- Orb - mailman.xmission.com

Cydonia Promo on MCA
by Don Gagen 26 Mar '03

26 Mar '03

It was released in 2000. The track list is the same, but I was wondering if it possibly had different mixes than the final version. "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: THE BADORB.COM BACKLASH
by Smiley 26 Mar '03

26 Mar '03

hi folks. i've been asked to post the following message by the orb management team, in response to the recent messages about the problems with badorb.com (i.e. being left high and dry). cheers, --- Smiley ***** Hi Orbsters, Further to the disgruntled messages/discussions regarding badorb.com... ...although The Orb fronted the label, the business/logistics side of things was taken on board by Rob Deacon (Deviant Records) with Alex taking the role of A&R manager. Unfortunately, Alex was led astray by Deviant, who informed him that they would be sorting out all the back orders for badorb.com, which is now apparent that they have not. Alex has just mastered the forthcoming Orb album, and is now able to turn his attentions to you Orbsters who have not received your orders from badorb.com. Alex is truly sorry that this has happened. We intend to do our utmost to rectify the situation, please bare with us while we make our investigations. We would like anyone affected by this situation to email us at: bobs(a)innit.demon.co.uk ...explaining your situation. Please please do not use this address other than for this purpose - as you will not get a reply! Alex will be making a personal statement on www.theorb.com ...soon...... Thank you for your understanding. The Orb Mother Ship *****

1 0

RE: [Orb] off topic WAR
by Ben May 26 Mar '03

26 Mar '03

Gah! I cannot seem to resist these rants. >Like they are so humanitarian!! Dress up as civilians and then shoot >under >the flag of truce!!! FUCK THEM!!!!!!!!! To quote sun tzu: "All war is deception." If you were the iraqis and you were facing down an invading army that is vastly technologically superior you would do the same exact thing. In fact, I'm surprised that anyone didn't expect this sort of thing, it's hardly a new military tactic. >They should have done the job >right the 1st time! Any one, who uses Terror tactics on his own people, >should be dismantled! I have a philosophical question to pose. What exactly are "Terror Tactics?" It seems to me that part of the problem is that nobody has been able to really identify what a terror tactic is, exactly. I mean if you take a conservative definition "The use of Terror by itself as a weapon" then the US is equally engaged in terror tactics against its own citizens as are al qaedi or saddam. Does it help our security or do anything to protect us to have rumsfeld and others saying "We will definately be hit by terrorists in the future" As far as doing bad stuff to your own people, the united states has done some pretty horrific things to its people in the past. We interned the japanese during WW2, SLAVERY say no more. To assert that the united states has some sort of moral high ground here is hubris. And as far as doing the job "right" last time, the previous conflict was solely to eject saddam from kuwait. That was was the UN sanctioned and that was the action carried out. >WE are the only ones, with the British, who >have the Fucking Balls to clean up the likes of him and the other Terror >advocates in the world. Hrm, I think you are again confused about terrorists. First of saddam is secular. He's not, i repeat NOT, a islamic fundamentalist. He is a fascist, and his state has more in common with stalinist models than with Shari'ah (islamic law). Another thing, it doesn't take balls to attack a weak state. It takes balls to think of ways of achieving your goals without resorting to war. It takes balls to compromise in the face of political pressure. >In my opinion, Korea should be next! North or south? Do you have any idea what would happen if we attacked north korea?! They have nuclear weapons you fool. They would destroy california in about 45 minutes. Not to mention japan, south korea, etc. >I don't know >where u live, but I like to keep my country safe from the likes of manicial >trash in 3rd world countries wanting to mame and destroy the American >dream. Hrm, the premise of this statement is that we are currently (or WERE prior to the start of hostilities) subject to some kind of threat to our safety from saddam. If you are talking about current threat, that is clearly not the case. Saddam might, i repeat MIGHT, have terrible weapons, but he has not used them in years, we have worse ones, and he has no way to deliver them to the US. If you are talking about future threats, then you are on very shakey ground. If your argument is that we must take out saddam due to a percieved future threat from him, how do you know that threat really exists? Can you tell the future? Maybe saddam would die of a heart attack in 3 years. Maybe he would sit and pose as a badass until his death. He is, after all, 65 years old. It makes me very nervous that the country which is supposed to lead by example is providing examples of attacking sovereign states based on percieved unproven future threats. And as far as threatening the american dream, what better way to gaurantee that there will be more people who hate us than to attack yet another islamic country for reasons which are murky, and with flimsy and/or classified evidence. >U see what he did and do to their own people, just see what they would like >to do to the US citizens if they could. But that's just the point. He cant. And if he DID, we would squash him and rightly so. >IF the 9-11 attacks did not outrage >you, Shame, Shame. It was on our soil. Hrm, I dont know where you live, but I am uniquely equipped to address this issue personally. I live in new york. I lost 2 coworkers and 2 friends when the world trade center fell. I also lost my job because of it. Twice. And yet, the only thing which made me cry throughout that entire ordeal was the thought that because a few assholes killed 3000 of our citizens, our government sent troops overseas to kill many more than 3000 in another country. Not to say this wasn't justified, but that statement of "On our soil" has a hidden implication. Namely, its ok for us to go somewhere and kill people, but how DARE someone else come over here and kill us? I'm sorry, but the WTC disaster was peanuts. It taught us a lesson about the reach and ability of terrorists, but it obviously DIDNT teach us other lessons we should have learned. For instance, actions taken in what are percieved as US short term interests can backfire. I am not blaming the US for 9/11, but for us to not look back and see how our OWN involvement in the history behind that attack is idiocy. We MUST learn from our mistakes, all of them. And to say that 9/11 has ANYTHING to do with our attacking iraq is fallacy. Our governing administration was desparate to do so prior to 9/11. Attacking iraq while using 9/11 as a reason is like deciding to attack spain because a small group of french militants came to our country and bombed a building and using french and spanish economic ties, or family ties, as our link. This whole thing of "linking" al qaeda to saddam is simply ludicrous. Are you aware of the mathematical concept of 6 degrees of separation? Basically heres how it works: Take 100 people you know (its safe to say you know AT LEAST this number) Take 100 of their friends Take 100 of their friends friends Do this 6 times and you have 100 ^ 6 people. That is a trillion for you non-math buffs. Last time I checked there are way fewer people on the planet than that. Plus you have to remember, iraq and afghanistan are not far apart at all. It would be absurd to conclude that iraq and al qaeda are somehow co-conspiritors simply because colon powel can find a chain of associations 4 links long which show that people from al qaeda know people in iraq's government. The statitistical chances of this NOT being the case are astronomical simply because of geographic and mathematical reality. >I can only imagine what is has been >like for people in Paris or London or other countries for the past 20-30 >yrs >with the bombings and attacks that hey have had to endure from terrorist >trash!! Huh? Please attach URLs showing the history of said attacks in the last 20-30 years in those countries. In fact, from what I understand, france and england have HUGE populations of imigrants from places like pakistan, yemen, morocco, etc who are more or less tax paying well behaved members of their respective societies. > He is trying to make the world a >little safer, I don't know about you. If you don't like what he is doing, >that is your opinion, but in the end, it will benefit us all. I have yet to see proof that this attack will make the world any safer. In fact, the CIA and FBI have made statement exactly to the contrary! Namely that us attacking iraq will make us LESS safe, not more. >************************** >"Rationalization is giving a socially >acceptable reason for socially >unacceptable behavior, and >socially unacceptable behavior >is a form of insanity". BB - Pg 550 Have you read your own signature!? Is not bush rationalizing our attack on iraq using heaps and heaps of spurious unproven suppositions and assumptions!? _________________________________________________________________ STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

1 0

RE: [Orb] off topic WAR
by Ben May 26 Mar '03

26 Mar '03

Don, Thanks! :) If you're at all interested in the whole israel/palestine thing, a good doc to check out is: http://www.cactus48.com/truth.html Kinda puts things into perspective a bit. One must never forget that this tiny strip of land has been subject to conquerers of all faiths and nationalities for roughly 3000 years. First the canaanites, then the assyrians, then the christians, the muslims, the christians again, the romans, the ottomans, the allies in WW1, etc etc etc. >You made some really good points especially with regard to Israel. I >didn't >know much of that until now. It is also worth mentioning that the >resolutions against Iraq were only with regard to the attack on Kuwait and >their failure to disarm. I'm not sure how many others they managed to get >in >their wars with Iran, Turkey, and Kurds. I think it's also interesting to note that none of the iraq-related resolutions say anything, to my knowledge, about "no fly zones." As I understand it the US and Britain decided that they would unilaterally create such zones in order to ostensibly enforce the UN resolutions which didn't actually call for their creation. More bizarre behavior in our foreign policy... _________________________________________________________________ The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

1 0

RE: [Orb] off topic WAR
by Mike VandeVelde 26 Mar '03

26 Mar '03

Right on Ben May. If I had bothered to say something, I couldn't have said it better. sincerely, a canuck who supports his government in not supporting our southern neighbours in their maniacal rampage around the globe showing off their latest smartest weapons and how good they are at dismembering a little bit less civilians than the last time. bah ok you got me fired up here goes... Iraq has weapons of mass destruction eh? Even billions and billions of dollars couldn't convince any significant majority of countries to say with a straight face that they believe it. You have Blair considering himself a morally justified hero while he commits political suicide. You have Howard... I haven't figured out the Aussies. You have Spain - with what 80% of their people against the war? Aren't they having enough trouble holding their own country together, what with the Basques and Catalonia, to be going around spreading Utopia in the rest of the world? Add a list of pico-powered countries who are basically just saying that they'll help put the peices back together, and you have the coalition of the willingly bought and paid for. It's right in the charter that the UN is built on - you don't interfere with the domestic situation of a sovereign country. This war is fundamentally illegal - one every level you can look at it. I don't hear Sadam saying to the UN do things my way or you will fade into history and become irrelevant. Who is undermining the credibility of the UN here? The USA failed miserably at strong arming enough countries into authorizing this invasion. But nobody would need any bribing to pass a resolution outlawing this invasion (except maybe some counter-bribing to the USA telling countries they want to vote no). All the world needs is someone with the balls to step forward and suggest it. The USA accusing Russia of selling military hardware to Iraq gets us a little closer to that. How could they call Iraq a threat to the rest of the world while saying out of the other side of their mouths that all the soldiers will roll over and the people will great the American invaders with open arms? (How wrong they were, sigh) They kept comparing Iraq to Hitler's Germany - as if Iraq is going to blitzkrieg throughout the Middle East attacking their neighbours at will. Iraq today is the result of a decade of crippling war and then another decade of crippling sanctions, not a worthy opponent for the US Army (guerilla tactics are another matter, and can't really be defeated militarily anyway). And they don't have weapons of mass destruction. If the USA has something besides suspicions, if they actually do have some real evidence instead of these high school quality intelligence bits they keep trotting out, then why the hell didn't they hand it over to the inspectors? How can they say they know Sadam has weapons and that they want to take them away from him, meanwhile they can't help the people looking for the supposed weapons to find them? Either they have proof but are deciding to hide it so they can go to war anyway, or they don't have proof and it's all propaganda so they can go to war anyway. I don't have any trust either way. Canada's biggest anti war protests are in Montreal, the biggest city in the province of Quebec, the one that wants to declare independence. Canada supporting the war would be a huge boost for the separatists. Our Prime Minister would be committing political suicide in an even more spectacular fashion than Blair if he sent Canadian troops to Iraq. The governing Liberals would hemorrhage votes to the only other anti war party, the left NDP, if they came out supporting the war. In spite of all of this, the American Ambassador still has the gall to criticize us for making the obvious decision. Nevermind that it represents the will of the majority of our people. Nevermind the entwined history of our two countries. (especially nevermind that despite us having a free trade agreement there are recent new duties on Canadian softwood lumber and wheat affecting thousands and thousands of jobs, and that border security is adding more and more significantly to trade costs). If we're not with the US, apparently we're against them. I for one don't mind one bit. http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=584&ncid=584&e=2&u=/nm/200… Yes I saw the video of American POWs here in Canada - I didn't see anything wrong with them, the soldiers gave dignified responses to the reporter's questions. They didn't show any of the dead bodies that were mentioned though, which I wouldn't be interested in seeing anyway. I think it's hypocritical for the Americans to be getting so steamed by pictures of POWs after what they did in Afghanistan. Remember it's easy to call youselves free if you never check if the door to your cage is locked - censorship is not good, plain and simple. </rant> Sorry everyone, couldn't help myself. Peace.

3 2

Groovetech Show
by RMStringer 26 Mar '03

26 Mar '03

Does anyone have a track listing for the Youth & Humphrey Show? I am just Mesmerized by the set!!!!! INCREDIBLE!!!!!!!!!!! I cant stop listening to it. So haunting are the sounds, familiar, but very ethereal. I say this is one of the best sets this year, so far. I will post it on my server for a few days. The login and pass will be Youth. The ip is 24.175.202.170 24.175.202.170 RMStringer ************************** "Rationalization is giving a socially acceptable reason for socially unacceptable behavior, and socially unacceptable behavior is a form of insanity". BB - Pg 550

1 0

Wav Files
by RMStringer 26 Mar '03

26 Mar '03

Does anyone know of a good wav splitter to chop large files into separate files? I uncompressed the Groovetech Show and it is about 1.2 gigs. Can someone help? Thankx RMStringer ************************** "Rationalization is giving a socially acceptable reason for socially unacceptable behavior, and socially unacceptable behavior is a form of insanity". BB - Pg 550

2 2

Re: Orb Digest, Vol 1, Issue 586
by Dgowc1st＠aol.com 26 Mar '03

26 Mar '03

In a message dated 3/25/2003 3:40:09 PM Eastern Standard Time, Mick Szucs writes: > And right now bombs are > falling on the 24+ million people of Iraq. wow, all 24 million of them? thats a lot of bombs.... any orb content this week?

2 1

off topic WAR
by Alan 26 Mar '03

26 Mar '03

> Were the shocking videos of the dead or arrested US soldiers > broadcasted by > the US tv channels? Pictures of real, dead, people and real, red, blood might counteract the will of the Bush regime. If Americans saw the carnage being fostered in their name they might actually do something about it. We saw during Vietnam and tried to stop it though we pretty much folded after Kent State. Bush & Co has learned much since then (and since the US news media is owned by the mega-corporations that are profiting from this war they can rest assured that the US stations will speak loudly against showing this, though they should). Our television shows are incredibly violent but we can't show two people loving each other. This should tell you a lot about how fucked up we are as a society. Goddamned Puritans... www.psychicreform.com Who let that monkey in here!?! Dada is dead. Watch your overcoat.

9 12

RE: [Orb] off topic WAR
by Don Gagen 25 Mar '03

25 Mar '03

The editorial is labeled a Truthout Perspective for a reason. It is based on the writer's opinion. The writer used facts to build a basis for his opinion, and ultimate prediction of the US ending up like some Orwellian society under martial law. The fact is that none of the people in this article have broken international law with the single exception of Saddam. Here are a few more documented facts from Amnesty International regarding the torture, rape, and murder of Iraqi political prisoners under Saddam's regime and form your own opinion. Keep in mind that these are Iraqi citizens. http://web.amnesty.org/ai.nsf/Index/MDE140082001?OpenDocument <http://web.amnesty.org/ai.nsf/Index/MDE140082001?OpenDocument&of=COUNTRIES% 5CIRAQ> &of=COUNTRIES%5CIRAQ I really didn't know that Israel has been in violation of international law as many times as someone else mentioned. It's definitely hypocritical in my point of view. "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 -----Original Message----- From: Kevin Smith [mailto:kms7@sympatico.ca] Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2003 2:41 PM To: What were the skies like when you were young? Subject: Re: [Orb] off topic WAR Are you truly living in a wonderland? This war has been waged under several banners including the need to rid the world of terrorism. Or was it regime change???? Or was it??? The true reason is economics and megalomania. Hopefully this article will enlighten individuals who are under the assumption that they understand the motivation for this war. http://truthout.org/docs_03/022803A.shtml <http://truthout.org/docs_03/022803A.shtml> Also, if anyone actually wants the report , "Rebuilding America's Defense", email me. ----- Original Message ----- From: Don <mailto:DGagen@EnsembleStudios.com> Gagen To: 'What <mailto:orb@mailman.xmission.com> were the skies like when you were young?' Cc: 'hal8999_(a)hotmail.com' <mailto:'hal8999_(a)hotmail.com'> Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2003 2:50 PM Subject: RE: [Orb] off topic WAR What they fail to mention is that 12 years ago the UN determined that Saddam's regime broke international law by attacking Kuwait. As a result, he and his government lost the rights that that other countries have with regard to military weapons by way of UN resolution 687. So, much like any other criminal he was lucky to retain even partial rights in society. It also states that if Iraq failed to comply with disarmament (which it did) military force can be used. http://www.iaea.org/worldatom/Programmes/ActionTeam/resolutions/res687.pdf <http://www.iaea.org/worldatom/Programmes/ActionTeam/resolutions/res687.pdf> Over the course of those 12 years Saddam has continued to break international law by failing to work with UN inspectors and disarm. As a result he stacked up even more resolutions. I found almost 20. Maybe there are more. http://www.iaea.org/worldatom/Programmes/ActionTeam/resolutions2.html <http://www.iaea.org/worldatom/Programmes/ActionTeam/resolutions2.html> I don't totally agree that the US should have moved forward with the attack without a majority vote of the UN, but I definitely don't buy into any of the arguments in Saddam's favor. He's had 12 years. Who gets that many chances with regard to anything in life? I really don't think there would be so many people protesting this war if they knew all the facts. Don "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 <MAILTO:DGAGEN@ENSEMBLESTUDIOS.COM> ENSEMBLE STUDIOS http://www.ensemblestudios.com <http://www.ensemblestudios.com> -----Original Message----- From: Ben May [mailto:hal8999_@hotmail.com <mailto:hal8999_@hotmail.com> ] Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2003 1:00 PM To: orb(a)mailman.xmission.com Subject: RE: [Orb] off topic WAR Just for a little international perspective: http://www.rediff.com/news/2003/mar/25inter.htm <http://www.rediff.com/news/2003/mar/25inter.htm> And a viewer comment posted on the Al Jazeera website (kudos to my girlfriend for finding and translating this for me): Sometimes, late at night, I wonder if the USA has set themselves upon a path that will lead, in 20, 30, or 50 years to a 'coalition of the willing' advancing through New Orleans on the way to Washington, to arrest the leader of another 'rogue state', where he sits in a place called the oval office. _________________________________________________________________ Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail <http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail> _______________________________________________ Orb mailing list Orb(a)mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/orb <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

1 0