From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V16 #163 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Thursday, April 19 2007 Volume 16 : Number 163 Today's Subjects: ----------------- rights [great white shark ] Re: fegmaniax-digest V16 #161 [hssmrg@bath.ac.uk] GAMES FOR MAY tickets [HwyCDRrev@aol.com] Re: reap at virginia tech ["Stewart C. Russell" ] Re: reap at virginia tech [FSThomas ] Re: Gays, guns, and guts made the Feglist free... [FSThomas ] Re: virginia tech reap [FSThomas ] RE: Machismo Festapalooza ["Michael Wells" ] Re: GAMES FOR MAY tickets [Rex ] Re: GAMES FOR MAY tickets [HwyCDRrev@aol.com] Re: Gays, guns, and guts made the Feglist free... [Rex ] Re: Guns [kevin ] Re: reap at virginia tech [2fs ] Re: Gays, guns, and guts made the Feglist free... [Sebastian Hagedorn Subject: rights young master ferris wrote: > /remembers reading Gerry Adams' book years ago and being aghast at the > laws and/or permissions granted the British military/Northern Irish > Police in the routing out of the IRA and thinking, "they're trampling > people's rights." yeah tis awful , it could never happen in the states , lets just forget about segregation, the goons who used to beat up strikers in the 30s, the invasions of various countries ( panama, grenada, haiti and many others) the supporting of so many right wing regimes for decades including iraq, the war on drugs, prohibition , the indian wars, slavery, the 2000 and 2004 elections , the invasion fo cambodia , New Orleans and almost everything the bush regime has ever done . thats not to say that almost everyone else tramples on people human rights too, but the statement you made is so naive that it staggers the imagination . The US has stood up at times and has sometimes done a stirling job to stop oppression , but usually only when its own interests are threatened, this " champion of the free world " crap just does not wash . When it suits, the US is just as capable of trampling on rights as the next guy, just ask all the people rotting in jail for minor acid and grass offences over the years . Its interesting how conservatives want " their " freedoms preserved isn't it ? They trumpet long and loud about ' rights " but they won't give me the right to take drugs, to ask to die with dignity if I am terminally ill, to join with other workers in collectively bargaining , or to have a right to cheap medical attention, but its ok for them to carry lethal weapons, to treat animals as objects , to pay below subsistance wages, to export jobs to other countries where they rip off workers , pollute the waterways , deforest the land and kill off the biodiversity , buy up all the assets such as water and native plants ( yes I'm talking about YOU Coca Cola ) and generally fuck up the planet. These are " Rights" - unalienable ones in their minds . Unregulated guns are just another symptom of our collective madness, those of us who have been trying to warn of the dangers of robber baron capitalism and endless growth for the past 40 years or so have been ridiculed , vilified and sometimes persecuted for our beliefs, it is interesting how so many conservatives are now having to make backflips as the science proves there is a problem, but ultra right wingers ( and extreme left wingers too ) really piss me off as they are so fucking unable to see any other perspective other than their own . der pissed off Kommander ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 11:52:31 +0100 From: hssmrg@bath.ac.uk Subject: Re: fegmaniax-digest V16 #161 Hi Dave! I see that Helen Liddell says Iraq intervention nothing to do with war on terror: Apparently this has gone down badly with John Howard. No idea why... Helen Liddell is one of the few sane people in New Labour, although she has always defended the crazy Iraq policy: - - Mike Godwin ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 07:11:20 EDT From: HwyCDRrev@aol.com Subject: GAMES FOR MAY tickets Queen Elizabeth Hall Games For May Robyn Hitchcock featuring Robyn Hitchcock and Graham Coxon Saturday 26 May 2007, 7:30 P.M. Special guest artists including Robyn Hitchcok and Graham Coxon unite to pay tribute Pink Floyd on the 40th anniversary of their legendary performance at the Queen Elizabeth Hall. book tickets Select the date and time of the performance you wish to book by clicking the relevant date and time in the list below. If a performance is no longer available it will not be clickable. * _BOOK NOW_ (http://www.southbankcentre.co.uk/music/productions/games-for-may-16582?action=seats&production=16582&performance=16583&zone=40) Saturday 26th May 2007, 7:30 P.M. _http://www.southbankcentre.co.uk/music/productions/games-for-may-16582_ (http://www.southbankcentre.co.uk/music/productions/games-for-may-16582) ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 08:04:48 -0400 From: "Stewart C. Russell" Subject: Re: reap at virginia tech FSThomas wrote: > > While it goes a long way to define Parliament's position it doesn't > extend any guarantees to freedom of religion, speech (outside of > Parliament), press, or peaceable assembly. True enough, but England in 1689 was not a pretty place. Its freedom of religion clause basically gave you the freedom to be a member of the established protestant church, or be outwith the king's protection. Even still, it has some merits, and building on the Magna Carta (which basically ended fort main and started habeus corpus) it was a fairly radical document for its time. I feel (or fear) that all constitutional documents are products of their time. When the need for them becomes so great, they are drafted to fill that immediate need. I feel very much the same about the over-debated US 2nd amendment. This was a young nation that had recently won (probably to their great and welcome surprise) a guerrilla war against a great power. Since the guns of the time could probably squeeze off one shot a minute with a deadly range of (I'm guessing) about 200 yards, and that you couldn't stock up on a gross of hollowpoints at the local K-Mart for your standardized bore weapon, guns then weren't the threat they are now. Stewart ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 08:28:32 -0400 From: FSThomas Subject: Re: reap at virginia tech Capuchin wrote: > Lastly, I think you've made a gross error in side-stepping Jeffrey's > point about other nations not having so many guns and still not being > totalitarian (indeed, maintaining a higher public approval rating for > their leaders than we have in the USA). If your argument is that their > system of government is different, so they don't NEED to assure guns for > the public in order to prevent totalitarianism, then doesn't that > strongly argue for the adoption of whatever traits allow for the two to > coexist? Ok. Taking a different tact while looking at it: resources. What about the ability of the nation to adequately police itself? Both the UK and Japan have pretty strict gun laws, right? Look at the population densities of the three (UK, Japan, US). England is about 50K mileB3 with a population ~55.5M people. Japan is about 116.7K mileB3 with a population ~128M. That puts their population densities at 976 people/mileB3 in England and 873/mileB3 in Japan. The US, by comparison, has a population density of 85/mileB3 (301M people for 3.5M square miles). Both the UK and Japan have massively dense populations, right? They're packed into areas less than the size of New England (the UK) and that of Vermont, New Hampshire, and Massachusetts combined (Japan). Now take the three countries and grant them a police force of 1 cop for 500 residents. The UK would get 111K police (.45/mileB3), 256K in Japan (.45/mileB3) and 602K in the US, at .16/mileB3. The cop in the US would responsible for almost three times the amount of territory as his/her counterparts in the other two countries. How do you compensate for that? You could: A.) Demean, ridicule, then disband both the military and police. B.) Hire a lot more cops (from 1/500 people to 1/178 people for the same dispersion rate) C.) Hire a few more cops and, to some extent, allow the population to police itself. Just a thought. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 09:19:37 -0400 From: FSThomas Subject: Re: Gays, guns, and guts made the Feglist free... Michael Sweeney wrote: > Ferris wrote: > >> How fucking fascist. > > Isn't it ironic (doncha think)? Sweet. From Wikipedia: "Fascism is an authoritarian political ideology (generally tied to a mass movement) that considers individual and other societal interests inferior to the needs of the state, and seeks to forge a type of national unity, usually based on ethnic, religious, cultural, or racial attributes." Now I know y'all love to draw lines between The Right and fascism, but it's just as easy (possibly even more so) to flip it the other way around and pin the moniker on the Left. I'll stick to the definition of the word as given, though, and try not deviate too far. "Individual and other societal interests inferior to the needs of the state" could be translated as Government for its own sake, no? That the rights/interests/needs of the individual are inferior to that of the State? Personal rights are being encroached upon from all sides in this country, but the biggest infringement is from expansive federal government. A federal government attained and maintained through invasive taxation. "A type of national unity, usually based on ethnic, religious, cultural, or racial attributes." A dissolution of individuality, or compartmentalizing of society based on some classifier, correct? Unity based not on a national aggregate, but on subsets of the population? This is something the Left does all the time. Pitching Black v. White. Rich v. Poor. Gay v. Straight. Us v. Them. It's race-baiting. It's wealth-baiting. Whatever. The problem the Left runs into in this situation is that, at heart, the concept of the individual rubs against the grain of their doctrine. If you recognize the individual, you then have to recognize the concept of individual rights. Property rights (eminent domain, the growing tax disparity, etc.), gun ownership (crap! there it is again), and, as Don Imus found out recently, free speech all come back into play when you recognize the individual. Looking at a few lines regarding the issue from different sources: "There is the great, silent, continuous struggle: the struggle between the State and the Individual; between the State, which demands, and the individual, who attempts to evade such demands." In that case would the individual would be the one seeking, say, a smaller, less invasive government? (I haven't broken any rules yet; that was Mussolini.) "We must abolish the cult of the individual decisively, once and for all." Indeed. (That one's a bit harder: Nikita Khrushchev.) "We must stop thinking of the individual and start thinking about what is best for society." /shudder Hillary Clinton. And lastly ... "The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities." Think about that one for a second. - -ferris bennito thomas. (Ayn Rand) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 09:31:28 -0400 From: "Bachman, Michael" Subject: RE: Machismo Festapalooza Lauren: >i find these points pretty interesting. i can't believe that as of late, i've been finding myself discussing >things that might be deemed "gender issues" and then i try not to throw up on myself. >i don't see this as being about anger per se, but more about men losing their place in modern culture. which >old well lead to anger, but i think the initial problem is that much of the foundation of being male in this >culture has been really shaken apart. and what's there to replace it with - emo boys and metrosexuals? >i had a friend who had three teenagers - twin girls and a boy, and she would talk about the twins' being at the top of the world. they would spell their names in big cursive letters, they were sort of bigger than life >with their sports teams and school plays and magic markers. >and she worried about her boy because she said in many ways he was just invisible. everyone was making sure >the girls had their modern-age self-esteem, which they did, and that was great, but it was kind of like the boys were being left behind with no way to bridge the gap between the old world and the new world. and god knows what the new world even is for a young man. hold a door open for someone and either get a thank you or the finger  it's a crap shoot. be a good listener and the girls still go chasing after the boys who exhibit that sexy "criminal versatility." My 28 year old nephew is a total loser. He stole my sister's credit card and racked up 13K in debt, which my sister and brother in law can't afford to make payments on and now have creditors banging on there door. He is a total user and been in jail twice, takes no responsibility for his actions and blames his parents for everything. His sister, my 24 year old niece Lauren, graduated from college last year and just bought a house. MJ Bachman ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 09:40:08 -0400 From: "Bachman, Michael" Subject: RE: Machismo Festapalooza >> I've never seen "Falling Down", but that's GOTTA suck... like my worst >> Howard Stern / Charles Bronson nightmare... anyone seen it? Lauren wrote: i've seen it and i don't think it sucked. Fredric Forrest is way over the top sick/funny as the neo-nazi army surplus shop owner. He has always been a favorite character actor of mine. He did a real nice job playing Dashiell Hammett in Fracis Ford Coppola's "Hammett". It's finally out in DVD. Peter Boyle is also very good in "Hammett". MJ Bachman ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 09:46:03 -0400 From: "Bachman, Michael" Subject: RE: Machismo Festapalooza Er, make the Francis Ford Copplola. - -----Original Message----- From: owner-fegmaniax@smoe.org [mailto:owner-fegmaniax@smoe.org] On Behalf Of Bachman, Michael Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2007 9:40 AM To: Lauren Elizabeth; a sweet little cupcake...baked by the devil! Subject: RE: Machismo Festapalooza >> I've never seen "Falling Down", but that's GOTTA suck... like my worst >> Howard Stern / Charles Bronson nightmare... anyone seen it? Lauren wrote: i've seen it and i don't think it sucked. Fredric Forrest is way over the top sick/funny as the neo-nazi army surplus shop owner. He has always been a favorite character actor of mine. He did a real nice job playing Dashiell Hammett in Fracis Ford Coppola's "Hammett". It's finally out in DVD. Peter Boyle is also very good in "Hammett". MJ Bachman ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 09:50:05 -0400 From: FSThomas Subject: Re: rights great white shark wrote: > young master ferris wrote: > > Its interesting how conservatives want " their " freedoms preserved > isn't it ? They trumpet long and loud about ' rights " but they won't > give me the right to take drugs, to ask to die with dignity if I am > terminally ill, to join with other workers in collectively > bargaining , or to have a right to cheap medical attention, but its > ok for them to carry lethal weapons, to treat animals as objects , to > pay below subsistance wages, to export jobs to other countries where > they rip off workers , pollute the waterways , deforest the land and > kill off the biodiversity , buy up all the assets such as water and > native plants ( yes I'm talking about YOU Coca Cola ) and generally > fuck up the planet. These are " Rights" - unalienable ones in their > minds . Aw, crap. In order: 1.) Right to take drugs Wholly agree. If you're not infringing on anyone else's life, liberty, or property nor conspiring to do so, I don't give a rat's ass what you put in your body. And if it's particularly good I might consider ... 2.) To ask to die with dignity Wholly agree with doctor assisted suicide. 3.) Collective bargaining Differ on this one. Unions' times have passed. Wages shouldn't be dictated by a collective, but rather what the market can bear. 4.) Cheap medical attention Costs are out of control on some treatments, true. This is due mostly to rising malpractice insurance rates, due largely in part to frivolous lawsuits. > as the science proves there is a problem, but ultra right > wingers ( and extreme left wingers too ) really piss me off as they > are so fucking unable to see any other perspective other than their > own . I don't know about where you are, but it's unseasonably cold here at the moment. And hasn't there been some good press given lately to more than a few respected members of the scientific community coming out *against* global warming? There's also the Channel 4 documentary which I thought raised some interesting points (http://tinyurl.com/3a4aev). - -f. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 10:00:07 -0400 From: FSThomas Subject: Re: virginia tech reap great white shark wrote: > the US being THE bastion of > freedom and democracy -( despite the fact that you don't even have > universal healthcare ... > something like 4% > of the population own around 90% of the wealth ... > der commander Commrade sounds more appropriate. You slight us for not having a womb-to-tomb imperial government and deride us for not actively redistributing wealth. The latter is the one that really, really kills me. Redistributing wealth (dispersing your quoted 90% to the other 96% of the population) would infer that the 4% didn't earn it in the first place; that they have no right to it, that their labors warrant no more compensation than any other person in the society, no matter what profession. You're right, we have a weird society. A constitutional republic (not a f*cking democracy!) based on the capitalist system; not a socialist regime. - -f. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 09:14:47 -0500 From: "Michael Wells" Subject: RE: Machismo Festapalooza Eddie the oracle: > it's a close call between him and siskel, but i think that roeper is my favourite of the three. ebert, natch, is a very-far-distant third. I've actually come to agree with this. When Roeper was first chosen I was a little put off due to his history at the Sun-Times (I thought he had nowhere near the background for job), but he has proved surprisingly knowledgeable and concise. Rex re Heinlein: > "The rest of you" is a minority. A strident, vocal, minority, but being by definition Angry White Males, that's to be expected. Sorry, but do you really know what the majority is? Quail's point is commonly accepted, though not universally, and I tend to agree: "Troopers" (the book at least) is a savagely brilliant satire rolled up in a nice sci-fi crust. If you all were talking about the movie, then apologies. Typically not strident and generally not angry, Michael ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 07:17:00 -0700 From: Rex Subject: Re: GAMES FOR MAY tickets > Queen Elizabeth Hall > Games For May Robyn Hitchcock > featuring Robyn Hitchcock and Graham Coxon I bet Robyn would appreciate being the headliner on a bill that also features Robyn Hitchcock. Cue surreal duality-of-nature monologue... - -Rex ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 10:20:40 EDT From: HwyCDRrev@aol.com Subject: Re: GAMES FOR MAY tickets i think liz hall is the headliner, actually robyn and robyn play the two parts of syd's schizophrenic personality In a message dated 4/19/2007 9:17:22 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, spottedeagleray@gmail.com writes: Queen Elizabeth Hall Games For May Robyn Hitchcock featuring Robyn Hitchcock and Graham Coxon I bet Robyn would appreciate being the headliner on a bill that also features Robyn Hitchcock. Cue surreal duality-of-nature monologue... ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 07:21:46 -0700 From: Rex Subject: Re: Gays, guns, and guts made the Feglist free... On 4/18/07, 2fs wrote: > > On 4/19/07, Rex wrote: > > > > > > > > On 4/18/07, 2fs wrote: > > > > > > > > > (Incidentally, what things other than guns - and bales (of cotton) - > are > > > "toted"? Or is that one of those verbs - like "twiddled" - that seems > to > > > be > > > used only with an extremely limited number of nouns?) > > > > > > Well, you DON'T tote on Superman's cape. > > > > I'm pretty sure that line is "you don't TUG on Superman's cape." I bow to your superior Croce fandom. Of course, his first album was better. Smiley emoticon here if I used them, Rex ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 10:28:02 -0400 From: The Great Quail Subject: Re: Gays, guns, and guts made the Feglist free... >> What is *not* a legitimate use for these guns is killing innocent >> people. > > No one is innocent. Comments like this are what remind me what a weird, disconnected crank you can be. Why don't you send this exchange to the families of the dead? I'm sure they'd have something to say about your smug ideology. But then again, you are the one who was posting to the effect that the United States had it coming while they were still searching for the bodies in the rubble of 911. Stop pretending to care, Capuchin. You only care about yourself -- and some ideological, utopian, crypto-fascist, imaginary construct of the "world" and how it "should" be. - --Quail ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 07:34:23 -0700 From: Rex Subject: Re: Gays, guns, and guts made the Feglist free... On 4/19/07, FSThomas wrote: > > > The problem the Left runs into in this situation is that, at heart, the > concept of the individual rubs against the grain of their doctrine. If > you recognize the individual, you then have to recognize the concept of > individual rights. Not my kind of leftism, pal. Property rights (eminent domain, the growing tax > disparity, etc.), Of concern to the rich only. Yeah, I mean that. You get rich enough to have property, you deal with it. Hire lawyers or some shit. gun ownership (crap! there it is again), We all find murder to be wrong, and as is pointed out, the kind of guns that inevitably set off this debate exist to kill people. And as others have noted, plenty of non-fascist nations ban guns and don't have Virginia Techs, nor kids dying from playing with Daddy's revolver (which is as bad as it gets). and, as Don > Imus found out recently, free speech all come back into play when you > recognize the individual. Again, poor example. The idea of political correctness in legislation is fifteen years dead. Imus wasn't driven off the air by a fascist *government*... he pissed off the general public, who made a stink about it (that's democracy) and that made the plutocrats look at the bottom line and fire him (that's captitalism). > "We must abolish the cult of the individual decisively, once and for all." > > Indeed. (That one's a bit harder: Nikita Khrushchev.) But today's leftists prize diversity, rights for minorities, alternative lifestyles, public media. etc. etc. etc. This whole "Though Police" idea is wrong, and SHOULD BE BANNED. Erm, just kidding on that last bit. - -Rex ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 07:36:43 -0700 From: Rex Subject: Re: Gays, guns, and guts made the Feglist free... On 4/19/07, The Great Quail wrote: > > >> What is *not* a legitimate use for these guns is killing innocent > >> people. > > > > No one is innocent. > > Comments like this are what remind me what a weird, disconnected crank you > can be. Why don't you send this exchange to the families of the dead? I'm > sure they'd have something to say about your smug ideology. > > But then again, you are the one who was posting to the effect that the > United States had it coming while they were still searching for the bodies > in the rubble of 911. Quail's Law: it always comes back to 9/11. If you were so deeply affected by all that carnage, how come you still get your jollies by ending your posts with pornographically violent death-match fantasies? And then ask someone ELSE to stop "pretending to care"? - -Rx ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 07:40:44 -0700 From: Rex Subject: Re: Machismo Festapalooza On 4/19/07, Lauren Elizabeth wrote: > > Rex says: > > Hey, it's an issue, for sure. One that might be of interest to a broad > > majority of people in this world shaped by the white man. But it just > > doesn't interest me that much personally. I'm a straigh white male, and > I > > find my way through the world without much trouble... and last time I > > checked, while his overlarge piece of the pie may have diminished a tiny > > bit, Whitey's doing just fine. > > but the fact that it doesn't interest you points to perhaps your not > having a sense of loss about it. Exactly, and I think I said that. > rex, i don't mean to single you out on this  it's just that i feel > strongly about these issues. and i don't mean to dismiss your point > of view. i know it's your point of view. i unfortunately just feel > the desire to express mine as well. That's totally okay. In reading your comments, it's clear that your lack of identification with female norms is why this stuff interests you-- and my lack of identification with male norms is why it doesn't interest me. We're actually coming from similar places, right? - -Rex ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 08:21:23 -0700 (GMT-07:00) From: kevin Subject: Re: Guns >that said, the libertarian party's website >houses precious little insight into its thinking on foreign policy matters. > There's a libertarian party *website*? I find it hard enough to believe there's a libertarian *party*...reminds me of an old joke from a firesign theatre radio show: The anarchists held a convention in St. Louis, and everyone who showed up was kicked out of the movement. >ebert, natch, is a very-far-distant third. > Dude, you're talking about the co-author of Beyond the Valley Of the Dolls. That gives him points in my book regardless of anything. That is one of the zaniest movies ever... ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 10:23:41 -0500 From: 2fs Subject: Re: reap at virginia tech On 4/19/07, FSThomas wrote: > > Ok. Taking a different tact while looking at it: resources. What about > the ability of the nation to adequately police itself? > > Both the UK and Japan have pretty strict gun laws, right? Look at the > population densities of the three (UK, Japan, US). > > England is about 50K mileB3 with a population ~55.5M people. > Japan is about 116.7K mileB3 with a population ~128M. > > That puts their population densities at 976 people/mileB3 in England and > 873/mileB3 in Japan. > > The US, by comparison, has a population density of 85/mileB3 (301M people > for 3.5M square miles). > How do you compensate for that? You could: > > A.) Demean, ridicule, then disband both the military and police. > B.) Hire a lot more cops (from 1/500 people to 1/178 people for the same > dispersion rate) > C.) Hire a few more cops and, to some extent, allow the population to > police itself. Or you could - imagine that! - recognize that different laws are appropriate for different places, and not shout *either* about "ban all guns everywhere" (the stereotypical, and sometimes actual, anti-gun position) or "allow all guns everywhere" (the s.a.s.a. pro-gun position). Not that I'm a fullbore technocrat or anything...but there are possibilities of rationally analyzing and monitoring situations, and creatively forming a legal response to them, that would respect such differences in situation w/o being overwhelmingly confusing. Like, say, instead of a sign posting an invariable speed limit on a roadway, an electronic sign keyed to a system that monitors road and weather conditions and traffic and adjusts the speed limit accordingly. Or instead of painting lane dividers (which are obscured on wet or snowy pavement, and wear out over time), or installing reflective bits into the pavement (which don't work well in snowy climates, as plows tend to destroy them), have lasers on already existing light poles and so on that beam the lane dividers visibly onto the roadway. One typical problem (even if somebody thinks of such things) is that there's a high initial expense, even though the savings over time might well be far greater than keeping things the same. - -- ...Jeff Norman The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 17:25:57 +0200 From: Sebastian Hagedorn Subject: Re: Gays, guns, and guts made the Feglist free... - --On 19. April 2007 10:28:02 -0400 The Great Quail wrote: >> No one is innocent. > > Comments like this are what remind me what a weird, disconnected crank you > can be. Why don't you send this exchange to the families of the dead? I'm > sure they'd have something to say about your smug ideology. But it's just catholicism (and probably pietism etc.)! Only children are innocent, everyone else is a sinner. ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V16 #163 ********************************