On a related note: I remember reading an investigative piece in Rolling Stone sometime in the early to mid-nineties about a group of homeless/squatter California teens who were ritualistically torturing and killing the weaker members. When they interviewed the ringleader after the fact, he said that it had started as run-of-the-mill hazing, but that it had been pushed over the edge by the Skinny Puppy's "Worlock."
I mean, Rabies was a big record for my crowd back then, too, but damn.
But yeah, I always wonder what it's like for an artist to hear stuff like this about their music.
$666,000 in royalties?! LOL - what. a. fucking. joke.
That guy doesn't give a sweaty fuck about the prisoners who were tortured. He just wants some exposure/$
At the very least, he could pretend to care by saying he plans on donating the funds to Amnesty Int'l (or wherever) if his case is successful.
It was either that or $666. It's clearly a joke to get attention and if they get paid all the better. It's either a well thought art prank or a dumb joke, either way it's funny.
On 22 January 2009, President Obama signed executive orders directing the CIA to shut what remains of its network of "secret" prisons and ordering the closing of the Guant??namo detention camp within a year.[38] However, he postponed difficult decisions on the details for at least six months.[39]
As of December 2013, the U.S. government has yet to close the detention camp.
On 7 March 2011, President Obama issued an executive order that permits ongoing indefinite detention of Guant??namo detainees.[40] The National Defense Authorization Act for 2012 would have authorized indefinite detention of suspected terrorists,[41] but enforcement of the relevant section was blocked by a federal court on 16 May 2012,[42] ruling on a suit brought by a number of private citizens, including Chris Hedges, Daniel Ellsberg, Noam Chomsky, and Birgitta Jonsdottir.[43] The government sidestepped the ruling, however, saying "The government construes this Court???s Order as applying only as to the named plaintiffs in this suit."[44]
bassie
11,710 Posts
Comments
On a related note: I remember reading an investigative piece in Rolling Stone sometime in the early to mid-nineties about a group of homeless/squatter California teens who were ritualistically torturing and killing the weaker members. When they interviewed the ringleader after the fact, he said that it had started as run-of-the-mill hazing, but that it had been pushed over the edge by the Skinny Puppy's "Worlock."
I mean, Rabies was a big record for my crowd back then, too, but damn.
But yeah, I always wonder what it's like for an artist to hear stuff like this about their music.
Sadly only whistle blowers have been.
That guy doesn't give a sweaty fuck about the prisoners who were tortured. He just wants some exposure/$
At the very least, he could pretend to care by saying he plans on donating the funds to Amnesty Int'l (or wherever) if his case is successful.
I think you're taking that figure a little too seriously.
b/w
He's probably just mad that they considered their music to be torture.
They must still be hanging around for the music.
It's the new Ibiza. They even came out with a whole line of Gitmo dress code compatible raver fashion that's all in orange:
I WANT TO WATERBOARD THIS DUDE.
That's what the funnel is for!
It was either that or $666. It's clearly a joke to get attention and if they get paid all the better. It's either a well thought art prank or a dumb joke, either way it's funny.
As of December 2013, the U.S. government has yet to close the detention camp.
On 7 March 2011, President Obama issued an executive order that permits ongoing indefinite detention of Guant??namo detainees.[40] The National Defense Authorization Act for 2012 would have authorized indefinite detention of suspected terrorists,[41] but enforcement of the relevant section was blocked by a federal court on 16 May 2012,[42] ruling on a suit brought by a number of private citizens, including Chris Hedges, Daniel Ellsberg, Noam Chomsky, and Birgitta Jonsdottir.[43] The government sidestepped the ruling, however, saying "The government construes this Court???s Order as applying only as to the named plaintiffs in this suit."[44]