|
Korean Job Discussion Forums "The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Junior

Joined: 18 Nov 2005 Location: the eye
|
Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 4:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Satori wrote: |
| And I will recieve the news that she got nothing and the charges were thrown out of court with great joy and gleeful pleasure... |
But maybe the judge won't be a Beatles fan.
i saw an interview with a longtime personal friend of kim jong Il the other day. She said what a great guy he always was..shy..generous..etc..and how could such a man be evil.
But of course thousands of other people know how he has reduced his people to rummaging in the sewers for something to eat... There are many hidden sides to a person...
In my opinion...in America popularity or wealth is more likely to elude justice, but thats not the case in Britain.
Last edited by Junior on Fri Oct 20, 2006 5:48 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Satori

Joined: 09 Dec 2005 Location: Above it all
|
Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 4:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Junior wrote: |
| In my opinion...in America popularity or wealth is more likely to elude justice, but thats not the case in Britain. |
Good. Cause from all that we can see Macca doesn't need any special advantages to get out of this sham of a claim... |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
jinju
Joined: 22 Jan 2006
|
Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 4:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Most of those little records the Beatles set were when they were nothing but N'Sync or BSB. Musically worthless songs like "I wanna hold your hand" or "She loves you yea yea yea" have no musical merit, certainly not more than anything that Westlife or N'Sync ever did. They were nothing but cute boys playing musical fluff to screaming girls. They did grow up later but their fluff will always taint them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Tiberious aka Sparkles

Joined: 23 Jan 2003 Location: I'm one cool cat!
|
Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 5:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jinju is clearly more Beatles Blue than Beatles Red.
Question: can he C-walk?
(I'll make a grilled-cheese sandwich for whoever gets that.)
One blood,
E |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Zoidberg

Joined: 29 Mar 2006 Location: Somewhere too hot for my delicate marine constitution
|
Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 5:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Junior wrote: |
| The whole point of debating something is that your opinion changes if you acquire new information. my opinion has changed and altered on many things discussed on here .. through discussion. You don't lose credibility by taking new ideas on board. maybe you should open up to the possibility that he actually was abusive? |
I am open to that possibility. In fact, if it turns out he brutally beat her every night, I would be neither surprised or disappointed. And he would then deserve whatever happens.
| Junior wrote: |
| but overall the idea of some rich old dude marrying a decorative hottie then discovering that he's incompatible, then having to pay for it...is mildly amusing. That and the fact i was never a beatles fan. |
I'm not a fan either. Don't understand what all the fuss is over. Maybe it was innovative at the time, but I didn't exist in that time. Just like Shakespeare. Poison in the ear my ass!
| Junior wrote: |
And..lighten up.! This is not deadly serious debate... its a story good for a few laughs  |
Look, really what was bothering me mostly was you were suggesting that she get 500 million bucks regardless of whether he beat her or whether he was the most loving husband in the history of the world. Of course, as in any divorce she should get something, it's Paul's fault for not getting a pre-nup, but unless he actually did what she said, half his worth is a bit much. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Leslie Cheswyck

Joined: 31 May 2003 Location: University of Western Chile
|
Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 6:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| manlyboy wrote: |
| She's got a ticket to ride, and the b*tch don't care. |
Yeah! And that other song: Wiccan, Work It Out. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Doogie
Joined: 19 Jan 2006 Location: Hwaseong City
|
Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 2:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Here's what makes me suspicious:
1. He was married for over 25 years and raised 4 kids with no history of this type of behaviour. Like every other rock star, he had the occasional drug infraction but, all in all, he was a good family man. He seems to be really close to his kids. That says a lot about his character.
2. No prenup signed. What's up with that? I remember reading at the time that his kids wanted him to cover himself. They obviously didn't trust her. You gotta know that his lawyers must have been begging him to get one signed.......yet he didn't. All this in an era where all rich people get prenups signed.
3. The amount of money. What? She can't live comfortably on $40 or $50 million? She's going for $500 freakin million!!
Is it possible he shoved her around? Yea, it's possible. It's also possible that, for all his fame and money, he was a lonely older billionaire who lost the love of his life to cancer. A perfect target. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
SPINOZA
Joined: 10 Jun 2005 Location: $eoul
|
Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 5:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Here's what we've all gotta take into account. It's an unpleasant reality.
We must immediately distrust anyone - man or woman - who marries someone 30 years older than them. Can genuine love occur in those circumstances? No doubt, especially when one party has hundred of millions. Picture Sir Macca as a 68 year old sweeping the streets. Would a woman in her 30s wish to marry him? Of course not.
She is 100% disgsuting. She perpetuates the (false) image of all women as money-grabbing, shallow wh**es. Anybody with any sense knows that that's not the case, but many men believe it. She's an embarrassment to women and anyone with any affection for the female sex ought to agree.
Here's comes the really unpleasant bit: what amuses me is that, if Paul did hit her, she's the kind of woman who probably deserved it. If he didn't hit her, he should have. I don't advocate hitting women, but then I don't advocate hitting anyone - man, woman, child, or animal. But sometimes people lose their temper and lash out. Sometimes people are totally unreasonable - disgracefully out of order in action or comment or both - and genuinely deserve some kind of quick-fix punishment. I say when someone's so out of order, so unreasonable, hit away, no matter what their sex. Some women - a minority - seem to think they can use and abuse men and then later play the innocent, weaker victim card. Shouldn't be acceptable. Give someone who deserves it a damn good thrashing with a stick! My only regret is that it cannot be televized after this evening's football. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Satori

Joined: 09 Dec 2005 Location: Above it all
|
Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 11:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jinju wrote: |
| Most of those little records the Beatles set were when they were nothing but N'Sync or BSB. Musically worthless songs like "I wanna hold your hand" or "She loves you yea yea yea" have no musical merit, certainly not more than anything that Westlife or N'Sync ever did. They were nothing but cute boys playing musical fluff to screaming girls. They did grow up later but their fluff will always taint them. |
What "little" records are you seeing? Are you looking at the same info? I'm seeing big records. I'm seeing the most compreshensively dominant band of any time in history. And they didn't stop breaking records as they matured.
| Quote: |
Most consecutive no. 1 albums in the Billboard albums chart (8 consecutive no. 1 albums from 1965 to 1968).
Most consecutive top 5 albums in the Billboard albums chart (16 consecutive top 5 albums from 1965 to 1977).
Most no. 1 albums in the Billboard albums chart in a calendar year (3 no. 1 albums in 1964, repeated in 1965 and 1966).
Most top 3 albums in the Billboard albums chart (27 top 3 albums).
Most transatlantic no. 1 hit singles (12 songs reached no. 1 in both the U.S. and Britain).
Group with most consecutive top 5 hits in the Billboard Hot 100 chart (17 consecutive top 5 hits from 1964 to 1969).
Group with most consecutive top 10 hits in the Billboard Hot 100 chart (24 consecutive top 10 hits from 1964 to 1976).
Group with most consecutive top 20 hits in the Billboard Hot 100 chart (27 consecutive top 20 hits from 1964 to 1976). |
As for thier early stuff being fluff, I don't think I've heard a more meaningless claim ever. That stuff may sound quaint now, but not at the time. It was still more happening and energetic than anything else on the charts by a country mile. They were 21 for christs sake. And they did what they were trying to do, make fun music that a lot of people enjoy, and sell boatloads of records.
Now, they developed very quickly. Only thier first two albumns were lightweight. And if you're going to put forward the idea that a bands entire career has to be tainted by the standard of thier early albumns, then you've got to right off the Stones too, thier first albumn crap, and full of covers. Dylans entire first albumn was covers of other peoples songs too. This theory just doesn't work at all. Tons of great bands didn't not make thier best albumn first time up, including the Beach Boys, The Eagles, Fleetwood Mac, Springsteen, U2, REM, Crowded House, and many many more. The idea, much like yourself, is so poor it's obscene.
How quick did they develop? Well, by the third albumn "A Hard Days Night", which was released in 64 by the way ( first albumn released in 63 ) they had tracks with serious content and artistic merit such as ...
If I Fell
And I Love Her
Can't Buy Me Love
Things We Said Today
I'll Be Back
All except "Can't Buy Me Love" were harmonically dark and moody, and melodically complex. And they contain more complex and conflicted ideas about love than the early songs. And of course, "Can't Buy Me Love" is a big idea, one we take for granted now, but put into song for the first time by the Beatles ( not the first time they would be first to put big cultural ideas into pop songs either ).
And it just got better from there.
But what are you doing trying to talk about this stuff anyway? You've been banned from serious music discussion. Get back to the corner and face the wall... |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Junior

Joined: 18 Nov 2005 Location: the eye
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Zoidberg

Joined: 29 Mar 2006 Location: Somewhere too hot for my delicate marine constitution
|
Posted: Sat Oct 21, 2006 7:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Junior wrote: |
| * just an idea- wouldn't it be good if judges could award a significant % of damages to an appropriate charity? That way, cases would be more about focussing attention on the issues and helping society than individuals ammassing vast amounts of money. Nobody who had been genuinely abused could object to the idea of 30% of damages going to a charity to help victims, for example. It would help to weed out lawsuits where people were simply trying to profit from their victimhood. |
This is a good idea. Sadly though, when people are getting multi-million dollar payments, 30% may not matter if they still get several million. And the one paying is still equally hurt, if that is the intent.
But, at least some of the money would go somewhere worthwhile. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
dogbert

Joined: 29 Jan 2003 Location: Killbox 90210
|
Posted: Sat Oct 21, 2006 7:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Amputee fetish? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Satori

Joined: 09 Dec 2005 Location: Above it all
|
Posted: Sat Oct 21, 2006 6:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Why am I not surprised by those last two links. This is what I've been saying all along... |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|