HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: Mason.L.Allen@dartmouth.edu (Mason L. Allen)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.individualism,alt.censorship,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa,alt.activism.d
Subject: Re: REVERSING THE SCALES OF INJUSTICE: If Iraq Oc
Date: 27 Jan 93 01:56:34 GMT
 <1993Jan21.024209.11223@mcshub.dcss.mcmaster.ca> 
 <C1DEMw.JwC@dartvax.dartmouth.edu>  
 <1993Jan24.231332.19764@husc3.harvard.edu>
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
X-Posted-From: InterNews1.0a5@newshost.dartmouth.edu

exactly.  my point.  

m.
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy
From: gtoal@pizzabox.demon.co.uk (Graham Toal)
Subject: Re: Is something going on here??
Keywords: noise,bizarre,synchronicity
Organization: Cuddlehogs Anonymous
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 23:13:16 GMT

In article <1993Jan21.155002.13704@aber.ac.uk> clef@aber.ac.uk (Jim Finnis) writes:
:Are subscribers to this newsgroup being watched??

Well, GCHQ *did* join the internet two days ago.  However, the method of
their joining (with a slip feed at 14.4Kbaud) is either the most ingenious
piece of disinformation I've ever come across, or *extremely* reassuring
about the state of snooping in this country... (or maybe they just wanted
to start answering all the articles they've been reading ;-) )

G
Xref: sparky alt.conspiracy:14451 alt.activism:21153 alt.activism.d:4514 alt.revisionism:969
From: geb@cs.pitt.edu (Gordon Banks)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.activism.d,alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Flakes and the FED
Date: 21 Jan 93 22:18:40 GMT
Reply-To: geb@cs.pitt.edu (Gordon Banks)
Followup-To: alt.conspiracy
Organization: Univ. of Pittsburgh Computer Science

In article <1j3a8qINNs28@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> cj195@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (John W. Redelfs) writes:

>On the other hand, I have known hundreds of people in various right-wing
>organizations.  Jewish members were almost unknown.
>
There are many right wing Jews.  Take Rabbi Meir Kahane's faction
for instance.  They are as right wing as Gritz or anyone else.
Joe McCarthy's right hand man was Roy Cohn.  

Most of the opposition to Israel is left-wing, although I don't
want to say that any opposition to Israel is by definition
anti-semitic.  The communists running the USSR were quite
anti-semitic, and since you say you are a Bircher, you must
think they are left-wing, no?  

It is really silly to categorize as you have done.  Your experience
with Jews probably means the Jews you have known were university
intellectuals and everyone knows how pinko they are ;-).  Visit
Brooklyn sometime and meet a million or two conservative Jews.


-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gordon Banks  N3JXP      | "I have given you an argument; I am not obliged
geb@cadre.dsl.pitt.edu   |  to supply you with an understanding." -S.Johnson
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy,talk.politics.misc,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: art@world.std.com (Al Thompson)
Subject: Re: (no subject given)
Followup-To: alt.conspiracy,talk.politics.misc,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 07:50:38 GMT

In article <1993Jan22.214352.24208@netnews.alf.dec.com> harry@hershele.alf.dec.com (Harry Katz) writes:

   In article <C17rpI.GFJ@news.cso.uiuc.edu>,
   vengeanc@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu wrote:

	   Here's the situation.  Rush is an ENTERTAINER first and
	   foremost.  He is not a journalist, reporter, or Geraldo Rivera.

   If Rush is not a journalist or a reporter then he must be a "Geraldo
   Rivera," that is, an entertainer posing as a reporter.

The difference is that Rush says straight out that he's an entertainer.
He makes is very clear that he is not a reporter.

	   He can do anything he wants to keep the show moving and
	   interesting.  He has no obligation to let anyone say anything!
	   He openly admits this, and callers therefore have no excuse
	   for not knowing this when they call.  

   Unfortunately, many of his supporters on this net do not know this fact
   and it colors their perception of the man and his ideas.

I don't see how they could miss it unless they are deaf.  He says over
and over again that he controls the whole show, including screening
calls.  He even goes so far as to say the purpose of taking calls is to
make him look good.  He's quite open about this, and anybody who doubts
it just plain isn't listening.

Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy
From: nelson_p@apollo.hp.com (Peter Nelson)
Subject: Re: Yale Law One-World Government?
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 14:16:18 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Corporation, Chelmsford, MA

In article <1jll6hINNc5h@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> aq817@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Steve Crocker) writes:
>
>Peter Nelson suggests that it is natural for leaders to share such
>indicators as high incomes and well-connected families. This is true
>in an aristocratic state, but certainly falls a ways short of the 
>democratic ideal according to which a common person, such as Lincoln, 
>could rise to power with minimal or zero suppport from the power
>brokers.

  "Democratic ideals" are in the eye of the beholder, but I'm
  not sure what your point is . . . if you're merely saying that
  we don't live in a pure democracy, that's a given -- we live
  in a republic.   If you're lamenting the fact that one cannot
  achieve national office in the US without vast money and 
  support from the politically well-connected, the what's your
  point about that?   Can you envision some way of structuring
  the electoral system of a vast, extremely diverse post-industrial
  nation of 240 million people that *wouldn't* require this?

  Bill Clinton came from humble beginnings.  But he also got his
  education at schools attended mainly my the rich and powerful,
  and this inevitably shapes one's values. 

 

> Peter further suggests that the "natural" tendency to want 
>to discus matters of "common interest" in a private setting is a far
>cry from conspiracy. To the contrary, it is a precise description of
>conspiratorial behavior.

  From the _American Heritage Dictionary_, Second College Edition:
  "Conspiracy . . . 1.  An agreement to perform together an illegal,
  treacherous, or evil act."

  This is the key.  A mere confluence of interests does not a
  conspiracy make.  You and I and third member of a 5 member 
  Board of Selectmen may together vote against an ordinance 
  that in our heart-of-hearts we know is good for the town,
  thus defeating it.    But if we did so each for our own
  self-serving reasons, and without some prior plotting to-
  gether to do so, it's not a conspiracy.   A conspiracy 
  requires that the conspirators plan to act together in the
  interest of the conspiracy.


---peter


  

  
  

Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy
From: monaghan@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk (N.O. Monaghan)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy
Subject: Re: Gritz, Populists, and Nationalists
Date: 25 Jan 93 20:17:36 GMT
Organization: Glasgow University Computing Science Dept.

bz965@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Richard Hatch) writes:
>monaghan@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk (N.O. Monaghan) writes concerning the 
>book _Beyond the Pale_ by Derrick Knight, CARAF Publications, 
>1982, and the British National Party (BNP):
> 
>>My opinion of the book is based not just on its biased 
>>political stance but also on its collection of lies, half-
>>truths, unwarranted assumptions and general smear tactics that 
>>it uses - many directed against people that I know personally.
> 
>>As to the BNP, I have not examined its policies in detail and 
>>unable to comment on whether it follows the classical fascist 
>>corporatism or not.

[ Material on the history of various nationalist groups in Britain deleted ] 
 
Although you gave a summary of the history of the BNP, you failed to
note whether or not it is a specifically fascist organization - concerns
such as immigration and other matters do not really have a bearing on
this point.
 
>political and civic groups. One of these groups, Christians 
>Against Racism and Fascism (CARAF) formed as a result of a 1977 
>meeting of the British Council of Churches. [_The National Front 

The British Council of Churches is a somewhat strange organization and
any politically motivated body which they have created ought to be kept
at arm's length if not further away. Their dabbling in politics is
without exception, that of an extremist left-wing outlook - very much
following in the footsteps of the World Council of Churches which has a
great many warped ideas about Christianity - one of these being for
example, the supply of funds to communist terrorist organizations.

For those interested, a couple of works which might be of interest are:

John Cotter: The World Council of Churches (Supplement to Approaches #90)

Rachel Tingle: Another Gospel? An Account of the Growing Involvement of the Anglican Church in Secular Politics (The Christian Studies Centre, London, 1988)

ed Avril Smith: The Voice of Christian Affirmation

also a couple of works by Bernard Smith, whose titles I do not have at
hand.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
N.O. Monaghan

monaghan@dcs.gla.ac.uk
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy
From: nelson_p@apollo.hp.com (Peter Nelson)
Subject: Re: Conspiracy books
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 12:06:01 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Corporation, Chelmsford, MA

In article <1993Jan26.014808.29485@midway.uchicago.edu> thf2@midway.uchicago.edu writes:

> I recommend Hofstadter's "The Paranoid Style in American
>Politics."
 
  American politics isn't nearly as paranoid as in some
  other countries.  The excesses of NAZI Germany are well
  known, or course, but events in Eastern Europe following 
  the collapse of communism have taken a familiar turn.  
  In Hungary, with a population of only 30,000 Jews, there
  are growing calls for limiting their rights, since they
  are widely being blamed for most of the problems of 
  the country both under and since Communism.  And Life
  Magazine recently documented the various groups in
  Latvia which have sprung up to expel Jews from the
  country for the same reasons, despite the fact that
  nearly every Jew in the country was killed in the
  Holocaust.  Latvian Jews who can are, today, escaping
  not just to Israel, but to Poland and Germany!

  In the US Jews are 3% of the population and some people
  are willing to believe they run the show.  In many eastern
  European nations they are an even smaller portion of the 
  population and many people are willing to believe anything 
  about them.


---peter

Newsgroups: uk.politics,alt.conspiracy
From: grimmer@nyx.cs.du.edu (Geoff Rimmer)
Subject: Re: Norman Lamont, his flexible friend, and Miss Whiplash
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
	of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
	control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 93 03:22:00 GMT

In article <1993Jan22.104021.19139@wraxall.inmos.co.uk> des@inmos.co.uk (David Shepherd) writes:
>mathew (mathew@mantis.co.uk) wrote:
>: But interestingly, Ms St Clair recently claimed (according to Ceefax) that
>: she had a "dirt file" detailing famous people who have been clients of
>: prostitutes, and that she was prepared to reveal this information to protest
>: about a huge tax bill she had been sent.
>
>: And now she's missing.  It all sounds very odd.  Does anyone know
>: what's going on?
>
>Given that (i) she parked her car and was seen walking away (ii) one
>of her bank cards has been used subsequently to get money from a bank,
>I'd say it looks like a publicity stunt or a "Stonehouse". It looks,
>though, as if she may have got more than she bargained for as the 
>Police seem to have decided that in order to solve this "mystery" they
>need to do a detailed search of her house for any evidence that might
>indicate what was going on!

Sounds like some MPs will be getting worried :-)

UPDATE: BBC News 9pm 22nd Jan 93 says she's been found in Florida!

So it looks like they'll be after her for both tax AND a fine
for wasting police time!

Geoff
+------------------------------------------+------------------------------+
| Geoff Rimmer calling from England        | "We're just two lost souls   |
| 011 -- 44 -\-- 562 -- 884497        HOME | swimming in a fish bowl      |
|             \- 21 -- 236 -\-- 7051  WORK | year after year"             |
| (grimmer@nyx.cs.du.edu)    \- 2494  FAX  |         - Pink Floyd         +
+------------------------------------------+------------------------------+
Xref: sparky alt.conspiracy:14558 alt.atheism:26919 alt.mindcontrol:181
From: aq817@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Steve Crocker)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy,alt.atheism,alt.mindcontrol
Subject: Re: A carefully tuned network of filters
Date: 24 Jan 1993 09:26:05 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


DOesn't surprise me a bit, after watching the analogous process by
which the "anti-fascist left" consistently mischaracterize and 
distort the positions of their conservative opponents. Add your
own examples. Any number can play.

-Steve
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy,alt.atheism,alt.mindcontrol
From: pierce@lanai.cs.ucla.edu (Brad Pierce)
Subject: A carefully tuned network of filters
Organization: UCLA, Computer Science Department
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 93 07:01:21 GMT

"Our sense of the past is created for us largely by history's winners.
The voices of the losers, when heard at all, are transmitted through a
carefully tuned network of filters. The final triumph of orthodox
Christianity is instructive in this regard.

"...

"Occasionally we are blessed with extraordinary discoveries that make
it possible for the first time to read the original score.  The Dead
Sea Scrolls and the Nag Hammadi codices were two such finds. They have
revolutionized our conception of the Palestinian Jewish setting of
early Christianity on the one hand and our understanding of Gnostic
Christianity on the other. But they have also taught a painful lesson.
The seemingly insuperable difficulties encountered in trying to
reconcile these new documents with ancient descriptions of them by
their orthodox opponents - whether Jewish or Christian - remind us not
only how little we know of history's losers but even more poignantly
how consistently 'bad' the reports of the winners have been."

                      -- John G. Gager

[Source: John G. Gager, _The Origins of Anti-Semitism:  Attitudes
Toward Judaism in Pagan and Christian Antiquity_, Oxford University
Press, 1983; pp. 265-266.]


Xref: sparky alt.conspiracy:14440 talk.politics.misc:68971 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:13321
From: vengeanc@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy,talk.politics.misc,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: (no subject given)
Date: 21 Jan 93 17:10:29 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana

Kurt Ludwick <KEL111@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:

>In article <1993Jan19.232219.5703@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu>,
>tip@lead.aichem.arizona.edu (Tom Perigrin) says:

>>Although Rush has had a few good discussions with people who could
>>intelligently  hold the opposite position, in general he cuts them off,
>>gets the last word in, and goes to break.

Here's the situation.  Rush is an ENTERTAINER first and foremost.  He is
not a journalist, reporter, or Geraldo Rivera.  He can do anything he wants
to keep the show moving and interesting.  He has no obligation to let
anyone say anything!  He openly admits this, and callers therefore have
no excuse for not knowing this when they call.  


>You realize, of course, that he has to budget his 3 hours.  He can't afford to
>spend the whole time with any caller, even an interesting one.  I think he
>allows plenty of time to the callers who disagree with him, especially if they
>are articulate and don't just scream at him.

>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Kurt  E.  Ludwick     | If PRO is the opposite of CON, then
> -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -|
> kel111@psuvm.psu.edu  |             what's the opposite of Progress...?
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------


E.S.
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy
From: ad626@yfn.ysu.edu (Steve Crocker)
Subject: Re: Report on Gritz from Idaho
Organization: Youngstown State/Youngstown Free-Net
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 05:29:21 GMT


Since attacks on the "new world order" and the "power of the Federal
reserve" have now been officially declared "code words" for anti-semitism,
the question now arises as to what terms should be used by those of us
who actually want to criticize the new world order and the Federal Reserve.

Maybe we could refer to the world as imperialistically challenged and
monetarily challenged. Would that be preferable?


-Steve
Xref: sparky alt.conspiracy:14449 alt.activism:21151 alt.society.civil-liberty:7473 alt.individualism:6263 alt.censorship:10064 misc.headlines:7539 soc.culture.usa:9974 misc.activism.progressive:10231
From: gpalo@digi.lonestar.org (Gerry Palo)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy
Subject: Re: Secret Societies
Date: 26 Jan 93 23:18:16 GMT
Organization: DSC Communications Corp, Plano, TX

In article <1993Jan25.225826.28392@starbase.trincoll.edu> nmiller@starbase.trincoll.edu (norman miller) writes:
>In article <1993Jan25.150258.2555@ccsvax.sfasu.edu> f_gautjw@ccsvax.sfasu.edu wr
>ites:
>>
>>I find it unreasonable that anyone would discredit the basic idea of
>>"conspiracy theory" although there are obviously those who do it.
>>I certainly don't find it unreasonable that one might discredit any
>>given conspiracy theory as we all read the data differently.  I ask
>>myself:  Why would anyone discredit the basic concept of conspiracy
>>theory?
>
>Why would anyone discredit the basic concept of elves and leprechauns?
>
>>Could someone's attack on conspiracy theory
>>in general [or against particular important conspiracy theories] be part
>>of a conspiracy?  Could they be on the payroll for this?  Could such
>>a conspirator be unwitting and not think of themselves as being part
>>of a conspiracy but instead accept the myth that they are doing
>>mankind a great service by helping to mid-wife a great new age.  Is
>>the "New World Order" far enough along where its proponents can
>>finance propagandists to tailor articles and rebuttals for specific
>>needs or does it have enough volunteers who've bought its line and
>>spew forth its dogma.
>
>Shall I be the first to confess?  Very well, I confess.  I've been on
>college payrolls for 40 years and I've been teaching students the sub-
>versive doctrine that the burden of proof rests with the person who
>proposes a theory or proposition.
>
>>
>>If there were such a conspiracy by anti-conspiratorialists, how would
>>we ever know?  We could only suspect.
>
>No need to suspect.  It's a dead certainty.
>
>>-Joe Gaut
>
>Norman Miller

Of the different kinds of people in the world, two are especially interesting.
These are conspiracy theorists, who believe in this or that specific cons-
piracy, and the anti-conspiracy theorists, who go non-linear at the very 
suggestion of any conspiracy at all.  Sometimes the latter do not go com-
pletely non-linear, or rather they cover up the fact with clever, biting
humor.  Either way, the two types basically never communicate.  

Gerry Palo (73237.2006@compuserve.com)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy,talk.politics.misc,alt.president.clinton
From: tleylan@pegasus.com (Tom Leylan)
Subject: Re: Execute Amy Fisher!!!
Organization: Pegasus,  Honolulu
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 93 04:22:52 GMT

mwilson@ncratl.AtlantaGA.NCR.COM (Mark Wilson) writes:

>|>So you've proven that she has a head wound.  You still claimed that she was
>|>unable to function, which is obviously not true.

>Do you always get so offensive when somebody proves you wrong, or are you
>this offensive all of the time.

I believe you meant to write "sorry I wrote that you claimed that she was
unable to function".  You see I didn't claim it, ergo you haven't proven
me wrong you've simply lied.  I doubt you did maliciously but you've made
no effort to correct your error.

>It is quite possible to have a bullet in the brain, or most other parts of
>the body and not have any symptoms.

We were not discussing "possibilities" but rather a particular woman.  If
you want to generalize then yes it is possible to be shot and display few
or no visible symptoms.  The observation which spurred my reply however
was based on one guy, unqualified to be an expert witness on the subject
say "in essence" that he saw no symptoms on a taped TV show less than one
hour in length.

Does the woman suffer from severe headaches ?  Does she have emotional
trouble when she answers the door at night ?  Are they in financial
trouble ?  Can the bullet move from its present position ?  If she used
to entertain the church congregation with piano music does a crippled
hand on one arm interfere ?

You want to cry on TV and explain how chaotic her life is before you are
convinced that she has a problem... pardon the world for not providing
you enough documentation on this woman's medical condition.

>If somebody does not have any symptoms then they are fine.

I forget is that the medical description or the legal one... you a doctor
or a lawyer ?
>
Try and realize that your "enemy" here isn't me, I'll confess that you're
10 times as smart and make 100 times more money... you still have a stupid
opinion about what constitutes being "fine".

tom

Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy
From: nelson_p@apollo.hp.com (Peter Nelson)
Subject: Re: Jewish Bankers
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 11:50:23 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Corporation, Chelmsford, MA

In article <1k1jf7INNhmf@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> cj195@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (John W. Redelfs) writes:
>
>In a previous article, thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank) says:
>
>>And what evidence do you have of a "Jewish banking Mafia"?
>>-- 
>Do you admit the possibility, Ted, that there might be a multicultural
>banking Mafia?  If there is no evidence that there is one, is there any
>evidence that there is not one?

  A course in logic should be required for everyone posting on
  Usenet.   *It is up to the person making the positive assertion
  to provide the evidence*.  The lack of proof against something 
  is not evidence for that thing's existence (for the simple
  reason that there is simultaneously a lack of evidence against
  many, mutually exclusive conclusions in any set of possible 
  statements about something.  E.g., I do not have evidence that
  the buttons on the uniform of the UFO pilot are not blue.  I 
  also have no evidence that they are not red.  I also have no
  evidence that he (it, they, etc) is/are not naked.  Et cetera.)
  This is the most common mistake made in Usenet debates.


>So it is with criminal bankers.  We may have no evidence with which to
>convict.  But we can see the results all around us.  Excuse me, SOME of
>us can see the results.  Others are as willfully ignorant as the tobacco
>lobbyists that still deny there is any proof that tobacco causes
>cancer.

  This is idiotic.  There is positive proof, in the form of well
  designed studies, that tobacco causes cancer and respiratory
  problems.   There is no equivalent to this for a "Jewish Mafia".


---peter