From: owner-ecto-digest@smoe.org (ecto-digest) To: ecto-digest@smoe.org Subject: ecto-digest V7 #260 Reply-To: ecto@smoe.org Sender: owner-ecto-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-ecto-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk ecto-digest Friday, September 14 2001 Volume 07 : Number 260 Today's Subjects: ----------------- making a better world (Re: Fw: Canadian editorial on America) [Dan Riley ] Re: Phil, Response to Terror ["TB" ] Re: Phil, Response to Terror [Paul Blair ] From Mila Drumke [Paul Blair ] RE: Phil, Response to Terror [Phil Hudson ] Re: FW: Phil, Response to Terror [Christopher Montville ] Songs for this week's tragedy [Valerie Richardson ] RE: Phil, Response to Terror [Phil Hudson ] Re: Songs for this week's tragedy [John Higdon ] Re: Songs for this week's tragedy ["JoAnn Whetsell" ] RE: Songs for this week's tragedy ["Foghorn J Fornorn" ] Re: Songs for this week's tragedy [Billi Mazur ] Re: Songs for this week's tragedy [meredith ] Re: Songs for this week's tragedy [Joseph Zitt ] Re: Songs for this week's tragedy [Neal Copperman ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 13 Sep 2001 18:38:36 -0400 From: Dan Riley Subject: making a better world (Re: Fw: Canadian editorial on America) This decades old editorial sparked something I've been thinking about for a while... "Angel's Shadow" forwarded: > Germany, Japan and, to a lesser extent, Britain and > Italy were lifted out of the debris of war by the > Americans who poured in billions of dollars and > forgave other billions in debts. [...] > The Marshall Plan and the Truman Policy pumped > billions of dollars into discouraged countries. The Marshall Plan was one of the US's great moments, and it also stands out as a time we really learned something from history and acted on it. Lessons we should remember now. After WWI, the winners imposed onerous reparation obligations on the losers, effectively crushing the post-war economy of Germany. The Treaty of Versailles followed by the 1929 world recession created a large population of resentful Germans who felt oppressed by the winning countries and by the bankers they saw as the tools of that oppression, a people ready for the corrosive poison of National Socialism--leading directly to WWII. After WWII, the allies put on trial (some of) those responsible. Then the US committed significant resources ($20 billion dollars) to rebuilding Europe, winners and losers alike--and the result has been 50 years of relative peace and prosperity. Of course, there were other significant factors (e.g. the cold war), but the Marshall Plan set the tone and laid the groundwork for what Western Europe is today. The US acted similarly towards Japan, with similar results (though there is some argument the US was *too* nice to Japan). There's a simple lesson there--the oppressed, the dispossessed, the poor will lash out at whomever they identify as their oppressors. Given little to live for and the promise of paradise in the next, they may even commit suicide to do so. Furthering such poverty and economic oppression (as the US is in Iran, for example) makes those people more angry, more desparate, more *dangerous*. (I don't know what we *should* be doing in Iran, but the current strategy isn't it.) I believe we should pursue the people responsible for the horrible acts in NYC, PA, DC--preferably to bring them to trial, limited military action if we must. But along the way, and especially afterwards, we need to acknowledge that to make the world a truly safer place for ourselves and our loved ones, without turning the US into "fortress America" for real (something I don't want to see), we will have to make the world a better place for *everyone*. This won't happen without US engagement and support, so this should properly be seen as a matter of national security. Just something I was thinking today--I'll relinquish the soapbox now... - -dan p.s. just heard from a friend and former colleague who now works for Lehman Bros.--he was on the 38th floor of 1 WTC when the first plane hit. Scary story; thankfully he's ok. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 18:01:39 -0500 From: "TB" Subject: Re: Phil, Response to Terror This will also be my only response because I agree that this isn't the right venue. I don't agree with you that Bush's decision was made out of cowardness, but that's your perogative. Knowing that the White House and the President was a target, I understand why he'd be intelligent enough to listen to his security advisors until some measures were taken. But that's just my opinion. More importantly, as to the money requested, I do want to point out that, according to the article I read on the matter, that according to http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,34331,00.html Quote: "Bush sent House Speaker Dennis Hastert a formal request Thursday for $20 billion and suggested he could request more money. Quick passage "will send a powerful signal of unity to our fellow Americans and to the world," Bush said. "If additional resources are necessary, I will forward another request for additional funding," he said. Background documents say the money is needed to provide assistance to victims and address other consequences of the attack, including "support to counter, investigate or prosecute" terrorism and increase money for transportation." That's quite different from asking for 20 billion to "ramp up interventionist machinery" as you express it. I understand your feelings about retaliation and that you are against any act of war. The problem is that I feel excessive use of rhetoric actually downplays your argument. That's the kind of behavior that will actually get arguments dismissed as being knee-jerk and unrealistic rather than rational. I don't mean to be at all insulting by that and I apologize if I sound so. Tracy - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Phil Hudson" To: Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2001 4:48 PM Subject: FW: Phil, Response to Terror > I'm quite obviously going off a lot here on this topic; I apologize in > advance and I promise I will shut up after the following tirade. > > Jeff and Tracy's comments are quite right concerning my remarks about Bush > going into hiding, they may be perceived as 'a wee bit unfair' ( thanks > Jeff, for your gentle verbal restraint :) but hey, let's remember that he's > *supposed* to be the friggin' "Leader of the Free World". This man is the > commander in chief of the greatest military force on the planet and he is > allowing his bodyguards to order him into hiding out until the danger is > over? > He's supposed to be in charge of THEM, remember? > > What does it say about him and his qualities of bravery and leadership? > Just read some of the WWII history books about prominent and powerful people > who placed themselves in positions of enormous danger and risk, who did not > have to, but chose to, out of a sense of duty or responsibility. > > To the best of my knowledge Harry Truman never went underground and hid from > *anything*. > Winston Churchill and, I believe, most of the Royal Family stayed in London > during some of the worst German bombing blitzes of WWII. In short, they > stood by their people and faced the danger with them. They did not run away. > > By comparison George Bush went into hiding two miles below the surface of > the Earth, in Nebraska, at the very center of the US: He could not have made > himself any less at risk had he climbed aboard the space shuttle and stayed > in orbit for the duration. > > The after-the-fact spin that his PR crew tried to put on it could have been > bettered by a high school poli-sci major. > I heard someone on the radio say " I never thought I'd hear myself say this, > but Bush's actions even made Rudi Giuliani look good!" > > The fact that I think Bush Jr is a belligerent, pusillanimous little chimp > whose Daddy gave him the White House quite obviously has a lot to do with > the views I have expressed. Your mileage may differ. > > I also don't feel very *positive* about a President who is about to use > these tragic events as an excuse to ramp up the existing military > interventionist machinery ( $20 billion worth, no less!) and start bombing > *more* innocent humans simply to support the likes of Martin Marietta and > Lockheed. > let's face it revenge and justice have nothing to do with this at the > Cabinet level; it's all special interest and cold cash, and the view from > 30,000 feet does not include human beings. > > American weapons manufacturers are celebrating with more gusto than the > Palestinians right now. > They're getting just what they wanted for Christmas. > But if you live in Afghanistan or Iraq, or any other country that won't > drink Uncle Sam's Kool Aid, that's won't be Santa you'll be hearing coming > down your chimney this year..... > > Apologies to all, this is after all, Ecto and this is some of the least > musically-related, and most depressing prose I've ever written. > > > Phil > (Who doesn't normally make public pronouncements about politics or > philosophy. I just find the hypocrisy of what is happening extremely > sickening and worrisome) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 19:02:22 -0400 From: Paul Blair Subject: Re: Phil, Response to Terror Let's be clear about the nature of those who did this. They want nothing positive for themselves; they want us destroyed. Issues such as whether or not there is a Palestinian state or who oppressed whom last Thursday are completely beside the point; the very existence of America and what it stands for is a moral affront to them that must be wiped off the face of the Earth. Western movies and television they want abolished. They want you on a prayer rug facing Mecca; if you wish to express your thoughts they want you muzzled; if you are a blasphemer they want you executed. If you are a woman, they want you wearing a veil and enslaved to your husband or father. If you are a homosexual, they want you dead. If you value your life and happiness they want you subjugated. They want and fully intend to use violence on us regardless of whether or not we resist, and are willing to give up their lives in the effort. Cliches like "violence begets violence" are utterly inappropriate. To speak of a "cycle of violence" is to blame the victims for resisting the attacks of those who will not rest until those victims are destroyed. It is to demand that the innocent sacrifice themselves to the guilty and let the evil win over the good. It is to repudiate justice and to stand with injustice. There is no moral sophistication in blindly equating initiating force with retaliating against it. Nor is there any legitimate moral basis for treating as equivalent the targeting of innocent people in a terrorist attack, with fighting a war against governments that pose a genuine threat. Civilians who live in those countries have an obligation either to flee or to revolt; they have no right to expect that their governments will be permitted to commit any atrocity and remain untouched by hiding behind them. In the long run, moral cowards wind up the dead victims of those they refuse to fight. They will leave the world to those of us who are willing to pass moral judgment. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 19:12:45 -0400 From: Paul Blair Subject: From Mila Drumke >Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 19:20:52 -0400 >From: Mila Drumke >Organization: Little Pro Records >To: ciriwe@phobot.net >Subject: Re: Are you ok? > >Hi Paul, > >I'm okay. A close friend was one of the first firefighters to go in, and >his entire squad is just gone without a trace. > >I'm glad to hear you are okay too. > >Thanks for checking in, > >Mila > >Paul Blair wrote: > >> Hello Mila, >> >> Just hoping you didn't happen to have a day job in >> the World Trade Center and that you and your loved >> ones are OK. Please let me know; I'll post it to >> ecto. >> >> I watched the second plane hit on TV and was down by >> the courthouse (reporting for jury duty) when I saw >> the second tower fall. I'm still numb. >> >> All the best, >> >> Paul ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 16:16:29 -0700 From: Phil Hudson Subject: RE: Phil, Response to Terror Tracy brings up some good points: I apologize for my lurid rhetoric, and yes, I'm just making personal hay with the "President Cowardly Lion" thing, but I just feel very strongly about the bully roles that the US and my homeland, the UK, have played across the globe for purely their own benefit, and the blatant unfairness of their labeling others "terrorists" when both major powers have consciously committed far greater atrocities. I also think a lot of that new money from Congress will go to the same out-of-control "Skull & Bones" agencies that trained people like Bin laden in the first place. I will shut up now and listen to Equipoise. Phil - -----Original Message----- From: TB [mailto:river@grapevine.net] Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2001 4:02 PM To: Phil Hudson; ecto@smoe.org Subject: Re: Phil, Response to Terror This will also be my only response because I agree that this isn't the right venue. I don't agree with you that Bush's decision was made out of cowardness, but that's your perogative. Knowing that the White House and the President was a target, I understand why he'd be intelligent enough to listen to his security advisors until some measures were taken. But that's just my opinion. More importantly, as to the money requested, I do want to point out that, according to the article I read on the matter, that according to http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,34331,00.html Quote: "Bush sent House Speaker Dennis Hastert a formal request Thursday for $20 billion and suggested he could request more money. Quick passage "will send a powerful signal of unity to our fellow Americans and to the world," Bush said. "If additional resources are necessary, I will forward another request for additional funding," he said. Background documents say the money is needed to provide assistance to victims and address other consequences of the attack, including "support to counter, investigate or prosecute" terrorism and increase money for transportation." That's quite different from asking for 20 billion to "ramp up interventionist machinery" as you express it. I understand your feelings about retaliation and that you are against any act of war. The problem is that I feel excessive use of rhetoric actually downplays your argument. That's the kind of behavior that will actually get arguments dismissed as being knee-jerk and unrealistic rather than rational. I don't mean to be at all insulting by that and I apologize if I sound so. Tracy - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Phil Hudson" To: Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2001 4:48 PM Subject: FW: Phil, Response to Terror > I'm quite obviously going off a lot here on this topic; I apologize in > advance and I promise I will shut up after the following tirade. > > Jeff and Tracy's comments are quite right concerning my remarks about Bush > going into hiding, they may be perceived as 'a wee bit unfair' ( thanks > Jeff, for your gentle verbal restraint :) but hey, let's remember that he's > *supposed* to be the friggin' "Leader of the Free World". This man is the > commander in chief of the greatest military force on the planet and he is > allowing his bodyguards to order him into hiding out until the danger is > over? > He's supposed to be in charge of THEM, remember? > > What does it say about him and his qualities of bravery and leadership? > Just read some of the WWII history books about prominent and powerful people > who placed themselves in positions of enormous danger and risk, who did not > have to, but chose to, out of a sense of duty or responsibility. > > To the best of my knowledge Harry Truman never went underground and hid from > *anything*. > Winston Churchill and, I believe, most of the Royal Family stayed in London > during some of the worst German bombing blitzes of WWII. In short, they > stood by their people and faced the danger with them. They did not run away. > > By comparison George Bush went into hiding two miles below the surface of > the Earth, in Nebraska, at the very center of the US: He could not have made > himself any less at risk had he climbed aboard the space shuttle and stayed > in orbit for the duration. > > The after-the-fact spin that his PR crew tried to put on it could have been > bettered by a high school poli-sci major. > I heard someone on the radio say " I never thought I'd hear myself say this, > but Bush's actions even made Rudi Giuliani look good!" > > The fact that I think Bush Jr is a belligerent, pusillanimous little chimp > whose Daddy gave him the White House quite obviously has a lot to do with > the views I have expressed. Your mileage may differ. > > I also don't feel very *positive* about a President who is about to use > these tragic events as an excuse to ramp up the existing military > interventionist machinery ( $20 billion worth, no less!) and start bombing > *more* innocent humans simply to support the likes of Martin Marietta and > Lockheed. > let's face it revenge and justice have nothing to do with this at the > Cabinet level; it's all special interest and cold cash, and the view from > 30,000 feet does not include human beings. > > American weapons manufacturers are celebrating with more gusto than the > Palestinians right now. > They're getting just what they wanted for Christmas. > But if you live in Afghanistan or Iraq, or any other country that won't > drink Uncle Sam's Kool Aid, that's won't be Santa you'll be hearing coming > down your chimney this year..... > > Apologies to all, this is after all, Ecto and this is some of the least > musically-related, and most depressing prose I've ever written. > > > Phil > (Who doesn't normally make public pronouncements about politics or > philosophy. I just find the hypocrisy of what is happening extremely > sickening and worrisome) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 19:48:18 -0400 (EDT) From: Christopher Montville Subject: Re: FW: Phil, Response to Terror > Apologies to all, this is after all, Ecto and this is some of the least > musically-related, and most depressing prose I've ever written. > > > Phil > (Who doesn't normally make public pronouncements about politics or > philosophy. I just find the hypocrisy of what is happening extremely > sickening and worrisome) Don't apologise. The television media aren't talking about it, the new york times isn't writing about it... but I hope that through the internet we'll all be able to tell our "leaders" what is and isn't going to be acceptable in response to this disaster. Things that got me thinking: www.zmag.org/ZNET.htm (Especially the essays by michael moore and noam chomsky) www.indymedia.com www.salon.com (especially the peice about guliani vs. bush) etc. I'm no radical, but when our president can't remember the name of the leader of pakistan or answer reporters question without a briefing, we can't just all be complacent. "Don't turn tragedy into war" Chris. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 20:22:58 -0400 From: "Foghorn J Fornorn" Subject: RE: Phil, Response to Terror I should probably stay out of this discussion, but after reading Phil's rants, I am compelled to offer the following point of view for your consideration. - ----- Since the heinous terrorist attack on the World Trade Center and Pentagon, there have been sporadic outbreaks of violence against Americans of Arab descent and/or Islamic and Muslim faith. Most of the reasonably enlightened people know that the majority of these people are innocent, that their faiths are as peaceful as the Judeo-Christian majority of the U.S.A., if not more so. Americans want to retaliate, and are desperate for identification of a target to strike back at. It is my fervent opinion that the common thread among all the terrorist attacks of recent memory is not so much the parties nationality or faith, but their fanaticism. Simply put, extremist viewpoints of any kind ultimately result in extreme actions. Virtually all the attacks perpetrated by those who claim themselves of Islamic faith subscribe to a fringe radical element that places the 'jihad', or Holy War, above all else. It is more important than their own survival. Timothy McVeigh, the domestic terrorist, held views shared by the rebels of the modern American anti-government militia movement, but fanatically twisted to the point where dozens of day-care deaths affected him about as much as a paint scratch would a normal person. Clearly, these people are fanatics. And terrorism and fanatacism go hand in hand. Therefore, it is imperative that these fanatics, all fanatics, must be stopped, must be eradicated from decent human civilization. Fanatics come in many forms: religious fanatics, political fanatics (liberal and conservative), sports fanatics, music fanatics, art fanatics, food fanatics, fashion fanatics, to name just a few. While the acts of individuals in these groups will seldom cause the level of devastation of recent events, it should be easy to see that fanatics of any kind are like a cancer on society and can serve no useful purpose whatsoever to the normal, comparatively blissfully apathetic common decent public. To that end it is proposed that we, the people, end our apathy and take these matters into our own hands for the benefit, nay, the survival, of our species: we must eliminate all fanatics, exterminate them completely. We must hunt them down and destroy them without hesitation. We must pursue this goal singularly, selfishly, and irrevocably. Should anyone who reads this henceforth encounter a fanatic, be swift and merciless in ending that fanatic's life so as to prevent further spreading of their disease. Once a fanatic is deceased, it is imperative to identify the fanatic's family, friends and acquaintances so that they too can also be identified and targeted, for it is through this network of association that the original fanatic's disease would continue to spread, long after they are dead and buried. To end terrorism, everyone must commit themselves relentlessly, uncompromisingly and singlemindedly to the extermination of every last fanatic on the face of the earth! The future of you and all your descendents depends on it. There can be no higher purpose in this life - this is the ultimate call to self defense. Heed it. Thank you. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 17:41:25 -0700 From: cheryl belansky Subject: Re: Phil, Response to Terror Was your tirade the 6:00PM version that you had promised previously? Or can we look forward to that one also? I am the last person to defend our "Commander in Chief", however we are stuck with him. Whether his Daddy game him the White House or he bought his way into the position. I am sure that he is not rallying with his Cabinet members, Martin Marietta or Lockheed just itching to push "the button" in order to ramp up the existing military interventionist machinery. Many of your points seem to be valid, but let us not forget, we do not have the strong leadership of Truman, Eisenhower nor Churchill at this time. I dare to say that I would not want to be in Bush's shoes right now. My mother stated to me today, "I just want those men found. When they are I want to be present during their execution". Pretty grim, huh. I suggest that all should e-mail their opinions (or tirades) to president@whitehouse.gov. It may not help, however it may be better than venting and all should have their opinions heard. By the way, the secret service has the last word (believe it or not). When crisis occurs the Secret Service is in charge. Cheryl - ---------- ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 20:54:38 -0400 From: Valerie Richardson Subject: Songs for this week's tragedy I'm glad to hear that most of this community's members are safe. I stayed glued to the news radio for the first two days, but I woke up this morning with a desperate need to listen to a lot of music, and I'd like to hear what music others listen to for solace (or catharsis) in times like these. Music has always been at the center of my spiritual life I'm also looking for ideas for my radio show tomorrow. I had thought of playing only somber instrumental music, but I don't know. I know that several people in our audience lost family members in NYC, including one woman whose sister was a stewardess on one of the planes, and many people in our area had to struggle to get out of New York after the blasts on Tuesday. There are almost don't seem to be words to adequately express what we've all experienced this week. - --Valerie ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 18:04:04 -0700 From: Phil Hudson Subject: RE: Phil, Response to Terror Nope, the 6pm tirade got pulled. I got a call from the FBI telling me to knock it off. I'm now in hiding in Nebraska; don't tell anyone. :) P - -----Original Message----- From: cheryl belansky [mailto:talicat@pacbell.net] Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2001 5:41 PM To: ecto@smoe.org; ecto-digest@smoe.org Subject: Re: Phil, Response to Terror Was your tirade the 6:00PM version that you had promised previously? Or can we look forward to that one also? ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 21:27:36 -0500 From: John Higdon Subject: Re: Songs for this week's tragedy At 08:54 PM 9/13/01 -0400, Valerie Richardson wrote: >I stayed glued to the news radio for the first two days, but I woke up >this morning with a desperate need to listen to a lot of music, and I'd >like to hear what music others listen to for solace (or catharsis) in >times like these. Music has always been at the center of my spiritual >life Well, while I was at the dentist today, the piped in radio talked about the tragedy but also wove a little music into the mix. The one song I remember was Sarah's I Will Remember, which seemed pretty appropriate. John Higdon ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 22:35:26 -0400 From: "JoAnn Whetsell" Subject: Re: Songs for this week's tragedy I heard Marvin Gaye's "What's Going On" on the radio yesterday after a political discussion. Listening to the lyrics, it really made a lot of sense. JoAnn >From: Valerie Richardson >To: "ecto@smoe.org" >Subject: Songs for this week's tragedy >Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 20:54:38 -0400 > >I'm glad to hear that most of this community's members are safe. > >I stayed glued to the news radio for the first two days, but I woke up >this morning with a desperate need to listen to a lot of music, and I'd >like to hear what music others listen to for solace (or catharsis) in >times like these. Music has always been at the center of my spiritual >life > >I'm also looking for ideas for my radio show tomorrow. I had thought of >playing only somber instrumental music, but I don't know. I know that >several people in our audience lost family members in NYC, including one >woman whose sister was a stewardess on one of the planes, and many >people in our area had to struggle to get out of New York after the >blasts on Tuesday. There are almost don't seem to be words to adequately >express what we've all experienced this week. > >--Valerie _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 22:39:37 -0400 From: "Robert Lovejoy" Subject: The Dalai Lama's letter to President Bush From the Dalai Lama's web site: The Dalai Lama's letter to the President of the United States of America Your Excellency, I am deeply shocked by the terrorist attacks that took place involving four apparently hijacked aircrafts and the immense devastation these caused. It is a terrible tragedy that so many innocent lives have been lost and it seems unbelievable that anyone would choose to target the World Trade Center in New York City and the Pentagon in Washington D.C. We are deeply saddened. On behalf of the Tibetan people I would like to convey our deepest condolence and solidarity with the American people during this painful time. Our prayers go out to the many who have lost their lives, those who have been injured and the many more who have been traumatized by this senseless act of violence. I am at tending a special prayer for the United States and it's people at our main temple today. I am confident that the United States as a great and powerful nation will be able to overcome this present tragedy. The American people have shown their resilience, courage and determination when faced with such difficult and sad situation. It may seem presumptuous on my part, but I personally believe we need to think seriously whether a violent action is the right thing to do and in the greater interest of the nation and people in the long run. I believe violence will only increase the cycle of violence. But how do we deal with hatred and anger, which are often the root causes of such senseless violence? This is a very difficult question, especially when it concerns a nation and we have certain fixed conceptions of how to deal with such attacks. I am sure that you will make the right decision. With my prayers and good wishes The Dalai Lama September 12, 2001 Dharamsala, India http://www.tibet.com/NewsRoom/hhdl-letter.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 21:39:58 -0500 From: John Higdon Subject: RE: Phil, Response to Terror At 04:16 PM 9/13/01 -0700, Phil Hudson wrote: >Tracy brings up some good points: I apologize for my lurid rhetoric, and >yes, I'm just making personal hay with the "President Cowardly Lion" thing, As for that remark, I would point out that prolly any of the recent Presidents would have done the same thing (hid in a bunker), not just GW. I long for the day when our leaders took the same risks that ordinary citizens were faced with (or in times of war, ordinary soldiers). >but I just feel very strongly about the bully roles that the US and my >homeland, the UK, have played across the globe for purely their own benefit, >and the blatant unfairness of their labeling others "terrorists" when both >major powers have consciously committed far greater atrocities. Such as previously using the pre-terrorists against our own enemies. IMO, if it's not worth the risk of sending our own people to do it (or it's too unseemly for us to appear to be doing it) then we shouldn't be doing it at all. >I also think a lot of that new money from Congress will go to the same >out-of-control "Skull & Bones" agencies that trained people like Bin laden >in the first place. Yeah, that's my fear too. The company I work for makes image products from satellite and aerial imagery, and we're starting to ramp up for more gov't work because of this. Me, I'm trying to stay as far from that side of things as possible, 'cause I trust organizations such as the CIA and NSA _less_ than I trust, say, the PLO, and I'd really not like to help them in the least. (Yeah, I know that these organizations will prolly be the way we find the assholes who committed Tuesday's heinous act, but I hold them at least partially responsible for that to begin with. See the previous paragraph for why.) John Higdon ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 22:49:37 -0400 From: "Foghorn J Fornorn" Subject: RE: Songs for this week's tragedy When I lost my father, many years ago, I had just bought a new King Crimson album. I decided to play it, thinking it might take me away from my grief, for a little while. Little did I know it contained a track that spoke to it, drew it out of me yet left me feeling so comforted at the end. It's the title track of Islands. It helps to play the preceding instrumental track, Prelude: Song of the Gulls, as a lead-in. As I listened to it a little while ago, the Island (singular) metaphor strikes me on a couple new levels, re: Manhattan, and also (as Islands plural), re: the continents of countries who've expressed support. More recently (and ectophilicly), Jane Siberry's The Vigil from When I Was a Boy is a very touching expression of grief, although more personal in origin. And while you have that out, Calling All Angels couldn't be more apropos, IMHO. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 22:57:15 EDT From: Jessweiser24@aol.com Subject: Re: Songs for this week's tragedy I was going to cover "The Prayer of St. Francis" which Sarah McLachlan does this weekend at my shows in Boston, but I am not playing now. That song is really beautiful, although it might not be appropriate for your show, I have no idea. My friend Cameron Dezen just made a song available online for anyone to download for comfort, etc. www.camerondezen.com We've been listening to a lot of John Lennon here. And Lou Reeds "Perfect Day"... I guess some Sarah McLachlan would be cool... dunno. I haven't listened to all that much the past few days... Jessica www.jessicaweiser.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2001 03:25:08 From: "Lyle Howard" Subject: Repercussions of NY Disaster Hello, Hope everyone is safe and not too damaged psychologically. I just wanted to let you know that the attack in New York affects everyone. Out here in Denton, TX, the repercussions of Tuesday are being felt in a nasty way. Some yahoos attempted to bomb the local mosque Wednesday night. Fortunately the yokels that made the attempt were drunk and/or stupid. They tried to lob a beer bottle Molotov cocktail through the window of the mosque, breaking the window and scorching the exterior wall. Now, Ive run by this mosque hundreds of times, admired its architectural beauty, and noted how quiet and humble the people who go there seem to be. I watched news footage on the attack this evening and the news crew interviewed a former co-worker of mine named Dr. Ali Emran. He is a member of the mosque and one of the kindest, most decent men I know. He and the other muslims of this town do not need this grief. (This message is not aimed at you ectos, since you all seem to be intelligent and conscientious people.) I think people forget that muslim terrorists are right-wingers and not representative of the large populace of muslim believers. And bin Laden doesnt strike me as being religious so much as being a power monger. Its a tiny news story in comparison with what is happening on the eastern seaboard, but if you want to read about it, go to: http://www.dentonrc.com/news/470124_DRC_Mosque.html On a lighter note: One of the local good ol boys decided to take a student pilot up for a lesson yesterday (I think it was yesterday). He soon found himself surrounded by F-18s and was forced to land rather quickly. He thought the air travel ban had been lifted. He was mistaken. Hang in there everybody. Lyle _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 20:41:56 -0700 From: Billi Mazur Subject: Re: Songs for this week's tragedy Valerie, I too was thinking of both King Crimson and Jane Siberry as suggestions for you. From "In the Wake of Poseidon" please consider "Peace - A Beginning", Peace - A Theme", and "Peace - An End". I was also thinking of "Calling all Angels" from Jane Siberry. I really enjoy Cyoakha's version as well from the first Land of the Blind CD, "One Eye". John Lennon's "Give Peace a Chance" would be another suggestion. Peace!!! Bill M. Foghorn J Fornorn wrote: > When I lost my father, many years ago, I had just bought a new King Crimson > album. I decided to play it, thinking it might take me away from my grief, > for a little while. Little did I know it contained a track that spoke to it, > drew it out of me yet left me feeling so comforted at the end. It's the > title track of Islands. It helps to play the preceding instrumental track, > Prelude: Song of the Gulls, as a lead-in. As I listened to it a little while > ago, the Island (singular) metaphor strikes me on a couple new levels, re: > Manhattan, and also (as Islands plural), re: the continents of countries > who've expressed support. > > More recently (and ectophilicly), Jane Siberry's The Vigil from When I Was a > Boy is a very touching expression of grief, although more personal in > origin. And while you have that out, Calling All Angels couldn't be more > apropos, IMHO. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 23:48:12 -0400 From: meredith Subject: Re: Songs for this week's tragedy Hi, >I'm also looking for ideas for my radio show tomorrow. I had thought of >playing only somber instrumental music, but I don't know. I haven't listened to music at all this week. Partly because when I haven't been at work or at an organizational meeting for this weekend's Eli Whitney Folk Festival I've been glued to the TV, partly because I don't want a piece of heretofore favorite music to be associated with this horrible event. But if I were planning to be on the radio tomorrow, I'd play songs such as: KaTe, "Love And Anger" Susan Werner, "I Still Believe" Veda Hille, "Tuktiaktuk Hymn" Sarah McLachlan, "Hold On" Rachael Sage, "Among All Of God's Creatures" My mind is drawing a blank, but I hope that helps as a start, at least... ======================================= Meredith Tarr New Haven, CT USA mailto:meth@smoe.org http://www.smoe.org/meth "things are more beautiful when they're obscure" -- veda hille ======================================= Live At The House O'Muzak House Concert Series http://www.smoe.org/meth/muzak.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 22:46:59 -0500 From: Joseph Zitt Subject: Re: Songs for this week's tragedy On Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 08:54:38PM -0400, Valerie Richardson wrote: > I'm also looking for ideas for my radio show tomorrow. I had thought of > playing only somber instrumental music, but I don't know. I know that > several people in our audience lost family members in NYC, including one > woman whose sister was a stewardess on one of the planes, and many > people in our area had to struggle to get out of New York after the > blasts on Tuesday. There are almost don't seem to be words to adequately > express what we've all experienced this week. One song I would play: Happy's "Ode". - -- |> ~The only thing that is not art is inattention~ --- Marcel Duchamp <| | jzitt@metatronpress.com http://www.metatronpress.com/jzitt | | Latest CD: Jerusaklyn http://www.mp3.com/josephzitt | | Comma: Voices of New Music Silence: the John Cage Discussion List | ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 22:53:22 -0600 From: Neal Copperman Subject: Re: Songs for this week's tragedy At 8:54 PM -0400 9/13/01, Valerie Richardson wrote: >I stayed glued to the news radio for the first two days, but I woke up >this morning with a desperate need to listen to a lot of music, and I'd >like to hear what music others listen to for solace (or catharsis) in >times like these. Music has always been at the center of my spiritual >life As far as instrumental music goes, Gorecki's Symphony of Sorrowful Songs might actually be too much. Also, I've been strongly tempted to wade through my piles of tapes looking for a bootleg I have somewhere. I saw Nanci Griffith perform a few days after the Oklahoma City bombing, and she played a heartrending version of It's A Hard Life Wherever You Go (from Storms). The Nirvana covers - All Apologies by Sinead O'Connor and Tori's Smells Like Teen Spirit. On the same Sinead album - Tiny Grief Song (a bit specific, but the litany "I'd a terrible broken heart" and "my grief" fits, and it's very mournful). Almost anything on Kronos Quartet's Early Music. Why Wasn't I More Grateful (When Life Was Sweet) - Maria McKee (You Gotta Sin To Be Saved) Probably lots of songs by Sweet Honey in the Rock. In particular, Breaths always gets me. neal np: Breaths - Sweet Honey in the Rock nr: I Know This Much Is True - Wally Lamb ------------------------------ End of ecto-digest V7 #260 **************************