PDA

View Full Version : Online petition to save "Rock & Roll, Part 2"


Fire Me Boy!
08-10-2006, 10:47 AM
http://www.petitiononline.com/Chiefs24/petition.html

jspchief
08-10-2006, 10:49 AM
Sincerely,


NAMBLA

Fire Me Boy!
08-10-2006, 10:50 AM
Say what you will... I just threw this up because I found out about it. The people that want it base their opinion on the FACT that most people don't even know the name of the song, let along who sang it, that he's in prison or why he's in prison.

Iowanian
08-10-2006, 10:52 AM
Playing that song, still gives royalties to a Kidhumper.

No thanks.

jspchief
08-10-2006, 10:53 AM
Oh, excellent reasoning. As long as they don't know that they're putting money in the pocket of a pervert, they won't mind.

If you're going to petition, you're wasting your time with the Chiefs. The NFL banned the use of the song, so the Chiefs don't have a choice in the matter.

Predarat
08-10-2006, 10:57 AM
I know a lot of college bands play it. Does Glitterboy still get royalties if they play a recording of a college band?

MOhillbilly
08-10-2006, 10:58 AM
no thanks- pedos deserve death.


ill sign that petition.

htismaqe
08-10-2006, 11:05 AM
It doesn't matter if nobody in the entire stadium knows who sings it.

He (or someone he supports) get PAID when we play it.

This petition is in EXTREMELY bad taste.

Fire Me Boy!
08-10-2006, 11:29 AM
Oh, excellent reasoning. As long as they don't know that they're putting money in the pocket of a pervert, they won't mind.

If you're going to petition, you're wasting your time with the Chiefs. The NFL banned the use of the song, so the Chiefs don't have a choice in the matter.
Wrong. The NFL did not ban the use of it. They ASKED teams to not use it. They did NOT ban it.

http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/living/15190244.htm

And a little interesting site... http://sports-law.blogspot.com/2006/06/gary-glitter-proof-law-and-morality-of.html

jspchief
08-10-2006, 11:30 AM
Wrong. The NFL did not ban the use of it. They ASKED teams to not use it. They did NOT ban it.My bad. In that case, go on with your effort to line the pockets of a child molester.

Eleazar
08-10-2006, 11:34 AM
I'm all for tradition. But there's no way the league, the team, or the fanbase should capitulate toward child molestation to any degree no matter how small.

We already have enough leniency towards these subhuman parasites in the judicial system. We should reject it and anyone who supports or displays apathy towards it in any way.

F gary glitter. Maybe him losing these royalty moneys means he won't be able to afford a dictionary to slam his crank in when he's old and gray in prison. Hope so.

Fire Me Boy!
08-10-2006, 11:34 AM
My bad. In that case, go on with your effort to line the pockets of a child molester.
I haven't signed it. But I think that argument is ridiculous... I particularly like this nugget from the above blog. Have the NFL explain this:


3) What About Marv (Albert)?
Marv Albert is the lead play-by-play voice of Westwood One's NFL coverage, calls Monday Night Football games and has called every Super Bowl since 2002. This is true even though, in 1997, he pled guilty to misdemeanor sexual assault charges (after being charged with felony charges of forcible sodomy). Granted, his sexual crime was inflicted upon an adult, but Albert's role with the NFL is clearly larger than Glitter's, and Albert himself is far better known than Glitter. In fact, I had no idea who Glitter was before this story broke, and I never knew or bothered to learn who sung that song. It didn't matter.

greg63
08-10-2006, 11:35 AM
Wrong. The NFL did not ban the use of it. They ASKED teams to not use it. They did NOT ban it.

http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/living/15190244.htm

And a little interesting site... http://sports-law.blogspot.com/2006/06/gary-glitter-proof-law-and-morality-of.html


Well in that case the Faders will probably continue to use it. :p

Chiefnj
08-10-2006, 11:36 AM
Say what you will... I just threw this up because I found out about it. The people that want it base their opinion on the FACT that most people don't even know the name of the song, let along who sang it, that he's in prison or why he's in prison.

You want royalties going to a pedophile just so you can sing "Hey" after a TD?

jspchief
08-10-2006, 11:37 AM
I haven't signed it. But I think that argument is ridiculous... I particularly like this nugget from the above blog. Have the NFL explain this:


3) What About Marv (Albert)?
Marv Albert is the lead play-by-play voice of Westwood One's NFL coverage, calls Monday Night Football games and has called every Super Bowl since 2002. This is true even though, in 1997, he pled guilty to misdemeanor sexual assault charges (after being charged with felony charges of forcible sodomy). Granted, his sexual crime was inflicted upon an adult, but Albert's role with the NFL is clearly larger than Glitter's, and Albert himself is far better known than Glitter. In fact, I had no idea who Glitter was before this story broke, and I never knew or bothered to learn who sung that song. It didn't matter.So rather than the NFL being hypocritical, you think they should give all perverts a fair chance to make a buck? Awesome line of logic.

jspchief
08-10-2006, 11:39 AM
You want royalties going to a pedophile just so you can sing "Hey" after a TD?Exactly.

"I don't give a shit if I'm supporting child molesters, I just want to keep using the same stupid chant at a football game"

Fire Me Boy!
08-10-2006, 11:42 AM
Geez, guys... I'm gettin' railed on here because I posted a ****in' online petition that I didn't make. Some people, like it or not and agree with them or don't, think it's BS for the NFL to urge different music when there are criminals in the game, criminals providing music, etc.

So you don't want the NFL to pay chump change to Gary Glitter because he broke the law... what about millions upon millions paid to Randy Moss? Or Eric Warfield? Or the most of the Cowboys from the late 80s, early 90s?

Guys, I see the point about stopping the music. I also find it kind of ridiculous when you consider the fact that the NFL pays felons millions of dollars to play a game. They are making a statement because of the crime, but how is it worse to pay a nickel to play a song or $2 million to be a role model?

Bash away. I'm ready for the neg rep.

Fire Me Boy!
08-10-2006, 11:43 AM
I've said in the other thread, don't pay the guy and sing the ****ing song anyway.

Fire Me Boy!
08-10-2006, 11:44 AM
I recently heard someone suggest having the band on the field play the song -- it's mostly instrumental anyway and it gets the band involved again. To my knowledge (I could be wrong) you don't have to pay royalties when you're covering a song.

KC Dan
08-10-2006, 11:44 AM
Geez, guys... I'm gettin' railed on here because I posted a ****in' online petition that I didn't make. Some people, like it or not and agree with them or don't, think it's BS for the NFL to urge different music when there are criminals in the game, criminals providing music, etc.

So you don't want the NFL to pay chump change to Gary Glitter because he broke the law... what about millions upon millions paid to Randy Moss? Or Eric Warfield? Or the most of the Cowboys from the late 80s, early 90s?

Guys, I see the point about stopping the music. I also find it kind of ridiculous when you consider the fact that the NFL pays felons millions of dollars to play a game. They are making a statement because of the crime, but how is it worse to pay a nickel to play a song or $2 million to be a role model?

Bash away. I'm ready for the neg rep.
How about the fact that he spent 10 years in a British prison for child pornography years ago. That really stopped his music from playing in stadiums in the past didn't it. Stupid PC crap, its just a song.

Fire Me Boy!
08-10-2006, 11:46 AM
So rather than the NFL being hypocritical, you think they should give all perverts a fair chance to make a buck? Awesome line of logic.
I'm not arguing that we should stop using the song. I'm arguing that the NFL is making a moral judgment and not enforcing it universally.

Fire Me Boy!
08-10-2006, 11:46 AM
How about the fact that he spent 10 years in a British prison for child pornography years ago. That really stopped his music from playing in stadiums in the past didn't it. Stupid PC crap, its just a song.
Thank you.

Chiefnj
08-10-2006, 11:47 AM
Geez, guys... I'm gettin' railed on here because I posted a ****in' online petition that I didn't make. Some people, like it or not and agree with them or don't, think it's BS for the NFL to urge different music when there are criminals in the game, criminals providing music, etc.

So you don't want the NFL to pay chump change to Gary Glitter because he broke the law... what about millions upon millions paid to Randy Moss? Or Eric Warfield? Or the most of the Cowboys from the late 80s, early 90s?

Guys, I see the point about stopping the music. I also find it kind of ridiculous when you consider the fact that the NFL pays felons millions of dollars to play a game. They are making a statement because of the crime, but how is it worse to pay a nickel to play a song or $2 million to be a role model?

Bash away. I'm ready for the neg rep.

It is the Chiefs decision. They would rather not have money going to a PEDOPHILE. If you or others don't mind money going to someone who likes having sex with 12 year old Vietnamese girls just so you can sing a dumb ass little cheer then sign the petition.

As far as I know Moss isn't running around having sex with 12 year olds.

I find it ridiculous that you can't differentiate between child molestation and DUI or an argument with a meter maid.

Demonpenz
08-10-2006, 11:48 AM
Maybe we can just have a 3 year old crying on the jumbotron and still play the song.

jspchief
08-10-2006, 11:48 AM
I'm not arguing that we should stop using the song. I'm arguing that the NFL is making a moral judgment and not enforcing it universally.So they are hypocrites. I agree. But the petition isn't about getting Marv Alberts fired.

Eleazar
08-10-2006, 11:50 AM
It is the Chiefs decision. They would rather not have money going to a PEDOPHILE. If you or others don't mind money going to someone who likes having sex with 12 year old Vietnamese girls just so you can sing a dumb ass little cheer then sign the petition.

Actually, one of them was 11.


I find it ridiculous that you can't differentiate between child molestation and DUI or an argument with a meter maid.

THAT is the really deplorable part of this thread. As if there is some kind of moral equivalency between a traffic violation or having a bag of weed and molesting children.

Fire Me Boy!
08-10-2006, 11:52 AM
It is the Chiefs decision. They would rather not have money going to a PEDOPHILE. If you or others don't mind money going to someone who likes having sex with 12 year old Vietnamese girls just so you can sing a dumb ass little cheer then sign the petition.

As far as I know Moss isn't running around having sex with 12 year olds.

I find it ridiculous that you can't differentiate between child molestation and DUI or an argument with a meter maid.
No, I can. But a law is a law is a law. It's just as illegal to **** a 12-year-old as it is to drive drunk.

And if you can't learn to read then "your and idiot."

I'm not arguing that we should stop using the song. I'm arguing that the NFL is making a moral judgment and not enforcing it universally.

and...

I've said in the other thread, don't pay the guy and sing the ****ing song anyway.

As in... sing it without the music.

Fire Me Boy!
08-10-2006, 11:53 AM
So they are hypocrites. I agree. But the petition isn't about getting Marv Alberts fired.
And once again...

I haven't signed the petition!!!

I just posted it on here for those that might.

Fire Me Boy!
08-10-2006, 11:54 AM
Actually, one of them was 11.



THAT is the really deplorable part of this thread. As if there is some kind of moral equivalency between a traffic violation or having a bag of weed and molesting children.
The moral equivalency is what I'm taking issue with... I'm not even trying to say weed is equivalent to child rape. I'm saying they're both illegal. And it is my opinion, the NFL is in no position to make moral judgments. Make a judgment based on legality.

Eleazar
08-10-2006, 11:55 AM
The moral equivalency is what I'm taking issue with... the NFL is in no position to make moral judgments. Make a judgment based on legality.

So since a bank isn't in a position to make moral judgements either, you wouldn't object to them issuing a mortgage to Gary Glitter in the house next door to yours?

Moooo
08-10-2006, 11:56 AM
I know a lot of college bands play it. Does Glitterboy still get royalties if they play a recording of a college band?

Yes... I think it has to do with the fact that he's jailed in a country other than his residence, so technically he's not a criminal in one place but is in another...

Moooo, who could be very, very wrong.

KingPriest2
08-10-2006, 11:56 AM
Why did the NFL wait so long to discourage the use of this song.


In 1999, Glitter was convicted of child pornography offences classifying him as a sex offender under UK law. He went to live in Vũng Tàu in Vietnam in March 2005 and applied for permanent resident status. Glitter is currently in prison in Vietnam, convicted for sexually abusing two girls of 10 and 11 years of age, after being arrested on November 19, 2005.

Fire Me Boy!
08-10-2006, 11:58 AM
So since a bank isn't in a position to make moral judgements either, you wouldn't object to them issuing a mortgage to Gary Glitter in the house next door to yours?
I can say with no reservations that while I would not want him living next to me, he has every right to do that. And I have every right to move.

I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it. -- Voltaire

The bank is in no position to deny the mortgage, no.

jspchief
08-10-2006, 11:59 AM
The moral equivalency is what I'm taking issue with... I'm not even trying to say weed is equivalent to child rape. I'm saying they're both illegal. And it is my opinion, the NFL is in no position to make moral judgments. Make a judgment based on legality.That's ridiculous. So I suppose since the NFL allows guys with speeding tickets to play, they should also allow murderers to play?

There is a difference. There is a variance in degree, both legally and morally. How can you not understand that?

The reality is, you don't give a damn about what the NFL allows as long as you can still satisfy your selfish needs.. in this case, your need to prop up a silly tradition.

Fire Me Boy!
08-10-2006, 12:00 PM
Yes... I think it has to do with the fact that he's jailed in a country other than his residence, so technically he's not a criminal in one place but is in another...

Moooo, who could be very, very wrong.
Which brings up another issue... while I'm certainly not saying he's innocent -- I SAY HE'S PROBABLY VERY, VERY VERY GUILTY -- he was convicted in a place that has, shall we say, less than the highest of standards of justice.

jspchief
08-10-2006, 12:00 PM
Why did the NFL wait so long to discourage the use of this song.


In 1999, Glitter was convicted of child pornography offences classifying him as a sex offender under UK law. He went to live in Vũng Tàu in Vietnam in March 2005 and applied for permanent resident status. Glitter is currently in prison in Vietnam, convicted for sexually abusing two girls of 10 and 11 years of age, after being arrested on November 19, 2005.Who cares?

Wouldn't this fit into the category of "better late than never"?

tk13
08-10-2006, 12:01 PM
If there is no way around keeping him from getting royalties, then I don't have a problem with removing the Hey song.

That said, I do have to agree with the fact that he's always been a pedophile... I don't understand why the NFL suddenly waited to jump on this now.

KingPriest2
08-10-2006, 12:01 PM
Playing that song, still gives royalties to a Kidhumper.

No thanks.


I am trying to find it but I think he does not get royalities on it because of it.

jspchief
08-10-2006, 12:05 PM
That said, I do have to agree with the fact that he's always been a pedophile... I don't understand why the NFL suddenly waited to jump on this now.Maybe it's an increased effort to present a cleaner image.

Let's not pretend the NFL doesn't have say in what songs get played at their games. No doubt they alreay have regulations regarding the lyrical content. This is just taking the next step, with a song that has ties to a particularly disgusting issue.

KingPriest2
08-10-2006, 12:05 PM
Who cares?

Wouldn't this fit into the category of "better late than never"?


First

Should have been done then if they were going to do it Why now?
No one knows who performs the song.
So they don't know the srory with Glitter. ( they know now because of all the commution

Second

I read somewhere where he is not getting royalities on the song becsoue of this.

With that being said what is the big deal?

No one know who he is or that he sings that song
He is not getting royalties on the song (checking the infO)

The Big Lebowski
08-10-2006, 12:05 PM
The thing that makes me laugh is that there are a bunch of fans that think this is a "chiefs tradition". Give me a break. This is/was played at like 90% of sporting events. Im a 13 year season ticket holder to the Pats and they have always played this stupid song after a TD.

I say good riddance.

tk13
08-10-2006, 12:08 PM
The thing that makes me laugh is that there are a bunch of fans that think this is a "chiefs tradition". Give me a break. This is/was played at like 90% of sporting events. Im a 13 year season ticket holder to the Pats and they have always played this stupid song after a TD.

I say good riddance.
Eh, I think most people know it's more than a Chiefs tradition. Chiefs fans just do it the best. :)

Saulbadguy
08-10-2006, 12:08 PM
I don't really care one way or another. I'll miss the "We're gonna beat the **** out of you" chant, but i'll get used to whatever else is played.

I could care less if the royalties are paid to a mass murderer or a child molester. He never molested me.

Fire Me Boy!
08-10-2006, 12:08 PM
That's ridiculous. So I suppose since the NFL allows guys with speeding tickets to play, they should also allow murderers to play?

There is a difference. There is a variance in degree, both legally and morally. How can you not understand that?

The reality is, you don't give a damn about what the NFL allows as long as you can still satisfy your selfish needs.. in this case, your need to prop up a silly tradition.
My god... are you really that dense?

How many times do I have to say in a row that I believe he is guilty and that we shouldn't pay him, meaning we shouldn't play his recording? Four more? Nine? Should I PM it to you? Tatoo it on your forehead? Brand it on your ****ing foot?

I'll say it one more time, after that it's up to you to get it -- maybe Hooked on Phonics.

I do not support Gary Glitter. What he did was bad. He should not get paid by the NFL. He should not get paid by the Chiefs. He should not get paid any royalties for the use of Rock & Roll, Part 2. I did not, nor will I, sign the petition.

Eleazar
08-10-2006, 12:11 PM
That's ridiculous. So I suppose since the NFL allows guys with speeding tickets to play, they should also allow murderers to play?

There is a difference. There is a variance in degree, both legally and morally. How can you not understand that?

The reality is, you don't give a damn about what the NFL allows as long as you can still satisfy your selfish needs.. in this case, your need to prop up a silly tradition.

:clap:

jspchief
08-10-2006, 12:13 PM
First

Should have been done then if they were going to do it Why now?
Maybe they gave the guy the benefit of the doubt the first time. Maybe that was phase 1 of their "too disgusting to be associated with the NFL" program, and going on to rape two children put him in phase 2. Or maybe it just finally occured to someone in the NFL that it didn't present the most favorable image for the entity. Hell, blame it on Janet Jackson's boob.

Seriously, who cares that they were slow to react? Shouldn't you just appreciate that they finally decided to not promote this scumbag, regardless of how long it took to get to that point? Is your chant really so important that you'd cast aside moral outrage for a child molester?

jspchief
08-10-2006, 12:15 PM
I could care less if the royalties are paid to a mass murderer or a child molester. He never molested me.What a f*cking pathetic statement. Unfortunately, it sums up the state of mind of today's American.

"As long as I get mine, I don't care".

ferrarispider95
08-10-2006, 12:15 PM
Signature #299 by Herm Edwards

299. Herm Edwards Hey Chiefs fans! Its me, coach Herm. Just letting you know you dont need to worry about a TD song becase all we will be doing is kicking Field Goals. May I suggest the Soccer Anthem as our FG song? You know, the one that goes ole ole ole ole ole ole ole ole ole ole ole ole ole ole ole

The Big Lebowski
08-10-2006, 12:18 PM
Eh, I think most people know it's more than a Chiefs tradition. Chiefs fans just do it the best. :)

Most people here maybe. I was referring more to the people that have signed that petition.
:hmmm:

KC Dan
08-10-2006, 12:19 PM
The thing that makes me laugh is that there are a bunch of fans that think this is a "chiefs tradition". Give me a break. This is/was played at like 90% of sporting events. Im a 13 year season ticket holder to the Pats and they have always played this stupid song after a TD.

I say good riddance.
This coming from someone with a Bewitched style homo-sig.....
:)

tk13
08-10-2006, 12:22 PM
Maybe it's an increased effort to present a cleaner image.

Let's not pretend the NFL doesn't have say in what songs get played at their games. No doubt they alreay have regulations regarding the lyrical content. This is just taking the next step, with a song that has ties to a particularly disgusting issue.
Oh yeah, I'm sure the NFL probably put more pressure on the Chiefs than just a "Hey buddy, maybe sometimes I think maybe it would be a good idea not to play that song."

There's no doubt the NFL does the best job of presenting the cleanest image of any of the major sports. That's the one thing doesn't get mentioned about Tagliabue's legacy. Now to some people it's become the No Fun League because of it, but they've given the NFL a sterling image. People can be murderers, drug dealers, whatever, and it just kinda slides. Or even the steroid/HGH problem... that might be Tags greatest accomplishment to me, he let that get passed off on baseball.

I think part of it is just that so many people love football they're just more willing to look the other way about stuff like that.

Halfcan
08-10-2006, 12:27 PM
I am looking forward to a new song. BOOM screamed out by 70k fans, seems to be a good idea.

Saulbadguy
08-10-2006, 12:30 PM
What a f*cking pathetic statement. Unfortunately, it sums up the state of mind of today's American.

"As long as I get mine, I don't care".
That's the way I feel - I really don't care. I won't sugarcoat it by pretending I care what the guy did, I really don't. Why should I care?

teedubya
08-10-2006, 12:36 PM
And once again...

I haven't signed the petition!!!

I just posted it on here for those that might.


318. Fire Me Boy! Yeah! Lets pay Gary the Molester more money!!!


:shrug:

Eleazar
08-10-2006, 12:40 PM
Haha. A certain someone signed the petition for me. How classy.

Saulbadguy
08-10-2006, 12:42 PM
Haha. A certain someone signed the petition for me. How classy.
322. jspchief Hooray for Gary Glitter! Lets go rape us some kids!
321. Diane Holden
320. Saulbadguy I don't care, he didn't molest me!
319. Cochise I REFUSE to sign this petition and support this scumbag!
318. Fire Me Boy! Yeah! Lets pay Gary the Molester more money!!!


Yeah, really funny.

Fire Me Boy!
08-10-2006, 12:42 PM
Apparently someone's signed it for me, too.

jspchief
08-10-2006, 12:45 PM
Anyone that didn't see that coming?

Donger
08-10-2006, 12:45 PM
323. Redrum_69 your mom was a child molestor.

ROFL

Sorry, not exactly funny subject matter, but come on.

Brock
08-10-2006, 12:54 PM
I wonder if they're taking the Who off their playlist also.

Mr. Kotter
08-10-2006, 01:18 PM
322. jspchief Hooray for Gary Glitter! Lets go rape us some kids!
321. Diane Holden
320. Saulbadguy I don't care, he didn't molest me!
319. Cochise I REFUSE to sign this petition and support this scumbag!
318. Fire Me Boy! Yeah! Lets pay Gary the Molester more money!!!


Yeah, really funny.

It wasn't me, so TC has probably been busy....have you found the right time to post that pic yet. Heh.

KC Kings
08-10-2006, 02:28 PM
Why did the NFL wait so long to discourage the use of this song.


In 1999, Glitter was convicted of child pornography offences classifying him as a sex offender under UK law. He went to live in Vũng Tàu in Vietnam in March 2005 and applied for permanent resident status. Glitter is currently in prison in Vietnam, convicted for sexually abusing two girls of 10 and 11 years of age, after being arrested on November 19, 2005.

They were VC, it doesn't count.

morphius
08-10-2006, 02:45 PM
They are going to change the song, I would like to suggest that after they finish the song everyone just do the chant once, "We're gonna beat the hell out of you...". Could actually seem pretty sweet.

Lzen
08-10-2006, 02:51 PM
I wouldn't have a problem with them keeping the song if I knew that he would not receive royalties. Unfortunately, I don't think that's possible. I will never, ever knowingly support a child molester. And if you choose to, shame on you.

tk13
08-10-2006, 03:02 PM
They are going to change the song, I would like to suggest that after they finish the song everyone just do the chant once, "We're gonna beat the hell out of you...". Could actually seem pretty sweet.
It would probably actually take some practice, but I think it could work with the "Boom" song. "Boom, here comes the boom... we're going to beat the hell outta you". Something like that. It would be much faster, but I think you could probably make it work... I haven't actually listened to that song in a while though, I could be remembering it wrong. And it'd sound a lot better than "the boys from the South" or however that lyric goes after the "Boom!" line.

tburg
08-10-2006, 03:29 PM
dont mean to piss on anyone parade but no amount of names is going to change anything...

htismaqe
08-10-2006, 03:33 PM
It would probably actually take some practice, but I think it could work with the "Boom" song. "Boom, here comes the boom... we're going to beat the hell outta you". Something like that. It would be much faster, but I think you could probably make it work... I haven't actually listened to that song in a while though, I could be remembering it wrong. And it'd sound a lot better than "the boys from the South" or however that lyric goes after the "Boom!" line.

See. All it takes is a little creativity brewing under those mullets... :D