HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: dxc4@po.CWRU.Edu (David Condon)
Subject: Is environmentalism a conspiracy?
Reply-To: dxc4@po.CWRU.Edu (David Condon)
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 92 04:22:12 GMT


Dr. George Reisman of Pepperdine University evidently thinks so. You be the
judge!


Article 2988 of alt.save.the.earth:
From: amck@emx.utexas.edu (Alan McKendree)
>Newsgroups: alt.individualism,alt.politics.correct,alt.save.the.earth,austin.general,sci.environment,sci.skeptic,soc.culture.usa,talk.environment,talk.philosophy.misc,ut.general
Subject: Reminder:  Case against environmentalism lecture
Date: 14 Apr 92 03:44:52 GMT
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin; Austin, Texas

Apologies to those of you outside the Austin area--I have this flagged
for Austin distribution but there are apparently some leaky gateways out
there.

What is the environmentalism movement?  What arguments must one accept
in order to accept the conclusions of environmentalism?  What scientific
basis is there for its claims?

Hear the case _against_ environmentalism.


                  Topic:  The Toxicity of Environmentalism
                  Date:  Wednesday, April 15, 7:00 p. m
		  Place:  Batts Hall Auditorium, U.T. campus
			  (just southeast of the main tower)
		  Speaker:  Dr. George Reisman
			    Professor of Economics, Pepperdine University
		  Admission:  $5, general public
			      free to U.T. students and faculty

                  A question and answer period will follow.


Dr. Reisman will not only question the motives and goals of the
environmental movement, he will reveal the fundamental moral premises on
which environmentalism is based.  After showing that human life and
well-being depend on science, technology, and economic progress, and
that the quality of human life has improved immeasurably since the
beginning of the Industrial Revolution, *** HE WILL DEMONSTRATE THAT THE
ULTIMATE GOAL OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL MOVEMENT IS THE DESTRUCTION OF
INDUSTRIAL CIVILIZATION, IMPOVERISHMENT, AND, ULTIMATELY, DEPOPULATION. ***
[emphasis added -- d.c.]

It obviously must be the ALIENS at work RIGHT?
-- 
		Full frontal nudity? Yes, I'd do it if it was
		valid ... er, if the money was valid ... and
		if it were a small part.
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy
From: ceblair@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Charles Blair)
Subject: Re: "Deep Throat", who was he?
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1992 13:39:30 GMT

   John Dean's book, LOST HONOR, analyzes a number of candidates for DEEP
THROAT, with no clear conclusion.  Dean points out that a number of things
DT told Woodward were wrong.  At one time, Dean thought DT must be a com-
posite of several people--- I'm not sure whether Woodward denied this.
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy
From: anachem@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (mark s gilstrap)
Subject: Re: "Deep Throat", who was he?
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 92 17:32:27 GMT

In article <KILCUP.92Apr6123049@einstein.mps.ohio-state.edu> kilcup@pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu (Greg Kilcup) writes:
>Let me recommend the book
>
>   *Silent Coup: the Removal of a President*
>   by Robert Gettlin and Len Colodny,
>   (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1991).
>   Call number: E860.C635.1991
>
>The authors make a strong case that "Deep Throat" was Al Haig,
>and that Bob Woodward knew and briefed Haig when Woodward worked
>in the Pentagon.  Woodward vehemently denies that he knew Haig,
>and the Washington Post did its best to suppress the publicity
>of the book.  However, the authors produced tape recorded interviews
>with several Pentagon brass and Secretary of Defense Mel Laird
>verifying that Woodard frequently briefed Haig.
>This information goes a long way in explaining how such a junior
>reporter was trusted by a high-level White House source.
>
>I must say I have gotten used to the idea that we can't trust
>people in power to tell the truth, but I am still depressed that
>even the press will stoop to suppressing information if it is
>damaging to one of their own.
>

	On the (now jammed by "friendlies") WWCR shortwave station
	it has been pointed out many times that Woodward is just
	another ex-Naval Intelligence operative in place in the
	media to keep things under control for the New World Order
	folks. Because of the job he did on Watergate, the real
	truth may never come out - so they say....

Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy
From: 891034d@ace.acadiau.ca (PETER F. DEARMAN)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy
Subject: Want info: Trilateral Commission
Date: 10 Apr 92 18:35:07 GMT
Organization: Acadia University

I am interested in learning more about the Trilateral Commission.  Can 
anyone direct me to some good references on this subject matter?
Email me or post please. Thanks.

--peter--
From: melchar@west.darkside.com (Melchar)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy
Subject: ignoring the racists
Date: 17 Apr 92 20:10:16 GMT
Organization: The Dark Side of the Moon +1 408 245 SPAM

Sounds good to me.  I still can't believe there are twits out there who 
don't believe the Holocaust happened, but you know what they say about 
the ignorant teaching the uninformed.....
    (I had a poly sci instructor back in college who was one of the 
'lucky' survivors of a death camp.  Her job was to pull out the gold 
fillings from the corpses.  I suppose the racist twits would call that 
holiday dentistry.)
From: janm@London.docs.uu.se (Jan Mattsson)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy
Subject: Re: Another U2 point to consider
Date: 9 Apr 92 16:02:21 GMT
Reply-To: janm@student.docs.uu.se
Organization: UDAC, Uppsala, Sweden
Organisation: CS Dept., Uppsala University, Sweden

MEDELMA@cms.cc.wayne.edu (Michael Edelman) writes:

>The fans of paranoid conspiracies seem to talk about the mysterious
>shootdown of Powers as some sort of anomaly. In fact, *many* U2s were
>shot down over Cuba and the peripery of the USSR. Power's shootdown
>was only noteable because he was captured alive and because of the
>political hay the hardliners in the USSR made of it.

Not only U2's were shot down. In the late fifties or early sixties
a Hercules modified for ELINT duties was shot down over Armenia.
It had a large crew (10-15 people if I remember correctly).
Several RF-101's and RF-4's were shot over Cuba in connection
with the Cuban missile crisis. At least one American ELINT plane 
was shot down over the Baltic sea late forties or early fifties.
Sweden also lost an ELINT plane over the Baltic sea (a C-47, June 1952).
During the period 1945-63 (approximately) it seems that it was more
or less standard policy for the Soviets and some of their allies
to shoot down strategic reconnaissance aircraft when they felt threatened.
--
Jan Mattsson                    janm@student.docs.uu.se
Computer Science student, Uppsala University, Sweden
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,soc.rights.human,soc.culture.usa,soc.culture.latin-america,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.censorship
From: steinar@faust.solan.unit.no (Cindy Kandolf)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy,alt.discrimination,soc.history,alt.activism
Subject: Re: April 9
Date: 11 Apr 92 14:45:46 GMT
	<1992Apr9.164702.2270@cbnewsl.cb.att.com>
Organization: Flodnak, Inc., Trondheim, Norway

Stan Krieger writes:
>Now a question involving the German invasion of Denmark and Norway.  I
>believe it was April 8 that Britain starting mining Norwegian waters
>(was it to close the port of Narvik?).  Was this in response to a known
>impending invasion?  (I don't think that the British mine laying operation
>changed the invasion plans; is that correct?).

This could be a long post, folks; better go refill your coffee cups.

Norway (and Denmark too) were hoping to remain neutral, as they had during
WW1.  However, there are two strategic reasons for wanting control over
Norway in case of a European war.  The first is that the coastline is
very hard to blockade.  The second is Narvik, which was and still is 
the port through which much of the iron mined in northern Sweden is shipped.

France had an additional reason for not liking the situation.  Hitler
had already captured Poland and had signed a non-agression pact with 
the USSR, so Germany had pretty much secured itself to the east.  To the
South were neutral (Switzerland) or allied countries.  If there were
only neutral countries to the north, as well, this meant Germany would
have secure borders and would not have its hands tied elsewhere while
attacking France.

And Britain had its reason, too.  At the time Norway claimed a 30km 
limit on its territorial waters.  German ships were attacking British
ships within this zone.  Norway did nothing, for fear of violating its
neutrality and justifying attack.  

So the British mine fields, which were laid the night between 7 and 8 
April, 1940, were an attempt to put a stop to the attacks (by forcing
German ships out into open water, where the British could put up stronger
resistance) and to make an Axis attack on Narvik harder.  The mine fields
were between Bodoe and Narvik, under the "arm" formed by the Lofoten
Islands.  (If you look at a map of northern Norway it should be very easy
to see where i mean.)

To say Norway was unhappy with this would be an understatement.  The
government in Norway at the time was strongly pacifistic and believed
the only right way out was to remain completely neutral.  But nothing
other than a few angry statements ever came of it.  Very early the
next morning Denmark and Norway were invaded.  

According to the books i found at home, the invasion plans were probably
not affected a bit by the mine laying.  Certainly Germany had already
planned to invade, and apparently April 9 was the date chosen.  And
though Britain suspected the invasion would come, they didn't know when.
It seems it was just a coincidence that the two events happened so
close together.

Hope this helps...

-Cindy Kandolf
 cindy@solan.unit.no
 Trondheim, Norway
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy,alt.activism
From: studier@ninja.life.uiuc.edu (Jim Studier)
Subject: Those Wicked Japs
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1992 13:34:04 GMT

       The above author prints a transcript of the PBS special

 "HOW JAPANESE CARTEL DESTROYED US ELECTRONICS INDUSTRY (PBS-TV)"

 and comments:

>     Such corporate policies are, in the long term, bad both for
>  America and the ordinary Japanese people, to whom nothing is held
>  against by this article.

>  These kinds of actions on the part of gigantic Japanese
>  multinationals are as big a threat to our way of life in America as
>  the Soviets ever were. In fact, they are probably even a bigger
>  threat because the Soviet system was not sustainable over the long
>  term, but the Japanese industrial system is.
        ....
>  The consequences of economic warfare and military warfare are
>  strikingly similar. Driving American industry out of business (be it
>  cars, semiconductors or industrial equipment) through economic
>  warfare is tantamount to dropping bombs on it. In both cases the
>  factories are gone, the workers are unemployed and the technology is
>  lost. This is what America is currently up against.

   I disagree.
The comparison of economic competition with warfare is pernicious mischief.
Competition at most forces people to change jobs.  They are not shot to death.
Physical capital such as buildings can often be reallocated to new uses.
It is not destroyed as in a bombing. Those who purchase "dumped" products
achieve a higher standard of living because they obtain better goods
at lower prices.  If the "dumped" prices are financed by the Japanese
people thats their problem, not ours.

>  If what you read above disturbs you, tell your friends, and help
>  protect our own country's industries by looking for quality and buying
>  American whenever you can. A threat like this can be fought, one
>  American at a time. Hopefully, we will eventually elect politicians
>  who will stand up and take substantial actions to defend our country
>  from such economic attack. We are in essence, fighting a war, but
>  unfortunately, most of us don't even realize it yet.

   Such "substantial actions" would be like advocating a government 
program to save the buggy whip industry.  The only difference is
the presence of an international border.

   If an industry can't survive on its own what purpose is served by
raising everybody else's costs, through trade barriers or subsidies in order
to "save" it.
   Why not outlaw all imports and let the government use taxes and business
subsidies to make sure that no one ever loses a job?

>   (Please support PBS, they are there to serve you)

   I believe that every taxpayer already does this even if they don't
wish to be "served" by them.  At least the commercial broadcasters
don't use tax money to broadcast political propaganda.

    Jim Studier  (studier@ninja.life.uiuc.edu)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,talk.politics.misc
From: dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren)
Subject: Re: Call Banished CPU for *REAL* Freedom of Speech!
Organization: Brown University Department of Computer Science
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1992 04:24:36 GMT

In article <gate.yNmZiB1w164w@b-cpu.UUCP# maynard@b-cpu.UUCP (Maynard "the Main Nerd") writes:
#
# *YES*, you should certainly call Banished CPU!

Why? You flood the net with your stuff anyway. Recently, you have removed
any doubt as to the fact that you are Nazi trash by advertising
material distributed by the NAAWP, a racist neo-nazi organization
that calls for "relocation of Jews, Blacks, Asians and other minorities".
Hey Maynard (come on we all know you are really "Ralph Winston") - you
can't fool the world again, we know what "relocation" means, now don't
we?

#      _Computer Bits_ magazine (of Portland, Oregon) PURPOSEFULLY
# CENSORED Banished CPU from their BBS list (as they finally admitted on
# 04/09/92) and refuses to include us in any future BBS listings!  Why?
# I was told:  textfiles that challenge certain parts of the official
# "Holocaust story" (the worst thoughtcrime!) and a textfile on
# explosives, with information that can be found in public libraries!
  ^^^^^^^^^^

EXPLOSIVES? EXPLOSIVES?

Just *what* are you Nazis up to? 

-Danny Keren.

Xref: sparky alt.conspiracy:6281 alt.censorship:3253 alt.discrimination:1465 soc.history:3561 talk.politics.misc:17878 talk.politics.mideast:10639 soc.misc:477
From: gross@befvax.uchicago.edu
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy,alt.censorship,alt.discrimination,soc.history,talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.mideast,soc.misc,misc.headline
Subject: Re: THE HOLOCAUST STORY:  HOW MUCH IS FALSE?  The Case for Open Debate
Date: 11 Apr 92 22:04:55 GMT
Reply-To: gross@befvax.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago, Dept of Molecular Genetics

In article <x-vj0p+.mortal@netcom.com>, mortal@netcom.com (Phyllis Schlafley) writes:
>To put my .02 cents worth, why not create a Holocaust news group and 
>let all these people slug it out there instead of waisting bandwidth 
>by putting the same stuff in three or four news groups?
>
>Any one like this?
>
>Mortal@netcom.com

Look Phyllis (nice name)

The people at the B-CPU post their propaganda from the IHR all over the
place.  I and others respond. 

Get them to stop spewing forth their hatred all over the place, and the
problem will disappear.  Or get them to restrict their activities to
one group.   You can try to send them mail, but they won't tell you
how, and they won't respond to your requests.

The reason they post all over the place is they are spreading propaganda,
and it costs them nothing.  

And there really aren't two sides to this.  There is no academic debate.
The Holocaust is a fact.   The only people who deny that are those with
no academic credentials who have no historians supporting them.

They are simply a white-supremicist, anti-Semitic hate group.

Leon Gross
I'm not an actor, but I play one on TV.
Xref: sparky alt.conspiracy:6071 alt.censorship:3145 alt.discrimination:1340 soc.history:3437 sci.research:459 alt.activism:7245
From: ab3o+@andrew.cmu.edu (Allan Bourdius)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy,alt.discrimination,soc.history,sci.research,alt.activism,alt.censorship
Subject: Re: Want facts? "WHO RUNS THE MEDIA? The Alarming Facts"
Date: 6 Apr 92 19:49:40 GMT
Organization: Junior, History, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA

>     Take for example the Israel-Arab conflict.  The media tells us
>that Israel is the only real democracy in the Middle East, when the
>truth is that over a million Arabs in Israel don't have the right to
>vote, or any rights of citizenship.

This, of course, is total bull.  There are Arab and Muslim members of
the Knesset, much less Israeli citizens with the right to vote.  Some
Israeli Arabs have even been allowed to join the IDF.  The only Arabs in
Israel who can't vote are those who are visiting or Palestinian
refugees, since they are technically citizens of a foreign country.

>     The media is constantly telling us about Arab terrorism, when the
>state of Israel was founded by terror.  Through terrorism and massacres
>of civilians, the Jews drove millions of Arabs out of the land that now
>comprises Israel. Menachem Begin as head of an Israeli terrorist
>organization helped bomb the King David Hotel in Jerusalem (killing
>dozens) and masterminded the massacre at Deir Yassin, where over 250
>mostly women and children were murdered.  News of this massacre was
>then publicized and played up in order to cause panic among the Arabs
>and cause a mass exodus from Palestine.

Since I found this on soc.history, perhaps Mr. Winston would like to
learn some of the history behind the forming of Israel.  The ARABS
started the 1948 war, not the Israelis.  In fact, if you'd take the time
a recording of Ben-Gurion declaring Israel's independence within the
borders set by the 1947 UN Partition Plan, you can distinctly hear the
explosions caused by Egyptian and Syrian bombs in the background in Tel
Aviv-Jaffa.

Allan
-------------------------------------
Allan Bourdius [(|)K(-)/USMCR]
ab3o+@andrew.cmu.edu
"Give, expecting nothing thereof."
All opinions are those of the author.
Xref: sparky alt.conspiracy:6361 talk.politics.misc:18334
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Birch Society says bad checks not unexpected
From: hcollings@vax1.umkc.edu
Date: 14 Apr 92 11:55:31 CST
Organization: University of Missouri-Kansas City

In article <c364iB1w164w@cellar.org>, techie@cellar.org (William A Bacon) writes:
> 
>      BIRCH SOCIETY SAYS BAD CHECKS NOT UNEXPECTED
>     "Why should anyone be surprised that 355 present or former members of the 
> U.S. House would write bad checks? With White House coopeation, Congress has 
> been overdrawing the nation's  account to the tune of hundreds of billions of 
> dollars each year!"
>       So states David Affleck the local leader of John Birch Society. The 
> organization points out that both President Bush and the Congressional Budget 
> office estimate that more than $1 Billion in new indebtedness is being added 
> to the national debt every day (365 days per year).
>      "When these congressional deadbeats wrote their own bad checks, they 
> eventually had to pay up," said Mr. Affleck. "But when they put the nation in 
> the hole, they're forcing the debt on today's kids in the playground, babes 
> in the womb, and all the American children who will be born in the next 
> 10,20, or 50 years."
>      The Society leader points out that the accumulated national debt by the 
> end of the current fiscal year (sept. 30,1992) will be $4trillion - - more 
> than four times what it was when the Reagan - Bush took office in 1981. 
> "These adminstration should not be classified conseritive; the correct 
> adjetives for them is big-borrowing liberals."
>    Affleck claims that the spiralling deficits are propelling the nation into 
> the new world order, described by the Birch Society as "socialism and world 
> government - - or economic control and political control."
>     A major ingredient of socialism is increased taxation, according to the 
> Society. "Right now, total interest on the national debt exceeds $325 bilion 
> per year more than national defense spending. THis is money the government 
> takes from Americans to pay government creditors Congress and the president 
> borrowed the money to pay for foreign aid, vote buying schemes, and a host of 
> programs he people don't want and can't afford," he insists.
>     The bad check scandal may involve very little taxpayers' money (House 
> employee salaries, office space and equipment, etc.), but Affleck says he 
> hopes "it will lead to a Wholesale House cleaning."
>      "If fedearl spending and borrowing isn't reduced soon, we will pay for 
> it with our earnings, then our economic freedom, and with our nation's 
> independence."
> 
> ------
> techie@cellar.org (William A Bacon)
> The Cellar BBS - (215) 654-9184


I've never considered myself a "Bircher" and truly have paid little attention
to it's set of values or followed it's ideas, however, these quotes seem to
have captured the Reagan-Bush "reign".  Especially noting that the deficit has
more than quadrupled during this time.  It's a shame more of the spending
didn't occur in this country to refurbish our industries and give us a better
chance to compete in a world market.  
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy
From: dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren)
Subject: Re: HOLOCAUST MYTHS
Organization: Brown University Department of Computer Science
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1992 00:55:07 GMT

In article <1992Apr16.131056.1@eagle.wesleyan.edu# mzener@eagle.wesleyan.edu writes:
#Question for you netters who (unlike me) have been following this guy's posts:
#
##      The media's use of the Laugh Track is to destroy our
## morals, ethics (including work ethic), educational system and
## family unit.  Theft, drugs, prostitution, rape and murder
## (anything illicit) rate laughs, including incest.
#
#   Is this guy _serious_??????


Yes, the Reichsdummkopf is serious. And that is an alarming fact.

-Danny Keren.

Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy,alt.activism
From: s870694@otto.bf.rmit.oz.au (Alfred Porziella)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy
Subject: Re: JFK shot from front
Keywords: JFK assassination murder conspiracy
Date: 6 Apr 92 02:29:38 GMT
Organization: RMIT Computer Centre, Melbourne Australia.

bfrg9732@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Brian F. Redman) writes:


> DALLAS (AP) April 2, 1992 -- A doctor who was part of Parkland
> Memorial Hospital's trauma team on the days President Kennedy
> and Lee Harvey Oswald died there says Kennedy's fatal head wound
> had to have come from the front.
>     In a transcript of the "20-20" interview, he said, "I will
> always know that he was shot from the front."


Front? Where would the gunman have been? Maybe he means from a side on position
indicating the bullet may have been fired from the grassy knoll area....

Does anyone out there give much creedence to the theory that JFK may have 
been shot by SS Agent Hickey riding in the car behind Kennedy. Apparently
in picking up a rifle in an attempt to return fire towards someone he saw
firing shots from the TSBD, he accidentally fired a shot which hit JFK in
the back of the head causing the massive head injury.

Well that's what someone called Howard Donahue is pushing in a book called
 'Mortal Error'. It conveniently gets rid of any conspiracy theory and he
 pointed that out very specifically in an interview I saw him do on TV.
 
In order for Hickey to have fired the shot he would have had to work out 
where the shots were coming from and that would have to take a few seconds 
at least. He would then have to bend down, pick up the rifle from the floor
of the car and acheive all of this in under 6 seconds ? - very questionable.