From: owner-loud-fans-digest@smoe.org (loud-fans-digest) To: loud-fans-digest@smoe.org Subject: loud-fans-digest V2 #219 Reply-To: loud-fans@smoe.org Sender: owner-loud-fans-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-loud-fans-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk loud-fans-digest Saturday, June 22 2002 Volume 02 : Number 219 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: [loud-fans] Ranting at random... (NS) [JRT456@aol.com] Re: [loud-fans] Ranting at random... ["Aaron Milenski" ] [loud-fans] he's wearing lifts [Miles Goosens] Re: [loud-fans] Cameras at concerts ["John Sharples" ] Re: [loud-fans] Minority Report (ns) ["me" ] [loud-fans] Not Enron, and Minority Report (ns) [Dana Paoli ] Re: [loud-fans] the benefits of a Yale education (Legacy division) [Jeff] Re: [loud-fans] Not Enron, and Minority Report (ns) [Jeffrey with 2 Fs Je] Re: [loud-fans] the benefits of a Yale education (Legacy division) [JRT4] Re: [loud-fans] Minority Report (ns) [Michael Mitton ] Re: [loud-fans] Ranting at random... (NS) ["John Sharples" ] Re: [loud-fans] Ranting at random... (NS) ["John Sharples" > If a person is murdered, then there's nothing inaccurate about the term "homicide bomber." << What happened to "fair and balanced" or "we report, you decide"? >> No problem there. Again, just because a term is preferred by Israel doesn't mean it's inaccurate. At worst, the term "homicide bomber" is biased against a terrorist's martyrdom. Of course, newspapers like the Chicago Tribune and Philadelphia Inquirer won't even use the word "terrorist" to describe a Palestinian bomber. Every linguist that I've seen consulted on "homicide bomber" for news articles (which, after all, is why linguists are here) say that the real problem is the lack of any appropriate word. Andrew Sullivan is pushing for "Islamikaze." ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 09:16:08 -0400 From: "Aaron Milenski" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Ranting at random... >The Bush administration suggested the terminology change, and Fox >News immediately said they'd implement it. This was a few weeks ago; >I haven't heard anything further, such as other news institutions >following suit. > >I agree that the phrase "homicide bomber" pushes its agenda on the >listener, since the term "murder bomber" would be more euphonious >while not making the obvious contrast with "suicide bomber." My issue is that it just plain sounds stupid (hmmm, maybe that's par for the course given the usual speech patterns of the president). The term is essentially redundant, and in the case of those occasional suicide bombers who don't kill people, it's plain wrong. Not to mention that the whole point of the term "suicide bomber" is to describe the way the bomb is set off, not the obvious fact that it intends to kill people. A remote control bomber could be homicide bomber too. and since when does the word "suicide" have positive connotations anyway? Fox News jumping on the term is certainly no surprise... _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 08:47:49 -0500 From: Bill Silvers Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Ranting at random... Re: homicide/suicide bombing > Fox News jumping on the term is certainly no surprise... Nor is, it seems, the loud-list. sheesh, b.s. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 10:30:27 -0400 From: Miles Goosens Subject: [loud-fans] he's wearing lifts So this morning on the way to work, I was listening to disc 1 of Steve H.'s swap set (thanks, Steve), which meant that I listened to Sly and the Family Stone's "Hot Fun in the Summertime" for the first time in several years. And during today's listen, I made a connection I hadn't made before: the melody of "Hot Fun"'s chorus was lifted by one Mr. P. Collins for the choruses of Genesis' "Misunderstanding." I haven't made a discovery this profound since hearing the Supremes' "Love Child" for the first time and realizing that Prince had appropriated its verses for "Sign O' the Times." later, Miles ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 15:59:33 +0000 From: "O Geier" Subject: [loud-fans] Cameras at concerts I'm going to see Elvis on Sunday, and will attempt to sneak my Canon EOS 650 in, with my 105mm lens. Usually, I wear a loose fitting jacket, with the body on the strap under it, with the lens concealed in a pocket. I'm thinking of buying a single use (disposable) and carrying it in my hand, so that they'll ask me to surrender it, and not think I have another. Any thoughts? Think it'll work? No 'Go Digital' comments please. Support anti-Spam legislation. Join the fight http://www.cauce.org/ - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: Click Here ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 12:20:36 -0400 From: "John Sharples" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Cameras at concerts OZ: >I'm going to see Elvis on Sunday, and will attempt to sneak my Canon EOS >650 in, with my 105mm lens. I forget where you live, but if things are anything like they are here in NY, you might very well get patted down. If venue security is following standard police procedure (which of course they don't have to do, they can subject you to a full search if they want, and even with a valid ticket they can legally bar your entry for any reason, although you might be due a refund), if they feel that big-ass Canon with telephoto lens they will have every reasonable right to conduct a full search to make sure you're not packing a weapon. Then, if there's a no-camera rule, they'd have a great reason to bar your entry, although they don't need one, because the ticket's a revocable license, but the problem is they now could probably deny your refund, too. I don't think they can keep your camera, though. Or, maybe you'll get away with it. In which case, could you send me some jpegs, dude? > Usually, I wear a loose fitting jacket, with >the body on the strap under it, with the lens concealed in a pocket. ...or are you just happy to see Elvis? JS ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 09:17:58 -0700 (PDT) From: "Joseph M. Mallon" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] he's wearing lifts On Fri, 21 Jun 2002, Miles Goosens wrote: > So this morning on the way to work, I was listening to disc 1 of Steve H.'s > swap set (thanks, Steve), which meant that I listened to Sly and the Family > Stone's "Hot Fun in the Summertime" for the first time in several years. And > during today's listen, I made a connection I hadn't made before: the melody > of "Hot Fun"'s chorus was lifted by one Mr. P. Collins for the choruses of > Genesis' "Misunderstanding." Wouldn't be surprising. Phil C. & Peter G. are both big R & B fans. Gabriel used to sing "Ain't That Peculiar" in his early solo shows, and Collins added the EWF Horns to songs on ABACAB & GENESIS. J. Mallon ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 12:50:59 -0500 (CDT) From: Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey Subject: [loud-fans] the benefits of a Yale education (Legacy division) Former executive editor of the Brazilian paper _Estado Sao Paulo_ Fernando Pedreira reported in his column of 4/28 that during a visit with Brazilian President Fernando Henrique Cardoso, G.W. Bush asked, "Do you have blacks too?" The White House says this is "crap" - but Pedreira is apparently close to Cardoso... - --Jeff J e f f r e y N o r m a n The Architectural Dance Society www.uwm.edu/~jenor/ADS.html ::Some days, you just can't get rid of a bomb:: __Batman__ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 18:21:36 +0000 From: "O Geier" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] the benefits of a Yale education (Legacy division) <> This was reported in Der Spiegel, and ignored by the American press. It's been on the 'net since it was uttered. Do a google search with "Do you have blacks too?" in quotes, and watch it come flowing in. Much as I'd like to believe it, I wonder if it was incorrectly translated into German, and then back to American English. As for the White House going to great pains to deny it, I don't blame them for not addressing it. After the 'Major League Asshole' comment, I doubt many would believe a denial. I'll wait for the tape. Just for the record, JFK did not say "I am a jelly doughnut". A 'Berliner' was (is) the name for a jelly filled pastry sold in Berlin. Speaking of doughnuts....an exchange on Politically Incorrect from the other night between Dennis Miller and Monica Crowley: Monica: So you're like this narrow, little part of America who doesn't think he's (Bush) doing a good job? Dennis: He's smart enough to know that he's not particularly smart, so he surrounds himself with smart people in much the same way a hole surrounds itself with a doughnut. And you gotta give it to him. Support anti-Spam legislation. Join the fight http://www.cauce.org/ - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: Click Here ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 14:27:21 EDT From: JRT456@aol.com Subject: Re: [loud-fans] the benefits of a Yale education (Legacy division) In a message dated 6/21/02 10:51:59 AM, jenor@csd.uwm.edu writes: << Former executive editor of the Brazilian paper _Estado Sao Paulo_ Fernando Pedreira reported in his column of 4/28 that during a visit with Brazilian President Fernando Henrique Cardoso, G.W. Bush asked, "Do you have blacks too?" >> Yeesh. There's an urban legend that died an undetermined death by early May. As with Ashcroft's fictional phobia of calico cats, nobody could find a single confirmation of the incident...and there's no doubting that plenty of left-wing pundits went looking. In the future, you might want to make use of that snopes2.com site that was mentioned recently. Still, our President could certainly have worse things to worry about than the wishful thinking of others. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 20:29:34 +0100 From: "richblath" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] More evil actions from the record companies > Regardless, it's a common practice: witness "The dB's" and "the B-52's"... > > --Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey And Mark's old faves - The Go-go's! Richard ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 16:33:59 -0400 From: Dave Walker Subject: [loud-fans] Minority Report (ns) Just got back from seeing it. I'll try to stay spoiler free. My initial impression is "yeehah" with a caveat (mushy muffed ending, naturally) or two. Color me a fan of the newer, darker Spielberg. As with _A.I._, the production design and photography are peerless. My regret is that PKD didn't live to share in the megabucks Hollywood has created via his visions. Big ups for casting Jessica "Suspiria" Harper in a small role. - -- Dave Walker freeform radio and live, nude fish at: http://www.freeke.org/ffg ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 13:56:15 -0700 From: "me" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Minority Report (ns) > Color me a fan of the newer, darker Spielberg. > As with _A.I._, the production design and > photography are peerless. PLEASE tell me he didn't get sick of trying to decide on an ending, showing us 3 or 4 potential ones, then drag it on and on and eventually introdue an alien race in order to do so.... very excite dto see MR, hated AI - -- "Drag me, drop me, treat me like an object." - -- ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 18:41:21 -0400 From: Dana Paoli Subject: [loud-fans] Not Enron, and Minority Report (ns) Re: Minority Report: I've been looking forward to this since seeing the preview way back when, and I'm glad to see that the early reviews are reasonably good. The visual design alone looked utterly striking, and as if someone had finally imagined a future that doesn't look like Blade Runner or Star Trek. Sad, though, to hear continued dissing of AI. I still think that it's a tragedy that that movie bombed, and I'm adding AI to the short list of movies (Hudsucker Proxy is the other that springs to mind) that I fully expect to gain classic status as years pass. Yeah, it had flaws. Given the competition lately, though, I can't imagine why people wouldn't at least embrace it as a noble failure which is a hell of a lot more than you can say for pretty much every other major movie that's come out in the last few years. Wondering if anyone else has bought the new Enon album, and what the reaction is. Talk about a group that's all over the place! I hear echoes of Blonde Redhead, Archers of Loaf, any number of power pop bands, '80's electronic music, the Pixies and lord only knows what else. They're another one of those bands, like Blur and Thou, who are doing interesting combinations of guitar rock with electronica production, but they're way more eclectic sounding than Blur or Thou. Not sure about the songwriting yet, which seems to lack a little bit in the catchiness department. I've never heard anything by Braniac, which is apparently the predecessor to Enon. Curious as to what others are thinking about this. At this point I can say that it's definitely interesting, but not much else. - --dana ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 18:59:48 -0400 From: Dave Walker Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Minority Report (ns) I forgot to mention that the trailers before _Minority Report_ included a teaser trailer (not much more than a title card and some narration "There are some places mankind was not meant to go", or something similar) for the Steven Soderbergh/James Cameron remake of _Solaris_. Even if the remake is lousy, it means we should finally get a decently distributed DVD of the original _Solaris_ (I've only ever seen the movie on a really chewed up rental VHS.) - -- Dave Walker freeform radio and live, nude fish at: http://www.freeke.org/ffg ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 19:32:53 -0500 (CDT) From: Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey Subject: Re: [loud-fans] the benefits of a Yale education (Legacy division) On Fri, 21 Jun 2002 JRT456@aol.com wrote: > In a message dated 6/21/02 10:51:59 AM, jenor@csd.uwm.edu writes: > > << Former executive editor of the Brazilian paper _Estado Sao Paulo_ Fernando > Pedreira reported in his column of 4/28 that during a visit with Brazilian > President Fernando Henrique Cardoso, G.W. Bush asked, "Do you have blacks > too?" >> > > Yeesh. There's an urban legend that died an undetermined death by early May. It was in _Der Spiegel_, and as I note, in the Brazilian paper. Source for this info is: http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A61118-2002Jun4¬Found=true While there remains some doubt as to whether Bush actually said this, Pedreira is well-placed to have heard it from Cardoso himself - and I'm not sure what political purpose it would serve him to make it up. If I were at snopes2.com, I'd give it a yellow light. - --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 ::[clever or pithy quote]:: __[source of quote]__ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 19:38:17 -0500 (CDT) From: Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Not Enron, and Minority Report (ns) On Fri, 21 Jun 2002, Dana Paoli wrote: > > Wondering if anyone else has bought the new Enon album, and what the > reaction is. Talk about a group that's all over the place! I hear > echoes of Blonde Redhead, Archers of Loaf, any number of power pop bands, > '80's electronic music, the Pixies and lord only knows what else. > They're another one of those bands, like Blur and Thou, who are doing > interesting combinations of guitar rock with electronica production, but > they're way more eclectic sounding than Blur or Thou. Not sure about the > songwriting yet, which seems to lack a little bit in the catchiness > department. I've never heard anything by Braniac, which is apparently > the predecessor to Enon. I haven't heard the new one, but the first one had one or two catchy tunes (i.e., I can remember them now w/o having listened to the CD for a while). Brainiac was a predecessor for one member, I think - but the main guy's previous gig was Skeleton Key, I think. I haven't heard Thou - AMG seems little help, comparing them to Portishead. I like Portishead, but then everyone suddenly sounded like them, and none of them sounded any good. And I just read AMG describing Tram as "trippy" and "space-rock." Musta been a different Tram (who are mopey and depressing in a very pretty way, and neither spacey nor trippy at all). - --Jeff Jeffrey Norman, Posemodernist University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Dept. of Mumblish & Competitive Obliterature http://www.uwm.edu/~jenor/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 21:21:30 EDT From: JRT456@aol.com Subject: Re: [loud-fans] the benefits of a Yale education (Legacy division) In a message dated 6/21/02 5:33:42 PM, jenor@csd.uwm.edu writes: << While there remains some doubt as to whether Bush actually said this, Pedreira is well-placed to have heard it from Cardoso himself - and I'm not sure what political purpose it would serve him to make it up. >> Well, at least you've now mentioned that there's some doubt. In fact, there's only been increasing doubt ever since the story first started making the rounds. File under urban legend, and take comfort in that there's still plenty of video of Bush pronouncing "terror" with a funny Texas accent. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 21:20:55 -0400 (EDT) From: Michael Mitton Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Minority Report (ns) On Fri, 21 Jun 2002, Dave Walker wrote: > meant to go", or something similar) for the Steven > Soderbergh/James Cameron remake of _Solaris_. You're kidding? I didn't know about this, and it is absolutely beyond my ability to comprehend a Soderbergh/Cameron remake of "Solaris", or any Tarkovsky movie for that matter with the possible exception of "My Name is Ivan." That said, "Solaris" was one of the worst seemingly 27 hours I've spent in a theater. (But I'm a great admirer of at least three of his other films--Nostalgia, Stalker, and The Sacrifice.) - --Michael ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 21:14:00 -0500 From: steve Subject: Re: [loud-fans] the benefits of a Yale education (Legacy division) On Friday, June 21, 2002, at 08:21 PM, JRT456@aol.com wrote: > File under urban legend, and take comfort in that there's still > plenty of video of Bush pronouncing "terror" with a funny Texas accent. Funny maybe, but it has nothing to do with Texas. - - Steve __________ Pat Robertson's resignation this month as president of the Christian Coalition confirmed the ascendance of a new leader of the religious right in America: George W. Bush. - Dana Milbank ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 21:34:00 -0500 From: steve Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Minority Report (ns) On Friday, June 21, 2002, at 05:59 PM, Dave Walker wrote: > I forgot to mention that the trailers before _Minority Report_ > included a teaser trailer (not much more than a title card and > some narration "There are some places mankind was not > meant to go", or something similar) for the Steven > Soderbergh/James Cameron remake of _Solaris_. Staring George Clooney, don't forget. Minority opinion - Minority Report is very competent, but nothing special, with a couple or three really stupid plot devices. - - Steve __________ "Miyazaki's latest animation feature (co-winner with 'Bloody Sunday' of the Berlin Golden Bear) more than justifies his status as Japan's most revered culture hero. What starts out as a fine example of the through-the-looking- glass kids' adventure genre becomes almost Shakespearean in its lyricism, breadth of vision and humanity." - Tony Rayns, Sight & Sound __________ The generally dismal quality of America's mass-marketed pop music is an esthetic national emergency. - Lorraine Ali & David Gates, Newsweek ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2002 00:02:03 -0400 From: "John Sharples" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Ranting at random... (NS) J.R.: >If a person is murdered, then there's nothing inaccurate about the term >"homicide bomber." Actually, there is *plenty* inaccurate about it -- at least if we're talking about terms that should be used by a free press or a moderating nation. We've already discussed several reasons it's less accurate than "suicide bomber" so I don't need to catalog them. But one thing we haven't discussed is whether the word "homicide" is even appropriate. Homicide and murder are terms that assume a single value system. After all, those who support the Palestinians regard the bombers as freedom fighters. *I* don't, you obviously don't, but that's not the issue here, is it? I don't personally consider the US airmen dropping bombs on the Taliban as homicide bombers, but really, who's to say? Depends entirely on whose side you're on, right? Our Founding Fathers could fairly be described as terrorists in their day, etc. And that's just my point. A free press should demonstrate its independence by not taking sides. There are plenty of Americans who support the Palestinian side of this conflict. Plenty more haven't decided. Should the free press simply turn on these freedom-loving, tax-paying Americans? >At worst, the term "homicide bomber" is biased against >a terrorist's martyrdom. You admit it's a biased term! You're starting to get it... > Of course, newspapers like the Chicago Tribune and >Philadelphia Inquirer won't even use the word "terrorist" to describe a >Palestinian bomber. Gee, you make that sound like a BAD thing! *Of course* they shouldn't use the term 'terrorist.' Again, it's perjorative, it's evaluative, and to use it is to choose sides. Why not just use a neutral term? J.R., what is it about a free press that threatens you so? >Every linguist that I've seen consulted on "homicide bomber" for news >articles say that the real problem is the lack of any appropriate word. I suspect what you claim here is actually not true. Last night I canvassed the internet using the search term "homicide bombers." Those media outlets using the term unironically were exclusively, as was noted here on the list, right-wing, like News Corp, National Review, bushcountry.org, etc. The left-wing sources lambasted use of the term, of course, *but so did* all apparently neutral sources, like linguists, copy editors, and various foreign media. Do the search yourself, and see. So, it seems that when the press refrains from saying "terrorist" and "homicide bomber" in favor of more neutral, more descriptive, and less partisan terms, you accuse them of bias. Ironically, when they bend over backwards to eliminate language that would suggest a particular viewpoint, you accuse them of bias when in fact your complaint is that they don't endorse the Bush party line. And that, for me, typifies the usual conservative complaint that the media have a liberal slant. When you closely scrutinize these charges, you usually find (1) they are mind-bogglingly trivial ("CNN calls the bombers victims!"), and (2) what conservatives call bias is actually a stringent effort by the press to remain neutral, and a refusal to support the conservative position on a particular issue. JS ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2002 01:20:08 EDT From: JRT456@aol.com Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Ranting at random... (NS) In a message dated 6/21/02 8:57:05 PM, jsharple@bls.brooklaw.edu writes: << Homicide and murder are terms that assume a single value system. After all, those who support the Palestinians regard the bombers as freedom fighters. *I* don't, you obviously don't, but that's not the issue here, is it? I don't personally consider the US airmen dropping bombs on the Taliban as homicide bombers, but really, who's to say? Depends entirely on whose side you're on, right? Our Founding Fathers could fairly be described as terrorists in their day, etc. >> Not everybody is so impressed with the drive for moral equivalency. I'm grateful that our current administration has no interest in it. In that same spirit, balanced reporting doesn't require fairness to the point of amorality. Michael Kinsley just wrote a thoughtful piece in which he noted how Fox News currently stands out for providing the most balanced reporting within the inherent biases of the news medium. I hope this doesn't mean he's going to work for Fox, though. As for selective definitions of "terrorist"... << Gee, you make that sound like a BAD thing! *Of course* they shouldn't use the term 'terrorist.' Again, it's perjorative, it's evaluative, and to use it is to choose sides. Why not just use a neutral term? J.R., what is it about a free press that threatens you so? >> I'd be more impressed with a free press that showed consistency. As it is, the Chicago Tribune (amongst other papers) decides that Palestinians killing Jews aren't terrorists, but Islamics flying jets into the World Trade Center certainly are. It's fair to wonder why Americans suffer terrorist attacks, while Israelis are denied a similar plight. << I suspect what you claim here is actually not true. >> You're referring to a claim that I made about most linguists quoted in news articles about the term? Instead of searching for who uses the term "homicide bomber," try searching for news articles about the term. << So, it seems that when the press refrains from saying "terrorist" and "homicide bomber" in favor of more neutral, more descriptive, and less partisan terms, you accuse them of bias. Ironically, when they bend over backwards to eliminate language that would suggest a particular viewpoint, you accuse them of bias when in fact your complaint is that they don't endorse the Bush party line. >> I like the notion that conservative thought includes respecting the phraseology of a democracy under terrorist attack. Still, the Democratic party has shown too much support for Israel (that is, in the past two years) for the term "homicide bomber" to be considered a partisan phrase. I've certainly never thought of "suicide bomber" as being an example of liberal bias. On the other hand, no damage is done to the facts by using the term "homicide bomber"...although someone might disagree if they believe that respect for different values systems means eliminating biased terms like "homicide" or "murder." ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2002 01:34:05 -0400 From: Dana Paoli Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Minority Report (ns) Minority opinion - Minority Report is very competent, but nothing special, with a couple or three really stupid plot devices. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Just got back from it a few minutes ago. I think that if you go looking for a great plot, or for Philip Dick level mind futzing, you'll leave disappointed. But, it looks really, really great, and is pretty gripping until very near the end when the action stops and the talking starts. As evidence, I'll cite the fact that no one in the (usually gabby beyond all belief) audience at the local Pavillion theater said one single word until about the last 20 minutes of the film. I was stunned, as this has *never* happened before. Shari and I enjoyed the movie a lot, though we didn't really have much to talk about afterwards beyond the visuals. Given how popular "Run Lola Run" was, though, I don't see any good reason to criticize Minority Report for the flaws in its plot. It could have been better, but as it is I felt that I got my $10 worth. - --dana ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2002 02:05:45 -0400 From: "John Sharples" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Ranting at random... (NS) >Not everybody is so impressed with the drive for moral equivalency. Now, don't try to characterize a call for neutral reporting as a drive for moral equivalency. The two are clearly different and easily distinguishable. As it is, >the Chicago Tribune (amongst other papers) decides that Palestinians killing >Jews aren't terrorists, but Islamics flying jets into the World Trade Center >certainly are. It's fair to wonder why Americans suffer terrorist attacks, >while Israelis are denied a similar plight. Well, Israel is denied nothing by the US press, but I'll play along with you: the Palestinians represent at least a theoretical nation-state. They have a colorable claim to have been robbed of their homeland. They have clearly stated goals. In short, we know what the hell they want, problematic as it is. Their actions, reprehensible as we might find them, have a stated purpose other than merely creating terror. The WTC hijackers lack all of this. No group has even claimed responsibility for the 9/11 attacks. Therefore, we can only conclude that their actions were intended to cause terror, and nothing else. The Tribune and the Enquirer seem to have considered this difference. JS ------------------------------ End of loud-fans-digest V2 #219 *******************************