HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: talk.politics.soviet,talk.politics.theory,talk.philosophy.misc,soc.history,misc.legal
Subject: Re: Assasination
From: zeleny@husc9.harvard.edu (Michael Zeleny)
Date: 19 Aug 92 19:29:18 EDT
Followup-To: talk.philosophy.misc
Organization: Harvard University Science Center

In article <1992Aug19.181238.14909@husc3.harvard.edu>
zeleny@husc9.harvard.edu (Michael Zeleny) writes:

>In a recent discussion I noted the legitimacy of assasination as the last
>recourse for obtaining justice, as witnessed by the German and French court
>decisions in the cases of Tehlirian's 1921 killing of Talaat Bey and
>Schwartsbard's 1927 killing of Petliura.  It is my considered opinion that
>such a course of action may be morally justified, *provided that* no other
>means of bringing the criminal to justice are available, and that the
>assasin is willing to submit to trial for his action.  However, other
>historical cases, like that of the politically inconclusive, though highly
>spectacular French anarchist _propaganda par le fait_ of the 1890's, make
>me doubt the soundness of my reasoning.  Accordingly, I would like to hear
>some calm arguments from people interested in history, legal theory, and
>political philosophy.  I suggest that all participants observe the followup
>line, and attempt to keep this discussion reasonably noise-free.

DISCLAIMER: the above is intended solely as a request for a theoretical
discussion, rather than a call for action.  Furthermore, the inclusion of
the clause that no other means of bringing the criminal to justice be
available disqualifies this tentative suggestion from being applicable to
the case of a modern constitutional democracy, and so from being construed
as a license for Edward G. Nilges to act out his professed animosity for
George Herbert Walker Bush.  (However, I would welcome a mud-wrestling
match between these two worthies as the appropriate means for reconciling
their ideological differences.)  As a paradigmatic example, consider the
1944 German "general's plot".

cordially,
mikhail zeleny@husc.harvard.edu
"Un de mes plus grands plaisirs est de jurer Dieu quand je bande."
Newsgroups: talk.politics.soviet
Subject: Re: Standing Trial (was re: a question)
From: verbit@brauer.harvard.edu (Mikhail S. Verbitsky)
Date: 21 Aug 92 03:11:10 EDT
Organization: Dept. of Math, Harvard Univ.

In article <1408@newsserver.cs.uwindsor.ca> hlynka@server.uwindsor.ca (Myron Hlynka) writes:

>Mikhail Zeleny <zeleny@HUSC9.HARVARD.EDU> writes

>>I can't think of a single reason for "a paid Bolshevik agent" to surrender
>>himself to the French authorities, insisting on standing trial for his
>>action.  Could you suggest one?

>If there were witnesses to the crime, then it would have been 
>difficult to deny involvement and escape. Many people turn themselves
>in under such circumstances. There would have certainly been a trial
>anyway. So insisting on one is hardly a mark of having a clear 
>conscience. There are lots of cases where people insist on a trial or 
>hearing to clear their names with the hope that the truth will 
>never be known. (Just think of U.S. politicians. 
>Gary Hart to the press: Follow me. That will prove that I have
>never been guilty of womanizing.), 

>cordially,
>myron Hlynka 

Note that the assassins of Russian politician Milyukov
(monarchists who tried to kill him, because he "sold Russia
to Jews", but killed the father of a writer Nabokov instead:
Nabokov shielded Milyukov by his own body), also gave up
themselves. On the trial, they tried to make up the evidence 
that Milyukov insulted late Russian Tsarine and they killed him for
this insult, and got only mediate jail scores (less than ten years).

I am sure nobody will say that they were Communists, since
they were members of Nazi party. Actually, one of alleged 
heirs to Russian throne also sponsored Nazis since she believed
that they will free Russia from Communists (in middle-twenties).
Involvement of Russian ex-arystocrasy and monarchist parties 
in early Nazi activities were colossal (reference on request). 
Not a wonder since they were fiercely antisemitic.

About Milyukov's (as well a Petlyura's) assassins, 
I am sure I know the reason for them giving up to the authorities.
They wanted publicity to expose their views: Nazi in one
case, anti-Petlyurian in another. They also wanted to
distinguish their doings from a usual felony acts, and
be praised by their peers for a heroism.

Being tried, Nabokov's murderers exposed themselves as
spineless and cowardly creatures. They did not get desired
publicity, which could probably turn the history from
feet to head: their target was to become a Nazi's Horst
Wessel (spelling is wrong :(). I cannot imagine what
Nazi were doing if their "favourite martyr" happened
to be a Russian! 

Misha.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.soviet
From: vgurarie@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Victor V. Gurarie)
Subject: a question
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 16:12:43 GMT


   I have a question which arose when we discussed the following with my
friend. Everybody knows that Lithuanians (together with Ukranians and Poles)
on the average were very glad to turn in Jews to Germans during the second
world war, and they broke all the records in this business, even in compari-
son with Germans themselves, who after all just did what it was told to them
by Nazi propaganda, while above mentioned nations did that voluntary and
with joy. And my question is whether Estonians (or Latvians) also did the
same, or maybe not, or maybe less often, or maybe not? I want to emphisize
I do not need answers like "Stop this $%#$, Ukranians were always the best
friends of Jewish people", or "You are @#$#@#$#%!". I need an answer from
someone who really knows the subject.
  Thank you
From: sommar@enea.se (Erland Sommarskog)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.soviet
Subject: You thought bugging diplomats were history?
Date: 21 Aug 92 21:28:28 GMT
Reply-To: "talk.politics.soviet via ListServ" <TPS-L@indycms.iupui.edu>

We know of several cases of embassies and consulates which
were bugged in the old Soviet Union. Often the bugging
equipment was put there during the construction of the house.

"Sure", you say with a yawn, "but the cold war is over. That
doesn't happen any longer."

Oh so naive we can be. A new case has been revealed just
the other days. When the Swedish consulate in St. Peters-
burg was being renewed, built-in bugging equipment was
found in the walls. "Of course, but as I said that's history
now!" Well, if it is history, explain why the equipment was
still in use.

Sweden has send a strong protest note to Russia, although
it is generally believed that it is not with the govern-
ment's consent that the bugging has continued.

As you may remember, I posted an article about submarines
in Swedish waters in 1992, and speculation that there was
a secret organization behind these submarines. Some of
the comments I received were quite skeptical. But is it
really so hard to understand? Do you really think that
Yeltsin & co has managed to get all those KGB, GRU, army
etc people who indulged in this out of the way? Or even
stop doing such things? Of course not. I don't recall
exactly, but I think it was Norway who extradited a Russian
diplomat the other day, because of espionage.

No matter we believe that Yeltsin knows that this is going on
or not, it is least of all flattering for him. If he doesn't
or knows about it but can't do anything, it means that he does
not have control. And if he sanctions it, well go figure.
--
Erland Sommarskog - ENEA Data, Stockholm - sommar@enea.se
Life is wonderful when the wonderlife is full
From: 055434@uottawa.bitnet (Sean Maguire)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.soviet
Subject: Re: 'PXP111:' Paying Lip Service Is Not Enough - Further Expose'.
Date: 19 Aug 92 19:40:46 GMT
Reply-To: "talk.politics.soviet via ListServ" <TPS-L@indycms.iupui.edu>

At line 518 (as my mailer has set it up) in one of his longest messages I've
seen from him in quite a while, the "Mutlumeister" says:

>Need I go on?

My first reaction:  Are you kidding?
My second reaction:  Does it matter what my first reaction was?

Are you still busily reading "Men Are Like That", "Mutlumeister", in order to
respond to Rob Milson, or have you thrown in the towel and will continue to use
those ridiculous question marks?

Sean Maguire
055434@uottawa.bitnet
Newsgroups: talk.politics.soviet
From: yholbroo@nyx.cs.du.edu (Yash Holbrook)
Subject: Zhirinovsky and Yeltsin's Ctrl over Army
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix (sponsored by U. of Denver Math/CS dept.)
Disclaimer1: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University of
Disclaimer2: Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
Disclaimer3: control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 92 16:09:11 GMT

Lyle,

In my earlier responses to your postings, I told you Rutskoy was a likely
candidate to replace Yeltsin, and that Rutskoy's popularity among the 
military was immense.  Below you will see an item from today's Radio
Liberty Daily report about Yeltsin's tenuous control over the army.  That
item is followed by another from todays RL Daily about Zhirinovsky's party.

YELTSIN'S CONTROL OVER ARMY QUESTIONED. General Aleksandr
Vladimirov, a military expert of the Russian parliamentary faction
of radical democrats told Stolitsa (no.  31) that Russian
President Boris Yeltsin has lost control over the military.  He
asserted that the 23rd division of the Russian Army entered the
battle in Nagorno-Karabakh at a time when Yeltsin and Defense
Minister Pavel Grachev were outside the country, and even State
Secretary Gennadii Burbulis, whom Yeltsin had left in charge,
lacked the authority to stop these military actions.  Vladimirov
seems to have been referring to Russian military activity in NKAO
in June when Yeltsin and Grachev were in Washington and then
Dagomys, Ukraine. (Alexander Rahr, Moscow)

ZHIRINOVSKY'S PARTY BANNED.  ITAR-TASS reported on 11 August that
the Russian Justice Ministry has annulled the registration
(carried out in April 1991 by the USSR Ministry of Justice) of the
Liberal-Democratic Party of the Soviet Union.  The
misleadingly-titled party, which is led by Vladimir Zhirinovsky,
was only the second party (after the CPSU) to be registered in the
USSR. Now Russia's Justice Ministry says it is rescinding the
party's legal status because irregularities occurred when the
party was registered in 1991.  The party is believed to have
overstated the size of its membership in order to ensure
registration, but the Russian Justice Ministry also criticized the
fact that the party still uses the designation "of the Soviet
Union" in its title. (Elizabeth Teague)
From: CDELL@VAX1.UMKC.EDU ("VALENTINE M. SMITH")
Newsgroups: talk.politics.soviet
Subject: A couple of questions ...
Date: 17 Aug 92 07:56:07 GMT
Reply-To: "talk.politics.soviet via ListServ" <TPS-L@indycms.iupui.edu>

Does anyone know if Stalin's wartime "Orders" have been published in English?
I'm particularly interested in #307 (9 October, 1942) and #325 (16 October,
1942). Also, is the man Marshall Boris Shoposhnikov who was Stalin's army
chief of staff from 1937 to a date unclear to me related to the CIS
"commander in chief" Shoposhnikov? thanks, VMS
Xref: sparky talk.politics.soviet:7126 soc.history:7502
From: muh@physics20 (Yury M. Mukharsky)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.soviet
Subject: Re: RFE/RL Report
Date: 21 Aug 92 23:38:40 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
NNTP-Posting-Host: physics20.berkeley.edu

In article <gunars.714430185@spssig> gunars@spss.com (Gunars V Lucans) writes:
>
>To say that the citizenship status will be determined by ethnicity
>implies that THE ETHNIC GROUP IN QUESTION, AS A WHOLE OR PRIMARILY, is:
>	a) incapable of learning the local language, or is
>	b) incapable of living there for whatever residency
>	   requirement is finally determined, or is
>	c) a member of the military, criminal class, etc.
	d) unwilling to learn this languages

In case d) when this group constitute substantial part of population, 
IMHO, country should
has two or three official languges. Examples: Swiss, Finland, Canada (some
provinces at least, republics in xSU, etc...

If you do not believe my last statement, especially in part of republics
of xSU, let me give you one example. When I was in high school children
of immigrant from Russia were forced to learn Ukrainian in schools. They
had a lot of trouble with this.

>
Yury.
From: fsdhp@acad3.alaska.edu
Newsgroups: talk.politics.soviet
Subject: New name for t.p.soviet,s.c.soviet
Date: 21 Aug 92 14:11:28 GMT
Organization: University of Alaska Fairbanks

Subject: The name of this net.


I think new nets should be devised.  There is no Soviet Union, after all. Why
not t.p.balkans, t.p.Central_Asia, t.p.Baltic_sea, etc. or even one for all the
former republics? Or do people on this net think there is real economic or
political points of commonality left in the "Commonwealth?" (other than the
mess they make changing from bureaucratic socialism to predatory capitalism)

Does anyone who knows and can do this agree?

EXAMPLE OF IMMEDIATE BENEFIT:

If there were a talk.politics.armenia, Hasan Mutlu would spend so much time
posting to it, it would give the net world a break. We could send everyone who
posted to it a kill file (no use inflicting more punishment on the Armenians).
{I also support the creation of alt.ethnic_war -- why not give people with
long racial memories and a healthy store of invective terms a chance to blow
off steam -- the Olympics is the only non-war vehicle we have now for good old-
fashioned regional/ethnic conflict, and it doesn't suffice. THEN we have a net
conference of the sysadmins who host talk.politics.____ and soc.culture._______
and work out a way to block any cross-posting from the ethnic war net.}

I myself am primarily interested in the Dalnyi Vostok region.  This region
alone has at least 50 different nationalities -- another argument against
an inclusive talk.politics.soviet. Bad enough if it is lumped into an
alt.politics.russia.  When I lived in Hungary I was glad some people could
speak my Russian, but it was also an historical injustice -- like the USA
making everyone in Mexico learn American English would be -- and now they
are free of that. The Altaic countries are probably going to drop Russian,
at least. You could argue it is good to have Russian as a Commonwealth
language, but I think it won't happen due to the distasteful associations
with the past.

David Pennell
From: j.guy@trl.oz.au (Jacques Guy)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.soviet
Subject: Re: Translation from Latin
Date: 21 Aug 92 12:59:16 GMT
Reply-To: "talk.politics.soviet via ListServ" <TPS-L@indycms.iupui.edu>

About the dead nothing if not good.
From: VIZNYUK@MPS.OHIO-STATE.EDU (SERGEI VIZNYUK)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.soviet
Subject: Re: RFE/RL Report
Date: 20 Aug 92 19:37:00 GMT
Reply-To: "talk.politics.soviet via ListServ" <TPS-L@indycms.iupui.edu>

>                 RFE/RL Daily Report No. 159
>                                            August 20, 1992
>
> YELTSIN ANNOUNCES MORE DETAILS ON VOUCHERS. President Yeltsin
> devoted a significant part of his television address on 19
> August to privatization vouchers. Calling for the creation of
> "millions of owners, not a small group of millionaires,"
> Yeltsin announced that the distribution of vouchers for
> buying shares of state-owned enterprises would begin on 1
> October. Each Russian citizen is to receive one voucher
> valued at 10,000 rubles. The voucher holder may purchase
> available shares directly, through an investment company or
> sell it for cash. Yeltsin also confirmed that the total value
> of state assets (calculated according to 1 January price
> levels) that will be made available for purchase through the
> voucher program is 1,400 billion rubles. (Erik Whitlock)

  Today Russian TV claimed that privatization vouchers
will cost 10,000 roubles "in prices of 1985 year".

> BALTICS AND THE UN. The Baltic representatives have formally
> appealed to the UN to take up the issue of former Soviet
> troops remaining in the Baltic states, western agencies
> report. In a 19 August letter to the UN Secretary General
> Boutros-Ghali, the Baltic representatives said that they have
> not seen much progress from European organizations such as
> the CSCE, and that bilateral talks with Russia "have been
> largely unsuccessful." Meanwhile, a Russian human rights
> expert attached to a UN subcommission dealing with protection
> of minorities told reporters on 19 August in Geneva that
> Estonia and Latvia have adopted "discriminatory legislation"
> vis-`-vis non-Baltics living in the area. Stanislav
> Chernichenko, who claimed ethnic Russians do not have the
> right to own land in Estonia and Latvia, said the situation
> in Lithuania is "not as bad." In fact, land ownership in
> Estonia and Latvia is determined not by a person's ethnicity
> but by his or her citizenship status. (Riina Kionka)
      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
...which in its turn is determined by the person's
ethnicity.  BTW, that last sentence from RFE/RL report
clearly demonstrates its "objectivity".
S.V.
From: ns@csd.cri.dk (Nick Sandru)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.soviet,soc.culture.europe,soc.culture.soviet
Subject: Mama mumu in the top 25 news submitters
Date: 19 Aug 92 07:36:09 GMT
Organization: Computer Resources International A/S

From news.lists:

>         No. of       % of
>Rank Articles KBytes Total   User

>  13   151     573.6  0.1%   han@anadolu.MICHIGAN.COM  (hasan.b.mutlu)
>			      16% soc.culture.turkish
>			      15% soc.culture.europe
>			      15% soc.culture.greek
>			      15% talk.politics.mideast
>			      15% talk.politics.soviet
>			      14% soc.history

13th place only? Quite a bad result for mama mumu, who once made it to
the 7th place... Keep it on, my kill file is hungry! I've just came back
from vacation and found it thin and weak after only 151 mutlus trapped last
week...

Nick Sandru

aka Long Haired Nick
From: dleschin@FEDS66.PRIME.COM (Dmitri Leschiner)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.soviet
Subject: Re: Standing Trial (was re: a question)
Date: 19 Aug 92 03:20:12 GMT
Reply-To: "talk.politics.soviet via ListServ" <TPS-L@indycms.iupui.edu>

A humorless jerk Verbitsky makes fool of himself posting shit
on Usenet as a public articles (quoted below:). I demand that
such be directed to person of Mr Verbitsky immediately.

Any concern will be appreciated, thanks

	What a gutless attitude! Some jerks should be killed
	at any rate. For instance, Michael Zeleny. Or Misha
	Verbitsky with his family. If ASALA/ARF/ASAP
	indeed exist (no doubt) they deserve its close attention.

Say what? Hehe.

	He he they'll take care of Misha's family, like Charles
	Manson did.


"Morgen, Morgen, nur nicht Heute, sagen alle faulen Leute."

--------------- END OF ARTICLE --------

Disclaimer:
The mention of Michael Zeleny as well as that disclaimer
are supposed to be enough for humor impaired.
From: cescript@mtu.edu (Charles Scripter)
Subject: Re: FREE 1-YEAR NRA... enough allready!!
Organization: Michigan Technological University
Distribution: usa
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1992 00:32:28 GMT

In article <14AUG199213192060@venus.lerc.nasa.gov>, smpod@venus.lerc.nasa.gov
(Stefan) writes:

> cthong@fraser.sfu.ca (Christopher Thong) writes...
> >(James Douglas Del-Vecchio) writes:
> >>...
> >>	As for the rights/need argument.   Rights are the things you
> >>don't have to justify with "need".  When a police officer wants to look 
> >>around in your house w/o a warrant, you don't say no because you "need" 
> >>privacy, you say no because it is your house.  
> > 
> Doesn't this sound like
> >you've got something in your place that you don't want the authorities
> >to see? look.. i plan on signing on with my country's police force
> >next time. and it's RIGHTS like this that would make my job of keeping
> >the peace and ensuring public safety more DIFFICULT than it already is.
> 
> You seem to have the police-state mentality that many police have.

Perhaps he's been listening to G.Bush's new ad, "..this is a nation of law.."
(or something similar...).  G.Bush is clearly not interested in _justice_
only _law_.  Definitely the guy I want for president... :-(

-- 
Charles Scripter   *   cescript@phy.mtu.edu
Dept of Physics, Michigan Technological University, Houghton, MI 49931
-------------------------------------------------------------------
With your one remaining eye, please do NOT look back into the laser
From: J.M.Spencer@newcastle.ac.uk (Jonathan Spencer)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Gun control in California
Date: 19 Aug 92 16:44:21 GMT
Organization: University of Newcastle upon Tyne, UK, NE1 7RU

PA146008@utkvm1.utk.edu (David Veal) writes:

>In article <Bt6s1F.6tn@newcastle.ac.uk> J.M.Spencer@newcastle.ac.uk (Jonathan Spencer) writes:
[munch munch]
>>(attributes may be mangled)
>>
>>someone, maybe, syspb@smartstar.com (Paul) writes:
>>>>              ...  Pretty soon, California may
>>>>be like England, where nobody can have a gun.  ...
>>
>>This, quite simply, is wrong. Only those who are prohibited from owning
>>guns, or those whom a Chief Constable considers cannot be entrusted with
>>a gun, may not have them. Everyone else can have them.

>     "Those prohibited from owning guns," and "those whom a Chief Constable
>considers cannot be entrusted with a gun," pretty much some it up.

No. Prohibited persons are those who have served a 3+ month custodial
sentence (ie jail).

>     And if the Chief Constable decides *nobody* gets to own a gun?  One
>guy makes that decision and *poof* nobody gets to own a gun.

No, we have a right of appeal against CC's decisions and the shoting
organisations will back (fund) the appeal. CC's seldom refuse a licence
- they know they'll lose in court.

The point is that *loads* of people *do* have guns. And legally, too :-)

--Jonathan
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: cescript@mtu.edu (Charles Scripter)
Subject: Re: No charges filed in SWAT killing
Organization: Michigan Technological University
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 20:00:09 GMT

In article <viking.714181082@vincent1.iastate.edu>, viking@iastate.edu
(Dan Sorenson) writes:

> 	They shouldn't _have_ to, but the days of the possee and the
> sheriff deputizing a band of armed men at the saloon to get Pecos Bill
> are long gone, and citizens are no longer as active in enforcing the
> law.

Hmmm... I was under the impression that most police frown on private
citizens capturing, or shooting suspects (even in their own homes).
If that attitude changed, the police might see more support from
private citizens than they thought possible...

(There _are_ areas that effectively forbid the citizens from defending
themselves, yet will not guarantee police protection, either...)

-- 
Charles Scripter   *   cescript@phy.mtu.edu
Dept of Physics, Michigan Technological University, Houghton, MI 49931
-------------------------------------------------------------------
With your one remaining eye, please do NOT look back into the laser
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
From: runyan@cup.hp.com (Mark Runyan)
Subject: Re: Gun control in California
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 20:48:45 GMT
Organization: HP, Cupertino, CA, USA
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3

PA146008@utkvm1.utk.edu (David Veal) writes:
>     Laws regarding licensing and registering of automobile only apply with
>regard to their use on private property.  There are no laws (or very, very
>few that never crop up) regarding the *ownership* of automobiles *or* their
>use on private property.

Well, I'll stick my neck out and claim that California requires you 
register all cars, even those on private property.   At least, recent
laws indicate that it is necessary to register even non-functioning
vehicles in the state of California.

Mark Runyan
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns