From: Fred Davidson (email suppressed)
Date: Thu Aug 06 2009 - 06:59:12 PDT
You may laugh now but it is we who will have the last laugh. We
will laugh last because we know what appropriate cleavage to show or
not to show is and FOX simply does not. They are reprehensible. They
are slime. They are the enemy. So have your laugh, enjoy it while you
can. Your days are numbered.
On Aug 6, 2009, at 8:16 AM, Lundgren wrote:
> You need to learn to turn the other check. ;)
> Fox isn't really a problem. If everyone reacted the way I guess most
> Frameworkers do to that clip (okay I laughed - I don't care anymore,
> it's just fun) then there'd be no problem and there'd be no Fox.
> You see, I really think the eggS came first.
> Bjorn Lundgren
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tony Conrad" <email suppressed>
> To: <email suppressed>
> Sent: Thursday, August 06, 2009 3:26 AM
> Subject: Re: Murdoch's Falsehoods [Was: Kuchar/McDowell screen on
> Fox News!]
>> Wake up!
>> I agree with Gregg Biermann. Fox is the ENEMY; the ENEMY; the ENEMY.
>> Not that your slushy liberalism is going to have any effect (except
>> stiffening the spines of some of us who see things more clearly),
>> but your remarks certainly represent the final disintegration of
>> "experimental" into complete meaninglessness. "Art" as well, it
>> On Wed 08/05/09 1:47 PM , Lundgren email suppressed sent:
>>> I think the clip is an experimental film in it's own sense.
>>> We should always have a wide definition of art, and we should try to
>>> interprete any work of art as a good work of art.
>>> Therefore I see no other thing to do than to consider this a
>>> really great
>>> experimental satire.
>>> Björn Lundgren
>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Scott Stark" BEAM.NET>To: email suppressed
>>> >Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 9:15 PM
>>> Subject: Re: Murdoch's Falsehoods [Was: Kuchar/McDowell screen on
>>> > At 06:19 PM 8/2/2009 -0700, Chuck Kleinhans
>>> >>They also seem to not grasp the fact that the
>>> film was made in 1975 and is >>not being funded by the NEA.
>>> > Actually I think they were very carefully
>>> creating this confusion. If you > listen closely they do state
>>> that the funding
>>> went to the "theater" that > was planning to show the film, not
>>> the film
>>> itself, but that goes by very > quickly and they made sure to blur
>>> distinction with the "shocking" > imagery and voice-over details.
>>> > I think the Fox team is actually very smart and
>>> crafty, and has a lot of > fun making stuff up.
>>> > Scott
>>> > For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at
>>> For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at om>.
>> For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.
> For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.
For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.