HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: perwaiz@engrg.uwo.ca (Mr. Jamshed Perwaiz)
Subject: Return air ticket to London,ENGLAND
Organization: University of Western Ontario, London
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 05:23:04 GMT
Originator: perwaiz@engrg.uwo.ca

AIR TICKET TO LONDON, ENGLAND.

FLY FROM TORONTO, OTTAWA, HALIFAX OR VANCOUVER.

male or female.  RETURN TICKET.

Can be used anytime before JULY 1, 1992

Contact me ASAP.

Jamshed Perwaiz
---------------------------------
e-mail: perwaiz@engrg.uwo.ca
phone: 519-661-2111 ext 8314 (leave message)
FAX:   519-661-3020

Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,rec.arts.books
From: wojdylo@maths.uwa.oz.au (INFIDEL)
Subject: Re: ENGLISH AS SHE IS SPOKE
Organization: University of Western Australia
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 10:37:32 GMT

wojdylo@maths.uwa.oz.au (INFIDEL) writes:

>Douglas Harper harps on:

>>In article <1992Apr5.154938.15375@uniwa.uwa.oz.au> amuzon@maths.uwa.oz.au (Polish news) writes:
>>>wojdylo@maths.uwa.oz.au (INFIDEL) writes:

>>More of the same.

>>I know I'm not the only one dead sick of the insane ravings of this
>>person.  If you feel as I do that he has seriously abused the net,
>>especially in his attempts to stay out of KILL files, please sent a
>>complaint to postmaster@maths.uwa.oz.au.  I have.

[...]



After doing his rounds of the Stations of the Cross on Good Fridays, 
Douglas Harper licks the crucified Christ's balls (after making sure that
the hags in the front row have their heads bowed in earnest prayer and
cannot see him). Vaginamouth Harper peers around slyly, and seeing that 
even God above is not watching, unfastens Christ's nappy and sucks off his
dick. Douglas Harper is so good at this that rumour  prophecies Christ's
second coming any day now. Hold your breath, Douglas, my friend. Douglas
is a good boy - he swallows, never spits, thereby keeping faith with 
the Lord's word and every sperm sacred. This Good Friday, a miracle
occurred - while giving the crucified Christ a head job, Christ blew his
head into Mr. Harper's cavernous mouth; sacred gizzum  poured down his
throat and came to rest in the warmth of his belly. Thus the Lord sowed his
seed upon the troubled Douglas Harper. In the succulent warmth of the
immaculate belly, the gizzum mutliplied through some miraculous process -
and conceived with one of Douglas's co-inhabitants, a surprised tape-worm
by the name of Mary. Thus the seed was conceived in the immculate
conception, and Douglas's belly became the womb of the Second Coming
prophecy. Douglas Harper began to menstruate with increasing frequency;
since his arsehole was too tight, the menstrual blood would build up
periodically and empty via his oesophygus through his mouth. The menstrual
blood stank like hell and caused Douglas Harper to lose some of his closest
friends - they just hated the stench emmanating from his vaginamouth. The
Word, however, is Holy, and Douglas Harper was beside himself with all the
wonderful pronouncements he was now capable of. It was like speaking in
tongues, except that Douglas's tongue was free to masticate  Christ's
penis while Holy vaginal fluid poured from his mouth.  The tapeworm Mary
was very impressed; when she got to be the size of a buffalo she pushed and
pushed her way down through Douglas Harper's poor tight rectum and was shat 
out one fine Sunday morning. Glory be to the Lord - Christ is risen, Halleluiah!
Praise the Lord - Halleluiah! King of Kings, Host of Hosts! And in the 
shit-pan - a thousand writhing worms, the products of Douglas Harper's
labours.


jw
Maths Dept
University of Western Australia
Holy Thursday, 1992
From: pac9897@zeus.tamu.edu (SO MUCH FOR DEMOCRACY IN BRITAIN)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Thoughts on Election Results
Date: 11 Apr 92 02:21:00 GMT
Organization: Texas A&M University, Academic Computing Services
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <1992Apr10.070851.2795@rdg.dec.com>, cockburn@majors.enet.dec.com (Craig Cockburn) writes...
> 
>In article <1992Apr9.234947.1@acfcluster.nyu.edu>, axd7104@acfcluster.nyu.edu writes...
>>Yes, it's confirmed.  The Tories have won a "Small, but workable,
>>majority," according to the BBC World Service.  Thank God.
>> 
>The situation in England was never in much doubt, England is probably going
>to be Tory with a big majority for decades. 
> 
>However, the Conservatives still have a tiny number of MPs in Scotland,
>and so the constitutional question there still remains. 
>We wait to see if the Claim of Right 1988 is to be invoked.

You may remember a few moons ago I was poo-pooing the idea of Scottish
independence (but no devolution) because I thought it impractical.
Well, having yet again watched those stupid fools in the South of England
(and it is overwhelmingly the South) I can see no reason, no matter
how impractical seperation may seem, that the Scots should be denied the
right to have a government whose party they have voted for for the last
4 times.
By the same token, most of England north of Nottingham deserves to have
it's own parliament since so very few people vote Tory up there too.
And as it happens, the Welsh don't really like the Tories much neither -
so perhaps they should have some kind of body to represent them.

Or perhaps the faint ridiculousness of my serious suggestions above highlight
the fact that the only real solution is to give people an electoral system
that accounts for the fact that 57% of people did not vote for the main
party in '87 and even less did this time.


Can anyone supply the % figures for the Liberal Democrats voting share
and their share of seats in the new Parliament - I think that will illustrate
the fairness of "first past the post" fully.


Philip A. Carney		On Exchange from Lancaster University,
Texas A&M University, TX	England.

**********ALL VIEWS EXPRESSED ARE MY OWN, NOT NECESSARILY THOSE OF**************
******TEXAS A & M UNIVERSITY, LANCASTER UNIVERSITY OR THEIR ASSOCIATES**********

"The lust for power is rooted not in strength, but in weakness..." - Erich Fromm
From: smee@bristol.ac.uk (Paul Smee)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Election Fraud by the Conservatives
Date: 13 Apr 92 10:22:49 GMT
Reply-To: P.Smee@bristol.ac.uk (Paul Smee)
Organization: University of Bristol

In article <13508@suns3.crosfield.co.uk> pdg@crosfield.co.uk (paul goffin) writes:
>In article <1992Apr10.163753.5602@bristol.ac.uk> P.Smee@bristol.ac.uk (Paul Smee) writes:
>>An obviously American question.  It's a bit of an oversimplification,
>>but in essence, over here, it's the Government's responsibility to make
>>sure that all eligible voters are registered; not like the States,
>>where if you don't go in and tell them about you, they don't care.  So,
>>to a very good approximation, if you are of voting age over here, and
>>the government is aware of your existence, you will be on the electoral
>>roll.
>
>Sorry, WRONG!
>
>Every year the "electoral roll" is drawn up.  Every address is sent
>an electoral register form (these are hand delivered by local
>govt officals, so they try to find all new houses too!)
>
>This has to be filled in with the details of everyone over 16 at that
>address, and then returned to the registra.
>
>If you're not on that list, you don't get to vote.

True, but (in theory at least, and in practice around here) if you
don't return the form, or if they are not 'convinced', they are
supposed to do follow-up checks to make sure they got you.  Even with
this, it is certainly possible to slip out -- which is why I qualified
my statement by saying it was both an 'oversimplification' and an
'approximation'.  And it is certainly a major difference between the UK
and US systems.  The difference between 'voting age population' and
'registered population' appears to be insignificant here, as compared
to in the US.

>Since most people who don't register for poll tax probably don't
>want a Tory government, this probably reduces the size of the opposition
>vote.

True, but as I said, there is a general correlation between
socioeconomic level and party affiliation, and there is a general
correlation between socioeconomic level and willingness to try to evade
the poll tax, and I have a suspicion that the two of these taken
together mean that the effect may only be significant in seats that the
Tories couldn't possibly win anyway.  I wouldn't try to argue that it
doesn't have an effect on the raw vote, but I'm not as convinced that
it will have an effect on the distribution of seats.

-- 
Paul Smee, Computing Service, University of Bristol, Bristol BS8 1UD, UK
 P.Smee@bristol.ac.uk - ..!uunet!uknet!bsmail!p.smee - Tel +44 272 303132
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,alt.politics.british
From: rna@leland.Stanford.EDU (Robert Ashcroft)
Subject: Re: The Decline of Britain (was Re: Great Britain as a malfunctioning democracy)
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 92 21:20:54 GMT

In article <1992Apr15.090252@axion.bt.co.uk> ravis@axion.bt.co.uk (Richard Avis) writes:

>Bzzzt, wrong. The Poll Tax was a morally reprehensible idea from start to finish.
>
>Bzzzt, wrong again!! Selling off the water and sewage businesses was
>inspired by the Tories barking mad tendency. Firstly, there's going to be
>no competition, and secondly how on earth can it be cheaper when a PLC
>makes a 10%+ return not 5%? Electricity privatisation was even more laughable,
>they ring fenced nuclear power and are allowing the squandering of North Sea
>gas in the most inefficient way possible, while the coal industry goes to the
>wall.

The idea behind the poll tax was to make local councils responsible for the
(sometimes) enormous amounts of money they were spending.  The Tories figured
that if everyone in the population had to pay for the extravagances
of their local council, they'd be a lot more likely to demand that the
local council spend wisely.  Which is a good idea.  The execution was another
matter.

Electricity privatisation was another good idea run amok.  Having a common
carrier grid with competitive suppliers to that grid is a great way of
driving prices down.  Unfortunately that still left the albatross of the
nuclear industry, which the Tories bobbled again.

As for sewage and water, would you rather have government put its capital
in these things (which the market will happily supply with capital) or
in education and things which the market will NOT supply with capital?

RNA


Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: david@guadet.gr.osf.org (David George)
Subject: Re: Inclusion of expats in UK elections
Organization: Open Software Foundation
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 13:13:27 GMT

In article <1992Apr13.112613.27022@hasler.ascom.ch>  
kevinh@hslrswi.hasler.ascom.ch (kevinh) writes:
> 
> In article <1992Apr13.004613.11462@cc.uow.edu.au>, jlloyd@cc.uow.edu.au  
(Jonathan Lloyd) writes:
> 
> There was a TV documentary a while ago on this subject. It basically
> boiled down to the fact that the Tory party was very active amongst expats
> in areas such as Spain/South of France in collecting rather large donations
> towards campaigns etc. as well as drumming up support for elections. 
> 

Well they better not come calling around here !!!

David@south_of_france.com
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: sp@mirabeau.osf.fr (Simon Patience)
Subject: Re: The Decline of Britain (was Re: Great Britain as a malfunctioning democracy)
Reply-To: sp@mirabeau.osf.fr (Simon Patience)
Organization: OSF Research Institute
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1992 16:00:32 GMT

In article <1992Apr14.152659.19564@osf.org>, david@guadet.gr.osf.org
(David George) writes:
> In article <1992Apr14.101803@axion.bt.co.uk> ravis@axion.bt.co.uk (Richard  
> Avis) writes:
> > 
> > |> Proportional representation sounds like a
> > |> good idea but it had led to very unstable governments in countries like 
> > |> .... Italy.
> 
> Up to the recent election Italy has had 50 years of Christian Democrat  
> dominated govt. which has been credited with economic reform and
defeating Red  
> Brigade terrorism.  According to Paul Smee (he was going to dig out some  
> figures) they're even ahead of Britain economically ! 

In addition, Italy's problem is not that it has PR, but that it has in
the order of 50 parties. I always think people who cite Italy as a
reason to use PR are grasping at straws considering the number of other
countries in the world who use it perfectly satisfactorily.

Simon.

  Simon Patience
  Open Software Foundation			Phone: +33-76-63-48-72
  Research Institute				FAX:   +33-76-51-05-32
  2 Avenue De Vignate				Email: sp@gr.osf.org
  38610 Gieres, France				       uunet!gr.osf.org!sp
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: dbrooks@osf.org (David Brooks)
Subject: Snooker record (was Re: The Vogon News Service: 06-Apr-92)
Organization: Open Software Foundation
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1992 20:13:47 GMT

cockburn@majors.enet.dec.com (Craig Cockburn) writes:
|>     "Can Wattana top his record break of one hundred and forty seven?"
|> 
|> 				- Nick Owen, LWT, at a snooker match
|> 				  [ 147 is the maximum break possible. ]

Actually 155.  I think Hurricane Higgins scored 152 once, but my Guinness
is at home (along with my book of records).

Still, I don't know about the cited event; it was probably a "normal"
break.
-- 
David Brooks				dbrooks@osf.org
Systems Engineering, OSF		uunet!osf.org!dbrooks
April is the crullerist month: time to make the dougnuts.
From: matthew@ntl02.decnet.nokia.fi (Matthew Faupel)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Natural Law
Date: 13 Apr 92 12:43:44 GMT
Organization: Nokia Telecommunications, Cambridge, UK

>>>>> On 10 Apr 92 16:01:27 GMT, skenny@nano.engr.mun.ca (Shawn Kenny) said:

> I saw an article on the CBC National News about the "Natural Law Party"
> with the company of the Maharishi, Doug Henning and George Harrison. I
> was wondering whether this was on the ballot and if so how many votes
> did it get from the populous? 

It was on the ballot paper in 313 seats (out of 651 total) making it the
fourth largest party, ahead of the Greens.  It won about 0.4% of the vote
nationally, which works out at about 400 votes per candidate out of the
average 53000 (approx) cast in each constituency.


Matthew
--
---* Amnesiac the Wizard *------------------* matthew@uk.tele.nokia.fi *---
 Opinions expressed here are not those of my company.    | NB. ntl02 is EN
 They're not even my own; I plagiarised the lot of them! | TEE EL ZERO TWO
---* matthew@ntl02.decnet.nokia.fi *------------------* Matthew Faupel *---
From: horne-scott@CS.YALE.EDU (Scott Horne)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Is Holohan a dweeb?
Date: 15 Apr 92 13:39:38 GMT
Article-I.D.: cs.1992Apr15.133938.12662
Organization: Computer "Science" Dept, Yale University

In article <6250075@hpopd.pwd.hp.com>, apm@hpopd.pwd.hp.com (Andrew Merritt) writes:
<horne-scott@CS.YALE.EDU (Scott Horne) writes:
<
<>One other thing:  Don't swear by the _OED_.  See what it has to say about the
<>"correct" pronunciation of `key'.
<
<Could you expand on this comment?  The pronunciation given looks normal to
<me (ki: (where ':' stands for the similar looking IPA character), with the 
<i: sound the same as the 'ea' in bean).

The last time I checked, there was a note claiming that the "correct"
pronunciation was [kei], pronounced like the name of the letter `K'.

					--Scott

-- 
Scott Horne                               ...!{harvard,cmcl2,decvax}!yale!horne
horne@cs.Yale.edu      SnailMail:  Box 7196 Yale Station, New Haven, CT   06520
203 436-1848                Residence:  Rm 1848 Silliman College, New Haven, CT
Shao2shan1 sheng1 de tai4yang2 yong3 bu2 luo4!
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: plummer@cs.swarthmore.edu (David Barker-Plummer)
Subject: Re: Election Fraud by the Conservatives
Organization: Swarthmore College, Swarthmore, PA
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 13:51:46 GMT

In article <1992Apr10.102209.22158@osf.org> david@guadet.gr.osf.org (David George) writes:

DG> Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
DG> From: david@guadet.gr.osf.org (David George)
DG> Keywords: Poll Tax
DG> Sender: news@osf.org (USENET News System)

DG> A dissapointed Labour voting friend of mine claims that "Labour
DG> was robbed" by the poll tax.  He says Labour would have one but
DG> for the 'million Labour voters who couldn't afford to register to
DG> vote".  In view of the 77.5% turn out is there any truth in this ?

Is that 77.5% of those on the roll, or 77.5% of the voting-age
population.  

Do you get to be on the roll if you don't pay the Poll Tax?

-- Dave
From: mlemmerm@nl.oracle.com (Mick Lemmerman Publisher)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Manipulative election broadcasts
Date: 6 Apr 92 11:14:04 GMT
Reply-To: mlemmerm
Organization: Oracle Europe, De Meern, The Netherlands

In article <1992Apr3.110309.11169@newcastle.ac.uk> Trevor.Kirby@newcastle.ac.uk (Trevor Kirby) writes:

Heres a quick run down on the election posters spotted on the way home last 
night.

1) A picture of a porcupine with Tory defence policy under it, next to a picture
   of a hedgehog with labour defense policy under it. I don't know if this is
   meant to indicate that the tory policy has more bite or that they intend to
   buy American weapons.

	I think it has something to do with which party has the most pricks!
From: gdb15@grebe.cl.cam.ac.uk (Guy Barry)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Great Britain as a malfunctioning democracy
Date: 13 Apr 92 12:06:32 GMT
Reply-To: gdb15@cl.cam.ac.uk (Guy Barry)
Organization: U of Cambridge Computer Lab, UK

In article <12APR199219114424@zeus.tamu.edu> pac9897@zeus.tamu.edu (THEY SENTENCED ME TO 5 MORE YEARS) writes:

>What Great Britain (and notice they have PR in Northern Ireland because
>the Westminster parties are fully aware that PR tends toward fairer 
>representation) has now is not real democracy, it is an elected dictatorship
>that relies on 42% of voters - the majority of who live in the home counties
>to force their policies on everyone else.

While I agree with the main thrust of your article, I can't let you
get away with the use of the term "elected dictatorship".  We may have
what looks like one-party rule at the moment, but the government's
still subject to democratic control, inasmuch as those who keep it
in office can issue warnings to it by means of by-elections, local
elections and opinion polls.  The government ignores such warnings
at its peril, as we saw with the poll tax.

--
Guy Barry	Phone: +44 (0)223 334757 | University of Cambridge
		  Fax: +44 (0)223 334678 | Computer Laboratory   
	   JANET: Guy.Barry@uk.ac.cam.cl | New Museums Site, Pembroke Street
        Internet: Guy.Barry@cl.cam.ac.uk | Cambridge CB2 3QG, England, UK
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: jac61@cas.org ()
Subject: Re: reasons for leaving (was Re: Inclusion of expats in UK elections)
Organization: Chemical Abstracts Service, Columbus, Ohio
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 11:43:30 GMT

In article <34593@ttidca.TTI.COM> jackson@soldev.tti.com (Dick Jackson) writes:
>>In article <jfml5g0@zola.esd.sgi.com> livesey@solntze.esd.sgi.com (Jon Livesey) writes:
>>>
>>> Maybe we should have people say why they left.
>
>I left (a long time ago) to visit my cousin for a few months. I failed
>to return out of sheer laziness.  Many people come to California and
>never leave, drugged by the sunshine, the lack of parking problems, and
>the casual life style.
>
>Dick Jackson


	I left the U.K. to work in a lab. over that was supposed to be good
	but was run by a prize pillock.  When I was over here I met the
	woman who is now my wife.  She became a U.S. civil servant, my
	background in molecular biology and genetics would go just about
	anywhere.  This is why I ended up back in the U.S. after 4.5 years
	in West Berlin.  If anybody is going to offer me a job in the U.K.
	that would allow us to maintain the way of life to which we are
	now accustomed...

	Alec Chambers
From: wilcox@vax.oxford.ac.uk
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Questions on the election
Date: 13 Apr 92 14:27:17 GMT
Organization: Oxford University VAXcluster

In article <1992Apr10.115106.19941@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu>, migod@turing.toronto.edu (Mike Godfrey) writes:
> 
> 
> -- What kind of seat did Glenda Jackson win (was it traditionally a 
>    marginal/strong Labour/LibDem/Tory seat)?


Hampstead & Highgate: notoriously full of Guardian-reading "champagne
socialists" :-) :-) :-) please don't flame me...
A Labour-Tory marginal
 
> -- Who defeated Gerry Adams and from what party?  What was Adams' plurality
>    last time around?  Any ideas on what this represents?

A local GP, representing the SDLP - i.e the _constitutional_ nationalists
(catholics) overturned a majority of about 1000, believed to be with the aid of
some unionists (protestants) voting anti Sinn Fein

> -- What was the "conservative newspaper" that endorsed Labour this time
>    around?  The local news didn't identify it.

Believe it or not, the Financial Times reckoned it was time for a change. What
that says for the future economic health of the country, we can only guess...

 
> Thanks.
> 
> -- 
> Mike Godfrey   	           		"Either that wallpaper goes, or I do."
> Dept of Comp Sci, UofT      	         	-- allegedly, the last words
> migod@turing.toronto.edu			   of Oscar Wilde

Stephen 
wilcox@maths.ox.ac.uk
From: stevew@cs.man.ac.uk (Steve Wallis)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Why wait 5 years?
Date: 15 Apr 92 10:31:00 GMT
	<1992Apr14.085231.6557@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU>
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of Manchester

In article <1992Apr14.085231.6557@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU> baker@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Andrew Baker) writes:
>In article <STEVEW.92Apr13120006@mushroom.cs.man.ac.uk> stevew@cs.man.ac.uk (Steve Wallis) writes:
>>After Labour's disastrous election defeat, the British people have to wait
>>another 5 years to get rid of the Tories, and the Scottish people have to
>>wait another 5 years for devolution.  Or do they? ...
>>
>>If (or when) the struggle takes off in Scotland, it could spread to England
>>and Wales....  So why wait until 1997 to ditch the
>>Tories when they shouldn't be in power now?
>
>Because they won fair and square.

I've seen many Liberal Democrat supporters on the net saying things like "the
Tories shouldn't be in power because they only got about 40% of the vote".
If the Labour Party also decides to advocate proportional representation,
then surely many Labour supporters will feel the same way.  So come on all
you Labour and Liberal Democrat supporters out there - would you support a
struggle to oust the Tories immediately, or would you prefer to wait another
five years under the rules of the current "unjust" electoral system?

>>There are turbulent times ahead!  Forward to a socialist society...
>
>Are you sure you didn't mean to say "Backward to a socialist society"?

Yes.

>I thought that even the Labour Party had renounced socialism.

True; the Labour leadership has (not every member has, of course).  However,
while the Labour Party has moved to the right, social trends have moved to
the left.  A recent poll (in the Guardian I think) showed that asked the
question "Would you prefer a mainly capitalist society or a mainly socialist
society" 48% chose a mainly socialist society.  It is a real shame that no
mainstream party is prepared to advocate socialism at the moment, but this
situation cannot last indefinitely.

Steve.

--
  /    / / \    / /            --------------------------------------------
  \/\ /\ \/ \  / \\/      /    |    Steve Wallis (stevew@cs.man.ac.uk)    |
    /   \ \/ \/   \\//\  /     | Mail me if you want to join the struggle |
                   \/  \/      --------- for a socialist society. ---------
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british