Someone set the man on fire during the eclipse!!!

K-mom · Post by **K-mom** » Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:53 pm

Please give some examples of where and when they encourage illegal activities.

Bob · Post by **Bob** » Sat Sep 01, 2007 10:37 pm

Crikey, Marian made me take down all the JPEGs on the DPW website that showed people w/ firearms 7 or 8 years ago.

Geezer -- nothing is preventing you or that fuckstick homunculus who (allegedly) committed arson at the event from doing whatever the FUCK you want, except your respective conscience, respect for the law, respect for art, respect for the people who built the Man, respect for anyone who showed up after Tuesday morning, and respect for everybody who felt morally obligated to rebuild the Man.

Hope this fucking helps.

Bob · Post by **Bob** » Sat Sep 01, 2007 10:41 pm

Jesus Fuckstick Christ, the assholes are coming out of the woodwork worse than in a Minneapolis airport bathroom.

akmojo · Post by **akmojo** » Sun Sep 02, 2007 10:52 am

will need to rename this years event to the "blackened" man....

can't sit still · Post by **can't sit still** » Sun Sep 02, 2007 12:30 pm

Last year, there was a big current of rumor that someone was going to light up the man on wednesday. They reportedly put out extra security. That may have been the inspiration for the attention-craving cretin who torched it.

I doubt that his moment of fame will be worth the price that he hopefully will have to pay.

dana · Post by **dana** » Sun Sep 02, 2007 3:20 pm

tisha2 wrote:I felt the same way Diane.... he just looks so. damn. proud-of-himself.

ick.

I saw a picture of the guy in the local paper.
Actually I didn't think it looked like a smirk. A smirk says - I'm superior or.. I'm in on a great joke, wink wink...

His face looked like - I'm fucked... and I don't care!
(Bad. I'm seeing a sudden outbreak of sociopaths for some reason.)

BAS · Post by **BAS** » Mon Sep 03, 2007 1:06 am

I pretty much figure it was going to happen sooner or later, so whoever did it doesn't really matter. I also figure, what the heck?!, write it off as a throw back to the anarchy and fire origins of the event. Burning Man survived its origins, so it should be able to survive this incident. Apparently HatMan laughed when he was told about it, so I don't really see any reason to worry about, or to dwell on the incident. (Though it kind of sucks I wasn't there for it, I suppose. Then again, I only got to go in 2006, and missed most of what happened then, to, so could easily have missed the premature burn, too.)

B.

Bob · Post by **Bob** » Mon Sep 03, 2007 1:13 am

Sooner or later somebody should explain how setting fire to other people's art is a throwback to anything but HITLER.

pixiepam · Post by **pixiepam** » Mon Sep 03, 2007 7:24 am

Karma will cath him sooner or later.

BAS · Post by **BAS** » Mon Sep 03, 2007 10:11 am

Bob wrote:Sooner or later somebody should explain how setting fire to other people's art is a throwback to anything but HITLER.

Do you mean people haven't burned other people's stuff since Hitler, or that burning people's stuff started with Hitler?

Just wondering....

B.

Actually, I think Bob is deliberately being dense, but am still interested in his answer.

HughMungus · Post by **HughMungus** » Mon Sep 03, 2007 11:23 am

diane o'thirst wrote:starts plotting his revenge.

It wasn't revenge.

but if I hated something enough to walk away from it, I wouldn't come back

Even if you loved it?

Answer to Hugh Mungus: No, I wasn't advocating killing the guy for burning the Man early. But there are people who are pissed enough with him to lay some grievous bodily harm on him for that.

And you're validating their reactions.

diane o'thirst · Post by **diane o'thirst** » Mon Sep 03, 2007 3:29 pm

HughMungus wrote: Even if you loved it?

In my experience, love and hate are antithetical. So love wouldn't be there.

[quote ="HughMungus"]

Answer to Hugh Mungus: No, I wasn't advocating killing the guy for burning the Man early. But there are people who are pissed enough with him to lay some grievous bodily harm on him for that.

And you're validating their reactions.[/quote]

Nope. I'm acknowledging them. Validation would be if I said, "Hey, that's cool, go for it." Acknowledgment isn't validation.

Besides, that's all academic. Has this Chris Radcliffe guy gotten any mailbombs at FreePaulAddis.com yet? Someone just posted the alleged address and phone number of Paul Addis on this board, has anyone filled up his mailbox and answering machine with flames and poison pen letters yet? If not, then no-one's acted against him except the sheriff and judge in Pershing County.

I just wish people would stop defending him. He's a violent asshole who set a very bad precedent, let the courts have their way with him. He was a lawyer, he can defend himself. The man will burn without you.

BAS · Post by **BAS** » Mon Sep 03, 2007 5:11 pm

I think what Hugh Mungus meant by validating is that, if Addis' intent was to provoke a reaction and gain attention, then that is what people are doing here. (And that is what was/is actually behind my position of writing it off as something that was bound to happen sooner or later, so the person who did it doesn't matter, and writing it off as a throwback to the old outlaw/anarchy/fire origins of the event. Give Addis what he claims he wants, and don't give him a strong reaction nor personal attention, and see what he does. If he really intended it as throwback, he should be happy. If he did it as a way to draw attention to himself, then he won't be happy.)

B.

(Aw, crud! I wasn't going to explain myself for another couple days! Oh well...)

diane o'thirst · Post by **diane o'thirst** » Mon Sep 03, 2007 5:24 pm

Uhmm, sorry. The "just ignore them/don't sink to their level" defense when someone needles you is bullshit. It's begging them to stick it to you harder. Humans hate to be ignored, especially when they're as self-absorbed as people like PDA is.

Better to turn, engage, and give them all the (negative) attention they want. And like I said â€” not necessarily violence but social ostracism and sanction from the Rule of Law. Remember that he has a felony arson charge nocked into the string and pointed at his head. A million-dollar fine and/or lawsuit is gonna <i>hurt</i> him more and in more ways that 40,000 baseball bats and steel-toed boots ever could.

BAS · Post by **BAS** » Mon Sep 03, 2007 5:50 pm

I never said don't sue him. I said give him what he claims he wants, and see what he does with it. Sometimes the worst punishment is giving someone exactly what they claim they want.

Actually, you are giving him what he really wants. Attention and anger. If I got angry whenever that was what someone really wanted, my service sector jobs wouldn't be nearly as fun! Remaining polite and feigning helpfulness is much more frustrating to a rude individual, looking to get you upset.

If you choose to remain angry with him, and yell about what he did, it will just validate his actions in his mind.

If you separate the individual from the act, allow that maybe the act could be interpreted the way he claims he intended it, although you do not agree with the act nor endorse that interpretation, and that he has committed the act and it is now up to the authorities to deal with it-- and then forget about him-- it is both less frustrating and not as satisfying to the person trying to make you angry.

If you go ahead and chew him out, he will just claim you are part of the problem and proving his point.

Anyway, this has reminded me too much of the games which have been being played in politics these last couple or so decades, and I feel like I need a shower now.

B.

diane o'thirst · Post by **diane o'thirst** » Mon Sep 03, 2007 6:12 pm

BAS wrote:If you choose to remain angry with him, and yell about what he did, it will just validate his actions in his mind.

It's not anger, it's scorn. And in his mind, he's already established that what he did was right and valid and continues to think that way, whatever I say. He's already gone on record that he doesn't give a rusty fuckwich what anyone thinks about it.

If you go ahead and chew him out, he will just claim you are part of the problem and proving his point.

And you know as well as I do that he was talking out his ass when he called us spineless, self-replicating swine who contribute nothing to the Burn except money and obedience. These are groundless judgments so any claim he or anyone else makes that I'm proving his point is equally baseless.

Shower? Yeah, that sounds like a good idea. Burn's over, everyone's coming home, I'm done. Wolf Out.

Rabbi Dali Rick · Post by **Rabbi Dali Rick** » Mon Sep 03, 2007 7:36 pm

I don't know how I feel about this.

It's like the old joke about the guy watching his brand new caddilac go over the cliff with his mother-in-law in the passenger seat.

the rebbi

HughMungus · Post by **HughMungus** » Mon Sep 03, 2007 10:27 pm

Rabbi Dali Rick wrote:I don't know how I feel about this.

It's like the old joke about the guy watching his brand new caddilac go over the cliff with his mother-in-law in the passenger seat.

the rebbi

Exactly. It's a dichotomy. Anyone who 'doesn't 'understand 'that' 'isn't 'getting 'it.

K-mom · Post by **K-mom** » Mon Sep 03, 2007 10:47 pm

BAS wrote: If I got angry whenever that was what someone really wanted, my service sector jobs wouldn't be nearly as fun! Remaining polite and feigning helpfulness is much more frustrating to a rude individual, looking to get you upset.

Gotta side with you on this one Bas

ZaphodBurner · Post by **ZaphodBurner** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 8:50 am

stargeezer wrote:
BM org prints that on the back of the ticket to help cover their butt when something goes wrong, while in fact encouraging activities that are illegal.

I'm curious, since this is "fact": Where do they encourage activities that are illegal. Specifically. Where?

-zb

stargeezer · Post by **stargeezer** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 10:03 am

ZaphodBurner wrote:
stargeezer wrote:
BM org prints that on the back of the ticket to help cover their butt when something goes wrong, while in fact encouraging activities that are illegal.
I'm curious, since this is "fact": Where do they encourage activities that are illegal. Specifically. Where?

-zb

I am very surprised at all the flack I am getting just because I pointed out that LEOs are put in an interesting position.

First off, I have never stated that I disagree with any of the "normal" activities of the event, only that the "early burn" caused an interesting paradox.

BM does encourage self expression and has the event in the middle of nowhere to aid in giving freedom for this expression. Again, I personally have no problem with this, but it does in fact violate laws that many do not agree with and others push to have enforced. If BM were not trying to protect participants from these laws, there are several areas closer to large cities that would make participation more convenient.

Self expression can come in many forms. My personal belief is that as long as that expression causes no harm to others, everyone should be tolerant. The defination of harm becomes an issue for many, again, I personally define this as physical harm. As mentioned in another thread, RESPECT OF OTHERS is what really is required, and failure to respect is what causes problems.

I do appreciate the position that LEO is in. They turn their backs on many forms of expression that they could not tolerate in a city park while trying to prevent any physical harm coming to anybody. Yes, they do enforce a few laws that some would like ignored, but then that again is the cause for the little comments on the back of the ticket.

Finally, looking at my comments, I do not see where any have been disrespectful of the organization, the event, or any participants. My only conclusion is that any flack must be due to my positive comments about LEO.

Rob the Wop · Post by **Rob the Wop** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 10:39 am

People have been talking about doing this since I first started attending, back in 97. I'm sure they talked about it since at least a couple years before it. I'll bet the reason Larry 'laughed it off' was that he has probably been waiting for this to happen for many, many years.

My first thought was 'well, its about time- now that's finally out of the way'. My second thought was disbelief in how rabidly this guy has been persued via legal system. First degree felony arson is minimum 2 years and maximum 15 years. 15 years people. Do you really think that some guy burning a wooden sculpture that was designed to be burned, was planned to be burned, was legally sanctioned to be burned, was at a festival where things are created to be burned, but that he burned early- deserves to spend 15 years in prison?

It's just a truckload of fucking wood people. Built nicely, but not even original artwork since they have built it the same way for years. I quit attending the burn itself in 99. In 99, 03, and 04 I would leave before the burn happened, or go check out other stuff during the burn. I liked checking out the original stuff people have done themselves. I've always been of the opinion that we need to focus less of the spectacle/quasi-religious symbolism of the burn night and get back to the individual participation.

Fuck it. Drop the arson charge, take him to civil court, and give him the choice of paying massive amounts of cash- or building the damn thing by himself for the next couple years for BM. I'd put money on him not minding building the damn thing. This was a once off stunt really. Maybe it will polarize people and get some change into the event.

ZaphodBurner · Post by **ZaphodBurner** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 10:50 am

Rob the Wop wrote: First degree felony arson is minimum 2 years and maximum 15 years. 15 years people. Do you really think that some guy burning a wooden sculpture that was designed to be burned, was planned to be burned, was legally sanctioned to be burned, was at a festival where things are created to be burned, but that he burned early- deserves to spend 15 years in prison?

Definately not, but 90 days or so might wake him the fuck up about respecting other people's rights. If my wife spent all day preparing a potluck and some jackass came up and ate it all before she was ready to serve it, saying "Well, it's FOOD and it was MEANT TO BE EATEN" I'd probably just stand by while she kicked his ass.

RESPECT. If you don't respect your community and you don't respect law and rights, then why should the community respect yours?

If somebody doesn't respect me and doesn't respect the laws that respect me, then what prevents me from busting that person's head with a baseball bat. Would I do something like that just because somebody destroyed my art?

Might.

Why wouldn't I? Respect.

-zb

Bob · Post by **Bob** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 11:11 am

I'd be happy if the little turd had to work on a Nevada fire crew for a year or two, but he'd probably go AWOL the first week.

Isotopia · Post by **Isotopia** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 12:50 pm

It's not anger, it's scorn. And in his mind, he's already established that what he did was right and valid and continues to think that way, whatever I say. He's already gone on record that he doesn't give a rusty fuckwich what anyone thinks about it.

Which makes for mildly amusing reading after just returning from the playa.

People are already forgetting Addis and his little narcissistic tantrum. Hell, callous as it sounds he'll be forgotten quicker than the 30+ Va Tech students murdered back east a few months ago. Certainly not many will give much more of a shit in hindsight because he really didn't say fuck in or with his silly little act other than exhibiting a reckless regard for the safety of others and an inability to honor (or consider) the fact that destroyed in the Man that Tuesday morning were hundreds of personal mementos (cremated remains, keepsakes, notes, etc.) which many people were robbed of. Of course such protestations will probably be summarily dismissed by those who're in agreement with destroying the Man as Symbol if only to keep up their continually morphing Burningman Whinge du Jour. Still, in a few months even these Keepers of True Burniness(TM) will pretty much drop off the radar with their insistence that Addis' prank was political, necessary or appropriate. Those vacuous ramblings disguised as informed opinion usually implode on themselves after a while - especially when the moralistic tune Addis was singing earlier is seems like it's starting to fray a bit at the edges as further contradictory statements start to emerge. I'm betting he's starting to smell the magnitude of his little puerile cock shaking moment as the reality of his situation becomes more and more apparent.

I only wish I could be there to see that smug little smirk of his melt when he sees the final costs of his legal bills - assuming he doesn't get some lame public defender.

The guy's a fuckstick and he'll probably rot assuming he's convicted.

Rob the Wop · Post by **Rob the Wop** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 3:07 pm

ZaphodBurner wrote:
Rob the Wop wrote: First degree felony arson is minimum 2 years and maximum 15 years. 15 years people. Do you really think that some guy burning a wooden sculpture that was designed to be burned, was planned to be burned, was legally sanctioned to be burned, was at a festival where things are created to be burned, but that he burned early- deserves to spend 15 years in prison?
Definately not, but 90 days or so might wake him the fuck up about respecting other people's rights. If my wife spent all day preparing a potluck and some jackass came up and ate it all before she was ready to serve it, saying "Well, it's FOOD and it was MEANT TO BE EATEN" I'd probably just stand by while she kicked his ass.

Wellllll....
Let me use my Magical Perspective Generator(tm).

It would be more akin to your wife preparing a potluck, some jackass coming and eating it- then your wife torturing, then killing the jackass' family, and then crucifying the jackass himself after forcing him to watch the family genocide.

At that point I would be far more worried about your wife's actions than that of the jackass.

Sure, this guy did something that was asinine. But I'll bet a hell of a lot of folks have thought of doing the exact same thing at some point or other. Now if he would have created some kind of massive artistic spectacle to torch it, then I might applaud his actions. 200 thermite infused syncopated model airplanes, for example. Unfortunately, it appears more of a drug inspired, uncreative prank of some sort.

But I'm far more concerned about the pursuing of felony arson charges. I'm hoping its just smokescreen to fuck with the guy and that they aren't seriously trying to nail him for 2 to 15.

BTW- Hats off to Larry if his reaction was as stated. I don't doubt it, since he's known the SF Caco contingent for decades- but still, my opinion of him increased 200%. Class act reaction. Boffo good show guv.

BigCock · Post by **BigCock** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 4:50 pm

I think the basis of the felony arson charge is the supposed value of the thing burned. It was considered property worth $250,000 which is far more than necessary to make it a felony.

Anyway, some additional second-hand info about Addis. He's bipolar and he worked alone. He was in the BLD which is my old camp. A bit embarrassing, that. Basically, DOT nailed it: a violent asshole.

But I was there when they stood the man the second time. It was fucking fantastic. People were really truly euphoric, probably more so than they would have been if it hadn't been torched in the first place. How did they do a complete restoration including neon? A-mazing. And it was the best burn I've ever seen. That mushroom cloud. Wow wow wow. My 9th burn and definitely my best.

So ha ha, fuck you Paul.

Bob · Post by **Bob** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 4:56 pm

C'mon Rob. It's more like one church group rebuilds a church after its timely demise the previous year, another church group is holding a festival in the church basement, and yet another church group is planning a weekend sing-along choir session & BBQ, but some little fuck of an arsonist comes along and torches the church steeple.

If you'd camped with the asshole, you'd know he's capable of hate crimes.

Isotopia · Post by **Isotopia** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 5:03 pm

I'm hoping its just smokescreen to fuck with the guy and that they aren't seriously trying to nail him for 2 to 15.

I wouldn't take any bets on it Rob.

I think the BLM figures that it has extorted about as much money from the event as they can without a real push back from both the LLC as well as state and local agencies in Nevada who're now lining up to suck on the BM cash tit that's served the Winnemucca BLM office so well over the years.

What do you do when there's so many little piggies going after a finite number of BM titties? Well, I think you might go to either the Department of Homeland Security or the Dept of Interior in DC. You might come up with this bogus, bullshit story that your regional agency's law enforcement division needs extra funds just in case domestic terrorists - specifically fiery ELF style eco-terrorists - should come to town and cause some trouble.

Having an Addis in custody for felony arson on federal land (remember ELF) now makes asking for future supplemental operating funds much, much easier because you now have your 'terrorist.' As a branch of an underfunded governmental agency you've made a compelling case for an implausible scenario and you've made it stick. And it'll keep sticking as long as you can continue to have your suspect fit the mold that you've pre-defined. OK, so now you have your man. You're taking the little bastard to the mat. You're going after him with both guns. You're gonna bury his punk ass under the federal pen. The Full Fucking Force of the Law(TM). By God we'll have him and John Walker Linde become suck buddies in a federal SUPERMAX. BTW, you think they might ask Washington for even more $$$$ next year?

I think it's pretty damn safe to assume that Addis has nothing to do with the above scenario but being a betting man I'll wager that the BLM will make every effort to go after Addis with everything they have to portray him as the very sort of radical, punk terrorist they might have made the case for in Washington assuming they did go to Washington...which I wouldn't know about because, well, I wasn't there or anything. Nor did I hear it first hand from a representative of the federal government while I was at the burn...where I might not have been - or something....

Bob · Post by **Bob** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 5:09 pm

Or they could settle for having him scoop up truckers' pee bottles & wet sacks of burner garbage along I-80 for a couple of seasons.

Someone set the man on fire during the eclipse!!!

.... Those Aren't My Chickens ...........

Re: .... Those Aren't My Chickens ...........

My $.02

Re: My $.02

Re: My $.02