to fight a War...if they hate the President so....why not hate the troops too? I mean especially the ones that are there voluntarilly. But wait...they are ALL there voluntarilly, just like our politicians.

mf_dolphin · #23 Postby **mf_dolphin** » Thu Apr 03, 2003 4:04 pm

wx247 wrote:Never mind. I was trying to critique the article. I hope in no way I implied you were Anti-American, because I did not mean to. I understand what you are saying perfectly, but I think what I am trying to explain you do not understand. I should have clarified. This article has a couple of assumptions that need to be backed up by fact or thrown out of the article.

I understand your "technical" question but since we weren't their what's the point of asking it? As I read the article in question it was apparent to me that the writer was quoting some of the fans that left. I guess you have to assume that the writer was at the concert and was able to guage and report the cause and effect of the action.

Lindaloo · #24 Postby **Lindaloo** » Thu Apr 03, 2003 5:09 pm

Great post j!! I am glad you picked up on that. :lol:

You are accurate too mf_dolphin. :wink:

blizzard · #25 Postby **blizzard** » Fri Apr 04, 2003 1:48 am

O.K> Don't shoot me for this, but I have to ask the following question, Just to play devil's advocate.
I seem to remember when the fiasco involving the Dixie Chicks hit these boards. Most of you agreed that it would have been alright to say what they did if they were on American soil. So, why is it not the same for Pearl Jam? Maybe we are just a society of slamming other people for what they say, no matter the circumstances? We just alter our views to fit the current popular stance? Again, don't execute me for this, just an observation.

hunter84 · #26 Postby **hunter84** » Fri Apr 04, 2003 4:14 am

The great thing about living here in America is we have the freedom of speech, to say what is on our mind (for the most part). Another great thing is we don't have to agree with other peoples opinions or the stages they choose to deliver these opinions.
I would have walked out of the concert also. Am I going to destroy cd's or tapes of their music ? No. What will that accomplish?

blizzard · #27 Postby **blizzard** » Fri Apr 04, 2003 4:39 am

Also, they already received the money from the ticket sales. just as the Dixie Chicks will do if the concert goers decide to go to the Marchal tucker band concert instead. So not much is accomplished there.

j · #28 Postby j » Fri Apr 04, 2003 6:34 am

blizzard wrote:Also, they already received the money from the ticket sales. just as the Dixie Chicks will do if the concert goers decide to go to the Marchal tucker band concert instead. So not much is accomplished there.

I totally disagree that nothing is accomplished unless you think all these people care about is money

Public opinion DOES matter to an artists career. Just ask Michael Jackson.

j · #29 Postby j » Fri Apr 04, 2003 6:51 am

blizzard wrote:O.K> Don't shoot me for this, but I have to ask the following question, Just to play devil's advocate.
I seem to remember when the fiasco involving the Dixie Chicks hit these boards. Most of you agreed that it would have been alright to say what they did if they were on American soil. So, why is it not the same for Pearl Jam? Maybe we are just a society of slamming other people for what they say, no matter the circumstances? We just alter our views to fit the current popular stance? Again, don't execute me for this, just an observation.

They are free to say whatever they want, you are correct. But, they also will have to suffer the consequences for those actions. They made a choice to say the things they have said knowing full well it would be un-popular with some. This is what the Hollywood left and the Music Industry in most part live for. They want attention, and will acheive it anyway they can. Its always been like this.

What irks me more than anything is how they always follow up their bash party with the blanket "but we support our troops" BS. I'd respect them more if they would just hold to their beleifs, instead of trying to pull the wool over the less suspecting of their fans eyes, with this sugar coating.

As the writer of the article pointed out, everything was going ok for Pearl Jam, anti war sentiment withstanding, UNTIL they crossed that line with the "Bush head on the stick pounding it into the stage", and the message they sent. Fans decided they would send PJ their own message and left in droves. That is THEIR right too, and what I respect more about thses fans is they did it peacefully, without anger and degradatiion. They just plain left. Perhaps they will follow up by skipping future shows..who knows.

Lindaloo · #30 Postby **Lindaloo** » Fri Apr 04, 2003 9:28 am

Well said j!! Blizzard was saying that we are double standard. Pearl Jam not only protested the war, he was showing himself to be anti Bush by putting Bush's head on a stick, but in the same breath saying he supports the troops. Did I like the Dixie Chicks? NO. Did I like Pearl Jam? YES, but have since boycotted them. That is MY right to free speech. Demonstrations like what Pearl Jam did is in no way free speech. His support of the troops was free speech.

JQ Public · #31 Postby **JQ Public** » Fri Apr 04, 2003 9:57 am

just another opinion. he did say he supported the troops just didn't think the war was justified and thats OK. people have a right to an opinion it seems like the "right" is for freedom of speech as long as it involves saying things they like...and if they don't like it they try to bring the other person down.

chadtm80 · #32 Postby **chadtm80** » Fri Apr 04, 2003 10:18 am

just another opinion. he did say he supported the troops just didn't think the war was justified and thats OK. people have a right to an opinion it seems like the "right" is for freedom of speech as long as it involves saying things they like...and if they don't like it they try to bring the other person down.

No problem with Freedom of speech here, but jumping on the Prisidents head does not qualify as freedom of speech in my mind,,, I think they should of been yanked off the stage by the cops and draged to the police station and questioned for Threatning the president.. Should they have been prosecuted for something?? naaaaaaa.. But they should of made them have one heck of a long night in a holding cell... JMO

Rainband · #33 Postby **Rainband** » Fri Apr 04, 2003 10:38 am

JCT777 wrote:Another musical act who just shot themselves in the head.

I have listened to them forever..OH WELL..They choose to commit suicide :roll:

You'd think The DC would have showed them their fate, guess not!!

Johnathan

Pearl Jam next Fools on The Hill

Who is online