Re: Small taste of things to come if the war on Iraq happens.
At 12:11 AM 01/20/2003 -0500, Declan McCullagh wrote: On Sun, Jan 19, 2003 at 07:45:56AM -0500, Jay h wrote: > The obsession with Starbucks really puzzles me. Starbucks is one of > the few mass retailers that actually offers medical coverage to even > part timers, it allows people to move from place to place and pick It was kind of amusing to see DC cops protecting Starbucks yesterday; no other business on Penn Ave SE was apparently deemed controversial enough to require police presence. Hey, police have values, and coffee is one of them. Remember what coffee was like in most of the country before Starbucks? Brown water, usually burned by sitting on a warmer for too long, maybe enough caffeine to give you a buzz and enough acid to give you an upset stomach, but certainly nothing resembling Coffee except in a few oases like San Francisco and the Italian parts of NY/NJ. Obviously this is a Commie Plot to control our Precious Bodily Fluids - Actually, to give credit where credit is due, and to put a technology spin on things, a lot of the credit for improving US coffee needs to go to Mr. Coffee, which got us to stop using percolators.
Re: Small taste of things to come if the war on Iraq happens.
On Sun, Jan 19, 2003 at 07:45:56AM -0500, Jay h wrote: > The obsession with Starbucks really puzzles me. Starbucks is one of > the few mass retailers that actually offers medical coverage to even > part timers, it allows people to move from place to place and pick It was kind of amusing to see DC cops protecting Starbucks yesterday; no other business on Penn Ave SE was apparently deemed controversial enough to require police presence. See photos: http://www.mccullagh.org/theme/anti-iraq-war-march-jan03.html -Declan
Re: Small taste of things to come if the war on Iraq happens.
Hmm, I thought it was satire. On Sun, Jan 19, 2003 at 02:36:33PM -0600, Alif The Terrible wrote: > This is about the lamest thing I have read in years. > > On Sun, 19 Jan 2003, Tyler Durden wrote: > > > Well, our offensive against Starbucks wasn't so much against Starbucks per > > se. We wanted to utilize some crappy generic corporate "art" to auto-destroy > > another establishment that, at the time, was rapidly crystallizing "brand > > consciousness" in the minds of consumers. > > So, to put this in a language other than "Dot-Com Drivel", you picked on the > first thing that came to mind, blindly, and then tried to figure out how to > justify it later. > > > By destroying a Starbucks, we > > wished to introduce a crystal imperfection, so that alternate, > > non-corporate-driven considerations of "branding" might be catalyzed. > > We continue to maintain the right to develop truly populist forms of conception > > towards consumer items, independent of the desire of the coporate state. > > Yet more Dot-Com Drivel. Do you write web pages for living? > > > Unfortunately, we incurred our first casualty, one Robert Paulson. Note the > > willingness of rentacops to use deadly force to stop someone who was > > finished in the destruction of mere property. This, according to the > > establishment, was justified as an act of "violence against violence". > > I agree that death was an inappropriate sentence here, while I also realize > that there is an delicious Darwinian twist as well. > > > As for Starbucks itself, we have no particular qualm. > > And with this one sentence, you have utterly destroyed your credibility. > > > -Tyler Durden > > > -- > Yours, > J.A. Terranson > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > If Governments really want us to behave like civilized human beings, they > should give serious consideration towards setting a better example: > Ruling by force, rather than consensus; the unrestrained application of > unjust laws (which the victim-populations were never allowed input on in > the first place); the State policy of justice only for the rich and > elected; the intentional abuse and occassionally destruction of entire > populations merely to distract an already apathetic and numb electorate... > This type of demogoguery must surely wipe out the fascist United States > as surely as it wiped out the fascist Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. > > The views expressed here are mine, and NOT those of my employers, > associates, or others. Besides, if it *were* the opinion of all of > those people, I doubt there would be a problem to bitch about in the > first place... > -- Harmon Seaver CyberShamanix http://www.cybershamanix.com
Re: Small taste of things to come if the war on Iraq happens.
Could be. If it is, that'll teach me (again...) to read the whole thread rather than try to just empty my [overflowing] mailbox... On Sun, 19 Jan 2003, Harmon Seaver wrote: > Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 14:50:35 -0600 > From: Harmon Seaver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Alif The Terrible <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Small taste of things to come if the war on Iraq happens. > > Hmm, I thought it was satire. > > > On Sun, Jan 19, 2003 at 02:36:33PM -0600, Alif The Terrible wrote: > > This is about the lamest thing I have read in years. > > > > On Sun, 19 Jan 2003, Tyler Durden wrote: > > > > > Well, our offensive against Starbucks wasn't so much against Starbucks per > > > se. We wanted to utilize some crappy generic corporate "art" to auto-destroy > > > another establishment that, at the time, was rapidly crystallizing "brand > > > consciousness" in the minds of consumers. > > > > So, to put this in a language other than "Dot-Com Drivel", you picked on the > > first thing that came to mind, blindly, and then tried to figure out how to > > justify it later. > > > > > By destroying a Starbucks, we > > > wished to introduce a crystal imperfection, so that alternate, > > > non-corporate-driven considerations of "branding" might be catalyzed. > > > We continue to maintain the right to develop truly populist forms of conception > > > towards consumer items, independent of the desire of the coporate state. > > > > Yet more Dot-Com Drivel. Do you write web pages for living? > > > > > Unfortunately, we incurred our first casualty, one Robert Paulson. Note the > > > willingness of rentacops to use deadly force to stop someone who was > > > finished in the destruction of mere property. This, according to the > > > establishment, was justified as an act of "violence against violence". > > > > I agree that death was an inappropriate sentence here, while I also realize > > that there is an delicious Darwinian twist as well. > > > > > As for Starbucks itself, we have no particular qualm. > > > > And with this one sentence, you have utterly destroyed your credibility. > > > > > -Tyler Durden > > > > > > -- > > Yours, > > J.A. Terranson > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > If Governments really want us to behave like civilized human beings, they > > should give serious consideration towards setting a better example: > > Ruling by force, rather than consensus; the unrestrained application of > > unjust laws (which the victim-populations were never allowed input on in > > the first place); the State policy of justice only for the rich and > > elected; the intentional abuse and occassionally destruction of entire > > populations merely to distract an already apathetic and numb electorate... > > This type of demogoguery must surely wipe out the fascist United States > > as surely as it wiped out the fascist Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. > > > > The views expressed here are mine, and NOT those of my employers, > > associates, or others. Besides, if it *were* the opinion of all of > > those people, I doubt there would be a problem to bitch about in the > > first place... > > > > -- Yours, J.A. Terranson [EMAIL PROTECTED] If Governments really want us to behave like civilized human beings, they should give serious consideration towards setting a better example: Ruling by force, rather than consensus; the unrestrained application of unjust laws (which the victim-populations were never allowed input on in the first place); the State policy of justice only for the rich and elected; the intentional abuse and occassionally destruction of entire populations merely to distract an already apathetic and numb electorate... This type of demogoguery must surely wipe out the fascist United States as surely as it wiped out the fascist Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. The views expressed here are mine, and NOT those of my employers, associates, or others. Besides, if it *were* the opinion of all of those people, I doubt there would be a problem to bitch about in the first place...
Re: CDR: Re: Small taste of things to come if the war on Iraq happens.
This is about the lamest thing I have read in years. On Sun, 19 Jan 2003, Tyler Durden wrote: > Well, our offensive against Starbucks wasn't so much against Starbucks per > se. We wanted to utilize some crappy generic corporate "art" to auto-destroy > another establishment that, at the time, was rapidly crystallizing "brand > consciousness" in the minds of consumers. So, to put this in a language other than "Dot-Com Drivel", you picked on the first thing that came to mind, blindly, and then tried to figure out how to justify it later. > By destroying a Starbucks, we > wished to introduce a crystal imperfection, so that alternate, > non-corporate-driven considerations of "branding" might be catalyzed. > We continue to maintain the right to develop truly populist forms of conception > towards consumer items, independent of the desire of the coporate state. Yet more Dot-Com Drivel. Do you write web pages for living? > Unfortunately, we incurred our first casualty, one Robert Paulson. Note the > willingness of rentacops to use deadly force to stop someone who was > finished in the destruction of mere property. This, according to the > establishment, was justified as an act of "violence against violence". I agree that death was an inappropriate sentence here, while I also realize that there is an delicious Darwinian twist as well. > As for Starbucks itself, we have no particular qualm. And with this one sentence, you have utterly destroyed your credibility. > -Tyler Durden -- Yours, J.A. Terranson [EMAIL PROTECTED] If Governments really want us to behave like civilized human beings, they should give serious consideration towards setting a better example: Ruling by force, rather than consensus; the unrestrained application of unjust laws (which the victim-populations were never allowed input on in the first place); the State policy of justice only for the rich and elected; the intentional abuse and occassionally destruction of entire populations merely to distract an already apathetic and numb electorate... This type of demogoguery must surely wipe out the fascist United States as surely as it wiped out the fascist Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. The views expressed here are mine, and NOT those of my employers, associates, or others. Besides, if it *were* the opinion of all of those people, I doubt there would be a problem to bitch about in the first place...
Re: Small taste of things to come if the war on Iraq happens.
Well, our offensive against Starbucks wasn't so much against Starbucks per se. We wanted to utilize some crappy generic corporate "art" to auto-destroy another establishment that, at the time, was rapidly crystallizing "brand consciousness" in the minds of consumers. By destroying a Starbucks, we wished to introduce a crystal imperfection, so that alternate, non-corporate-driven considerations of "branding" might be catalyzed. We continue to maintain the right to develop truly populist forms of conception towards consumer items, independent of the desire of the coporate state. Unfortunately, we incurred our first casualty, one Robert Paulson. Note the willingness of rentacops to use deadly force to stop someone who was finished in the destruction of mere property. This, according to the establishment, was justified as an act of "violence against violence". As for Starbucks itself, we have no particular qualm. -Tyler Durden From: "Jay h" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Small taste of things to come if the war on Iraq happens. Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 07:45:56 -0500 -- Original Message -- From: Matthew X <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 20:47:49 +1100 >street, and through the windows of a Starbucks and a Victoria's Secret. Yes all those evil weapons of mass destruction made by Victoria's Secret... they MUST BE STOPPED! The obsession with Starbucks really puzzles me. Starbucks is one of the few mass retailers that actually offers medical coverage to even part timers, it allows people to move from place to place and pick up employment at another store, their policies have always been actively supportive of people discriminated against elsewhere such as lesbian and gay, and unlike Walmart, their prices pose no threat to the beloved 'mom and pop' stores in a community. It would seem there are better targets to attack as the evil tools of oppression. j Sent via the WebMail system at 1st.net _ Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
Re: Small taste of things to come if the war on Iraq happens.
-- Original Message -- From: Matthew X <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 20:47:49 +1100 >street, and through the windows of a Starbucks and a Victoria's Secret. Yes all those evil weapons of mass destruction made by Victoria's Secret... they MUST BE STOPPED! The obsession with Starbucks really puzzles me. Starbucks is one of the few mass retailers that actually offers medical coverage to even part timers, it allows people to move from place to place and pick up employment at another store, their policies have always been actively supportive of people discriminated against elsewhere such as lesbian and gay, and unlike Walmart, their prices pose no threat to the beloved 'mom and pop' stores in a community. It would seem there are better targets to attack as the evil tools of oppression. j Sent via the WebMail system at 1st.net
