| |
Main
Date: 30 Aug 2006 11:28:23
From: annika1980
Subject: I did JonBenet!
|
Now where's my first class flight to Colorado?
|
|
| |
Date: 31 Aug 2006 02:48:11
From: muk
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
On 30 Aug 2006 11:28:23 -0700, "annika1980" <annika1980@aol.com > :
>Now where's my first class flight to Colorado?
Dude, everyone knows she is too old for your tastes.
|
| |
Date: 30 Aug 2006 18:44:54
From: Tex
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
long&left wrote:
> Vandar wrote:
> > long&left wrote:
> >
> >> annika1980 wrote:
> >>
> >>> Now where's my first class flight to Colorado?
> >>>
> >>
> >> ya know, while this is in poor taste, ya gotta admit that the guy is
> >> pretty smart. He's wasting away in a prison in southeast Asia and
> >> comes up with this great plan to change his fortunes to steaks and
> >> chocolate milkshakes and a pretty nice pad to stay in, not to mention
> >> 1st class air travel. I'll bet you $100 bucks he gets off in CO after
> >> a long and expensive trial...
> >
> >
> > FTR, he wasn't wasting away in a Thai jail. The Boulder DA got the
> > warrant for his arrest and passed it on to the Thai authorities. When
> > they received it, they revoked his visa. Karr was then picked up by Thai
> > Immigration and turned over to US Immigration. They brought him to
> > California and he was arrested there for the Ramsey warrant.
>
> thanks for the clarification. I'm just a dumb sh*t that only watches TGC
> so WTF do I know...I still betcha he's not the one that did it and gets
> off the hook...
Way to stay up with cuurent events :)
All charges were dropped and the weasel is on his way to California for
Child Porn charges...
Jon Benet's killer still runs free.
Tex
|
| | |
Date: 31 Aug 2006 02:20:15
From: Howard Brazee
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
On 30 Aug 2006 18:44:54 -0700, "Tex" <marktexkoenig@gmail.com > wrote:
>All charges were dropped and the weasel is on his way to California for
>Child Porn charges...
>
>Jon Benet's killer still runs free.
Yeah, and a thousand other killers of children who weren't as pretty
and rich.
|
| | | |
Date: 30 Aug 2006 22:41:51
From: Otto
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
The killer might be dead.
Otto
> On 30 Aug 2006 18:44:54 -0700, "Tex" <marktexkoenig@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>All charges were dropped and the weasel is on his way to California for
>>Child Porn charges...
>>
>>Jon Benet's killer still runs free.
|
| | | | |
Date: 31 Aug 2006 07:15:41
From: Bert Robbins
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
Recently deceased?
Otto wrote:
> The killer might be dead.
>
> Otto
>
>
>> On 30 Aug 2006 18:44:54 -0700, "Tex" <marktexkoenig@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> All charges were dropped and the weasel is on his way to California for
>>> Child Porn charges...
>>>
>>> Jon Benet's killer still runs free.
>
>
|
| | | | | |
Date: 31 Aug 2006 07:44:36
From: Otto
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
Perhaps in the past year or so from ovarian cancer?
Otto
"Bert Robbins" <screw@you.com > wrote in message
news:LYqdnQfUdIlDWWvZnZ2dnUVZ_sWdnZ2d@comcast.com...
> Recently deceased?
>
> Otto wrote:
>> The killer might be dead.
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 31 Aug 2006 08:19:01
From: Bert Robbins
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
I believe we are in agreement on this issue.
Otto wrote:
> Perhaps in the past year or so from ovarian cancer?
>
> Otto
>
>
> "Bert Robbins" <screw@you.com> wrote in message
> news:LYqdnQfUdIlDWWvZnZ2dnUVZ_sWdnZ2d@comcast.com...
>> Recently deceased?
>>
>> Otto wrote:
>>> The killer might be dead.
>
>
|
| | |
Date: 31 Aug 2006 07:09:37
From: long&left
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
Tex wrote:
> long&left wrote:
>
>>Vandar wrote:
>>
>>>long&left wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>annika1980 wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Now where's my first class flight to Colorado?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>ya know, while this is in poor taste, ya gotta admit that the guy is
>>>>pretty smart. He's wasting away in a prison in southeast Asia and
>>>>comes up with this great plan to change his fortunes to steaks and
>>>>chocolate milkshakes and a pretty nice pad to stay in, not to mention
>>>>1st class air travel. I'll bet you $100 bucks he gets off in CO after
>>>>a long and expensive trial...
>>>
>>>
>>>FTR, he wasn't wasting away in a Thai jail. The Boulder DA got the
>>>warrant for his arrest and passed it on to the Thai authorities. When
>>>they received it, they revoked his visa. Karr was then picked up by Thai
>>>Immigration and turned over to US Immigration. They brought him to
>>>California and he was arrested there for the Ramsey warrant.
>>
>>thanks for the clarification. I'm just a dumb sh*t that only watches TGC
>>so WTF do I know...I still betcha he's not the one that did it and gets
>>off the hook...
>
>
> Way to stay up with cuurent events :)
> All charges were dropped and the weasel is on his way to California for
> Child Porn charges...
>
> Jon Benet's killer still runs free.
>
> Tex
>
HEY! I know that Ben Wah balls come on a Swing Setter!
|
| |
Date: 30 Aug 2006 16:12:47
From: long&left
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
annika1980 wrote:
> Now where's my first class flight to Colorado?
>
ya know, while this is in poor taste, ya gotta admit that the guy is
pretty smart. He's wasting away in a prison in southeast Asia and comes
up with this great plan to change his fortunes to steaks and chocolate
milkshakes and a pretty nice pad to stay in, not to mention 1st class
air travel. I'll bet you $100 bucks he gets off in CO after a long and
expensive trial...
Dave
|
| | |
Date: 30 Aug 2006 23:39:24
From: Vandar
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
long&left wrote:
> annika1980 wrote:
>
>> Now where's my first class flight to Colorado?
>>
>
> ya know, while this is in poor taste, ya gotta admit that the guy is
> pretty smart. He's wasting away in a prison in southeast Asia and comes
> up with this great plan to change his fortunes to steaks and chocolate
> milkshakes and a pretty nice pad to stay in, not to mention 1st class
> air travel. I'll bet you $100 bucks he gets off in CO after a long and
> expensive trial...
FTR, he wasn't wasting away in a Thai jail. The Boulder DA got the
warrant for his arrest and passed it on to the Thai authorities. When
they received it, they revoked his visa. Karr was then picked up by Thai
Immigration and turned over to US Immigration. They brought him to
California and he was arrested there for the Ramsey warrant.
|
| | | |
Date: 30 Aug 2006 17:03:07
From: long&left
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
Vandar wrote:
> long&left wrote:
>
>> annika1980 wrote:
>>
>>> Now where's my first class flight to Colorado?
>>>
>>
>> ya know, while this is in poor taste, ya gotta admit that the guy is
>> pretty smart. He's wasting away in a prison in southeast Asia and
>> comes up with this great plan to change his fortunes to steaks and
>> chocolate milkshakes and a pretty nice pad to stay in, not to mention
>> 1st class air travel. I'll bet you $100 bucks he gets off in CO after
>> a long and expensive trial...
>
>
> FTR, he wasn't wasting away in a Thai jail. The Boulder DA got the
> warrant for his arrest and passed it on to the Thai authorities. When
> they received it, they revoked his visa. Karr was then picked up by Thai
> Immigration and turned over to US Immigration. They brought him to
> California and he was arrested there for the Ramsey warrant.
thanks for the clarification. I'm just a dumb sh*t that only watches TGC
so WTF do I know...I still betcha he's not the one that did it and gets
off the hook...
|
| | | | |
Date: 31 Aug 2006 01:14:11
From: Vandar
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
long&left wrote:
> Vandar wrote:
>
>> long&left wrote:
>>
>>> annika1980 wrote:
>>>
>>>> Now where's my first class flight to Colorado?
>>>>
>>>
>>> ya know, while this is in poor taste, ya gotta admit that the guy is
>>> pretty smart. He's wasting away in a prison in southeast Asia and
>>> comes up with this great plan to change his fortunes to steaks and
>>> chocolate milkshakes and a pretty nice pad to stay in, not to mention
>>> 1st class air travel. I'll bet you $100 bucks he gets off in CO after
>>> a long and expensive trial...
>>
>>
>>
>> FTR, he wasn't wasting away in a Thai jail. The Boulder DA got the
>> warrant for his arrest and passed it on to the Thai authorities. When
>> they received it, they revoked his visa. Karr was then picked up by
>> Thai Immigration and turned over to US Immigration. They brought him
>> to California and he was arrested there for the Ramsey warrant.
>
>
> thanks for the clarification. I'm just a dumb sh*t that only watches TGC
> so WTF do I know...
Hopefully, how to play golf. :)
> I still betcha he's not the one that did it and gets
> off the hook...
He's a loon for sure. Evidence suggests it wasn't him, but it still
might be.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 30 Aug 2006 18:26:12
From: long&left
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
Vandar wrote:
> long&left wrote:
>
>> Vandar wrote:
>>
>>> long&left wrote:
>>>
>>>> annika1980 wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Now where's my first class flight to Colorado?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ya know, while this is in poor taste, ya gotta admit that the guy is
>>>> pretty smart. He's wasting away in a prison in southeast Asia and
>>>> comes up with this great plan to change his fortunes to steaks and
>>>> chocolate milkshakes and a pretty nice pad to stay in, not to
>>>> mention 1st class air travel. I'll bet you $100 bucks he gets off in
>>>> CO after a long and expensive trial...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> FTR, he wasn't wasting away in a Thai jail. The Boulder DA got the
>>> warrant for his arrest and passed it on to the Thai authorities. When
>>> they received it, they revoked his visa. Karr was then picked up by
>>> Thai Immigration and turned over to US Immigration. They brought him
>>> to California and he was arrested there for the Ramsey warrant.
>>
>>
>>
>> thanks for the clarification. I'm just a dumb sh*t that only watches
>> TGC so WTF do I know...
>
>
> Hopefully, how to play golf. :)
>
>> I still betcha he's not the one that did it and gets off the hook...
>
>
> He's a loon for sure. Evidence suggests it wasn't him, but it still
> might be.
yes I do, and we shall see :)
|
| |
Date: 30 Aug 2006 12:55:34
From: Cesar Neri
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
You forgot to mention the first class accomodations at the county jail, the
designer bright orange outfit and of course, that wonderful bling you get to
wear on your hands and your feet. If all that appeals to you, GO FOR IT!
"annika1980" <annika1980@aol.com > wrote in message
news:1156962503.179450.288510@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
> Now where's my first class flight to Colorado?
>
|
| |
Date: 30 Aug 2006 14:36:54
From: annika1980
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
Nomen Nescio wrote:
>
> That explains why no semen was found.
Her daddy taught her well. She was a swallower.
|
| | |
Date: 31 Aug 2006 12:06:04
From: Da Ringer
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
Damn........ Hammer would write a novel in response to this.
Where is he when we need him?
Da Ringer
"annika1980" <annika1980@aol.com > wrote in message
news:1156973814.116275.231480@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
>
> Nomen Nescio wrote:
>>
>> That explains why no semen was found.
>
> Her daddy taught her well. She was a swallower.
>
|
| | |
Date: 31 Aug 2006 13:38:56
From: David
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
On 30 Aug 2006 14:36:54 -0700, "annika1980" <annika1980@aol.com >
wrote:
>
>Nomen Nescio wrote:
>>
>> That explains why no semen was found.
>
>Her daddy taught her well. She was a swallower.
I have withheld my judgement of you until now. I was not sure what
to make of you based on your posts. This, however, has put you over
the edge and shown everyone what a complete idiot you are. I hope
that you don't have children. If you do, you have probably abused them
in the past, or will do so in the near future. Your remarks in this
thread cannot be construed as sarcasm--simply sick.
David
|
| | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 10:20:08
From: Ben.
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
Bobby Knight wrote:
> On 1 Sep 2006 10:00:57 -0700, "Ben." <kombi45@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
> >Frank was a genius, musical and otherwise, the likes of which we will
> >not see in our lifetimes again.
>
> Not even close.
Show me another musician as fluent in as many genres as Frank and I'll
retract. There are certainly musicians more competent in their
particular genre; however, I've yet to hear someone as well-versed as
Frank was in:
- rock
- jazz
- avant garde/digital music programming (Synclavier)
- classical - he was an astute student of Varese, Bartok, Ravel, etc
- metal
- pop
- country (it _is_ a genre, after all)
Many times in the same song.
Let us not forget, Frank was a composer - he literally wrote the music
out himself in longhand prior to the Synclavier - and I would wager he
was one of the first "composers" to use this technique. I know you are
a musician, I'm not. I am an appreciater of great music...and if there
is someone I've not heard that rivals Frank's remarkably diverse range
as a highly competent composer/guitarist/musician in general, please
enlighten me. I'm not being contentious - I would like to hear this
person!
|
| | | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 21:16:02
From: Ben.
Subject: Re: WAY OT: was (Re: I did JonBenet!)
|
Bobby Knight wrote:
> I can't identify with "training his musicians", since the only ones
> that I knew that worked with him were studio players. They don't need
> any training. You get them for three hours per date to literally
> sight-read your music.
Understood. Let me just ask this question - would you say that Frank's
music was easy to play, moderately easy, moderately difficult to play
or pretty difficult to play? As a studio hack, I realize you could
play anything put in front of you - but there are certainly sessions
that stretch your chops a good deal more than others. I mean, c'mon,
you weren't walking into a session with The Eagles, for crying out
loud!
> I'm going to end this thread with this, since RSG is definitely the
> wrong forum for it.
So was the em-effing 9000 post thread about Hammer, Brad, Dene and
Chris S, but that didn't stop you! I keed, Bobby, I keed! ;^)
> That's good shooting.It's been three years since I broke eighty, and
> lately I'm having trouble breaking 90. Years, and physical problems,
> are taking their toll.
Sorry to hear that. May you shoot your age your next outing. Will
that mean breaking 80?
|
| | | | |
Date: 02 Sep 2006 05:12:31
From: Bobby Knight
Subject: Re: WAY OT: was (Re: I did JonBenet!)
|
On 1 Sep 2006 21:16:02 -0700, "Ben." <kombi45@yahoo.com > wrote:
>
>Bobby Knight wrote:
>
>Understood. Let me just ask this question - would you say that Frank's
>music was easy to play, moderately easy, moderately difficult to play
>or pretty difficult to play? As a studio hack, I realize you could
>play anything put in front of you - but there are certainly sessions
>that stretch your chops a good deal more than others. I mean, c'mon,
>you weren't walking into a session with The Eagles, for crying out
>loud!
>
I don't recall it being difficult. Sure, there were sessions that you
were really taxed, but you never knew what they would be in advance.
You'd damn sure remember them though.
>> I'm going to end this thread with this, since RSG is definitely the
>> wrong forum for it.
>
>So was the em-effing 9000 post thread about Hammer, Brad, Dene and
>Chris S, but that didn't stop you! I keed, Bobby, I keed! ;^)
>
You keed on the level :-) This one isn't related to golf or golfers
though.
>> That's good shooting.It's been three years since I broke eighty, and
>> lately I'm having trouble breaking 90. Years, and physical problems,
>> are taking their toll.
>
>Sorry to hear that. May you shoot your age your next outing. Will
>that mean breaking 80?
Big time. I would be two under our par on a regular course.
___,
\o
|
| | | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 13:11:13
From: Booker Little
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
"Ben." <kombi45@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1157131208.866225.251700@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
> Bobby Knight wrote:
>> On 1 Sep 2006 10:00:57 -0700, "Ben." <kombi45@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> >Frank was a genius, musical and otherwise, the likes of which we will
>> >not see in our lifetimes again.
>>
>> Not even close.
>
> Show me another musician as fluent in as many genres as Frank and I'll
> retract. There are certainly musicians more competent in their
> particular genre; however, I've yet to hear someone as well-versed as
> Frank was in:
>
> - rock
> - jazz
> - avant garde/digital music programming (Synclavier)
> - classical - he was an astute student of Varese, Bartok, Ravel, etc
> - metal
> - pop
> - country (it _is_ a genre, after all)
>
> Many times in the same song.
>
> Let us not forget, Frank was a composer - he literally wrote the music
> out himself in longhand prior to the Synclavier - and I would wager he
> was one of the first "composers" to use this technique. I know you are
> a musician, I'm not. I am an appreciater of great music...and if there
> is someone I've not heard that rivals Frank's remarkably diverse range
> as a highly competent composer/guitarist/musician in general, please
> enlighten me. I'm not being contentious - I would like to hear this
> person!
Frank Zappa! You must have a limited musical background. How about Miles
Davis, John Coltrane, Charles Yardbird Parker, Charles Mingus, Duke
Ellington, Dizzy Gillepsie, Gerry Mulligan, George Gershwin, anon. I could
keep going if you wish...........
|
| | | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 12:43:17
From: Bobby Knight
Subject: WAY OT: was (Re: I did JonBenet!)
|
On 1 Sep 2006 10:20:08 -0700, "Ben." <kombi45@yahoo.com > wrote:
>
>Bobby Knight wrote:
>> On 1 Sep 2006 10:00:57 -0700, "Ben." <kombi45@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> >Frank was a genius, musical and otherwise, the likes of which we will
>> >not see in our lifetimes again.
>>
>> Not even close.
>
>Show me another musician as fluent in as many genres as Frank and I'll
>retract. There are certainly musicians more competent in their
>particular genre; however, I've yet to hear someone as well-versed as
>Frank was in:
>
>- rock
>- jazz
>- avant garde/digital music programming (Synclavier)
>- classical - he was an astute student of Varese, Bartok, Ravel, etc
>- metal
>- pop
>- country (it _is_ a genre, after all)
>
>Many times in the same song.
>
>Let us not forget, Frank was a composer - he literally wrote the music
>out himself in longhand prior to the Synclavier - and I would wager he
>was one of the first "composers" to use this technique. I know you are
>a musician, I'm not. I am an appreciater of great music...and if there
>is someone I've not heard that rivals Frank's remarkably diverse range
>as a highly competent composer/guitarist/musician in general, please
>enlighten me. I'm not being contentious - I would like to hear this
>person!
First of all, the term "genius" is all too often bandied about. He
was not a genius.
Off the top of my head, Quincy Jones is on line 1, and not a genius
either. I'm excluding classical for both of them. Zappa wasn't well
versed in Jazz, and most decent composers study the classics.
Incidentally, I worked for both, and saw guys like Tommy Tedesco make
his music better.
|
| | | |
Date: 02 Sep 2006 00:29:20
From: johnty
Subject: Re: WAY OT: was (Re: I did JonBenet!)
|
Bobby Knight wrote:
>
> I'm going to end this thread with this, since RSG is definitely the
> wrong forum for it.
>
That's a pity, it was interesting reading.
Why is RSG the wrong forum? Goodness knows, there's not a high
proportion of golf threads here.
|
| |
Date: 30 Aug 2006 16:36:06
From: Da Ringer
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
Damn dude........ you need to lay off the diet coke.
Da Ringer
"annika1980" <annika1980@aol.com > wrote in message
news:1156962503.179450.288510@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
> Now where's my first class flight to Colorado?
>
|
| |
Date: 30 Aug 2006 21:30:04
From: Nomen Nescio
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
In article <1156962503.179450.288510@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com >
"annika1980" <annika1980@aol.com > wrote:
That explains why no semen was found.
|
| |
Date: 30 Aug 2006 12:11:26
From: Tex
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
bigoldcat2@yahoo.com wrote:
> annika1980 wrote:
> > Now where's my first class flight to Colorado?
>
> I'm waiting to hear from the committee on "poor taste".
There is a committee? I thought the "poor taste" crowd left with the
Psycho?
Tex
|
| | |
Date: 30 Aug 2006 12:39:27
From: Jim Garnett
Subject: Re: RSG Vancouver - Golf this weekend
|
In article <1156956921.154083.188870@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com >,
"i.smithee" <magickaboots@hotmail.com > wrote:
>Put your labours behind you and come play golf this weekend. Open to
>suggestions as to time and place. Prizes (beer) awarded for nicest 4
>iron shot and most putts within 10 feet.
>
>Howard
>
Riverway? Pref. Monday?
~j.
--
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
NOTE: Spam blocker in place. E-mail address has been modified.
To reply personally, simply remove the first "j".
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
|
| | | |
Date: 31 Aug 2006 01:33:11
From: i.smithee
Subject: Re: RSG Vancouver - Golf this weekend
|
Jim Garnett wrote:
> Riverway? Pref. Monday?
I like Riverway, but Monday might be iffy. I've got a family thing
(Inlaws - and I would really like to get out of it) Can you see about
tee times and I'll see about the family thing.
Anyone else? Can we make a foursome?
|
| | | | |
Date: 31 Aug 2006 03:13:36
From: Big Bobby Clobber
Subject: Re: RSG Vancouver - Golf this weekend
|
i.smithee wrote:
> Jim Garnett wrote:
>
>> Riverway? Pref. Monday?
>
> I like Riverway, but Monday might be iffy. I've got a family thing
> (Inlaws - and I would really like to get out of it) Can you see about
> tee times and I'll see about the family thing.
>
> Anyone else? Can we make a foursome?
I'm in for anything Sunday or Monday.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 31 Aug 2006 08:50:17
From: Jim Garnett
Subject: Re: RSG Vancouver - Golf this weekend
|
In article <AtsJg.487119$iF6.125334@pd7tw2no >, Big Bobby Clobber
<farm.this@spammer > wrote:
>i.smithee wrote:
>> Jim Garnett wrote:
>>
>>> Riverway? Pref. Monday?
>>
>> I like Riverway, but Monday might be iffy. I've got a family thing
>> (Inlaws - and I would really like to get out of it) Can you see about
>> tee times and I'll see about the family thing.
>>
>> Anyone else? Can we make a foursome?
>I'm in for anything Sunday or Monday
I'm only good for Monday, so I'll do the Sat. noon phone thing and see
what comes up.
~j.
--
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
NOTE: Spam blocker in place. E-mail address has been modified.
To reply personally, simply remove the first "j".
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 31 Aug 2006 14:48:13
From: Rude Dog
Subject: Re: RSG Vancouver - Golf this weekend
|
"Jim Garnett" <jjgarnett@benwell.com > wrote in message
news:jjgarnett-B6AF66.08501731082006@news.starcon.com...
> In article <AtsJg.487119$iF6.125334@pd7tw2no>, Big Bobby Clobber
> <farm.this@spammer> wrote:
>
>>i.smithee wrote:
>>> Jim Garnett wrote:
>>>
>>>> Riverway? Pref. Monday?
>>>
>>> I like Riverway, but Monday might be iffy. I've got a family thing
>>> (Inlaws - and I would really like to get out of it) Can you see about
>>> tee times and I'll see about the family thing.
>>>
>>> Anyone else? Can we make a foursome?
>>I'm in for anything Sunday or Monday
>
> I'm only good for Monday, so I'll do the Sat. noon phone thing and see
> what comes up.
>
> ~j.
>
> --
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> NOTE: Spam blocker in place. E-mail address has been modified.
> To reply personally, simply remove the first "j".
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I might be able to make Monday.
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 09:37:19
From: Jim Garnett
Subject: Re: RSG Vancouver - Golf this weekend
|
In article <12fem8vlsmpi13@corp.supernews.com >, "Rude Dog"
<never@mind.com > wrote:
>"Jim Garnett" <jjgarnett@benwell.com> wrote in message
>news:jjgarnett-B6AF66.08501731082006@news.starcon.com...
>> In article <AtsJg.487119$iF6.125334@pd7tw2no>, Big Bobby Clobber
>> <farm.this@spammer> wrote:
>>
>>>i.smithee wrote:
>>>> Jim Garnett wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Riverway? Pref. Monday?
>>>>
>>>> I like Riverway, but Monday might be iffy. I've got a family thing
>>>> (Inlaws - and I would really like to get out of it) Can you see about
>>>> tee times and I'll see about the family thing.
>>>>
>>>> Anyone else? Can we make a foursome?
>>>I'm in for anything Sunday or Monday
>>
>> I'm only good for Monday, so I'll do the Sat. noon phone thing and see
>> what comes up.
>>
>> ~j.
>>
>> --
>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> NOTE: Spam blocker in place. E-mail address has been modified.
>> To reply personally, simply remove the first "j".
>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
>I might be able to make Monday.
Replied via email. Looks like one group full: H; RD; J; (BBC?), Need
another caller to book 2nd group if needed, ~9:30 Mon, Sept 4.
Lemme know at: jimg AT paralynxDOTcom if more info needed.
Cheers,
~j.
--
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
NOTE: Spam blocker in place. E-mail address has been modified.
To reply personally, simply remove the first "j".
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 17:54:21
From: muk
Subject: Re: RSG Vancouver - Golf this weekend
|
On Fri, 01 Sep 2006 09:37:19 -0700, Jim Garnett
<jjgarnett@benwell.com > wrote:
>In article <12fem8vlsmpi13@corp.supernews.com>, "Rude Dog"
><never@mind.com> wrote:
>
>>"Jim Garnett" <jjgarnett@benwell.com> wrote in message
>>news:jjgarnett-B6AF66.08501731082006@news.starcon.com...
>>> In article <AtsJg.487119$iF6.125334@pd7tw2no>, Big Bobby Clobber
>>> <farm.this@spammer> wrote:
>>>
>>>>i.smithee wrote:
>>>>> Jim Garnett wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Riverway? Pref. Monday?
>>>>>
>>>>> I like Riverway, but Monday might be iffy. I've got a family thing
>>>>> (Inlaws - and I would really like to get out of it) Can you see about
>>>>> tee times and I'll see about the family thing.
>>>>>
>>>>> Anyone else? Can we make a foursome?
>>>>I'm in for anything Sunday or Monday
>>>
>>> I'm only good for Monday, so I'll do the Sat. noon phone thing and see
>>> what comes up.
>>>
>>> ~j.
>>>
>>> --
>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> NOTE: Spam blocker in place. E-mail address has been modified.
>>> To reply personally, simply remove the first "j".
>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>
>>I might be able to make Monday.
>
>Replied via email. Looks like one group full: H; RD; J; (BBC?), Need
>another caller to book 2nd group if needed, ~9:30 Mon, Sept 4.
>
>Lemme know at: jimg AT paralynxDOTcom if more info needed.
>
>Cheers,
>~j.
my monday is already tied up, would have loved to join.
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Date: 02 Sep 2006 18:37:05
From:
Subject: Re: RSG Vancouver - Golf this weekend
|
On Fri, 01 Sep 2006 17:54:21 GMT, muk <mukhp@NOSPAMhotmail.com > wrote:
>On Fri, 01 Sep 2006 09:37:19 -0700, Jim Garnett
><jjgarnett@benwell.com> wrote:
>
>>In article <12fem8vlsmpi13@corp.supernews.com>, "Rude Dog"
>><never@mind.com> wrote:
>>
>>>"Jim Garnett" <jjgarnett@benwell.com> wrote in message
>>>news:jjgarnett-B6AF66.08501731082006@news.starcon.com...
>>>> In article <AtsJg.487119$iF6.125334@pd7tw2no>, Big Bobby Clobber
>>>> <farm.this@spammer> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>i.smithee wrote:
>>>>>> Jim Garnett wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Riverway? Pref. Monday?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I like Riverway, but Monday might be iffy. I've got a family thing
>>>>>> (Inlaws - and I would really like to get out of it) Can you see about
>>>>>> tee times and I'll see about the family thing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Anyone else? Can we make a foursome?
>>>>>I'm in for anything Sunday or Monday
>>>>
>>>> I'm only good for Monday, so I'll do the Sat. noon phone thing and see
>>>> what comes up.
>>>>
>>>> ~j.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>> NOTE: Spam blocker in place. E-mail address has been modified.
>>>> To reply personally, simply remove the first "j".
>>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>
>>>I might be able to make Monday.
>>
>>Replied via email. Looks like one group full: H; RD; J; (BBC?), Need
>>another caller to book 2nd group if needed, ~9:30 Mon, Sept 4.
>>
>>Lemme know at: jimg AT paralynxDOTcom if more info needed.
>>
>>Cheers,
>>~j.
>
>my monday is already tied up, would have loved to join.
Yeah, and too bad it's so hard to book time there. But we're in!
Tee time confirmed: 9:46 am, Mon. Sept 4.
Pretty much confirmed line-up right now:
Jim
Howard
Adrian
You in Bobby?
Clobber mentioned in an earlier post that you are good for any time
the weekend, but Craig I haven't seen any confirmation post?
Tentatively I'll hold the spot for you, and confirm to all you guys
via email as well.
Gotta run but will look for you confirmation Craig hopefully before
tomorrow morning, Sun Sept 3, cause I have some other guys that will
give me beer in exchange, so send the word along.
Cool, will drop a line later, and we'll be dancin' on Monday!
Jim
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 03 Sep 2006 01:49:21
From: Big Bobby Clobber
Subject: Re: RSG Vancouver - Golf this weekend
|
panfriedspam@love.it wrote:
> On Fri, 01 Sep 2006 17:54:21 GMT, muk <mukhp@NOSPAMhotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 01 Sep 2006 09:37:19 -0700, Jim Garnett
>> <jjgarnett@benwell.com> wrote:
>>
>>> In article <12fem8vlsmpi13@corp.supernews.com>, "Rude Dog"
>>> <never@mind.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Jim Garnett" <jjgarnett@benwell.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:jjgarnett-B6AF66.08501731082006@news.starcon.com...
>>>>> In article <AtsJg.487119$iF6.125334@pd7tw2no>, Big Bobby Clobber
>>>>> <farm.this@spammer> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> i.smithee wrote:
>>>>>>> Jim Garnett wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Riverway? Pref. Monday?
>>>>>>> I like Riverway, but Monday might be iffy. I've got a family thing
>>>>>>> (Inlaws - and I would really like to get out of it) Can you see about
>>>>>>> tee times and I'll see about the family thing.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Anyone else? Can we make a foursome?
>>>>>> I'm in for anything Sunday or Monday
>>>>> I'm only good for Monday, so I'll do the Sat. noon phone thing and see
>>>>> what comes up.
>>>>>
>>>>> ~j.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>> NOTE: Spam blocker in place. E-mail address has been modified.
>>>>> To reply personally, simply remove the first "j".
>>>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>> I might be able to make Monday.
>>> Replied via email. Looks like one group full: H; RD; J; (BBC?), Need
>>> another caller to book 2nd group if needed, ~9:30 Mon, Sept 4.
>>>
>>> Lemme know at: jimg AT paralynxDOTcom if more info needed.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> ~j.
>> my monday is already tied up, would have loved to join.
>
> Yeah, and too bad it's so hard to book time there. But we're in!
>
> Tee time confirmed: 9:46 am, Mon. Sept 4.
> Pretty much confirmed line-up right now:
>
> Jim
> Howard
> Adrian
> You in Bobby?
>
> Clobber mentioned in an earlier post that you are good for any time
> the weekend, but Craig I haven't seen any confirmation post?
> Tentatively I'll hold the spot for you, and confirm to all you guys
> via email as well.
>
> Gotta run but will look for you confirmation Craig hopefully before
> tomorrow morning, Sun Sept 3, cause I have some other guys that will
> give me beer in exchange, so send the word along.
>
> Cool, will drop a line later, and we'll be dancin' on Monday!
>
> Jim
>
I'm in. See you there.
Craig
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 02 Sep 2006 22:09:45
From:
Subject: Re: RSG Vancouver - Golf this weekend
|
On Sun, 03 Sep 2006 01:49:21 GMT, Big Bobby Clobber
<farm.this@spammer > wrote:
>panfriedspam@love.it wrote:
>> On Fri, 01 Sep 2006 17:54:21 GMT, muk <mukhp@NOSPAMhotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 01 Sep 2006 09:37:19 -0700, Jim Garnett
>>> <jjgarnett@benwell.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> In article <12fem8vlsmpi13@corp.supernews.com>, "Rude Dog"
>>>> <never@mind.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> "Jim Garnett" <jjgarnett@benwell.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:jjgarnett-B6AF66.08501731082006@news.starcon.com...
>>>>>> In article <AtsJg.487119$iF6.125334@pd7tw2no>, Big Bobby Clobber
>>>>>> <farm.this@spammer> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> i.smithee wrote:
>>>>>>>> Jim Garnett wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Riverway? Pref. Monday?
>>>>>>>> I like Riverway, but Monday might be iffy. I've got a family thing
>>>>>>>> (Inlaws - and I would really like to get out of it) Can you see about
>>>>>>>> tee times and I'll see about the family thing.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Anyone else? Can we make a foursome?
>>>>>>> I'm in for anything Sunday or Monday
>>>>>> I'm only good for Monday, so I'll do the Sat. noon phone thing and see
>>>>>> what comes up.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ~j.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>> NOTE: Spam blocker in place. E-mail address has been modified.
>>>>>> To reply personally, simply remove the first "j".
>>>>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>> I might be able to make Monday.
>>>> Replied via email. Looks like one group full: H; RD; J; (BBC?), Need
>>>> another caller to book 2nd group if needed, ~9:30 Mon, Sept 4.
>>>>
>>>> Lemme know at: jimg AT paralynxDOTcom if more info needed.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> ~j.
>>> my monday is already tied up, would have loved to join.
>>
>> Yeah, and too bad it's so hard to book time there. But we're in!
>>
>> Tee time confirmed: 9:46 am, Mon. Sept 4.
>> Pretty much confirmed line-up right now:
>>
>> Jim
>> Howard
>> Adrian
>> You in Bobby?
>>
>> Clobber mentioned in an earlier post that you are good for any time
>> the weekend, but Craig I haven't seen any confirmation post?
>> Tentatively I'll hold the spot for you, and confirm to all you guys
>> via email as well.
>>
>> Gotta run but will look for you confirmation Craig hopefully before
>> tomorrow morning, Sun Sept 3, cause I have some other guys that will
>> give me beer in exchange, so send the word along.
>>
>> Cool, will drop a line later, and we'll be dancin' on Monday!
>>
>> Jim
>>
>I'm in. See you there.
>
>Craig
Excellent. We be jammin!
Talk to you later.
Jim
|
| |
Date: 30 Aug 2006 11:58:21
From: dugjustdug
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
I don't think you have the neck for it - or lack thereof...
|
| |
Date: 30 Aug 2006 11:56:36
From: The World Wide Wade
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
In article
<1156962503.179450.288510@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com >,
"annika1980" <annika1980@aol.com > wrote:
> Now where's my first class flight to Colorado?
Buddy, you've sunk low.
|
| |
Date: 30 Aug 2006 11:44:23
From: Larry Bud
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
annika1980 wrote:
> Now where's my first class flight to Colorado?
Amazingly, you're far too boring to be of any media interest.
|
| |
Date: 30 Aug 2006 11:39:07
From:
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
annika1980 wrote:
> Now where's my first class flight to Colorado?
I'm waiting to hear from the committee on "poor taste".
|
| | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 02:59:05
From: AKA Gray Asphalt
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
<bigoldcat2@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1156963147.644626.156140@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
> annika1980 wrote:
>> Now where's my first class flight to Colorado?
>
> I'm waiting to hear from the committee on "poor taste".
Not exactly 80s high point.
|
| | |
Date: 31 Aug 2006 22:54:07
From: Matt 'Ocho' Aamold
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
<bigoldcat2@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1156963147.644626.156140@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> I'm waiting to hear from the committee on "poor taste".
I don't need a committee to tell me brets post was poor taste
|
| |
Date: 31 Aug 2006 08:54:04
From: annika1980
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
bigoldcat2@yahoo.com wrote:
> >
> > If you are that concerned with it, I suggest you go bitch slap Mr.
> > Ramsey, who pimped her out. I think anybody who dresses up a 6 year old
> > to try to make them look sexy deserves a good beatin. Parents who do
> > that crap think it's cute until their kid gets molested or even worse.
>
> The Ramseys and others like them are guilty of child abuse. This does
> not excuse you writing that you "did" JonBenet and then posting a sick
> reference to having oral sex with her. You probably got some serious
> bad karma headed your way.
Dude, I've been surrounded by bad karma for 30 years. I bathe in it.
I would think you of all people could decipher the difference between
what is real and what is said in jest.
My whole point is that people who are offended when I post something
like that should be even more offended by the circumstances that caused
me to post it. Some people, not you necessarily, condone beauty
pageants for 6 year-olds but act shocked when one of these kids is
molested. Believe it or not, I have the same feelings about 6 year-old
cheerleaders. Parents dress up their daughters in little cheerleader
outfits and let them do provocative gyrations to look hot. Everybody
knows that girls don't achieve maximum hotness until at least the age
of 12.
|
| | |
Date: 31 Aug 2006 20:35:29
From: David
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
On 31 Aug 2006 08:54:04 -0700, "annika1980" <annika1980@aol.com >
wrote:
<snipped >
>My whole point is that people who are offended when I post something
>like that should be even more offended by the circumstances that caused
>me to post it. Some people, not you necessarily, condone beauty
>pageants for 6 year-olds but act shocked when one of these kids is
>molested. Believe it or not, I have the same feelings about 6 year-old
>cheerleaders. Parents dress up their daughters in little cheerleader
>outfits and let them do provocative gyrations to look hot. Everybody
>knows that girls don't achieve maximum hotness until at least the age
>of 12.
Bret, you are simply an asshole. Not once did you make an apology
for posting that sick crap, then you end what some of your fans might
fancy to be an apology with another sick remark about 12 year old
girls. Placing the blame what happened to that unfortunate girl on
her parents does not give you the right to make a post like that.
You are probably the type that blames the girl when she gets raped
because she should have worn clothing that covered every inch of her
body, instead of something stylish and, dare I say it, sexy.
I wonder how Natalie Gulbis would feel about all of the pictures you
have taken of her and your obvous infatuation of her if she were to
read what you posted here. Her bodyguards would not let you within
100 yards of her because you are obviously a threat.
David
|
| |
Date: 31 Aug 2006 08:17:17
From:
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
annika1980 wrote:
> bigoldc...@yahoo.com wrote:
> >
> > I agree with you somewhat, but, that little girl was abused her entire
> > life, beauty queen, etc. Then raped and murdered. She didn't choose to
> > be here in rsg. Bret, you, and I and many others are big boys and
> > choose to be part of this, that child didn't and doesn't deserve his
> > disrespect. I'm sure that I'd have to bitch slap Bret, in memory of
> > JonBenet, if he was here.
>
> If you are that concerned with it, I suggest you go bitch slap Mr.
> Ramsey, who pimped her out. I think anybody who dresses up a 6 year old
> to try to make them look sexy deserves a good beatin. Parents who do
> that crap think it's cute until their kid gets molested or even worse.
The Ramseys and others like them are guilty of child abuse. This does
not excuse you writing that you "did" JonBenet and then posting a sick
reference to having oral sex with her. You probably got some serious
bad karma headed your way.
|
| |
Date: 31 Aug 2006 06:45:11
From: annika1980
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
bigoldc...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> I agree with you somewhat, but, that little girl was abused her entire
> life, beauty queen, etc. Then raped and murdered. She didn't choose to
> be here in rsg. Bret, you, and I and many others are big boys and
> choose to be part of this, that child didn't and doesn't deserve his
> disrespect. I'm sure that I'd have to bitch slap Bret, in memory of
> JonBenet, if he was here.
If you are that concerned with it, I suggest you go bitch slap Mr.
Ramsey, who pimped her out. I think anybody who dresses up a 6 year old
to try to make them look sexy deserves a good beatin. Parents who do
that crap think it's cute until their kid gets molested or even worse.
|
| | |
Date: 31 Aug 2006 11:32:55
From: Otto
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
And then when the little girl wets her pants and the parents think she is 25
but they have screwed up her mind and they get frustrated and there is a
scuffle in the bathroom and the little girl slips and falls and fractures
her skull on the toilet or tub and the parents panic.
Then the cover up.
Merry Christmas.
None of the above is based on fact but it is the only theory that answers
all my questions.
Otto
"annika1980" <annika1980@aol.com > wrote in message
news:1157031911.471737.27920@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
> If you are that concerned with it, I suggest you go bitch slap Mr.
> Ramsey, who pimped her out. I think anybody who dresses up a 6 year old
> to try to make them look sexy deserves a good beatin. Parents who do
> that crap think it's cute until their kid gets molested or even worse.
>
|
| | |
Date: 31 Aug 2006 22:59:25
From: Matt 'Ocho' Aamold
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
"annika1980" <annika1980@aol.com > wrote in message
news:1157031911.471737.27920@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
> If you are that concerned with it, I suggest you go bitch slap Mr.
> Ramsey, who pimped her out. I think anybody who dresses up a 6 year old
> to try to make them look sexy deserves a good beatin. Parents who do
> that crap think it's cute until their kid gets molested or even worse.
Attempting to change the subject Bret? What you posted about JonBenet is
what is at issue here.
|
| | | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 06:27:20
From: Chris S
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
"Matt 'Ocho' Aamold" <maamold@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:ypmdnZBL37HeUWrZnZ2dnUVZ_oKdnZ2d@comcast.com...
> "annika1980" <annika1980@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:1157031911.471737.27920@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
>> If you are that concerned with it, I suggest you go bitch slap Mr.
>> Ramsey, who pimped her out. I think anybody who dresses up a 6 year old
>> to try to make them look sexy deserves a good beatin. Parents who do
>> that crap think it's cute until their kid gets molested or even worse.
>
> Attempting to change the subject Bret? What you posted about JonBenet is
> what is at issue here.
>
Isn't that the way things are done here?? Make a completely idiotic post,
and then backpeddle when the outrage starts and try to deflect the point
that it was in incredibly poor taste.
|
| | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 19:41:54
From: Ben.
Subject: Re: WAY OT: was (Re: I did JonBenet!)
|
Bobby Knight wrote:
> >You worked for Tedesco and Jones, Zappa and Jones or Zappa and Tedesco?
>
> Tommy was a personal friend, worked a lot with him...for Zappa and Q.
I would imagine you were a transcriptionsit for FZ, like David Ocker
perhaps, as I've never heard you mentioned or credited on any studio
work - is this incorrect? If I am wrong, in what capacity/what era did
you work for him?
> I really only take issue with using the term genius. Everything else
> is purely personal opinion.
I know - everyone here on RSG has a minimum IQ of 150, makes $250k+/yr,
belongs to the most desirable private club in town, is a single digit
'capper or better, hits a 3 wood 290 yards on a bad day, and has a wife
that would put Carmen Electra to shame. I take your comment with a
grain of salt.
I don't know FZ's actual IQ, but whether it was genius or not, you must
measure him on the body and sheer proclivity of his work - take the
word out of it, and what do you have? A man who wrote, conducted,
produced, performed, and sold his own vision - with no exceptions. Who
out there can say that? After Warner Brothers, he formed his own label
(Barking Pumpkin), ran it with the help of his wife and a small office
staff, funded his own tours, paid his own musicians, and booked his own
gigs. All this while producing one of the largest catalogs of music in
the modern era - he personally released _57_ albums during his
lifetime, and there are numerous posthumous Zappa Trust/Barking Pumpkin
releases of "leftover" material! Again, I say, who else out there can
say they ran the entire organization on their own, all while
_constantly_ reinventing themselves musically?
So, you say he's not all that, I say the man was a genius of
proportions we will not see in the popular music space probably ever
again. Again, I don't know what his IQ was, but he was no Slingblade.
Also, you have a skewed opinion of FZ, as do most of his ex-employees.
He was not a popular individual with those that worked scale for him.
You weren't his friend, you weren't coming over to dinner, you worked
for Frank - you were a means to an end. I say you, of course, in the
"employee of Zappa" sense...not in the BK was not welcome on the Zappa
household sense.
PS - You have the sheer audacity to change the subject header in a
thread about molesting Jonbenet Ramsey to "WAY OT" when it turns to
music? WTF, BK? talk about not being a genius...
|
| | | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 21:58:05
From: Bobby Knight
Subject: Re: WAY OT: was (Re: I did JonBenet!)
|
On 1 Sep 2006 19:41:54 -0700, "Ben." <kombi45@yahoo.com > wrote:
>
>Bobby Knight wrote:
>
>> >You worked for Tedesco and Jones, Zappa and Jones or Zappa and Tedesco?
>>
>> Tommy was a personal friend, worked a lot with him...for Zappa and Q.
>
>I would imagine you were a transcriptionsit for FZ, like David Ocker
>perhaps, as I've never heard you mentioned or credited on any studio
>work - is this incorrect? If I am wrong, in what capacity/what era did
>you work for him?
>
I was a studio musician in the 60's and 70's in LA. I was on many,
many, recordings for which the musicians weren't credited. Whether or
not I was credited on any of Zappa's I wouldn't know, I never bought
his albums.
>> I really only take issue with using the term genius. Everything else
>> is purely personal opinion.
>
>I know - everyone here on RSG has a minimum IQ of 150, makes $250k+/yr,
>belongs to the most desirable private club in town, is a single digit
>'capper or better, hits a 3 wood 290 yards on a bad day, and has a wife
>that would put Carmen Electra to shame. I take your comment with a
>grain of salt.
>
<clip obvious copying of zappa hype >
>
He wasn't a genius.
>
>PS - You have the sheer audacity to change the subject header in a
>thread about molesting Jonbenet Ramsey to "WAY OT" when it turns to
>music? WTF, BK? talk about not being a genius...
I just wanted the thread to change, and I don't profess to be a
genius. I don't know what your profession is, but I wouldn't deign to
argue with you in an area where your expertise lies. You might want
to think about that regarding my background in music.
|
| | | | |
Date: 02 Sep 2006 03:23:32
From: Chris Bellomy
Subject: Re: WAY OT: was (Re: I did JonBenet!)
|
Bobby Knight <bknight@conramp.net > wrote:
> I just wanted the thread to change, and I don't profess to be a
> genius. I don't know what your profession is, but I wouldn't deign to
> argue with you in an area where your expertise lies. You might want
> to think about that regarding my background in music.
You're a satirist? I had no idea!
Oh, that's not what you meant... hmm, then maybe you're not
qualified to comment on FZ, whose genius was more literary
than musical. He does get credit for not being content to
write everything in I-IV-V and I-vi-IV-V 4/4 progressions,
though. (To put it lightly.)
But yeah, he was pretty far from Ellington and Armstrong as
a musical genius, you win that point without argument.
FZ's genius was in his social commentary. I wouldn't go so
far as to compare him outright to Mark Twain, but he did
operate in a similar sardonic vein, using a musical medium
that insured that he got reach that was both wide and
immediate. His presence in today's sociopolitical climate
really is sorely missed. :(
--
Chris Bellomy
C-List Charter Member
http://clist.org/
|
| | | | | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 22:30:51
From: Bobby Knight
Subject: Re: WAY OT: was (Re: I did JonBenet!)
|
On 2 Sep 2006 03:23:32 GMT, Chris Bellomy <puevf@tbbqfubj.arg.invalid >
wrote:
>Bobby Knight <bknight@conramp.net> wrote:
>
>> I just wanted the thread to change, and I don't profess to be a
>> genius. I don't know what your profession is, but I wouldn't deign to
>> argue with you in an area where your expertise lies. You might want
>> to think about that regarding my background in music.
>
>You're a satirist? I had no idea!
WTF?
>
>Oh, that's not what you meant... hmm, then maybe you're not
>qualified to comment on FZ, whose genius was more literary
>than musical. He does get credit for not being content to
>write everything in I-IV-V and I-vi-IV-V 4/4 progressions,
>though. (To put it lightly.)
IMO the term genius was applied to his musical abilities in all
genres. That, flatly, is ridiculous.
>
>But yeah, he was pretty far from Ellington and Armstrong as
>a musical genius, you win that point without argument.
>
That WAS the argument.
>FZ's genius was in his social commentary. I wouldn't go so
>far as to compare him outright to Mark Twain, but he did
>operate in a similar sardonic vein, using a musical medium
>that insured that he got reach that was both wide and
>immediate. His presence in today's sociopolitical climate
>really is sorely missed. :(
I don't miss it at all. :-)
___,
\o
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 02 Sep 2006 03:40:21
From: Chris Bellomy
Subject: Re: WAY OT: was (Re: I did JonBenet!)
|
Bobby Knight <bknight@conramp.net > wrote:
> On 2 Sep 2006 03:23:32 GMT, Chris Bellomy <puevf@tbbqfubj.arg.invalid>
> wrote:
>>FZ's genius was in his social commentary. I wouldn't go so
>>far as to compare him outright to Mark Twain, but he did
>>operate in a similar sardonic vein, using a musical medium
>>that insured that he got reach that was both wide and
>>immediate. His presence in today's sociopolitical climate
>>really is sorely missed. :(
>
> I don't miss it at all. :-)
You do, it's just that you don't realize it. Nobody today can
skewer the president with the precision that Zappa could. Not
even close.
--
Chris Bellomy
C-List Charter Member
http://clist.org/
|
| | | | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 20:18:42
From: long&left
Subject: Re: WAY OT: was (Re: I did JonBenet!)
|
>>I know - everyone here on RSG has a minimum IQ of 150, makes $250k+/yr,
>>belongs to the most desirable private club in town, is a single digit
>>'capper or better, hits a 3 wood 290 yards on a bad day, and has a wife
>>that would put Carmen Electra to shame. I take your comment with a
>>grain of salt.
>>
yes, yes, yes, no, no, yes...I like salt
|
| |
Date: 31 Aug 2006 06:36:13
From:
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
Tex wrote:
> David wrote:
> > On 30 Aug 2006 14:36:54 -0700, "annika1980" <annika1980@aol.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >Nomen Nescio wrote:
> > >>
> > >> That explains why no semen was found.
> > >
> > >Her daddy taught her well. She was a swallower.
> >
> > I have withheld my judgement of you until now. I was not sure what
> > to make of you based on your posts. This, however, has put you over
> > the edge and shown everyone what a complete idiot you are. I hope
> > that you don't have children. If you do, you have probably abused them
> > in the past, or will do so in the near future. Your remarks in this
> > thread cannot be construed as sarcasm--simply sick.
>
> David, you should know by now Annika loves to post things for "shock
> and awe"....he gets off on "sticking it to ya". Much like his dear old
> Dad used to "stick it to him".
>
> You will also find out soon enough, his skin is not nearly as thick as
> he's made everyone believe, most likely from all the beatings his Dad
> gave him as a child.
>
> So do yourself a favor, ignore most of his "shock and awe" as a stunt
> to get attention and do recognize that when he was playing golf, he did
> have game and does understand the game. He's probably just bored now
> that he's not playing anymore.
>
> Tex
I agree with you somewhat, but, that little girl was abused her entire
life, beauty queen, etc. Then raped and murdered. She didn't choose to
be here in rsg. Bret, you, and I and many others are big boys and
choose to be part of this, that child didn't and doesn't deserve his
disrespect. I'm sure that I'd have to bitch slap Bret, in memory of
JonBenet, if he was here.
|
| | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 07:25:20
From: annika1980
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
David wrote:
>> >A kids beauty pageant is not an invitation for molestors to come in an
> >abuse kids without assuming 100% of the blame. They are not
> >advertisements for abuse. Only the sick and twisted mind of the
> >criminal child abuser can see them as opportunities.
>
> Which is exactly why Bret is a candidate to be a sexual abuser of
> children (if he has not done so already) in my book.
Before we continue further, please take a moment to go fuck yourself.
>
> Bret tries the first amendment argument here.
Yeah, ain't it great? Do they have the same freedoms where you live?
> Well, people have a
> right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, also. Simply
> because Bret finds pageants for 6 year old girls wrong, that does not
> make it wrong for the parents to enter their kids in these events.
I think it's much more disgusting and just plain wrong than someone
making offensive posts on a newsgroup. But we can differ here.
> Bret is is living in the dark ages. He believes that women who are
> raped deserved what they got.
I think in the future that you and I will get along better if you stop
trying to tell me what I think. That's like me saying, "David believes
it is OK to pimp your kids out, parade them as sexual objects, and
offer them to men with money."
What I really believe is that actions have consequences. If a beauty
queen goes up to Mike Tyson's room at 2AM, that's called "safe sex,"
because it's a damn safe bet that she's about to get some sex. If you
are a pretty girl walking down the street nude, you have exponentially
increased your chances of getting approached by some pervert.
And if you dress up your 6 year-old daughter to look sexy like Scarlett
Johansson, you might think it's cute but your actions could have
negative consequences.
> Well, free speech works both way and nothing prevents me from
> posting his message all over the internet, so that everyone can see
> what a sicko he truly is.
Yes, you certainly have that right. It's not like people haven't
already done that many times before, posting not only my words, but my
personal info like my address and phone numbers. And then I'll have the
right to do what I'll do.
Actions do have consequences.
|
| | | |
Date: 02 Sep 2006 01:16:03
From: David
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
On 1 Sep 2006 07:25:20 -0700, "annika1980" <annika1980@aol.com > wrote:
>
>David wrote:
<snipped >
Bret, you can go fuck yourself before you start doing to little
girls on the beach wearing bikinis.
>> Well, free speech works both way and nothing prevents me from
>> posting his message all over the internet, so that everyone can see
>> what a sicko he truly is.
>
>Yes, you certainly have that right. It's not like people haven't
>already done that many times before, posting not only my words, but my
>personal info like my address and phone numbers. And then I'll have the
>right to do what I'll do.
>Actions do have consequences.
There is not consequence here, Bret. What you posted is black and
white. The only person who could expect any consequences would be you
for posting something so sick.
David
|
| | | | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 22:47:36
From: AKA Gray Asphalt
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
"David" <dgold1958@yahoo.de > wrote in message
news:hmfhf2t11kbd3injrpjnbihrv19q280t7k@4ax.com...
> On 1 Sep 2006 07:25:20 -0700, "annika1980" <annika1980@aol.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>David wrote:
>
> <snipped>
>
> Bret, you can go fuck yourself before you start doing to little
> girls on the beach wearing bikinis.
>
>>> Well, free speech works both way and nothing prevents me from
>>> posting his message all over the internet, so that everyone can see
>>> what a sicko he truly is.
>>
>>Yes, you certainly have that right. It's not like people haven't
>>already done that many times before, posting not only my words, but my
>>personal info like my address and phone numbers. And then I'll have the
>>right to do what I'll do.
>>Actions do have consequences.
>
> There is not consequence here, Bret. What you posted is black and
> white. The only person who could expect any consequences would be you
> for posting something so sick.
>
> David
He didn't do anything. He just said something that is out of character for
him. He doesn't need me to defend him but there are a lot of things that
didn't come out the way I wanted or meant and nobody made a federal case out
of it, luckily. I'm trying not to say something I'll regret right now.
Strange temptation isn't it ...
|
| |
Date: 31 Aug 2006 05:58:43
From: Tex
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
David wrote:
> On 30 Aug 2006 14:36:54 -0700, "annika1980" <annika1980@aol.com>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >Nomen Nescio wrote:
> >>
> >> That explains why no semen was found.
> >
> >Her daddy taught her well. She was a swallower.
>
> I have withheld my judgement of you until now. I was not sure what
> to make of you based on your posts. This, however, has put you over
> the edge and shown everyone what a complete idiot you are. I hope
> that you don't have children. If you do, you have probably abused them
> in the past, or will do so in the near future. Your remarks in this
> thread cannot be construed as sarcasm--simply sick.
David, you should know by now Annika loves to post things for "shock
and awe"....he gets off on "sticking it to ya". Much like his dear old
Dad used to "stick it to him".
You will also find out soon enough, his skin is not nearly as thick as
he's made everyone believe, most likely from all the beatings his Dad
gave him as a child.
So do yourself a favor, ignore most of his "shock and awe" as a stunt
to get attention and do recognize that when he was playing golf, he did
have game and does understand the game. He's probably just bored now
that he's not playing anymore.
Tex
|
| | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 12:44:44
From:
Subject: Re: WAY OT: was (Re: I did JonBenet!)
|
NP: Joe's Garage....yes, the man is (was) a genius.
|
| | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 12:38:25
From: Ben.
Subject: Re: WAY OT: was (Re: I did JonBenet!)
|
Bobby Knight wrote:
> Off the top of my head, Quincy Jones is on line 1, and not a genius
> either. I'm excluding classical for both of them. Zappa wasn't well
> versed in Jazz, and most decent composers study the classics.
> Incidentally, I worked for both, and saw guys like Tommy Tedesco make
> his music better.
You worked for Tedesco and Jones, Zappa and Jones or Zappa and Tedesco?
|
| | | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 14:43:39
From: Bobby Knight
Subject: Re: WAY OT: was (Re: I did JonBenet!)
|
On 1 Sep 2006 12:38:25 -0700, "Ben." <kombi45@yahoo.com > wrote:
>
>Bobby Knight wrote:
>
>> Off the top of my head, Quincy Jones is on line 1, and not a genius
>> either. I'm excluding classical for both of them. Zappa wasn't well
>> versed in Jazz, and most decent composers study the classics.
>> Incidentally, I worked for both, and saw guys like Tommy Tedesco make
>> his music better.
>
>You worked for Tedesco and Jones, Zappa and Jones or Zappa and Tedesco?
Tommy was a personal friend, worked a lot with him...for Zappa and Q.
I really only take issue with using the term genius. Everything else
is purely personal opinion.
___,
\o
|
| | | | |
Date: 06 Sep 2006 06:55:16
From: annika1980
Subject: Re: Jon Benet
|
Birdie Bill wrote:
>
> I didn't reply until he started blaming the parents for complicity
> and made comments about her Dad teaching her to swallow.
> What "wait and see" attitude was required before responding
> to that tripe?
>
> We've waited 10 years, and the prime suspect is dead.
> However, if Patsy DIDN'T do it, blaming the parents because
> they got their kid into beauty pagents is total BS.
Until proven otherwise, I will always believe that Jon Benet's parents
were complicit in her death. I have a hard time believing they would
intentionally kill her, but I can see a scenario where they would allow
strangers to come in and do whatever.
Hence, my comments about "pimping her out."
You are free to disagree and offer alternative explanations if you
wish.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 06 Sep 2006 09:20:28
From: MnMikew
Subject: Re: Jon Benet
|
"annika1980" <annika1980@aol.com > wrote in message
news:1157550916.362473.201140@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> You are free to disagree and offer alternative explanations if you
> wish.
>
The Butler did it in the parlor with a candlestick.
|
| | | | |
Date: 06 Sep 2006 06:28:36
From: Birdie Bill
Subject: Re: Jon Benet
|
Bobby Knight wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Sep 2006 05:39:35 -0700, "Chris S" <golfzlf@coxyahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >"AKA Gray Asphalt" <goodidea1950@hotmail.spam.com> wrote in message
> >news:yesLg.2386$nL2.909@fed1read02...
> >>
> >> It's a little confusing but when the comment about 'doing Jon Benet' was
> >> first posted it seemed extremely insensitive but as time passes it seems
> >> to be more directed at the injustice of the whole fiasco of a guy saying
> >> he did it and getting attention when he was obviously a nut case ... but
> >> at the time of the posting most of us thought he really might have been
> >> guilty ... maybe it was the timing or maybe just that the OP understood
> >> the situation better than me, but it sure doesn't seem so inappropriate
> >> now. To me it seemed like the OP was mocking those who were close to Jon
> >> Benet, now it doesn't seem that way at all.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >OP sat at his keyboard wondering what shocking thing he could post on that
> >day and dug something up out of his pea brain to do that. Then, when the
> >outrage rightfully came, he backpedaled. Typical, and sad.
> >
> I'm with Asphalt on this one. Annika's satirical statement was
> obvious, at least to some. "Where's my first class ticket to
> Colorado" pointed out his doubts about Karr's "confession".
>
> The crowd mentality didn't even take a wait and see attitude, they
> just called for drawing and quartering a publicity seeker, and didn't
> see through the false statement.
>
> Annika's perspicacity was right on.
I don't know why you guys are dragging this back up, but Bret's
post was made AFTER the results of the DNA test were made
public, and after the charges were dropped.
I didn't reply until he started blaming the parents for complicity
and made comments about her Dad teaching her to swallow.
What "wait and see" attitude was required before responding
to that tripe?
We've waited 10 years, and the prime suspect is dead.
However, if Patsy DIDN'T do it, blaming the parents because
they got their kid into beauty pagents is total BS.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 06 Sep 2006 08:51:05
From: Bobby Knight
Subject: Re: Jon Benet
|
On 6 Sep 2006 06:28:36 -0700, "Birdie Bill" <bighorn_bill@hotmail.com >
wrote:
>
>Bobby Knight wrote:
>> On Wed, 6 Sep 2006 05:39:35 -0700, "Chris S" <golfzlf@coxyahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>> Annika's perspicacity was right on.
>
>I don't know why you guys are dragging this back up, but Bret's
>post was made AFTER the results of the DNA test were made
>public, and after the charges were dropped.
>
Damned if you aren't right about that. I didn't even follow the
original post at first, until the thread started on on Zappa (talk
about OT), so I was off base with the time line.
>I didn't reply until he started blaming the parents for complicity
>and made comments about her Dad teaching her to swallow.
>What "wait and see" attitude was required before responding
>to that tripe?
>
That, I didn't see. Bad taste indeed.
>We've waited 10 years, and the prime suspect is dead.
>However, if Patsy DIDN'T do it, blaming the parents because
>they got their kid into beauty pagents is total BS.
There's some culpability there, but not total.
Thanks for setting me straight Bill.
___,
\o
|
| | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 11:00:28
From: John B.
Subject: Re: WAY OT: was (Re: I did JonBenet!)
|
Bobby Knight wrote:
> On 1 Sep 2006 10:20:08 -0700, "Ben." <kombi45@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >Bobby Knight wrote:
> >> On 1 Sep 2006 10:00:57 -0700, "Ben." <kombi45@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> >Frank was a genius, musical and otherwise, the likes of which we will
> >> >not see in our lifetimes again.
> >>
> >> Not even close.
> >
> >Show me another musician as fluent in as many genres as Frank and I'll
> >retract. There are certainly musicians more competent in their
> >particular genre; however, I've yet to hear someone as well-versed as
> >Frank was in:
> >
> >- rock
> >- jazz
> >- avant garde/digital music programming (Synclavier)
> >- classical - he was an astute student of Varese, Bartok, Ravel, etc
> >- metal
> >- pop
> >- country (it _is_ a genre, after all)
> >
> >Many times in the same song.
> >
> >Let us not forget, Frank was a composer - he literally wrote the music
> >out himself in longhand prior to the Synclavier - and I would wager he
> >was one of the first "composers" to use this technique. I know you are
> >a musician, I'm not. I am an appreciater of great music...and if there
> >is someone I've not heard that rivals Frank's remarkably diverse range
> >as a highly competent composer/guitarist/musician in general, please
> >enlighten me. I'm not being contentious - I would like to hear this
> >person!
>
> First of all, the term "genius" is all too often bandied about. He
> was not a genius.
>
> Off the top of my head, Quincy Jones is on line 1, and not a genius
> either. I'm excluding classical for both of them. Zappa wasn't well
> versed in Jazz, and most decent composers study the classics.
> Incidentally, I worked for both, and saw guys like Tommy Tedesco make
> his music better.
I don't know if Zappa was a genius. I do think he was extremely
talented and that he wasted that talent on trying to be funny rather
than musical. Montana, Stinkfoot, Valley Girl and that sort of junk
make up a huge proprtion of his repertory and I think that's a shame.
|
| |
Date: 31 Aug 2006 19:25:23
From: annika1980
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
Tex wrote:
>
> A kids beauty pageant is not an invitation for molestors to come in an
> abuse kids without assuming 100% of the blame. They are not
> advertisements for abuse. Only the sick and twisted mind of the
> criminal child abuser can see them as opportunities.
Do you lock your car when you leave it parked? What about your house
... do you lock the door when you leave? If so, why? It's not your
fault if somebody walks in and steals your stuff. My dad once told me
that a lock was just there to keep honest people honest. (Then he went
back to beatin me.) Only a criminal would see an unlocked door as an
opportunity. But that doesn't help you too much when they steal your
shit.
The point is that there will always be bad people who do bad things,
but why make it easy or tempting for them? Would you let your daughter
go around town wearing just a skimpy bikini? The fact that there are
sickos and criminals out there is precisely the reason to exercise
caution. It's also why we have gun laws, but that's another topic for
a different day.
|
| |
Date: 31 Aug 2006 19:08:30
From: Tex
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
Chris Bellomy wrote:
> Tex <marktexkoenig@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > The Hammer wrote:
> >> When you take a little girl and dress her up to be years older looking
> >> and broadcast her likeness all over the media, you are inviting
> >> trouble.
> >
> > So you might be saying it's "the woman's fault" if she dresses sexy and
> > gets raped? So you are saying that all the sickos (and you know about
> > them how?) are just waiting to be invited by sexy dress??
> >
> > I've got eye opening news for you...the "fault" lies in the person(s)
> > that commits the crime.
>
> Alert the media: I'm about to take Eric's side of an argument.
> Sort of.
>
> My only point is this: blame can be shared. It's certainly
> possible for parents to irresponsibly put their children in
> positions of great vulnerability/exposure to predators, and
> those who do deserve the heat they get, IMO. That doesn't
> excuse or mitigate the crimes of the predators themselves,
> not one bit. But there are too many parents who fail to take
> their roles as protectors seriously enough; it's not sufficient
> to blame the predators and call it a day.
Agreed, to a point....who's fault is it if your kids are at the
playground and a sniper takes one out? Afterall, you put your kids
outdoors and exposed them.
The fault goes to the person pulling the trigger.
A kids beauty pageant is not an invitation for molestors to come in an
abuse kids without assuming 100% of the blame. They are not
advertisements for abuse. Only the sick and twisted mind of the
criminal child abuser can see them as opportunities.
Tex
|
| | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 02:49:59
From: Chris Bellomy
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
Tex <marktexkoenig@gmail.com > wrote:
>
> Chris Bellomy wrote:
>> Tex <marktexkoenig@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > The Hammer wrote:
>> >> When you take a little girl and dress her up to be years older looking
>> >> and broadcast her likeness all over the media, you are inviting
>> >> trouble.
>> >
>> > So you might be saying it's "the woman's fault" if she dresses sexy and
>> > gets raped? So you are saying that all the sickos (and you know about
>> > them how?) are just waiting to be invited by sexy dress??
>> >
>> > I've got eye opening news for you...the "fault" lies in the person(s)
>> > that commits the crime.
>>
>> Alert the media: I'm about to take Eric's side of an argument.
>> Sort of.
>>
>> My only point is this: blame can be shared. It's certainly
>> possible for parents to irresponsibly put their children in
>> positions of great vulnerability/exposure to predators, and
>> those who do deserve the heat they get, IMO. That doesn't
>> excuse or mitigate the crimes of the predators themselves,
>> not one bit. But there are too many parents who fail to take
>> their roles as protectors seriously enough; it's not sufficient
>> to blame the predators and call it a day.
>
> Agreed, to a point....who's fault is it if your kids are at the
> playground and a sniper takes one out? Afterall, you put your kids
> outdoors and exposed them.
>
> The fault goes to the person pulling the trigger.
True. The standard expected of the parents must be reasonable;
anticipating snipers is, of course, a bit much. Dressing your
6 y/o daughter up like a beauty queen, complete with makeup,
and entering her in pageants, though... I think that, at the
least, the parent has to understand that this invites some pretty
seriously creepy people into the child's life.
> A kids beauty pageant is not an invitation for molestors to come in an
> abuse kids without assuming 100% of the blame. They are not
> advertisements for abuse. Only the sick and twisted mind of the
> criminal child abuser can see them as opportunities.
Yeah, but it's the parent's job to know that these sick and
twisted people exist, and to navigate the child away from them
rather than towards them. To fail to do so is definitely a
crime of a much lesser magnitude than that of the molester,
but IMO it's a moral crime nonetheless. I probably would have
seen this differently before I was a parent, but now I am very
aware how dependent my kids are on me to keep them in safe
environments.
Now, if I may be excused, I need to haul out the bailing wire
and chewing gum... I have a 54 hole golf tournament this weekend
and my game has more sputters in it than a 1967 Triumph.
--
Chris Bellomy
C-List Charter Member
http://clist.org/
|
| | | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 04:08:02
From: bill-o
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
On 31-Aug-2006, Chris Bellomy <puevf@tbbqfubj.arg.invalid > wrote:
> Now, if I may be excused, I need to haul out the bailing wire
> and chewing gum... I have a 54 hole golf tournament this weekend
> and my game has more sputters in it than a 1967 Triumph.
Could be worse, if it was in the condition of my Dad's ole 58 MGB, you
wouldn't make it to the 1st tee!
--
bill-o
A "gimme" can best be defined as an agreement between
two golfers neither of whom can putt very well.
|
| | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 13:48:00
From: David
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
On 31 Aug 2006 19:08:30 -0700, "Tex" <marktexkoenig@gmail.com > wrote:
>
>Chris Bellomy wrote:
>> Tex <marktexkoenig@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > The Hammer wrote:
>> >> When you take a little girl and dress her up to be years older looking
>> >> and broadcast her likeness all over the media, you are inviting
>> >> trouble.
>> >
>> > So you might be saying it's "the woman's fault" if she dresses sexy and
>> > gets raped? So you are saying that all the sickos (and you know about
>> > them how?) are just waiting to be invited by sexy dress??
>> >
>> > I've got eye opening news for you...the "fault" lies in the person(s)
>> > that commits the crime.
>>
>> Alert the media: I'm about to take Eric's side of an argument.
>> Sort of.
>>
>> My only point is this: blame can be shared. It's certainly
>> possible for parents to irresponsibly put their children in
>> positions of great vulnerability/exposure to predators, and
>> those who do deserve the heat they get, IMO. That doesn't
>> excuse or mitigate the crimes of the predators themselves,
>> not one bit. But there are too many parents who fail to take
>> their roles as protectors seriously enough; it's not sufficient
>> to blame the predators and call it a day.
>
>Agreed, to a point....who's fault is it if your kids are at the
>playground and a sniper takes one out? Afterall, you put your kids
>outdoors and exposed them.
>
>The fault goes to the person pulling the trigger.
>
>A kids beauty pageant is not an invitation for molestors to come in an
>abuse kids without assuming 100% of the blame. They are not
>advertisements for abuse. Only the sick and twisted mind of the
>criminal child abuser can see them as opportunities.
Which is exactly why Bret is a candidate to be a sexual abuser of
children (if he has not done so already) in my book. The fact is,
wining the Miss America pageant brings a lot of rewards. The girls
that win all started out at a very early age. It is a competition and
like any other competitive event, you start out young if you want to
make it to the top.
Bret tries the first amendment argument here. Well, people have a
right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, also. Simply
because Bret finds pageants for 6 year old girls wrong, that does not
make it wrong for the parents to enter their kids in these events. It
does not make it wrong for a woman to put on something sexy for a date
and expect that her date respect her and not rape her.
Bret is is living in the dark ages. He believes that women who are
raped deserved what they got. Well, new to him, there is no common
profile of women who get raped. They are all ages, races, looks,
etc.... Bret is probably secretly hoping that whoever did this gets
away wtih it, in order to show the world a lesson.
Well, free speech works both way and nothing prevents me from
posting his message all over the internet, so that everyone can see
what a sicko he truly is.
>Tex
David
|
| | | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 20:14:12
From: bill-o
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
On 1-Sep-2006, David <dgold1958@yahoo.de > wrote:
> Which is exactly why Bret is a candidate to be a sexual abuser of
> children (if he has not done so already) in my book.
Riiiight
--
bill-o
A "gimme" can best be defined as an agreement between
two golfers neither of whom can putt very well.
|
| |
Date: 31 Aug 2006 18:23:11
From: Tex
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
The Hammer wrote:
> When you take a little girl and dress her up to be years older looking
> and broadcast her likeness all over the media, you are inviting
> trouble.
So you might be saying it's "the woman's fault" if she dresses sexy and
gets raped? So you are saying that all the sickos (and you know about
them how?) are just waiting to be invited by sexy dress??
I've got eye opening news for you...the "fault" lies in the person(s)
that commits the crime.
Tex
|
| | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 01:58:49
From: Chris Bellomy
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
Tex <marktexkoenig@gmail.com > wrote:
>
> The Hammer wrote:
>> When you take a little girl and dress her up to be years older looking
>> and broadcast her likeness all over the media, you are inviting
>> trouble.
>
> So you might be saying it's "the woman's fault" if she dresses sexy and
> gets raped? So you are saying that all the sickos (and you know about
> them how?) are just waiting to be invited by sexy dress??
>
> I've got eye opening news for you...the "fault" lies in the person(s)
> that commits the crime.
Alert the media: I'm about to take Eric's side of an argument.
Sort of.
My only point is this: blame can be shared. It's certainly
possible for parents to irresponsibly put their children in
positions of great vulnerability/exposure to predators, and
those who do deserve the heat they get, IMO. That doesn't
excuse or mitigate the crimes of the predators themselves,
not one bit. But there are too many parents who fail to take
their roles as protectors seriously enough; it's not sufficient
to blame the predators and call it a day.
None of this is meant as specific comment on the Ramsey case,
about which I simultaneously know not nearly enough and way
too much.
--
Chris Bellomy
C-List Charter Member
http://clist.org/
|
| | |
Date: 31 Aug 2006 23:01:42
From: Matt 'Ocho' Aamold
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
"Tex" <marktexkoenig@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:1157073791.451497.224510@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> So you might be saying it's "the woman's fault" if she dresses sexy and
> gets raped? So you are saying that all the sickos (and you know about
> them how?) are just waiting to be invited by sexy dress??
>
> I've got eye opening news for you...the "fault" lies in the person(s)
> that commits the crime.
>
> Tex
Well it was Bret's fault that his daddy treated him so :-)
|
| |
Date: 31 Aug 2006 14:36:13
From:
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
David wrote:
> On 31 Aug 2006 08:54:04 -0700, "annika1980" <annika1980@aol.com>
> wrote:
>
> <snipped>
>
> >My whole point is that people who are offended when I post something
> >like that should be even more offended by the circumstances that caused
> >me to post it. Some people, not you necessarily, condone beauty
> >pageants for 6 year-olds but act shocked when one of these kids is
> >molested. Believe it or not, I have the same feelings about 6 year-old
> >cheerleaders. Parents dress up their daughters in little cheerleader
> >outfits and let them do provocative gyrations to look hot. Everybody
> >knows that girls don't achieve maximum hotness until at least the age
> >of 12.
>
> Bret, you are simply an asshole. Not once did you make an apology
> for posting that sick crap, then you end what some of your fans might
> fancy to be an apology with another sick remark about 12 year old
> girls.
Hmmm...well I read his post you've cited here. Agreed with him more or
less up until that last sentence.
The last sentence got a laugh.
Thanks for making the guy next to me in the office look at me funny,
Annika. :-P
The rest of your post, well, I'll just delete it and move on.
Bob
Huntington Beach, CA
|
| | |
Date: 31 Aug 2006 19:13:42
From: long&left
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
double_entendre@hotmail.com wrote:
> David wrote:
>
>>On 31 Aug 2006 08:54:04 -0700, "annika1980" <annika1980@aol.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>><snipped>
>>
>>>My whole point is that people who are offended when I post something
>>>like that should be even more offended by the circumstances that caused
>>>me to post it. Some people, not you necessarily, condone beauty
>>>pageants for 6 year-olds but act shocked when one of these kids is
>>>molested. Believe it or not, I have the same feelings about 6 year-old
>>>cheerleaders. Parents dress up their daughters in little cheerleader
>>>outfits and let them do provocative gyrations to look hot. Everybody
>>>knows that girls don't achieve maximum hotness until at least the age
>>>of 12.
>>
>> Bret, you are simply an asshole. Not once did you make an apology
>>for posting that sick crap, then you end what some of your fans might
>>fancy to be an apology with another sick remark about 12 year old
>>girls.
>
>
> Hmmm...well I read his post you've cited here. Agreed with him more or
> less up until that last sentence.
>
> The last sentence got a laugh.
>
> Thanks for making the guy next to me in the office look at me funny,
> Annika. :-P
>
> The rest of your post, well, I'll just delete it and move on.
>
> Bob
> Huntington Beach, CA
>
so, you're officially HB Bob now rather than Rancho Bob?
:)
--
Dave
You are meant to play the ball as it lies, a fact that may help to touch
on your own objective approach to life. ~Grantland Rice
|
| | | |
Date: 31 Aug 2006 23:03:14
From: Matt 'Ocho' Aamold
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
"long&left" <nospam@diespammers.com > wrote in message
news:hHMJg.238$pe2.74@newsfe05.lga...
> so, you're officially HB Bob now rather than Rancho Bob?
> :)
Butter Bob
|
| | | | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 07:11:28
From: long&left
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
Matt 'Ocho' Aamold wrote:
> "long&left" <nospam@diespammers.com> wrote in message
> news:hHMJg.238$pe2.74@newsfe05.lga...
>
>
>>so, you're officially HB Bob now rather than Rancho Bob?
>>:)
>
>
> Butter Bob
>
>
as in smooth? or, maybe slick?? I'll be on the golf course with Butter
Bob a week from today :)
Dave
|
| |
Date: 31 Aug 2006 13:48:46
From: The Hammer
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
David wrote:
> On 31 Aug 2006 08:54:04 -0700, "annika1980" <annika1980@aol.com>
> wrote:
>
> <snipped>
>
> >My whole point is that people who are offended when I post something
> >like that should be even more offended by the circumstances that caused
> >me to post it. Some people, not you necessarily, condone beauty
> >pageants for 6 year-olds but act shocked when one of these kids is
> >molested. Believe it or not, I have the same feelings about 6 year-old
> >cheerleaders. Parents dress up their daughters in little cheerleader
> >outfits and let them do provocative gyrations to look hot. Everybody
> >knows that girls don't achieve maximum hotness until at least the age
> >of 12.
>
> Bret, you are simply an asshole. Not once did you make an apology
> for posting that sick crap, then you end what some of your fans might
> fancy to be an apology with another sick remark about 12 year old
> girls. Placing the blame what happened to that unfortunate girl on
> her parents does not give you the right to make a post like that.
>
> You are probably the type that blames the girl when she gets raped
> because she should have worn clothing that covered every inch of her
> body, instead of something stylish and, dare I say it, sexy.
>
> I wonder how Natalie Gulbis would feel about all of the pictures you
> have taken of her and your obvous infatuation of her if she were to
> read what you posted here. Her bodyguards would not let you within
> 100 yards of her because you are obviously a threat.
>
> David
You are a bigger asshole. because you have totally missed the point of
what Bret was trying to say. I will give the benefit of the doubt to
him on this one.
When you take a little girl and dress her up to be years older looking
and broadcast her likeness all over the media, you are inviting
trouble. There are tens of thousands of sickos out there that will
drool just at the sight of these pictures and she can easily become
targeted by one of them. This is reality. There are sick
motherfuckers out there that look for this stuff, actively seeking it
out, so why put it out there for them in the first place. With the
internet, it can take seconds to find out where someone lives. So
why the Ramseys did not DESERVE what happened to their daughter, they
are COMPLICIT in what happened to her. If they just would have let
her be a little girl, and get dirty and hang around friends and just be
a kid for God sakes, none of this would have ever happened. I agree
with Bret here, there was nothing particularly "cute" about what the
Ramseys did with their daughter, it was outright perverse. They are
every bit as fucking disgusting as the animal that killed their
daughter. They set the bait well.
And Bret's orgininal point about the asshole who confessed and got a
first class flight. He deserved to be tied up and gagged and thrown in
the bathroom full of unflushed crap. That is all he deserved. What he
got was a taste of royalty for a short time, and enough notoriety to
last a lifetime. Even though he didn't do it, he should be killed for
even saying that he did. Because the fact that one even thinks such
thoughts, makes him worthy of permanently being removed from the gene
pool. I hope his days are numbered and we read one day of some
mysterious accident or sickness while in jail or when he gets out. I
will toast to whomever did that when it happens.
To some extent, we deserve what we get with all this child molestation
crap. My wife's son-in-law is a senior official with the federal
probation department and they cannot keep up with the caseload for
these offenders. We let them out, they do it again. They are stalking
all over the internet, and even though the odds are high of getting
entrapped, they are more than willing to take the risk, because they
are so fucking ill. If we took every one of these offenders and threw
them into a pool of starved alligators and made a public spectacle of
it, I am certain we would see very few of these offenses in the future.
But since we do not have the will to do it, and we have liberal,
sociologist types that see many of these folks of "victums" themselves
and worthy of public efforts to rehabilitate, we will see many more Jon
Benet's.
Bret's comments on the surface appear in bad taste, but I will defer to
him this time that there is a message behind the message.
The Hammer
|
| | |
Date: 31 Aug 2006 16:07:56
From: The World Wide Wade
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
In article
<1157057326.314004.117830@74g2000cwt.googlegroups.com >,
"The Hammer" <buggertt@yahoo.com > wrote:
> I agree
> with Bret here, there was nothing particularly "cute" about what the
> Ramseys did with their daughter, it was outright perverse. They are
> every bit as fucking disgusting as the animal that killed their
> daughter.
That's insane.
|
| | |
Date: 31 Aug 2006 16:57:09
From: Da Ringer
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
SHAZAAAAAAM!!!!!
"The Hammer" <buggertt@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1157057326.314004.117830@74g2000cwt.googlegroups.com...
>
> You are a bigger asshole. because you have totally missed the point of
> what Bret was trying to say. I will give the benefit of the doubt to
> him on this one.
>
> When you take a little girl and dress her up to be years older looking
> and broadcast her likeness all over the media, you are inviting
> trouble. There are tens of thousands of sickos out there that will
> drool just at the sight of these pictures and she can easily become
> targeted by one of them. This is reality. There are sick
> motherfuckers out there that look for this stuff, actively seeking it
> out, so why put it out there for them in the first place. With the
> internet, it can take seconds to find out where someone lives. So
> why the Ramseys did not DESERVE what happened to their daughter, they
> are COMPLICIT in what happened to her. If they just would have let
> her be a little girl, and get dirty and hang around friends and just be
> a kid for God sakes, none of this would have ever happened. I agree
> with Bret here, there was nothing particularly "cute" about what the
> Ramseys did with their daughter, it was outright perverse. They are
> every bit as fucking disgusting as the animal that killed their
> daughter. They set the bait well.
>
> And Bret's orgininal point about the asshole who confessed and got a
> first class flight. He deserved to be tied up and gagged and thrown in
> the bathroom full of unflushed crap. That is all he deserved. What he
> got was a taste of royalty for a short time, and enough notoriety to
> last a lifetime. Even though he didn't do it, he should be killed for
> even saying that he did. Because the fact that one even thinks such
> thoughts, makes him worthy of permanently being removed from the gene
> pool. I hope his days are numbered and we read one day of some
> mysterious accident or sickness while in jail or when he gets out. I
> will toast to whomever did that when it happens.
>
> To some extent, we deserve what we get with all this child molestation
> crap. My wife's son-in-law is a senior official with the federal
> probation department and they cannot keep up with the caseload for
> these offenders. We let them out, they do it again. They are stalking
> all over the internet, and even though the odds are high of getting
> entrapped, they are more than willing to take the risk, because they
> are so fucking ill. If we took every one of these offenders and threw
> them into a pool of starved alligators and made a public spectacle of
> it, I am certain we would see very few of these offenses in the future.
> But since we do not have the will to do it, and we have liberal,
> sociologist types that see many of these folks of "victums" themselves
> and worthy of public efforts to rehabilitate, we will see many more Jon
> Benet's.
>
> Bret's comments on the surface appear in bad taste, but I will defer to
> him this time that there is a message behind the message.
>
> The Hammer
>
|
| | |
Date: 02 Sep 2006 01:23:31
From: David
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
On 31 Aug 2006 13:48:46 -0700, "The Hammer" <buggertt@yahoo.com >
wrote:
<snipped >
>Bret's comments on the surface appear in bad taste, but I will defer to
>him this time that there is a message behind the message.
And what was the message behind the message when he posted the
following comment: "Her daddy taught her well. She was a swallower?"
You are just one of Bret's bitches.
>The Hammer
David
|
| |
Date: 31 Aug 2006 13:44:34
From: annika1980
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
David wrote:
> Bret, you are simply an asshole.
Can't argue that.
> Not once did you make an apology
> for posting that sick crap, then you end what some of your fans might
> fancy to be an apology with another sick remark about 12 year old
> girls. Placing the blame what happened to that unfortunate girl on
> her parents does not give you the right to make a post like that.
You're right, the Constitution of the good old US of A gives me that
right.
And you're right once again, I do blame the parents. When a situation
like that happens, 11 times out of 10 it's someone in the family
involved.
No apologies will be forthcoming. You must be new here.
> I wonder how Natalie Gulbis would feel about all of the pictures you
> have taken of her and your obvous infatuation of her if she were to
> read what you posted here. Her bodyguards would not let you within
> 100 yards of her because you are obviously a threat.
Natalie Gulbis? Isn't she like 22?
BTW, when I jerk your chain, does it leave a mark?
|
| |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 10:00:57
From: Ben.
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
Chris Bellomy wrote:
> Bret D: The most misunderstood artist since Frank Z.
The next time you even dream of mentioning the verbally ham-fisted Bret
in the same paragraph with FZ, you best wake up and apologize.
I understand the comparison you are reaching for - but it is completely
inaccurate. Bret is trolling for reactionaries. Reactionaries trolled
for FZ. While some of Frank's material was, to the less literate among
us, completely morally bankrupt, Frank was clearly parodying the
molesters, the rapers, the Jewish princesses, the latent homosexual
jocks, and all other manner of sexual/social deviants.
Frank was a genius, musical and otherwise, the likes of which we will
not see in our lifetimes again. For every Usenet clown like Bret,
there are 100 others in 100 different newsgroups.
I think bigoldcat's razor sharp summary of the situation bears
repeating:
"Nothing is funnier than watching a would be clown explain all his
material. It just loses its edge."
Except I would amend it to read "nothing is less funny..."
|
| | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 12:07:09
From: Bobby Knight
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
On 1 Sep 2006 10:00:57 -0700, "Ben." <kombi45@yahoo.com > wrote:
>Frank was a genius, musical and otherwise, the likes of which we will
>not see in our lifetimes again.
Not even close.
|
| | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 20:53:36
From: Ben.
Subject: Re: WAY OT: was (Re: I did JonBenet!)
|
Bobby Knight wrote:
> Zappa just didn't impress me, musically.
Could it possibly be, and hear me out, that you just don't like his
music?!? Maybe not, but from this layperson's persepctive it sure
seemed like Frank was able to write/perform/conduct and train his
musicians to perform in a live environment, some insanely difficult
music.
> What's your handicap? :-)
I don't know, man. I haven't kept an actual index in over a year - I
only play two or three times a month. However, and I'm glad you asked,
this afternoon I shot my career low round of 75. Three birdies on the
front, one on the back - 8 bogeys, though. Was putting lights out, and
short game in general was on fire. But I could just as easily fire a
90 tomorrow...I'll check back in if I play!
|
| | | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 23:01:23
From: Bobby Knight
Subject: Re: WAY OT: was (Re: I did JonBenet!)
|
On 1 Sep 2006 20:53:36 -0700, "Ben." <kombi45@yahoo.com > wrote:
>
>Bobby Knight wrote:
>
>> Zappa just didn't impress me, musically.
>
>Could it possibly be, and hear me out, that you just don't like his
>music?!? Maybe not, but from this layperson's persepctive it sure
>seemed like Frank was able to write/perform/conduct and train his
>musicians to perform in a live environment, some insanely difficult
>music.
>
I can't identify with "training his musicians", since the only ones
that I knew that worked with him were studio players. They don't need
any training. You get them for three hours per date to literally
sight-read your music.
I'm going to end this thread with this, since RSG is definitely the
wrong forum for it.
>> What's your handicap? :-)
>
>I don't know, man. I haven't kept an actual index in over a year - I
>only play two or three times a month. However, and I'm glad you asked,
>this afternoon I shot my career low round of 75. Three birdies on the
>front, one on the back - 8 bogeys, though. Was putting lights out, and
>short game in general was on fire. But I could just as easily fire a
>90 tomorrow...I'll check back in if I play!
That's good shooting.It's been three years since I broke eighty, and
lately I'm having trouble breaking 90. Years, and physical problems,
are taking their toll.
___,
\o
|
| | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 18:59:11
From: Chris Bellomy
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
Ben. <kombi45@yahoo.com > wrote:
>
> Chris Bellomy wrote:
>
>> Bret D: The most misunderstood artist since Frank Z.
>
> The next time you even dream of mentioning the verbally ham-fisted Bret
> in the same paragraph with FZ, you best wake up and apologize.
Oh, lighten up, Ben. (That's what Zappa would say.) Do you
suppose that there may have been a touch of hyperbole in my
little statement? It sorta goes without saying that nobody
does barbed social commentary the way FZ did, but even the
more ham-fisted among us can trigger the same reactions he
did. Reading earnestness into satire is a very common
mistake.
--
Chris Bellomy
C-List Charter Member
http://clist.org/
|
| |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 07:48:20
From: annika1980
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
bigoldcat2@yahoo.com wrote:
> annika1980 wrote:
>
> > When have I backpedaled or denied that my post was in poor taste?
> > I can't help it if some of you are too fuckin stupid to get the real
> > message.
>
> Nothing is funnier than watching a would be clown explain all his
> material. It just loses its edge.
I agree. In future posts I shall endeavor to simply leave them hanging
and guessing.
If my meaning goes over their heads, I'll simply say "Swoosh!"
Then they'll think it's Nike-related.
|
| |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 07:38:16
From:
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
annika1980 wrote:
> When have I backpedaled or denied that my post was in poor taste?
> I can't help it if some of you are too fuckin stupid to get the real
> message.
Nothing is funnier than watching a would be clown explain all his
material. It just loses its edge.
|
| |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 07:34:07
From: annika1980
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
John van der Pflum wrote:
> >>Was someone serious when they said you don't play golf anymore?
> >
> >Yes. That was probably me who said that. But like Jeff George, I'm
> >thinkin about a comeback.
>
> September 16th sounds like a good day to do so.
Yeah, I might play that day just so long as I finish in time for the
Tennessee-Florida game. Did you have any place special in mind where I
should make my comeback?
Anybody else playin any golf that weekend?
|
| | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 20:13:08
From: bill-o
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
On 1-Sep-2006, "annika1980" <annika1980@aol.com > wrote:
> Anybody else playin any golf that weekend?
Well, duh!
--
bill-o
A "gimme" can best be defined as an agreement between
two golfers neither of whom can putt very well.
|
| | |
Date: 02 Sep 2006 20:03:16
From: John van der Pflum
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
On 1 Sep 2006 07:34:07 -0700, "annika1980" <annika1980@aol.com > wrote:
>
>John van der Pflum wrote:
>> >>Was someone serious when they said you don't play golf anymore?
>> >
>> >Yes. That was probably me who said that. But like Jeff George, I'm
>> >thinkin about a comeback.
>>
>> September 16th sounds like a good day to do so.
>
>Yeah, I might play that day just so long as I finish in time for the
>Tennessee-Florida game. Did you have any place special in mind where I
>should make my comeback?
>Anybody else playin any golf that weekend?
Game kicks off at 8:00 PM. Unless you plan on playing an 11 hour
round I think you'd be done in plenty of time.
|
| |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 07:05:02
From: annika1980
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
AKA Gray Asphalt wrote:
> > Now where's my first class flight to Colorado?
>
> You OK? It just doesn't sound like you.
You must be new here.
>Was someone serious when they said you don't play golf anymore?
Yes. That was probably me who said that. But like Jeff George, I'm
thinkin about a comeback.
|
| | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 10:23:29
From: John van der Pflum
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
On 1 Sep 2006 07:05:02 -0700, "annika1980" <annika1980@aol.com > wrote:
>
>AKA Gray Asphalt wrote:
>> > Now where's my first class flight to Colorado?
>>
>> You OK? It just doesn't sound like you.
>
>You must be new here.
>
>>Was someone serious when they said you don't play golf anymore?
>
>Yes. That was probably me who said that. But like Jeff George, I'm
>thinkin about a comeback.
September 16th sounds like a good day to do so.
--
jvdp
The only way to beat me is to make a hole in one
http://www.rsgcincinnati.com
|
| | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 22:50:51
From: AKA Gray Asphalt
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
"annika1980" <annika1980@aol.com > wrote in message
news:1157119502.565682.94560@74g2000cwt.googlegroups.com...
>
> AKA Gray Asphalt wrote:
>> > Now where's my first class flight to Colorado?
>>
>> You OK? It just doesn't sound like you.
>
> You must be new here.
A couple of years but I've changed my name a few times.
>>Was someone serious when they said you don't play golf anymore?
>
> Yes. That was probably me who said that. But like Jeff George, I'm
> thinkin about a comeback.
>
|
| |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 07:02:19
From: annika1980
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
Matt 'Ocho' Aamold wrote:
> "annika1980" <annika1980@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:1157031911.471737.27920@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
> > If you are that concerned with it, I suggest you go bitch slap Mr.
> > Ramsey, who pimped her out. I think anybody who dresses up a 6 year old
> > to try to make them look sexy deserves a good beatin. Parents who do
> > that crap think it's cute until their kid gets molested or even worse.
>
> Attempting to change the subject Bret? What you posted about JonBenet is
> what is at issue here.
No, dumbass, it's just weenies like you who try to turn the real
subject into petty little bitching about someone's posting style. I
think I know what the subject is since I started the thread. The
subject is the JonBenet case, the way it was mishandled, and the events
that led up to it.
|
| | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 15:11:43
From: Chris Bellomy
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
annika1980 <annika1980@aol.com > wrote:
>
> Matt 'Ocho' Aamold wrote:
>> "annika1980" <annika1980@aol.com> wrote in message
>> news:1157031911.471737.27920@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
>> > If you are that concerned with it, I suggest you go bitch slap Mr.
>> > Ramsey, who pimped her out. I think anybody who dresses up a 6 year old
>> > to try to make them look sexy deserves a good beatin. Parents who do
>> > that crap think it's cute until their kid gets molested or even worse.
>>
>> Attempting to change the subject Bret? What you posted about JonBenet is
>> what is at issue here.
>
> No, dumbass, it's just weenies like you who try to turn the real
> subject into petty little bitching about someone's posting style. I
> think I know what the subject is since I started the thread. The
> subject is the JonBenet case, the way it was mishandled, and the events
> that led up to it.
Bret D: The most misunderstood artist since Frank Z.
--
Chris Bellomy
C-List Charter Member
http://clist.org/
|
| | | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 20:55:27
From: Ben.
Subject: Re: WAY OT: was (Re: I did JonBenet!)
|
Chris Bellomy wrote:
> > "Star Wars won't work!"
> >
> > "From the administration that brought you ketchup as a vegetable."
>
> "The Meek Will Inherit Nothing."
Fuck me, I miss him!
|
| | | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 20:43:27
From: Ben.
Subject: Re: WAY OT: was (Re: I did JonBenet!)
|
Chris Bellomy wrote:
> You do, it's just that you don't realize it. Nobody today can
> skewer the president with the precision that Zappa could. Not
> even close.
Amen! My favorite Zappa lines about (the) Reagan (administration):
"Star Wars won't work!"
"From the administration that brought you ketchup as a vegetable."
|
| | | | |
Date: 02 Sep 2006 03:46:49
From: Chris Bellomy
Subject: Re: WAY OT: was (Re: I did JonBenet!)
|
Ben. <kombi45@yahoo.com > wrote:
>
> Chris Bellomy wrote:
>
>> You do, it's just that you don't realize it. Nobody today can
>> skewer the president with the precision that Zappa could. Not
>> even close.
>
> Amen! My favorite Zappa lines about (the) Reagan (administration):
>
> "Star Wars won't work!"
>
> "From the administration that brought you ketchup as a vegetable."
"The Meek Will Inherit Nothing."
--
Chris Bellomy
C-List Charter Member
http://clist.org/
|
| | | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 20:40:10
From: Ben.
Subject: Re: WAY OT: was (Re: I did JonBenet!)
|
Bobby Knight wrote:
> IMO the term genius was applied to his musical abilities in all
> genres. That, flatly, is ridiculous.
WRONG! I said the fact that he was "fluent" in many different genres
was what made him a genius. Failure to comprehend on your part does
not make me wrong. I never stated he was a genius in every genre I
mentioned.
> >
> >But yeah, he was pretty far from Ellington and Armstrong as
> >a musical genius, you win that point without argument.
> >
> That WAS the argument.
Again, you greatly misunderstood the point - I said he was a genius and
stated why I thought so - I never said that he was a genius on the
musical level of those men. He was a genius for reasons I have
mentioned including business, leadership, social satire, creativity,
and yes, MUSIC!
> >FZ's genius was in his social commentary. I wouldn't go so
> >far as to compare him outright to Mark Twain, but he did
> >operate in a similar sardonic vein, using a musical medium
> >that insured that he got reach that was both wide and
> >immediate. His presence in today's sociopolitical climate
> >really is sorely missed. :(
>
> I don't miss it at all. :-)
Being the good Dem you are, I find that hard to believe!
|
| | | | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 22:55:26
From: Bobby Knight
Subject: Re: WAY OT: was (Re: I did JonBenet!)
|
On 1 Sep 2006 20:40:10 -0700, "Ben." <kombi45@yahoo.com > wrote:
>
>Bobby Knight wrote:
>
>> IMO the term genius was applied to his musical abilities in all
>> genres. That, flatly, is ridiculous.
>
>WRONG! I said the fact that he was "fluent" in many different genres
>was what made him a genius. Failure to comprehend on your part does
>not make me wrong. I never stated he was a genius in every genre I
>mentioned.
Quoted directly from your post at 12:00 today:
>>>>>>Frank was a genius, musical and otherwise, the likes of which we will
>>>>>>not see in our lifetimes again.
>> >
>> >But yeah, he was pretty far from Ellington and Armstrong as
>> >a musical genius, you win that point without argument.
>> >
>> That WAS the argument.
>
>Again, you greatly misunderstood the point - I said he was a genius and
>stated why I thought so - I never said that he was a genius on the
>musical level of those men.
When you say he's a musical genius, you're comparing him to them.
>He was a genius for reasons I have
>mentioned including business, leadership, social satire, creativity,
>and yes, MUSIC!
>
I won't argue about anything but his music.
>> > His presence in today's sociopolitical climate
>> >really is sorely missed. :(
>>
>> I don't miss it at all. :-)
>
>Being the good Dem you are, I find that hard to believe!
I don't make a good Dem for several reasons. One is that I hate to be
categorized. I'm fiscally conservative, and liberal when it comes to
personal rights.
___,
\o
|
| | | |
Date: 02 Sep 2006 09:27:30
From: Ben.
Subject: Re: WAY OT: was (Re: I did JonBenet!)
|
bigoldcat2@yahoo.com wrote:
> > No I wouldn't, and no I haven't. Much like the people here who take
> > great pains to point out that FZ was not on the levels of Ellington and
> > the like, Phish and Trey Anastasio in general, was not capable of
> > carrying and FZ band's jock on their best day. I liked them immensely
> > in their very early, "theme and composition" years, but you are vastly
> > incorrect in attributing those words to me.
>
> As a loyal mudshark, I've tried to stay out of this, BUT, if someone
> doesn't mention Flo and Eddie, I shall scream.
Ah listen, that only goes to show you once again that
Aaaaaaaaaaaaaa mountain is something
you don't wanna fuck with
You don't wanna fuck with
Don't fuck around
Don't fuck around
Don't fuck with Billy, no
And don't fuck with Ethel
You saw what just happened
To the guy with the flies
Don't fuck around
Don't fuck around
Don't fuck around
Don't fuck around
Don't fuck around
Don't fuck around
Don't fuck around
|
| | | |
Date: 02 Sep 2006 07:45:20
From:
Subject: Re: WAY OT: was (Re: I did JonBenet!)
|
Ben. wrote:
> sjh wrote:
>
> > It's just OTT fans with a freakin' boner. Ben would, and has, said the
> > same type of stuff about the group "Phish."
>
> No I wouldn't, and no I haven't. Much like the people here who take
> great pains to point out that FZ was not on the levels of Ellington and
> the like, Phish and Trey Anastasio in general, was not capable of
> carrying and FZ band's jock on their best day. I liked them immensely
> in their very early, "theme and composition" years, but you are vastly
> incorrect in attributing those words to me.
As a loyal mudshark, I've tried to stay out of this, BUT, if someone
doesn't mention Flo and Eddie, I shall scream.
|
| | | |
Date: 02 Sep 2006 07:31:30
From: Ben.
Subject: Re: WAY OT: was (Re: I did JonBenet!)
|
sjh wrote:
> It's just OTT fans with a freakin' boner. Ben would, and has, said the
> same type of stuff about the group "Phish."
No I wouldn't, and no I haven't. Much like the people here who take
great pains to point out that FZ was not on the levels of Ellington and
the like, Phish and Trey Anastasio in general, was not capable of
carrying and FZ band's jock on their best day. I liked them immensely
in their very early, "theme and composition" years, but you are vastly
incorrect in attributing those words to me.
|
| | | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 23:52:00
From: sjh
Subject: Re: WAY OT: was (Re: I did JonBenet!)
|
Bobby Knight wrote:
> On 2 Sep 2006 03:23:32 GMT, Chris Bellomy <puevf@tbbqfubj.arg.invalid>
> wrote:
>
> >Bobby Knight <bknight@conramp.net> wrote:
> >
> >> I just wanted the thread to change, and I don't profess to be a
> >> genius. I don't know what your profession is, but I wouldn't deign to
> >> argue with you in an area where your expertise lies. You might want
> >> to think about that regarding my background in music.
> >
> >You're a satirist? I had no idea!
> WTF?
> >
> >Oh, that's not what you meant... hmm, then maybe you're not
> >qualified to comment on FZ, whose genius was more literary
> >than musical. He does get credit for not being content to
> >write everything in I-IV-V and I-vi-IV-V 4/4 progressions,
> >though. (To put it lightly.)
>
> IMO the term genius was applied to his musical abilities in all
> genres. That, flatly, is ridiculous.
It's just OTT fans with a freakin' boner. Ben would, and has, said the
same type of stuff about the group "Phish." Sure they are above the
typical 3 chord band, but it's just high scale rock and nothing more.
In the case of Zappa he might have brought in a vibe player (or 'bone
player) here and there that was a good jazz musician, but that doesn't
give him the credit. So did the Beatles and countless others before
them.
I have much of Zappa's stuff and enjoy his arrangments, I recognize
that it's superior to REO Speedwagon nonsense around that time. But I
can't tell you how many times I heard zealots in high school try to
tell me that full orchestras attempted to play his music but were
unable to because it was too complicated. Gimme a break, it was good
but not that good.
(Besides, even Bobby can do it... :)
|
| | | |
Date: 05 Sep 2006 09:01:59
From: sjh
Subject: Re: WAY OT: was (Re: I did JonBenet!)
|
Ben. wrote:
> sjh wrote:
>
> > It's just OTT fans with a freakin' boner. Ben would, and has, said the
> > same type of stuff about the group "Phish."
>
> No I wouldn't, and no I haven't. Much like the people here who take
> great pains to point out that FZ was not on the levels of Ellington and
> the like, Phish and Trey Anastasio in general, was not capable of
> carrying and FZ band's jock on their best day. I liked them immensely
> in their very early, "theme and composition" years, but you are vastly
> incorrect in attributing those words to me.
Referring to the Duval/Phish post.
I recalled "best in the world being" attributed to Phish.
Perhaps it was best in the world "at their style" or such.
|
| | | | |
Date: 05 Sep 2006 21:29:37
From: AKA Gray Asphalt
Subject: Jon Benet
|
It's a little confusing but when the comment about 'doing Jon Benet' was
first posted it seemed extremely insensitive but as time passes it seems to
be more directed at the injustice of the whole fiasco of a guy saying he did
it and getting attention when he was obviously a nut case ... but at the
time of the posting most of us thought he really might have been guilty ...
maybe it was the timing or maybe just that the OP understood the situation
better than me, but it sure doesn't seem so inappropriate now. To me it
seemed like the OP was mocking those who were close to Jon Benet, now it
doesn't seem that way at all.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 06 Sep 2006 05:39:35
From: Chris S
Subject: Re: Jon Benet
|
"AKA Gray Asphalt" <goodidea1950@hotmail.spam.com > wrote in message
news:yesLg.2386$nL2.909@fed1read02...
>
> It's a little confusing but when the comment about 'doing Jon Benet' was
> first posted it seemed extremely insensitive but as time passes it seems
> to be more directed at the injustice of the whole fiasco of a guy saying
> he did it and getting attention when he was obviously a nut case ... but
> at the time of the posting most of us thought he really might have been
> guilty ... maybe it was the timing or maybe just that the OP understood
> the situation better than me, but it sure doesn't seem so inappropriate
> now. To me it seemed like the OP was mocking those who were close to Jon
> Benet, now it doesn't seem that way at all.
>
>
>
OP sat at his keyboard wondering what shocking thing he could post on that
day and dug something up out of his pea brain to do that. Then, when the
outrage rightfully came, he backpedaled. Typical, and sad.
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 06 Sep 2006 10:09:12
From: AKA Gray Asphalt
Subject: Re: Jon Benet
|
"Chris S" <golfzlf@coxyahoo.com > wrote in message
news:bkzLg.3393$TA5.3213@fed1read09...
>
> "AKA Gray Asphalt" <goodidea1950@hotmail.spam.com> wrote in message
> news:yesLg.2386$nL2.909@fed1read02...
>>
>> It's a little confusing but when the comment about 'doing Jon Benet' was
>> first posted it seemed extremely insensitive but as time passes it seems
>> to be more directed at the injustice of the whole fiasco of a guy saying
>> he did it and getting attention when he was obviously a nut case ... but
>> at the time of the posting most of us thought he really might have been
>> guilty ... maybe it was the timing or maybe just that the OP understood
>> the situation better than me, but it sure doesn't seem so inappropriate
>> now. To me it seemed like the OP was mocking those who were close to Jon
>> Benet, now it doesn't seem that way at all.
>>
>>
>>
> OP sat at his keyboard wondering what shocking thing he could post on that
> day and dug something up out of his pea brain to do that. Then, when the
> outrage rightfully came, he backpedaled. Typical, and sad.
That is sort of true, but you don't really know what is in someone's mind.
What you say seems reasonable, but it wasn't any different that many many
posts on a bunch of different ngs. Why this got so much anger was what makes
me wonder. And that it came from a guy who is a regular and one, who I for
one, whose posts I find educational and entertaining, not that they are
exceptionsl, but among those that I'm glad to see.
For me the raw nerves that accompany some things that happen ... if someone
had written a similar post about 911, there would have been a similar
reaction. And still now. What was surprising is how much pain is still
evident regarding Jon Benet. Maybe part of is is that the mother died
recently without knowing what happened and who killed her daughter ...
anyway, maybe it is a little like the assassination of Kennedy. You hear
jokes every once in a while about Lincoln (besides that how did you like the
play?, eg) but you will probably never hear a joke about John Kennedy's
assassination, well not in my lifetime anyway.
I should get off of this because enough has been said. I like to talk about
off topic subjects here though, because we're not like a fringe group
focusing on politics or some similarly focused 'issues' group and we're more
representative of life in general, imo.
Sorry to add more heat to this discussion, if I did.
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 06 Sep 2006 08:00:53
From: Bobby Knight
Subject: Re: Jon Benet
|
On Wed, 6 Sep 2006 05:39:35 -0700, "Chris S" <golfzlf@coxyahoo.com >
wrote:
>
>"AKA Gray Asphalt" <goodidea1950@hotmail.spam.com> wrote in message
>news:yesLg.2386$nL2.909@fed1read02...
>>
>> It's a little confusing but when the comment about 'doing Jon Benet' was
>> first posted it seemed extremely insensitive but as time passes it seems
>> to be more directed at the injustice of the whole fiasco of a guy saying
>> he did it and getting attention when he was obviously a nut case ... but
>> at the time of the posting most of us thought he really might have been
>> guilty ... maybe it was the timing or maybe just that the OP understood
>> the situation better than me, but it sure doesn't seem so inappropriate
>> now. To me it seemed like the OP was mocking those who were close to Jon
>> Benet, now it doesn't seem that way at all.
>>
>>
>>
>OP sat at his keyboard wondering what shocking thing he could post on that
>day and dug something up out of his pea brain to do that. Then, when the
>outrage rightfully came, he backpedaled. Typical, and sad.
>
I'm with Asphalt on this one. Annika's satirical statement was
obvious, at least to some. "Where's my first class ticket to
Colorado" pointed out his doubts about Karr's "confession".
The crowd mentality didn't even take a wait and see attitude, they
just called for drawing and quartering a publicity seeker, and didn't
see through the false statement.
Annika's perspicacity was right on.
___,
\o
|
| | | |
Date: 06 Sep 2006 07:02:56
From: annika1980
Subject: Re: Jon Benet
|
bigoldcat2@yahoo.com wrote:
> I'm just waiting for him to remember that Steve Irwin had a young
> daughter.
Crikey!
Steve Irwin probably never dressed up his daughter to make her look
sexy, paraded her around in beauty pageants for 6-year olds, or pimped
her out to perverts.
The Ramsey's intentions were clear from Day 1. Who names their kid
"Jon Benet" anyway?
|
| | | |
Date: 06 Sep 2006 06:53:57
From:
Subject: Re: Jon Benet
|
Chris S wrote:
> "AKA Gray Asphalt" <goodidea1950@hotmail.spam.com> wrote in message
> news:yesLg.2386$nL2.909@fed1read02...
> >
> > It's a little confusing but when the comment about 'doing Jon Benet' was
> > first posted it seemed extremely insensitive but as time passes it seems
> > to be more directed at the injustice of the whole fiasco of a guy saying
> > he did it and getting attention when he was obviously a nut case ... but
> > at the time of the posting most of us thought he really might have been
> > guilty ... maybe it was the timing or maybe just that the OP understood
> > the situation better than me, but it sure doesn't seem so inappropriate
> > now. To me it seemed like the OP was mocking those who were close to Jon
> > Benet, now it doesn't seem that way at all.
> >
> >
> >
> OP sat at his keyboard wondering what shocking thing he could post on that
> day and dug something up out of his pea brain to do that. Then, when the
> outrage rightfully came, he backpedaled. Typical, and sad.
I'm just waiting for him to remember that Steve Irwin had a young
daughter.
|
| | | |
Date: 06 Sep 2006 06:50:20
From: annika1980
Subject: Re: Jon Benet
|
Chris S wrote:
> OP sat at his keyboard wondering what shocking thing he could post on that
> day and dug something up out of his pea brain to do that. Then, when the
> outrage rightfully came, he backpedaled. Typical, and sad.
When did I backpedal? OK, I fucked her!
|
| | | | |
Date: 06 Sep 2006 07:43:20
From: Chris S
Subject: Re: Jon Benet
|
"annika1980" <annika1980@aol.com > wrote in message
news:1157550620.137606.169960@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> Chris S wrote:
>> OP sat at his keyboard wondering what shocking thing he could post on
>> that
>> day and dug something up out of his pea brain to do that. Then, when the
>> outrage rightfully came, he backpedaled. Typical, and sad.
>
> When did I backpedal? OK, I fucked her!
>
Someone needs to lock your keyboard.
|
| | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 20:29:33
From: Ben.
Subject: Re: WAY OT: was (Re: I did JonBenet!)
|
Bobby Knight wrote:
> <clip obvious copying of zappa hype>
"Copying"? Not sure what you mean - that was purely original hype.
> He wasn't a genius.
Please show me which of these criteria, taken from dictionary.com, FZ
particularly wasn't:
1. an exceptional natural capacity of intellect, especially as shown in
creative and original work in science, art, music, etc.: the genius of
Mozart.
If you want to deny that FZ was a unique and creative force in the
world of music from the mid 60's to the late 80's, you are entitled to
your opinion. You would be wrong, but you are certainly entitled to
think such.
2. a person having such capacity.
Not sure what this one means - I'm not all that bright.
3. a person having an extraordinarily high intelligence rating on a
psychological test, as an IQ above 140.
I don't know if he did or not, I'm going over to
alt.music.fan.frank-zappa to pose this very question.
4. natural ability or capacity; strong inclination: a special genius
for leadership.
You can deny this, too, BK. But Frank not only employed and led some
of the most elite popular musicians, he mentored them and was a
springboard to some of the most successful acts in the history of
popular music: Missing Persons/Duran Duran (Patrick O'Hearn, Warren
Cucarullo, and Terry Bozzio), Adrian Belew (of David Bowie/King Crimson
fame) - FZ literally discovered and mentored him, Steve Vai, Chad
Wackerman, Lowell George of Little Feat, Jean Luc Ponty, and the list
goes on and on.
(As an aside, you should be proud that Frank let you in the studio with
him - FZ did not suffer fools/incompetents gladly or for more than a
few minutes. But I still want to know from you when/how you worked for
him. He was meticulous about crediting musicians in his liner notes.
Was it the 60's, was it the 70's? Who else was in the band? What type
of music was it? Surely you know the general time frame...)
5. distinctive character or spirit, as of a nation, period, or
language.
Frank was most certainly this. His esoteric nomenclature, and
conceptual continuity was of undeniable and peculiar intellect.
> I just wanted the thread to change, and I don't profess to be a
> genius. I don't know what your profession is, but I wouldn't deign to
> argue with you in an area where your expertise lies. You might want
> to think about that regarding my background in music.
I'm not arguing with you about your background in music or even music -
I readily concede you have forgotten more about music than I will
probably ever know. What we are discussing, at the root level, is
whether Frank Zappa was a genius. From your perspective, he wasn't.
>From mine he was. I'm sure we can put this to rest empirically over at
alt.music.fan.frank-zappa. I've already started a thread requesting
his actual IQ.
|
| | | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 22:45:21
From: Bobby Knight
Subject: Re: WAY OT: was (Re: I did JonBenet!)
|
On 1 Sep 2006 20:29:33 -0700, "Ben." <kombi45@yahoo.com > wrote:
>(As an aside, you should be proud that Frank let you in the studio with
>him - FZ did not suffer fools/incompetents gladly or for more than a
>few minutes. But I still want to know from you when/how you worked for
>him. He was meticulous about crediting musicians in his liner notes.
>Was it the 60's, was it the 70's? Who else was in the band? What type
>of music was it? Surely you know the general time frame...)
Well, it was over thirty years ago. I remember that it was at
Capitol, and that I sat next to Lew McCrary. Tedesco was there, and I
think that Chuck Bergohfer was too. It was a big group...otherwise I
wouldn't have been on the call. I wasn't a rhythm player.
>I'm not arguing with you about your background in music or even music -
>I readily concede you have forgotten more about music than I will
>probably ever know. What we are discussing, at the root level, is
>whether Frank Zappa was a genius. From your perspective, he wasn't.
>>From mine he was. I'm sure we can put this to rest empirically over at
>alt.music.fan.frank-zappa. I've already started a thread requesting
>his actual IQ.
Boy. I'm sure that you'll get a unbiased opinion from that news
group. Sorta like checking in on the Ellington, or Kenton, groups;
all roses, no thorns.
The definition of genius from the dictionary is pretty wide too.
Frankly, I think of those who are genius to be above the level of
whatever number is applied to IQ. For instance, Mensa suggests that
one have an IQ of genius to be a member. Ever been to a Mensa
meeting? They ain't pushing Einstein, or Mozart.
Zappa just didn't impress me, musically. I worked with the best in
the world, and he just doesn't come to mind in that regard. As we
both have agreed, this is a matter of opinion. Neither of us is
going to change.
What's your handicap? :-)
___,
\o
|
| | | | |
Date: 02 Sep 2006 03:48:55
From: Chris Bellomy
Subject: Re: WAY OT: was (Re: I did JonBenet!)
|
Bobby Knight <bknight@conramp.net > wrote:
> Zappa just didn't impress me, musically. I worked with the best in
> the world, and he just doesn't come to mind in that regard.
FWIW, I'm 98% certain that Zappa would agree with you on this,
and mean it. He at least was smart enough to know how limited
his musical vocabulary really was. In popular music, that degree
of self-awareness is sadly unusual.
--
Chris Bellomy
C-List Charter Member
http://clist.org/
|
| | |
Date: 02 Sep 2006 00:20:05
From: Matt 'Ocho' Aamold
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
"annika1980" <annika1980@aol.com > wrote in message
news:1157119339.578151.245830@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
> No, dumbass, it's just weenies like you who try to turn the real
> subject into petty little bitching about someone's posting style. I
> think I know what the subject is since I started the thread. The
> subject is the JonBenet case, the way it was mishandled, and the events
> that led up to it.
again your post was in poor taste and people have called you on it. Now you
are trying to defend yourself instead of admitting that you were wrong.
BTW....The free speech clause to which you refer to means that the
government cannot go after you for talking bad about the government - It
does not protect you from saying whatever the hell you want to anyone or
about anyone, read a little would ya?
|
| | | |
Date: 02 Sep 2006 01:46:55
From: AKA Gray Asphalt
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
It seems to me that most people in life want to do something important for
mankind. Most of us can't find something that is really useful to do with
our lives. That is unfortunate and I have that diseaze myself ... wannabe
everything from dor to volunteer toilet cleaner. It is also unfortuneate
that I, and others, substitute doing good things ... substitute getting 'bad
guys' for doing good things. It makes us feel good to attack someone we
think of as a bad guy, but it really doesn't feel that good because we know
the bad guy isn't really a bad guy. I guess this is really that relevant to
the JonBenet post, but the idea has been eating at me and this is the first
time I've had the excuse to post it anywhere. I wish we all could do
something valuable. Imo, it's not from a lack of trying or caring.
"Matt 'Ocho' Aamold" <maamold@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:ALCdnXeEhJQKr2TZnZ2dnUVZ_o6dnZ2d@comcast.com...
> "annika1980" <annika1980@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:1157119339.578151.245830@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
>> No, dumbass, it's just weenies like you who try to turn the real
>> subject into petty little bitching about someone's posting style. I
>> think I know what the subject is since I started the thread. The
>> subject is the JonBenet case, the way it was mishandled, and the events
>> that led up to it.
>
> again your post was in poor taste and people have called you on it. Now
> you are trying to defend yourself instead of admitting that you were
> wrong. BTW....The free speech clause to which you refer to means that the
> government cannot go after you for talking bad about the government - It
> does not protect you from saying whatever the hell you want to anyone or
> about anyone, read a little would ya?
>
|
| |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 06:54:53
From: annika1980
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
Matt 'Ocho' Aamold wrote:
> I don't need a committee to tell me brets post was poor taste
And your point?
|
| |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 06:53:42
From: annika1980
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
Chris S wrote:
> > Attempting to change the subject Bret? What you posted about JonBenet is
> > what is at issue here.
> >
> Isn't that the way things are done here?? Make a completely idiotic post,
> and then backpeddle when the outrage starts and try to deflect the point
> that it was in incredibly poor taste.
When have I backpedaled or denied that my post was in poor taste?
I can't help it if some of you are too fuckin stupid to get the real
message.
|
| | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 08:00:09
From: Chris S
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
"annika1980" <annika1980@aol.com > wrote in message
news:1157118822.136641.231540@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
>
> Chris S wrote:
>> > Attempting to change the subject Bret? What you posted about JonBenet
>> > is
>> > what is at issue here.
>> >
>> Isn't that the way things are done here?? Make a completely idiotic
>> post,
>> and then backpeddle when the outrage starts and try to deflect the point
>> that it was in incredibly poor taste.
>
> When have I backpedaled or denied that my post was in poor taste?
> I can't help it if some of you are too fuckin stupid to get the real
> message.
>
Got the message, just was no need to do that here. Pontificating behind
your keyboard again. What a fucking moron. (your words.)
|
| | |
Date: 02 Sep 2006 00:03:28
From: Matt 'Ocho' Aamold
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
"annika1980" <annika1980@aol.com > wrote in message
news:1157118822.136641.231540@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
> When have I backpedaled or denied that my post was in poor taste?
> I can't help it if some of you are too fuckin stupid to get the real
> message.
What kind of backup alarm do you have on your garbage truck. You
backpedaled when you changed the subject to JonBenet's parents from your
originally bad taste post about JonBenet.
|
| |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 06:47:13
From: Birdie Bill
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
The Hammer wrote:
> So
> why the Ramseys did not DESERVE what happened to their daughter, they
> are COMPLICIT in what happened to her. If they just would have let
> her be a little girl, and get dirty and hang around friends and just be
> a kid for God sakes, none of this would have ever happened. I agree
> with Bret here, there was nothing particularly "cute" about what the
> Ramseys did with their daughter, it was outright perverse. They are
> every bit as fucking disgusting as the animal that killed their
> daughter. They set the bait well.
Sorry Eric, but I have to call BS on both you and Bret. Total Crap.
These pagents are nothing more than talent shows. No different than
having your kid compete in gymnastics, or swimming, or even softball.
If you see it somehow erotic, or perverse, it speaks volumes to
your own problems.
|
| | |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 08:17:42
From: glfnaz
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!--OT
|
"Birdie Bill" <bighorn_bill@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:1157118432.980424.274670@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
> The Hammer wrote:
>> So
>> why the Ramseys did not DESERVE what happened to their daughter, they
>> are COMPLICIT in what happened to her. If they just would have let
>> her be a little girl, and get dirty and hang around friends and just be
>> a kid for God sakes, none of this would have ever happened. I agree
>> with Bret here, there was nothing particularly "cute" about what the
>> Ramseys did with their daughter, it was outright perverse. They are
>> every bit as fucking disgusting as the animal that killed their
>> daughter. They set the bait well.
>
> Sorry Eric, but I have to call BS on both you and Bret. Total Crap.
> These pagents are nothing more than talent shows. No different than
> having your kid compete in gymnastics, or swimming, or even softball.
> If you see it somehow erotic, or perverse, it speaks volumes to
> your own problems.
>
Mostly agree.
They are talent shows, nothing different than my daughter wearing skimpy
stuff today in her volleyball match at school. Bad guys know where to find
young targets. It isn't the parents fault if they take reasonable cautions.
I know a bit more about this subject than many here.
Both of my kids are victims, when they were 3 and 5. ---6 Felony 2's in
about 1 hour. From a babysitter we had known for 12 years. They survived,
but they still suffer symptoms.
Here's some facts I've learned from professional counselors.--
1) It's learned behavior. 95% of all people who rape kids were raped
themselves as kids.
2) In most all cases, parents used reasonable care to protect the child, but
the bad guy stalked and waited for his 'window of chance' to open before he
strikes. They earn family trust. This is why a huge % of all child rapes are
done by people who already know the child, often relatives / neighbors.
Personally I don't think Bret meant any harm. He was joking as usual.
|
| |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 03:04:59
From: AKA Gray Asphalt
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
"annika1980" <annika1980@aol.com > wrote in message
news:1156962503.179450.288510@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
> Now where's my first class flight to Colorado?
You OK? It just doesn't sound like you. I don't know you but I respect what
I've seen and look forward to what you post. Was someone serious when they
said you don't play golf anymore?
|
| |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 19:57:50
From: Thor
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
long&left wrote:
> Matt 'Ocho' Aamold wrote:
> > "long&left" <nospam@diespammers.com> wrote in message
> > news:hHMJg.238$pe2.74@newsfe05.lga...
> >
> >
> >>so, you're officially HB Bob now rather than Rancho Bob?
> >>:)
> >
> >
> > Butter Bob
> >
> >
>
> as in smooth? or, maybe slick?? I'll be on the golf course with Butter
> Bob a week from today :)
Ewww.
|
| |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 19:47:44
From: Ben.
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
Chris Bellomy wrote:
> Oh, lighten up, Ben. (That's what Zappa would say.) Do you
> suppose that there may have been a touch of hyperbole in my
> little statement? It sorta goes without saying that nobody
> does barbed social commentary the way FZ did, but even the
> more ham-fisted among us can trigger the same reactions he
> did. Reading earnestness into satire is a very common
> mistake.
Zappa would probably say a lot worse that lighten up. However, there
was quite a bit of hyperbole in my rejoinder, as well. So, FUCK YOU,
CB!!!
|
| | |
Date: 02 Sep 2006 03:02:56
From: Chris Bellomy
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
Ben. <kombi45@yahoo.com > wrote:
>
> Chris Bellomy wrote:
>
>> Oh, lighten up, Ben. (That's what Zappa would say.) Do you
>> suppose that there may have been a touch of hyperbole in my
>> little statement? It sorta goes without saying that nobody
>> does barbed social commentary the way FZ did, but even the
>> more ham-fisted among us can trigger the same reactions he
>> did. Reading earnestness into satire is a very common
>> mistake.
>
> Zappa would probably say a lot worse that lighten up. However, there
> was quite a bit of hyperbole in my rejoinder, as well. So, FUCK YOU,
> CB!!!
Oh yeah?
I'm gonna tell you the way it is
And I'm not gonna be kind or easy
Your whole attitude stinks I say
And the live you lead is completely empty
Paint your head
Your mind is dead
You don't even know what I just said
HAHAHAHAHA I BET YOUR FEELING PRETTY STUPID RIGHT NOW >
--
Chris Bellomy
C-List Charter Member
http://clist.org/
|
| |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 15:56:04
From: Tex
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
Dene wrote:
> Tex wrote:
> > Dene wrote:
> > > What's your excuse for being the drunken pig you've become?
> >
> > And yet, with a personality such as yours, you'd want us to believe you
> > are generally nice person.
> >
> > I'm glad you spoke again to once again remove all doubt.
> >
> > Tex
>
> Didn't think you could answer the question.
Why bother with your drivel...You are entitled to your opinion, which,
like most assholes, stinks.
Tex
|
| |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 14:05:48
From: Dene
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
Tex wrote:
> Dene wrote:
> > What's your excuse for being the drunken pig you've become?
>
> And yet, with a personality such as yours, you'd want us to believe you
> are generally nice person.
>
> I'm glad you spoke again to once again remove all doubt.
>
> Tex
Didn't think you could answer the question.
-Greg
|
| |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 11:45:01
From:
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
annika1980 wrote:
> bigoldcat2@yahoo.com wrote:
> > annika1980 wrote:
> >
> > > When have I backpedaled or denied that my post was in poor taste?
> > > I can't help it if some of you are too fuckin stupid to get the real
> > > message.
> >
> > Nothing is funnier than watching a would be clown explain all his
> > material. It just loses its edge.
>
> I agree. In future posts I shall endeavor to simply leave them hanging
> and guessing.
> If my meaning goes over their heads, I'll simply say "Swoosh!"
> Then they'll think it's Nike-related.
Why not lean back and smile the all knowing smile? I'm amazed when
someone gets what I'm saying, as I've learned not to expect much from
the masses.
|
| |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 11:24:38
From: Dene
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
annika1980 wrote:
> Nomen Nescio wrote:
> >
> > That explains why no semen was found.
>
> Her daddy taught her well. She was a swallower.
Bret,
I get the message behind the message, but if you were the father of a
little girl, you would not/could not post this.
-Greg
|
| |
Date: 01 Sep 2006 11:22:18
From: Dene
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
Tex wrote:
> David, you should know by now Annika loves to post things for "shock
> and awe"....he gets off on "sticking it to ya". Much like his dear old
> Dad used to "stick it to him".
> You will also find out soon enough, his skin is not nearly as thick as
> he's made everyone believe, most likely from all the beatings his Dad
> gave him as a child.
Some advice. How about organizing your few remaining brain cells and
come up with a new one. Let's presume that Bret had an abusive father.
He's recovered, in that he's a good man with a solid marriage and a
contributor to society.
What's your excuse for being the drunken pig you've become?
> So do yourself a favor, ignore most of his "shock and awe" as a stunt
> to get attention and do recognize that when he was playing golf, he did
> have game and does understand the game. He's probably just bored now
> that he's not playing anymore.
"Shock and awe" describes your posting history. Drunk and dumb are
even more accurate descriptors.
-Greg
|
| |
Date: 02 Sep 2006 05:25:43
From: Thor
Subject: Re: I did JonBenet!
|
bill-o wrote:
> On 1-Sep-2006, "annika1980" <annika1980@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > Anybody else playin any golf that weekend?
>
> Well, duh!
I'll check my calendar.
-- Thor
|
|
