From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V11 #49 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Wednesday, February 13 2002 Volume 11 : Number 049 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: Out in Ballard looking soulful at the pines [FS Thomas ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 06:42:02 -0800 (PST) From: FS Thomas Subject: Re: Out in Ballard looking soulful at the pines - --- Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey wrote: > "Lighthearted"? Yeah, if anti-Muslim stereotyping is > lighthearted. Jeffrey, it's a simple matter of fact: the terrorist acts carried out on the occasions listed weren't perpetrated by Scandinavian midgets or Ghanian businessmen, they were carried out by those of Middle Easter decent. In light of 9/11 the increases in airline safety fall mostly on those of Middle Eastern origin. > The US State Dept. released a report in May of 2000 > entitled "Patterns of > Global Terrorism, 1999." Anti-US attacks. Does this include kidnapings? (I only ask because of the high percentage of Latin American entries in the category. > (And where was that McVeigh guy from anyway?) There's aberrations in every statistical analysis. > Yes, of course there are Muslim extremists - but > there are extremists of > every nationality and religion. True. You can't hamstring security for the sake of political correctness, though. End of sentence. End of story. > (How many people have been killed, how > many wounded, and how much property damaged by > anti-abortion fanatics They, too, are terrorists and I'm sure are being pursued, albeit not with the same fervor. I've flown quite a few times since September. The last time I went I was picked for security screenings both departing and returning. There is a randomness to it (some of you have met me--I don't think I fit the profile.) I don't, however, have any qualms when people are hand-picked out of a queue of passengers for screening when they fit a profile. Sorry. A good friend of my girlfriend's husband is Lebanese. It's not affected him directly, but his son, who's an air-traffic controller for the Air Force has been constantly hounded by the Feds since September. Is there a reason for it? Probably not beyond the fact that someone of Middle Eastern decent is a party to the air-traffic procedures of our military and might be privy to knowledge of traffic volume coming and going to our bases. I do feel genuine sympathy for Muslim Americans (be they immigrants to this country or born citizens) for any ill-placed back-lashes and inconveniences due to security. I feel more sympathy, though, for the families who lost loved ones as a result of the terrorist attacks or who have family members serving in the military stationed in the Mid East. - -f. - --- Send FREE Valentine eCards with Yahoo! Greetings! http://greetings.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 15:03:39 +0000 From: "matt sewell" Subject: Re: Out in Ballard looking soulful at the pines I see your point - I guess it's easy in a discussion like this to downplay the terrible suffering so many people have gone through, although I have as much sympathy any of the victims of the situation - that would include the innocent Afghans (deathcount apparently somewhere between 1 and 20 thousand, although no-one seems to be counting) who have so far died in "the war against terrorism". I think a hierarchy of sympathy with westerners at the top is a pretty dangerous one... Cheers Matt >From: FS Thomas > >I do feel genuine sympathy for Muslim Americans (be >they immigrants to this country or born citizens) for >any ill-placed back-lashes and inconveniences due to >security. I feel more sympathy, though, for the >families who lost loved ones as a result of the >terrorist attacks or who have family members serving >in the military stationed in the Mid East. > >-f. >--- >Send FREE Valentine eCards with Yahoo! Greetings! >http://greetings.yahoo.com - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: Click Here ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 09:32:49 -0500 (CDT) From: gSs Subject: Re: Out in Ballard looking soulful at the pines On Wed, 13 Feb 2002, Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey wrote: > On Wed, 13 Feb 2002, Thomas, Ferris wrote: > > > A slightly more lighthearted look at profiling from the underbelly of the > > 'net. (Complete with low-teens percentage RH content in #1) > > "Lighthearted"? Yeah, if anti-Muslim stereotyping is lighthearted. Yet we see anti-western stereotyping, anti-christian stereotyping, anti-conservative stereotyping, anti-American stereotyping, anti-liberal stereotyping, anti-antedeluvian steroetyping and even anti-climactic stereotyping on this very list. I read no anti-Mulsim stereotyping in his note. Profiling has existed since organized law enforcement began and it must continue or any form of effective control will be gone. If a string of crimes is committed and all the witnesses say there is one thing about the suspect that they remember distinctly, that information is used to create a profile so that a more effective investigation and can be made. What this also does is give possible future victims a little better chance of not being a victim. They all say the person was a white man, so should all Chinese women now be considered suspects? But if they are excluded, simply based on descriptions from witnesses, is that not profiling? Why don't they just detain and search all of us as we walk out our front door on suspicion of terrorist activity. We are all suspects, aren't we? No, we are not all suspects. There appears to be a few distinct things that all of the terrorists have so far had in common and that data is being used to create a profile. gSs ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 09:53:50 -0500 (CDT) From: gSs Subject: Re: Out in Ballard looking soulful at the pines On Wed, 13 Feb 2002, matt sewell wrote: > I see your point - I guess it's easy in a discussion like this to > downplay the terrible suffering so many people have gone through, > although I have as much sympathy any of the victims of the situation - > that would include the innocent Afghans (deathcount apparently somewhere > between 1 and 20 thousand, although no-one seems to be counting) who have > so far died in "the war against terrorism". And what was the death count of Afghans killed by Taliban or Russians or Pashtoons or bin laden in the last 20 years or right up until "the war on terrorism"? Nobody seems to be counting those. Long before Sept. 11, the refugee camps in and around Afghanistan were over flowing by the millions and millions and millions and millions and millions and millions and millions. How many have died in these camps? Far more than have been killed by American troops since Sept. 11. Noboby seems to want to include these counts in the big equation. > I think a hierarchy of sympathy with westerners at the top is a pretty > dangerous one... I think a hierachy of sympathy with any single group on top anymore, is pretty dangerous. gSs ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 10:07:38 -0600 From: "Brian Huddell" Subject: RE: Out in Ballard looking soulful at the pines > I think a hierachy of sympathy with any single group on top > anymore, is pretty dangerous. In a pinch, "humans aged 0 to 5 years" might fill the top spot with a minimum of controversy. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 10:11:06 -0600 (CST) From: Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey Subject: Re: Out in Ballard looking soulful at the pines On Wed, 13 Feb 2002, FS Thomas wrote: > > Yes, of course there are Muslim extremists - but > > there are extremists of > > every nationality and religion. > > True. You can't hamstring security for the sake of > political correctness, though. End of sentence. End > of story. At what point does "security" become a justification for operating on pre-existing biases? Note: the piece you quoted referred to "Muslim extremists": Not all Muslims are Arabs, and vice versa - in fact, I believe I read that most US Arabs are Christians. The people being profiled, therefore, are not necessarily Muslims, but those who look as if they're of Middle Eastern descent. Note that the guy w/the shoebomb called himself a Muslim...but was not of Middle Eastern descent. "Political correctness" is a meaningless buzzword used to obfuscate argument, not forward it. > I've flown quite a few times since September. The > last time I went I was picked for security screenings > both departing and returning. There is a randomness > to it (some of you have met me--I don't think I fit > the profile.) I don't, however, have any qualms when > people are hand-picked out of a queue of passengers > for screening when they fit a profile. Sorry. I'm not against increased security at airports, but I am against the Ashcroftian suspension of civil liberties - many of whose components, note, were on various right-wingers' wishlists for quite some time preceding the 9/11 attacks. I stand with Senator Feingold, who correctly points out that, sure, we could massively increase security to the extent that all but a very few terrorist actions would be stopped...by creating a police state that the rest of us would not want to live in. As horrifying as the 9/11 attacks were, there are many more deaths each year attributable to preventable causes, many of which arise from corporate or governmental malfeasance. Note also that the ringleader of those attacks was on a watchlist but was not caught, apparently due to sheer incompetence. Note also that the increased security being sought (aside from the issue of profiling) has been fought for years by airlines concerned about holding down costs: w/o properly trained, reasonably paid security officers, pulling aside the occasional Middle Eastern looking is at best a diversion and at worst sheer discrimination. I would add that profiling is unlikely to be effective - since, once it's in place, any intelligent terrorist (and the dangerous ones are that) will find people not fitting the profile to act for them. Instead, even more of the vast majority of innocent profilees will be singled out, thereby increasing the general air of bigotry against them ("if everyone's watching them, they must be doing something wrong," runs the train of thought). - --Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey J e f f r e y N o r m a n The Architectural Dance Society www.uwm.edu/~jenor/ADS.html ::sex, drugs, revolt, Eskimos, atheism:: ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 16:16:38 +0000 From: "matt sewell" Subject: Re: Out in Ballard looking soulful at the pines Hmm... I'd say I was pretty much against the killing of innocents regardless of by whom. I don't see what you're saying - do you mean that it was Ok for them to be killed (directly or indirectly) by the "allied" military as they would sooner or later have been murdered or have starved to death anyway? I hate George Bush, his policies and his illegal government of cronies, let's get that straight. However, just because I hate these, it does not follow that: 1. I hate America 2. I support anti-american terrorism 3. I have more sympathy for (say) Afghans than for (say) Americans who have been killed 4. I think the Taliban, Soviets, Pashtuns or Al-Queda have any moral high ground over anyone Furthermore, your assertion that "refugee camps in and around Afghanistan were over flowing by millions and millions and millions and millions and millions and millions", is, quite simply, not true. It *is* true, though that the Taliban were doing a fine job of oppressing everyone, particularly women and Tajiks, that many Afghans were facing hunger due to decades of war and drought and that Afghanistan allowed Al-Queda training camps to operate in the Hindu Kush. Anyway, I don't want to make this a long and unreadable post, so: Gss wrote: >I think a hierachy of sympathy with any single group on top anymore, is >pretty dangerous. Er, yeah... I wasn't saying that there should be a hierarchy of sympathy at all - or did you think I meant that non-westerners should go to the top of it? Cheers Matt >From: gSs >Reply-To: gSs >To: fegmaniax@smoe.org >Subject: Re: Out in Ballard looking soulful at the pines >Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 09:53:50 - -0500 (CDT) > >On Wed, 13 Feb 2002, matt sewell wrote: > > > I see your point - I guess it's easy in a discussion like this to > > downplay the terrible suffering so many people have gone through, > > although I have as much sympathy any of the victims of the situation - > > that would include the innocent Afghans (deathcount apparently somewhere > > between 1 and 20 thousand, although no-one seems to be counting) who have > > so far died in "the war against terrorism". > >And what was the death count of Afghans killed by Taliban or Russians or >Pashtoons or bin laden in the last 20 years or right up until "the war on >terrorism"? Nobody seems to be counting those. Long before Sept. 11, the >refugee camps in and around Afghanistan were over flowing by the millions >and millions and millions and millions and millions and millions and >millions. How many have died in these camps? Far more than have been >killed by American troops since Sept. 11. Noboby seems to want to include >these counts in the big equation. > > > I think a hierarchy of sympathy with westerners at the top is a pretty > > dangerous one... > >I think a hierachy of sympathy with any single group on top anymore, is >pretty dangerous. > >gSs - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: Click Here ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 08:18:49 -0800 (PST) From: Jeff Dwarf Subject: Re: Out in Ballard looking soulful at the pines FS Thomas wrote: > Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey wrote: > > Yes, of course there are Muslim extremists - but > > there are extremists of every nationality and religion. > > True. You can't hamstring security for the sake of > political correctness, though. End of sentence. End > of story. fine, but we're still ignoring a few things. i like how to be politcally correct, so many people keep saying Muslim American when they mean Arab, never mind that until a few years ago the majority of Arab Americans were Christian (and Muslims are still only barely the majority of Arab Americans now). and never mind that the biggest Muslim country in the world is Indonesia. and never mind that among the Taliban/Al Queida fighters we've caught/detained whatever were a substantial number of Sudanese and Filipinoes. and never mind that Richard Reid is Jamaican Brit. and John Walker Lindh is a white American (and let's not even get mention that if one white American was found amongst the Taliban in October of whenever it was, it's rather unlikely that there aren't white American sleeper Al Queida sitting amongst us now). The fact is, you DON'T know a Muslim just by looking at him the way you can readily see someone's gender or even someone's race. but is seriously doubt any Filipinos, Sudanese, or Indonesians have been reported to the authorities as suspicious. it's a very tricky line trying to weed out possibly suspicious and dangerous people at a time like this, and some level of profiling is probably necessary. but to exclude non-Arabs from being looked at is just stupid, as both Richard Reid and John Walker Lindh have shown so far. i kinda doubt that too many of the right people get that though, so when the next Al Queida attack comes, and it's committed by two guys who look more like 'NSYNC than the guy at 7-11, the goverment and media and public will act shocked and dumbfounded, when they were just duped by their own idiocy. > > (How many people have been killed, how > > many wounded, and how much property damaged by > > anti-abortion fanatics > > They, too, are terrorists and I'm sure are being > pursued, albeit not with the same fervor. by this administration, the only thing they are being sought for is to give them jobs. but that's another issue. ===== "This week, the White House says President Bush meant no disrespect when he referred to the Pakistani people as 'Pakis.' But just to be on the safe side, White House staffers have cancelled his trip to Nigeria" -- Tina Fey, Saturday Night Live's "Weekend Update" "To announce that there must be no criticism of the president or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." -- Theodore Roosevelt . Send FREE Valentine eCards with Yahoo! Greetings! http://greetings.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 10:27:22 -0500 (CDT) From: gSs Subject: RE: Out in Ballard looking soulful at the pines On Wed, 13 Feb 2002, Brian Huddell wrote: > > I think a hierachy of sympathy with any single group on top > > anymore, is pretty dangerous. > > In a pinch, "humans aged 0 to 5 years" might fill the top spot with a > minimum of controversy. > Eeeek (that was my startled bird noise), do you mean from birth to 5 years or from conception to 5 years? Is there a specific time at which a fetus becomes a person or is it not actually a person until after if has been delivered. What if it is premature by say two months, is it actually a person then or only when it can breath and actually eat? If it is not a person until a certain time then can anyone be held for anything other than assaulting the mother if the mother is beaten by someone who's intent is simply to kill the fetus. But then can the person actually be charged with assault if the intent was only to kill the fetus and that can be proven? What if someone introduces something into the mother which will not hurt her but could cause a miscarriage or complications that could lead to a miscarriage. Should the person be charge with murder, attempted murder or assualt even though the woman was not assualted or even injured physically? I guess that should have read: I think a hierachy of non-specific sympathy with any single group on top anymore, is pretty dangerous. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 08:44:21 -0800 From: "Jason R. Thornton" Subject: Re: Out in Ballard looking soulful at the pines At 06:42 AM 2/13/2002 -0800, FS Thomas wrote: >Jeffrey, it's a simple matter of fact: the terrorist >acts carried out on the occasions listed weren't >perpetrated by Scandinavian midgets or Ghanian >businessmen, they were carried out by those of Middle >Easter decent. This is, of course, a false dilemma, which was also the biggest logical fallacy perpetuated by the original "humorous" post. By limiting all the non-Middle Eastern options to what seem like perfectly harmless groups, and defining the terms in a restrictive fashion to every group but Middle Easterners, one is merely creating an unfair, unequal comparison. If you're going to talk about little old ladies, or children, or midgets, why not attribute these "harmless" characteristics to Middle Easterners as well? Why should all "those of Middle Easter(n) decent" be targeted? Are there not little old Middle Eastern women, or children, or midgets, or businessmen, that are perfectly innocent and deserve targeting no more than you do? >In light of 9/11 the increases in >airline safety fall mostly on those of Middle Eastern >origin. And almost all serial killers are white guys, so you should probably have your house bugged. The vast majority of Middle Easterners do not fly planes into buildings. And, if you think Middle Easterners are the only people capable of evil, you're sadly mistaken. For fuck's sake, the Columbine killers, suburban white kids from good homes, came up with a similar plan to hijack a jetliner and crash it into New York City, but luckily were never able to execute it. >Anti-US attacks. Does this include kidnapings? (I >only ask because of the high percentage of Latin >American entries in the category. This is really the heart of the argument - how one defines "terrorism." If anything, it should be looked at in the most unbiased, logical fashion possible, and not in such a way to target specific groups without solving the overall problem. If you overlook certain crimes just to rule out specific groups, you're doing nothing more than attempting to justify your obvious racism. > > (And where was that McVeigh guy from anyway?) > >There's aberrations in every statistical analysis. All terrorists are aberrations if you're looking at the overall worldwide population numbers. > > Yes, of course there are Muslim extremists - but > > there are extremists of > > every nationality and religion. > >True. You can't hamstring security for the sake of >political correctness, though. End of sentence. End >of story. Saying "end of sentence" and "end of story" doesn't magically win you an argument. You cannot hamstring liberty for the sake of some false sense of security. And, if you base your security screening on illogic or obvious fallacies, you're never going to truly be secure. You are again just going to overlook another potential threat because you're instead too busy stereotyping the innocent. Abracadabra. - --Jason "Only the few know the sweetness of the twisted apples." - Sherwood Anderson ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 08:55:57 -0800 From: "Jason R. Thornton" Subject: Re: Out in Ballard looking soulful at the pines At 09:32 AM 2/13/2002 -0500, gSs wrote: >If a string >of crimes is committed and all the witnesses say there is one thing about >the suspect that they remember distinctly, that information is used to >create a profile so that a more effective investigation and can be made. >What this also does is give possible future victims a little better chance >of not being a victim. They all say the person was a white man, so should >all Chinese women now be considered suspects? But if they are excluded, >simply based on descriptions from witnesses, is that not profiling? Why >don't they just detain and search all of us as we walk out our front door >on suspicion of terrorist activity. We are all suspects, aren't we? No, we >are not all suspects. There appears to be a few distinct things that all >of the terrorists have so far had in common and that data is being used to >create a profile. There's a big difference between your example and what was being advocated here. Looking for a specific person suspected of committing a crime based on an accurate description and credible information gathered about the crime is perfectly logical. If you're going after a certain person tied to a terrorist group, and you know this person to be of Middle Eastern decent, then there's nothing wrong with looking for a specific Middle Easterner that looks a certain way. If witnesses all agree that the guy that robbed the bank had blue eyes, you can rule out that guy with green eyes the cops picked for "acting suspicious." It's another thing entirely to target a group as *potential* criminals, based solely on their ethnicity. - --Jason "Only the few know the sweetness of the twisted apples." - Sherwood Anderson ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 10:55:17 -0600 From: "Brian Huddell" Subject: RE: Out in Ballard looking soulful at the pines > > > I think a hierachy of sympathy with any single group on top > > > anymore, is pretty dangerous. > > > > In a pinch, "humans aged 0 to 5 years" might fill the top > spot with a > > minimum of controversy. > > > > Eeeek (that was my startled bird noise), do you mean from > birth to 5 years or from conception to 5 years? Is there a > specific time at which a fetus becomes a person or is it not > actually a person until after if has been delivered. What if > it is premature by say two months, is it actually a person > then or only when it can breath and actually eat? If it is > not a person until a certain time then can anyone be held for > anything other than assaulting the mother if the mother is > beaten by someone who's intent is simply to kill the fetus. > But then can the person actually be charged with assault if > the intent was only to kill the fetus and that can be proven? > What if someone introduces something into the mother which > will not hurt her but could cause a miscarriage or > complications that could lead to a miscarriage. Should the > person be charge with murder, attempted murder or assualt > even though the woman was not assualted or even injured physically? Oops, sorry to have put you through all that. I just meant "kids, aren't they great? Doesn't it suck when they suffer?" forgetting that their status was so politically charged. If it helps any, my standard with my own kid was that life begins at the moment you are able to hold your head up and focus on an entire Tellytubbies episode. Until then all bets are off. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 11:17:54 -0500 (CDT) From: gSs Subject: Re: Out in Ballard looking soulful at the pines On Wed, 13 Feb 2002, Jason R. Thornton wrote: > There's a big difference between your example and what was being advocated > here. I was just using that as a simple example to show how profiling is used regularly in crime prevention. > If you're going after a certain person tied to a terrorist group, and you > know this person to be of Middle Eastern decent, then there's nothing wrong > with looking for a specific Middle Easterner that looks a certain way. The specific specifics are the problem. That is why we use profiles. When the army coming over the hill has outfited each of its soldiers with a destinct uniform and a big red star on their cap, the enemy is easy to spot. When the army coming over the hill is made of people that fit any number of profiles then it can be very difficult. So far the army coming over the hill fits a specific profile. > It's another thing entirely to target a group as *potential* criminals, > based solely on their ethnicity. Not if they fit the profile. gSs ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 17:31:26 +0000 From: "Abydos *" Subject: Postponing Hibernation Glenn: >You know what that means, don't you? The list has now become bigger >than >its subject. Doe that make Fegmaniax a Tardis? I -have- always wanted one. - --------------- My first Robyn show, 87 or 88, the Chestnut Caberet in Philly. Ken and Max, I made every NY/Hoboken date till '90, so I saw him several times at the Ritz an Maxwells. Any distinctive markings for those show? - ----------------- Ken >I uploaded the mp3 to my website. Oh Ken, thank you. - ------------- Reap John Henry Abbot. http://www.nytimes.com/2002/02/11/nyregion/11ABBO.html - -------------------------------- Barbara: Hello, sound like your about the same age and stage of life as Jill and me. So, what music have you loved, and how does it contibute to what you like of Robyn's?(Ill assume that youve lurked here long enough to know the second part of that question is entirely optional. We have many, many episodes on this Tardis without the good Dr. even being reffered to, let alone starring.) Drew: >I had wondered how he suddenly found himself >able to carry a tune. I like his funny little voice Hey--Reed is the only singer who writes songs in my range! All 9 notes of it;-) He's perfect proof of my pet contention that phrasing, mood and tude are what make a singer, not just hitting notes. Nevertheless, Im no real good as a fangirl. I didn't even know Loaded had two versions. Yup, the copy I own is on vynal and dates back to the year of its release. Is the new one part of the box set I cant afford? - --------------------------- So Godwin, what is the addy for this tantalizing Webpage of yours? - ---------------------------- Miles: >I started to get >interesting in how the rhythm guitar weaves around the organ figure, >and >by the third I was completely hypnotized. Thats it! How can I say this--both intruments are so -there-. You can see their sounds off in an altra-universe, whirling around each other like streamers in ascending and descending patterns. I have a weakness for strong rythmic guitar so this is one of my favorite tracks in all rock n roll. Its fairly easy to trance-out on mid-tempo stuff. Im not sure I know anything else this fast and this intense that is also this hypnotic. I love a strong rhythm guitar, its an overlooked expertise. This may show how much my early taste was formed by the Stones. And why I like what Robyn got from Martin Carthy so much. (Yes, I know Reed, Richards and Carthy arent supposed to rhyme--but in my altra-universe, they do. With Chuck Berry:-) As for Sweet Jane, I love both versions. Again, theres just that great rock n roll riff. Years ago, after New York was released Reed played in Philly, half solo and half with a kick-ass band. So after showing he could give Frank Sinatra a run for his money as an interpreter of the divine Harold Arlen(He did One for My Baby really well)he brought out the band. And when they hit the Sweet Jane riff it was one of those moments, well, where rock n roll justifies its own existance. - ------------------ I also definiatly recommend The Kinks Chronicles. If I was ever put on a desert island thou, it would be a difficult choice tween that one and Village Green Preservation Society. Sometimes I don't know if its just my weird taste or that something really is better than its critical rep, so thank you Miles for making me consider perhaps the latter in terms of Preservation 1 or 2. Whenever I pass construction of more suburban sprawl(those awefull, rickity postmodern developments overtaking farmland, called things like "Ye Olde Village at Hunter's Run")the song Demolition plays in my head. Now, if I could only find a copy of "When I Turn off the Living Room Light." - ---------------------- Kay, putting her head between her legs... (which leads me to an thought(or should I say longing) I had the other day while watching Cory. If humans, like dogs, could lick their own genitals, would civilization as we know it have developed?) It is of interest to note that while some dolphins are reported to have learned English -- up to fifty words used in correct context -- no human being has been reported to have learned dolphinese. -Carl Sagan, astronomer and writer (1934-1996) _________________________________________________________________ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V11 #49 *******************************