From: Digestifier To: Subject: Dead-Flames Digest #676 Dead-Flames Digest #676, Volume #48 Wed, 26 Oct 05 09:00:02 PDT Contents: Re: OK, They've Gone Too Far Now (NDC) (joker4153@comcast.net) Re: OK, They've Gone Too Far Now (NDC) (bigamps) B&P Offer: Was Pssssst! (Dead Content) ("Roger") Re: India CDRs? ("Dylanstubs") Re: OK, They've Gone Too Far Now (NDC) (The Lord of Eltingville) Re: West must become smarter in use of force: general (NDC) (JimK) Re: OK, They've Gone Too Far Now (NDC) (JimK) Re: White House Indictment vigil(NDC) (JC Martin) Re: Condi v Hillary 2008? (memory705@hotmail.com) Re: New SKB SBD 10/22/05cm LMA ("Rick L") Re: OK, They've Gone Too Far Now (NDC) ("tim_ratdog") "God" is great ("Tim Ujin") Re: "God" is great ("dazed&perfuzed") Re: cheney = traitor (Kelly Humphries) Re: New SKB SBD 10/22/05cm LMA ("Olompali4") Re: Condi v Hillary 2008? (JC Martin) Re: what should the United States do with combatants who don't belong to regular armies? ("Sparky the Wonder Dog") Re: A Conservative viewpoint.... ("Sparky the Wonder Dog") Bob Dylan 11/24/03 on Dime ("Dylanstubs") Re: what should the United States do with combatants who don't belong to regular armies? ("Sparky the Wonder Dog") Re: Condi v Hillary 2008? (memory705@hotmail.com) Re: A Conservative viewpoint.... ("Sparky the Wonder Dog") Re: cheney = traitor ("Everybody's Gonna Be Happy") Re: cheney = traitor ("Everybody's Gonna Be Happy") Re: A Conservative viewpoint.... (DG) Re: cheney = traitor ("Everybody's Gonna Be Happy") Re: cheney = traitor ("Everybody's Gonna Be Happy") ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: joker4153@comcast.net Subject: Re: OK, They've Gone Too Far Now (NDC) Date: 26 Oct 2005 06:59:23 -0700 I don't believe it. ------------------------------ From: bigamps Subject: Re: OK, They've Gone Too Far Now (NDC) Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 14:03:50 GMT scarletbgonias@hotmail.com wrote: > Now the Bush Administration is attacking a valuable "news source". They > must be stopped. > > Theresa > -------------------------------------------- > http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/24/business/24onion.html?incamp=article_popular_1 > > Protecting the Presidential Seal. No Joke. > KATHARINE Q. SEELYE > Published: October 24, 2005 > > You might have thought that the White House had enough on its plate > late last month, what with its search for a new Supreme Court nominee, > the continuing war in Iraq and the C.I.A. leak investigation. But it > found time to add another item to its agenda - stopping The Onion, the > satirical newspaper, from using the presidential seal. .... Ignore it, it's a red herring designed to take attention off of Plame-gate. ------------------------------ From: "Roger" Subject: B&P Offer: Was Pssssst! (Dead Content) Date: 26 Oct 2005 07:09:31 -0700 anyone wanting 2-28-69 (or any of the other Fillmore shows, if you don't have d/l capability) can contact me at: may306 at lightlynx dot net (fix email addy with the obvious) This offer is open to all. Roger ------------------------------ From: "Dylanstubs" Subject: Re: India CDRs? Date: 26 Oct 2005 07:14:02 -0700 > scarletbgonias@hotmail.com wrote: > The Taiwan disc manaufacturing process was outsourced to India. Damn outsourcing. :) ------------------------------ From: The Lord of Eltingville Subject: Re: OK, They've Gone Too Far Now (NDC) Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 09:59:32 -0400 "scarletbgonias@hotmail.com" wrote: > > Now the Bush Administration is attacking a valuable "news source". They > must be stopped. > > Theresa > -------------------------------------------- > http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/24/business/24onion.html?incamp=article_popular_1 > > Protecting the Presidential Seal. No Joke. > KATHARINE Q. SEELYE > Published: October 24, 2005 > > You might have thought that the White House had enough on its plate > late last month, what with its search for a new Supreme Court nominee, > the continuing war in Iraq and the C.I.A. leak investigation. But it > found time to add another item to its agenda - stopping The Onion, the > satirical newspaper, from using the presidential seal. > > [...] Has anyone else noticed how some of BushCo's most vocal buttmonkeys (Buck, Chunk, Shelby, and even crazy ol' Marky Williams) have grown unusually quiet over the past month or so? I guess it must be pretty embarrassing to be a republican these days... ------------------------------ From: JimK Subject: Re: West must become smarter in use of force: general (NDC) Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 10:25:13 -0400 Reply-To: jkezwind@comcast.net On Wed, 26 Oct 2005 14:01:45 +0900, "band beyond description" <123@456.com> wrote: >Not with Bush in there... >---- > >BC-NATO-UTILITY (MILITARY FEATURE, PICTURE) FEATURE-West must become >smarter in use of force-general > > By Paul Taylor > > BRUSSELS, Oct 26 (Reuters) - Why does the West so often win wars and then >go on to lose the peace? > > Above all, he insists, the use of force must be ``nested'' in an overall >political strategy to achieve the desired objective. That is where the >United States went wrong in Iraq, Smith contends, failing to plan properly >for the post-war occupation and reconstruction, to anticipate the resistance >or to understand how to >win Iraqi hearts and minds. > > With all due respect to the General, I think we already knew this. In fact, it's exactly what many feared would happen even before the war began. Even the war hawks are now beginning to understand it. JimK ------------------------------ From: JimK Subject: Re: OK, They've Gone Too Far Now (NDC) Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 10:27:31 -0400 Reply-To: jkezwind@comcast.net On Wed, 26 Oct 2005 14:03:50 GMT, bigamps wrote: >scarletbgonias@hotmail.com wrote: >> Now the Bush Administration is attacking a valuable "news source". They >> must be stopped. >> >> Theresa >> -------------------------------------------- >> http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/24/business/24onion.html?incamp=article_popular_1 >> >> Protecting the Presidential Seal. No Joke. >> KATHARINE Q. SEELYE >> Published: October 24, 2005 >> >> You might have thought that the White House had enough on its plate >> late last month, what with its search for a new Supreme Court nominee, >> the continuing war in Iraq and the C.I.A. leak investigation. But it >> found time to add another item to its agenda - stopping The Onion, the >> satirical newspaper, from using the presidential seal. >... > >Ignore it, it's a red herring designed to take attention off of Plame-gate. Aw, it's just another fake Onion story. JimK ------------------------------ From: JC Martin Subject: Re: White House Indictment vigil(NDC) Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 14:50:08 GMT Excerpt from http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9824067/: Interviews include agent’s neighbors Fitzgerald has been in Washington since Monday and over the last two days dispatched FBI agents to conduct some 11th-hour interviews, according to lawyers close to the investigation, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the secrecy of grand jury proceedings. One set of interviews occurred in the neighborhood of Bush administration critic Joseph Wilson, whose wife Valerie Plame was outed as an undercover CIA officer. Agents asked neighbors whether they had any inkling that Plame works for the CIA. “They wanted to know how well we knew her, which is very well,” said neighbor David Tillotson. “Did we know anything about her position before the story broke? Absolutely not.” =================== But she really wasn't covert! #### :-P -JC ------------------------------ From: memory705@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Condi v Hillary 2008? Date: 26 Oct 2005 07:53:14 -0700 JC Martin wrote: > Sparky the Wonder Dog wrote: > > Kurt--why do you think she is so unelectable? Too left-wing for the > > country? Too right-wing for Democrats? > > > She doesn't have a warm personality and isn't very convincing as a > salesperson. And she's seen by moderates as slippery. Without > moderates, the Democrats can't win a national election. Heck, Hillary > is the most divisive Democrat out there. Kurt is right. > > Condi can't win the Republican nomination at this point either. A near > agnostic, single, black woman who acted as Bush's lap dog? No way. Why > do people take Dick Morris seriously anyway? > > -JC Near agnostic? Where on Earth did you get that idea? I read her biography and she's a very religious person and was raised by a preacher. ------------------------------ From: "Rick L" Subject: Re: New SKB SBD 10/22/05cm LMA Date: 26 Oct 2005 07:57:26 -0700 Olompali4 wrote: > http://www.archive.org/audio/etree-details-db.php?id=30436&from=landingReviews Thanks for the heads up. ------------------------------ From: "tim_ratdog" Subject: Re: OK, They've Gone Too Far Now (NDC) Date: 26 Oct 2005 07:59:33 -0700 The Lord of Eltingville wrote: > Has anyone else noticed how some of BushCo's most vocal buttmonkeys > (Buck, Chunk, Shelby, and even crazy ol' Marky Williams) have grown > unusually quiet over the past month or so? Bad form. This is like saying (while on the road) "gee my car hasn't broken down in a while" :-) > I guess it must be pretty embarrassing to be a republican these days... Only if folks feel like keeping the divide in the country and possibly making it worse. I personally don't feel that the Republican voters are responsible for the crimes committed by the administration. Rather than rub a smelly "I told you so" in anyone's face I think we need to talk about dealing with criminal politicians. -tim ------------------------------ From: "Tim Ujin" Subject: "God" is great Date: 26 Oct 2005 08:01:50 -0700 I thoroughly enjoyed the Cream show last night. Clapton sounded fabulous, in some ways better than ever. "Stormy Monday"(!?) "Brave Ulysses" and show-ending "Sunshine of Your Love>jam" were highlights for me. Much more of a polished, charted execution of the material than back in the day - much less jamming - but totally compelling nonetheless. They played for two hours. ------------------------------ From: "dazed&perfuzed" Subject: Re: "God" is great Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 11:12:24 -0400 I was there last night too. I agree with you but what amazed me more than anything was Ginger Baker's playing. This guy is 65 and plays like he's 20. "Tim Ujin" wrote in message news:1130338910.688566.175870@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... >I thoroughly enjoyed the Cream show last night. Clapton sounded > fabulous, in some ways better than ever. "Stormy Monday"(!?) "Brave > Ulysses" and show-ending "Sunshine of Your Love>jam" were highlights > for me. Much more of a polished, charted execution of the material > than back in the day - much less jamming - but totally compelling > nonetheless. They played for two hours. > ------------------------------ From: Kelly Humphries Subject: Re: cheney = traitor Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 08:17:30 -0700 Also sprach Seth Jackson : > On Tue, 25 Oct 2005 15:23:18 -0400, JimK > wrote: > > >What still puzzles me is what the purpose of the leak was. All the > >news reports and commentaries seem to point to an attempt to discredit > >Wilson after he went public on the administration's use of bad > >intelligence to support the war. > > Not to discredit him, but to get revenge on him. Yup. It was a ham-fisted attempt to insinuate that he got the job investigating the Niger uranium claims through nepotism and cronyism (oh, the irony...), and if it ruined his wife's career along the way, well, them's the breaks. ------------------------------ From: "Olompali4" Subject: Re: New SKB SBD 10/22/05cm LMA Date: 26 Oct 2005 08:19:08 -0700 > heads up. Sox! ------------------------------ From: JC Martin Subject: Re: Condi v Hillary 2008? Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 15:20:16 GMT memory705@hotmail.com wrote: > JC Martin wrote: > >>Sparky the Wonder Dog wrote: >> >>>Kurt--why do you think she is so unelectable? Too left-wing for the >>>country? Too right-wing for Democrats? >> >> >>She doesn't have a warm personality and isn't very convincing as a >>salesperson. And she's seen by moderates as slippery. Without >>moderates, the Democrats can't win a national election. Heck, Hillary >>is the most divisive Democrat out there. Kurt is right. >> >>Condi can't win the Republican nomination at this point either. A near >>agnostic, single, black woman who acted as Bush's lap dog? No way. Why >>do people take Dick Morris seriously anyway? >> >>-JC > > > Near agnostic? Where on Earth did you get that idea? I read her > biography and she's a very religious person and was raised by a > preacher. I'm a religious (I prefer spiritual) person and went to Catholic boarding school for 4 years, and I'm an agnostic. I described her as a near-agnostic. I haven't read Condi's biography, but she certainly doesn't use any religious rhetoric, she's unmarried and essentially is a modern day feminist. I don't see her faith as being an absolute either. I was also speaking within the context of the conservative base, of a which a fairly large chunk is made up of premillenarian dispensationalism types. They would no doubt classify Condi as a near-agnostic since most of them don't believe one can be both Christian and pluralistic concurrently. Condi's self-perception has little to do with how the right wing base would perceive her is kind of the point here. -JC ------------------------------ From: "Sparky the Wonder Dog" Subject: Re: what should the United States do with combatants who don't belong to regular armies? Date: 26 Oct 2005 08:20:48 -0700 Rick you trolling sack of scumbag shit. I don't argue with anti-Semites. ------------------------------ From: "Sparky the Wonder Dog" Subject: Re: A Conservative viewpoint.... Date: 26 Oct 2005 08:21:52 -0700 Seth: well, OK. ------------------------------ From: "Dylanstubs" Subject: Bob Dylan 11/24/03 on Dime Date: 26 Oct 2005 08:24:02 -0700 Not quite as exciting as 11/23, IMO, but still a must-have. http://www.dimeadozen.org/torrents-details.php?id=65808 Hammersmith Apollo London, England November 24, 2003 Crystal Cat 725-26 Incredible recording and astonishing set list with Bob and his band at full force; complete with 8 fillers from various venues (see attached artwork) Lineage: CD-R > EAC > FLAC frontend (aligned on sector boundaries) > You Taper: no info 00. Announcement 01. Drifter's Escape 02. You Ain't Goin' Nowhere 03. Cry A While 04. Girl From The North Country 05. Romance In Durango (Bob Dylan-Jacques Levy/Bob Dylan) 06. Dear Landlord 07. High Water (for Charlie Patton) 08. Tough Mama 09. Floater (Too Much To Ask) 10. Million Miles 11. Jokerman 12. Honest With Me 13. The Lonesome Death Of Hattie Carroll 14. Summer Days 15. Cat's In The Well 16. Like A Rolling Stone 17. All Along The Watchtower 18. Never Gonna Be The Same Again (filler) 19. Saving Grace (filler) 20. Lay Lady Lay (filler) 21. I'll Be Your Baby Tonight (filler) 22. Everything Is Broken (filler) 23. I Don't Believe You (She Acts Like We Never Have Met) (filler) 24. Knockin' On Heaven's Door (filler) 25. It Ain't Me, Babe (filler) Concert # 1587 of The Never-Ending Tour Concert # 32 of the 2003 Europe Fall Tour 2003 concert # 97 Concert # 86 with the 16th Never-Ending Tour Band: Bob Dylan (vocal & piano) Freddie Koella (guitar) Larry Campbell (guitar, mandolin, pedal steel guitar & electric slide guitar) Tony Garnier (bass) George Receli (drums & percussion) 4, 13 acoustic with the band 2, 4, 8, 9 Bob Dylan (harmonica) 2 Larry Campbell (pedal steel guitar) 3, 12 Larry Campbell (slide guitar) NOTE: First version of Romance In Durango since San Antonio, Texas May 11, 1976! 27 yrs! 11 new songs (64%) compared to previous concert 4 new songs for this tour ------------------------------ From: "Sparky the Wonder Dog" Subject: Re: what should the United States do with combatants who don't belong to regular armies? Date: 26 Oct 2005 08:31:27 -0700 However, for disinterested readers I invite them to read prior posts and determine for themselves whether Rick's repeated McCarthyite accusations of "dual loyalty" have not. in fact, been answered repeatedly--but the clown is free to repeat his "have you stopped beating your wife" accusation until the cows come home. I also note that Rick seems to be essentially spamming a group supposedly Dead-related although he doesn't listen to the group--yes BBD? ------------------------------ From: memory705@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Condi v Hillary 2008? Date: 26 Oct 2005 08:33:39 -0700 JC Martin wrote: > memory705@hotmail.com wrote: > > JC Martin wrote: > > > >>Sparky the Wonder Dog wrote: > >> > >>>Kurt--why do you think she is so unelectable? Too left-wing for the > >>>country? Too right-wing for Democrats? > >> > >> > >>She doesn't have a warm personality and isn't very convincing as a > >>salesperson. And she's seen by moderates as slippery. Without > >>moderates, the Democrats can't win a national election. Heck, Hillary > >>is the most divisive Democrat out there. Kurt is right. > >> > >>Condi can't win the Republican nomination at this point either. A near > >>agnostic, single, black woman who acted as Bush's lap dog? No way. Why > >>do people take Dick Morris seriously anyway? > >> > >>-JC > > > > > > Near agnostic? Where on Earth did you get that idea? I read her > > biography and she's a very religious person and was raised by a > > preacher. > > > > I'm a religious (I prefer spiritual) person and went to Catholic > boarding school for 4 years, and I'm an agnostic. I described her as a > near-agnostic. I haven't read Condi's biography, but she certainly > doesn't use any religious rhetoric, she's unmarried and essentially is a > modern day feminist. Well of course she uses no religious rhetoric. In her position it would be EXTREMELY unprofessional to do so. She's not a preacher or even a politician, she's secretary of state. She's not even supposed to express her personal opinions, let alone her religion. And what does not being married have to do with it? Priests are unmarried and they're the most religious. And if she's a feminist, why isn't she a Democrat, and what does being a feminist have to do with religion anyway? Are religious people supposed to be AGAINST women having any kind of success? ------------------------------ From: "Sparky the Wonder Dog" Subject: Re: A Conservative viewpoint.... Date: 26 Oct 2005 08:33:55 -0700 btw Seth todays news about Cheney's attempts to provide a permanent exemption for the CIA from international anti-torture treaties are related to the whole issue. ------------------------------ From: "Everybody's Gonna Be Happy" Subject: Re: cheney = traitor Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 08:34:18 -0700 "imsjry" wrote in message news:1130265042.970736.308720@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > > Everybody's Gonna Be Happy wrote: >> "DG" wrote in message >> news:ltlsl15r1t7joov9ju5ihlfpkbv0ga6nsd@4ax.com... >> > >> > >> > So this prick leaked the name to the man who told the times. Time for >> > these guys to be charged, tried and let justice take it's course. >> >> >> This leaking business is much ado about nothing, especially as you >> describe >> it. >> >> Cheney isn't being accused of leaking anything, the Vice President of the >> United States is being accused of talking about a CIA agent with his >> chief >> of staff. If they can't discuss the CIA, who can? > > Are you really that naive???? Are you really that naive? The man is the vice president of the United States, he can discuss anything he wants to with anyone else with a top security clearance. Welcome to the federal government! And if you actually believe that Cheney is going to be ratted out as the head of a conspiracy by any of his minions, you are REALLY naive. There is zero chance of the vice president suffering anything other than political damage from this episode. Is Cheney a liar? Of course. He led the campaign that led up to the war; and that campaign was based on lies. But sorry folks, this leak of a name of some Washington desk jockey is small potatoes compared to that. I realize some think the two circumstances will be linked as a result of this investigation, but there is no way a vice president is going down because he spoke to his chief of staff about the CIA and who works there, no matter what his motive was. The leak investigation is a big stretch that will have little if any staying power, even if a couple of toupe wearing henchmen are indicted. Its a peripheral issue at best. EGBH ------------------------------ From: "Everybody's Gonna Be Happy" Subject: Re: cheney = traitor Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 08:36:46 -0700 "Brad Greer" wrote in message news:k9vsl1d9tu3tlumc28km2fh9hvslls41a5@4ax.com... > On 25 Oct 2005 11:30:43 -0700, "imsjry" wrote: > I don't think EGBH is being naive. You may well believe that Cheney > discussed the agent's identy with his chief of staff and told him to > leak it to the press, Cheney may well have done that. But proving it > is a whole different ball of wax. Going after Cheney's chief of staff > is easy, going after Cheney is not. > > Now it's possible that the chief of staff of the vice president of the > United States doesn't have a security clearance to discuss the real > identities of agents. The CIA is supposed to under the control of the execustive branch of government. If the second most powerful man in the executive branch can't discuss who works there, then the CIA is now officially independent of any control whatsoever and is free to do whatever it pleases. Bush, Cheney, and Goss run that show folks. It isn't operating independently. EGBH ------------------------------ From: DG Subject: Re: A Conservative viewpoint.... Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 08:40:30 -0700 Sparky the Wonder Dog wrote: > >btw Seth todays news about Cheney's attempts to provide a permanent >exemption for the CIA from international anti-torture treaties are >related to the whole issue. It's related in the sense that they are trying to give him some cover. Cheney doesn't give a fuck about the people below him. He only has to suck bush and sowdee cock. Face it, this guy is a scumbag who outed a CIA agent. Try him for treason, convict him and give him an appropriate sentence. Imagine the frothing if Clinton/Gore did this? ------------------------------ From: "Everybody's Gonna Be Happy" Subject: Re: cheney = traitor Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 08:44:24 -0700 "Ray" wrote in message news:1130277767.820525.291770@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > > Everybody's Gonna Be Happy wrote: >> "DG" wrote in message >> news:ltlsl15r1t7joov9ju5ihlfpkbv0ga6nsd@4ax.com... >> > >> > >> > So this prick leaked the name to the man who told the times. Time for >> > these guys to be charged, tried and let justice take it's course. >> >> >> This leaking business is much ado about nothing, especially as you >> describe >> it. >> >> Cheney isn't being accused of leaking anything, the Vice President of the >> United States is being accused of talking about a CIA agent with his >> chief >> of staff. If they can't discuss the CIA, who can? > > Merely talking about a CIA agent is not a crime. However as I > understand it conspiracy to out a CIA agent as political payback is. I > strongly doubt they'll have the goods on Cheney however - that'd be a > very hard one to proove. But that said it is a possilibity. > >> If somebody leaked the name and if somebody lied they should be called to >> account, tried, and punished accordingly. > > Agree. > >> But this is such small potatoes compared to the other things this >> administration has done. Its fun to watch them squirm, and its gonna be >> fun >> to watch one or more of them face a judge and maybe even a jury. But >> there >> is no serious damage done to the CIA by any of this > > Disgree. If Plame was outed by the government then this has > substantial adverse impact on our national security. Former CIA case > officer and prosecutor James Marcinkowski explains why: Just a lot of background noise. CIA agents are outed in every administration. I remember hundreds being outed in the past. And this woman sat at a desk in Washington for years before being "outed" (as if many DC insiders didn't know who she worked for already--her name was in the phone book!). This is just a tawdry little example of typical Washington revenge. I certainly don't cheer it on, don't condone it, and hope anyone who committed a crime does a nationally televised perp walk. But just as this was a case of personal revenge, so will be the glee we all experience if someone goes down. Its all about the personalities, there is no large governance issue involved here. This administration did far worse things in the run up to the war; its just that this little nothing is all anyone can grab onto legally to exact some personal satisfaction from. Trying to turn this into Watergate is absurd. It ain't gonna bring a president or vice president down. In 6 months no one will even remember what it was all about. The big lies that led up to the war are what will be remembered, not some peripheral, minor aspect of that effort. EGBH ------------------------------ From: "Everybody's Gonna Be Happy" Subject: Re: cheney = traitor Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 08:45:24 -0700 "Richard Morris" wrote in message news:pvWdnV2hgNGdeMPeRVn-og@comcast.com... > > "Everybody's Gonna Be Happy" wrote in message > news:QOt7f.404$EP6.2042@eagle.america.net... > > snip > >> Cheney is off the hook unless someone is willing to testify to a >> conspiracy to leak the name led by Cheney. >> >> I can't imagine that happening, even as prosecutors try to flip Libby or >> whoever with threats of jail time. Those guys aren't gonna rat out >> Cheney even if he was the instigator. And we have no evidence that he >> was. > If he was the instigator, don't be too sure that his lackey won't sell him > out. When faced with a little prison time, these are not necessarily > stand-up guys. No chance. Libby is going to testify that Cheney ordered him to break the law? LOL. EGBH ------------------------------ ** FOR YOUR REFERENCE ** The service addresses, to which questions about the list itself and requests to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, are as follows: Internet: dead-flames-request@gdead.berkeley.edu Bitnet: dead-flames-request%gdead.berkeley.edu@ucbcmsa Uucp: ...!{ucbvax,uunet}!gdead.berkeley.edu!dead-flames-request You can send mail to the entire list (and rec.music.gdead) via one of these addresses: Internet: dead-flames@gdead.berkeley.edu Bitnet: dead-flames%gdead.berkeley.edu@ucbcmsa Uucp: ...!{ucbvax,uunet}!gdead.berkeley.edu!dead-flames End of Dead-Flames Digest ****************************** .