Amy in ruckus at theater
#61
Posted 20 January 2010 - 08:26 PM
#62
Posted 20 January 2010 - 08:31 PM
- 8-/
#66
Posted 21 January 2010 - 03:03 AM
Wouldn't community service be more effective than a fine? She's not exactly short of cash. Perhaps the conditional discharge will discourage her from this type of behaviour in future.
I think it's a positive sign that she pleaded guilty - it might be sinking in that she can't just lash out at people.
She's always been a pretty honest person, hasn't she? It's hard for me to imagine Amy outright lying, assuming she's sober. Of course, she doesn't always see her condition for what it is, but I don't view that as lying, it's just she can't see it.
I agree with most of the posts here, including that community service would have been good at this point. One more incident and it sounds like they are really going to throw the book at her.
"Flawed yet fabulous, tormented yet towering"
#67
Posted 21 January 2010 - 03:55 AM
:-$You've been a bad girl, Amy. Now come bend over uncle Phil's lap for a spanking.
^perv^
#68
Posted 21 January 2010 - 04:43 AM
I couldn't agree less with those who portray Amy almost as a villain who deserves to get her comeuppance. What an awful attitude towards Amy, and one that says naught about her and all about who entertain such views. Amy is not a criminal, and even if she were, according to the judiciary, which is a joke anyway, one wouldn't have to go along with such mock justice as was dispensed yesterday. If a book is to be thrown at anyone, then it should be To Kill a Mockingbird, and it should not be thrown at Amy, but at the mob of "justices", who apparently need to learn so much more from it than Amy. I'm not excusing bad behaviour, but I am here to support Amy, and I will stand up for her.She's always been a pretty honest person, hasn't she? It's hard for me to imagine Amy outright lying, assuming she's sober. Of course, she doesn't always see her condition for what it is, but I don't view that as lying, it's just she can't see it.
I agree with most of the posts here, including that community service would have been good at this point. One more incident and it sounds like they are really going to throw the book at her.
Edited by Winehousedrunk, 21 January 2010 - 05:08 AM.
#69
Posted 21 January 2010 - 10:04 AM
I couldn't agree less with those who portray Amy almost as a villain who deserves to get her comeuppance. What an awful attitude towards Amy, and one that says naught about her and all about who entertain such views. Amy is not a criminal, and even if she were, according to the judiciary, which is a joke anyway, one wouldn't have to go along with such mock justice as was dispensed yesterday. If a book is to be thrown at anyone, then it should be To Kill a Mockingbird, and it should not be thrown at Amy, but at the mob of "justices", who apparently need to learn so much more from it than Amy. I'm not excusing bad behaviour, but I am here to support Amy, and I will stand up for her.
She's not a villain who got her comeuppance. She is someone who committed a criminal assault (again) and has been punished in accordance with the country where she commited the crime.
Just because I like her music does not mean that I will be supportive of her assaulting someone in a theatre full of children.
I refuse to be blinded by stardom. Amy is a human being who should not be allowed to behave violently towards members of the public, just because she is famous.
I also don't care if that makes me awful in your eyes. I would rather be honest than starstruck.
#70
Posted 21 January 2010 - 01:23 PM
Stupid rules! Must. Try. Harder. Wah-Wah. :-$
NO SOUP FOR YOU!!!!
She's not a villain who got her comeuppance. She is someone who committed a criminal assault (again) and has been punished in accordance with the country where she commited the crime.
Just because I like her music does not mean that I will be supportive of her assaulting someone in a theatre full of children.
I refuse to be blinded by stardom. Amy is a human being who should not be allowed to behave violently towards members of the public, just because she is famous.
I also don't care if that makes me awful in your eyes. I would rather be honest than starstruck.
Did you ever know that you're my heeeeeerooooooooooooooo?????? You're eeeeeeverything I'd wish could beeeeeeeeee. I can fly hiiiiiiigherrrr than an eeeeeeeeeeaagllle. You are the wind beneath myyyyyy wiiiings....
- 8-/
#72
Posted 21 January 2010 - 04:40 PM
***She's not a villain who got her comeuppance. She is someone who committed a criminal assault (again) and has been punished in accordance with the country where she commited the crime.
Then I advise that you don't go live in most parts of the world, where women, in accordance with the law of the land, are treated as second class citizens, or slaves. I can name a few: Iran, Saoedi-Arabia, Sudan, and you can find the rest mentioned in the papers with sad regularity also.
Just because I like her music does not mean that I will be supportive of her assaulting someone in a theatre full of children.
I'm not supportive of her assaulting someone, and if you actually read my posts right, then you'd know that I'm not, apart from when she's actually defending herself. Dramatizing situations should be left to those whose profession it is to twist words and make up things up to suit their game.
I refuse to be blinded by stardom. Amy is a human being who should not be allowed to behave violently towards members of the public, just because she is famous.
I'm not blinded; moral ethics is a pet subject of mine, and I've been thinking about it for more than 30 years. The seriousness of her offence(s) is of relative minor importance, which should be reflected in one's moral judgement.
I also don't care if that makes me awful in your eyes. I would rather be honest than starstruck.
I don't care for your insinuations that I'm supportive of violence because I am starstruck, which would make me immoral and a moron. I find your attitude towards Amy sanctimonious, and towards me unjustifiably arrogant. But don't let that stop you from arguing. I am very against censorship, or self-censoring, for that matter.
Edited by Winehousedrunk, 21 January 2010 - 05:00 PM.
#73
Posted 21 January 2010 - 05:25 PM
Your reply is exactly the reason I very rarely come to this forum anymore. Bring on the new album when we will have something else to talk about rather than the childish, drunken exploits of a talented lady who is pissing away her talent.
BTW I am not insinuating anything. I am flat out telling you. Read your posts above. You "support Amy", but you do it blindly. You are a fan who thinks that anyone who tries to have clarity of judgement about a famous person's behaviour is a hater. I am not a hater, I am a realist who thinks that Amy Winehouse is a talented songwriter with a beautiful voice and an appalling attitude.
Edited by kylakoolie, 21 January 2010 - 05:32 PM.
syntax
#74
Posted 21 January 2010 - 05:28 PM
Your reply is exactly the reason I very rarely come to this forum anymore. Bring on the new album when we will have something else to talk about rather than the childish, drunken exploits of a talented lady who is pissing away her talent.
Seconded, thirded, etc, etc.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users