From: owner-angry-psychos-digest@smoe.org (angry-psychos-digest) To: angry-psychos-digest@smoe.org Subject: angry-psychos-digest V7 #60 Reply-To: angry-psychos@smoe.org Sender: owner-angry-psychos-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-angry-psychos-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk X-To-Unsubscribe: Send mail to "angry-psychos-digest-request@smoe.org" X-To-Unsubscribe: with "unsubscribe" as the body. angry-psychos-digest Wednesday, February 27 2002 Volume 07 : Number 060 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: philosophical blahblah (renamed from the bitching-about-survey thread) ["j." ] NPR:Who Am I? ["j." ] Re: philosophical blahblah (renamed from the bitching-about-survey thread) ["j." ] Re: Conjure One release date ["j." ] conjure one ["j." ] NPR- philosophical blahblah Go Navy!-NPR ["Bad Bender" ] Re: philosophical blahblah (renamed from the bitching-about-survey thread) [Derek Benton ] Re: philosophical blahs-tales from the crypt ["Dee" ] WILD on KZON right now... [Cyberfan Corporation ] NPR: NPR tag reminder [Miharu ] Re: Who me? [LiveThruThisVow@aol.com] Re: philosophical blahblah (renamed from the bitching-about-survey thread) ["John A, Bell" ] NPR Re: philosophical blahblah (renamed from the bitching-about-survey thread) ["John A, Bell" ] NPR philosophical blahblah ["Bad Bender" ] Re: NPR philosophical blahblah ["Jess" ] Re: NPR philosophical blahblah ["Andrea E. Jackman" ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 00:48:25 -0600 From: "j." Subject: Re: philosophical blahblah (renamed from the bitching-about-survey thread) On Mon, Feb 25, 2002 at 10:40:40AM -0500, John A, Bell wrote: > But... but... *sniff* I already AM Republican!!!! ;) > > Seriously. Without a basis, a standard with which to determine what is good > nd what is evil, what is right and what is wrong, all things lose any sense > of morality (apart from law, which is subjectively made by men and thus has Law has a much more pragmatic view of things, however -- it focuses not on whether an action is right or wrong, but rather what action can be taken without penalty, and the penalties if an illegal action is taken. > no basis, either). Is this honestly how you believe it to be? Is it okay to > rape and kill someone because the rapist thinks it's good and right to do > so? Is it legal when/where it took place? I'm certainly not endorsing rape; it's something I would be against due to my particular understanding of justice -- I accord others the same rights they accord me and that would obviously be crossing the line there -- but I refuse to assign the act of rape itself an innnate, universal value of wrong or right. > > -jb > [snip] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 01:00:36 -0600 From: "j." Subject: Re: philosophical blahblah Go Navy! On Mon, Feb 25, 2002 at 01:48:36PM -0500, sp00k@poe.org wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > Sent: Monday, February 25, 2002 12:00 PM > Subject: Re: philosophical blahblah (renamed from the bitching-about-survey thread) > > > > >Hell yeah its ok to rape and kill , if > > you are in the Army. Be all you can be. Visit strange and exotic places , > > meet new and different people, then shoot them. > > > Killing, yes, that is part of combat, it is authorized... rape is not. Depends on the time and place. Read your Bible or any historical text (note that I didn't say any OTHER historical text); you will notice that traditionally, women were included in the spoils, in the phrase 'to the victor go the spoils'. > From what I read, the people of Afghanastan are pretty happy that > for what ever reason, we drove out the taliban. There are countless > stories about how horrible it was there before we bombed the hell > out of the place, and how happy the MAJORITY are that we did > so, FIANALY. > There have been a lot of things that have happened even this early in our occupation that have caused me to question the "righteousness" of our cause. I think that we Americans have allowed ourselves to be swayed by emotional rhetoric and posturing and misled by Dumbya and his aides. As far as the people of Afghanistan being happy -- well, that's a nice side effect, and great propaganda, but I'm not convinced we have any business being there in the first place. > More importantly, we reamain at war, here is a little something for > everybody to ponder if you have already forgotten, this is not old news, > just information that is not discussed much in the media, but I guess it > deserves mention in this thread. . Hate to quibble over semantics, but this doesn't exactly fit the traditional definition of war. In this case, the use of the word 'war' bothers me because of its propaganda value. I'm not trying to start ANOTHER huge thread on this list, but to me bombing the hell out of a tiny nation poorer than any single one of our states or even a protectorate like Puerto Rico, suffering minimal (or no, can somebody confirm this?) military losses, doesn't exactly qualify as a war to me. It's a one-sided fight with a manhunt thrown in for good measure, at best. [snip] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 01:32:41 -0600 From: "j." Subject: NPR:Who Am I? AT, here's something you might find amusing, I did: http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2002/2/22/15413/7829 - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2002 02:12:08 -0800 From: "AT" Subject: NPR:Who Am I? Yesterday I watched the Fight Club on teevee. Then I went to the store. Then I fed my dog. After that I helped train foriegn police the latest cattle prod techniques. Then I helped blow up a childrens hospital, a sewage treatment plant,and a few schools full of kids.Then I helped with some kidnappings and some really nifty grand-scale thefts. And I havent smoked crack in over a month. Who am I? An American tax payer. AT - ------------------------------ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 01:46:56 -0600 From: "j." Subject: Re: philosophical blahblah (renamed from the bitching-about-survey thread) Derek, I share that lack of respect for the Armed Forces, in a sense. I respect the fact that the men and women -- the grunts -- believe that that's what they're doing and are willing to do so, but you have to remember that traditionally a soldier is supposed to more or less blindly follow orders. I for one do not believe that even half the times any section of any branch of our armed forces is deployed, they are on a mission that will, in actuality, "ensure freedom". Call me cynical, but I believe that most military actions are taken for the sole or main purpose of furthering a governmental or corporate (yes, corporate, the government can definitely be bought) agenda. So in that sense, yes, I do not respect the armed forces. They are allowing themselves to be used. Whether they are aware of what they are doing or not, they are still complicit as far as I am concerned. As far as 'doing things about it', isn't that what we are doing now? By discussing it and making it clear to others that they're not the only ones with doubts? Sure there is more that I can do, but suppose I'm not willing to do it? Suppose I'm not willing to risk whatever consequences might be in place for a dissenter? How does that render me less worthy of respect in your opinion? It could be argued that you are doing the exact same thing to further the government and armed forces that I am to detract from them -- nothing. Aside from talking. [snip] > Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2002 14:12:59 -0500 > From: Derek Benton > Subject: Re: philosophical blahblah (renamed from the bitching-about-survey thread) > > Hmm, I can't help but pick up a bit of sarcasm in your response. > > I'm hoping I'm misreading your intent in your e-mail, because to me it > sounds like you have a SERIOUS lack of respect for the Army, and/or Armed > Forces. > > Now, if we're bitching about the Gov't, then there are some things I > tend to agree with as far as what's screwed up about it. But its better than > just about any other Gov't established in the world, and there are two > things you can do about it, leave the country or take pro-active steps to > change it. Yeah, I guess you have the right to bitch and moan, but I can't > respect that without action. Just the way I am. But the men and women giving > their lives to protect me and you I think deserve a little more respect then > what I'm perceiving from your e-mail. Again, I may be misreading it, so I'll > say no more save to re-iterate that I hope that I am misreading it. > > Respectfully, > Derek [snip] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 01:50:45 -0600 From: "j." Subject: Re: more philosophical blahs.. Media-monger, war, alien concepts... Ah, McCarthyism at its finest. Dee, would you by any chance know where I could find a transcript of that speech? I'd like to read it for myself if possible. [snip] > Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2002 12:08:37 -0800 > From: "Dee" > Subject: Re: more philosophical blahs.. Media-monger, war, alien concepts... > > Media-monger that I am, I couldn't resist this thread. Not to politicize the > list, but Attorney General John Ashcroft essentially testified in front of > congress six weeks ago that any Americans who disagree with his approach to > how the Gov't handles the business of this war is "aiding and abetting > terrorism." > So I -- for one -- will not be saying anything too much against our brand our > democracy anytime soon. But I'd still feel very amiss if I didn't include the > lyrics of another of my fave songs - strongly akin to Robert Heinlein's cult > classic "Stranger in a Strange land," a look at love from an "alien" > perspective. [snip] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 01:55:33 -0600 From: "j." Subject: Re: Who me? Welcome to the list, Stephanie. I'm in Michigan myself, nice to know that at least someone's fled this hellhole. Lords of Acid rule, although I liked Ruth's vocals better than Jade 4 U or Natalie -- Voodoo U, classic. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 02:01:36 -0600 From: "j." Subject: Re: Conjure One release date Some additional Conjure One info for those of you who care: There's a short bio at http://www.nettwerk.com/artists/biography.jsp?artist_id=441 There's a Conjure One track available online if you want to hear what they'll sound like at http://www.delerium.com/media/mp3/ConjureOne-MaxGrahamMix.mp3. Unfortunately it doesn't feature Poe vocals, although it's nearly 14 minutes long. Modem users beware. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 02:40:06 -0600 From: "j." Subject: conjure one Here's a more complete link: http://www.delerium.com/media-dremix.html The page features the album and Max Graham Trance mixes of Redemption. I also HIGHLY recommend their cover of U2's song New Year's Day, with Tiffany (the 80's pop star) on vocals. It's a GREAT cover. You should check out their cover of Madonna's Justify My Love, too. Not as well done but still a pretty good version. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 06:49:08 -0600 From: "Bad Bender" Subject: NPR- philosophical blahblah Go Navy!-NPR > There have been a lot of things that have happened even this early in our occupation > that have caused me to question the "righteousness" of our cause. I think that we > Americans have allowed ourselves to be swayed by emotional rhetoric and posturing > and misled by Dumbya and his aides. Every President needs the support of the people to carry out a task such as this. It was made infinately easier by the attacks of 9-11. As I see it, GW is fulfilling his oath to defend and protect the Constitution of the US. As far as the people of Afghanistan being > happy -- well, that's a nice side effect, and great propaganda, but I'm not convinced > we have any business being there in the first place. We are seeking the men that organized the attacks on the US. The Taliban were told to hand him over, they did not. We warned them and they laughed at us. Our business is to hunt down the man responsible for the bombing of Kohbar Towers in Saudi, the bombing of the USS Cole, the bombing of our embassies, the attacks of 9-11. We have a laundry list on this guy. > Hate to quibble over semantics, but this doesn't exactly fit the traditional > definition of war. Nope, no Nazi's of communists here I think. In this case, the use of the word 'war' bothers me because > of its propaganda value. I'm not trying to start ANOTHER huge thread on this > list, but to me bombing the hell out of a tiny nation poorer than any single one > of our states or even a protectorate like Puerto Rico, suffering minimal (or no, > can somebody confirm this?) military losses, doesn't exactly qualify as a war > to me. It's a one-sided fight with a manhunt thrown in for good measure, at > best. Tell that to the enemy, they still think they can win. This whole campaign could have been avoided had the Taliban just handed over Osama when we asked. Once that first bullet is shot at you, you know it's a war. Out troops are constantly being attacked over there, sad how no one reports it on TV. We have lost people over there. I know on the Air Force side we've lost about 2 troops in the RED HORSE unit from Montana. We haven't had a high body bag count on our side because of training. Out troops are highly trained for combat, this is what we pay them for, and right now they are projecting our might as a nation very well. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 08:21:33 -0800 (PST) From: MonkeyT Subject: Re: philosophical blahblah (renamed from the bitching-about-survey thread) All this talk of intrinsic this and intrinsic that... Lets talk about evil, no... lets talk about an evil chicken. I don't mean ill tempered or slightly rotten. I mean horns poking out from its little chicken head fireball-egg shitting evil. Got that picture? Well lets look at rape. I don't think we need a definition here we're all pretty comfortable with the run of the mill Hollywood embellished non vagina monologue bad act. Well lets say we rape the evil chicken... Is this two wrongs making a right by punishing the evil chicken or is this simply evil begetting evil? -Alex *There's nothing like a good night sleep followed by enough caffine to kill a pack mule >:) ===== - -The views and or advertisements to follow are not necessarily those of the sender. Yahoo! Sports - Coverage of the 2002 Olympic Games http://sports.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 11:48:40 EST From: Spidersrcute2@aol.com Subject: Re: NPR New psycho Welcome Stephanie!! As you can see from the posts, we're all a little opinionated. You came in at a wierd time, we're arguing about good vs. evil in mankind. Just wanted to say hey. Also, I really dig Lords of Acid too!!! Being a soon to be married female, the songs they play give me my release. Take care!! Tracie ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 11:55:26 -0500 From: Derek Benton Subject: Re: NPR New psycho Welcome Stephanie!! Ah, Lords of Acid...good stuff to be sure. Wanted to say welcome and glad to have ya. Don't let the debates scare ya, we're all basically full of it! Myself especially! LOL Derek ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 12:21:36 -0500 From: Derek Benton Subject: Re: philosophical blahblah (renamed from the bitching-about-survey thread) on 2/26/02 11:21, MonkeyT at monkeytrinket@yahoo.com wrote: > > All this talk of intrinsic this and intrinsic that... > Lets talk about evil, no... lets talk about an evil > chicken. I don't mean ill tempered or slightly > rotten. I mean horns poking out from its little > chicken head fireball-egg shitting evil. Got that > picture? Well lets look at rape. I don't think we > need a definition here we're all pretty comfortable > with the run of the mill Hollywood embellished non > vagina monologue bad act. Well lets say we rape the > evil chicken... Is this two wrongs making a right by > punishing the evil chicken or is this simply evil > begetting evil? LOL Y'know, I don't think that I'll ever be able to say: "Choking the Chicken" without thinking about *THAT* image. THE CHICKEN CHOKES BACK! Actually, as I used to ride horses and thereby hung out around barns a lot when I was a kid, I actually had an encounter with a rooster that pretty much was described by the above, save the egg laying part. The thing actually would attack people for no conceivable reason. We're talking drawing blood. The owner of the stable eventually shot the damn thing. Evil Rooster. But I digress... I think the real question is what would PETA say is evil in this case? >=)~ To answer the question, with all joking aside, is the chicken being punished JUST for being "Evil" then to me, that is wrong. If it does something wrong then punishment should come, but I NEVER think that rape is an adequate punishment. I think that good and evil are mainly subjective. At one time what we know as "modern medicine" and "modern thinking" were seen as "evil" the work of the devil (church-lady voice). There is popular opinion, even in this day and age that governs thoughts on such things as good and evil. Learn to manipulate this, and your manipulating the mass of people who agree with the proposed concepts of good and evil. Actual good and evil is something much trickier to define, assuming it even can be. I think that there is, in some way, governing polarities over our universe, but I think of them as "positive" and "negative". I'm not substituting one set of words for the other, these things, to me, have very different meanings. Good and positive don't equate to mean the same thing, nor do Evil and negative. I think these polarities exist for there to be balance, they are necessary. Now, we are humans, and I think we need laws and governing moral codes to guide us, but these are subjective to culture, time period, etc, etc. To me, terrorism, rape, senseless murder, child molestation are "evil", somebody who chooses to do these things are basically making the choice to perform evil. Are they intrinsically evil? Hard to say, and I think humans are capable of either, and are not intrinsically either. More important to me is responsibility. All actions have consequence, everyone must pay the piper. That doesn't mean (to me) that if you're willing to take responsibility for raping someone, you are entitled to do so, it means that you will be made responsible for it, and I tend to have extreme views on punishment for things like that. Raping and pillaging were part of warfare in the times I adore the most, ancient (pre-Christian) to medieval. I think, living in this century, in this culture, with my ideals of morality it's impossible to understand the reason behind this, but I don't affix good or evil to it, I disagree with it, but then that was the way things were. It's unfortunate that atrocities occur in life, but that's the way things are, I accept it. That doesn't mean that when one happens to me I "turn the other cheek" I deal with it the best way I can. Having strong spiritual beliefs (which I DO NOT impose on anyone) I have a belief in the afterlife, where things are much better. But that's another discussion entirely. Lunch time is here, thank the Gods. And I'm spent! Derek ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 14:04:34 -0500 From: "SteVisOK" Subject: NPR Morpheus The copy of Morpheus that I downloaded came from C|NET. It initially worked. Now it sez I need later version. C|NET doesn't have it& the app links me to the musiccity.com hompage, which links me to C|NET. Can anyone offer me a suggestion of where a newer version can be obtained or of a workaround? TIA SteVe ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 11:19:06 -0800 From: "Dee" Subject: Re: philosophical blahs-tales from the crypt j, just one more thing, then i'm done (right). the war phrase, "to the victor goes the spoils" does indeed include women, but should contain, "those who remain alive." throw in 75% dead women and children, which is the fallout from every war we fight. I'm with AT on: >who is responsible? If we were fighting THEM >than it would be Righteous. Afghan babies aint the ones. War propaganda is extremely high and media folks know it, and continue to play it full force for good reason. If McCarthyism sounds familiar, you may want to check out this harvard poll http://www.npr.org/news/specials/civillibertiespoll/011130.poll.html Americans want to be searched these days and have their daily network news censored, it's en vogue. here's ashcroft's speech, and other provocative tales from the [news] crypt: http://www.webactive.com/webactive/pacifica/demnow.html >.paints a detailed picture of the Bush administration's secret negotiations with the Taliban government in the months and weeks before the attacks on the World Trade Center. It charges that under the influence of US oil companies the Bush administration blocked U.S. secret service investigations on terrorism. It tells the story of how the administration conducted secret negotiations with the Taliban to hand-over Osama bin Laden in exchange for political recognition and economic aid.. j wrote: Ah, McCarthyism at its finest. Dee, would you by any chance know where I could find a transcript of that speech? I'd like to read it for myself if possible. [snip] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 20:57:30 +0000 (GMT) From: Cyberfan Corporation Subject: WILD on KZON right now... WILD is being played on 101.5 KZON right now... *** I always love it when a DJ says "we haven't played POE in a while." heh' - Because DJ's suck... but they are playing POE, so I am happy. *************************************************** JK/// Jarrod Kniff President - Cyberfan Corporation jarrod@cyberfan.com *************************************************** "One important key to success is self-confidence. An important key to self-confidence is preparation." -- Arthur Ashe *************************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 11:57:01 -0800 From: Miharu Subject: NPR: NPR tag reminder Hiya gang.. This is just a reminder.. if your post isn't Poe-related, even if it's a reply to a non-Poe-related topic that wasn't tagged properly to begin with, PLEASE PLEASE *begbeg* smack a big ol NPR somewhere in the subject of the email. Those of us (like myself, lately.. I've just gotten too damn busy ><) that don't really participate in the NPR stuff that use trusty email filters need everyone to tag stuff correctly. I ask this because lately I've been getting WAY too much mail that should be tagged NPR in the wrong folder. I know it's easy to forget, especially when you're replying to something.. but again, please think of us quiet people when you post. ;p And.. I still love you all! ^^ - -miharu ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 19:13:18 EST From: LiveThruThisVow@aol.com Subject: Re: Who me? Praga Khan's the coolest. Breakfast in Vegas is a very cool song, his solo project kicks ass. Peace, MeLissA Of all the animals, man is the only one that is cruel. He is the only one that inflicts pain for the pleasure of doing it. - Mark Twain ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 19:26:46 -0500 From: "John A, Bell" Subject: Re: philosophical blahblah (renamed from the bitching-about-survey thread) Being the moral relativist that you are, then, do you believe is it okay to rape and torture women for personal pleasure? - -jb - ----- Original Message ----- From: To: ; ; Sent: Monday, February 25, 2002 6:10 PM Subject: Re: philosophical blahblah (renamed from the bitching-about-survey thread) > > In a message dated 2/25/2002 1:05:12 AM Eastern Standard Time, > jbell126@nac.net writes: > > > > Personally, I find it difficult to accept that there is no morality, = > > thus I am forced to accept the real presence of real good and real evil. = > > How how does one justify otherwise? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Good and Evil are forms of knowledge, not substances...and morality is > relative, not absolute, and arrived at aesthetically. IOW, bad morals = bad > taste. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 19:30:16 -0500 From: "John A, Bell" Subject: Re: philosophical blahblah (renamed from the bitching-about-survey thread) If this is the case, then, regardless of law (which wasn't the issue), nothing is moral, nothing is immoral... moral nihilism all around, eh? I wonder if the case would be the same if your girlfriend, mother, wife, or daughter were raped and tortured, or murdered, or anything else. - -jb - ----- Original Message ----- From: "j." To: "John A, Bell" Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 1:42 AM Subject: Re: philosophical blahblah (renamed from the bitching-about-survey thread) > (By the way, please forward this to the list if your original message > was a post to the list rather than to me alone, I have no idea if you bcc'd > the list, or meant to :) > > On Mon, Feb 25, 2002 at 10:37:29AM -0500, John A, Bell wrote: > > My point is, though, is that there is no basis for laws, no basis for any > > concept of right and wrong, whatsoever if we subjectify good, evil, right, > > wrong. In fact, when you say that no one has a right to demand that another > > comply to their sense of morality, you are also saying that the government > > doesn't have the right to demand that I comply to their laws; even further, > > according to your argument, I do have the right to demand anything I want > > because I deem it good and right to do so; it's only what "I think is > > right." > Let me clarify. Of course we comply to laws as a simple matter of practicality; > if you get caught you'll be penalized regardless of whether you consent to be > governed by the laws of the land or not. Just because you have a right does not > always mean it's respected. For instance, theoretically, by paying taxes, we > fund the government. By contributing to the government's operating costs, we > give implied consent to its authority. However, what happens if you don't pay > taxes? You get thrown in jail. Do not pass Go; do not collect $200. So yes, > in a way, the government does propagate itself by force. Just because we > have a right does not mean everybody respects it. > > On to laws being a society's valufies codified. I never said there was no basis > for a concept of right and wrong; I said that there was no basis for a UNIVERSAL > concept of right and wrong. There is nothing in the physical nature of the universe > that defines a basic foundation for the concept of right and wrong when used in a > moral context; it's purely a mental construct made by humans. And that includes > the concept of not believing in a right or wrong at all, should somebody choose > to think that way. > > Here's an interesting thing I've noticed. It's somewhat related but totally > different from the point I was trying to make above. Christianity, or at least > some sects of it, believe that everything happens for a reason, that their > god above has a master plan that is detailed and precise and leaves nothing -- > that's right, nothing -- out. In that case, doesn't that invalidate the concept > of right and wrong? If you believe there is a god out there who knows everything > you're going to do from the moment you're born to the moment you die (and yes, > I'm aware of the 'free will' argument and I believe that the two contradict > each other) then where do right and wrong come into the picture? There is no > occasion for you to make a moral choice since everything is according to your > god's will -- everything is right because that is his will. > > > Do you think it is immoral to rape another human being? If so, do you only > > base that on law, common sense morality, or is there some better reason you > > think it is immoral? > > > > -jb > No. I don't think it's immoral. Nor do I think that it's moral. It's certainly > illegal. Which we've already established is the codification of a society's morals. > In another place and time, and under a certain set of circumstances, rape would > be neither immoral nor illegal, though, regardless of what I think. > > [snip] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 19:42:04 -0500 From: PoeJunkie Subject: instant gratification hey guys, i like that we can use this list as a discussion group for anything, and i love all the poe dialog i get from this list, but can we please remember to use NPR when it's not about poe? it would be nice to be able to get all the poe info without sorting through a few hundred other emails first. i'm an instant gratification kinda girl. thanks. ~PoeJunkie ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 19:51:36 -0500 From: "John A, Bell" Subject: NPR Re: philosophical blahblah (renamed from the bitching-about-survey thread) EEK, my bad. My stupid Outlook keeps removing it. - -jb - ----- Original Message ----- From: "sp00k@poe.org" To: "John A, Bell" ; "Angry Psychos" ; "j." Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 7:47 PM Subject: Re: philosophical blahblah (renamed from the bitching-about-survey thread) > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "John A, Bell" > To: "Angry Psychos" ; "j." > Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 7:30 PM > Subject: Re: philosophical blahblah (renamed from the bitching-about-survey thread) > > > > > > If this is the case, then, regardless of law (which wasn't the issue), > > nothing is moral, nothing is immoral... moral nihilism all around, eh? > > > > I wonder if the case would be the same if your girlfriend, mother, wife, or > > daughter were raped and tortured, or murdered, or anything else. > > > Which brings to mind that while I am opposed to the death penalty, > I'd kill the bastard that did any of the above to my family, if I found the > opportunity to do so... but then thats passion and not logic speaking, or is it? > > at any rate... PoeJunkie is right, it is NPR... ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 19:47:31 -0500 From: "sp00k@poe.org" Subject: Re: philosophical blahblah (renamed from the bitching-about-survey thread) - ----- Original Message ----- From: "John A, Bell" To: "Angry Psychos" ; "j." Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 7:30 PM Subject: Re: philosophical blahblah (renamed from the bitching-about-survey thread) > > If this is the case, then, regardless of law (which wasn't the issue), > nothing is moral, nothing is immoral... moral nihilism all around, eh? > > I wonder if the case would be the same if your girlfriend, mother, wife, or > daughter were raped and tortured, or murdered, or anything else. > Which brings to mind that while I am opposed to the death penalty, I'd kill the bastard that did any of the above to my family, if I found the opportunity to do so... but then thats passion and not logic speaking, or is it? at any rate... PoeJunkie is right, it is NPR... ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 19:40:55 -0600 From: "Jess" Subject: NPR philosophical blahblah I think the thing that first came to mind when reading this thread was Apocalypse Now. That was a great movie although very violent but that has never bothered me. When the army kills innocent women and children and whoever else for political reasons because we didn't like the government it doesn't matter. Afterall you can come back home after the war and get honored for killing anything that wasn't American but you do the same thing here for whatever reasons you go to prison or get the death sentence. I'm not saying it's right but the sense of right and wrong is a bit off. I'd also like to add (this may offend some one and if so oh well cause I'm not here to say what others think but what I think) that I was not surprised that the WTC was bombed. I really didn't see how other Americans were. Wasn't this the same place bombed less than 10 years ago? If you're stupid enough to work in a place like that then be prepared for what could happen. It's called the WORLD TRADE CENTER for god sakes, wouldn't that sound like a great place for a terrorist to hit besides the fact that it had been attacked before? Maybe I'm just missing something cause I'm not feeling bad for these people and I don't feel obliged to give their surviving families my money because of their loved one's mistake of working in one of the most likely targets for terrorist attacks in the U.S. The only reason most people cared about the attack is because they realized hey I might be next. If we don't think it's going to change our lives, it doesn't matter. A few years ago there were those bombings of U.S. embassys in Africa but the entire nation wasn't rushing to aid their families even though they were actually Americans. People knew it wouldn't affect them so who cares. Most people are more self centered than they'd like to admit but I'm not pissed off about people being self centered. I hate listening to people pretending to be everything but that and acting like they actually 'care' about the people who died (I'm sure there are some but I'm talking about in general). I can at least say if it doesn't affect me I don't give a shit and wouldn't ever deny it. But anyways I think people should read this: http://www.misanthropic-bitch.com/wtc.html Jessica "This is the end, my only friend, the end" ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 20:22:42 -0600 From: "Bad Bender" Subject: NPR philosophical blahblah I've taken what you said as serious but I can't help what comes to mind. I remember a episode of Married with Children when Al wanted to kill Peggy and he said " Why is it you can go to war and kill everybody and get a medal, be a hero, but when you kill your wife in the heat of passion they send you to the chair!" I know it's off the subject, I just thought that moment was funny............. Subject: NPR philosophical blahblah > > I think the thing that first came to mind when reading this thread was > Apocalypse Now. That was a great movie although very violent but that has > never bothered me. When the army kills innocent women and children and > whoever else for political reasons because we didn't like the government it > doesn't matter. Afterall you can come back home after the war and get > honored for killing anything that wasn't American but you do the same thing > here for whatever reasons you go to prison or get the death sentence. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 20:19:28 -0600 From: "Jess" Subject: Re: NPR philosophical blahblah No problem here, that show was hilarious. TV really isn't worth watching anymore although but at least Fox has That 70's Show and Titus. The crazy mom in Titus reminds me of Johnny Truant's mom. - ----- Original Message ----- From: Bad Bender To: Jess ; Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 8:22 PM Subject: NPR philosophical blahblah > > I've taken what you said as serious but I can't help what comes to mind. I > remember a episode of Married with Children when Al wanted to kill Peggy and > he said " Why is it you can go to war and kill everybody and get a medal, be > a hero, but when you kill your wife in the heat of passion they send you to > the chair!" I know it's off the subject, I just thought that moment was > funny............. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 21:30:32 -0500 From: "Andrea E. Jackman" Subject: Re: NPR philosophical blahblah left ring. right wing. chicken wing. whatever. i deftly avoid the topics of religion and politics . . . especially at dinner. let's just consider this NG list a big ass banquet table. will someone pass the mudslides and cheesecake? ///Andrea littleREDelf ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 00:11:25 -0500 From: "nick nemphos" Subject: Re: NPR Morpheus im having the same problems with my morpheus tooany suggestions out there? Nick - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: Click Here ------------------------------ End of angry-psychos-digest V7 #60 **********************************