Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Scandinavian Indie Digest Vol 97 Issue 09
scan-indie-d Digest Volume 97 : Issue 9 26 Nov 1997
Today's Topics:
Roovel Oobik
Re: Re. Nordman again?!
Re: Nordman again?!
Re: Bob Hund.
Re: Re. Nordman again?!
Re: Swe char, etc
Re: Kent
Re: Nordman again?!
Sin's Music on the Radio [01-Dec-97]
drugs.
Re: Nordman again?!
Re: 120 minutes & M2
Drugs
Drugs again
Re: 120 minutes & M2
Re: drugs.
Drugs / Racism
Nordman (not longer) / Nazi Bands
Drugs again and again ?
Re: drugs.
Re: drugs.
Re: Drugs again and again ?
Re: drugs.NON SCAN
Drugs, what else ?
BH now!
Re: BH now!
Re: BH now!
Administrivia:
To unsubscribe from the Scandinavian Indie Digest mailing list:
* send e-mail to: scan-indie-d-request@lysator.liu.se
* with the Subject: unsubscribe
To post to the Scandinavian Indie mailing list:
* use the address: scan-indie@lysator.liu.se
Digest back issues can be found in the [SID] section at the
Scan-Indie website: http://www.lysator.liu.se/~chief/scan.html
() Please take care not to include the entire digest in your
() reply, only the message(s) you are replying to.
-----------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 1997 19:07:49 +0000
From: "Siim Kalder" <siimk@ut.ee>
Subject: Roovel Oobik
> The reason for all this is that I want you to give me info on an (I believe)
> Estonian noise-pop band that I heard a couple of years back, called, wait for
> it.... Roovel oobik, with dots over all o:s, i.e. Roeoevel oeoebik, which is
> pretty hard discussing without the dots...
>
> Thanks Magnus for the Kaare-address!
>
> Micke/CV
Will try on this one, although I don't know much about Roovel Oobik and
have only heard a song or two.
I don't think they play any more but they used to be real good. They
are one of the old school bands here, if I may use this term, and
are/were a genuine example of the underground scene, that was actually
pretty active before the great shift of the "indie" music into the orbit
of "mainstream" interests not more than a couple of years ago. (Only a
personal opinion though, perhaps determined by my own range of interests
mostly.)
The next information comes from the only website (more like a single
page though) that i'm aware of containing Roovel Oobik info:
http://www.sjoki.uta.fi/~latvis/yhtyeet/roovel.html
The original line up of Roovel Oobik was:
Tönu Pedaru; voc.
Allan Hmelnitski; guitar, effects
Tarvo Hannovarres; bass
Raul Saaremets; drums. effects
The name "Roovel Oobik" means robber nightingale and I think it was
chosen for the sound of it only. The band started about 1986, with quite
rough alternative sounds and produced three releases under the Stupido
Twins label:
History of The USSR (7" EP, 1989, Stupido 003) SOLD OUT
Ilu ("Beauty")(cassette, 1989, Kuldnokk) SOLD OUT
Mamma Mia/Outta Myself ( 7", 1990, Stupido 008)
Roovel Oobik caught the interest of John Peel, who invited them to
record a Peel session. Have never heard it though. Anywayz, the next
album of Roovel Oobik was
Popsubterranea (cd, 1992, TWINCD 10)
on which the band presented a new sound, more sophisticated, ambient and
electronic.
I'm not sure about their more recent releases, there is definately a
song or two on a 1993 compilation of Estonian indie "Sue Darling" on
Sally Cinnamon, the label that recently released a follow up to "Sue
Darling" - "Sue's Back".
The mucicians are active on the music scene more or less until today.
Raul Saaremets is a known (radio) DJ and also plays (used to play?) in a
band called Una Bomba together with some (?) (of the other) member(s) of
Roovel Oobik. Una Bomba has an almost completely electronic sound, with
drum and bass features and a lot of sampling and stuff.
Real sorry I can't give you more on the music itself - I'm not a big fan
of Estonian alternative music - especially a couple of years old - it
simply does not compare (for the most part) to the "big" (read "real")
guys out there and offers something enjoyable to _listen_ to only
occasionally. But hey, it is most likely that I have missed out a couple
of things myself.
I hope if there's anybody from Estonia with more stuff on Roovel Oobik,
he/she won't hesitate to speak up. (And sorry for the mistakes above...
if there are any, of course.)
And something else - do not bother to write Roeoevel Oeoebik, Ro"o"vel
O"o"bik or something else, it won't pay off and will only look strange.
At least in Estonian there is (almost) no possibility to mix up the
words with umlaut characters with the ones without.
Siim
siimk@ut.ee
-----------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 1997 18:46:54 +0100
From: j.sundstrom@ekuc.se (Jan Sundstrom)
Subject: Re: Re. Nordman again?!
> It's never good to hate. But of course, one has to condemn racism and
> certainly not listen to music made by racists.
> Jan Sundstrom wrote:
> Or take something more controversial, propagate use of hard drugs?
> Are you crazy? Do you think drugs are more controversial than
> antisemitism?
I meant the other way round. It's easy to condemn racist music beacuse
it's so _wrong_, but it's more controversial to say "I won't listen to
band X, because they are glorifying heroine".
>IMO, there's nothing to refuse more in general than antisemitism,
>racism, fasicm and all that, because hard drugs is the choice of
>everyone himself, for example ...
There is a difference in choosing to use drugs, and keep it for
yourself, and _propagating_ the use of drugs.
Of course it's everybodys choice (just as it is everybodys choice if
one want to be a racist or not), but what offends me are the artists
saying "drugs are great, you should try it" (early Verve, Shamen, Black
Crowes etc etc.)
Jan
-----------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 1997 19:52:20 +0100 (MET)
From: Micke Rehnstrom <micre215@student.liu.se>
Subject: Re: Nordman again?!
Petter Tiilikainen wrote
>> According to Micke Rehnstrom:
>>
>> It is hard to say what is "wrong", I guess. But if I hear a band which I
>> know are nazis I am so busy hating them that I do not even notice the
>> music. And if a band has texts that imply these connections - No, I would
>> never be able to like such a band, no matter what their music sounds like.
>> Just hate them too much.
>
> I'm more offended by bad music. I personally believe that controversy
> challenges your intellect more than some shiny happy cute indiepop crap.
> The world is an ugly place, basically, and there's no need to pretend it's
> not.
Very true! And I am not pretending anything like it. I realize the world is
ugly and if someone looks at my records and books he or she will find much
proof for my belief there. But realizing it is ugly does not mean accepting
it, or not trying to change it, without use of violence of course. I bet I
am one of the few here who has actually read Mein Kampf and a whole lot of
info from Swedish far right wing parties. All of this just to try to
receive an understanding for them and figure out how to approach them. But
I still hate them. And bad music will never offend me as much as racism!
Hmm, are we drifting away from the music. I think we are. Perhaps better
stop it there.
Micke
-----------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 1997 19:56:55 +0100
From: j.sundstrom@ekuc.se (Jan Sundstrom)
Subject: Re: Bob Hund.
>> Perhaps it should also be said that Tomas Oberg, the vocalist in BOB HUND,
>> has also been a member of a couple of synth music inspired bands/projects.
>> OVEN & STOVE, for example. And there was at least one more, but I cannot
>> remember the name of it.
>
> Maybe you're thinking of Spacelab, the duo Tomas Oberg had together
> with Jonas Synthguy. They made two albums, both containing of great
> Kraftwerkrip-offs in both sound- and songwise. And the sleeve artwork
> is actually one of the nicest I've ever seen. If you're lucky you might
> be able to find these album pretty cheap second-hand. They're definitely
> worth buying.
Oh, i finally found a spacelab-discog:
http://herb.algonet.se/~jonwar/spacelab.html
It mentions that one of the members previously was in Car Skid & Crash.
Does anybody on the list know anything about CSC??? It seems to be a
mysterious band, since the band members are not known...
Jan
-----------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 1997 14:26:18 -0500 (EST)
From: Chris Forsberg <forsberg@charm.net>
Subject: Re: Re. Nordman again?!
On Tue, 25 Nov 1997, Jan Sundstrom wrote:
> There is a difference in choosing to use drugs, and keep it for
> yourself, and _propagating_ the use of drugs.
> Of course it's everybodys choice (just as it is everybodys choice if
> one want to be a racist or not), but what offends me are the artists
> saying "drugs are great, you should try it" (early Verve, Shamen, Black
> Crowes etc etc.)
This is getting seriously off-topic :-0 but, I feel I must add that, at
least in THIS country (USA) there is an extremely serious by-product of
drug use that harms LOTS of innocent people: the horrible violence that is
plaguing our cities because of the rise of gangs. Over here, little
children are dying by stray bullets because people are fighting over the
right to deal their drugs on this corner or that. It's really frightening,
and it's getting worse, not better. In Europe it's not as big a problem,
but seeing it here, and seeing what it's doing to future generations of
inner-city kids, it's a hard for me to just shrug and say, "oh, it's
everybody's choice."
Chris
-----------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 1997 14:43:22 -0500 (EST)
From: svenskax@sfsu.edu
Subject: Re: Swe char, etc
> Even though we do use the two dots diacritical mark in English to indicate
> diaeresis in words like naive, noel, imported from French, it's not in the
> 0-127 character set :-(
>
> There's an established convention among German writers to represent
> umlaut-ed characters by an e after the letter, eg Duesseldorf, maedchen,
> frauelein, when accented characters are not available -- are there similar
> conventions in Swedish?
>
> Although in real life German emails you'd just write Dusseldorf, madchen,
> fraulein, and everyone would know what you meant. This would probably be
> true if you just wrote Roovel Oobik as well...
Don't forget that there is also two dots on the "u" of some words in spanish!
-----------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 1997 21:23:53 +0000
From: "johanna.hillgren" <johanna.hillgren@swipnet.se>
Subject: Re: Kent
Petter Tiilikainen wrote:
> According to aquadays@swipnet.se:
>> Erik Soderstrom wrote:
>>>
>>> When it comes to Kent and their new album "Isola", the only
>>> band I can think of comparing them to is The Cure.
>>
>> And Radiohead!!!! The similarities are extreme!
>
> What about Uno Svenningson and his former band Freda' ?
> I think Kent sounds like them with the addition of distortion,
> they're about as talented too.
>
> Petter
Seems to me like you haven't heard Kent in about a million years. Give
'em a try!
Daniel
-----------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 1997 21:27:10 +0000
From: "johanna.hillgren" <johanna.hillgren@swipnet.se>
Subject: Re: Nordman again?!
aquadays@swipnet.se wrote:
Jan Sundstrom wrote:
>> Or take something more controversial, propagate use of hard drugs?
>
> Are you crazy? Do you think drugs are more controversial than antisemitism?
>
> Martin
Have to agree with Martin with all my heart!
Drugs are ugly but a beauty compared to antisemitism and racism.
Daniel
-----------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 1997 23:29:42 +0100 (MET)
From: Erik Soderstrom <chief@lysator.liu.se>
Subject: Sin's Music on the Radio [01-Dec-97]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scandinavian Indie MUSIC ON THE RADIO Scandinavian Indie
December 1 -> 4, 1997
by Erik Soderstrom (chief@lysator.liu.se)
Day Date Artist Recorded
--- ----- -------------------------------- ---------------------------------
Mon 1/12 DiLeva Pite}, Dansar & Ler -97
Tue 2/12 Zap Mama Denmark, Roskilde Festival Jun-97
Wed 3/12 Front 242 Arvika, Festival -97
Thu 4/12 Handsome, 3 Colours Red Hultsfred Festival Jun-97
This list covers the Swedish National Channel P3's "Live" - at 21.03-22.00
or 18.03-19.00 where marked with a '*'. (R) = Rerun
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
This list is also available on the Scandinavian Indie site
at: http://www.lysator.liu.se/~chief/upcoming.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 1997 00:38:09 +0200 (EET)
From: Timo Riitamaa <timo.riitamaa@kolumbus.fi>
Subject: drugs.
>This is getting seriously off-topic :-0 but, I feel I must add that, at
>least in THIS country (USA) there is an extremely serious by-product of
>drug use that harms LOTS of innocent people: the horrible violence that is
>plaguing our cities because of the rise of gangs. Over here, little
>children are dying by stray bullets because people are fighting over the
>right to deal their drugs on this corner or that. It's really frightening,
>and it's getting worse, not better. In Europe it's not as big a problem,
>but seeing it here, and seeing what it's doing to future generations of
>inner-city kids, it's a hard for me to just shrug and say, "oh, it's
>everybody's choice."
Not so much as to try and give a solution to america's problems, but rather
just the drug problem. why not make them legal? if drugs were as cheap and
legal as bread there would be virtually no drug-related organized crime, or
crime related to poor people trying to find the money to buy their drugs.
Somebody explain to me why i'm wrong.
Tornado DaSilva.
-----------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 1997 23:43:34 +0100 (MET)
From: per langstrom <pela0011@student.gu.se>
Subject: Re: Nordman again?!
At 13.05 1997-11-24 +0100, Petter Tiilikainen wrote:
>Maybe this is a bit theoretical, but consider a band that
>are convinced antisemites, still making the most incredible
>music (yeah, I'm not talking Ultima Thule or Skrewdriver
>here). Would it be very wrong to like that band? Personally
>, I don't think so.
like any other form of art, music shouldn't be taken
out of context. i wouldn't watch nazi propaganda films
no matter how well made they were. the message they
send out is still utterly disgusting and intorable.
when bying records by ultima thule or whatever deluded
neo-nazi band, you are without doubt supplying them with
the best means of spreading their message that there is,
namely money. and all because of the fact they happen to
have a couple of great-sounding chord-progressions (or
whatever).
per
-----------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 1997 23:50:19 +0100 (MET)
From: per langstrom <pela0011@student.gu.se>
Subject: Re: 120 minutes & M2
someone ought to learn a thing or two about net-etiquette
and the, for all parties involved, favourable use of per-
sonal e-mail.
At 17.52 1997-11-24 -0800, svenskax@sfsu.edu wrote:
>i did not scream anything. and i know what you are going to say. just a
>way to distinguish.
>
>>>>> you do know now that toby amies is in MTV inn the USA right?
>>>>
>>>> Heh, nope! He did mention he was going to cross the pond, but he
>>>> never said what he was going to do over there (or if he did, I
>>>> didn't pay attention...). What is he doing at MTV USA then?
>>>
>>> HE HAS THIS SHOW THAT SUCKS. THEY SHOW VIDEOS THAT ARE EXTREMELY POPULAR
>>> AND THEY SUCK BIG TIME. I THINK NOW HE IS ON SOME SHOW CALLED "LIVE". IT'S
>>> NOT LIVE THOUGH. THEY HAVE GUESTS LIKE ALYSA MILANO AND MOST TIMES ALL MTV
>>> VJ'S ARE THERE WITH HIM SO IT'S NOT REALLY HIS SHOW. ANYWAYS HE AND HIS
>>> SHOW SUCK.
for your information, toby used to host more than one show
on mtv europe before he left. so, yes, at times he had to
show the audience videos by some of the worst bands there
is. i am sure those videos wasn't among his personal
favourites though (those he saved for the alternative nation).
per
-----------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 1997 00:30:14 +0100 (MET)
From: aquadays@swipnet.se
Subject: Drugs
> Jan Sundstrom wrote:
>I meant the other way round. It's easy to condemn racist music beacuse
>it's so _wrong_, but it's more controversial to say "I won't listen to
>band X, because they are glorifying heroine".
Ah, so that's what you meant!
I have to apologize, you're not crazy, you're right!
>There is a difference in choosing to use drugs, and keep it for
>yourself, and _propagating_ the use of drugs.
>Of course it's everybodys choice (just as it is everybodys choice if
>one want to be a racist or not), but what offends me are the artists
>saying "drugs are great, you should try it" (early Verve, Shamen, Black
>Crowes etc etc.)
I for one usually get upset when I hear people talking about drugs like
they're harmless. How many bands have we heard doing this?
Primal Scream, Spacemen 3, Boo Radleys, the list goes on and on.
The fact that these bands and their music often are real good, doesn't
make things easier.
People, especially young people, are easily influenced. They look up to
their idols, they want to become like them. If Bobby Gillespie is talking
carelessly about his "tests" with drugs, many young people will think that
it seems groovy and cool to get a little stoned.
It's the same with smoking. It's disgustingly many artists, popstars and filmstars
that keep on posing with a "cool" cigarette in their mouth all the time.
They have to realize that this is exactly the same as saying to all their fans:
Go on! Take up smoking! It's cool, it's harmless and good! Look at me!
Martin
-----------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 1997 00:31:06 +0100 (MET)
From: aquadays@swipnet.se
Subject: Drugs again
>"Tornado DaSilva" (suspect it's not his real name) wrote:
>Not so much as to try and give a solution to america's problems, but rather
>just the drug problem. why not make them legal? if drugs were as cheap and
>legal as bread there would be virtually no drug-related organized crime, or
>crime related to poor people trying to find the money to buy their drugs.
>Somebody explain to me why i'm wrong.
Oh please!!!
You're wrong because you are forgetting all the millions of people that
would get stuck in drug addiction if you and all other drug liberals got
your ideas realized!
The problems in USA is not caused by the illegalization of drugs,
they have their problems with violence, egoism, drugs, environmental
destruction etc. etc. because of the ultra-liberal, capitalistic
system the country has been suffering from for centuries.
Martin.
-----------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 1997 15:55:50 -0800
From: svenskax@sfsu.edu
Subject: Re: 120 minutes & M2
At 11:50 PM 11/25/97 +0100, you wrote:
> someone ought to learn a thing or two about net-etiquette
> and the, for all parties involved, favourable use of per-
> sonal e-mail.
>
> At 17.52 1997-11-24 -0800, svenskax@sfsu.edu wrote:
>
>> i did not scream anything. and i know what you are going to say. just a
>> way to distinguish.
>>
>>>>>> you do know now that toby amies is in MTV inn the USA right?
>>>>>
>>>>> Heh, nope! He did mention he was going to cross the pond, but he
>>>>> never said what he was going to do over there (or if he did, I
>>>>> didn't pay attention...). What is he doing at MTV USA then?
>>>>
>>>> HE HAS THIS SHOW THAT SUCKS. THEY SHOW VIDEOS THAT ARE EXTREMELY POPULAR
>>>> AND THEY SUCK BIG TIME. I THINK NOW HE IS ON SOME SHOW CALLED "LIVE".
>>>> IT'S NOT LIVE THOUGH. THEY HAVE GUESTS LIKE ALYSA MILANO AND MOST TIMES
>>>> ALL MTV VJ'S ARE THERE WITH HIM SO IT'S NOT REALLY HIS SHOW. ANYWAYS HE
>>>> AND HIS SHOW SUCK.
>
> for your information, toby used to host more than one show
> on mtv europe before he left. so, yes, at times he had to
> show the audience videos by some of the worst bands there
> is. i am sure those videos wasn't among his personal
> favourites though (those he saved for the alternative nation).
>
> per
hey.........i dont' watch MTV here so i do not know what kind of guy he is
ok. i don't know what he likes or dislikes or if he is "indie". i just
don't like the guy. i do not give a #$%$^ abou MTV Europe or American and
much less about your %$^&* hero toby.
-----------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 1997 19:25:11 -0500 (EST)
From: Chris Forsberg <forsberg@charm.net>
Subject: Re: drugs.
On Wed, 26 Nov 1997, Timo Riitamaa wrote:
> Not so much as to try and give a solution to america's problems, but rather
> just the drug problem. why not make them legal? if drugs were as cheap and
> legal as bread there would be virtually no drug-related organized crime, or
> crime related to poor people trying to find the money to buy their drugs.
>
> Somebody explain to me why i'm wrong.
Well, I go back and forth on this one; sometimes I think legalisation is
"the answer" and sometimes not. When I'm thinking not, here's the hole in
your theory that presents itself: if you are going to make drugs legal for
the purpose of bringing down the price, you better be prepared to make 'em
legal for persons of ALL ages. That means cheap and legal crack and heroin
for 10 years old (or ANY year-olds). You prepared to give that a green
light? I dunno, I have a problem with doing that. You have to have no age
restriction, or there will still be a nice big niche in the black market
for it. This is the one point that the anti-drug legalisation side brings
up that I have a problem finding an answer to.
I don't have a real problem with pot, acid, hash, beer....but I have a
friend who is struggling with a heroin addiction, and it ain't pretty.
Whether it was legal or not, he'd be going thru the same hell.
But then again, I think that there most probably isn't any other way to
take the profit out of it. Not a really rosy picture...
Chris
-----------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 1997 09:16:12 +0100
From: "Barczinski, Reiner, WAC" <Barczinski@celanese.de>
Subject: Drugs / Racism
Yeah, that's the way, I think, too ... you can do away the ugliest part
of drugs -> the criminality that is necessary for the addicts to get the
money they need, when making the drugs legal, but you can never turn
away the ugliness of racism and these other things we talked about ...
and that's a big difference! Because then, only the users themselves are
affected of the negative sides of the drugs ... (I don't wanted to say
anymore not about music, but, you see ...)
Reiner
>> This is getting seriously off-topic :-0 but, I feel I must add that, at
>> least in THIS country (USA) there is an extremely serious by-product of
>> drug use that harms LOTS of innocent people: the horrible violence that is
>> plaguing our cities because of the rise of gangs. Over here, little
>> children are dying by stray bullets because people are fighting over the
>> right to deal their drugs on this corner or that. It's really frightening,
>> and it's getting worse, not better. In Europe it's not as big a problem,
>> but seeing it here, and seeing what it's doing to future generations of
>> inner-city kids, it's a hard for me to just shrug and say, "oh, it's
>> everybody's choice."
>
> Not so much as to try and give a solution to america's problems, but
> rather just the drug problem. why not make them legal? if drugs were
> as cheap and legal as bread there would be virtually no drug-related
> organized crime, or crime related to poor people trying to find the
> money to buy their drugs.
>
> Somebody explain to me why i'm wrong.
-----------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 1997 09:21:16 +0100
From: "Barczinski, Reiner, WAC" <Barczinski@celanese.de>
Subject: Nordman (not longer) / Nazi Bands
And, imo, it would be even wrong to listen to a band that makes good
music and even good (not even "right-wing") lyrics, if I knew that the
money they earn will profit any Nazi-Organisation or so ... right ?
That's the reason for boycotting much company, who, themselves are not
fascistic at first sight ...
Reiner
At 13.05 1997-11-24 +0100, Petter Tiilikainen wrote:
>Maybe this is a bit theoretical, but consider a band that
>are convinced antisemites, still making the most incredible
>music (yeah, I'm not talking Ultima Thule or Skrewdriver
>here). Would it be very wrong to like that band? Personally
>, I don't think so.
like any other form of art, music shouldn't be taken
out of context. i wouldn't watch nazi propaganda films
no matter how well made they were. the message they
send out is still utterly disgusting and intorable.
when bying records by ultima thule or whatever deluded
neo-nazi band, you are without doubt supplying them with
the best means of spreading their message that there is,
namely money. and all because of the fact they happen to
have a couple of great-sounding chord-progressions (or
whatever).
per
-----------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 1997 09:24:32 +0100
From: "Barczinski, Reiner, WAC" <Barczinski@celanese.de>
Subject: Drugs again and again ?
Do you think, the kind of addiction to drugs would be same with
legalized ones? I don't think so ... the other effects of drugs, that
these people can't / don't want to work and especially all the dying on
drugs, it's all because the quality is not controlled ... Legalized
drugs must have good quality, and there would be not much of the
problems left, I think ...
Reiner
>> "Tornado DaSilva" (suspect it´s not his real name) wrote:
>> Not so much as to try and give a solution to america's problems, but rather
>> just the drug problem. why not make them legal? if drugs were as cheap and
>> legal as bread there would be virtually no drug-related organized crime, or
>> crime related to poor people trying to find the money to buy their drugs.
>>
>> Somebody explain to me why i'm wrong.
>
> Oh please!!!
> You're wrong because you are forgetting all the millions of people that
> would get stuck in drug addiction if you and all other drug liberals got
> your ideas realized!
>
> The problems in USA is not caused by the illegalization of drugs,
> they have their problems with violence, egoism, drugs, environmental
> destruction etc. etc. because of the ultra-liberal, capitalistic system
> the country has been suffering from for centuries.
>
> Martin.
-----------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 1997 11:34:16 +0100
From: baars@bahnhof.se (Girilal Baars)
Subject: Re: drugs.
Chris Forsberg wrote:
>But then again, I think that there most probably isn't any other way to
>take the profit out of it. Not a really rosy picture...
Who are we kidding? Who's interested in taking the profit out of it? As
soon as it is legalized all the multinationals will move in and sell
Coke-acola, Camel Joints, Ovaltine-speed, even Exxon Smack. Then you'll
really see a campain to make drugs look like the thing to do. Virtual
reality? F**k that!
Girilal Baars
-----------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 1997 11:34:12 +0100
From: baars@bahnhof.se (Girilal Baars)
Subject: Re: drugs.
>> least in THIS country (USA) there is an extremely serious by-product of
>> drug use that harms LOTS of innocent people: the horrible violence that is
>
> Not so much as to try and give a solution to america's problems, but rather
> just the drug problem. why not make them legal? if drugs were as cheap and
> legal as bread there would be virtually no drug-related organized crime, or
> crime related to poor people trying to find the money to buy their drugs.
>
> Somebody explain to me why i'm wrong.
Actually, you're right from one point of view. If society can condone the
purchase of mind-altering products like Ace of Base, why not numb-skulling
drugs, too?
Girilal Baars
-----------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 1997 11:34:20 +0100
From: baars@bahnhof.se (Girilal Baars)
Subject: Re: Drugs again and again ?
> Do you think, the kind of addiction to drugs would be same with
> legalized ones? I don't think so ... the other effects of drugs, that
> these people can't / don't want to work and especially all the dying on
> drugs, it's all because the quality is not controlled ... Legalized
> drugs must have good quality, and there would be not much of the
> problems left, I think ...
>
> Reiner
What about the problem of millions of human beings fleeing reality to live
in their small, cloistered world drugs. Why care about the future? Why
achieve anything? Why live? People who can't/won't deal with reality as it
is, should be a major concern for everyone interested in our common
humanity. And is that what great music is about - dealing with pain?
-----------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 1997 11:57:09 +0100
From: beluga@wineasy.se
Subject: Re: drugs.NON SCAN
just heard:
did you know that jeffrey evans from 68 comeback OD'd
and died a week ago? Sad bussiness.
Trevor
-----------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 1997 12:11:02 +0100
From: "Barczinski, Reiner, WAC" <Barczinski@celanese.de>
Subject: Drugs, what else ?
Yeah, of course, sounds right, like most does ... and the problem is, I
can't really imagine, why people take drugs ... but now we come to
another problem perhaps, but I don't know if I want this discussed, too?
Can we condemn taking drugs? Don't we have to condemn much more the
society that builds the base for taking drugs? Society has to change,
that nobody wants to flee into different worlds from her? But this only
in addition ... back to something more friendly, music, would be nice?
Not to close eyes facing these problems, but I don't want to make this
list something it does not meant to be ...
Reiner
>> Do you think, the kind of addiction to drugs would be same with
>> legalized ones? I don't think so ... the other effects of drugs, that
>> these people can't / don't want to work and especially all the dying on
>> drugs, it's all because the quality is not controlled ... Legalized
>> drugs must have good quality, and there would be not much of the
>> problems left, I think ...
>
> What about the problem of millions of human beings fleeing reality to
> live in their small, cloistered world drugs. Why care about the future? Why
> achieve anything? Why live? People who can't/won't deal with reality as it
> is, should be a major concern for everyone interested in our common
> humanity. And is that what great music is about - dealing with pain?
-----------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 1997 17:28:19 +0100
From: j.sundstrom@ekuc.se (Jan Sundstrom)
Subject: BH now!
They're playing the new BH song on P3 now!
-----------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 1997 12:05:38 -0500
From: mqo4365@is4.nyu.edu (Martin Olson)
Subject: Re: BH now!
At 5:28 PM 11/26/97, Jan Sundstrom wrote:
> They're playing the new BH song on P3 now!
Well since I doubt I'm going to have much luck picking up P3 over here : )
could you describe the sound of the new song/s? Just curious...
later,
Martin.
-----------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 1997 18:18:24 +0100
From: Mats L <blooob@mindless.com>
Subject: Re: BH now!
Martin Olson wrote:
> At 5:28 PM 11/26/97, Jan Sundstrom wrote:
>> They're playing the new BH song on P3 now!
>
> Well since I doubt I'm going to have much luck picking up P3 over here : )
> could you describe the sound of the new song/s? Just curious...
It sounds "exactly" as the original "Final Solution", Pere Ubu's second
single. With swedish vocals instead. Maybee I sound a bit bored about
it. But I'm not... It's great!!!
I hope some more people of the world gets up their eyes for Pere Ubu
this way.
/M
-----------------------------
End of Scandinavian Indie Digest Vol.97 #09
*******************************************
