Although I don't have a dog... I can tell you that my cat Augie loves her dry Science Diet chow with a tiny bit of olive oil added to it, as well as a few crumbled up barbecue potato chips mixed in... is this unusual??

Has it really gotten to the point where you have to end your post with a disclaimer??

I'm not saying the 4 releases I chose to mention aren't good either, just at the bottom of the list.  And to be honest with you, I didn't even consider the 'Ripper' era releases...oops!!  Guess that goes to show you where I rate Jugulator and Demolition...

		Deep Freeze wrote:
		LEAST favorite? Hmm.. Well, I guess Demolition and Jugulator followed by Turbo. Not sure I have a fourth.  Not that any of those albums are bad, I just do not care for Ripper. And before we get all the Ripper-goons too excited, it is NOT because he cannot sing or anything like that!! He is a GREAT vocalist!...For some other band! The two albums I mention are just not Priest to me. They are like listening to some Priest cover band. That is strictly an OPINION and not meant to start a "Ripper is God" war!     (Quoting Message by ronhartsell from Sunday, January 11, 2009 9:32:50 AM)   ronhartsell wrote:   DF, I wouldn't play DOTF at my 'man-gatherings' either (poker night!!)...out of curiosity, what would be your 4 least fav Priest albums??      Deep Freeze wrote:   OY!! Thank you jimmy AND Ron! I was starting to feel as though I was drowning!! HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Adriana, I think Ron was best at explaining it. Although, I am not in full agreement with regard to playing  DotF at my "man gatherings". I really love the music. I have never been so focused on lyrics that I allow a good tune to go unplayed! In fact, that is a BIG reason we recorded Jawbreaker and Eat me Alive! They are great songs and they play well for us. I mean, the songs are great for our sound and my vocal limitations. It has been so long now that I really do not recall how we even got to this point in the conversation! I don't remember what started this! HA!!!!!!!!!! Suffice it to say that Eat me Alive, Jawbreaker and Ram it Down really do speak for themselves from a sexual innuendo postion... Oh MAN! Foot heading towards mouth again!! MUST SHUT UP!!!!!!!   HAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!! Edited at: Sunday, January 11, 2009 9:20:59 AM Edited at: Sunday, January 11, 2009 9:40:38 AM

OH!!!!!!!!! FOUL! FOUL! FOUL!!!!!! HB, you are BAD!!!!!! HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!

		Head banger wrote:
		look on the bright side, beter a foot than the alternative!!! HA!!!      Deep Freeze wrote: OY!! Thank you jimmy AND Ron! I was starting to feel as though I was drowning!! HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Adriana, I think Ron was best at explaining it. Although, I am not in full agreement with regard to playing  DotF at my "man gatherings". I really love the music. I have never been so focused on lyrics that I allow a good tune to go unplayed! In fact, that is a BIG reason we recorded Jawbreaker and Eat me Alive! They are great songs and they play well for us. I mean, the songs are great for our sound and my vocal limitations. It has been so long now that I really do not recall how we even got to this point in the conversation! I don't remember what started this! HA!!!!!!!!!! Suffice it to say that Eat me Alive, Jawbreaker and Ram it Down really do speak for themselves from a sexual innuendo postion... Oh MAN! Foot heading towards mouth again!! MUST SHUT UP!!!!!!!   HAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!! Edited at: Sunday, January 11, 2009 9:20:59 AM

Right (as usual) IMP! And great to see you again!!

Jimmy, I'm afraid you have misunderstood me. Or perhaps I was simply not clear in what I wrote. When I heard that the Band was planning an album based on Nostradamus, I had an idea of what to expect from it. I was not surprised by the way it was written and presented, although I am still a bit confused over the opera- stuff. Perhaps that is not as big a surprise to others?  I don't know.

As for the comment on gay sex, I'm afraid you are reading far too much into that. I was only saying that it seems the Band (and Rob in particular) were rather fixated on gay sex, and sex in general, during that era. I have NO idea what to expect from the next album, if that is what you mean. I simply point out that Nostradamus is pretty much just what I thought it would be.  

I am not sure if we are both speaking the same language, or at least thinking along the same lines, but I can assure you there was nothing insidious about my post.  If you wish to discuss gay sex, I am sure there are Threads wherein you will find more than enough opinions and comments. I am not all that 'learned" on the subject. As a matter of fact, I am not sure I am the right person to even discuss the heterosexual version.....HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

		jimmyjames wrote:
		So going back to your original post you feel that gay sex and 15th century seers are themes that we can expect from Priest?      Deep Freeze wrote: It was meant in illustrative reference to the "theme" of the album as it compares to Nostradamus. Nothing more. As for eluding you, strat...well, most things seem to... HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!      jimmyjames wrote:  Yeah, the album itself was not really the point of the post. It was more about those idiot fans of the band that sometimes post on the site. Just used the album as an example to illustrate their mentality. Seeing it played in its entirety would be good but i don't think there would be much of a market for it, hence the comment about small venues. One question. What made you bring up gay sex?   (Quoting Message by Deep Freeze from Saturday, January 10, 2009 10:59:41 AM)   Deep Freeze wrote:   Oh, I did not mean to suggest that DotF is the only one! It's just that songs like Jawbreaker and Eat Me Alive come to mind. That's all. As I mentioned, I have no problem with the new album. Don't hate it, don't love it. It is fine with me. It is what it is. Personally, I was not expecting a Painkiller II. In fact, Nostradamus is pretty much what I figured it would be.      adrianaec_88 wrote:   I agree in what you said Freeze, it's a good album but is far from being one of their best.... why did you say "Rob went through his "gay sex" phase with Defenders"?? (I mean why do you say it was in Defenders and not other album)      Deep Freeze wrote:   I understand your point, jimmy. Personally, I like the album but I have been saying since day one that it is not my favorite. Like you, I do not simply rave on everything the Band produces. Not a big fan of Turbo at all. Not afraid to admit it, either. Nostradamus is a valiant effort at something that , eventually, most of the "greats" attempt. The Wall, Tommy...you get the idea. I suppose, in the Band's defense, that it is exactly the kind of subject matter we should expect from them. I mean, Rob already went through his "gay sex" phase with Defenders, right? I do not rate Nostradamus in my top five but I have no problem with it. There are some great songs and the Band accomplished exactly what they wanted to with it. It is supposed to emote a dark, forboding feeling and it succeeds. As for the quality of it on a song by song basis, I feel Stained Class, Painkiller and the other "classics" far exceed it. As for playing it in it's entirety, I do believe that it will happen. They have said they want to and, let's face it, if they were worried about selling out arenas, they would have changed their style a LONG time ago. Perhaps went to screaming and indecipherable growling? I don't know. The thing is, they are at a point where they do not have to play to fifty thousand people in order to survive or remain relevant. They are far beyond that. We will see a Nostradamus ONLY show. Count on it. Edited at: Saturday, January 10, 2009 5:00:17 PM

Right (as usual) IMP! And great to see you again!!

Jimmy, I'm afraid you have misunderstood me. Or perhaps I was simply not clear in what I wrote. When I heard that the Band was planning an album based on Nostradamus, I had an idea of what to expect from it. I was not surprised by the way it was written and presented, although I am still a bit confused over the opera- stuff. Perhaps that is not as big a surprise to others?  I don't know.

As for the comment on gay sex, I'm afraid you are reading far too much into that. I was only saying that it seems the Band (and Rob in particular) were rather fixated on gay sex, and sex in general, during that era. I have NO idea what to expect from the next album, if that is what you mean. I simply point out that Nostradamus is pretty much just what I thought it would be.  

I am not sure if we are both speaking the same language, or at least thinking along the same lines, but I can assure you there was nothing insidious about my post.  If you wish to discuss gay sex, I am sure there are Threads wherein you will find more than enough opinions and comments. I am not all that 'learned" on the subject. As a matter of fact, I am not sure I am the right person to even discuss the heterosexual version.....HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

		jimmyjames wrote:
		So going back to your original post you feel that gay sex and 15th century seers are themes that we can expect from Priest?      Deep Freeze wrote: It was meant in illustrative reference to the "theme" of the album as it compares to Nostradamus. Nothing more. As for eluding you, strat...well, most things seem to... HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!      jimmyjames wrote:  Yeah, the album itself was not really the point of the post. It was more about those idiot fans of the band that sometimes post on the site. Just used the album as an example to illustrate their mentality. Seeing it played in its entirety would be good but i don't think there would be much of a market for it, hence the comment about small venues. One question. What made you bring up gay sex?   (Quoting Message by Deep Freeze from Saturday, January 10, 2009 10:59:41 AM)   Deep Freeze wrote:   Oh, I did not mean to suggest that DotF is the only one! It's just that songs like Jawbreaker and Eat Me Alive come to mind. That's all. As I mentioned, I have no problem with the new album. Don't hate it, don't love it. It is fine with me. It is what it is. Personally, I was not expecting a Painkiller II. In fact, Nostradamus is pretty much what I figured it would be.      adrianaec_88 wrote:   I agree in what you said Freeze, it's a good album but is far from being one of their best.... why did you say "Rob went through his "gay sex" phase with Defenders"?? (I mean why do you say it was in Defenders and not other album)      Deep Freeze wrote:   I understand your point, jimmy. Personally, I like the album but I have been saying since day one that it is not my favorite. Like you, I do not simply rave on everything the Band produces. Not a big fan of Turbo at all. Not afraid to admit it, either. Nostradamus is a valiant effort at something that , eventually, most of the "greats" attempt. The Wall, Tommy...you get the idea. I suppose, in the Band's defense, that it is exactly the kind of subject matter we should expect from them. I mean, Rob already went through his "gay sex" phase with Defenders, right? I do not rate Nostradamus in my top five but I have no problem with it. There are some great songs and the Band accomplished exactly what they wanted to with it. It is supposed to emote a dark, forboding feeling and it succeeds. As for the quality of it on a song by song basis, I feel Stained Class, Painkiller and the other "classics" far exceed it. As for playing it in it's entirety, I do believe that it will happen. They have said they want to and, let's face it, if they were worried about selling out arenas, they would have changed their style a LONG time ago. Perhaps went to screaming and indecipherable growling? I don't know. The thing is, they are at a point where they do not have to play to fifty thousand people in order to survive or remain relevant. They are far beyond that. We will see a Nostradamus ONLY show. Count on it. Edited at: Saturday, January 10, 2009 5:00:17 PM

Right (as usual) IMP! And great to see you again!!

Jimmy, I'm afraid you have misunderstood me. Or perhaps I was simply not clear in what I wrote. When I heard that the Band was planning an album based on Nostradamus, I had an idea of what to expect from it. I was not surprised by the way it was written and presented, although I am still a bit confused over the opera- stuff. Perhaps that is not as big a surprise to others?  I don't know.

As for the comment on gay sex, I'm afraid you are reading far too much into that. I was only saying that it seems the Band (and Rob in particular) were rather fixated on gay sex, and sex in general, during that era. I have NO idea what to expect from the next album, if that is what you mean. I simply point out that Nostradamus is pretty much just what I thought it would be.  

I am not sure if we are both speaking the same language, or at least thinking along the same lines, but I can assure you there was nothing insidious about my post.  If you wish to discuss gay sex, I am sure there are Threads wherein you will find more than enough opinions and comments. I am not all that 'learned" on the subject. As a matter of fact, I am not sure I am the right person to even discuss the heterosexual version.....HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

		jimmyjames wrote:
		So going back to your original post you feel that gay sex and 15th century seers are themes that we can expect from Priest?      Deep Freeze wrote: It was meant in illustrative reference to the "theme" of the album as it compares to Nostradamus. Nothing more. As for eluding you, strat...well, most things seem to... HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!      jimmyjames wrote:  Yeah, the album itself was not really the point of the post. It was more about those idiot fans of the band that sometimes post on the site. Just used the album as an example to illustrate their mentality. Seeing it played in its entirety would be good but i don't think there would be much of a market for it, hence the comment about small venues. One question. What made you bring up gay sex?   (Quoting Message by Deep Freeze from Saturday, January 10, 2009 10:59:41 AM)   Deep Freeze wrote:   Oh, I did not mean to suggest that DotF is the only one! It's just that songs like Jawbreaker and Eat Me Alive come to mind. That's all. As I mentioned, I have no problem with the new album. Don't hate it, don't love it. It is fine with me. It is what it is. Personally, I was not expecting a Painkiller II. In fact, Nostradamus is pretty much what I figured it would be.      adrianaec_88 wrote:   I agree in what you said Freeze, it's a good album but is far from being one of their best.... why did you say "Rob went through his "gay sex" phase with Defenders"?? (I mean why do you say it was in Defenders and not other album)      Deep Freeze wrote:   I understand your point, jimmy. Personally, I like the album but I have been saying since day one that it is not my favorite. Like you, I do not simply rave on everything the Band produces. Not a big fan of Turbo at all. Not afraid to admit it, either. Nostradamus is a valiant effort at something that , eventually, most of the "greats" attempt. The Wall, Tommy...you get the idea. I suppose, in the Band's defense, that it is exactly the kind of subject matter we should expect from them. I mean, Rob already went through his "gay sex" phase with Defenders, right? I do not rate Nostradamus in my top five but I have no problem with it. There are some great songs and the Band accomplished exactly what they wanted to with it. It is supposed to emote a dark, forboding feeling and it succeeds. As for the quality of it on a song by song basis, I feel Stained Class, Painkiller and the other "classics" far exceed it. As for playing it in it's entirety, I do believe that it will happen. They have said they want to and, let's face it, if they were worried about selling out arenas, they would have changed their style a LONG time ago. Perhaps went to screaming and indecipherable growling? I don't know. The thing is, they are at a point where they do not have to play to fifty thousand people in order to survive or remain relevant. They are far beyond that. We will see a Nostradamus ONLY show. Count on it. Edited at: Saturday, January 10, 2009 5:00:17 PM

I agree in what you said Freeze, it's a good album but is far from being one of their best.... why did you say "Rob went through his "gay sex" phase with Defenders"?? (I mean why do you say it was in Defenders and not other album)

		Deep Freeze wrote:
		I understand your point, jimmy. Personally, I like the album but I have been saying since day one that it is not my favorite. Like you, I do not simply rave on everything the Band produces. Not a big fan of Turbo at all. Not afraid to admit it, either. Nostradamus is a valiant effort at something that , eventually, most of the "greats" attempt. The Wall, Tommy...you get the idea. I suppose, in the Band's defense, that it is exactly the kind of subject matter we should expect from them. I mean, Rob already went through his "gay sex" phase with Defenders, right? I do not rate Nostradamus in my top five but I have no problem with it. There are some great songs and the Band accomplished exactly what they wanted to with it. It is supposed to emote a dark, forboding feeling and it succeeds. As for the quality of it on a song by song basis, I feel Stained Class, Painkiller and the other "classics" far exceed it. As for playing it in it's entirety, I do believe that it will happen. They have said they want to and, let's face it, if they were worried about selling out arenas, they would have changed their style a LONG time ago. Perhaps went to screaming and indecipherable growling? I don't know. The thing is, they are at a point where they do not have to play to fifty thousand people in order to survive or remain relevant. They are far beyond that. We will see a Nostradamus ONLY show. Count on it.

He thinks he does, and we dont want to disapoint him. Oh, and dont tell him that santa isnt real either.

		Soylentgreen4u wrote:
		WHOA!...WHOA!!!...YOU LOST CONTROL???...AS IF TO SUGGEST WHAT?...YOU EVER HAD CONTROL?...      Deep Freeze wrote: You know, I ranted about this Travolta thing this morning and somehow, it morphed into this latest conversation. Just how the heck did I lose control here? HA!!!!!!!!!!!!

ARGHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!! If there ever was a valid reason to hate the US... Its you!!! Begone, satan of gridirion, demon of lame sports!!! Begone!!!

		Deep Freeze wrote:
		HA!!!!!!!!!!! You see?? I had NO idea he had left the states! It was all a marketing ploy, NOT a true sports move. The guy was supposed to bring soccer (HA!) to the forefront here in the US but, as with ALL that have tried previously, he failed and now he has crawled back to his Euro fans where he will be appreciated.  SOCCER is NOT a sport! BWWWAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!      _strat_ wrote: ? But hes gone back to Europe. I think I heard he plays in Italy now... In any case, it really isnt about his skills as a football (stop using that stupid "soccer" word, damn you!) player. He and his Spice Girl wife are just... Well, celebrities. Nobody is quite sure why are they so big (cause she is nothing special, and he is not even close to being the best player for years), but they are, so we just have to deal with them... Oh, and why arent moms and kids real sport fans? If they like real football, they are better sport fans than you...      Deep Freeze wrote: Oh, we do strat! The media really work hard at trying to legitimize that guy. FORTUNATELY, he is just like those that came before him...ZERO. Soccer  is just NOT interesting to the American sports fan. Moms and kids maybe, but not true sports fans.      _strat_ wrote: Be glad that real football is not so popular with you guys... If it were, you would hear all about Beckhams make up on the TV!      Head banger wrote: I think it shows just how interested we are with ceebrity, rather than real things.  some NFL guy was arested again last night, driving drunk their must be something of real importance going on.  but we dont see news on it.      Deep Freeze wrote: OK, I can stay silent NO longer! I realize I am setting myself up for more accusations of insensitivity and selfishness but this MUST be said; WHAT THE HELL is SO FRIGGIN IMPORTANT about Jett Travolta?!?!?!?!?!??  For the love of all that is holy!! WHY is this crap splattered all over the news and TV?? Specials on this kid and his "tragic' death!! SO FREAKIN WHAT??? Kids die EVERYDAY! Lots of them. All just as meaningful to their families as this kid was to Vinnie Barbarino!!!... WHY is it that this particular child is SO friggin relevant to the earth that we need hours and HOURS of coverage on him?? Was he closing in on a cure for cancer?? Was he involved in peace negotiations in the Middle East? Did he discover a formula that will fix the US financial crisis?  NO!!!! He was the son of an actor. Nothing more. His death is no more meaningful than any other child's. They are all extremely tragic, as are most passings. I had to endure TWO hours of news last night with this kid as the "top story", then the Princess watches some Hollywood insider show that dedicated another hour and a half to him! Every commercial break went something like this, "When we return, more on this tragic loss. We will talk with the Travolta's dog to get his take, then we have an exclusive with a guy that was peeing at a gas station five blocks from the scene.." AAAARRRRRRGGGGHHH!!!! I understand that John Travolta is a movie star. I actually like the guy. Great actor. But as far as I am concerned, his kid is no more important than anyone else's and all this sensationalism over it is sickening.

Tell me about it Vail, I hate water marks, yes that's what pisses me of .. lol


Hi everyone, I just returned home, stoping to say Hi, how is everybody doing?

		Vaillant 3.0 wrote:
		The lettering on this pic pisses me off. Sure...one needs to advertise the source of the pic, but does it REALLY have to be written all over the face of the one being photographed?!? And in this case, it just HAD to be GLENN!!!!!!!!! WHY??!?!?