Hecto.

Hector Rivera - I surely would want to watch a Pavarotti video than one about trump. Aaah refuge.

@@angelovitale7020 x

%trytnti foyrdntimplptontimp djztmntp

Add

Величайший тенор! На голову выше остальных теноров, включая и Карузо и др. Какая лёгкость и полётность - аж дух захватывает!

Bravo, well done Mattew!

Maybe it’s unusual for a pre-teen, but why should a person of any age not be inspired and enchanted by this beauty? I’m in my mid fifties now but I’ve experienced huge enjoyment in listening to music from across the WHOLE spectrum (and I mean classical opera to death metal and everything between and beyond 😂) since I was a kid. This open mindedness to diverse genres has totally enriched my life and I wouldn’t have had it any other way! Bravo to your pre-teen self!

Me too... so much!

Everybody overlooks the instrumentalist on these, but, you're right, there are two outstanding performances here.

these two turned in some beautiful sessions, they seemed to inspire each other, and of course, the audience. Always.

Cynthia Chase yeah, the singer’s not bad either

Really a masterpiece, the best version of grand piano of this aria with Pavarotti

🎩🎩🎩🎩🎩🎩🎩🎩🎩🎩🎩🎩🎩🎩🎩🎩🎩🎩

Vissi d,arte lyrics

An accusation is merely a comprehensible collection of words which indicate, under the assumption that they are true, that someone is guilty. An accusation cannot be given more value as a class of a statement, as an accusation merely means it belongs to the set of comprehensible and not internally inconsistent statements (an inconsistent statement would be for example: 'He is innocent because he killed {insert name}') and happens also to 'accuse' someone. The fact that a statement belongs to such a set implies neither that it is true, nor that it is false, or indeterminate like the liar's paradox. Without any substance attached to it, the statement is a little better (easier for humans to read) than words generated using a random number generation engine. An accusation only has (limited) value as an introduction to substance, which can be used to logically deduce the truth/falsehood of the subject. Let us say the statement is 'XYZ killed ABC', this is an accusation, however, looking at this statement reveals no information about either XYZ, ABC, or whether it is true, false, a paradox, e.t.c. Now, we can go ahead and say: this accusation has brought to our attention the question 'did XYZ kill ABC?', now the substance, which follows the statement could, for example, be evidence for and against, e.t.c. Unfortunately, our world is too complex and there is too little evidence to calculate things logically (in addition we lack consistent and perfectly accurate theories of physics and we have problems related to Goedel's theorem). Then we must follow a non-logical style of thought, known as 'common sense', designed to fill in large gaps of information we don't know but assume to be probable. Related to criminal accusations in particular, we have a special branch of this system which is much more strict, in order to try and get closer to what would be the ideal [in many people's eyes] - a completely logical way of things. Because of the huge error that arises from many factors, a decision was made in the criminal justice world, that it is better to let some guilty people run free than to have some innocent people punished. This is the basis for the what we generally know as the 'innocent until proven guilty' system. In order for an accusation to be of substance, the person accused must be proven to be (IMPORTANT) GUIlTY BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT. Failure of such a proof reduces the value of the accusation to zero in the criminal justice world. The common sense world is even more prone to error (we can't even agree what is common sense), however, even according to the vague ideas of 'common sense', an accusation of Levine in sexually assaulting someone is merely an internally consistent statement. Just as good as using random.org a number of times until you happen to end up with a comprehensible statement. I have checked, and am disgusted to find no 'substance' to any of the four accusations. If there exists such 'substance' then it would be nice if someone here could send me some reputable source. Until then, I must assume (under the system of common sense) that the modern court justice is lagging behind by a couple of hundred years (I think we are still at the witch stage). One can only hope that the justice world will not completely return back to medieval-style court. The only worse thing is if you will return to medieval-style court, but without any faith - this guarantees the complete unpredictability of how this court is going to operate. I don't like to be negative, but it isn't infeasible to say that we will perhaps even out-do previous systems. Of course, now it would be unthinkable that you guys (this is not a reference to OP, against whom I have not much yet, but rather a general statement to those who will inevitably oppose this text, some without even reading all of it) will be burning these 'witches', but again the Jews knew bad times during the years leading up to Shoah (the Holocaust), but couldn't even imagine exactly what would happen to most of them. I would be surprised, but it would be in-line with what I said if you will soon be building concentration camps for these 'witches'. I don't want to know what the devious minds of today will be able to do there with all the modern technology in place. Finally, for any reasonable person this should be obvious, but considering that unfortunately not all (or even most) people belong to this category, I have to add the following statement for the less versed in logical thought: In my text I do not discuss the subject of whether sexual assault is good or bad, this may lead some weak logical thinkers to assume that I am 'for' sexual assault (the mechanism of this style of thought is a big mystery), I will now state for this particular class of people: I consider this crime to be extremely traumatic for the victim, modern society actually demeans the trauma of this by putting it in the same line as 'hurt feelings'. Finally, I am completely and fully against this crime.

I'm from Seattle. I had friends in opera and I heard the same things, also before 1990. Involving victims under 10, even. It wasn't even an open secret, it was common knowledge, and I heard there were multiple payouts to parents. The Met has a black stain on its reputation forever

+William Oconnor Now it is seventeen, so a few more stupid people have come along. I actually suspect many thumbs down are directed at Levine for reasons unknown.

Eldovio Desanfernandino ...Domingo is better

Domingo is better as Baritono....you have to compare Big Luciano..with Jussy Byorling...Alfredo Krauss..Beniamino Gigli...