Would be good if that generation grew up understanding why their favourite band refuses to play in their country. It's knowledge and understanding like that which helped put an end to Apartheid in South Africa.
You're a champion at cutting and pasting links so where is your link from the Guardian.UK to prove this?
Here, lets try a little comprehension experiment, shall we??
A little change in focus, by changing the emphasis:
Would be good if that generation grew up understanding why their favourite band refuses to play in their country. It's knowledge and understanding like that which helped put an end to Apartheid in South Africa.
Would be good if....A hypothetical statement....Where did he say that this was the band's stated position? And you're asking for proof? Your selective emphasis changes the meaning of that sentence. The next few posters fell in line with your deceit.
My position on this has changed from one of indecision (in a previous thread on the porch back in november), to an emphatic "NO". Days after that thread began, Israel began bombing Gaza again, largely justified by propaganda and disinformation. I agree that the more pressure put on the Israeli government to end the occupation, the better. Artists and academia boycotting Israel encourages fans and students to do so. It also begins the dialogue for this topic at the proper starting line: why boycott Israel?
btw - in that original thread, YieldtoNothing was in my face about Perry Farrell and lolla Israel....and how it would not be cancelled because Perry is a 'big time zionist'.....well, guess what? It got cancelled, reportedly due to a lack of bands willing to play there. I think if more bands were willing to take a PUBLIC stand on this issue, you would see a MUCH larger number of bands actively boycotting playing in Israel. But, as this board proves time and again, Israel's apologists and the Israeli lobby are so quick to condemn anyone who speaks against the STATE of israel, as anti-semetic. Most bands would probably prefer to avoid the issue altogether in public.
Also in that thread, I stated that I had a huge amount of respect for Perry Farrell....I noticed the Electronic Intifada article Byrnzie posted on the porch not long after making that statement....and I will recant that as well. Of all the worthy causes in the world, PF chose to play a private benefit concert for an army who just finished a massive bombing campaign over the most densely populated area in the world, killing over 300 innocent kids in a matter of days....and to top it off, made snide remarks about having 'proved our point'?? Fuck that. Not another cent from me.
Would be good if....A hypothetical statement....Where did he say that this was the band's stated position? And you're asking for proof? Your selective emphasis changes the meaning of that sentence. The next few posters fell in line with your deceit.
actually, changing the emphasis on the sentence doesn't change it at ALL. he said that it would be good if certain people understood why the band REFUSES to play in their country. the "would be good" portion is referring to the understanding of the fans, not the band. it changes nothing about his statement. he is stating fairly emphatically that pearl jam will not play there because of the politics involved, and no one has ever heard the band say that, nor is he willing to provide proof.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
btw - in that original thread, YieldtoNothing was in my face about Perry Farrell and lolla Israel....and how it would not be cancelled because Perry is a 'big time zionist'.....well, guess what? It got cancelled, reportedly due to a lack of bands willing to play there. I think if more bands were willing to take a PUBLIC stand on this issue, you would see a MUCH larger number of bands actively boycotting playing in Israel. But, as this board proves time and again, Israel's apologists and the Israeli lobby are so quick to condemn anyone who speaks against the STATE of israel, as anti-semetic. Most bands would probably prefer to avoid the issue altogether in public.
it's no different than all the chest thumping americans getting all hot and bothered when you rag on their government and then they turn around and accuse you of hating americans or america as a whole.
some people can't seem to separate personal insults with criticizing their government's policies.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
It's quite clear that unless you have a link from the Guardian.UK to cut and paste or you're quoting from other peoples posts that you don't have anything original to say.
Kat: Discuss the topic, not the people discussing the topic. No personal comments. Look your comments over before hitting Submit and be sure you're debating THE TOPIC.
while I don't always agree with Byrnzie, claiming all of his information comes from cutting and pasting articles is doing yourself a disservice. you're just making yourself look foolish.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
Would be good if....A hypothetical statement....Where did he say that this was the band's stated position? And you're asking for proof? Your selective emphasis changes the meaning of that sentence. The next few posters fell in line with your deceit.
actually, changing the emphasis on the sentence doesn't change it at ALL. he said that it would be good if certain people understood why the band REFUSES to play in their country. the "would be good" portion is referring to the understanding of the fans, not the band. it changes nothing about his statement. he is stating fairly emphatically that pearl jam will not play there because of the politics involved, and no one has ever heard the band say that, nor is he willing to provide proof.
Well, thats not how I read it. I don't see how that sentence implies a statement made by the band. "Would be good if that generation grew up understanding why their favourite band refuses to play in their country" Yes, "would be good" refers to the fans understanding, and is followed by the position he wishes the band would take, and why. I don't know, I shouldn't speak for him, I suppose...Byrnzie can clarify, but he obviously didnt feel the need to reply to the personal attack....
btw - in that original thread, YieldtoNothing was in my face about Perry Farrell and lolla Israel....and how it would not be cancelled because Perry is a 'big time zionist'.....well, guess what? It got cancelled, reportedly due to a lack of bands willing to play there. I think if more bands were willing to take a PUBLIC stand on this issue, you would see a MUCH larger number of bands actively boycotting playing in Israel. But, as this board proves time and again, Israel's apologists and the Israeli lobby are so quick to condemn anyone who speaks against the STATE of israel, as anti-semetic. Most bands would probably prefer to avoid the issue altogether in public.
it's no different than all the chest thumping americans getting all hot and bothered when you rag on their government and then they turn around and accuse you of hating americans or america as a whole.
some people can't seem to separate personal insults with criticizing their government's policies.
yep, exactly the same. Except that hating on america is cool ....hating on israel gets you branded an anti-semite, which is a step from being branded a nazi..... which is decidedly uncool.
Yes, "would be good" refers to the fans understanding, and is followed by the position he wishes the band would take, and why. I don't know, I shouldn't speak for him, I suppose...Byrnzie can clarify, but he obviously didnt feel the need to reply to the personal attack....
his statement "why the band refuses to play there" to me wasn't the stance he wished the band would take, but that it was the stance the band has taken. But you're right, only he can clear that up.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
Would be good if....A hypothetical statement....Where did he say that this was the band's stated position? And you're asking for proof? Your selective emphasis changes the meaning of that sentence. The next few posters fell in line with your deceit.
actually, changing the emphasis on the sentence doesn't change it at ALL. he said that it would be good if certain people understood why the band REFUSES to play in their country. the "would be good" portion is referring to the understanding of the fans, not the band. it changes nothing about his statement. he is stating fairly emphatically that pearl jam will not play there because of the politics involved, and no one has ever heard the band say that, nor is he willing to provide proof.
I have no idea what Pearl Jam's feelings are on this issue, because as far as I know they've never mentioned it. I meant that It would be good if they refused - as they appear to have done by dint of not having played there before - as it would send a message to the fans in Israel that would hopefully have positive repercussions, as such messages did in the case of Apartheid South Africa.
Personally, If they did, then I'd cancel my membership and you'd never hear from me again (And, yeah, I know how happy that would make some of you). I don't think this band has any business playing in a racist, Apartheid state.
Discuss...
1) yes they should play there
2) why would where they play have anything to do with anybody's fandom. Would their music suddenly sound different? If people like bands for reasons other than their music, why?
3) You state that you think the band has no business playing somewhere. The truth is rather that it is US the fans who have no business in whether the band plays or does not play somewhere.
4) Music is magic and universal, it penetrates political bullshit and rises way above it. Who is anybody to try and stop this?
I understand this debate delves into taking a stance against the country and the reasons for it, but if there's a safe haven where the band can play, where Yosi said in the 3rd or 4th post in the thread, then the music needs to happen there. Maybe it would be the music itself that could bring the change, rather than the lack of.
No. It's not a safe enough part of the world right now IMO. I don't think I'd go to a huge public gathering in Israel at the moment, much less be in the spotlight as an American.
yosi would have us believe it's no more dangerous than anywhere else in the world. and really, just playing devil's advocate here, I wonder what the perception of the safety of US citizens is abroad after all the violence that has been going on (school and theatre and other mass shootings). I mean, really, all we can base our knowledge on, for the most part, is the media. and we all know the media sensationalizes absolutely everything for ratings and fear. maybe people in israel think "the US, I'd never fucking go there-you can't even go to a fucking movie! and the government protects the association that holds rallies of thousands of people proclaiming their rights to carry loaded weapons in public!".
If I lived thousands of miles and an ocean away, I might think the US is a pretty horrible and dangerous place too.
For the record, Pearl Jam can play anywhere they please, but I've followed this thread and I've put a bit of thought into it. For the sake of discussion... I'll play devil's advocate for the consensus:
Are all the people from Israel responsible for the acts that have people outraged on this forum? Much like the surge of support Muslims have received for the actions of the extreme and minor faction of their religion... why should the peaceful Israelis face consequences for the actions of their government and military? It's not as if PJ would be performing a private show for Israeli leaders- they would be performing a show for fans that get the same sensation listening to Present Tense on their headphones as I do.
I mean, to my way of thinking... if Pearl Jam was going to place a music embargo on a country based on their aggressive behaviour... wouldn't the US qualify for such treatment? They definitely went on record to state their dislike for the country's war efforts in the middle east, yet they still toured the US while speaking against the actions of the military.
2) why would where they play have anything to do with anybody's fandom. Would their music suddenly sound different? If people like bands for reasons other than their music, why?
3) You state that you think the band has no business playing somewhere. The truth is rather that it is US the fans who have no business in whether the band plays or does not play somewhere.
4) Music is magic and universal, it penetrates political bullshit and rises way above it. Who is anybody to try and stop this?
I understand this debate delves into taking a stance against the country and the reasons for it, but if there's a safe haven where the band can play, where Yosi said in the 3rd or 4th post in the thread, then the music needs to happen there. Maybe it would be the music itself that could bring the change, rather than the lack of.
Or maybe if the majority of bands refuse to play there, and in fact state publicy their reasons for doing so, then it may cause the Israeli public to realize that they aren't being treated the same as any other country, and will make them realize the reasons why that is. Otherwise they may just grow up believing that the oppression of the Palestinians, the ongoing land-grab and ethnic cleansing, is a normal and acceptable state of affairs - and it isn't.
The Apartheid regime in South Africa wasn't toppled due to artists continuing to play there as if everything was just fine and dandy. It was toppled due, in part, to an international boycott of their country - despite the U.S and Israel continuing to support that racist regime, and supply it with weapons, up until the very end.
For the record, Pearl Jam can play anywhere they please, but I've followed this thread and I've put a bit of thought into it. For the sake of discussion... I'll play devil's advocate for the consensus:
Are all the people from Israel responsible for the acts that have people outraged on this forum? Much like the surge of support Muslims have received for the actions of the extreme and minor faction of their religion... why should the peaceful Israelis face consequences for the actions of their government and military? It's not as if PJ would be performing a private show for Israeli leaders- they would be performing a show for fans that get the same sensation listening to Present Tense on their headphones as I do.
They vote that government into power. They're also responsible for making changes in that country that need to be made. I think 45 years has been long enough for them to end the occupation.
I mean, to my way of thinking... if Pearl Jam was going to place a music embargo on a country based on their aggressive behaviour... wouldn't the US qualify for such treatment? They definitely went on record to state their dislike for the country's war efforts in the middle east, yet they still toured the US while speaking against the actions of the military.
The same could have been said during the 1980's era of South African Apartheid: Why should any American artist boycott Apartheid South Africa when the U.S government was engaged in supporting, funding, and defending, genocide in Central America?'
2) why would where they play have anything to do with anybody's fandom. Would their music suddenly sound different? If people like bands for reasons other than their music, why?
3) You state that you think the band has no business playing somewhere. The truth is rather that it is US the fans who have no business in whether the band plays or does not play somewhere.
4) Music is magic and universal, it penetrates political bullshit and rises way above it. Who is anybody to try and stop this?
I understand this debate delves into taking a stance against the country and the reasons for it, but if there's a safe haven where the band can play, where Yosi said in the 3rd or 4th post in the thread, then the music needs to happen there. Maybe it would be the music itself that could bring the change, rather than the lack of.
Or maybe if the majority of bands refuse to play there, and in fact state publicy their reasons for doing so, then it may cause the Israeli public to realize that they aren't being treated the same as any other country, and will make them realize the reasons why that is. Otherwise they may just grow up believing that the oppression of the Palestinians, the ongoing land-grab and ethnic cleansing, is a normal and acceptable state of affairs - and it isn't.
The Apartheid regime in South Africa wasn't toppled due to artists continuing to play there as if everything was just fine and dandy. It was toppled due, in part, to an international boycott of their country - despite the U.S and Israel continuing to support that racist regime, and supply it with weapons, up until the very end.
But just as frustrated as many of the US 10C members are regarding their military affairs in Iraq, are you sure that the Israeli public is completely in the dark and unopposed to the actions we bear witness to and have you so upset? I'm pretty sure there are Israelis just as choked as you for what is occurring in their backyard.
But just as frustrated as many of the US 10C members are regarding their military affairs in Iraq, are you sure that the Israeli public is completely in the dark and unopposed to the actions we bear witness to and have you so upset? I'm pretty sure there are Israelis just as choked as you for what is occurring in their backyard.
I know not all Israeli's support the occupation, but as far as I'm aware, a fair percentage do:
Norman Finkelstein - Beyond Chutzpah - On The Misuse of Anti-Semitism and The Abuse of History
P.175-177
'...When Israel attacked Lebanon in in June 1982 in order to "safeguard the occupation of the West bank" (Yehoshafat Harkabi's phrase), the popularity ratings of Defense Minister Ariel Sharon and Prime Minister Begin soared, while more than 80 percent of Israeli's held the invasion to be justified. When Israel's battering of Beirut in August 1982 reached new heights of savagery, more than half of Israeli's still supported the begin-Sharon government, while more than 80 percent still supported the invasion - which in the end, left up to twenty thousand Lebanese and Palestinians, almost all civilians, dead, and which the U.N General Assembly condemned by a vote of 143 to 2 (United States and Israel) for inflicting "severe damage on civilian Palestinians, including heavy losses of human lives, intolerable sufferings and massive material destruction." Only when the costs of the Lebanon aggression proved too onerous - initially, from the worldwide outcry against the Sabra and Shatila massacres and, later, from the escalating military casualties - did Israeli's turn against it.
When Israel's violent repression of the first Intifada reached new heights of brutality in 1989, more than half of all Israeli's supported the deployment of yet "stronger measures" to quell the largely nonviolent civil revolt (only one in four supported any lessening of the repression), while "an overwhelming 72 percent...saw no contradiction between the army's handling of the uprising and 'the nation's democratic values.'"
Operation Defensive shield (March - April 2002), although wreaking devastation on Palestinian society and culminating in the commission by Israeli forces of "serious violations" of humanitarian law and "war crimes" in Jenin and Nablus, was supported by fully 90 percent of Israeli's.
Beyond the emotional support that Israeli's have lent to crimes of state, it bears emphasis that Israel relies on a citizen army to implement policy: the collective responsibility of the Israeli people accordingly runs much deeper than "moral complicity."
2) why would where they play have anything to do with anybody's fandom. Would their music suddenly sound different? If people like bands for reasons other than their music, why?
3) You state that you think the band has no business playing somewhere. The truth is rather that it is US the fans who have no business in whether the band plays or does not play somewhere.
4) Music is magic and universal, it penetrates political bullshit and rises way above it. Who is anybody to try and stop this?
I understand this debate delves into taking a stance against the country and the reasons for it, but if there's a safe haven where the band can play, where Yosi said in the 3rd or 4th post in the thread, then the music needs to happen there. Maybe it would be the music itself that could bring the change, rather than the lack of.
Or maybe if the majority of bands refuse to play there, and in fact state publicy their reasons for doing so, then it may cause the Israeli public to realize that they aren't being treated the same as any other country, and will make them realize the reasons why that is. Otherwise they may just grow up believing that the oppression of the Palestinians, the ongoing land-grab and ethnic cleansing, is a normal and acceptable state of affairs - and it isn't.
The Apartheid regime in South Africa wasn't toppled due to artists continuing to play there as if everything was just fine and dandy. It was toppled due, in part, to an international boycott of their country - despite the U.S and Israel continuing to support that racist regime, and supply it with weapons, up until the very end.
I understand what you're saying, and the reasons. I'm just curious, is the Israeli public really that unaware of their own state of affairs? And with regard to the public voting in the current government, did the people have a better choice of leaders to vote for--did they actually have a choice for, but voted against leaders that would have ended the oppression, etc.?
I understand in theory what you're saying.....but I'm just thinking of all the deprived fans. It doesn't seem fair to them. Especially if the purpose of a boycott is to merely raise awareness of what they already know.
I understand what you're saying, and the reasons. I'm just curious, is the Israeli public really that unaware of their own state of affairs? And with regard to the public voting in the current government, did the people have a better choice of leaders to vote for--did they actually have a choice for, but voted against leaders that would have ended the oppression, etc.?
I understand in theory what you're saying.....but I'm just thinking of all the deprived fans. It doesn't seem fair to them. Especially if the purpose of a boycott is to merely raise awareness of what they already know.
I doubt they're oblivious to what's going on. Either way, maybe an international boycott would wake them from their slumber.
But just as frustrated as many of the US 10C members are regarding their military affairs in Iraq, are you sure that the Israeli public is completely in the dark and unopposed to the actions we bear witness to and have you so upset? I'm pretty sure there are Israelis just as choked as you for what is occurring in their backyard.
I know not all Israeli's support the occupation, but as far as I'm aware, a fair percentage do:
Norman Finkelstein - Beyond Chutzpah - On The Misuse of Anti-Semitism and The Abuse of History
P.175-177
'...When Israel attacked Lebanon in in June 1982 in order to "safeguard the occupation of the West bank" (Yehoshafat Harkabi's phrase), the popularity ratings of Defense Minister Ariel Sharon and Prime Minister Begin soared, while more than 80 percent of Israeli's held the invasion to be justified. When Israel's battering of Beirut in August 1982 reached new heights of savagery, more than half of Israeli's still supported the begin-Sharon government, while more than 80 percent still supported the invasion - which in the end, left up to twenty thousand Lebanese and Palestinians, almost all civilians, dead, and which the U.N General Assembly condemned by a vote of 143 to 2 (United States and Israel) for inflicting "severe damage on civilian Palestinians, including heavy losses of human lives, intolerable sufferings and massive material destruction." Only when the costs of the Lebanon aggression proved too onerous - initially, from the worldwide outcry against the Sabra and Shatila massacres and, later, from the escalating military casualties - did Israeli's turn against it.
When Israel's violent repression of the first Intifada reached new heights of brutality in 1989, more than half of all Israeli's supported the deployment of yet "stronger measures" to quell the largely nonviolent civil revolt (only one in four supported any lessening of the repression), while "an overwhelming 72 percent...saw no contradiction between the army's handling of the uprising and 'the nation's democratic values.'"
Operation Defensive shield (March - April 2002), although wreaking devastation on Palestinian society and culminating in the commission by Israeli forces of "serious violations" of humanitarian law and "war crimes" in Jenin and Nablus, was supported by fully 90 percent of Israeli's.
Beyond the emotional support that Israeli's have lent to crimes of state, it bears emphasis that Israel relies on a citizen army to implement policy: the collective responsibility of the Israeli people accordingly runs much deeper than "moral complicity."
Damning.
Remember, I'm only playing devil's advocate here. I'm not defending Israel at all. Whether right or wrong, I'm pointing out the fact that a mentality does exist to show consideration for other ethnic groups 'guilty by association', yet there doesn't seem like much of a will to offer the same level of understanding towards the Israeli people. A line seems to have been drawn placing all Israelis on one side of it regardless of their personal beliefs or values which may contrast with the majority of their countrymen.
Remember, I'm only playing devil's advocate here. I'm not defending Israel at all. Whether right or wrong, I'm pointing out the fact that a mentality does exist to show consideration for other ethnic groups 'guilty by association', yet there doesn't seem like much of a will to offer the same level of understanding towards the Israeli people. A line seems to have been drawn placing all Israelis on one side of it regardless of their personal beliefs or values which may contrast with the majority of their countrymen.
There are many individuals and organizations in Israel actively opposed to the occupation, though unfortunately, as far as I can tell, they're a small percentage of the population. I'd like to be proven wrong on this point.
yep...my opinion is they never played there cos of where the israel is in the map
if israel was at north europe next to germany and netherlands,my opinion is they would play 15 times already there..and would be always sold out shows..they have huge fan base at israel..
Or maybe they've not played there before because its a racist Apartheid state engaged in an ongoing campaign of ethnic cleansing?
never the band,their management or members of the band said that..you just assuming..
my opinion still is they never played there cos of the location of israel..there are more than 100 countries out there arent a "racist Apartheid state engaged in an ongoing campaign of ethnic cleansing" and still pj never played there...
took them 15 years to come to Greece,and they add it last min aftet they announce the whole 2006 tour..
after alot of pressure ,letters,signs of 4000 greek fans,so they add croatia and greece at tour...
and nothing to do with politics the reason they didnt visit Greece before.
another exable is Asia tour,alot know things about the band says the logistics arent good enough thats why the band isnt return to tour there..
1st of all music intustry is business...
"...Dimitri...He talks to me...'.."The Ghost of Greece..".
"..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
“..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
yep...my opinion is they never played there cos of where the israel is in the map
if israel was at north europe next to germany and netherlands,my opinion is they would play 15 times already there..and would be always sold out shows..they have huge fan base at israel..
Or maybe they've not played there before because its a racist Apartheid state engaged in an ongoing campaign of ethnic cleansing?
never the band,their management or members of the band said that..you just assuming..
my opinion still is they never played there cos of the location of israel..there are more than 100 countries out there arent a "racist Apartheid state engaged in an ongoing campaign of ethnic cleansing" and still pj never played there...
took them 15 years to come to Greece,and they add it last min aftet they announce the whole 2006 tour..
after alot of pressure ,letters,signs of 4000 greek fans,so they add croatia and greece at tour...
and nothing to do with politics the reason they didnt visit Greece before.
another exable is Asia tour,alot know things about the band says the logistics arent good enough thats why the band isnt return to tour there..
1st of all music intustry is business...
Thank you Dimi.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
never the band,their management or members of the band said that..you just assuming..
my opinion still is they never played there cos of the location of israel..there are more than 100 countries out there arent a "racist Apartheid state engaged in an ongoing campaign of ethnic cleansing" and still pj never played there...
took them 15 years to come to Greece,and they add it last min aftet they announce the whole 2006 tour..
after alot of pressure ,letters,signs of 4000 greek fans,so they add croatia and greece at tour...
and nothing to do with politics the reason they didnt visit Greece before.
another exable is Asia tour,alot know things about the band says the logistics arent good enough thats why the band isnt return to tour there..
1st of all music intustry is business...
They played Taiwan, and the Philippines. I'd imagine playing in those countries would pose more of a logistic challenge than Israel - perched on the end of the Mediterranean, not a million miles from Italy.
But maybe you're right. Maybe it just comes down to logistics. I don't know.
never the band,their management or members of the band said that..you just assuming..
my opinion still is they never played there cos of the location of israel..there are more than 100 countries out there arent a "racist Apartheid state engaged in an ongoing campaign of ethnic cleansing" and still pj never played there...
took them 15 years to come to Greece,and they add it last min aftet they announce the whole 2006 tour..
after alot of pressure ,letters,signs of 4000 greek fans,so they add croatia and greece at tour...
and nothing to do with politics the reason they didnt visit Greece before.
another exable is Asia tour,alot know things about the band says the logistics arent good enough thats why the band isnt return to tour there..
1st of all music intustry is business...
They played Taiwan, and the Philippines. I'd imagine playing in those countries would pose more of a logistic challenge than Israel - perched on the end of the Mediterranean, not a million miles from Italy.
But maybe you're right. Maybe it just comes down to logistics. I don't know.
hells if they can make it all the way down here to australia they can make it anywhere.... if they choose to.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
never the band,their management or members of the band said that..you just assuming..
my opinion still is they never played there cos of the location of israel..there are more than 100 countries out there arent a "racist Apartheid state engaged in an ongoing campaign of ethnic cleansing" and still pj never played there...
took them 15 years to come to Greece,and they add it last min aftet they announce the whole 2006 tour..
after alot of pressure ,letters,signs of 4000 greek fans,so they add croatia and greece at tour...
and nothing to do with politics the reason they didnt visit Greece before.
another exable is Asia tour,alot know things about the band says the logistics arent good enough thats why the band isnt return to tour there..
1st of all music intustry is business...
They played Taiwan, and the Philippines. I'd imagine playing in those countries would pose more of a logistic challenge than Israel - perched on the end of the Mediterranean, not a million miles from Italy.
But maybe you're right. Maybe it just comes down to logistics. I don't know.
good you mention those countries....i had a copnversation last year with a guy is close to the band and music intustry,and told me they will never return there,cos the band lost money at that tour.
and now you said Italy,i still remember Eddie,when they asked him,why they went to play at Pistoia,Italy,how come pistoia and not a bigger city of italy,
he said"im going when they tells me to go"
go figure how they plan the tour,especially the year of a new album like 2006
"...Dimitri...He talks to me...'.."The Ghost of Greece..".
"..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
“..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
I understand what you're saying, and the reasons. I'm just curious, is the Israeli public really that unaware of their own state of affairs? And with regard to the public voting in the current government, did the people have a better choice of leaders to vote for--did they actually have a choice for, but voted against leaders that would have ended the oppression, etc.?
I understand in theory what you're saying.....but I'm just thinking of all the deprived fans. It doesn't seem fair to them. Especially if the purpose of a boycott is to merely raise awareness of what they already know.
I doubt they're oblivious to what's going on. Either way, maybe an international boycott would wake them from their slumber.
do you know if they had a choice to vote for leaders that would have actually or possibly ended the oppression?
or is it something like in the States--in the end you are voting between two goofs who survived the process of elimination from a whole panel of goofs.
I don't know. I know the situation needs help and attention, but I haven't really been convinced that a musical boycott is going to significantly or even minimally help the situation...especially if its just for the possibly unneccessary purpose of "awareness". Contrarily, it sounds like the people--the civilians who are just like you and me http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2v-ShaFpiVE * could use a litlle PJ.
Pearl Jam's a band who is positively against war and oppressive government. But besides that, they are first and majorly foremost a band who delivers music
I really think the place simply surpasses their highest limits as far as the chances of some kind of terrorist or war activity. Things are on a trip wire there, and events in the middle east are happening now, day to day, and those changing events could quite realistically affect safety in Israel. Why risk it?? I wouldn't. You won't catch me anywhere in the Middle East for the foreseeable future. In case anyone hasn't noticed, it's fucking nuts over there.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
never the band,their management or members of the band said that..you just assuming..
my opinion still is they never played there cos of the location of israel..there are more than 100 countries out there arent a "racist Apartheid state engaged in an ongoing campaign of ethnic cleansing" and still pj never played there...
took them 15 years to come to Greece,and they add it last min aftet they announce the whole 2006 tour..
after alot of pressure ,letters,signs of 4000 greek fans,so they add croatia and greece at tour...
and nothing to do with politics the reason they didnt visit Greece before.
another exable is Asia tour,alot know things about the band says the logistics arent good enough thats why the band isnt return to tour there..
1st of all music intustry is business...
They played Taiwan, and the Philippines. I'd imagine playing in those countries would pose more of a logistic challenge than Israel - perched on the end of the Mediterranean, not a million miles from Italy.
But maybe you're right. Maybe it just comes down to logistics. I don't know.
good you mention those countries....i had a copnversation last year with a guy is close to the band and music intustry,and told me they will never return there,cos the band lost money at that tour.
and now you said Italy,i still remember Eddie,when they asked him,why they went to play at Pistoia,Italy,how come pistoia and not a bigger city of italy,
he said"im going when they tells me to go"
go figure how they plan the tour,especially the year of a new album like 2006
ed goes where the surf is.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
good you mention those countries....i had a copnversation last year with a guy is close to the band and music intustry,and told me they will never return there,cos the band lost money at that tour.
and now you said Italy,i still remember Eddie,when they asked him,why they went to play at Pistoia,Italy,how come pistoia and not a bigger city of italy,
he said"im going when they tells me to go"
go figure how they plan the tour,especially the year of a new album like 2006
ed goes where the surf is.
no shit...where the hell he will go surfing at india or Russia?
"...Dimitri...He talks to me...'.."The Ghost of Greece..".
"..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
“..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
Comments
A little change in focus, by changing the emphasis:
Would be good if....A hypothetical statement....Where did he say that this was the band's stated position? And you're asking for proof? Your selective emphasis changes the meaning of that sentence. The next few posters fell in line with your deceit.
My position on this has changed from one of indecision (in a previous thread on the porch back in november), to an emphatic "NO". Days after that thread began, Israel began bombing Gaza again, largely justified by propaganda and disinformation. I agree that the more pressure put on the Israeli government to end the occupation, the better. Artists and academia boycotting Israel encourages fans and students to do so. It also begins the dialogue for this topic at the proper starting line: why boycott Israel?
Also in that thread, I stated that I had a huge amount of respect for Perry Farrell....I noticed the Electronic Intifada article Byrnzie posted on the porch not long after making that statement....and I will recant that as well. Of all the worthy causes in the world, PF chose to play a private benefit concert for an army who just finished a massive bombing campaign over the most densely populated area in the world, killing over 300 innocent kids in a matter of days....and to top it off, made snide remarks about having 'proved our point'?? Fuck that. Not another cent from me.
actually, changing the emphasis on the sentence doesn't change it at ALL. he said that it would be good if certain people understood why the band REFUSES to play in their country. the "would be good" portion is referring to the understanding of the fans, not the band. it changes nothing about his statement. he is stating fairly emphatically that pearl jam will not play there because of the politics involved, and no one has ever heard the band say that, nor is he willing to provide proof.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
it's no different than all the chest thumping americans getting all hot and bothered when you rag on their government and then they turn around and accuse you of hating americans or america as a whole.
some people can't seem to separate personal insults with criticizing their government's policies.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
while I don't always agree with Byrnzie, claiming all of his information comes from cutting and pasting articles is doing yourself a disservice. you're just making yourself look foolish.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
his statement "why the band refuses to play there" to me wasn't the stance he wished the band would take, but that it was the stance the band has taken. But you're right, only he can clear that up.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
I have no idea what Pearl Jam's feelings are on this issue, because as far as I know they've never mentioned it. I meant that It would be good if they refused - as they appear to have done by dint of not having played there before - as it would send a message to the fans in Israel that would hopefully have positive repercussions, as such messages did in the case of Apartheid South Africa.
1) yes they should play there
2) why would where they play have anything to do with anybody's fandom. Would their music suddenly sound different? If people like bands for reasons other than their music, why?
3) You state that you think the band has no business playing somewhere. The truth is rather that it is US the fans who have no business in whether the band plays or does not play somewhere.
4) Music is magic and universal, it penetrates political bullshit and rises way above it. Who is anybody to try and stop this?
I understand this debate delves into taking a stance against the country and the reasons for it, but if there's a safe haven where the band can play, where Yosi said in the 3rd or 4th post in the thread, then the music needs to happen there. Maybe it would be the music itself that could bring the change, rather than the lack of.
:shock: you are so right.
I'd be scared to live here to, if i didn't
Are all the people from Israel responsible for the acts that have people outraged on this forum? Much like the surge of support Muslims have received for the actions of the extreme and minor faction of their religion... why should the peaceful Israelis face consequences for the actions of their government and military? It's not as if PJ would be performing a private show for Israeli leaders- they would be performing a show for fans that get the same sensation listening to Present Tense on their headphones as I do.
I mean, to my way of thinking... if Pearl Jam was going to place a music embargo on a country based on their aggressive behaviour... wouldn't the US qualify for such treatment? They definitely went on record to state their dislike for the country's war efforts in the middle east, yet they still toured the US while speaking against the actions of the military.
Or maybe if the majority of bands refuse to play there, and in fact state publicy their reasons for doing so, then it may cause the Israeli public to realize that they aren't being treated the same as any other country, and will make them realize the reasons why that is. Otherwise they may just grow up believing that the oppression of the Palestinians, the ongoing land-grab and ethnic cleansing, is a normal and acceptable state of affairs - and it isn't.
The Apartheid regime in South Africa wasn't toppled due to artists continuing to play there as if everything was just fine and dandy. It was toppled due, in part, to an international boycott of their country - despite the U.S and Israel continuing to support that racist regime, and supply it with weapons, up until the very end.
You earned it
They vote that government into power. They're also responsible for making changes in that country that need to be made. I think 45 years has been long enough for them to end the occupation.
The same could have been said during the 1980's era of South African Apartheid: Why should any American artist boycott Apartheid South Africa when the U.S government was engaged in supporting, funding, and defending, genocide in Central America?'
But just as frustrated as many of the US 10C members are regarding their military affairs in Iraq, are you sure that the Israeli public is completely in the dark and unopposed to the actions we bear witness to and have you so upset? I'm pretty sure there are Israelis just as choked as you for what is occurring in their backyard.
I know not all Israeli's support the occupation, but as far as I'm aware, a fair percentage do:
Norman Finkelstein - Beyond Chutzpah - On The Misuse of Anti-Semitism and The Abuse of History
P.175-177
'...When Israel attacked Lebanon in in June 1982 in order to "safeguard the occupation of the West bank" (Yehoshafat Harkabi's phrase), the popularity ratings of Defense Minister Ariel Sharon and Prime Minister Begin soared, while more than 80 percent of Israeli's held the invasion to be justified. When Israel's battering of Beirut in August 1982 reached new heights of savagery, more than half of Israeli's still supported the begin-Sharon government, while more than 80 percent still supported the invasion - which in the end, left up to twenty thousand Lebanese and Palestinians, almost all civilians, dead, and which the U.N General Assembly condemned by a vote of 143 to 2 (United States and Israel) for inflicting "severe damage on civilian Palestinians, including heavy losses of human lives, intolerable sufferings and massive material destruction." Only when the costs of the Lebanon aggression proved too onerous - initially, from the worldwide outcry against the Sabra and Shatila massacres and, later, from the escalating military casualties - did Israeli's turn against it.
When Israel's violent repression of the first Intifada reached new heights of brutality in 1989, more than half of all Israeli's supported the deployment of yet "stronger measures" to quell the largely nonviolent civil revolt (only one in four supported any lessening of the repression), while "an overwhelming 72 percent...saw no contradiction between the army's handling of the uprising and 'the nation's democratic values.'"
Operation Defensive shield (March - April 2002), although wreaking devastation on Palestinian society and culminating in the commission by Israeli forces of "serious violations" of humanitarian law and "war crimes" in Jenin and Nablus, was supported by fully 90 percent of Israeli's.
Beyond the emotional support that Israeli's have lent to crimes of state, it bears emphasis that Israel relies on a citizen army to implement policy: the collective responsibility of the Israeli people accordingly runs much deeper than "moral complicity."
I understand what you're saying, and the reasons. I'm just curious, is the Israeli public really that unaware of their own state of affairs? And with regard to the public voting in the current government, did the people have a better choice of leaders to vote for--did they actually have a choice for, but voted against leaders that would have ended the oppression, etc.?
I understand in theory what you're saying.....but I'm just thinking of all the deprived fans. It doesn't seem fair to them. Especially if the purpose of a boycott is to merely raise awareness of what they already know.
I doubt they're oblivious to what's going on. Either way, maybe an international boycott would wake them from their slumber.
Damning.
Remember, I'm only playing devil's advocate here. I'm not defending Israel at all. Whether right or wrong, I'm pointing out the fact that a mentality does exist to show consideration for other ethnic groups 'guilty by association', yet there doesn't seem like much of a will to offer the same level of understanding towards the Israeli people. A line seems to have been drawn placing all Israelis on one side of it regardless of their personal beliefs or values which may contrast with the majority of their countrymen.
There are many individuals and organizations in Israel actively opposed to the occupation, though unfortunately, as far as I can tell, they're a small percentage of the population. I'd like to be proven wrong on this point.
my opinion still is they never played there cos of the location of israel..there are more than 100 countries out there arent a "racist Apartheid state engaged in an ongoing campaign of ethnic cleansing" and still pj never played there...
took them 15 years to come to Greece,and they add it last min aftet they announce the whole 2006 tour..
after alot of pressure ,letters,signs of 4000 greek fans,so they add croatia and greece at tour...
and nothing to do with politics the reason they didnt visit Greece before.
another exable is Asia tour,alot know things about the band says the logistics arent good enough thats why the band isnt return to tour there..
1st of all music intustry is business...
"..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
“..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
They played Taiwan, and the Philippines. I'd imagine playing in those countries would pose more of a logistic challenge than Israel - perched on the end of the Mediterranean, not a million miles from Italy.
But maybe you're right. Maybe it just comes down to logistics. I don't know.
hells if they can make it all the way down here to australia they can make it anywhere.... if they choose to.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
and now you said Italy,i still remember Eddie,when they asked him,why they went to play at Pistoia,Italy,how come pistoia and not a bigger city of italy,
he said"im going when they tells me to go"
go figure how they plan the tour,especially the year of a new album like 2006
"..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
“..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
do you know if they had a choice to vote for leaders that would have actually or possibly ended the oppression?
or is it something like in the States--in the end you are voting between two goofs who survived the process of elimination from a whole panel of goofs.
I don't know. I know the situation needs help and attention, but I haven't really been convinced that a musical boycott is going to significantly or even minimally help the situation...especially if its just for the possibly unneccessary purpose of "awareness". Contrarily, it sounds like the people--the civilians who are just like you and me http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2v-ShaFpiVE * could use a litlle PJ.
Pearl Jam's a band who is positively against war and oppressive government. But besides that, they are first and majorly foremost a band who delivers music
* (thank you mcgruff10)
ed goes where the surf is.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
"..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
“..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”