From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V13 #144 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Tuesday, May 18 2004 Volume 13 : Number 144 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: Greg Shell vs ROTW [] Re: Moral high kiosk [] Re: fegmaniax-digest V13 #143 [AidMerr@aol.com] RE: Moral High Ground ["Matt Sewell" ] RE: Moral High Ground ["Fortissimo" ] Re: the moral high ground [] Re: Moral High Ground [Barbara E Soutar ] RE: Moral High Ground ["Matt Sewell" ] RE: Moral High Ground ["Brian Huddell" ] RE: fegmaniax-digest V13 #135 [] Re: fegmaniax-digest V13 #143 [] RE: Greg Shell vs ROTW ["Palle Hoffstein" ] RE: Moral High Ground ["Palle Hoffstein" ] Letting Ross off the hook... ["Rex.Broome" ] RE: Letting Ross off the hook... ["Palle Hoffstein" ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 10:24:26 -0500 From: Subject: Re: Greg Shell vs ROTW [demime could not interpret encoding binary - treating as plain text] On Tue, 18 May 2004 09:17 , Fortissimo sent: >On behalf of myself as an American, I exclude myself from this statement. >Greg Shell doesn't speak for me. And you don't speak for me. Shooh, now that this is cleared up, we can continue. gSs - ---- Msg sent via WebMail ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 10:36:17 -0500 From: Subject: Re: Moral high kiosk [demime could not interpret encoding binary - treating as plain text] On Mon, 17 May 2004 16:59 , Capuchin sent: >I think this is exactly the arrogance that was being condemned in the post >to which you're replying. Sometimes it has the opposite effect. >Do you have any idea how much the U.S. has grown to depend on its client >states overseas? And them on us. It goes both ways and my point was that we could all become independant of each other. I don't think that's what most people want. >We don't have the domestic production base to say "so the fuck what?" anymore. But we could, easily, in less than 5 years. >Jeffrey's comment on the foreign debt is a solid one, certainly, but there >is also the issue of debts due in U.S. dollars that are the principle >reason many nations are forced to produce goods for the American market. I believe we are owed far more than we owe, though I haven't looked at those numbers in a while. >And as much as I'd like to see the Capitalists ousted worldwide, I think >the effect of a sudden revolt in more than one major nation could be >catastrophic in this age of nuclear power plants, weapons, and toxic >industry. Man, that makes at least two things in the last year that we have agreed upon. gSs - ---- Msg sent via WebMail ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 11:44:35 EDT From: AidMerr@aol.com Subject: Re: fegmaniax-digest V13 #143 (Provoked into delurking once more) > >No. What I was saying is most americans are at the point where we don't > >really > >care what you think of us. > > On behalf of myself as an American, I exclude myself from this statement. > Greg Shell doesn't speak for me. I second this. Greg Shell and his "If it's on Fox it must be true" buddies make me want to send back my passport. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 16:47:09 +0100 From: "Matt Sewell" Subject: RE: Moral High Ground I have to agree with Brian on this - it's a lazy cliche over here that Americans are either a) stupid; b) fat; c) Have no sense of irony. Of course when I went to America they wouldn't let me in (something about my length of hair and the books I was reading... actually come to think of it the airport security seemed stupid and lacking in a sense of irony, but I think this is something airport security has in common the world over...), but I would guess that if you took 100 Americans at random and 100 other people at random from any other (certainly Western for fatness) nation, you'd probably find an equal number of stupid people, fat people and people with no sense of irony in both demographics... I like national discrimination when it's well-observed, funny and clever, so hearing "oh American's have no sense of irony (that's my own particular most-hated)" makes me want to scream... Of course, Americans quite clearly aren't bright enough to get rid of their *terrible* government but *looks at every other country on Earth* neither are the rest of us... Cheers Matt >From: "Brian Huddell" > >Barbara Soutar: > > >Your government with its > > "embedded journalists" has fooled you. Everyone else in the > > world is not fooled. > >I've got no interest in Shell vs. Soutar, but I can't let this insult stand. >If you think, Barbara, that it is somehow *difficult* for Americans to find >solid information about the war or anything else then you are hopelessly >misinformed. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Watch LIVE baseball games on your computer with MLB.TV, included with MSN Premium! ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 11:14:42 -0500 From: "Fortissimo" Subject: RE: Moral High Ground On Tue, 18 May 2004 16:47:09 +0100, "Matt Sewell" said: > I have to agree with Brian on this - it's a lazy cliche over here that > Americans are either a) stupid; b) fat; c) Have no sense of irony. You must be dumb because you used a french word that I don't know what it means. I'd say more, but I gotta go eat my midmorning bacon triple-cheeseburger right now. - ------------------------------- ...Jeff J e f f r e y N o r m a n The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com/ :: Some days, you just can't get rid of a bomb :: --Batman ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 11:30:26 -0500 From: Subject: Re: the moral high ground [demime could not interpret encoding binary - treating as plain text] On Mon, 17 May 2004 16:52 , Capuchin sent: >> Why don't you give examples of where this has worked well. List places >> or periods where a repressive government has been overthrown or had it's >> structure changed dramatically by non-violent means to be followed by a >> significant improvement in the overall well being of the governed. South >> Africa and India are examples that could be used, but don't. > >But don't? What's THAT all about? >"Give me an example of a high quality, internally geared bicycle hub. >Shimano Nexus and Sturmy-Archer are examples that could be used, but >don't." > >Why can't I use the two BEST examples? India is by FAR the best example >of this and it was done against the greatest empire in the world by some >of the poorest people. Most people are familiar with both those examples, I wanted something we weren't all so familiar with. The indians continue to struggle today. Are things actually better for most people in India now? The British killed 4 million in 1943 alone through famine. Forced or not, they are responsible. So are you saying in 1947, when the Brits divided India, created Pakistan and then went home, they were the greatest empire on earth? I guess they owe their peaceful coexistance to the British. Who had no blood spilled during the struggle for independance or self rule, the South Africans, the Indians or the British? The suffering inflicted by the British on the people of India is matched by few others. The South Africans fought for years against white rule and gained self rule after a great deal of death and misery at the hands of the European colonizers. >> No, I am asking you what you think should be done to end the rule of >> tyrannical governments. Like for instance in Palestine, Korea, Syria, >> most of Africa. > >I've mentioned that already, but I'll re-iterate. Passive resistance, >non-violent disobedience from the people. Official recognition of the >organized people by powerful supporters outside. Trade sanctions against >agents of the oppressive power, trade support of agents of the people. >(No blanket sanctions against a nation as that violence hurts everybody.) What I wanted was a legitimate solution, not a "we will cover our heads while they brutalize us and rape our children and just hope they go away". >You know, the Apartheid sanctions of the 1980s would be illegal under the >WTO treaty today. That does little to change anything today or to compensate for the suffering it caused then. >> Quiet revolutions, coups and overthrows that actually make a difference >> are always welcomed over any violent alternatives. > >Glad to hear we agree. > >> But, how many people needlessly died as a result of Saddam, his sons and >> their methods? >> Was it 50,000, 100,000, 1,000,000? Probably between 1.5 and 2 million >> total, and that is just up until now. > >...and this was done with the support of the violent US state. Very few Americans supported him as a ruler. The French and USSR, controlled over 90% of all military imports to Iraq from 1975 until around 1989. Does that make the French and Russian states violent? > Far, far more than the 10,000 that may have been killed so far in Iraq. >> When is enough, enough. > >Apparently not yet, because there's still more killing. > >> Does this mean I support the invasion? No, but it also does not mean I >> am in complete opposition. Something needed to be done more than a >> decade ago and it wasn't. Saddam needed to be removed from power and few >> would argue that. > >Oh, a whole lot was done more than a decade ago! He was put into power >with the support of the US government, he was armed and aided by the >Americans, etc. etc.. He was assisted by the Americans, but as the facts show, and they even admit, received far more aid and support from the French and the Soviets. That is a fact. >> If the jews had been able to defeat the nazis on their own, would Israel >> be even more brutal now? >If the jews had defeated the Nazis on their own, there wouldn't be an >Israel. That wasn't the question. And I don't believe that is correct. The future of Isreal was all in the tea leaves for many. It's re-creation just happened to fit nicely in their sequence. gSs - ---- Msg sent via WebMail ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 09:19:23 -0700 From: Barbara E Soutar Subject: Re: Moral High Ground Brian Huddell said: "If you think, Barbara, that it is somehow *difficult* for Americans to find solid information about the war or anything else then you are hopelessly misinformed. You ignore journalists like the contributors to Znet and Common Dreams, not to mention mainstream writers like Krugman in the NY Times and Hersh in the New Yorker. You ignore the blogosphere. Greg has easy access to the same information you do, whether or not he avails himself of it or comes to the same conclusions that you and I might." I realize that many folks in the States have good access to information. The same information I have, that is freely available on the evening news and in newspapers in Canada. Americans have been cut off by a sycophantic and grovelling media, and have to want to find real news. It bugs me when I hear 'the party line' being repeated on this intelligent discussion list. I take part in online discussion groups who have all this information at their fingertips, the internet has as much information as you could want. Those who want to believe that America is still the good guy, wearing the white hat in the gun battle, don't want to find out exactly how bad America has become. But I just wanted our dim friends to know exactly why the rest of the world is shocked and appalled. And recommended that this war not be fought in the first place. That is ALL from me.I am shaking with anger, and losing sleep over this Iraq debacle. But discussion has been very polite in this good place. Most polite. Barbara Soutar Victoria, British Columbia ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 17:37:50 +0100 From: "Matt Sewell" Subject: RE: Moral High Ground Aaaargh! I have committed my very own most-hated crime against humanity - the apostrophe crime! If I plunge the knife in, would some kind soul please cut my head off... Mortified Matt >From: "Matt Sewell" >I like national discrimination when it's well-observed, funny and clever, >so hearing "oh American's have no sense of irony (that's my own >particular most-hated)" makes me want to scream... > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Stay in touch better and keep protected online with MSNs NEW all-in-one Premium Services. Find out more here. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 11:42:07 -0500 From: "Brian Huddell" Subject: RE: Moral High Ground Matt: > Aaaargh! I have committed my very own most-hated crime > against humanity - the apostrophe crime! rest assured that none of us Yanks noticed ;-) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 11:44:11 -0500 From: Subject: RE: fegmaniax-digest V13 #135 [demime could not interpret encoding binary - treating as plain text] On Tue, 18 May 2004 08:14 , FS Thomas sent: >> From Capuchin >> >> Well, that's a small bit of evidence. The UN is allowing the >> occupying force to control the money. So the folks that >> start the war get the money. > >Yes, the UN. Under their Oil For Palaces program Saddam had squandered >what oil revenues he had made. Funny how quickly that headline faded from the spotlight. The UN hates Iraqi children. >Yep; provided we do that. The war-time deficit definitely is looking a >little anemic, there, Jeme. It's really in our best interest to weaken >that government in Iraq and keep those troops there for, what, another >two years? Maybe five. Hell, let's clean out the DMZ in Korea and send >*those* boys over to Iraq. Let's fatten that deficit because, you know, >the oil revenues have entirely *paid* for the war! We're almost >breaking even! > >Not. That was one I stopped arguing before the war even started. It was simple math, but many can't add well. (all Iraqi oil profits for the next 5 years) - (monitary cost of war) does not equal zero. In fact it is a huge negative number. I heard but have not verified that we would need to suck all the profit out of Iraqi oil for approximately the next two decades to pay for this war. This is not new information, I heard it before the war even started. gSs - ---- Msg sent via WebMail ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 12:13:11 -0500 From: Subject: Re: fegmaniax-digest V13 #143 [demime could not interpret encoding binary - treating as plain text] On Tue, 18 May 2004 11:44:35 EDT , AidMerr@aol.com sent: >I second this. Greg Shell and his "If it's on Fox it must be true" buddies >make me want to send back my passport. Please do. By the way, I don't watch Fox news and don't think i ever have except maybe when cruising through the list. My father has a trillion channels and when I get into town to visit I will sometimes take control of the tv just so I can fuck around. But rarely is a news station what I am looking for. More like guitar repair, woodworking, kick-boxing, reloading ammo, rock climbing, bikini waxing, us woman's volleyball team etc... You know the stuff people like me enjoy. Without cable or satellite on my home tv, fox news is difficult to receive. You'll have to try that one again, but you must come up with some keener reason than that. And you can't use religion either, at least not any monotheistic one and especially not christianity, because as I've said before I think god talks out his ass and jesus was a fucking slacker. the first time I said that at least three people left the list and a few sent really nasty personal letters telling me they would include my id in their filter list and try to stay unoffended. i almost changed my id just to spite them. i believe i mentioned this once before. offense intended. it always seems to end this way. i reveal my thoughts, like so many do on this list, it cuts the thin skin so many have, and is then responses include and are often limited to personal insults and mocking. ooh well, i've been doing it for almost 10 years now and i look forward to at least another ten. gSs - ---- Msg sent via WebMail ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 10:56:19 -0700 From: "Palle Hoffstein" Subject: RE: Greg Shell vs ROTW Subject: Re: Greg Shell vs ROTW ...It has taken europe more than 10,000 years to even start getting close to what we accomplished in the United States in less than 100 years... Astonishing claim. Please cite examples, excluding any developmental arc begun in Europe. ...What I was saying is most americans are at the point where we don't really care what you think of us. It is not worth the effort... Actually, the percentage of Americans with an isolationist philisophy was much higher in the 1930s. It was even higher in the period of 1850-1890. There is an isolationist philosophy running through the US still - supporters tend to be conservative. Odd, given that conservative US governments have a more active record of tinkering with foreign governments. ...Hell, if the US ever goes to war in Europe again to save them from themselves, we'll probably use you as a staging area, like before... Actually, given that America is currently composed of a largely liberal urban population and a largely rural conservative, usually religious population, with very different interal and external interests, and that the left/right disparity has been growing in tension since 1949, while remaining at roughly 50% of equal votership interest, I think America is actually in danger of serious internal conflict. The situation has curious analogies to the voter frustrations that led to the civil war. Europe, on the other hand, tends to have less disparity between its current left wing and right wing supporters, especially when it comes to international issues. Europe is at its most unified ever, while the US is internally and bitterly torn. I suspect small conflicts to continue in places like ex-Yugoslavia and Chechnia, but they are driven by religious identity issues, and do not indicate the promise of any widespread European conflict. ...Like I said in a previous note, the devastation wrought upon those in Chechnya, makes Iraq look like an arts festival... I'm curious. Are you saying that because there is another conflict that is worse, the lesser conflict is therefor ok? Or are you deflecting the issues of the US/Iraq conflict by offering that because we're focusing on one conflict and not the other, that we are somehow negligent in the scope of our arguments. Does the a worse conflict, or an under-educated discussion of that conflict make our comments about the one conflict invalide? ...Most of the resentment you feel is a result of envy and jealousy because for instance, your country and most of the other big players have failed so often... Well, that's pretty ingnorant. America has been a power for about 200 years, and may already be slipping. That's nothing compared to the years as international powers put in by Britain, France, Spain, Portugal, etc. In the grand scheme of things, 200 years is not a long time for an empire. And in that 200 years America has had one big-ass civil war, hardly the picture of success. ...Shit, you'd all be either heil hitlerin' or worshipping Stalin if it wasn't for us. That is a fact... That is true. Not that positive behaviour in the past excuses poor behaviour in the present. We send people to prison for murder, even if they saved a life previously, which is as it should be. Canada remembers America's help in WWII and remains grateful. We also rememeber that, while we were being slaughtered, it took the US to be attacked on their own soil before they joined in. ...Apparently nothing the Russians and Germans have ever done takes long to forget. That's the funny part... Again, you seem to suggest that the existence of other atrocities, somehow makes current atrocities ok. It seems less like a real argument, and more like a game of gainsay. It's rather an "and your mother too!" approach to debate. I think the inference that, because we're not talking about Russian and German atrocities, that that somehow means we don't remember or consider them, to be rather empty arguements (that is, based not on what is presented but by what is not presented, and make large assumtions on that, to avoid discussing what is presented). Palle ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 11:17:28 -0700 From: "Palle Hoffstein" Subject: RE: Moral High Ground Subject: Re: Moral High Ground ...and they were all killed by americans. the death toll in chechnya, civilians and soldiers far exceeds the losses in Iraq. this is of course russia's second attempt. they are doing well, aren't they?... Again, you respond to worries about what the US is doing, by raising what others are doing instead. I don't think anyone suggested that what Russia was doing was acceptable, or that they were doing well. They obviously aren't. Again, I ask, what does what Russia is doing have to do with our concerns about what America is doing? Cannot we be concerned about both? Would it not seem obvious that a discussion group with many Americans but no Russians on it would tend to discuss one more than the other for obvious reasons? At least Russia, unlike Bush, insn't asking for internation applause. They admit they want to hold on the region for economic reasons and to maintain some influence in the middle east - same reasons as America, but America is unwilling to admit it. America has always wanted to be loved. Russia has never cared. When America isn't loved, they get offended and threaten to go away. But they never do. ...yeah, these kinds of things are just not normal during war and have probably never happened before... So you are OK with these things, because they are commonplace? ...Are you asking me to change US foreign policy, or are you asking me to change my foreign policy?... I think that, at most, people are hoping that you might consider some of what they are saying, instead of going for the reactionary gainsay response everytime, especially given how limited your arsenal of points seems to be. Palle ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 11:25:16 -0700 From: "Rex.Broome" Subject: Letting Ross off the hook... Miles: >>I thought it was clear from our messages that it *is* going to happen. Michael sez >>he's looking forward to meeting me, me saying I'm looking forward to meeting him, >>etc. It is arranged, if not by Van Dyke Parks. Let's hope not... that sounds almost as taxing for you to sit through as the Rush show itself. Hmmm... Rush covers Pet Sounds... there's a serious Miles-repellant for ya... Greg: >>Ross said "I lived in Europe during the first Gulf War. They hated our ass then [etc.] Actually, not that I want my hat back in the ring... that was me. It's true, "52 Stations" sounds pretty good right now. Hell, let's talk about "Vegetable Friend" for all I care... - -Rex ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 11:37:52 -0700 From: "Palle Hoffstein" Subject: RE: fegmaniax-digest V13 #143 This is, of course, yet another reponse to gSs: ...offense intended.... Ah, now I understand. Well, since your goal gshell, is to offend, I must therefor conclude something. Since the goal is to offend, and the goal is not discourse, that you do not care what others say, and you do not care what you say, as long as your goal (offending) is reached. Therefor, since the goal can be reached by looking at what offends, instead of what you actually may believe or know, that anything you claim to be a fact may instead be something said to offend. Your limited knowlege of world history made me suspect as much anyway. I will assume in the future that each of your posts has offence in mind, not the dispensing of facts or ideas. ...it always seems to end this way. i reveal my thoughts, like so many do on this list, it cuts the thin skin so many have... Interesting. In 15 years of internest discussions that may rank as one of the vainest things I've read. You probably pride yourself on your thick skin, or the thin-skinnedness of others would not be such a badge of honour. However, you cannot claim to offend intentionally, and decry others for being offended. That's like cutting off someone's hand and mocking them for bleeding. I certainly won't be de-listing because you're here - I am slow to take offence and like debates. I will instead take you as a reminder that xenophobia and backwoods national vanity, as a rationale for selective historical doctoring, continues as a phenomenon today. Palle - ---- Msg sent via WebMail ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 11:41:25 -0700 From: "Jason Brown \(Echo Services Inc\)" Subject: RE: Greg Shell vs ROTW Palle said: > >...Hell, if the US ever goes to war in Europe again to save them from > >themselves, > >we'll probably use you as a staging area, like before... > > Actually, given that America is currently composed of a largely liberal > urban population and a largely rural conservative, usually religious > population, with very different interal and external interests, and that > the > left/right disparity has been growing in tension since 1949, while > remaining > at roughly 50% of equal votership interest, I think America is actually in > danger of serious internal conflict. The situation has curious analogies > to the voter frustrations that led to the civil war. I think you are really reaching here. I'd wager Canada has a higher likelihood of serious internal conflict than the US, be it Quebecois or Western separatism. Urban and rural America have long been very far apart politically and the real power these days lies in the suburbs and ex-urbs. Sure there is the Red/Blue State split but that is not the stuff of violent struggle. Even the south is far less homogenous than it once was. Political strife may well continue but vilolent struggle outside the fringiest of the fringe? No way. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 20:40:58 +0200 From: Carrie Galbraith Subject: Re: war - Good God Ya'll! James: > AFAICT the situation in New Zealand is similar to that in Ireland - we > tend to hate the US Government but not the US people, although the > general impression is that a significant proportion of it are tainted > by a flag-waving, holier-than-thou, "my country right or wrong" > attitude. While there are, no doubt, a small proportion of Americans > who are like that, they sadly tend to taint the image of the rest. > One of the biggest problems I have with being an American abroad is going home. I've been out of the country since before 9/11 so the changes sometimes baffle me. There is this "you're either with us or against us" mentality that extends to a lot of people (and I believe Bush has even used this expression publically). The only grief I used to get traveling was going to Belfast from London. But now, coming into the US, the customs people flag me and grill me. It's happening every time. Last time they tried to tell me there is no airport in Venice so I couldn't have flown out of there. Then they fine toothed combed my passport and I had neglected to tell them of a vacation to Croatia and Slovenia (8 months earlier) and they spotted the stamps and I got grief for "hiding" this information. I'm dammed by the customs officials for choosing, of my own free will, to live out of the country. I'm pegged as "against us." And I don't dare argue - I've seen people taken from customs in handcuffs. - ------- On another note - I got a Venetian friend totally into RH from a compilation of mostly B sides! Somehow I came here with only You & Oblivion and JFS. I've since picked up Luxor and Robyn Stings! But I've nothing of the music I consider "classic Robyn." How is it that I have my entire Leonard Cohen and Tom Waits collections and no Robyn or Nick Cave? Terrible packing foresight I guess. Take my eyes, etc. - - c ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 11:44:01 -0700 From: "Palle Hoffstein" Subject: RE: Letting Ross off the hook... It's true, "52 Stations" sounds pretty good right now. Hell, let's talk about "Vegetable Friend" for all I care... - -Rex Actually, speaking of "Vegetable Friend," has anyone here ever learned how to play it on guitar? The top half is fine, but as it goes on I have no idea what the man is doing. Along with "A Skull, a Suitecase and a Long-Necked Bottle of Wine" the reason I most often stick "Invisible Hitchcock" in the tray. Palle Now Playing: Essex Green - The Long Goodbye ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 14:53:16 -0400 From: "Brian" Subject: Re: Letting Ross off the hook... said: > It's true, "52 Stations" sounds pretty good right now. Hell, > let's talk about "Vegetable Friend" for all I care... Oh gladly! Ya know it's getting really hard to stay politically agnostic while deleting all these political mails. Every once in a while I can't help but read one... interesting stuff and important, I'm sure. It's just- don't want to fill my head with it. I was going to go back to the digest an' tally the different discussions on this list just to see how little RH content there actual is. Has anyone done this? Curious.... Well I know I don't contribute much to this group anyway...one good thing lately is all the RH shows/files being shared! The NY Suny 1990 show IS the tops. I've got to find a moment to download that. It should be released as a live album- except there is no performance of Vegetable Friend. Come to think of it I don't think that one's been performed live. Correct me? Nuppy - -- Brian nightshadecat@mailbolt.com ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V13 #144 ********************************