From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V12 #223 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Wednesday, June 18 2003 Volume 12 : Number 223 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: Down (with) The Hatch [Capuchin ] Re: celeb birthdays [Michael R Godwin ] Re: I mean, can you really have *too* many? [Michael R Godwin ] list/Kylie/Wowsers/Birthdays/Fitba/and elderly male relative T Cobbley. [] Re: I mean, can you really have *too* many? ["Matt Sewell" ] Re:leaving the covey [minister of misinformation ] Re: leaving the covey [Eb ] everybody stop leaving! ["Brian Huddell" ] Re: everybody stop leaving! [mary ] RE: leaving the covey ["Iosso, Ken" ] RE: Down (with) The Hatch ["Jason Brown \(Echo Services Inc\)" ] Batten down the Hatches ["Rex.Broome" ] Re: Batten down the Hatches ["Jason R. Thornton" ] Re: Batten down the Hatches [Miles Goosens ] I said I didn't anymore, he said that's what you think ["Glen Uber" ] Re: legends at the mike ["Glen Uber" ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 01:45:59 -0700 (PDT) From: Capuchin Subject: Re: Down (with) The Hatch On Tue, 17 Jun 2003, FS Thomas wrote: > "There's no excuse for anyone violating copyright laws," Hatch said. Hasn't this guy ever heard of the fair use doctrine? And regardless of that pesky Constitution and its crazy amendments granting political rights, ANYONE saying that "there's no excuse" for violating ANY law is total lunacy. Every law needs to be broken in some circumstances. J. - -- _______________________________________________ Capuchin capuchin@bitmine.net Jeme A Brelin ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 12:10:23 +0100 (BST) From: Michael R Godwin Subject: Re: celeb birthdays On Tue, 17 Jun 2003, Sumiko Keay wrote: > Shouldn't Kylie Minogue be on the IMDB? I mean, wasn't she on some > soap? Or am I confusing her with different Australian singers? IIRC she was one of the founding castmembers of 'Neighbours'. Of course I never watched it (!) but I did have teenage stepdaughters in the house in those days - late 80s, I think. > There was also a Richard Strange who sounds familar but I don't > remember from where. Doctors of Madness: Not to be confused with Steve Strange. - - Mike Godwin n.p. Visage "Fade to Grey" ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 12:26:17 +0100 (BST) From: Michael R Godwin Subject: Re: I mean, can you really have *too* many? On Tue, 17 Jun 2003, Stewart C. Russell wrote: > CBC News: Man fined for having too many frogs: > "Sun Huynh, 47, was convicted under the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act of illegally transporting bullfrogs and snapping turtles". 'Illegally transporting bullfrogs' - fine. But since when has it been an offence to photograph turtles? - - MRG PS I was reading an article about 'mediocre' recently. Apparently it used to be used _favourably_, as in "no, I haven't got too many bullfrogs or too few, my catch of bullfrogs is mediocre". ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 07:43:56 -0400 From: "FS Thomas" Subject: RE: Down (with) The Hatch Sky falling? Fire, brimstone? Cats and dogs, living together? Whatwhatwhat?!? I *agree* with Capuchin?!? What the *HELL* is going on here? - -ferris. > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-fegmaniax@smoe.org [mailto:owner-fegmaniax@smoe.org] On Behalf > Of Capuchin > Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 4:46 AM > To: The Oracle > Subject: Re: Down (with) The Hatch > > On Tue, 17 Jun 2003, FS Thomas wrote: > > "There's no excuse for anyone violating copyright laws," Hatch said. > > Hasn't this guy ever heard of the fair use doctrine? > > And regardless of that pesky Constitution and its crazy amendments > granting political rights, ANYONE saying that "there's no excuse" for > violating ANY law is total lunacy. Every law needs to be broken in some > circumstances. > > J. > -- > _______________________________________________ > > Capuchin capuchin@bitmine.net Jeme A Brelin ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 23:49:01 +1200 From: grutness@surf4nix.com (James Dignan) Subject: list/Kylie/Wowsers/Birthdays/Fitba/and elderly male relative T Cobbley. >> i will also say that it has now become a running joke with some >> friends that when i have an interesting tidbit of information that >seems >> completely random, i have almost certainly gotten it here. >> > >This list is great for this kind of info. The only small problem I have >is that when I quote the source I tend to get blank stares from my >associates. Oh well. > >And thanks to Eb and others, I am always the first to know when >someone famous dies. the running joke with me is that whenever someone starts having a discussion about something weird, I tend to chime in with "funny you should say that - there was this discussion about that on Fegmaniax last week..." >>Shouldn't Kylie Minogue be on the IMDB? I mean, wasn't she on some >>soap? Or am I confusing her with different Australian singers? > > http://us.imdb.com/Name?Imbruglia,+Natalie a lot of Aussie singers seem to have started on soaps. Natalie Imbruglia, Kylie Minogue, Penny Flanagan (I think), Jason Donovan... Kylie started, alongside Jason, on ":Neighbours", one of the most pernicious pieces of television ever to hit the screens. >That's also the show they always seemed >to make jokes about on "Whose Line Is It Anyway?" and who can forget the Red Dwarf take-off of it: "Androids" >James: >>>I don't think any of us are wowsers, are we? > >Whoa, does that have a meaining or are you just acting like it does? It was >a pure, dumb exclamation when I wrote it; I'd hate to think it's an epithet >of some kind. a wowser is an extreme prude (it is also used to mean a teetotaller). Mary Whitehouse was a good example (as was Patricia Bartlett, but you won't have heard of her). The sort of person who thinks that the Amish are too licentious. Originally an Aussie term, it's common in NZ and also in South Africa, I believe. >>>Liz Fraser sang the buts in Lothlsrien, IIRC. > >The buts? Is that like the blues, only more conditional? blame the kiwi accent ;) "the bits" also I note that o-acute comes out as s. Megan gets Joe Strummer and Count Basie, I get Benny Goodman and Topper Headon. Maybe we should do a trade... >PPS James, Steven Gerrard is developing into a *superb* player. You should >be proud of him. I might be if he didn't play for friggin' Liverpool. Go the Gunners! >>>>Hrmmmph: nowhere near as good as my new band, "Stop! My Ass Is on Fire!" > >And now, although I didn't the first time I saw it, I'm hearing this to the >tune of "Hairdresser on Fire". And I would like to hear Morrissey sing it >that way. being an Eno fan I have to say that immediately I saw it I heard the second line "better throw it in the water". James PS - you 12/12ers might like to know that your b'day (pronounced 'bidet') is Kenya's national holiday (and Pennsylvania's, I believe). Others available on request ;) PPS - May 30th: Anguilla and Croatia. James Dignan, Dunedin, New Zealand -.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.- =-.-=-.-=-.- You talk to me as if from a distance .-=-.-=-.-=-. -=-. And I reply with impressions chosen from another time .-=- .-=-.-=-.-=-.-=- (Brian Eno - "By this River") -.-=-.-=-.-=-.-= ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 12:50:11 +0100 From: "Matt Sewell" Subject: Re: I mean, can you really have *too* many? *Throws rotten tomato* Boo! Gettoff! >From: Michael R Godwin >On Tue, 17 Jun 2003, Stewart C. Russell wrote: > > CBC News: Man fined for having too many frogs: >"Sun Huynh, 47, was convicted under the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act >of illegally transporting bullfrogs and snapping turtles". > >'Illegally transporting bullfrogs' - fine. But since when has it been an >offence to photograph turtles? >- MRG > >PS I was reading an article about 'mediocre' recently. Apparently it used >to be used _favourably_, as in "no, I haven't got too many bullfrogs or >too few, my catch of bullfrogs is mediocre". - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Build your own online music collection when you sign up for MSN Music Club! ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 09:04:09 -0400 From: Ken Weingold Subject: Re: I mean, can you really have *too* many? On Wed, Jun 18, 2003, Michael R Godwin wrote: > 'Illegally transporting bullfrogs' - fine. But since when has it been an > offence to photograph turtles? Only when they're under 18 and out of their shells. Sorry, had to take that one. - -Ken ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 04:21:39 +0930 From: minister of misinformation Subject: Re:leaving the covey Fegs, I have to agree that its a sad day that the quail has signed off the list, Its true he hasn't been his old hilarious self for the past few years, but in his heyday - he was the funniest and most original poster to any list that I ever came across and we had a great deal of fun in the olden days , with the odd flame war thrown in about the grateful dead- remember those Eb ! somehow, even those were different to the vitriol and nastiness that is often present in lists in these troubled times. I think that as politics has become more polarized , net lists have tended to reflect this and since most members are Americans , the degree of paranoia and insecurity felt in the states has been mirrored here and elsewhere . This has also happened to some extent in oztralia too, but overall we ain't quite as hazed as the US public are at present . well I just wanted to say that all the old surreal posse posts are still cached here http://tinpan.fortunecity.com/ebony/546/Robyn.html and in particular the quailspiracies which were his greatest achievement http://tinpan.fortunecity.com/ebony/546/quailspiricies.html and that I'm going to say goodbye too, in the last years I only looked at the digests every few weeks to see if anything interesting had happened and invariably , recently nothing much had ........ There have been some really good people here - James, Susan , Jon Fetter , Bayard , Tom ,eddie, mike godwin , gnat , quail lj, woj, even Eb- (despite our spats in the past ) and lots of others I can't remember now, anyway most of you would not remember me as I have not posted here for years - but to you all I say - fare thee well and --- lighten up !!!!! You know cthullu is angry with us as we no longer worship the great old ones sufficiently commander lang ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 08:26:11 -0700 From: Eb Subject: Re: leaving the covey >Lang: >...even Eb All right, there it is again...everyone has to take another drink.... Eb ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 10:27:11 -0500 From: "Brian Huddell" Subject: everybody stop leaving! I'm serious. I'll just find you and bore you in your own homes anyway. +brian (first stop, Brooklyn!) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 11:37:36 -0400 From: mary Subject: Re: everybody stop leaving! At 10:27 AM 6/18/2003 -0500, Brian Huddell wrote: >I'm serious. I'll just find you and bore you in your own homes anyway. > >+brian (first stop, Brooklyn!) Yes, do come to Brooklyn! In fact, there should be some big Feg get-together. It's been ages since I've met a new Feg. I suggest we all fly out to Jame's place in NZ. Commander Lang - good to see your re-appearance on the list. Now if I could only get my soul-sister Sharon back on the list I will be happy. Rex - were you ever able to order "Luxor"? s.Mary np - The Flaming Lips "Yoshimi Battles the Pink Robot" ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 11:05:42 -0500 From: "Iosso, Ken" Subject: RE: leaving the covey Hate walking into a party just when everyone's leaving. But there's still beer in the fridge! So I'm plunking myself down on the couch anyway. Praise God that I missed the Presidential recount and war wars. Ken Iosso -----Original Message----- From: minister of misinformation [mailto:coco95@senet.com.au] Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 1:52 PM To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Subject: Re:leaving the covey Fegs, I have to agree that its a sad day that the quail has signed off the list, Its true he hasn't been his old hilarious self for the past few years, but in his heyday - he was the funniest and most original poster to any list that I ever came across and we had a great deal of fun in the olden days , with the odd flame war thrown in about the grateful dead- remember those Eb ! somehow, even those were different to the vitriol and nastiness that is often present in lists in these troubled times. I think that as politics has become more polarized , net lists have tended to reflect this and since most members are Americans , the degree of paranoia and insecurity felt in the states has been mirrored here and elsewhere . This has also happened to some extent in oztralia too, but overall we ain't quite as hazed as the US public are at present . well I just wanted to say that all the old surreal posse posts are still cached here http://tinpan.fortunecity.com/ebony/546/Robyn.html and in particular the quailspiracies which were his greatest achievement http://tinpan.fortunecity.com/ebony/546/quailspiricies.html and that I'm going to say goodbye too, in the last years I only looked at the digests every few weeks to see if anything interesting had happened and invariably , recently nothing much had ........ There have been some really good people here - James, Susan , Jon Fetter , Bayard , Tom ,eddie, mike godwin , gnat , quail lj, woj, even Eb- (despite our spats in the past ) and lots of others I can't remember now, anyway most of you would not remember me as I have not posted here for years - but to you all I say - fare thee well and --- lighten up !!!!! You know cthullu is angry with us as we no longer worship the great old ones sufficiently commander lang ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 10:02:38 -0700 From: "Jason Brown \(Echo Services Inc\)" Subject: RE: Down (with) The Hatch FS Thomas exclaimed: > Sky falling? > Fire, brimstone? > Cats and dogs, living together? > Whatwhatwhat?!? > I *agree* with Capuchin?!? > What the *HELL* is going on here? Well there are some sentiments we can probably all agree on like Nuclear holocaust is bad, cutting in line is rude, killing your co-workers is a bad idea, etc. Letting Sony trash my computer because I downloaded an Mp3 of "Mr. Smurftastic" is probably among those ideas. Jason, who thought Jeme was cool before the 2000 Election ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 19:06:42 +0200 From: Ethyl Ketone Subject: Fwd: Down (with) The Hatch From a friend. Please don't argue with me about content - just thought it might be good to see that people ARE responding. - - c > Ridiculous! An associate of mine had this to say: > > "I emailed Hatch: > > -------------------------------------------- > > I happen to agree that online trading of copyrighted material is > wrong. In > fact, I think it's an inappropriate use of the internet, straining our > already overloaded infrastructure and bandwidth. > > However, your statement that damaging someone's computer "may be the > only > way you can teach somebody about copyrights", is a direct affront to > the law > which prohibits just such activity. I doubt that you would have any > trouble > at all finding people that equate such action to be something just > short of > terrorism. Further, such action would defy the oft-stated rule of law > which > suggests that a citizen is innocent unless proven guilty, assuming > that any > music/multimedia file being downloaded must be coipyrighted or > illegally > obtained. > > Your callous disregard for the law of the land does not speak well for > my > freedoms and rights. The government should not be involved in this > action at > all. If the entertainment industry desires to take steps to prevent > acts > that are already recognized as illegal, they should bear the full > brunt of > investigatory, and prosecutory costs and efforts at THEIR expense, not > at > the expense of the tax-payer. > > More legislation is not necessary - we already have laws on the books > concerning the issue at hand. I leave you with this thought - how would > *you* like it if someone hacked *your* computer because they're on some > half-witted and self-righteous crusade?" > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Ethyl Ketone" >>> >>> >>> From The Washington Post (http://tinyurl.com/el0a) >>> >>> Hatch Takes Aim at Illegal Downloading >>> >>> >>> By TED BRIDIS >>> The Associated Press >>> Tuesday, June 17, 2003; 5:22 PM >>> >>> >>> WASHINGTON - The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee said >>> Tuesday >>> he favors developing new technology to remotely destroy the computers >>> of >>> people who illegally download music from the Internet. >>> >>> The surprise remarks by Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, during a hearing on >>> copyright abuses represent a dramatic escalation in the frustrating >>> battle by industry executives and lawmakers in Washington against >>> illegal music downloads. >>> >>> During a discussion on methods to frustrate computer users who >>> illegally >>> exchange music and movie files over the Internet, Hatch asked >>> technology >>> executives about ways to damage computers involved in such file >>> trading. >>> Legal experts have said any such attack would violate federal >>> anti-hacking laws. >>> >>> "No one is interested in destroying anyone's computer," replied Randy >>> Saaf of MediaDefender Inc., a secretive Los Angeles company that >>> builds >>> technology to disrupt music downloads. One technique deliberately >>> downloads pirated material very slowly so other users can't. >>> >>> "I'm interested," Hatch interrupted. He said damaging someone's >>> computer >>> "may be the only way you can teach somebody about copyrights." >>> >>> The senator acknowledged Congress would have to enact an exemption >>> for >>> copyright owners from liability for damaging computers. He endorsed >>> technology that would twice warn a computer user about illegal online >>> behavior, "then destroy their computer." >>> >>> "If we can find some way to do this without destroying their >>> machines, >>> we'd be interested in hearing about that," Hatch said. "If that's the >>> only way, then I'm all for destroying their machines. If you have a >>> few >>> hundred thousand of those, I think people would realize" the >>> seriousness >>> of their actions, he said. >>> >>> "There's no excuse for anyone violating copyright laws," Hatch said. >>> >>> Rep. Rick Boucher, D-Va., who has been active in copyright debates in >>> Washington, urged Hatch to reconsider. Boucher described Hatch's role >>> as >>> chairman of the Judiciary Committee as "a very important position, so >>> when Senator Hatch indicates his views with regard to a particular >>> subject, we all take those views very seriously." >>> >>> Some legal experts suggested Hatch's provocative remarks were more >>> likely intended to compel technology and music executives to work >>> faster >>> toward ways to protect copyrights online than to signal forthcoming >>> legislation. >>> >>> "It's just the frustration of those who are looking at enforcing laws >>> that are proving very hard to enforce," said Orin Kerr, a former >>> Justice >>> Department cybercrimes prosecutor and associate professor at George >>> Washington University law school. >>> >>> The entertainment industry has gradually escalated its fight against >>> Internet file-traders, targeting the most egregious pirates with >>> civil >>> lawsuits. The Recording Industry Association of America recently won >>> a >>> federal court decision making it significantly easier to identify and >>> track consumers - even those hiding behind aliases - using popular >>> Internet file-sharing software. >>> >>> Kerr predicted it was "extremely unlikely" for Congress to approve a >>> hacking exemption for copyright owners, partly because of risks of >>> collateral damage when innocent users might be wrongly targeted. >>> >>> "It wouldn't work," Kerr said. "There's no way of limiting the >>> damage." >>> >>> Last year, Rep. Howard Berman, D-Calif., ignited a firestorm across >>> the >>> Internet over a proposal to give the entertainment industry new >>> powers >>> to disrupt downloads of pirated music and movies. It would have >>> lifted >>> civil and criminal penalties against entertainment companies for >>> disabling, diverting or blocking the trading of pirated songs and >>> movies >>> on the Internet. >>> >>> But Berman, ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary panel on the >>> Internet and intellectual property, always has maintained that his >>> proposal wouldn't permit hacker-style attacks by the industry on >>> Internet users. >>> >>> --- >>> >>> On the Net: Sen. Hatch: http://hatch.senate.gov ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 10:38:51 -0700 From: "Rex.Broome" Subject: Batten down the Hatches Nuppy: >>PS: I'm really enjoying the new Dandy Warhols "Welcome to the Monkey >>House" 1st lyrics start: Wire's coming back again. Elastica got sued by them. >>When Michael Jackson dies we're covering Blackbird... Dude. I was totally thinking about writing the Dandys off this time around, but that is too great to miss. Speaking of Wire, I just got my copy of their new album. It's really truly great, and it's probably doing at least as much to bore through my ear infection as my antibiotics. _____ So this is a "wowser": >>a mealy-mouthed hypocrite, a pious prude, one who condemns or seeks to >>curtail the pleasures of others or who works to have his or her own rigid >>morality enforced on all) ... and yet James doesn't think *any* of us are one? (smiley emoticon here if I used them) I'm trying to think of whose exclamatory trademark "wowsers" was. I'm thinking Daphne from Scooby Doo. Carnt be arsed to google it. ______ >>The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee said Tuesday >>he favors developing new technology to remotely destroy the computers of >>people who illegally download music from the Internet. Good gawd. This is surely illegal in addition to evil. What's a good analogy here? You've got this device that you use for various things. You use it once to do something which, let's just say for the sake of arguement, is illegal. As punishment, the device itself is destroyed. So. I make an illegal left turn and my car should self-destruct? If you were going to fine folks for downloads, there would be a specific amount to the fine, right? And yet who knows how much your computer is worth, to say nothing of the intellectual property or material essential to your livelihood which might be on the hard drive? Jeezus. Not too far off the mark from choppin' off shoplifter's hands. Ah well. Miles: >>Exhibit #47 of Miles' Declining Hitchcock Fandom. My first thought on >>spying that copy of LUXOR was "ten years ago, you would have plonked >>down the $21.99 without thinking twice," and my second thought was "ten >>years ago, you would have already bought the import from a mail-order shop >>and wouldn't need to get it from Tower." Ordered Luxor by snail-mail m'self. I'm not reading it as that much of an interest barometer on my own part. Over the past year (read: since 1 year deep into parenthood) my tendency to purchase *anything* on release dates has declined, and it's largely because, more often than not, I was finding I was buying records and then-- no matter how excited I was about them-- not being able to listen to them for days afterwards. Still evaluate them with the same zeal when I get to it, but I also probably realistically don't give them as many spins as I once would have, either. Maybe it's just getting older. I've seen this also amongst some friends who are both (A) childless, and (B) more plugged in and hipper musically than myself; the common factor seems to be: They're My Age. I remember being mildly astonished that my friend Mike didn't have Murray Street a week and a half after its release... I think that's when I started to let go a little bit. Of course, I useta see between 80 and 100 films theatrically a year, as recently as 1998... and that's way down now, apologies to World Party. Cheers, Rex ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 11:27:46 -0700 From: "Jason R. Thornton" Subject: Re: Batten down the Hatches At 10:38 AM 6/18/2003 -0700, Rex.Broome wrote: >If you were going to fine folks for downloads, there would be a specific >amount to the fine, right? And yet who knows how much your computer is >worth, to say nothing of the intellectual property or material essential to >your livelihood which might be on the hard drive? > >Jeezus. Not too far off the mark from choppin' off shoplifter's hands. Even worse, it would be like storeowners taking it upon themselves to decide who was or was not guilty and then having a private security force grab the person and cut off his or her hand right then and there in the store. No trial to determine guilt, no assumption of innocence, no real involvement from the legal system even. It would be nothing more than vigilantism. No matter how you feel about copyrighting intellectual property, Hatch's scheme would be a gross violation of the basic rights of the accused. According to our good old Constitution: "No person shall be ... deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." and "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury ... and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense. " and "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted." Fining people and even confiscating equipment could probably be justified, but it should not be in the hands of corporations or copyright owners to dole out "justice" as they see fit. Individuals deserve the right to a fair trial, and as noted by Rex, if found guilty of violating current laws, punishment that is not excessive, that won't destroy their own property, intellectual or physical. - --Jason "Only the few know the sweetness of the twisted apples." - Sherwood Anderson ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 13:40:04 -0500 From: Miles Goosens Subject: Re: Batten down the Hatches At 11:27 AM 6/18/2003 -0700, Jason R. Thornton wrote: >No matter how you feel about copyrighting intellectual property, Hatch's >scheme would be a gross violation of the basic rights of the accused. > >According to our good old Constitution: >"No person shall be ... deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due >process of law." > >and > >"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a >speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury ... and to be informed of the >nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses >against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his >favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense. " > >and > >"Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor >cruel and unusual punishments inflicted." We still have a Constitution? later, Miles ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 14:00:18 -0700 From: "Glen Uber" Subject: I said I didn't anymore, he said that's what you think Eb earnestly scribbled: >>Lang: >>...even Eb > >All right, there it is again...everyone has to take another drink.... Now THERE'S a topic idea: A feg drinking game! On a good day, most of us would be wasted before noon, James' time. ;) - -- Cheers! - -g- "Soylens Viridis Homines Est" ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 17:07:52 -0400 From: Ken Weingold Subject: Re: I said I didn't anymore, he said that's what you think On Wed, Jun 18, 2003, Glen Uber wrote: > >All right, there it is again...everyone has to take another drink.... > > Now THERE'S a topic idea: A feg drinking game! > > On a good day, most of us would be wasted before noon, James' time. ;) I say we just adopt the Withnail and I drinking game. No one would survive. - -Ken ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 17:12:50 -0400 (EDT) From: Jill Brand Subject: legends at the mike Off the top of my head, I know that my husband's birthday band would be a doozy, with Elvis Presley and David Bowie singing their hearts out (Don't Step on My Electric Blue Suede Shoes). Could someone send me the URL for that birthday site? I think I share a birthday with Jeff Beck, and I know for sure that Ulysses S. Grant died on that day. Jill ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 14:28:20 -0700 From: "Glen Uber" Subject: Re: legends at the mike Jill earnestly scribbled: >Off the top of my head, I know that my husband's birthday band would be a >doozy, with Elvis Presley and David Bowie singing their hearts out (Don't >Step on My Electric Blue Suede Shoes). Could someone send me the URL for >that birthday site? I think I share a birthday with Jeff Beck, and I know >for sure that Ulysses S. Grant died on that day. This is the URL for mine: Change the 11|06 at the end to your date of birth in MM|DD format. Your husband's band would be pretty good. He'd also have Shirley Bassey, Terry Sylvester (the Hollies) and Little Anthony on vocals, Robbie Krieger & Luther Perkins (Johnny Cash) on guitar, and Dave Weckl on drums. Couldn't find any bass players, but with both David Bowie and Luther Perkins on guitar, maybe Krieger could switch over to the 4-string. Oh, and you'd also have Mike Reno of Loverboy and Christy "One Day At A Time" Lane claiming they are with the band, but they'd be lying. And Soupy Sales could open the show with some hilarious sketches. - -- Cheers! - -g- "Soylens Viridis Homines Est" ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V12 #223 ********************************