Claudia Christian: most hated woman in scifi?
Bosch
The reason I ask this is because she's manage to alienate both major
fandoms. B5 fans hate her for obvious reasons: she left the show and
went down running her mouth. Some may not have liked her acting, such
as I. Christian's acting is ungodly. She strains to make the most
basic appearance of "frustration" work, and that's her good side.
Trek fans hate her because, well, she's with the enemy or something, and
she made numerous disparaging remarks about the franchise in the past,
including that making of B5 book, where she said Trek was stupid and
dead among other well-"argued" things.
Any thoughts on this? I thought not...
Ted from Brooklyn
Your posts are beginning to remind me of the old Lawyer line, "So how long
have you been beating your wife?"
This, too, is a loaded question. Besides, if you think this woman is hated
(I do not; she's done no wrong by me), then just mention Teri Garr to Trek
fans...
Bosch <ga...@sprynet.com> wrote in article
<356EF95A...@sprynet.com>...
Ted from Brooklyn
Whn she appeared in a TOS episode as the secretary to Gary Seven, she
garnered instant raves from the fanbase. Later, when conventions started
to appear, she was requested, and flatly refused. Later still, on Carson,
she was asked about her appearance on Trek, and muttered something back
along the lines of she never talks about that, it was the darkest part of
her career, the S-F fans are just creepy, etc. Totally dissed the facty
that she had basically no career before that - she took off afterwards. So
much for gratitude.
The fan reaction was swift and severe, albeit not as wide or long
remembered (obviously) as the Get a Life bit.
Brian Barjenbruch <bri...@home.com> wrote in article
<brianb1-2905...@cx31002-a.omhaw1.ne.home.com>...
> > then just mention Teri Garr to Trek fans...
>
> What about her?
>
> Brian
>
David M. Sueme
On Fri, 29 May 1998 13:07:22 -0500, Bosch <ga...@sprynet.com> wrote:
>The reason I ask this is because she's manage to alienate both major
>fandoms. B5 fans hate her for obvious reasons:
Pardon me for not following the B5 group every day, but last time I
checked the consensus was "break a leg" - that's a joke buddy. It
means best of luck. B-5 presents a dog-eat-dog universe, Claudia
thought she had a chance at a bigger bite. Not going for it wouldn't
be canon!
>Any thoughts on this? I thought not...
Not from you!
Dave
Paul G. Barnes
Ted from Brooklyn wrote about Teri Garr...
>Whn she appeared in a TOS episode as the secretary to Gary Seven, she
>garnered instant raves from the fanbase. Later, when conventions started
>to appear, she was requested, and flatly refused. Later still, on Carson,
>she was asked about her appearance on Trek, and muttered something back
>along the lines of she never talks about that, it was the darkest part of
>her career, the S-F fans are just creepy, etc. Totally dissed the facty
>that she had basically no career before that - she took off afterwards. So
>much for gratitude.
S-F fans *are* just creepy...
When was the last time Kirstie Alley was at a Trek Con? My guess is never.
Do Trek fans hate her too?
--
Paul G. Barnes
paul....@mmc-s.com
remove the dash and change the com to org to email me
"Am a perfectionist and rarely if if ever forget details."
--- Seen on a resume
Ted from Brooklyn
Paul G. Barnes <paul....@mmc-s.com> wrote in article
<H1Fb1.2088$Y2.28...@news2.atl.bellsouth.net>...
> Ted from Brooklyn wrote about Teri Garr...
>
> >Whn she appeared in a TOS episode as the secretary to Gary Seven, she
> >garnered instant raves from the fanbase. Later, when conventions
started
> >to appear, she was requested, and flatly refused. Later still, on
Carson,
> >she was asked about her appearance on Trek, and muttered something back
> >along the lines of she never talks about that, it was the darkest part
of
> >her career, the S-F fans are just creepy, etc. Totally dissed the facty
> >that she had basically no career before that - she took off afterwards.
So
> >much for gratitude.
>
>
> S-F fans *are* just creepy...
>
> When was the last time Kirstie Alley was at a Trek Con? My guess is
never.
> Do Trek fans hate her too?
>
But, but, ... she's a "star."
A *big* star...
Read that any way you like to.
Keary O'Dell
> > When was the last time Kirstie Alley was at a Trek Con? My guess is
> never.
> > Do Trek fans hate her too?
> >
>
> But, but, ... she's a "star."
> A *big* star...
>
> Read that any way you like to.
Kirstie is a Dyanetics whacko, and L. Ron Hubbard's sci-fi and Gene
Roddenberry's don't mix well
WWS
Besides, this header is just all wrong. The most hated fictional
woman in sci-fi is a tie between Cpt Janeway and Lwoxana Troy.
(Janeway's leading because she has annoyed more people lately)
The most hated real woman is Jeri Taylor - even the ST team is
dumping her. (yeah, she says she's resigning for "personal" reasons)
And this is not based on my personal opinion, but on the
volume and tone of the last 6 months of usenet posts. CC
has taken a lot of heat, but had a lot of defenders.
Just take the "Tuvix" threads, on the ST groups as one example.
How many fans are lined up begging Jeri not to go?
--
_______________________________________________________WWS______________________
James D Thompson
WWS wrote:
>
> The most hated real woman is Jeri Taylor - even the ST team is
> dumping her. (yeah, she says she's resigning for "personal" reasons)
But it is a "personal" reason, if she's leaving because nobody likes
her :)
David Thompson
Dirge
WWS wrote:
>
> Besides, this header is just all wrong. The most hated fictional
> woman in sci-fi is a tie between Cpt Janeway and Lwoxana Troy.
> (Janeway's leading because she has annoyed more people lately)
> dumping her. (yeah, she says she's resigning for "personal" reasons)
>
> volume and tone of the last 6 months of usenet posts. CC
> has taken a lot of heat, but had a lot of defenders.
> Just take the "Tuvix" threads, on the ST groups as one example.
> How many fans are lined up begging Jeri not to go?
>
Jeri Taylor! Don't go!
At least Jeri Taylor listens to fans, and tries to put social commentary
into Voyager (usually unsuccessfully -- but that's the price of being a
network show). And when she goes, Braga will be in charge.
Ted.
--
Ted Clancy <s34...@student.uq.edu.au>
President of UQ-Trek, the University of Queensland's Star Trek Club.
Visit the USS-Unique! http://members.tripod.com/~UQTrek/.
recook77
James D Thompson wrote in message <356F68...@inna.net>...
>WWS wrote:
>>
>> The most hated real woman is Jeri Taylor - even the ST team is
>> dumping her. (yeah, she says she's resigning for "personal" reasons)
>
> But it is a "personal" reason, if she's leaving because nobody likes
>her :)
Well, her *staff* appears to think very highly of her. Viewers, OTOH. . .
:)
>
>David Thompson
Gharlane of Eddore
Ted from Brooklyn wrote about Teri Garr...
>
> Whn she appeared in a TOS episode as the secretary to Gary Seven,
> she garnered instant raves from the fanbase. Later, when conventions
> started to appear, she was requested, and flatly refused. Later still,
> on Carson, she was asked about her appearance on Trek, and muttered
> something back along the lines of she never talks about that, it was
> the darkest part of her career, the S-F fans are just creepy, etc.
> Totally dissed the facty that she had basically no career before that
> - she took off afterwards. So much for gratitude.
>
*SHRUG* She owed "TREK" and "Trekkies" no gratitude, since that
appearance did nothing for her career. Referring to it as "the darkest
part of her career" is a hoot, since in point of fact, she *had* no
"career" to speak of at the time, just a string of mostly-uncredited
appearances, or appearances with credit lines like "Third Dancer."
She'd mostly worked as an uncredited dancer and Background Body in the
early sixties, in beach party movies and Elvis movies...
She had a minor role in "JOHN GOLDFARB" in '65, played the part on
'Old Trek' in '66, did another essentially uncredited background part
in a Presley movie in '67, a couple more random uncredited movie parts,
and then two credited appearances in "IT TAKES A THIEF" in 1968.
( Playing a total ditz-o tourist, essentially the same person she'd
played on "TREK," and to be honest, the same part she always plays...)
She got lucky with minor guest-appearance roles in various sitcoms
in the next couple of years, was a background cast regular for
"SONNY & CHER," ( with one featured dance number she and Cher did in
extremely brief Cowgirl Outfits, proving that neither of them could
handle a sixgun without stopping to think... but was fun to watch )
and only *THEN*, around '74, lucked into the beginning of a career....
the german lab assistant in "YOUNG FRANKENSTEIN," which careful
management would parlay into a series of movie roles.
Note that Mel Brooks loves to recycle people, and that you see a lot
of the same faces in his movies... but that Garr would only appear
in one of them. She also got a shot in Coppola's "CONVERSATION"
that year, and then started appearing in movie roles. Her stock
character was normally a ditz housewife, which was fortunately not a
great reach for her somewhat limited thespian capacities.
In later years, the much-heralded "live shower scene" on the Letterman
Show was probably her single greatest publicity boost.
Incidentally, real name is something like Theresa Marie O'Geara,
and do *not* believe the birthdate cited by the IMDB. Her "official"
birthdate spreads all over the 1940's, depending on what source you
check.
Paul G. Barnes <paul....@mmc-s.com> wrote in
<H1Fb1.2088$Y2.28...@news2.atl.bellsouth.net>...
>
> S-F fans *are* just creepy...
>
> When was the last time Kirstie Alley was at a Trek Con?
> My guess is never.
> Do Trek fans hate her too?
>
"Hate?" There are a lot of stories about why she either chose not
to keep playing Saavik, or why the studio dumped her, depending on
who you talk to. The fact of the matter is that as an actress she
was vastly superior to the actress who replaced her, Robin Curtis,
who although a nicer, more coherent person than Alley, needed about
ten years of Actors' Studio training before trying to deliver a line
in public. ( Intriguingly, Curtis had been working in the field
since the early sixties, starting as a kid with one of the soap
operas... She had a couple of undistinguished guest shots in TV shows,
and then lucked into Alley's part in 1984. ) Robin Curtis doesn't
work much, apparently preferring to be a mommy (and the wife of the guy
who probably gets her as many parts as she wants to bother with...)
Curtis had one guest shot on "BABYLON 5" that showed she'd improved
greatly in the previous decade, but she *still* had a tendency to
deliver her lines like a chanted lecture... order-of-magnitude
improvement, though. I'm told she also appeared on "SPACE:
ABYSMAL & BOTCHED," which probably shouldn't be held against her,
since she doesn't know any better.
Most Trekkies don't "hate" Kirstie Alley, just pity her for her
problems with weight, addictive substances, and pigeonholing as
a comedienne; she has a good deal of talent that she'll probably
never get to demonstrate. Most Trekkies don't "hate" Robin Curtis,
since she's a lovely nice lady with a good sense of humor who means
well, and just has somewhat limited acting talent that doesn't get
enough exercise to improve to the level she's capable of achieving.
In <01bd8b46$d387b5e0$5c47...@00a024e8e54a.s-c.com>
"Ted from Brooklyn" <te...@internetMCI.com> writes:
>
> But, but, ... she's a "star."
> A *big* star...
> Read that any way you like to.
>
Yeah, right. A "star." Like "Lina Lamont" in "SINGIN' IN THE RAIN."
*grin*
We're not exactly talking about Fay Dunaway, or even Mary Elizabeth Streep,
here.
We're talking about minor "celebrities," not major talents.
Bosc...@my-dejanews.com
In article <356f1857....@news.ais.net>,
dsu...@ais.net (David M. Sueme) wrote:
>
> On Fri, 29 May 1998 13:07:22 -0500, Bosch <ga...@sprynet.com> wrote:
>
> >The reason I ask this is because she's manage to alienate both major
> >fandoms. B5 fans hate her for obvious reasons:
>
> Pardon me for not following the B5 group every day, but last time I
> checked the consensus was "break a leg" - that's a joke buddy. It
> means best of luck. B-5 presents a dog-eat-dog universe, Claudia
> thought she had a chance at a bigger bite. Not going for it wouldn't
> be canon!
Oh, yes, B5 fans have been sooo kind to her! That's why she's gotten
threatening letters? The fact you'd classifty the entire fandom as liking
her suggests you are in fact a moron. And you know what, I can concede that
some such as you like her without hurting my point at all. A lot of B5 fans
do hate her, and for very good reasons.
>
> >Any thoughts on this? I thought not...
>
> Not from you!
Not from you!
>
> Dave
>
>
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
Bosc...@my-dejanews.com
In article <01bd8b38$c7472580$834b...@00a024e8e54a.s-c.com>,
"Ted from Brooklyn" <te...@internetMCI.com> wrote:
>
> Your posts are beginning to remind me of the old Lawyer line, "So how long
> have you been beating your wife?"
> This, too, is a loaded question. Besides, if you think this woman is hated
> fans...
I don't think it was a loaded question, as I left it open for debate, but I
do think Christian's a lot more hated by Trek fans who know how she feels
about Trek than any hatred these same fans might have toward Teri "nice
knockers" Garr
>
> Bosch <ga...@sprynet.com> wrote in article
> <356EF95A...@sprynet.com>...
> > The reason I ask this is because she's manage to alienate both major
> > fandoms. B5 fans hate her for obvious reasons: she left the show and
> > went down running her mouth. Some may not have liked her acting, such
> > as I. Christian's acting is ungodly. She strains to make the most
> > basic appearance of "frustration" work, and that's her good side.
> >
> > Trek fans hate her because, well, she's with the enemy or something, and
> > she made numerous disparaging remarks about the franchise in the past,
> > including that making of B5 book, where she said Trek was stupid and
> > dead among other well-"argued" things.
> >
> > Any thoughts on this? I thought not...
> >
> >
>
Reverend Sean O'Hara
Keary O'Dell wrote:
>
> Kirstie is a Dyanetics whacko, and L. Ron Hubbard's sci-fi and Gene
> Roddenberry's don't mix well
L Ron Hubbard's scifi fits in with Trek pretty well. It's that kooky
religion of his that doesn't mix with ST. If Hubbard's Mindless
Zombies(TM) give all their money to him, they can hardly spend it on
cheap Trek merchandise, now can they?
--
Reverend Sean O'Hara
You to can be an ordained minister: http://ulc.org/ulc
"There is a concept which corrupts and upsets all others. I refer not to
Evil, whose limited realm is that of ethics; I refer to Teletubbies."
Jorge Luis Borges (paraphrased)
recook77
Bosc...@my-dejanews.com wrote in message
<6kpgb1$ejs$1...@nnrp2.dejanews.com>...
>In article <01bd8b38$c7472580$834b...@00a024e8e54a.s-c.com>,
> "Ted from Brooklyn" <te...@internetMCI.com> wrote:
>>
>> Your posts are beginning to remind me of the old Lawyer line, "So how
long
>> have you been beating your wife?"
>> This, too, is a loaded question. Besides, if you think this woman is
hated
>> (I do not; she's done no wrong by me), then just mention Teri Garr to
Trek
>> fans...
>
>I don't think it was a loaded question, as I left it open for debate, but I
>do think Christian's a lot more hated by Trek fans who know how she feels
>about Trek than any hatred these same fans might have toward Teri "nice
>knockers" Garr
This is my experience, but I have *never* heard a Trekker make any
disparaging remarks about Ms. Christian. Re her comments about Trek: She
admits she's never seen the show, so, IMO, her remarks have no substance.
John David Watker
In article <6kpgb1$ejs$1...@nnrp2.dejanews.com>, Bosc...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>In article <01bd8b38$c7472580$834b...@00a024e8e54a.s-c.com>,
> "Ted from Brooklyn" <te...@internetMCI.com> wrote:
>>
>> Your posts are beginning to remind me of the old Lawyer line, "So how long
>> have you been beating your wife?"
>> This, too, is a loaded question. Besides, if you think this woman is hated
>> (I do not; she's done no wrong by me), then just mention Teri Garr to Trek
>> fans...
>
>I don't think it was a loaded question, as I left it open for debate, but I
>do think Christian's a lot more hated by Trek fans who know how she feels
>about Trek than any hatred these same fans might have toward Teri "nice
>knockers" Garr
Claudia Christian's knockers are just as nice as Teri Garrs! Hell,
their better!
Seriously, I don't hate either of them. Claudia left the series at
the end of the fourth season and it's obvious that she could have left on
better circumstances. I don't care for how she did it, but I don't hate her!
Four seasons of Ivanova are better than none!
As for her remarks about Trek, her opinion! I don't dislike her for
it.
I don't hate Teri Garr for two reasons: 1) I never head the remarks
about her not liking her Trek stint or Trekkers in general. 2) Us Trek fans
are weird and can intimidate someone not prepared for our, let us say, unique
perspective on a certain TV show.
--
John David Watker
e-mail: jdwa...@cybercomm.net
"With the first link, a chain is forged. The first speech censured,
the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us
all irrevocably." -Capt. Jean-Luc Picard "The Drumhead"
recook77
S.Knight wrote in message <6kqats$ees$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>recook77 wrote:
>
>> This is my experience, but I have *never* heard a Trekker make any
>> disparaging remarks about Ms. Christian.
>
>These trekkers probably haven't heard what she said about trek.
>
>> Re her comments about Trek: She admits she's never seen the show,
>> so, IMO, her remarks have no substance.
>
>For someone who's never seen the show, she sure comments on it quite
>frequently.
She certainly is more of an authority on it these days; she is rumored as a
guest star in Star Trek IX.
Morgan le Fee
> Claudia Christian's knockers are just as nice as Teri Garrs! Hell,
>their better!
I would say so! Not to mention the rest of her body woo hoo!!!
S.Knight
recook77 wrote:
> This is my experience, but I have *never* heard a Trekker make any
> disparaging remarks about Ms. Christian.
These trekkers probably haven't heard what she said about trek.
> Re her comments about Trek: She admits she's never seen the show,
> so, IMO, her remarks have no substance.
For someone who's never seen the show, she sure comments on it quite
frequently.
SmkMirrors
>She isn't in the film. The stars are F. Murray Abraham, Anthony Zerbe,
>Donna Murphy, and Quark also makes a cameo appearance. (The 'rumor' is
>that Max Grodenchik will appear but not as Rom.)
Yes, he will play that delightful little chap; Rumplestiltskin.
S.Knight
"recook77" <reco...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> She certainly is more of an authority on it these days; she is rumored as a
> guest star in Star Trek IX.
Indeed, she's also rumored to be on DS9. Where are all these rumors
coming from? I doubt any of them are true.
TMB
Chris and Ben Adams
> >Whn she appeared in a TOS episode as the secretary to Gary Seven, she
> >garnered instant raves from the fanbase. Later, when conventions
started
> >to appear, she was requested, and flatly refused. Later still, on
Carson,
> >she was asked about her appearance on Trek, and muttered something back
> >along the lines of she never talks about that, it was the darkest part
of
> >her career, the S-F fans are just creepy, etc. Totally dissed the facty
> >that she had basically no career before that - she took off afterwards.
So
> >much for gratitude.
>
>
>
> When was the last time Kirstie Alley was at a Trek Con? My guess is
never.
> Do Trek fans hate her too?
Well, yes, but then again, according to Leonard Nimoy, she was replaced as
Saavik because she asked for more money than DeForest Kelley was getting.
Why would she come to a Trek convention? She was in one movie, and then
left the franchise over pay issues. Her departure probably wasn't all that
amicable either.
Let's face facts. A lot of people that Trek fans want to come to
conventions won't, just because they are scared of Trek fans. Hell, I'm a
Trek fan, and I'm scared of a lot of Trek fans.
--
Rev. Christopher Adams
"And therefore, since I cannot prove a lover
To entertain these fair well-spoken days,
I am determined to prove a villain,
And hate the idle pleasures of these days."
Jay Denebeim
In article <6ko0ic$n...@news.csus.edu>,
Gharlane of Eddore <ghar...@ccshp1.ccs.csus.edu> wrote:
>She got lucky with minor guest-appearance roles in various sitcoms
>in the next couple of years, was a background cast regular for
>"SONNY & CHER," ( with one featured dance number she and Cher did in
>extremely brief Cowgirl Outfits, proving that neither of them could
>handle a sixgun without stopping to think... but was fun to watch )
>and only *THEN*, around '74, lucked into the beginning of a career....
>the german lab assistant in "YOUNG FRANKENSTEIN," which careful
>management would parlay into a series of movie roles.
Wow, I actually caught Gharlane missing something about movie
people...
You left out where she played McCloud's girlfriend for a number of
years. I'd say this is what launched her career more than anything
else, it's certainly when I noticed her.
(Yeah, she is a ditz, but I like her anyway)
Jay
--
* Jay Denebeim Moderator rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated *
* newsgroup submission address: b5...@deepthot.ml.org *
* moderator contact address: b5mod-...@deepthot.ml.org *
* personal contact address: dene...@deepthot.ml.org *
Shelley Hatfield
Bosc...@my-dejanews.com wrote in message
>A lot of B5 fans
>do hate her, and for very good reasons.
Because JMS told them to?
John W Kennedy
Dirge wrote:
> Jeri Taylor! Don't go!
>
> At least Jeri Taylor listens to fans, and tries to put social commentary
> into Voyager (usually unsuccessfully -- but that's the price of being a
> network show). And when she goes, Braga will be in charge.
And, if I remember rightly, JMS says she's a personal friend, and that
she could write much better than that if the Paramount suits would only
let her. Heck, maybe he'll let her try "Crusade"!
recook77
John W Kennedy wrote in message <3573267B...@ibm.net>...
I find the above claim very hard to believe. Perhaps she is a good writer,
but she's all wrong for Trek. Wanna lay odds that she *won't* write for
"Crusade"?
>
Robert Cook
ghar...@ccshp1.ccs.csus.edu (Gharlane of Eddore) wrote:
(snip)
>Most Trekkies don't "hate" Kirstie Alley, just pity her for her
>problems with weight, addictive substances, and pigeonholing as
>a comedienne; she has a good deal of talent that she'll probably
>never get to demonstrate.
(snip)
I'll always have a soft spot in my heart for Ms. Alley after that
scene in one of the 'Look Who's Talking' movies. (Gee.. wonder why
they stopped making those :-) In the movie, her character is reduced
to working as the assistant to a shopping mall Santa. She's an 'elf',
complete with the pointed ears. Some brat comes up and starts hassling
her, asking her what she's supposed to be, and she finally snaps,
hissing "I'm a *Vulcan*! Wanna see my death grip?"
Robert M. Cook
co...@sos.net
http://www.sos.net/~cook/index.htm
John David Watker
Anyone who can write "The Drumhead" is a good enough writer for Star
Trek and Crusade. (Though I doubt she will write for it).
Gharlane of Eddore
Dirge wrote:
> Jeri Taylor! Don't go!
>
> At least Jeri Taylor listens to fans, and tries to put social commentary
> into Voyager (usually unsuccessfully -- but that's the price of being a
> network show). And when she goes, Braga will be in charge.
>
The problem with this is, Jeri Taylor only listens to the fans she
can *UNDERSTAND*, and this places something of a cap on the value
of any such suggestions she might choose to attempt to implement.
John W Kennedy wrote in message <3573267B...@ibm.net>...
>
> And, if I remember rightly, JMS says she's a personal friend, and
> that she could write much better than that if the Paramount suits
> would only let her. Heck, maybe he'll let her try "Crusade"!
>
The problem with THIS is that JMS is notoriously loyal to his friends,
and simply will *not* speak ill of anyone he's worked with or for; it
comes under the heading of both professional courtesy and an
enlightened urge not to foul his own nest. He's got enough enemies
now, without gratuitously tweaking noses all over town.
Additionally, since Jeri Taylor was the principal show-runner/honcho
from the outset, if they weren't doing what she wanted, why did she
stay? It's not like she'll ever go hungry!
JMS is on record as thinking Jeri Taylor is a good, skilled writer.
JMS is on record as believing that the "VOYAGER" pilot movie was
good work. JMS is on record publicly complimenting Jeri Taylor
on what a wonderful, impressive job she had done.
Of course, JMS also voted for Bill Clinton, and thinks he's innocent.
JMS is good people, but in some areas he's not real bright.
In <6kvgev$k...@dfw-ixnews4.ix.netcom.com>, "recook77"
<reco...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
> I find the above claim very hard to believe. Perhaps she is a good
> writer, but she's all wrong for Trek. Wanna lay odds that she *won't*
> write for "Crusade"?
>
Note that JMS already had a Centauri Seeress in place, an established
character ( played by the remarkable Fredi Olster ) and that when he
got a chance to hire Majel Barrett to prove to the world that there
was no ill will between B-5 and "TREK," he jumped at the chance, and
wrote her a custom, largely undistinguished, part. If he was willing
to write a custom part for someone he'd just met, I certainly wouldn't
be surprised if he were willing to contract an old friend to write a
script...
In <6kvlpj$che$1...@ostrich.cybercomm.net> jdwa...@cybercomm.net
(John David Watker) writes:
>
> Anyone who can write "The Drumhead" is a good enough writer for Star
> Trek and Crusade. (Though I doubt she will write for it).
>
"THE DRUMHEAD?" The episode that established that Star Fleet has
learned *nothing* from the past, the episode that established that
"enlisted" members of the crew (I thought they were all officer
equivalents?) are somehow hired without proper background
checks and medical tests? Or that the testimonial veridication
process we saw in *OLD TREK*, eighty years previously, has somehow
been *FORGOTTEN*, and is no longer used to verify sworn testimony?
The episode that clearly demonstrated that Federation Special
Prosecutors are not subject to fitness evaluations before being
turned loose with far too much authority, and that there is no
constraint on their behavior or paranoia?
Just ask yourself what Melinda Snodgrass could have done with
that same story, and how much better it would have played, written
by someone with some writing ability and legal experience.
I was alive when "Tail-Gunner Joe" McCarthy was running loose, and
have clear memories of the damage he did to this country and our
legal system. Ms. Taylor's trivialization of history, military
law, Star Fleet procedure, logic, and good storytelling *does*
prove her competent to write for things like "EARTH 2," "VOYAGER,"
and possibly "SPACE: ABOVE AND BEYOND," but not for anything
resembling SF or good general fiction.
Jeri Taylor is *NOT* a good enough writer for "VOYAGER" or "CRUSADE,"
and I will be considerably disheartened if Joe Straczynski contracts
with her for a script just to prove there are no hard feelings.
( If he does, we must remember to ask him if he's forgotten the
recent recycling of "DECONSTRUCTION OF FALLING STARS." )
On the "plus" side, the principal problems with "TREK" in recent
years have been Piller, Berman, Braga, and Taylor, and now that
Taylor's leaving, perhaps Braga will shoot himself and the show
down in flames, leaving Piller and Berman to shut down DS9 and
give the public a rest from the incessant Paramount twaddle.
Paramount needs to understand that things are not automatically
high-profit products just because the word "TREK" is in the title,
and with any luck they'll realize this before putting the silly
"STAR FLEET ACADEMY" scenario into production.
Gharlane of Eddore
on Terry Gar/Teri Garr/Teri Gar/Terry Garr/Teri Garr (she either
changed it a lot, or various credit-hackers couldn't keep track of
the spellings... )
In <6ko0ic$n...@news.csus.edu>,
Gharlane of Eddore <ghar...@ccshp1.ccs.csus.edu> wrote:
>
> She got lucky with minor guest-appearance roles in various sitcoms
> in the next couple of years, was a background cast regular for
> "SONNY & CHER," ( with one featured dance number she and Cher did in
> extremely brief Cowgirl Outfits, proving that neither of them could
> handle a sixgun without stopping to think... but was fun to watch )
> and only *THEN*, around '74, lucked into the beginning of a career....
> the german lab assistant in "YOUNG FRANKENSTEIN," which careful
> management would parlay into a series of movie roles.
>
In <6ktmkv$6gr$1...@marvin.deepthot.ml.org>
dene...@deepthot.ml.org (Jay Denebeim) writes:
>
> Wow, I actually caught Gharlane missing something about movie
> people...
>
> You left out where she played McCloud's girlfriend for a number of
> years. I'd say this is what launched her career more than anything
> else, it's certainly when I noticed her.
>
> (Yeah, she is a ditz, but I like her anyway)
>
Nope.
Closest thing to a "girlfriend" Sam McCloud had was "Chris Coughlin,"
played by Diana Muldaur. Teri Garr's recurring role (which I remember
from only a couple of the 90-minute "Mystery Movies," not from the
relatively sporadic series) only showed up a couple of times, not for
a "number of years." I'm open to correction on this by anyone with
detail cites, but I think you were too bemused by the Blondeness to
notice that Di Muldaur, a much better looking lady and far more
skilled actress, was the Actual Lady-friend. McCloud would never
have dated a ditzoid administrative sergeant!
And after all, I *did* say: "....with minor guest-appearance roles in
various sitcoms...." or are you telling me that "McCLOUD" was as
serious as its prototype, "COOGAN'S BLUFF?" They had a mandate from
the network to build in lots of humor plotlines, lots of comedy, and
female-indentifiable roles with romantic situations, after all.
Admitted, several of the "McCLOUD" episodes did do reasonably acceptable
drama, but they were shooting for the same audience as "McMILLAN & WIFE,"
and they did *NOT* want a Serious Cop Show.
Nice try, but no big "gotcha" on this one, sorry.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
\|/ __\/ \|/ \|/ _\/_ \|/ \|/ \/__ \|/ \|/\/___ \|/
@~/ Oo\~@ @~/ Oo \~@ @~/Oo \~@ @~Oo \~@
/_( \__/)_\ /_( \__/ )_\ /_(\__/ )_\ /_\__/ )_\
\___U/ \__U_/ \_U__/ \U___/
+ +
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
( merge the two " + " characters for 3-D effect. (c) GoE, 1997 )
Franklin Hummel
In article <6kurqs$ikf$1...@barad-dur.nas.com>, Robert Cook <co...@sos.net>
wrote:
>
>I'll always have a soft spot in my heart for Ms. Alley after that
>scene in one of the 'Look Who's Talking' movies. (Gee.. wonder why
>they stopped making those :-) In the movie, her character is reduced
>to working as the assistant to a shopping mall Santa. She's an 'elf',
>complete with the pointed ears. Some brat comes up and starts hassling
>her, asking her what she's supposed to be, and she finally snaps,
>hissing "I'm a *Vulcan*! Wanna see my death grip?"
-- Franklin Hummel [ hum...@world.std.com ]
--
====================================================================
* NecronomiCon, 4th Edition: The Cthulhu Mythos Convention *
August 1999, Providence, RI * Guests: Fred Chappell & T.E.D. Klein
Visit our web site at: http://www.necropress,com/necronomicom
S.Knight
ghar...@ccshp1.ccs.csus.edu (Gharlane of Eddore) wrote:
> The problem with this is, Jeri Taylor only listens to the fans she
> can *UNDERSTAND*, and this places something of a cap on the value
> of any such suggestions she might choose to attempt to implement.
Well she still listens more than Braga though I'd still prefer Braga over
Taylor though that isn't saying much.
> "THE DRUMHEAD?" The episode that established that Star Fleet has
> learned *nothing* from the past, the episode that established that
> "enlisted" members of the crew (I thought they were all officer
> equivalents?) are somehow hired without proper background
> checks and medical tests? Or that the testimonial veridication
> process we saw in *OLD TREK*, eighty years previously, has somehow
> been *FORGOTTEN*, and is no longer used to verify sworn testimony?
So one admiral is responsible for all of Starfleet?
> On the "plus" side, the principal problems with "TREK" in recent
> years have been Piller, Berman, Braga, and Taylor, and now that
> Taylor's leaving, perhaps Braga will shoot himself and the show
> down in flames,
Piller left over 2 years ago. Berman doesn't write the scripts.
> leaving Piller and Berman to shut down DS9 and
> give the public a rest from the incessant Paramount twaddle.
How can Piller shut down DS9 if he hasn't been involved with it for 4 years?
DS9 is ending in it's 7th season so you won't have to whine about it anymore.
> Paramount needs to understand that things are not automatically
> high-profit products just because the word "TREK" is in the title,
Actually, Paramount still makes money from Voyager and DS9.
> and with any luck they'll realize this before putting the silly
> "STAR FLEET ACADEMY" scenario into production.
This rumor has been floating around since before Voyager was created. Don't
believe everything you hear.
Tom Thatcher
In article <6l1k80$h4j$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
S.Knight <we...@concentric.net> wrote:
>ghar...@ccshp1.ccs.csus.edu (Gharlane of Eddore) wrote:
>
>
>> "THE DRUMHEAD?" The episode that established that Star Fleet has
>> learned *nothing* from the past, the episode that established that
>> "enlisted" members of the crew (I thought they were all officer
>> equivalents?) are somehow hired without proper background
>> checks and medical tests? Or that the testimonial veridication
>> process we saw in *OLD TREK*, eighty years previously, has somehow
>> been *FORGOTTEN*, and is no longer used to verify sworn testimony?
>
>So one admiral is responsible for all of Starfleet?
Starfleet Command called up a retired Admiral with a provable mental
instability and gave her unlimited authority to conduct an inquiry
that trampled the civil rights of the targets of said investigation,
and was apparently not subject to review or oversight by command staff.
Devices previously seen in "Mudd's Women" and "The Menagerie" to
verify the veracity of witnesses have apparently been abandoned by
Starfleet. Starfleet Academy has the toughest entrance exams ever,
so tough that Wesley failed and Picard failed twice, yet the ultra-
selective academy failed to screen out a cadet whose grandfather was
a Romulan, something any good Starfleet doctor reasonably conversant
with medical magitech could figure out with a tricorder. Not to
mention the absurdity of an organization founded on the principle
of IDIC holding a man responsible for the sins of his grandfather,
rather than judging individuals on their own merits.
Does that spell out Gharlane's objections plainly enough?
>> and with any luck they'll realize this before putting the silly
>> "STAR FLEET ACADEMY" scenario into production.
>
>This rumor has been floating around since before Voyager was created. Don't
>believe everything you hear.
Thank Ghod.
--
Tom Thatcher | You can give a PC to a Homo habilis,
University of Rochester Cancer Center | and he'll use it, but he'll use it
tt...@uhura.cc.rochester.edu | to crack nuts.
S.Knight
tt...@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (Tom Thatcher) wrote:
>
> Starfleet Command called up a retired Admiral with a provable mental
> instability and gave her unlimited authority to conduct an inquiry
> that trampled the civil rights of the targets of said investigation,
> and was apparently not subject to review or oversight by command staff.
She abused her powers so when the other admiral saw what she was doing, he
ended the proceedings. Had another admiral been in charge of this
investigation, this wouldn't have been different. So I say again, you're
going to blame all of starfleet for the actions of one admiral?
> Devices previously seen in "Mudd's Women" and "The Menagerie" to
> verify the veracity of witnesses have apparently been abandoned by
> Starfleet. Starfleet Academy has the toughest entrance exams ever,
> so tough that Wesley failed and Picard failed twice, yet the ultra-
> selective academy failed to screen out a cadet whose grandfather was
> a Romulan, something any good Starfleet doctor reasonably conversant
> with medical magitech could figure out with a tricorder. Not to
> mention the absurdity of an organization founded on the principle
> of IDIC holding a man responsible for the sins of his grandfather,
> rather than judging individuals on their own merits.
Pay closer attention to the episode. He wasn't a cadet nor was he in
starfleet. He simply wanted to join starfleet. If you recall, Picard asked
him why he never went to the Academy.
Tom Thatcher
In article <6l24dc$99k$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
S.Knight <we...@concentric.net> wrote:
>tt...@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (Tom Thatcher) wrote:
>
>>
>> Starfleet Command called up a retired Admiral with a provable mental
>> instability and gave her unlimited authority to conduct an inquiry
>> that trampled the civil rights of the targets of said investigation,
>> and was apparently not subject to review or oversight by command staff.
>
>She abused her powers so when the other admiral saw what she was doing, he
>ended the proceedings. Had another admiral been in charge of this
>investigation, this wouldn't have been different. So I say again, you're
>going to blame all of starfleet for the actions of one admiral?
Are we to believe that this is the FIRST time she has violated a
crewman's rights? The first and ONLY investigation (of her many
investigations) in which she has gone too far? The second time
she questioned crewman Tarses, in front of an audience, and entraps
him with a lie, happened before she notified Starfleet. (She only
notified Starfleet after Picard interfered and she decided to get him.)
>> Devices previously seen in "Mudd's Women" and "The Menagerie" to
>> verify the veracity of witnesses have apparently been abandoned by
>> Starfleet.
I noticed you leave this point without comment.
>> Starfleet Academy has the toughest entrance exams ever,
>> so tough that Wesley failed and Picard failed twice, yet the ultra-
>> selective academy failed to screen out a cadet whose grandfather was
>> a Romulan, something any good Starfleet doctor reasonably conversant
>> with medical magitech could figure out with a tricorder. Not to
>> mention the absurdity of an organization founded on the principle
>> of IDIC holding a man responsible for the sins of his grandfather,
>> rather than judging individuals on their own merits.
>
>Pay closer attention to the episode. He wasn't a cadet nor was he in
>starfleet. He simply wanted to join starfleet. If you recall, Picard asked
>him why he never went to the Academy.
How do you serve on a Starfleet vessel without being part of Starfleet?
The Trek Encyclopedia states "he had lied on his Starfleet entrance
papers...he feared his Starfleet career was over." So he wasn't a
commissioned officer. My bad. Roddenbery decreed in TOS days that
Starfleet crewmen were at least the equivalent of U.S. astronauts,
hence officers one and all (Ensign or better). At last count, there
are exactly four non-officer grade enlistees in Starfleet: Crewman
Tarses and one other from "The Drumhead" and Chief O'Brien and Chief
Rhozhenko (Worf's adopted father, see "Family."
The point of all this is not, what do we blame on Starfleet, but rather
what do we blame on Jeri Taylor. Uncontested points include:
1) abandoment of TOS' lie detector technology
2) introduction of sub-officer rank crewmen in violation of series
continuity
3) Starfleet does not conduct background checks or thorough medical
exams of enlistees
4) Starfleet violates IDIC by holding a crewman's ancestry against him.
(If it didn't, crewman Tarses would never have feared the truth)
DB
On Sun, 31 May 1998 07:45:08 GMT, S.Knight <we...@concentric.net>
wrote:
>"recook77" <reco...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
>> She certainly is more of an authority on it these days; she is rumored as a
>> guest star in Star Trek IX.
>
>Indeed, she's also rumored to be on DS9. Where are all these rumors
>coming from? I doubt any of them are true.
>
They come from...another dimension. There's so many rumors that they
must come from somewhere.
S.Knight
In article <6l2lek$k8...@biko.cc.rochester.edu>,
tt...@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (Tom Thatcher) wrote:
>
> In article <6l24dc$99k$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
> S.Knight <we...@concentric.net> wrote:
> >tt...@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (Tom Thatcher) wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Starfleet Command called up a retired Admiral with a provable mental
> >> instability and gave her unlimited authority to conduct an inquiry
> >> that trampled the civil rights of the targets of said investigation,
> >> and was apparently not subject to review or oversight by command staff.
> >
> >She abused her powers so when the other admiral saw what she was doing, he
> >ended the proceedings. Had another admiral been in charge of this
> >investigation, this wouldn't have been different. So I say again, you're
> >going to blame all of starfleet for the actions of one admiral?
>
> Are we to believe that this is the FIRST time she has violated a
> crewman's rights? The first and ONLY investigation (of her many
> investigations) in which she has gone too far? The second time
> she questioned crewman Tarses, in front of an audience, and entraps
> him with a lie, happened before she notified Starfleet. (She only
> notified Starfleet after Picard interfered and she decided to get him.)
>
Is this so hard to believe? Maybe this is what old age does to her? Afterall,
she was retired. Even if she did, perhaps Starfleet never witnessed how she
operates, at least not later in her career when she perhaps changed tactics.
Afterall, had she not called in the head of starfleet to witness these
proceedings, it might have continued a little longer since he was the one who
ended it after seeing it for himself.
> >> Devices previously seen in "Mudd's Women" and "The Menagerie" to
> >> verify the veracity of witnesses have apparently been abandoned by
> >> Starfleet.
>
> I noticed you leave this point without comment.
>
Well, I hardly remember those episodes so I can't really comment on it.
> >> Starfleet Academy has the toughest entrance exams ever,
> >> so tough that Wesley failed and Picard failed twice, yet the ultra-
> >> selective academy failed to screen out a cadet whose grandfather was
> >> a Romulan, something any good Starfleet doctor reasonably conversant
> >> with medical magitech could figure out with a tricorder. Not to
> >> mention the absurdity of an organization founded on the principle
> >> of IDIC holding a man responsible for the sins of his grandfather,
> >> rather than judging individuals on their own merits.
> >
> >Pay closer attention to the episode. He wasn't a cadet nor was he in
> >starfleet. He simply wanted to join starfleet. If you recall, Picard asked
> >him why he never went to the Academy.
>
> How do you serve on a Starfleet vessel without being part of Starfleet?
> The Trek Encyclopedia states "he had lied on his Starfleet entrance
> papers...he feared his Starfleet career was over." So he wasn't a
> commissioned officer. My bad. Roddenbery decreed in TOS days that
> Starfleet crewmen were at least the equivalent of U.S. astronauts,
> hence officers one and all (Ensign or better). At last count, there
> are exactly four non-officer grade enlistees in Starfleet: Crewman
> Tarses and one other from "The Drumhead" and Chief O'Brien and Chief
> Rhozhenko (Worf's adopted father, see "Family."
>
Alright fine, so maybe he is somewhat a part of starfleet but as Picard asked
him, why didn't he go the full route? And besides, you said he was a cadet
which he wasn't.
> The point of all this is not, what do we blame on Starfleet, but rather
> what do we blame on Jeri Taylor. Uncontested points include:
>
> 1) abandoment of TOS' lie detector technology
They used a betazoid.
> 2) introduction of sub-officer rank crewmen in violation of series
> continuity
You mean the continuity with the original series? Remember now, TNG is in the
24th century not the 23rd. There's bound to be some changes.
> 3) Starfleet does not conduct background checks or thorough medical
> exams of enlistees
As Picard said, he didn't go the full route. Maybe they only do this with
Starfleet Academy applicants. Perhaps Starfleet will change their procedure
after this particular episode.
> 4) Starfleet violates IDIC by holding a crewman's ancestry against him.
> (If it didn't, crewman Tarses would never have feared the truth)
Starfleet didn't hold it against him. Admiral Satie did.
Tom Thatcher
In article <6l3v5q$nbv$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
S.Knight <we...@concentric.net> wrote:
>In article <6l2lek$k8...@biko.cc.rochester.edu>,
> tt...@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (Tom Thatcher) wrote:
>> The point of all this is not, what do we blame on Starfleet, but rather
>> what do we blame on Jeri Taylor. Uncontested points include:
>>
>> 1) abandoment of TOS' lie detector technology
>
>They used a betazoid.
Testimony by Vulcans on information found by telepathy or a mind-meld
is inadmissable in court. Why then is a betazed a legally acceptable
lie detector. If a betazed is not a legally acceptable lie detector
in Federation Law but Satie uses her aide as one in violation of the
law, why has no one called her to account for it before?
>
>> 2) introduction of sub-officer rank crewmen in violation of series
>> continuity
>
>You mean the continuity with the original series? Remember now, TNG is in the
>24th century not the 23rd. There's bound to be some changes.
Can you name any other non-officer Starfleet personnel other than the
four I mentioned as evidence for this change in Fleet policy?
>> 3) Starfleet does not conduct background checks or thorough medical
>> exams of enlistees
>
>As Picard said, he didn't go the full route. Maybe they only do this with
>Starfleet Academy applicants. Perhaps Starfleet will change their procedure
>after this particular episode.
I really don't think this is defensible. I could come up with a dozen
reasons why every being serving aboard a Starship should have some sort
of background check and security clearance (even a simple med-tech).
1) Starfleet medical database may contain senstive data on Federation
members' biology that could be of use to a Threat race, 2) access to
drugs and poisons, 3) access to replicators, 4) access to insterstellar
communications, 5) possibility that he might be a carrier of a disease
deadly to an alien race, 6) may be required to treat command officers.
>> 4) Starfleet violates IDIC by holding a crewman's ancestry against him.
>Starfleet didn't hold it against him. Admiral Satie did.
Then why did he lie on his application? Two of my ancestors were German,
named Schwarz and Nieppert. They changed their named to Black and
Nippert in the 1900's to avoid persecution and prejudice, as did many
others of German ancestry. The Federation is supposed to be the enlightened
flower of humanity. As far back as TOS, Lt. Stiles' negative reaction
to Spock when he saw a Romulan for the first time was portrayed as
a bad thing on his part; unthinking prejudice.
S.Knight
In article <6l40up$nn...@biko.cc.rochester.edu>,
tt...@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (Tom Thatcher) wrote:
>
> In article <6l3v5q$nbv$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
> S.Knight <we...@concentric.net> wrote:
> >In article <6l2lek$k8...@biko.cc.rochester.edu>,
> > tt...@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (Tom Thatcher) wrote:
>
> >> The point of all this is not, what do we blame on Starfleet, but rather
> >> what do we blame on Jeri Taylor. Uncontested points include:
> >>
> >> 1) abandoment of TOS' lie detector technology
> >
> >They used a betazoid.
>
> Testimony by Vulcans on information found by telepathy or a mind-meld
> is inadmissable in court. Why then is a betazed a legally acceptable
> lie detector. If a betazed is not a legally acceptable lie detector
> in Federation Law but Satie uses her aide as one in violation of the
> law, why has no one called her to account for it before?
>
Perhaps they modified the law since the 23rd century to allow for telepathy
to be used in court. If you don't have a problem using a lie detector, what's
the problem with using a Betazoid? Besides, this particular Betazoid was only
reading his emotions not his thoughts.
> >
> >> 2) introduction of sub-officer rank crewmen in violation of series
> >> continuity
> >
> >You mean the continuity with the original series? Remember now, TNG is in
the
> >24th century not the 23rd. There's bound to be some changes.
>
> Can you name any other non-officer Starfleet personnel other than the
> four I mentioned as evidence for this change in Fleet policy?
>
Well, not at the moment. However, they probably weren't integral to any other
episode. Afterall, the show isn't about these low-level personnel you see in
the background.
> >> 3) Starfleet does not conduct background checks or thorough medical
> >> exams of enlistees
> >
> >As Picard said, he didn't go the full route. Maybe they only do this with
> >Starfleet Academy applicants. Perhaps Starfleet will change their procedure
> >after this particular episode.
>
> I really don't think this is defensible. I could come up with a dozen
> reasons why every being serving aboard a Starship should have some sort
> of background check and security clearance (even a simple med-tech).
> 1) Starfleet medical database may contain senstive data on Federation
> members' biology that could be of use to a Threat race, 2) access to
> drugs and poisons, 3) access to replicators, 4) access to insterstellar
> communications, 5) possibility that he might be a carrier of a disease
> deadly to an alien race, 6) may be required to treat command officers.
>
Well perhaps they did do a check on him. Everything he said was true other
than his father being romulan. If you're applying for a job, does it matter
what race your father is? I don't think it matters to Starfleet either.
> >> 4) Starfleet violates IDIC by holding a crewman's ancestry against him.
>
> >Starfleet didn't hold it against him. Admiral Satie did.
>
> Then why did he lie on his application? Two of my ancestors were German,
> named Schwarz and Nieppert. They changed their named to Black and
> Nippert in the 1900's to avoid persecution and prejudice, as did many
> others of German ancestry. The Federation is supposed to be the enlightened
> flower of humanity. As far back as TOS, Lt. Stiles' negative reaction
> to Spock when he saw a Romulan for the first time was portrayed as
> a bad thing on his part; unthinking prejudice.
What you say is true. Perhaps he lied because there might be others who would
be prejudiced against him. However, being Romulan doesn't exclude you from
being able to apply for Starfleet. Afterall, the Federation is made up of
hundreds of different races and species. But that doesn't mean there aren't
some people out there who would still be prejudiced against him.
Michael Decosta III
In a previous article, we...@concentric.net (S.Knight) says:
...
>
>Perhaps they modified the law since the 23rd century to allow for telepathy
>to be used in court. If you don't have a problem using a lie detector, what's
>the problem with using a Betazoid? Besides, this particular Betazoid was only
>reading his emotions not his thoughts.
>
But unless the Betazoid was the adjudicator, you'd still need the lie
detector to be sure that the Betazoid wasn't lying about what he/she
sensed. Trek has demonstrated unscrupulous telepaths to exit within
the Federation.
--
recook77
Gharlane of Eddore wrote in message <6kvsn5$a...@news.csus.edu>...
(snip)
>
>Jeri Taylor is *NOT* a good enough writer for "VOYAGER" or "CRUSADE,"
>and I will be considerably disheartened if Joe Straczynski contracts
>with her for a script just to prove there are no hard feelings.
>( If he does, we must remember to ask him if he's forgotten the
> recent recycling of "DECONSTRUCTION OF FALLING STARS." )
>
>On the "plus" side, the principal problems with "TREK" in recent
>years have been Piller, Berman, Braga, and Taylor, and now that
>Taylor's leaving, perhaps Braga will shoot himself and the show
>down in flames, leaving Piller and Berman to shut down DS9 and
>give the public a rest from the incessant Paramount twaddle.
>
Piller has nothing to do with DS9. Ira Steven Behr is DS9's executive
producer, with Rick Berman. Piller is currently writing the next Trek film.
At least DS9 received the go-ahead for a seventh season. I'll be surprised
if Voyager lasts that long.
>Paramount needs to understand that things are not automatically
>high-profit products just because the word "TREK" is in the title,
>and with any luck they'll realize this before putting the silly
>"STAR FLEET ACADEMY" scenario into production.
That rumor was debunked a long time ago.
De Castellvi Jaime M
Rick (nospam...@aug.com) wrote:
: What do you mean by early?
:
: Jules Verne, Phillip Dick? Ray Bradbury? Arthur C. Clark? Edgar Rice
: Burroughs? Read 'em.
Obviously, not paying sufficient attention to detail or else you would
know that "Gharlane of Eddore" is not in any of their books and would not
need to ask. Try E.E. "Doc" Smith (I presume, with some uncertainty, that
you have at least heard of *him*?). Specifically, his Lensmen series,
starting with "TRIPLANETARY".
: .. and I'll stack my 30ish year old SAT's or ACT's up against yours (if
: I can find them).
I suspect that I would have been all too happy to obligue you quite a few
decades back, but I think I left whatever compulsions I ever had to play
"mine-is-bigger-than yours" back with the mudpies I used to toss at my
teachers in kindergarten.
Actually, wrong lifetime. I now distinctly recall that I never had such
compulsions in *this* lifetime. That comes from being born (as a baby)
with a schlong big enough already to give the poor schmuck of a doctor who
was there hoping to take credit for the delivery a complex. This prompted
him to spank me harder. But that only managed to give me what you would
consider a woodie (only larger), a reaction which made his complex even
worse because as I later learned he became flaccid whenever one of the
several nurses in the ward who were into mild S&M endeavoured to improve
his performance by applying a stinging flail to his buttocks. And here I
was, a born S&M natural right from the word "Whaaaaa!".
So he spanked me even harder but all he could get out of me was a big,
cheek-to-cheek grin of baby-like contentment, so eventually he turned me
over to a nurse (who *knew* what to do, bless her expert savoir-faire) and
left the room to have a nervous breakdown over at the men's john.
So that may be the reason why I have never experienced an overwhelming
compulsion to play "mine-is-bigger-than-yours" in this particular
lifetime.
It is, too...
(I never threw any mudpies at my teachers in *this* lifetime. either I
was not sufficiently attracted to any of them. Not in kindergarten.)
: I was not kidding.
Ah. You were in earnest then. I see. <*reassuring smile*> You came to
the right place.
: I am not your son.
I celebrate the fact that you are so certain that you are no product of
some youthful and regrettable mistake of mine awful past. There are
enough freaks out there trying to get at my rather substantial state as
is, and I don't relish the thought of burdening my lawyer with yet another
silly-assed lawsuit.
: And I have read.
I'm happy for you, son. Reading, speaking generally, is good. I find
that most people "have read" in their lives, at some point or another
(this tends to be encouraged in contemporary society, even by the mere
act of driving on a highway).
Now, what is it exactly that you purport to have read?
Cheers,
Jaime
--
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
/ Decadence generally results ^ Jaime M. de Castellví \
/ when a society or people has run ^ 3c...@qlink.queensu.ca \
/ out of myth; JERRY POURNELLE ^ http://qlink.queensu.ca/~3cjmd \
/\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\^////////////////////////////////\
/ "People don't always understand that being elegant isn't the same \
/ as being soft, and that's where I come in." THE GREEN MILE \
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Sleepbot ZZ09.4
3c...@qlink.queensu.ca (De Castellvi Jaime M) wrote:
>Rick (nospam...@aug.com) wrote:
>: What do you mean by early?
>:
>: Jules Verne, Phillip Dick? Ray Bradbury? Arthur C. Clark? Edgar Rice
>: Burroughs? Read 'em.
aww, c'mon. why bother. why should i concern myself with the past
when Star Trek promises such a bright and happy FUTURE!
i mean, in space, all women are babes. ensigns, nurses, empaths,
robotic symbiots... and the occasional skimpy-silk-dress-wearing
leader of a non-Federation planet.
i mean, even a total fuckhead like Wesley gets trippy chicks.
granted, he either had to kiss a creepy metamorphs or play BrainSucker
2000 for the rest of his life, but everything has its price.
to hell with Isaac Asimov... i want a future when i can:
(1) devolve into a lizard
(2) have my brain removed and used to maintain an underground
colony of food tubes
(3) be fed upon or disected by random 8th-dimension visitors
(4) fight bipedal gorillas in authentic Civil War uniforms
(5) meet those scary-ass mugwumps from the Waterverse
...all in less than an hour, and with no unpleasant side-effects.
hell, if Strazinski was in charge, all i'd get to do is watch
propaganda, be subjugated under Martial Law and then be taken away and
tortured for weeks upon end (assuming the Boneheads hadn't wiped me
out a decade earlier).
p-shaw. Philip K. Dick my ass.
not that there's anything wrong with that...
(Caution: Shake Well. Remove SPAM-FREE cap prior to Reply.)
................................................................................
. Dan Foley dfo...@sleepbot.com www.sleepbot.com ... Shall I? [ ]Yes [ ]Twice.
Dave Powell
It is a shame that Claudia Christian left B5. I feel bad about it, a a fan
of both B5 and Claudia Christian's performance on it. To suggest that one
hate an actor over a job decision is a bit silly. People who send
threatening letters like that need to grow up. So there was a screw up.
Yeah, it sucks, but it happens in Hollywierd.
At any rate, I don't think she is the most hated woman in Sci-Fi. Far from
it. She may have gotten mad over some things, but she never trashed B5
directly, and didn't harsh her co-stars. As I said, stuff sucks, but, hey...
so does life, sometimes. All you can do is go on.
If you want to see real animosity, check out some of the stuff said in this
thread regarding Teri Garr, or some of the rifle shots that have been taken
at Joan Collins by Harlan Ellison and others.
David Powell
Stephen S
If you consider Barbarella to be sci-fi then Claudia doesn't hold a
candle to the emnity toward an actress who posed in a Viet-cong
anti-aircraft gun used to shoot down Americans.
hungjury
Stephen S wrote:
DUDE--
War's over. Been over for years. Let it go, that's it, deep breath
and let it out, ahhhhhh thats better eh? Now please keep any more Hanoi
Jane tirades out of this group, they have no place here.
Kris Harper
What exactly did Teri Garr do?
Cant stand the silly cow anyways, but I'm just curious.
Kris Harper
------------------------------------
"Its a SIG, dammit, not an essay!!!"
Remove NOSPAM from email address to reply.
Dave Powell wrote
Dave Powell
hungjury wrote in message <35810858...@nomail.com>...
Tell that to the people who still wake up screaming. She got in the face of
American POWs when she was over there too, called them all kinds of junk,
while they were paraded out in front of her then taken off to be tortured.
That's like telling Jews to relax because the Holocaust is over.
No place? The thread is most hated woman in Sci-Fi. Barbarella can be
considered Sci-Fi. Jane Fonda (AKA Hanoi Jane) was in Barbarella. It is
relevant to the thread.
David Powell
Garak
In article <35810...@139.134.5.33>, def...@NOSPAMbigpond.com says...
> What exactly did Teri Garr do?
>
> Cant stand the silly cow anyways, but I'm just curious.
She played Gary Seven's secretary in the TOS episode "Assignment Earth"
She was a regular Mod-Squad reject, although she did inject some welcome
humour into that ep.
(If you have to ask about the Mod Squad reference, then you *were* born
yesterday.)
Garak
Barbara
Jane Fonda showed some incredible naivete -- many would say stupidity
-- in her tour of North Vietnam in 1972. (She did, in fact, apologize
for them in 1988.) However, as far as I know (and please correct me
if I'm wrong; I'd be interested in whatever attributions you could
find), she never met any American POWs while she was in Vietnam.
Gharlane of Eddore
Stephen S wrote:
>
> If you consider Barbarella to be sci-fi then Claudia doesn't hold a
> candle to the emnity toward an actress who posed in a Viet-cong
> anti-aircraft gun used to shoot down Americans.
>
In <35810858...@nomail.com> dont...@anymail.com writes:
>
> DUDE--
> War's over. Been over for years. Let it go, that's it, deep breath
> and let it out, ahhhhhh thats better eh? Now please keep any more Hanoi
> Jane tirades out of this group, they have no place here.
>
Bushwah. That dimbo trull spit (or worse) in the face of every American
who loved this country enough not to move to Canada. She made one tiny
mealy-mouthed apology decades later, and it was too little, far too late.
If she wants any of us who served in the military in that era to take
her seriously, she'll donate her husband's entire fortune to the
veterans' administration hospital program, which has been largely gutted
in a constant search for funds by "liberal" politicians who "care about
the people." And if she wants to be a bloody activist, and Make The
World Better, she can jolly well agitate to get some *proper* attention
for the U.S. servicemen whose bodies, minds, and lives have been damaged
by the Viet-Nam-era "Agent Orange" or the later "Gulf War Syndrome."
And next time you take it upon yourself to defend "Hanoi Jane" in a
public venue, implying that she should be forgiven her treason, her
provision of aid & comfort to the enemy in time of war, try to remember
that you're speaking to a good many folks who have reason to despise
your attitude almost as much as we despise Ms. Hanoi.
Kyle Haight
In article <6lrr82$a...@news.csus.edu>,
>public venue, implying that she should be forgiven her treason, her
>provision of aid & comfort to the enemy in time of war, try to remember
>that you're speaking to a good many folks who have reason to despise
>your attitude almost as much as we despise Ms. Hanoi.
I second Gharlane's attitude on this, and I was only a small child
when the Vietnam War wound down. From what I've heard, the term
"traitorous bitch" is merely an accurate description when applied to
dear old Hanoi Jane.
--
Kyle Haight
kha...@netcom.com
"We are mice, posting to Usenet in the first stages of a complex plan
to Take Over The WORLD!"
recook77
Barbara wrote in message <35816112.13571251@news>...
>On Fri, 12 Jun 1998 09:31:21 -0400, "Dave Powell"
><david_po...@msn.com> wrote:
>
>>hungjury wrote in message <35810858...@nomail.com>...
>>>
>>>
>>>Stephen S wrote:
>>>
>>>> If you consider Barbarella to be sci-fi then Claudia doesn't hold a
>>>> candle to the emnity toward an actress who posed in a Viet-cong
>>>> anti-aircraft gun used to shoot down Americans.
>>>
>>> DUDE--
>>> War's over. Been over for years. Let it go, that's it, deep breath
>>>and let it out, ahhhhhh thats better eh? Now please keep any more Hanoi
>>>Jane tirades out of this group, they have no place here.
>>
>>
>>Tell that to the people who still wake up screaming. She got in the face
of
>>American POWs when she was over there too, called them all kinds of junk,
>>while they were paraded out in front of her then taken off to be tortured.
>>That's like telling Jews to relax because the Holocaust is over.
>>
>>No place? The thread is most hated woman in Sci-Fi. Barbarella can be
>>considered Sci-Fi. Jane Fonda (AKA Hanoi Jane) was in Barbarella. It is
>>relevant to the thread.
>>
>>David Powell
>>
>>
>Jane Fonda showed some incredible naivete -- many would say stupidity
>-- in her tour of North Vietnam in 1972. (She did, in fact, apologize
>for them in 1988.) However, as far as I know (and please correct me
>if I'm wrong; I'd be interested in whatever attributions you could
>find), she never met any American POWs while she was in Vietnam.
She did call the POWs cowards and liars. However, as you said, she
apologized for her actions in 1988.
She did, however, tell a story behind the now-famous shot of her standing in
front of the Viet Cong guns. According to her, the Viet Cong soldiers she
met were singing an American song. She started cheering them on and
clapping. The resulting photo made it look like she was cheering on the
Viet Cong as they shot down American troops.
I agree that she was politically naive in perhaps the worst Hollywood
limousine-liberal sort of way. However, she acknowledged her mistakes years
later.
John Schilling
hungjury <I_w...@nomail.com> writes:
>Stephen S wrote:
>> If you consider Barbarella to be sci-fi then Claudia doesn't hold a
>> candle to the emnity toward an actress who posed in a Viet-cong
>> anti-aircraft gun used to shoot down Americans.
> DUDE--
> War's over. Been over for years. Let it go, that's it, deep breath
>and let it out, ahhhhhh thats better eh? Now please keep any more Hanoi
>Jane tirades out of this group, they have no place here.
World War II has been over for even longer, but I don't hear any calls
for rehabilitating the name of Vidkun Quisling. Nor, for that matter,
Benedict Arnold, and why do people keep knocking this "Judas Iscariot"
character?
There's no statute of limitations on treason, nor should there be. If
you want to argue that Jane Fonda didn't do anything wrong to begin
with, fine - there's plenty of people here who will take up the other
side of that argument for you. Otherwise, her infamy remains, and will
properly remain for as long as she is remembered at all.
--
*John Schilling * "You can have Peace, *
*Member:AIAA,NRA,ACLU,SAS,LP * or you can have Freedom. *
*University of Southern California * Don't ever count on having both *
*Aerospace Engineering Department * at the same time." *
*schi...@spock.usc.edu * - Robert A. Heinlein *
*(213)-740-5311 or 747-2527 * Finger for PGP public key *
Captain Infinity
In article <6lrr82$a...@news.csus.edu>
Gharlane of Eddore wrote:
>And next time you take it upon yourself to defend "Hanoi Jane" in a
>public venue, implying that she should be forgiven her treason, her
>provision of aid & comfort to the enemy in time of war, try to remember
>that you're speaking to a good many folks who have reason to despise
>your attitude almost as much as we despise Ms. Hanoi.
And then speak your mind and express yourself as you see fit.
After all, that's one of the rights they fought to protect.
**
Captain Infinity
...or am I getting my wars confused again?
Kyle Haight
In article <3581b519...@news-f.std.com>,
Captain Infinity <Infi...@world.std.com> wrote:
>
>And then speak your mind and express yourself as you see fit.
>
>After all, that's one of the rights they fought to protect.
Considering that the original poster basically told anybody who wanted
to express negative opinions of Hanoi Jane to shut up and go away,
reacting like Gharlane was advocating some kind of censorship is a bit
bizarre.
>**
>Captain Infinity
> ...or am I getting my wars confused again?
I think you're getting your wars confused again. My high school
history textbook claimed that we were fighting to defend the 'right to
self-determination' of South Vietnam, which as best as I can figure
means we weren't so much fighting for the rights of the citizens of
South Vietnam as we were fighting to defend their ability to vote
themselves into slavery instead of having it imposed on them from
without.
recook77
--
Kyle Haight wrote in message ...
>In article <3581b519...@news-f.std.com>,
>Captain Infinity <Infi...@world.std.com> wrote:
>>
>>And then speak your mind and express yourself as you see fit.
>>
>>After all, that's one of the rights they fought to protect.
>
>Considering that the original poster basically told anybody who wanted
>to express negative opinions of Hanoi Jane to shut up and go away,
>reacting like Gharlane was advocating some kind of censorship is a bit
>bizarre.
Good point, however, let's have perspective. The Vietnam War was not about
protecting America's freedoms. The Vietnam War was about aiding one
repressive government in a war against another repressive government. This
does not excuse Fonda's shocking stupidity and narrow-mindedness, however.
recook77
Captain Infinity wrote in message <3583c934...@news-f.std.com>...
>**
>Captain Infinity
> ...except that Moon Walk.
> *That* was history, and I knew it while I watched it.
Well, yeah, but "Thriller" represented a real last gasp for Michael Jackson,
as far as I'm concerned. An interesting record, followed by a lot of dreck.
Whatta shame. And he was such an adorable kid before plastic surgery
destroyed his face.
******ducks******
Captain Infinity
In article <khaightE...@netcom.com>
Kyle Haight wrote:
>In article <3581b519...@news-f.std.com>,
>Captain Infinity <Infi...@world.std.com> wrote:
>>
>>And then speak your mind and express yourself as you see fit.
>>
>>After all, that's one of the rights they fought to protect.
>
>Considering that the original poster basically told anybody who wanted
>to express negative opinions of Hanoi Jane to shut up and go away,
>reacting like Gharlane was advocating some kind of censorship is a bit
>bizarre.
Is that what I was doing?
Ah, well. Whatever.
As Bobby Holland might say, I'm not responsible for your interpretation.
Or maybe I am. Am I that good a troller? Or am I just transparent?
In any event, "Bizarre" and I are old friends.
>>**
>>Captain Infinity
>> ...or am I getting my wars confused again?
>
>I think you're getting your wars confused again. My high school
>history textbook claimed that we were fighting to defend the 'right to
>self-determination' of South Vietnam, which as best as I can figure
>means we weren't so much fighting for the rights of the citizens of
>South Vietnam as we were fighting to defend their ability to vote
>themselves into slavery instead of having it imposed on them from
>without.
Yes, I do believe you are correct. The war in Viet Nam had little to do
with American rights, although huge amounts of American blood was spilled.
Please excuse me for butting into something I know little about...I didn't
get to read about it in High School history books, so I'm clearly shaky on
what actually happened. To paraphrase somebody who was much better with
words than I am, you never recognize history while living through it.
I'll butt out now and let everybody get back to their flaming.
Kyle Haight
In article <6lsdg7$p...@dfw-ixnews10.ix.netcom.com>,
recook77 <reco...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
>Good point, however, let's have perspective. The Vietnam War was not about
>protecting America's freedoms. The Vietnam War was about aiding one
>repressive government in a war against another repressive government. This
>does not excuse Fonda's shocking stupidity and narrow-mindedness, however.
All true. I would never argue that the Vietnam War was a good thing --
everything I know about it leads me to conclude that we should never
have been involved in it in the first place. But wanting the United
States out of the war and providing aid and comfort to the enemy are
two different things.
Jim Phillips and Helen Hart
On 12 Jun 1998,
> Gharlane of Eddore
> And if she wants to be a bloody activist, and Make The
> World Better, she can jolly well agitate to get some *proper* attention
> for the U.S. servicemen whose bodies, minds, and lives have been damaged
> by the Viet-Nam-era "Agent Orange" or the later "Gulf War Syndrome."
I *know* I'm asking for trouble with this, but the whole "Gulf War
Syndrome" might largely be imaginary. The statistics involved (number of
servicemen affected vs. those unaffected) for Gulf War vets are comparable
to the general public. IOW, the strange maladies affecting Gulf War vets
affect the regular public with the same frequency, which indicates there
is no widespread "Gulf War Syndrome" (please note the use of the word
"widespread" when responding).
Jim
tomlinson
John Schilling (schi...@spock.usc.edu) wrote:
: World War II has been over for even longer, but I don't hear any calls
: for rehabilitating the name of Vidkun Quisling. Nor, for that matter,
: Benedict Arnold...
I have come across a number of these, in truth. Most to the effect that
Arnold was one of the colonies' more competent generals (although the only
bit of generalship of Arnold's that I can call to mind right away is his
failed assault on Canada, culminating in a botched attack on Quebec late
in 1775.)
Quisling, OTOH, was never anything more than a third-rate failed politician.
(Laval, at least, was a second-rate failed politician.)
-tomlinson
--
Ernest S. Tomlinson
Vis apud te erit...aeterne.
Dave Powell
recook77 wrote in message <6lrup0$g...@dfw-ixnews10.ix.netcom.com>...
>
>Barbara wrote in message <35816112.13571251@news>...
>>On Fri, 12 Jun 1998 09:31:21 -0400, "Dave Powell"
>><david_po...@msn.com> wrote:
>>
>>>hungjury wrote in message <35810858...@nomail.com>...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> If you consider Barbarella to be sci-fi then Claudia doesn't hold a
>>>>> candle to the emnity toward an actress who posed in a Viet-cong
>>>>> anti-aircraft gun used to shoot down Americans.
>>>>
>>>> DUDE--
>>>> War's over. Been over for years. Let it go, that's it, deep breath
>>>>and let it out, ahhhhhh thats better eh? Now please keep any more Hanoi
>>>>Jane tirades out of this group, they have no place here.
>>>
>>>
>of
>>>American POWs when she was over there too, called them all kinds of junk,
>>>while they were paraded out in front of her then taken off to be
tortured.
>>>That's like telling Jews to relax because the Holocaust is over.
>>>
>>>No place? The thread is most hated woman in Sci-Fi. Barbarella can be
>>>considered Sci-Fi. Jane Fonda (AKA Hanoi Jane) was in Barbarella. It is
>>>relevant to the thread.
>>>
>>>David Powell
>>>
>>>
>>Jane Fonda showed some incredible naivete -- many would say stupidity
>>-- in her tour of North Vietnam in 1972. (She did, in fact, apologize
>>for them in 1988.) However, as far as I know (and please correct me
>>if I'm wrong; I'd be interested in whatever attributions you could
>>find), she never met any American POWs while she was in Vietnam.
>
>
>She did call the POWs cowards and liars. However, as you said, she
>apologized for her actions in 1988.
Yes.. on a Bio of her (may have been A&E, or a Discovery Channel "Wings"
type show) They clearly showed the grainy, Communist footage of her getting
up in the face of bound POWs, all thin and obviously looking pretty bad, and
calling them in a calm and nieve voice cowards and baby killers, making war
on the peaceful people of Vietnam, and that the people of the US were not
with them. (This being after such hopes of support were all that were
keeping some of these guys going, who'd been in the Hilton for years.)
She should have done time, at the least, or been banished.
>She did, however, tell a story behind the now-famous shot of her standing
in
>front of the Viet Cong guns. According to her, the Viet Cong soldiers she
>met were singing an American song. She started cheering them on and
>clapping. The resulting photo made it look like she was cheering on the
>Viet Cong as they shot down American troops.
True... but she had to know something when she sat there. She was
manipulated a bit, but most of it was all her and her beau of the time, a
big time Red who put her up to it.
>I agree that she was politically naive in perhaps the worst Hollywood
>limousine-liberal sort of way. However, she acknowledged her mistakes
years
>later.
A little late, perhaps....
David Powell
Dave Powell
Jim Phillips and Helen Hart wrote in message ...
Well, a couple that I have met seem to have it... seems bacterial in most
cases.
David Powell
ObStarTrek: Remember the TNG episode with the banished warrors who had been
genetically engineered?
>
>Jim
>
Theron Fuller
Dave Powell wrote in message
<#4QLu65l...@upnetnews02.moswest.msn.net>...
Jane's husband just gave $1 billion to the United Nations. That should
atone for some of Jane's sins committed 25 years ago. The Israelis now have
good relations with Germany, the Catholics and Protestants are talking to
each other in Northern Ireland. The South Africans have a reconciliation
commission. The Vietnam War ended a couple of decades ago. It's time for
all parties to call a truce.
Regards,
Theron Fuller
Aubrey W. Adkins
Tokyo Rose and Axis Sally expressed regrets also, but they both did long
terms in federal prison. Jane should have done at least 30 years or so.
What she did, whether you believed in the Vietnam Conflict or not, was
tatamount to high treason. Normally in time of war they shoot you for
that. As far as apologies go, the kid who recently apologized for
killing his mom and two of his classmates apologized. It didn't keep him
from getting enough time to stay locked up for several lifetimes,
consecutively.
I would opt for shooting her, if that penalty were available and we
could convict her.
Aubrey
WWS
Jim Phillips and Helen Hart wrote:
>
> I *know* I'm asking for trouble with this, but the whole "Gulf War
> Syndrome" might largely be imaginary. The statistics involved (number of
> servicemen affected vs. those unaffected) for Gulf War vets are comparable
> to the general public. IOW, the strange maladies affecting Gulf War vets
> affect the regular public with the same frequency, which indicates there
> is no widespread "Gulf War Syndrome" (please note the use of the word
> "widespread" when responding).
>
It's not your fault for believing this, since this is the party line
that the medical establishment (most, not all) and the Pentagon have
been working overtime to reinforce for 7 years now.
CFS, Fibromyalgia, and GWS are 3 instances of diseases where diagnosis
is devilish, treatment is difficult to nonexistent, and contempt for
sufferers is S.O.P. among the medical community. Someone very close to
me suffers with CFS, and I have had a first hand view of this disease
for 8 years now. I watch it inflame, I watch it go into remission, I
have been able to help work out triggers for the most debilitating
attacks, and all in all, I have been witness to a real disease in what
had been a healthy and psychologicaly stable and happy person.
I have had the opportunity to be involved with a couple of support
groups, and because of that I have come to know some GWS sufferers.
The common denominator among these groups is that the most common
response is "it's all in your head, you big baby". People with
chemical sensitivities are in this boat, as well. I know a man
who will break out in big red welts from head to toe if his clothes
are washed with commercial detergents, tide being the worst. Once,
as a test, a relative used tide without telling him, told him all
the clothes were fine, wanted to see if it was in his head. He was
covered in welts and bedridden 12 hours later, and took 3 days to
recover. This is not some urban legend, I saw the welts and touched
them myself. I also saw a diagnosis where a respected doctor called
it an "extremely advanced case of psychosomatic illness".
Well, either that man is the most telekinetic sob on the face of the
earth or that Dr. is a lying bastard who didn't want to deal with
someone who wasn't going to be helped by some pill that he could
pop 6 times a day for 20 bucks a pop.
The problem with these illnesses is that they are not simple
diseases with a single cause but appear to be more of a systemic
disorder, where a number of stresses has caused body systems taken
for granted to start breaking down on what may be a cellular level.
When you start looking at these illnesses and the medical establishments
response to it, you realize quickly that the med. est. has two tools:
drugs, and surgery. And problems that don't respond to drugs or
surgery get kicked out the door and told that it is all in their head.
But there is a precedent, and some of this is slowly being established.
Lyme's disease, for example, is now believed to be caused by a
spirochette
that lives in a tick's bloodstream. But most of these illnesses are
probably not bacterial - no consistent link can be found. For GWS, some
current researchers think that a certain percentage of the population
is susceptible to some cellular level stresses caused in their case by
a broad band multiple vaccination which all soldiers recieved, followed
by the stress of breathing hydrocarbon laden air for several days.
This cannot and should not be repeated in a lab, and the suggestion is
not that this is a disease that can become an epidemic, but rather this
for some reason affects 5% to 10% of an otherwise healthy population.
With GWS, there is also the possibility of contamination by nerve agents
or bioactive munitions. It would have been easier to determine this,
except that for a seven day period surrounding the destruction of one of
the Iraqi's largest munitions depot's by American demolition teams, all
the company and brigade level reports, required to be filed and saved by
the military, have mysteriously vanished and no copies of any of the
field reports can be found. No one has ever been held responsible, no
explanation for the disappearance of critical field reports has ever
been given. This was documented in an investigative report by
"Insight" magazine about a year ago, and the disapearance of most of the
vaccination records for the gulf war was also documented.
I don't believe the government knows what causes GWS. I do think they
have taken active steps not only to prevent it being recognized, but
have actively destroyed any evidence that could have been seen as
casting any kind of liability for this on themselves. The medical
community shuns it because they don't understand it and it doesn't fit
in perfectly with current theories of sickness and treatment, so of
course, anyone who says your theories might be wrong must be nuts.
--
_______________________________________________________WWS______________________
Dave Powell
Theron Fuller wrote in message <6m0tr1$1j...@f02n01.cahwnet.gov>...
>
>Dave Powell wrote in message
><#4QLu65l...@upnetnews02.moswest.msn.net>...
>>Jim Phillips and Helen Hart wrote in message ...
>>>On 12 Jun 1998,
SNIP
>Jane's husband just gave $1 billion to the United Nations. That should
>atone for some of Jane's sins committed 25 years ago. The Israelis now
have
>good relations with Germany, the Catholics and Protestants are talking to
>each other in Northern Ireland. The South Africans have a reconciliation
>commission. The Vietnam War ended a couple of decades ago. It's time for
>all parties to call a truce.
I understand your point, and there was a truce at Paris, after which South
Vietnam, a couple years later, ceased to exist. However, the actions of
someone against their country in this way still are reprehensible. Despite
the "end of the cold war", people, even retired people, who are found to
have committed espionage against the US still go to jail. This is not
exactly what Fonda did, but it is close. She publicly humiliated POWs and
the US. As for the $1 Billion donation by Ted Turner, it was intended as
much as a gesture against the US for not paying UN Dues as it was as a
philanthropic statement, but that is neither here nor there. Your point
about peace is well met, unfortunately I will personally continue to be wary
until I am convinced that all our POWs came back after that war. This has
not yet occurred, and may never occur.
David Powell
>Regards,
>Theron Fuller
>
>
Theron Fuller
Dave Powell wrote in message
<#sWpty#l9GA...@upnetnews02.moswest.msn.net>...
Lt. Calley received a Presidential pardon for his war crimes, nobody was
prosecuted for the massacre of 4 people at Kent State, Richard Nixon was
allowed to resign and received a Presidential pardon for his crimes.
There's enough blame to go around on all sides. At least there was a couple
of decades ago. And to bring it all up on this news group under the
pretense of "The Most Hated Women in Science Fiction (Which is a really dumb
thread even before "Jane" was inserted) is kinda reaching.
If the subject must be discussed at all, then surely there is a more
suitable news group out there somewhere.
Regards,
Theron Fuller
The Vietnam War has been over for a couple of decades now.
Reverend Sean O'Hara
Gharlane of Eddore wrote:
>
> In <35810858...@nomail.com> dont...@anymail.com writes:
> >
> > DUDE--
> > War's over. Been over for years. Let it go, that's it, deep breath
> > and let it out, ahhhhhh thats better eh? Now please keep any more Hanoi
> > Jane tirades out of this group, they have no place here.
> >
>
> who loved this country enough not to move to Canada. She made one tiny
> mealy-mouthed apology decades later, and it was too little, far too late.
> If she wants any of us who served in the military in that era to take
> her seriously, she'll donate her husband's entire fortune to the
> veterans' administration hospital program, which has been largely gutted
> in a constant search for funds by "liberal" politicians who "care about
> World Better, she can jolly well agitate to get some *proper* attention
> for the U.S. servicemen whose bodies, minds, and lives have been damaged
> by the Viet-Nam-era "Agent Orange" or the later "Gulf War Syndrome."
>
> public venue, implying that she should be forgiven her treason, her
> provision of aid & comfort to the enemy in time of war, try to remember
> that you're speaking to a good many folks who have reason to despise
> your attitude almost as much as we despise Ms. Hanoi.
Even though I disagree with the Viet Nam war, I find Hanoi Jane
absolutely reprehensible. It's one thing to disagree with a war. That's
fine, become a conscientious objector and serve in the medical corp
saving lives. Don't run off to Canada. If you're totally pascifistic,
take responsibility for your actions, and serve time in jail. That's
what Civil disobedience is about, not running off to another country
where you don't have responsibility.
What Jane Fonda did was beyond even that; she went to the enemy,
supported them, posed on their gun emplacement, and worse. Then, when
the war was over, she came back to America and married one of the most
powerful men in this nation. She didn't stay in Viet Nam; she's not
starving with them; she's enjoying hte benefits of the country she
betrayed.
That makes her a hypocritical, traitorous, bitch.
--
Reverend Sean O'Hara
You to can be an ordained minister: http://ulc.org/ulc
"These hermaphroditic worms try to stab one another with
their penises, while at the same time trying desperately to
avoid being stabbed."
Popular Science (July 1998)
Reverend Sean O'Hara
Theron Fuller wrote:
>
> Jane's husband just gave $1 billion to the United Nations. That should
> atone for some of Jane's sins committed 25 years ago. The Israelis now have
> good relations with Germany, the Catholics and Protestants are talking to
> each other in Northern Ireland. The South Africans have a reconciliation
> commission. The Vietnam War ended a couple of decades ago. It's time for
> all parties to call a truce.
>
United Nations is not some magical agency for good. If that were the
case, then Kurt Waldheim wouldn't have been humiliated when his
duplicity with the Nazis was revealed.
Your point about Germany is absurd since we are dealing with two totally
different governments. What Israel has relations with is not the Third
Reich, or even Weimar republic; it is the Federal German Republic.
Nor with Jane Fonda are we dealing with a group of people, but an
individual and her actions. The Jews can forgive the German people, but
I doubt any of them will ever forgive Hitler; I can overlook the HUAC's
actions as misguided but I still hope Joe McCarthy is rotting in Hell.
I don't mind the Anti Viet Nam protesters, but I still think Jane Fonda
should've stayed in Viet Nam, where she could be starving with the
rest of the country.
Dave Powell
Theron Fuller wrote in message <6m1no5$1j...@f02n01.cahwnet.gov>...
>
>Dave Powell wrote in message
><#sWpty#l9GA...@upnetnews02.moswest.msn.net>...
>>Theron Fuller wrote in message <6m0tr1$1j...@f02n01.cahwnet.gov>...
>>>
>>>Dave Powell wrote in message
>>><#4QLu65l...@upnetnews02.moswest.msn.net>...
>>>>Jim Phillips and Helen Hart wrote in message ...
>>>>>On 12 Jun 1998,
>>
>>
>>SNIP
>>
>>>atone for some of Jane's sins committed 25 years ago. The Israelis now
>>have
>>>good relations with Germany, the Catholics and Protestants are talking to
>>>each other in Northern Ireland. The South Africans have a reconciliation
>>>commission. The Vietnam War ended a couple of decades ago. It's time
for
>>>all parties to call a truce.
>>
>>
>>Vietnam, a couple years later, ceased to exist. However, the actions of
>>someone against their country in this way still are reprehensible. Despite
>>the "end of the cold war", people, even retired people, who are found to
>>have committed espionage against the US still go to jail. This is not
>>exactly what Fonda did, but it is close. She publicly humiliated POWs and
>>the US. As for the $1 Billion donation by Ted Turner, it was intended as
>>much as a gesture against the US for not paying UN Dues as it was as a
>>philanthropic statement, but that is neither here nor there. Your point
>>about peace is well met, unfortunately I will personally continue to be
>wary
>>until I am convinced that all our POWs came back after that war. This has
>>not yet occurred, and may never occur.
>
>
>Lt. Calley received a Presidential pardon for his war crimes, nobody was
>prosecuted for the massacre of 4 people at Kent State, Richard Nixon was
>allowed to resign and received a Presidential pardon for his crimes.
couple
>of decades ago.
I agree totally. Calley should have hung. As for the rest, Kent State
deserved action, and Nixon was an idiot, although his exit as it was could
be seen as best for the country in the situation it was in.
And to bring it all up on this news group under the
>pretense of "The Most Hated Women in Science Fiction (Which is a really
dumb
>thread even before "Jane" was inserted) is kinda reaching.
I understand. However, when it started, I couldn't let it pass. It was too
late for the pebbles to vote, as it were. A very passionate issue, it is. It
was also relevant to the thread (Which, being about CC, why was that in a ST
group?)
Oh well..
>If the subject must be discussed at all, then surely there is a more
>suitable news group out there somewhere.
Nod.... I'd be more than happy to drop it. Really nothing left to say. Some
hate her, some love her, and it will be as it is, as it was, for some time,
until someone else has a turn to write the history of it all.
>Regards,
>Theron Fuller
>
>The Vietnam War has been over for a couple of decades now.
"It was... the old wound." - Lancelot, "Morte D'Arthur."
>
WWS
Ambasador Caffinator wrote:
>
> I have a couple of mates tht were in the gulf war in the airforce. They
> don't seem to have any problems ... hell in fact when they got back they
> took up skate boarding and they are like in the late 20's ...
>
> Well ... may be not physical in thier situation :)
I never meant to imply that everyone should have suffered from it.
95% or better of the people exposed to those conditions walked
away from it with no ill effects whatsoever. But a certain
percentage did not, and it is Wrong, as Wrong as it can possibly
be to start a campaign to tell these people that it is all in
their heads, that they are shirkers and freeloaders looking
for a free ride, which is what the American government and the
medical establishment has done. Why did these people come down
with these symptoms? Researchers are starting to think that there
are some latent weaknesses and defects in certain portions of
the population, and a certain combination of cellular stresses
and foreign agents can trigger a cascade type failure of basic
biochemical functions. Which is why the work at trying to find
a "cause" and a "cure" is so frustrating - this is not a "disease"
of the kind that our medical establishment is geared up to find
and treat. Just like CFS, and fibromyalgia, and chemical
sensitivities.
Our medical facilities are still geared up to look for the Jonas
Salk "magic bullet" polio type cure. One cause, one quick fix.
But these diseases are caused by the combination of 100 different
stresses on an individuals unique biochemistry. ( if you think
that your biochemistry is not unique, then ask yourself why rejection
is such a big problem with transplants and skin grafts) Any treatment
is probably going to require personal enviornmental management for
years, and recovery will be slow and probably partial at best.
But it is a real disease, and these are honest, hardworking
dedicated people trying to figure out why their lives have been turned
to crap and having to deal with mindless people and a government
who want to yell "IT"S ALL IN YOUR HEAD!!" at every turn.
BTW, the Dallas Observer, an idependant little weekly that publishes
some very good investigative pieces that do not make the mainstream
press published a piece about 6 months ago about a group of Doctors
in a Dallas based medical school (not fly-by-night operators)
who began a research project to disprove the existence of GWS,
Instead, they have begun to develop some diagnostic epistemology.
When they published their findings, rather than being greeted with
applause they were derided by most of the medical establishment for
believing these "lunatics", they were threatened with the loss of all
funding and the death of their careers unless they brought back a
study with the "Right" results. They have stuck to their guns, and
represent the best hope of actually nailing down a cause of this thing.
I kept the article, and it is about 20 pages of cross referenced,
footnoted data, full of personal interviews with all the involved parties.
This is not some hearsay kind of story - it is documented and published.
So why doesn't this get any wider attention than it does? That IS the
question, really. But I think it comes down to the hard fact of, "who
cares about a bunch of sick people most of us don't know and will never
see?" I know some of these people, in fact have sought out some of
them. It's not that hard to do, it just takes a little effort.
And the ability to not prejudge.
--
<*>
/ \|/ .....
() --*--------------------------------------------------| WWS |
--. /|\ '''''
Ambasador Caffinator
I have a couple of mates tht were in the gulf war in the airforce. They
don't seem to have any problems ... hell in fact when they got back they
took up skate boarding and they are like in the late 20's ...
Well ... may be not physical in thier situation :)
Gharlane of Eddore
On "Hanoi Jane" Fonda and her "Let's Build An International Army" husband,
In <#sWpty#l9GA...@upnetnews02.moswest.msn.net>
"Dave Powell" <david_po...@msn.com> writes:
>
> I understand your point, and there was a truce at Paris, after which
> South Vietnam, a couple years later, ceased to exist. However, the
> actions of someone against their country in this way still are
> reprehensible. Despite the "end of the cold war", people, even
> retired people, who are found to have committed espionage against
> the US still go to jail. This is not exactly what Fonda did,
> but it is close. She publicly humiliated POWs and the US. As for
> the $1 Billion donation by Ted Turner, it was intended as much as
> a gesture against the US for not paying UN Dues as it was as a
> philanthropic statement, but that is neither here nor there.
> Your point about peace is well met, unfortunately I will personally
> continue to be wary until I am convinced that all our POWs came back
> after that war. This has not yet occurred, and may never occur.
>
Abso-danged lutely. Prime-Time-"News"-disseminable *appearance*
of "peace" is vastly more marketable and managerially valuable
than reality, because the percentage of the populace in possession
of real information is simply not great enough to materially
affect things. Viet Nam vets can march around in "Don't Let
MIA's be KIA's" tee-shirts until they're blue in the face, and
the vast majority of the populace takes they attitude that we
vets were somehow at fault for having been there in the first
place, and that it's been so many years that none of our missing
prisoners could possibly be alive anyway; people do not *understand*
why we want the rest of our troops brought home, and why we think
that the Beautiful Wonderful Pretty Actress Person should be
tried for treason. ( And not executed; no reason to make a
Famous Martyr out of her, just put her in a prison with all the
same amenities that the average U.S. POW had in that war. For
about twenty-five years. With the same kind of chow and medical
care our POW's had..... One of the major points Ms. Bleeding-
Heart Liberal missed entirely is that the U.S. has a tradition
of FEEDING and HOUSING prisoners, and does not make it a custom
to torture prisoners for entertainment. I couldn't, in good
conscience, espouse this sort of treatment for anyone, but
doubt I'd complain were it applied to Ms. Hanoi. But I digress. )
As for the stuff about the U.N......
The situation has a lot to do with the fact that, with the splintering
of the Russian Union, the "cold war" sort of stopped existing; so the
U.N. had to go out and start scrabbling for something to do to justify
its existence. ( In much the same way that several large charities have
sought out new goals when their keynote diseases are finally licked --
so that they don't have to disband and go home, but can keep their nice
cushy jobs. ) The U.N. seems to have become tremendously interested
in gratuitous and non-decisive inteference in brushfire local wars,
door-to-door confiscation of privately-held arms in areas where it
intervenes, gung-ho and capriciously selective involvement in the
"war on drugs," and shipping food and support into countries which
have gutted their economies to produce war materiel and engage in
armed conflict.
I know it's politically incorrect to not be impressed with the U.N.,
but as far as I'm concerned, the only difference between the U.N. and
a "Russian Mafia" "protection" operation is that the U.N. is in a
position to con more people into working for it.
Think of the Canadian troops who, wearing Cute Little Blue U.N. Helmets,
engaged in acts of such barbarism that they made "My Lai" look trivial....
( I frankly didn't even believe it when I first heard of it! But the
Canuck government, unlike our own, doesn't seem to bury such things. )
and then reflect on the fact that the vast majority of the folks in
those little blue helmets come from countries where life, property,
and human rights are held in *vastly* greater contempt than in Canada.
Do *YOU* want U.N. troops quartered in your area to keep order?
Knowing where they came from, and their record in civilian population
management? I sure as heck don't, and seem to remember King George
using a similar approach to civil management, if only briefly.
U.N. Troops... .the modern Hessians.
Unless Ted "Numb-Cortex" Turner had some way to assure himself that
every single cent of the dough he donated got spent *solely* for
educational and medical/health projects, I figure he's contributed to
military actions, world-wide, and increased suffering to a degree
no other single man may have caused in the past. ( And even medical
and health projects still contribute negatively; every donated bit of
resource simply frees up that much more of the local economy for
investment in armed confrontation instead of the food and medicine
now being supplied. ( This was a major feature of the "Cold War"
era; the U.S. shipping grain to Russia to feed the people who were
going hungry while the Russian Gross National Product was going
into making huge nuke subs and the World's Greatest Tank Corps. )
What I'm saying here is that Good Works and Contributions can be
managed at the LOCAL level, but cannot be inserted at the national
or supra-national level without exacerabating the problem instead
of helping to ameliorate it.
If he wanted to make a world-bettering donation, he SHOULD have
stuffed a billion into the International Red Cross, or setting
up a humungous number of permanently-funded competitive scholarships.
A billion to the U.N. ? Feh. I've known far too many people who
are now dead due to the U.N.'s existence.
A bunch of my friends came back from visiting Saddam Hussein,
in boxes, but Hussein still has his job, and *nothing* was
accomplished by "Desert Storm" except the expenditures of
lives, material, and resource. If the U.N. was interested
in peace and the future, Hussein would have been extracted
at any cost, and tried for war crimes. As it was, what he
got was self-aggrandizing encouragement, because it had
become obvious that the U.N. couldn't hurt him. And since
he was still running the country, he was *right* *there*,
available for future demonization, any time someone needed a
little publicity or a photo op......
In other words, Turner donating money to the U.N. just made his
traitor wife look like a piker, as far as I'm concerned.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Obviously, this is a personal OPINION, and does not reflect any
beliefs or attitudes of my ISP, its supporting organizations, or
any persons or organizations with whom I've ever been involved.
But the large gray cat who lives a few buildings away agrees
with me completely.
Chris Spencer
On 12 Jun 1998 18:15:30 GMT, ghar...@ccshp1.ccs.csus.edu (Gharlane of Eddore)
wrote:
>In <35810858...@nomail.com> dont...@anymail.com writes:
>>
>> DUDE--
>> War's over. Been over for years. Let it go, that's it, deep breath
>> and let it out, ahhhhhh thats better eh? Now please keep any more Hanoi
>> Jane tirades out of this group, they have no place here.
>public venue, implying that she should be forgiven her treason, her
>provision of aid & comfort to the enemy in time of war, try to remember
>that you're speaking to a good many folks who have reason to despise
>your attitude almost as much as we despise Ms. Hanoi.
But Gharlane, it wasn't a war. It was just a police action.
Chris ("Running very fast towards a fire extinguisher") Spencer
Ale...@my-dejanews.com
In article <358405B7...@norfolk.infi.net>,
"Aubrey W. Adkins" <xazq...@norfolk.infi.net> wrote:
>
> Tokyo Rose and Axis Sally expressed regrets also, but they both did long
> terms in federal prison.
Are you sure about that? I just saw Tokyo Rose on TV - the History Channel
was doing some bit or other on her. They didn't mention prison. Besides, I
was under the impression that Tokyo Rose was a Japanese citizen who spoke
really good English, not an American. If that's true, the US has no
jurisdiction over her and there's no way she would have gone to a US federal
prison.
> Jane should have done at least 30 years or so.
<<obscenity deleted>>
> What she did, whether you believed in the Vietnam Conflict or not,
"Whether you believed in the Vietnam Conflict or not" is not an unimportant
distinction. If you did not believe in the Vietnam debacle (as well you
should not have), you would recognize it for the unconscionable act of
American imperialist aggression it was. The Vietnam War was not some
impersonal event like weather - it was a horror deliberately inflicted on the
Vietnamese people and on the American soldiers sent there by the US
government. It is one of the many great crimes of this century. What Jane
Fonda did is perfectly reasonable and respectable given the atrocity she was
fighting. When such barbarism is committed, it falls on people of good
conscience like Jane to oppose it by any means necessary.
> was
> tatamount to high treason.
Not really. And even so, America was wrong. She was on the right side.
> Normally in time of war they shoot you for
> that.
Of course they do. Politcally speaking, they have to. But that doesn't make
it right.
> As far as apologies go, the kid who recently apologized for
> killing his mom and two of his classmates apologized. It didn't keep him
> from getting enough time to stay locked up for several lifetimes,
> consecutively.
Goes to show you what happens when you're raised by hillbilly Christians.
> I would opt for shooting her, if that penalty were available and we
> could convict her.
Whoa! You're off the deep end there, Aub. BTW, this is *Seriously* OT.
Direct responses to my email.
> Aubrey
>
>
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
Theron Fuller
Gharlane of Eddore wrote in message <6m2f22$j...@news.csus.edu>...
Gharlane is entirely correct. What we have is a situation where Hanoi Jane
has gone unpunished for her war crimes for over 2 decades now. And her
Trilateral Commission husband is now committed even worse crimes against the
world order by financing a bloated, collapsing, "One World Order" United
Nations.
All self-respecting fans should take immediate action against these 2
criminals. Ted Turner probably continues to make obscene amounts of profit
off all aspects of the T-N-TEE-HAH operation, even after the sale to
Time-Warner. Babylon 5 fans should show their disgust for Hanoi Jane and
her World-Army husband Ted Turner by organizing an immediate boycott of
anything associated with T-N-TEE-HAH.
Refuse to watch the Babylon 5 series. Don't contribute to Ted Turner's
profit mongering by buying Time-Warner licensed Babylon 5 merchandise.
Write a letter to T-N-TEE-HAH and tell them you're not going to watch their
station ever again. Post messages on rastb5.Denebeim (formerly
rastb5.RomperRoom) telling Joe Straczynski you're boycotting Babylon 5 until
He breaks all ties with T-N-TEE-HAH.
Urge Dave Potter to organize and direct this vital effort. Babylon 5 fans
Unite! Punish Hanoi Jane now!
Regards,
Theron Fuller
Theron Fuller
Gharlane of Eddore wrote in message <6m2f22$j...@news.csus.edu>...
(Stuff Deleted)
>Obviously, this is a personal OPINION, and does not reflect any
>beliefs or attitudes of my ISP, its supporting organizations, or
>any persons or organizations with whom I've ever been involved.
>But the large gray cat who lives a few buildings away agrees
>with me completely.
Aw c'mon Dave. Your ISP is your employer, Cal State Sacremento. Looks like
you and Ford Thaxton have been having some exchanges again, huh?
Regards,
Theron Fuller
Reverend Sean O'Hara
Ale...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
> "Whether you believed in the Vietnam Conflict or not" is not an unimportant
> distinction. If you did not believe in the Vietnam debacle (as well you
> should not have), you would recognize it for the unconscionable act of
> American imperialist aggression it was. The Vietnam War was not some
> impersonal event like weather - it was a horror deliberately inflicted on the
> Vietnamese people and on the American soldiers sent there by the US
> government. It is one of the many great crimes of this century. What Jane
> Fonda did is perfectly reasonable and respectable given the atrocity she was
> fighting. When such barbarism is committed, it falls on people of good
> conscience like Jane to oppose it by any means necessary.
>
for your actions. Thoreau was willing to go to jail for his opposition
to the Mexican-American War; Jesus let himself be executed for upsetting
the status quo; Rommel didn't resist when the SS came for him. A person
who really believed that the Viet Nam Conflict was wrong (as opposed to
those too cowardly to serve) should've gone to prison for that belief,
just to prove the point, and not run off to a foreign country, whether
Russia, England, Canada, or North Viet Nam. Jane Fonda did just that.
Then, when the war was over, she came back to the country she opposed,
made money in films, and married a millionaire. Her actions had no
consequences. As far as I'm concerned, she should've stayed in Viet
> > was
> > tatamount to high treason.
>
> Not really. And even so, America was wrong. She was on the right side.
>
Yeah! Just like America was wrong in the Northern War of Aggression (or,
as you Yanks call it, the Civil War).
You see, it's all a matter of perspective. America may have been wrong
(I personally feel LBJ and his generals were morons who couldn't
execute the war properly), but it was also wrong in the Mexican- and
Spanish-American Wars, only far more so. In Viet Nam, at least the
government of South Viet Nam wanted us there, unlike the other two
conflicts named.
Dennis Heffernan
Ale...@my-dejanews.com wrote in message <6m45lc$o5t$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
|"Whether you believed in the Vietnam Conflict or not" is not an unimportant
|distinction. If you did not believe in the Vietnam debacle (as well you
|should not have), you would recognize it for the unconscionable act of
|American imperialist aggression it was.
Um, no. We had interests in Viet Nam.
It was STUPID to protect them -- they were going red no matter what we
did, it was just a question of time -- but perfectly legitimate.
|> was
|> tatamount to high treason.
|
|Not really. And even so, America was wrong. She was on the right side.
From the Constitution:
SECTION 3. Treason defined. Proof of. Punishment
1. Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying
war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and
comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the
testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in
open court.
2. The Congress shall have power to declare the punishment of
treason, but no attainder of treason shall work corruption of blood,
or forfeiture, except during the life of the person attainted.
There is no "not really" about it. The only thing keeping Hanoi Jane
out of jail was the fact that there was no formal declaration of war. But
it was a war, and she did give aid and comfort to the enemy. She's a traitor.
Dennis F. Heffernan UO: Venture (Catskills) df...@worldnet.att.net
Montclair State U #include <disclaim.h> ICQ:9154048 CompSci/Philosophy
"You bitch about the present and blame it on the past/I'd like to find your
inner child and kick its little ass!" - D. Henley/G. Frey, "Get Over It"
Theron Fuller
Reverend Sean O'Hara wrote in message <3585D7...@pop.erols.com>...
>Ale...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>>
>> "Whether you believed in the Vietnam Conflict or not" is not an
unimportant
>> distinction. If you did not believe in the Vietnam debacle (as well you
>> should not have), you would recognize it for the unconscionable act of
>> American imperialist aggression it was. The Vietnam War was not some
>> impersonal event like weather - it was a horror deliberately inflicted on
the
>> Vietnamese people and on the American soldiers sent there by the US
>> government. It is one of the many great crimes of this century. What
Jane
>> Fonda did is perfectly reasonable and respectable given the atrocity she
was
>> fighting. When such barbarism is committed, it falls on people of good
>> conscience like Jane to oppose it by any means necessary.
>>
>No. If you oppose something, you do so openly, and take responsibility
>for your actions. Thoreau was willing to go to jail for his opposition
>to the Mexican-American War; Jesus let himself be executed for upsetting
>the status quo; Rommel didn't resist when the SS came for him. A person
>who really believed that the Viet Nam Conflict was wrong (as opposed to
>those too cowardly to serve) should've gone to prison for that belief,
>just to prove the point, and not run off to a foreign country, whether
>Russia, England, Canada, or North Viet Nam. Jane Fonda did just that.
>Then, when the war was over, she came back to the country she opposed,
>made money in films, and married a millionaire. Her actions had no
>consequences. As far as I'm concerned, she should've stayed in Viet
>Nam, where she could be starving with the rest of the country.
But Lt. Calley received a Presidential pardon for his war crimes, Richard
Nixon received a Presidential pardon for his crimes against the U.S.
Constitution, the National Guardsmen who massacred 4 people at Kent State
never were punished, those FBI agents who illegally tapped phones and bugged
homes and offices of war protestors never were punished, and IRS personnel
who illegally used their positions to go after opponents of the war never
were punished.
So, after 20 years, I'd call it pretty much a wash and say let's forgive and
forget all around.
>
>> > was
>> > tatamount to high treason.
>>
>> Not really. And even so, America was wrong. She was on the right side.
>>
>Yeah! Just like America was wrong in the Northern War of Aggression (or,
>as you Yanks call it, the Civil War).
>
>You see, it's all a matter of perspective. America may have been wrong
>(I personally feel LBJ and his generals were morons who couldn't
>execute the war properly), but it was also wrong in the Mexican- and
>Spanish-American Wars, only far more so. In Viet Nam, at least the
>government of South Viet Nam wanted us there, unlike the other two
>conflicts named.
Again, there's enough blame to go around for all sides. Life goes on. Bury
the thread.
Regards,
Theron Fuller
WWS
jenny anderson wrote:
>
> Organization: "Hiiiiiiii! My Naaaame is Braaaaaaak!" - Brak
I like anyone who likes Brak. Try visualizing Brak singing,
"You make me feel like a Natural Woman".
"I used to be trmporarily insane, but now I'm just stupid!"
- Brak
Captain Infinity
In article <35874F33.CBC79ED6@no_spam.tyler.net>
WWS wrote:
>I like anyone who likes Brak. Try visualizing Brak singing,
>"You make me feel like a Natural Woman".
I've always heard that as: "You make me feel, like, unnatural, woman."
> / \|/ .....
> () --*--------------------------------------------------| WWS |
>--. /|\ '''''
^ ^
/|\ /|\
| |
| Wuhwuhs, as soon as I figure out what |
this is, I'm going to be mighty offended. |
|
I already know that this
is a flaming Q-Tip.
**
Captain Infinity
Robert Holland
Captain Infinity wrote:
>
> In article <khaightE...@netcom.com>
> Kyle Haight wrote:
>
> >In article <3581b519...@news-f.std.com>,
> >Captain Infinity <Infi...@world.std.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>And then speak your mind and express yourself as you see fit.
> >>
> >>After all, that's one of the rights they fought to protect.
> >
> >Considering that the original poster basically told anybody who wanted
> >to express negative opinions of Hanoi Jane to shut up and go away,
> >reacting like Gharlane was advocating some kind of censorship is a bit
> >bizarre.
>
> Is that what I was doing?
>
> Ah, well. Whatever.
> As Bobby Holland might say, I'm not responsible for your interpretation.
Trollerize me, will ya?!
No, *I'm* not responsible for Kyle's misinterpretation.
*You* might very well be...
Har!
> Or maybe I am. Am I that good a troller? Or am I just transparent?
Obviously, you have mind powers that forced Kyle's hands
to the keyboard. Gherkin's too.
You have a dirty mind now.
> In any event, "Bizarre" and I are old friends.
Say, I found a lot of cut-out B5 merchandise down at the
local bazaar. That stuff just doesn't move!
Bryan Lambert
On Wed, 17 Jun 1998 00:08:03 -0500, WWS <wschmidt@no_spam.tyler.net> wrote:
>jenny anderson wrote:
>>
>> Organization: "Hiiiiiiii! My Naaaame is Braaaaaaak!" - Brak
>
>I like anyone who likes Brak. Try visualizing Brak singing,
>"You make me feel like a Natural Woman".
>
>"I used to be trmporarily insane, but now I'm just stupid!"
> - Brak
Well, to muddy the waters a bit, Brak has, on various occasions, referred to
himself as:
1) A cat-monkey
2) Not a cat
3) Not a monkey
If Brak is a Kzin, he's a tailless one, with a predilection for considerably
more clothing than your average Kzin. Of course, that could be related to his
mental difficulties. Maybe Kzin, like the legend about the brontosaurus, had a
brain in his tail?
"One minute I was a happy space pirate, looting and pillaging, and then, POOM!
I'm as dumb as a doornail!"
Bryan Lambert <bryn...@minn.net>, RATMM's Official Biggest Wuss!
Keeper: "Modern Space Ghost FAQ"
See my "And Speaking Of" toy column on rec.toys.action-figures.discuss
Visit my spiff web site, The Messy Canvas, at http://www1.minn.net/~bryncthy
------------------------------------------------------------------
"Think I'm the only one who noticed that the most guy moment of
the year, the winning of the World Series, consists of a bunch of
men running around kissing and hugging, grabbing each other's
butts, and crying while Queen's "We Are The Champions" plays in
the background?"-Chad Van Wagner
sgwm
On Wed, 17 Jun 1998 10:51:54 -0700, Robert Holland <rhol...@wco.com>
wrote:
>Obviously, you have mind powers that forced Kyle's hands
>to the keyboard. Gherkin's too.
You just keep your hands on your own gherkin. :o)
>> In any event, "Bizarre" and I are old friends.
>
>Say, I found a lot of cut-out B5 merchandise down at the
>local bazaar. That stuff just doesn't move!
You know, sometimes I feel like taking JMS and strapping him into a
chair, much in the style that Malcolm MacDowell is strapped down in
Stanley Kubrick's film rendition of A Clockwork Orange. Then, I would
make him watch There All The Honor Lies interspersed with pictures of
the Delenn\Sheridan\GKar dolls, complete with ill fitting uniforms,
and these cardboard cutouts. Seems fitting somehow.
Still, I've yet to hear anyone using those cutouts the way some people
have been using similar cutouts of the Spice Girls (insert suitable
expletive in here eg. The Spice Corporate Fuck Puppets). A gun club in
Cumbria close to the border with Scotland has been using them for
targets...
--
My candle burns at both ends, it will not last the night,
but for all my foes and all my friends, it gives a lovely light.
Edna St. Vincent Milay
First Fig
Rat & Swan
**siiighhhh**
Try this again.
ONE member of Larry Niven's felinoid race is a Kzin. That's kay zee eye
enn. Kzin.
TWO members of Larry Niven's felinoid race are a fight... er... well.
they are also Kzinti. Plural. Kay zee eye enn tee eye! KzinTI.
As in "Both Kzinti stared in disbelief at Speaker To Animals, as the
Kzin stood alone."
Anyone seen any Puppeteers about recently? All took off, did they? H'm.
Swan
Psi Corps
Watch out for Lucifer's Hamster!
WWS
Rat & Swan wrote:
>
> **siiighhhh**
>
> Try this again.
>
> ONE member of Larry Niven's felinoid race is a Kzin. That's kay zee eye
> enn. Kzin.
>
> TWO members of Larry Niven's felinoid race are a fight... er... well.
> they are also Kzinti. Plural. Kay zee eye enn tee eye! KzinTI.
But last time I saw Brak, he was beside himself with joy!
>
> As in "Both Kzinti stared in disbelief at Speaker To Animals, as the
> Kzin stood alone."
Braaaaaak has double vision, too.
Braaaaaak has double vision, too.
>
> Anyone seen any Puppeteers about recently? All took off, did they? H'm.
They're on "Muppets tonite". Disney channel.
>
> Swan
>
> Psi Corps
>
> Watch out for Lucifer's Hamster!
Just keep him away from those pants legs.
--
_______________________________________________________WWS______________________
John Savard
Ale...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>"Whether you believed in the Vietnam Conflict or not" is not an unimportant
>distinction. If you did not believe in the Vietnam debacle (as well you
>should not have), you would recognize it for the unconscionable act of
>American imperialist aggression it was. The Vietnam War was not some
>impersonal event like weather - it was a horror deliberately inflicted on the
>Vietnamese people and on the American soldiers sent there by the US
>government. It is one of the many great crimes of this century. What Jane
>Fonda did is perfectly reasonable and respectable given the atrocity she was
>fighting. When such barbarism is committed, it falls on people of good
>conscience like Jane to oppose it by any means necessary.
As the U.S. never declared war on North Vietnam, there were some
technical obstacles to a treason conviction.
However, the acts of the Viet Cong in South Vietnam - the constant
pattern of cruel, wanton, direct, and deliberate attacks on civilians
- show who were really the barbarians. What about the Vietnamese Boat
People - who took such terrible risks, being desperate to escape what
was a cruel and despotic regime?
The U.S. record in Vietnam was, unfortunately, not without blemish.
But the worst thing the U.S. ever did to South Vietnam was its
abandonment to the Communists - by the U.S. Congress during the Ford
presidency.
John Savard
William Burns
On Mon, 15 Jun 1998 22:02:20 GMT, Ale...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>In article <358405B7...@norfolk.infi.net>,
> "Aubrey W. Adkins" <xazq...@norfolk.infi.net> wrote:
>> Tokyo Rose and Axis Sally expressed regrets also, but they both did long
>> terms in federal prison.
>Are you sure about that? I just saw Tokyo Rose on TV - the History Channel
>was doing some bit or other on her. They didn't mention prison. Besides, I
>was under the impression that Tokyo Rose was a Japanese citizen who spoke
>really good English, not an American. If that's true, the US has no
>jurisdiction over her and there's no way she would have gone to a US federal
>prison.
As I understand it, one of the Tokyo Rose's was an American citizen
visiting her grandparents when hostilities broke out. She was unable
to go home and the Japanese gave her a choice of Propaganda Radio or
prison. The others were Japanese citizens. I believe the American
was tried for treason by the Occupying Force but I don't recall what
sentence was imposed, if any.
Trying to remember where I heard this. I believe it was a series of
documentary films entitled _The War Years_, but am not certain.
No idea what happened to Axis Sally. Rose was a bit more infamous.
- William
"Every wise man loves his own cat, but
even the foolish love other people's kittens."
---Robert Lynd
Blackhawk
> **siiighhhh**
>
> Try this again.
>
> ONE member of Larry Niven's felinoid race is a Kzin. That's kay zee eye
> enn. Kzin.
>
> TWO members of Larry Niven's felinoid race are a fight... er... well.
> they are also Kzinti. Plural. Kay zee eye enn tee eye! KzinTI.
Gesundheit!
**
Blackhawk
(sniff)
Nelson Lu
In article <brianb1-1706...@cx31002-a.omhaw1.ne.home.com>,
Brian Barjenbruch <bri...@home.com> wrote:
>>As I understand it, one of the Tokyo Rose's was an American citizen
>>visiting her grandparents when hostilities broke out. She was unable
>>to go home and the Japanese gave her a choice of Propaganda Radio or
>>prison.
>
>were. And they weren't with America.
Easier said than done. You can't emphasize with her situation unless you
yourself had been put into that situation. Think "Chain of Command" as an
example.
Morgana
>jenny anderson wrote:
>>
>> Organization: "Hiiiiiiii! My Naaaame is Braaaaaaak!" - Brak
>
>I like anyone who likes Brak. Try visualizing Brak singing,
>"You make me feel like a Natural Woman".
Ohh...I love him singing..."I'm a cucumber.." ;)
----
Morgana.
recook77
Here's a thought: Brak is in fact one of CJ Cherryh's hani.
--
"Planet Earth is blue and there's nothing I can do."
David Bowie, "Space Oddity"
Blackhawk wrote in message ...
Dave Powell
Actually, thinking of Claudia, that new song by Aerosmith (From that
Armageddon movie that's coming out) sort of reminds me of her, and her
leaving a certain show...
Dave Powell
Dave Powell
John W Kennedy wrote in message <3586B3F8...@ibm.net>...
>tomlinson wrote:
>>
>> I have come across a number of these, in truth. Most to the effect that
>> Arnold was one of the colonies' more competent generals (although the
only
>> bit of generalship of Arnold's that I can call to mind right away is his
>> failed assault on Canada, culminating in a botched attack on Quebec late
>> in 1775.)
>
>No, Arnold really was a successful general on the US side, and he fought
>bravely and well, though the Quebec campaign ultimately failed. That's
>why there's a monument to his leg at Saratoga; since it was lost before
>his treason, it doesn't share in his shame.
That's an awesome concept.. very deep, if you think about it. Also, Robert
E. Lee was a hero in the Mexican War (Though his situation was different in
certain ways from Arnolds's)
David Powell
James C. Ellis
Brian Barjenbruch wrote:
>
> >As I understand it, one of the Tokyo Rose's was an American citizen
> >visiting her grandparents when hostilities broke out. She was unable
> >to go home and the Japanese gave her a choice of Propaganda Radio or
> >prison.
>
> The fact that she didn't *take* prison, shows where her real loyalties
> were. And they weren't with America.
Lessee... the choice between a brutal Japanese 'prison' during the
war, complete with probable rapes and beatings, or a nice, relatively
safe and comfy American prison afterward (_if_ she can't beat the rap).
There's a limit on what a person should be forced to endure for one's
country. Show some sympathy, o ye product of a safe and slothful age.
Biff
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------
"Me? Lady, I'm your worst nightmare - a pumpkin with a gun.
[...] Euminides this! " - Mervyn, the Sandman #66
-------------------------------------------------------------------