April 2003 - Orb - mailman.xmission.com

RE: [Orb] OFF TOPIC Re Favourite Dub Albums
by purple pagoda 11 Apr '03

11 Apr '03

No, Upright Man is not on this one. Here's the track listing: Babylon Ghost Dread Iternal Cyborg Assault Galactic Zone Sub Terrain Bill gonna seek out the King Tubby and Leggo Albums this weekend. _________________________________________________________________ Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

1 0

RE: [Orb] OFF TOPIC Re Favourite Dub Albums
by purple pagoda 11 Apr '03

11 Apr '03

2 1

OT: WARNING, THIS MESSAGE IS OFF TOPIC!!!! DONT OPEN!!! :P
by Ben May 11 Apr '03

11 Apr '03

An interesting article from the Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,927712,00.html) from a few days back. I cant say I always agree with her point of view on things, but here I think she's right on. -------------------------- Mesopotamia. Babylon. The Tigris and Euphrates How many children, in how many classrooms, over how many centuries, have hang-glided through the past, transported on the wings of these words? And now the bombs are falling, incinerating and humiliating that ancient civilisation Arundhati Roy Wednesday April 2, 2003 The Guardian On the steel torsos of their missiles, adolescent American soldiers scrawl colourful messages in childish handwriting: For Saddam, from the Fat Boy Posse. A building goes down. A marketplace. A home. A girl who loves a boy. A child who only ever wanted to play with his older brother's marbles. On March 21, the day after American and British troops began their illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq, an "embedded" CNN correspondent interviewed an American soldier. "I wanna get in there and get my nose dirty," Private AJ said. "I wanna take revenge for 9/11." To be fair to the correspondent, even though he was "embedded" he did sort of weakly suggest that so far there was no real evidence that linked the Iraqi government to the September 11 attacks. Private AJ stuck his teenage tongue out all the way down to the end of his chin. "Yeah, well that stuff's way over my head," he said. According to a New York Times/CBS News survey, 42 per cent of the American public believes that Saddam Hussein is directly responsible for the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon. And an ABC news poll says that 55 per cent of Americans believe that Saddam Hussein directly supports al-Qaida. What percentage of America's armed forces believe these fabrications is anybody's guess. It is unlikely that British and American troops fighting in Iraq are aware that their governments supported Saddam Hussein both politically and financially through his worst excesses. But why should poor AJ and his fellow soldiers be burdened with these details? It does not matter any more, does it? Hundreds of thousands of men, tanks, ships, choppers, bombs, ammunition, gas masks, high-protein food, whole aircrafts ferrying toilet paper, insect repellent, vitamins and bottled mineral water, are on the move. The phenomenal logistics of Operation Iraqi Freedom make it a universe unto itself. It doesn't need to justify its existence any more. It exists. It is. President George W Bush, commander in chief of the US army, navy, airforce and marines has issued clear instructions: "Iraq. Will. Be. Liberated." (Perhaps he means that even if Iraqi people's bodies are killed, their souls will be liberated.) American and British citizens owe it to the supreme commander to forsake thought and rally behind their troops. Their countries are at war. And what a war it is. After using the "good offices" of UN diplomacy (economic sanctions and weapons inspections) to ensure that Iraq was brought to its knees, its people starved, half a million of its children killed, its infrastructure severely damaged, after making sure that most of its weapons have been destroyed, in an act of cowardice that must surely be unrivalled in history, the "Allies"/"Coalition of the Willing"(better known as the Coalition of the Bullied and Bought) - sent in an invading army! Operation Iraqi Freedom? I don't think so. It's more like Operation Let's Run a Race, but First Let Me Break Your Knees. So far the Iraqi army, with its hungry, ill-equipped soldiers, its old guns and ageing tanks, has somehow managed to temporarily confound and occasionally even outmanoeuvre the "Allies". Faced with the richest, best-equipped, most powerful armed forces the world has ever seen, Iraq has shown spectacular courage and has even managed to put up what actually amounts to a defence. A defence which the Bush/Blair Pair have immediately denounced as deceitful and cowardly. (But then deceit is an old tradition with us natives. When we are invaded/ colonised/occupied and stripped of all dignity, we turn to guile and opportunism.) Even allowing for the fact that Iraq and the "Allies" are at war, the extent to which the "Allies" and their media cohorts are prepared to go is astounding to the point of being counterproductive to their own objectives. When Saddam Hussein appeared on national TV to address the Iraqi people after the failure of the most elaborate assassination attempt in history - "Operation Decapitation" - we had Geoff Hoon, the British defence secretary, deriding him for not having the courage to stand up and be killed, calling him a coward who hides in trenches. We then had a flurry of Coalition speculation - Was it really Saddam, was it his double? Or was it Osama with a shave? Was it pre-recorded? Was it a speech? Was it black magic? Will it turn into a pumpkin if we really, really want it to? After dropping not hundreds, but thousands of bombs on Baghdad, when a marketplace was mistakenly blown up and civilians killed - a US army spokesman implied that the Iraqis were blowing themselves up! "They're using very old stock. Their missiles go up and come down." If so, may we ask how this squares with the accusation that the Iraqi regime is a paid-up member of the Axis of Evil and a threat to world peace? When the Arab TV station al-Jazeera shows civilian casualties it's denounced as "emotive" Arab propaganda aimed at orchestrating hostility towards the "Allies", as though Iraqis are dying only in order to make the "Allies" look bad. Even French television has come in for some stick for similar reasons. But the awed, breathless footage of aircraft carriers, stealth bombers and cruise missiles arcing across the desert sky on American and British TV is described as the "terrible beauty" of war. When invading American soldiers (from the army "that's only here to help") are taken prisoner and shown on Iraqi TV, George Bush says it violates the Geneva convention and "exposes the evil at the heart of the regime". But it is entirely acceptable for US television stations to show the hundreds of prisoners being held by the US government in Guantanamo Bay, kneeling on the ground with their hands tied behind their backs, blinded with opaque goggles and with earphones clamped on their ears, to ensure complete visual and aural deprivation. When questioned about the treatment of these prisoners, US Government officials don't deny that they're being being ill-treated. They deny that they're "prisoners of war"! They call them "unlawful combatants", implying that their ill-treatment is legitimate! (So what's the party line on the massacre of prisoners in Mazar-e-Sharif, Afghanistan? Forgive and forget? And what of the prisoner tortured to death by the special forces at the Bagram airforce base? Doctors have formally called it homicide.) When the "Allies" bombed the Iraqi television station (also, incidentally, a contravention of the Geneva convention), there was vulgar jubilation in the American media. In fact Fox TV had been lobbying for the attack for a while. It was seen as a righteous blow against Arab propaganda. But mainstream American and British TV continue to advertise themselves as "balanced" when their propaganda has achieved hallucinatory levels. Why should propaganda be the exclusive preserve of the western media? Just because they do it better? Western journalists "embedded" with troops are given the status of heroes reporting from the frontlines of war. Non-"embedded" journalists (such as the BBC's Rageh Omaar, reporting from besieged and bombed Baghdad, witnessing, and clearly affected by the sight of bodies of burned children and wounded people) are undermined even before they begin their reportage: "We have to tell you that he is being monitored by the Iraqi authorities." Increasingly, on British and American TV, Iraqi soldiers are being referred to as "militia" (ie: rabble). One BBC correspondent portentously referred to them as "quasi-terrorists". Iraqi defence is "resistance" or worse still, "pockets of resistance", Iraqi military strategy is deceit. (The US government bugging the phone lines of UN security council delegates, reported by the Observer, is hard-headed pragmatism.) Clearly for the "Allies", the only morally acceptable strategy the Iraqi army can pursue is to march out into the desert and be bombed by B-52s or be mowed down by machine-gun fire. Anything short of that is cheating. And now we have the siege of Basra. About a million and a half people, 40 per cent of them children. Without clean water, and with very little food. We're still waiting for the legendary Shia "uprising", for the happy hordes to stream out of the city and rain roses and hosannahs on the "liberating" army. Where are the hordes? Don't they know that television productions work to tight schedules? (It may well be that if Saddam's regime falls there will be dancing on the streets of Basra. But then, if the Bush regime were to fall, there would be dancing on the streets the world over.) After days of enforcing hunger and thirst on the citizens of Basra, the "Allies" have brought in a few trucks of food and water and positioned them tantalisingly on the outskirts of the city. Desperate people flock to the trucks and fight each other for food. (The water we hear, is being sold. To revitalise the dying economy, you understand.) On top of the trucks, desperate photographers fought each other to get pictures of desperate people fighting each other for food. Those pictures will go out through photo agencies to newspapers and glossy magazines that pay extremely well. Their message: The messiahs are at hand, distributing fishes and loaves. As of July last year the delivery of $5.4bn worth of supplies to Iraq was blocked by the Bush/Blair Pair. It didn't really make the news. But now under the loving caress of live TV, 450 tonnes of humanitarian aid - a minuscule fraction of what's actually needed (call it a script prop) - arrived on a British ship, the "Sir Galahad". Its arrival in the port of Umm Qasr merited a whole day of live TV broadcasts. Barf bag, anyone? Nick Guttmann, head of emergencies for Christian Aid, writing for the Independent on Sunday said that it would take 32 Sir Galahad's a day to match the amount of food Iraq was receiving before the bombing began. We oughtn't to be surprised though. It's old tactics. They've been at it for years. Consider this moderate proposal by John McNaughton from the Pentagon Papers, published during the Vietnam war: "Strikes at population targets (per se) are likely not only to create a counterproductive wave of revulsion abroad and at home, but greatly to increase the risk of enlarging the war with China or the Soviet Union. Destruction of locks and dams, however - if handled right - might ... offer promise. It should be studied. Such destruction does not kill or drown people. By shallow-flooding the rice, it leads after time to widespread starvation (more than a million?) unless food is provided - which we could offer to do 'at the conference table'." Times haven't changed very much. The technique has evolved into a doctrine. It's called "Winning Hearts and Minds". So, here's the moral maths as it stands: 200,000 Iraqis estimated to have been killed in the first Gulf war. Hundreds of thousands dead because of the economic sanctions. (At least that lot has been saved from Saddam Hussein.) More being killed every day. Tens of thousands of US soldiers who fought the 1991 war officially declared "disabled" by a disease called the Gulf war syndrome, believed in part to be caused by exposure to depleted uranium. It hasn't stopped the "Allies" from continuing to use depleted uranium. And now this talk of bringing the UN back into the picture. But that old UN girl - it turns out that she just ain't what she was cracked up to be. She's been demoted (although she retains her high salary). Now she's the world's janitor. She's the Philippino cleaning lady, the Indian jamadarni, the postal bride from Thailand, the Mexican household help, the Jamaican au pair. She's employed to clean other peoples' shit. She's used and abused at will. Despite Blair's earnest submissions, and all his fawning, Bush has made it clear that the UN will play no independent part in the administration of postwar Iraq. The US will decide who gets those juicy "reconstruction" contracts. But Bush has appealed to the international community not to "politicise" the issue of humanitarian aid. On the March 28, after Bush called for the immediate resumption of the UN's oil for food programme, the UN security council voted unanimously for the resolution. This means that everybody agrees that Iraqi money (from the sale of Iraqi oil) should be used to feed Iraqi people who are starving because of US led sanctions and the illegal US-led war. Contracts for the "reconstruction" of Iraq we're told, in discussions on the business news, could jump-start the world economy. It's funny how the interests of American corporations are so often, so successfully and so deliberately confused with the interests of the world economy. While the American people will end up paying for the war, oil companies, weapons manufacturers, arms dealers, and corporations involved in "reconstruction" work will make direct gains from the war. Many of them are old friends and former employers of the Bush/ Cheney/Rumsfeld/Rice cabal. Bush has already asked Congress for $75bn. Contracts for "re-construction" are already being negotiated. The news doesn't hit the stands because much of the US corporate media is owned and managed by the same interests. Operation Iraqi Freedom, Tony Blair assures us is about returning Iraqi oil to the Iraqi people. That is, returning Iraqi oil to the Iraqi people via corporate multinationals. Like Shell, like Chevron, like Halliburton. Or are we missing the plot here? Perhaps Halliburton is actually an Iraqi company? Perhaps US vice-president Dick Cheney (who is a former director of Halliburton) is a closet Iraqi? As the rift between Europe and America deepens, there are signs that the world could be entering a new era of economic boycotts. CNN reported that Americans are emptying French wine into gutters, chanting, "We don't want your stinking wine." We've heard about the re-baptism of French fries. Freedom fries they're called now. There's news trickling in about Americans boycotting German goods. The thing is that if the fallout of the war takes this turn, it is the US who will suffer the most. Its homeland may be defended by border patrols and nuclear weapons, but its economy is strung out across the globe. Its economic outposts are exposed and vulnerable to attack in every direction. Already the internet is buzzing with elaborate lists of American and British government products and companies that should be boycotted. Apart from the usual targets, Coke, Pepsi and McDonald's - government agencies such as USAID, the British department for international development, British and American banks, Arthur Anderson, Merrill Lynch, American Express, corporations such as Bechtel, General Electric, and companies such as Reebok, Nike and Gap - could find themselves under siege. These lists are being honed and re fined by activists across the world. They could become a practical guide that directs and channels the amorphous, but growing fury in the world. Suddenly, the "inevitability" of the project of corporate globalisation is beginning to seem more than a little evitable. It's become clear that the war against terror is not really about terror, and the war on Iraq not only about oil. It's about a superpower's self-destructive impulse towards supremacy, stranglehold, global hegemony. The argument is being made that the people of Argentina and Iraq have both been decimated by the same process. Only the weapons used against them differ: In one case it's an IMF chequebook. In the other, cruise missiles. Finally, there's the matter of Saddam's arsenal of weapons of mass destruction. (Oops, nearly forgot about those!) In the fog of war - one thing's for sure - if Saddam 's regime indeed has weapons of mass destruction, it is showing an astonishing degree of responsibility and restraint in the teeth of extreme provocation. Under similar circumstances, (say if Iraqi troops were bombing New York and laying siege to Washington DC) could we expect the same of the Bush regime? Would it keep its thousands of nuclear warheads in their wrapping paper? What about its chemical and biological weapons? Its stocks of anthrax, smallpox and nerve gas? Would it? Excuse me while I laugh. In the fog of war we're forced to speculate: Either Saddam is an extremely responsible tyrant. Or - he simply does not possess weapons of mass destruction. Either way, regardless of what happens next, Iraq comes out of the argument smelling sweeter than the US government. So here's Iraq - rogue state, grave threat to world peace, paid-up member of the Axis of Evil. Here's Iraq, invaded, bombed, besieged, bullied, its sovereignty shat upon, its children killed by cancers, its people blown up on the streets. And here's all of us watching. CNN-BBC, BBC-CNN late into the night. Here's all of us, enduring the horror of the war, enduring the horror of the propaganda and enduring the slaughter of language as we know and understand it. Freedom now means mass murder (or, in the US, fried potatoes). When someone says "humanitarian aid" we automatically go looking for induced starvation. "Embedded" I have to admit, is a great find. It's what it sounds like. And what about "arsenal of tactics?" Nice! In most parts of the world, the invasion of Iraq is being seen as a racist war. The real danger of a racist war unleashed by racist regimes is that it engenders racism in everybody - perpetrators, victims, spectators. It sets the parameters for the debate, it lays out a grid for a particular way of thinking. There is a tidal wave of hatred for the US rising from the ancient heart of the world. In Africa, Latin America, Asia, Europe, Australia. I encounter it every day. Sometimes it comes from the most unlikely sources. Bankers, businessmen, yuppie students, and they bring to it all the crassness of their conservative, illiberal politics. That absurd inability to separate governments from people: America is a nation of morons, a nation of murderers, they say, (with the same carelessness with which they say, "All Muslims are terrorists"). Even in the grotesque universe of racist insult, the British make their entry as add-ons. Arse-lickers, they're called. Suddenly, I, who have been vilified for being "anti-American" and "anti-west", find myself in the extraordinary position of defending the people of America. And Britain. Those who descend so easily into the pit of racist abuse would do well to remember the hundreds of thousands of American and British citizens who protested against their country's stockpile of nuclear weapons. And the thousands of American war resisters who forced their government to withdraw from Vietnam. They should know that the most scholarly, scathing, hilarious critiques of the US government and the "American way of life" comes from American citizens. And that the funniest, most bitter condemnation of their prime minister comes from the British media. Finally they should remember that right now, hundreds of thousands of British and American citizens are on the streets protesting the war. The Coalition of the Bullied and Bought consists of governments, not people. More than one third of America's citizens have survived the relentless propaganda they've been subjected to, and many thousands are actively fighting their own government. In the ultra-patriotic climate that prevails in the US, that's as brave as any Iraqi fighting for his or her homeland. While the "Allies" wait in the desert for an uprising of Shia Muslims on the streets of Basra, the real uprising is taking place in hundreds of cities across the world. It has been the most spectacular display of public morality ever seen. Most courageous of all, are the hundreds of thousands of American people on the streets of America's great cities - Washington, New York, Chicago, San Francisco. The fact is that the only institution in the world today that is more powerful than the American government, is American civil society. American citizens have a huge responsibility riding on their shoulders. How can we not salute and support those who not only acknowledge but act upon that responsibility? They are our allies, our friends. At the end of it all, it remains to be said that dictators like Saddam Hussein, and all the other despots in the Middle East, in the central Asian republics, in Africa and Latin America, many of them installed, supported and financed by the US government, are a menace to their own people. Other than strengthening the hand of civil society (instead of weakening it as has been done in the case of Iraq), there is no easy, pristine way of dealing with them. (It's odd how those who dismiss the peace movement as utopian, don't hesitate to proffer the most absurdly dreamy reasons for going to war: to stamp out terrorism, install democracy, eliminate fascism, and most entertainingly, to "rid the world of evil-doers".) Regardless of what the propaganda machine tells us, these tin-pot dictators are not the greatest threat to the world. The real and pressing danger, the greatest threat of all is the locomotive force that drives the political and economic engine of the US government, currently piloted by George Bush. Bush-bashing is fun, because he makes such an easy, sumptuous target. It's true that he is a dangerous, almost suicidal pilot, but the machine he handles is far more dangerous than the man himself. Despite the pall of gloom that hangs over us today, I'd like to file a cautious plea for hope: in times of war, one wants one's weakest enemy at the helm of his forces. And President George W Bush is certainly that. Any other even averagely intelligent US president would have probably done the very same things, but would have managed to smoke-up the glass and confuse the opposition. Perhaps even carry the UN with him. Bush's tactless imprudence and his brazen belief that he can run the world with his riot squad, has done the opposite. He has achieved what writers, activists and scholars have striven to achieve for decades. He has exposed the ducts. He has placed on full public view the working parts, the nuts and bolts of the apocalyptic apparatus of the American empire. Now that the blueprint (The Ordinary Person's Guide to Empire) has been put into mass circulation, it could be disabled quicker than the pundits predicted. Bring on the spanners. _________________________________________________________________ STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

1 0

Re: [Orb] OT: police yourselves, please
by Ben May 11 Apr '03

11 Apr '03

>honestly, i was pretty disappointed to find out that two very good friends >of mine and long-term list members were asked, no, make that badgered into >leaving the list because people didn't like their exchanges with Thrash Hah! This problem comes about at least once on every list. I am sad to see the orb list change from what it was in 1999, but things change. Even the orb has changed, and even before 1999. I've been on the orb mailing list since at least then (check the archives, I've been using email benmay(a)cuccfa.ccc.columbia.edu as well as blm14(a)columbia.edu) but I do not grieve for what the list once was. As far as topic police goes, personally I do not view these lists or BBS's or weblogs (or anything which is generally topic-specific online) as being a way to discuss the topic. It is a way for people who all enjoy the same topic or are interested in it to discuss whatever topic is there. To attempt to avoid this in an unmoderated forum is both pointless and legitimately boring. Who would want to be on a list which gets 300 messages a day about the same topics over and over. I mean, from the perspective of someone who's also been on the list a while, I'm glad to see we aren't still all discussing the audio flaws in the Anthology II boot versus the lack thereof in the equivalent Visitor boot. Old topics gets stale, and if they are discussed constantly, you will have high member turnover. These things are unavoidable, like them or not. >(the king of inappropriateness). You have to admit, occasionally thrash has his moments of clarity and even moments where he speaks truth; I suspect that his highest bandwidth form of communication is not writing emails. I would love to meet the man in person... >i mean, really people! all this off-topic bullshit and you folks are going >to harass people for debating Thrash?! I would like to not see people harassing one another, but I also haven;t seen anything approaching an old school flame war on here recently. There have been worse spats than this, and I'm sure there will be worse ones than this in the future. >i only hope that the same folks who felt it was in "our" best interest to >have those members leave, also are bombarding the posters of political >babble with the same vehemence. Well, one could argue that political babble has more value than personal and often profane personal attacks. :) Its a shame people left, but nobody forced them to join and nobody forced them to leave. I wonder if any really hoped for people on the list to leave. That would be lame. I also would think its unfair to say all of our political discussion of late has been vehement. I dont recall expressing particular amounts of anger in any of my recent emails. Nor personal attacks. <scratches head> > >whew! just had to get that off my chest... :) See, thats why this list is cool. You can make that post, and people will read it. I hope people read this one, despite its length :) _________________________________________________________________ STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

3 2

RE: [Orb] How long have ya'll been on the list.
by Don Gagen 11 Apr '03

11 Apr '03

I can't remember exactly when, but it was sometime between 96 or 97. "There is no greater joy than soaring high on the wings of your dreams, except maybe the joy of watching a dreamer who has nowhere to land but in the ocean of reality." DONALD D GAGEN MAILTO:DGAGEN@ENSEMBLESTUDIOS.COM ENSEMBLE STUDIOS http://www.ensemblestudios.com

2 1

Re: [Orb] Sardines -- yum!
by JASON HICKS 11 Apr '03

11 Apr '03

Dude, lighten up or get out. I laughed my ass off when I read that post about sardines, it was genuinely funny and correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't having a sense of humor and integral part of "getting" what the Orb is/was all about? Personally I think people should be able to talk about whatever they want here (including throwing thrash some harsh words when he's being a dick, although I have noticed he is much more genial since he returned to the list and I appreciate it :) If you don't like reading OT posts then don't, as 90% of them indicate they are OT in the subject header. There is enough activity in this world today trying to control what people say and think, let's not have it on this list. My two cents. Jason >From: Brett Wagner <brett(a)madhouse.org> >Reply-To: What were the skies like when you were >young?<orb(a)mailman.xmission.com> >To: What were the skies like when you were young? ><orb(a)mailman.xmission.com> >Subject: Re: [Orb] Sardines -- yum! >Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 08:20:24 -0700 (PDT) > >here is the part when you take a big heaping teaspoon of 'shut the fuck >up'. > >this list is fast becoming the most off-topic and the most ill mannered >list i'm on... it's sad really, i remember when this list would be silent >for months between orb releases... those were the days. > >_ > / madhouse.org | get commited / > >b > >On Thu, 10 Apr 2003, P J Kane wrote: > > > << what the best brand of anchovies is .. >> > > > > anchovy smanchovy. sardines are far better! in fact i am very fond of >the product of the Stinson Seafood Company of Maine. nice atlantic fish, >and usually reasonably priced. > > > > check out their website for some great recipes, or if you really want i >can get you some! > > > > http://www.ibgm.com/stinson/stin-her.htm > > > > PJK > > > > > > please don't hate me because i can't type..... > > --- > > All the cool kids are doing it: > > HTTP://www.EvilSponge.org > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Orb mailing list > > Orb(a)mailman.xmission.com > > http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/orb > > > >_______________________________________________ >Orb mailing list >Orb(a)mailman.xmission.com >http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/orb _________________________________________________________________ Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail

4 6

RE: How long have ya'll been on the list.
by Rob_King 11 Apr '03

11 Apr '03

Hiya Orbies, I remember signing up during my first year of uni, so I've been subscribed to the list under various email addresses since 1994 or 95. I guess I can take the cake for longest on the list who's replied so far, and by far the least productive member at that. I believe this list was under a different mail manager at the time I signed up (hmmm... under hyperreal? can't remember). Anyhow, of all of the lists I'm signed up on, this is the most entertaining one, particularly for the non-orb content. Seriously, if there was a name for diarrhea of the mouth, it'd be something like orbanontopica. However, one takes the good with the bad, so I don't mind the frequent wanderings into the land of Off Topicsville. Somewhat music related, although non-Orb - I was able to pick up Art of Noise's seminal "Who's Afraid of (the Art of Noise" on CD for $10 (cdn) the other day. Listening to the title track "A Time for Fear" was kinda haunting, particularly with what's happening in Iraq right now. "....What happens now?" It's funny - after listening to that almost-20-years-old CD, it strikes me how far ahead the Art of Noise was in terms of quality of their mastering, usage of "hi-tech" equipment, sampling, etc. - compared to other pop contemporaries at the time. Anyhow, my $0.02... BTW Thrash thanks for recommending Holger Czukay to me - picked up some stuff by him recently. I like, I like! Also have "Plight and Premonition" on order right now... If any good, I'll recommend to the list. Cheers, Rob

2 1

How long have ya'll been on the list.
by Ben May 11 Apr '03

11 Apr '03

Searchin the orb archives I actually found the date I signed up for the list! may 19th, 1998... What a long strange trip, eh? (sidenote: I think I was a lurker on here on blm14 for a while before I switched it to the benmay account) _________________________________________________________________ The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

6 5

OT Fw: Is God Dead?
by Alan 10 Apr '03

10 Apr '03

Seriously, if you want something to be upset about, try getting this kind of shit on a regular basis. That really is the subject. I believe this e-mail may be proof to the affirmative. www.psychicreform.com Who let that monkey in here!?! Dada is dead. Watch your overcoat. ----- Original Message ----- From: stoobs(a)msn.com To: alanew(a)bellsouth.net ; alanevil(a)bellsouth.net Sent: Friday, April 11, 2003 4:04 AM Subject: Is God Dead? "Want to get BIGGER today?" Experience the results you've always wanted with a MASSIVE scientific breakthrough: Our Doctor-Approved Pill Will Actually Expand, Lengthen And Enlarge Your Manhood. 100% GUARANTEED! Best of all... There Are NO Agonizing Hanging Weights, NO Tough Exercises, NO Painful And Hard-To-Use Pumps, And There Is NO Dangerous Surgery Involved. WE GUARANTEE GENUINE LASTING RESULTS! THESE PILLS WILL WORK FOR YOU 100%, OR YOU GET 100% OF YOUR MONEY BACK! CLICK HERE TO GET GROWING REMOVE ME

1 0

RE: How long have ya'll been on the list.
by Alan 10 Apr '03

10 Apr '03

I've been on for about a year and a half. Rob King wrote: "BTW Thrash thanks for recommending Holger Czukay to me" I recorded a song with Holger Czukay! Small world, huh? Definately check out the Can remix album as well as the Gong remix album. The promo of the Can remix record has a lot of tracks that didn't make it to the end release. I don't know why, I'd imagine contractual bullshit. "Also have "Plight and Premonition" on order right now" Oooooo. Good album. David Sylvian is just so good. www.psychicreform.com Who let that monkey in here!?! Dada is dead. Watch your overcoat.

1 0