HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mmwang@adobe.com (Michael Wang)
Subject: Re: Khat
Organization: Adobe Systems Inc., Mountain View, California, USA
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 23:09:43 GMT

In article <1992Dec16.072249.5553@nntp.hut.fi> jkp@cs.HUT.FI (Jyrki Kuoppala) writes:
>In article <18287@borg.cs.unc.edu>, bell@liszt (Andrew Bell) writes:
>>At least NPR did have one guy who explained that it was almost exactly like
>>a cup of strong coffee in its effects, and that he had actually tried it.
>>One wonders if he'll get fired for violating any sort of "Drug-free workplace"
>>rules...
>
>And you are stupid enough to trust a druggie saying things like that?
>He was lucky to even survive after a stupid thing like that, taking a
>drug, even more so to be able to say anything after that.  Now his
>brain is probably half-dissolved and his utterances are worth no more
>than those from a random number generator.  I hope his passport is
>taken away and he never gets out of Somalia - would serve him right to
>be left in a "country" (more like a nuthouse) with those millions of
>stupid druggie meatballs who can't even feed themselves without help
>from the greatest country on Earth, USA.

Well, CNN seems to have jumped onto the khat-craze bandwagon. Their
reporter in the capital yesterday has talking about how the new
contingent of Canadians had to watch out for gun-toting bandits "high
on narcotics."  Having learned to be mistrustful of our government, I
would imagine that the U.S. military is purposefully misleading the
press about the use and effects of the drugs so that when questionable
killings start coming up, the standard response will be, "well, we
believe he was on drugs at the time." And poor saps that we are, we'll
believe it.

-- 
Michael Wang
mmwang@mv.us.adobe.com
Newsgroups: alt.censorship
From: cburian@ux4.cso.uiuc.edu (Christopher J Burian)
Subject: Re: I've just been repremanded by net.big.brother
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 18:23:17 GMT

peewee@infoserv.com (Philip Stromer) writes:

>My account was actually SHUT DOWN for 7 days for making the statement,
>on rec.sport.pro-wrestling, that "since all gays have AIDS..." and
>then I went into a tirade against a pro wrestler named the Ultimate
>Warrior, who I have heard has AIDS.

	Rock Hudson didn't give any other actors AIDS during
	his acting career, what makes you think the Ultimate
	Warrior will? 

>I was told that this was in VIOLATION of the net.rules, and that I'm
>now FORBIDDEN from ever posting again to r.s.p-w.  I was told that
>there were too many complaints about my postings, even though I
>have refrained from using profanity, and I have refrained from
>threats, and I have refrained from advocating violence against
>any individual or group of individuals.

	Hey, what's your complaint?  All they did was enact
	"community standards", the justification for sodomy
	laws, and banning pornography and sex education.  How's
	it feel to be on the other side of law and order.  ;-)

>Free speech isn't worth anything anymore, unless it's within the
>realm of Political Correctness (tm).     

	Democracy in action, Bub. 

>The liberals are in reality
>only fair weather friends, as opposed to the far right, who hate
>everyone except other far right wingers.  Centrists are the only
>real hope for progress.  Vote Libertarian !!!

	Libertarians are NOT centrists.  Centrists are wishy-
	washy political panderers like Slick Willie.

>--Philip Stromer (peewee@infoserv.com)

Chris Burian---

	* Jesus saves souls -- and redeems them for valuable prizes * 

Newsgroups: alt.censorship
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [rec.humor.funny]  Publication Ban on Page 1
Followup-To: alt.censorship,rec.humor.funny
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 02:26:08 GMT

[A repost - Carl]

Date: Fri, 11 Dec 92 12:20:03 EST
Newsgroups: rec.humor.funny
Subject:  Publication Ban on Page 1
From: nalin@cs.uregina.ca (Nalin Whatyamacallit)

The following piece appeared on Page 1 of the Dec 5, '92 Globe & Mail -
Canada's only national news paper.  It seems court censorship has come full
circle.

	"Somewhere in Canada yesterday, a group requested a court ban on the
	publication/broadcast of a certain work for certain reasons.

	"The court granted the ban on publication/broadcast and, in addition,
	imposed a ban on reporting the fact of the ban.

	"This has required The Globe and Mail to withhold Broadcast Week
	magazine, which is normally included in the Saturday papers distributed
	in Ontario.

	"The Globe and Mail, with certain other parties, has mounted a legal
	challenge against the ban on reporting the ban, on grounds that it
	interferes with freedom of the press and other media of communication,
	which is guaranteed in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms."


--
Selected by Maddi Hausmann.  MAIL your joke (jokes ONLY) to funny@clarinet.com
Attribute the joke's source if at all possible.  A Daemon will auto-reply.

Jokes ABOUT major current events should be sent to topical@clarinet.com
(ie. jokes which won't be funny if not given immediate attention.)
Anything that is not a joke submission goes to funny-request@clarinet.com
-- 
Carl Kadie -- I do not represent any organization; this is just me.
 = kadie@cs.uiuc.edu =
Xref: sparky alt.censorship:9636 talk.politics.drugs:7960
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,talk.politics.drugs
Subject: Re: Atheist citizens (was Re: Teacher says no to legalization)
From: bigbro@netlink.cts.com (Kenneth Sullivan)
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 92 14:33:19 PST
Organization: NetLink Online Communications, San Diego CA

> 
> It is sad but true.  On August 27, 1987, then Vice President George Bush had 
> the following exchange with reporter Robert I. Sherman during a news conferen
> at O'Hare Airport:
> 
> RIS : What will you do to win the votes of the Americans who are Atheists?
> GHWB: I guess I'm pretty weak in the Atheist community.  Faith in god is 
>       important to me.
> RIS : Surely you recognize the equal citizenship and patriotism of Americans 
>       who are Atheists.
> GHWB: No, I don't know that Atheists should be considered as citizens, nor 
>       should they be considered patriots.  This is one nation under God.
> RIS : Do you support as a sound constitutional principle the separation of 
>       state and church?
> GHWB: Yes, I support the separation of church and state.  I'm just not very 
>       high on Atheists.
> 
> Information obtained from:
>   American Atheists General Headquarters
>   P.O. Box 140195
>   Austin, TX  78714-0195
>   Phone:  512-458-1244
> 
> What is sad is the fact that the "Under God" part of "One Nation Under God" w
> added to the Pledge of Allegiance on June 14, 1954 (i.e. during George Bush's
> lifetime) and the Motto of the U.S. was changed to "In God We Trust" from "E 
> Pluribus Unum" on July 30, 1956.  Still, George Bush and other conservative
> christians treat these two phrases with more deference than they give to the
> First Ammendment.
> 
> There are a couple more citations about the Bush Quote in the alt.atheists FA
> -- 
> Mike A. McAngus	(mam@jcnpc.cmhnet.org) 
> 
> Like I really need another time-consuming hobby.
> This Posting Exploits Illiterates.

Wow, thats weird I have never heard that before.  Its one of those things 
that get overlooked when it should receive a lot more press.

--                    
INTERNET:  bigbro@netlink.cts.com (Kenneth Sullivan)
UUCP:   ...!ryptyde!netlink!bigbro
NetLink Online Communications * Public Access in San Diego, CA (619) 453-1115
From: weinberg@imager (George Weinberg)
Newsgroups: alt.censorship
Subject: Re: Banning the Beatles?
Date: 20 Dec 92 20:05:59 GMT
Organization: Laboratory for Experimental Astrophysics

In article <1663@emoryu1.cc.emory.edu> libwca@emory.edu (Bill Anderson) writes:
>erkamp@janus (Bob Erkamp) writes:
>: In article <1992Dec10.203840.8210@seachg.uucp>, chrisb@seachg.uucp (Chris Blask) writes:
>: >over?
>: >
>: 
>: I heard this as well. I don't recall which song it was but the lyrics implied
>: violence to women. The station that played the song got numerous calls from 
>: womens groups so they pulled it.
>: 
>: Bob      
>
>A Beatles song about violence to women?  C'mon.  Does
>anybody know anything about this?
>
>Bill  
The song in question is "run for your life" from Rubber soul

My impression of this song is that it is sung from the point of view of a fictional character,  not of the singers (like Paperback Writer).  Anyway,  I think
this constitutes fair use so...

Well I'd rather see you dead little girl
than to be with another man
so you'd better keep your head little girl
or I won't know who I am

CHORUS:
you'd better run for life if you can little girl
hide your head in the sand little girl
catch you with another man that's the end
little girl

Well you know that I'm a wicked guy
and I was born with a jealous mind
And I can't spend my whole life
trying just to make you toe the line

Chorus

Let this be your sermon
I mean everything I said
bayby I'm determined
and I'd rather see you dead

chorus

First verse repeats.
--------------------------------------------
C
b
D
D
Well you know that I'm a wicked guy and 
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: aker@hightop.nrl.navy.mil (Les Aker)
Subject: Re: Request or order?  [was Re: I've just been repremanded...] 
Organization: Computer Security, Naval Research Lab
Distribution: USA 
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 15:06:52 GMT

The place for the user to address the issue is on the content of
the complaints, not by deciding that Tipper Gore & record labelling
may result from being asked to restrain from some behavior.  If the
complaints are valid then the user must understand why a change is
required in his/her behavior.  If not, then the university must 
understand why the freedom of speech of the user is protected.

Now, putting all of this university code stuff aside, what do you all
think of addresses the complaints as the central issue?  What does it
take for YOU do decide that someone has gone over the line far
enough for you to complain to the sys. admin. instead of just sending
a reply to a posting?



-- 
#####################################
# Leslie L. Aker, Sr.               #    
# Email : 76326.2425@compuserve.com #
# include "standard.disclaimer"     #
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,alt.feminism
From: jamie@cs.sfu.ca (Jamie Andrews)
Subject: Re: [alt.feminism] Feminist Censorship in Canada
Organization: CSS, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 03:44:59 GMT

In article <1992Dec16.222528.15763@llyene.jpl.nasa.gov> julie@eddie.jpl.nasa.gov (Julie Kangas) writes:
>Mob rule.  Gotta love it.

     Yeah, those damn feminists came around with crowbars and
Molotov cocktails and threatened to burn the radio station down
unless they stopped playing the song.

--J.
From: other022@cnsvax.uwec.edu
Newsgroups: alt.censorship
Subject: re:khat
Date: 15 Dec 92 16:22:24 -0600
Organization: University of Wisconsin Eau Claire

re:khat
sources: NBC news (sorry) and an AP release to the local newspaper

this is what I've heard---the US marines have taken it upon themselves to close
the khat markets around the capital ( please don't ask me to spell it),
interfering with the livelihood of those Somalis still alive.  This empty
marketplaces where shown on the NBC nightly news a couple of nights ago.

And now the backdrop.....from an AP article published yesterday....a Somali
woman was allegedly providing "services" to the men of the French legionnaire
and was punished by the locals though a public stoning.  Apparently hundreds
had converged upon her.  She was rescued once by the French.  After being
released from their protection, again this "crowd" discovered the woman and
began beating her.....while US marines stood by watching the incident.
Well, so much for humanity........


Newsgroups: ia.newsgroups,ia.talk.politics,isu.cc.general,isu.cc.vincent,isu.newsgroups,isu.talk.misc,isu.talk.computer-fee,isu.talk.politics,alt.censorship,isu.talk.usenet-policy
From: edsall@iastate.edu (David M Edsall)
Subject: ONE YEAR AGO: What to do about the new Newsgroup Censorship Policy at ISU
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames IA
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 22:33:42 GMT

In <dave.692899784@camelot> dave@camelot.bradley.edu (David L. Vessell) writes:


>Excuse me, but for the benefit of those not attending Iowa State (you *did*
>crosspost this to alt.censorship and talk.politics), could you explain
>the current situation at ISU?  Obviously it's a case of newsgroups being 
>censored or omitted but very little information otherwise, or maybe I just
>missed it.

>Could someone there recap what's happened and what's happening?

>--
>======*dR.Dave*.....making the world safe for intelligent dance music.========
> "More and faster, here we come. White and trashy and incredibly dumb."-KMFDM
>   (dave@camelot.bradley.edu) (David Vessell) (dave@bradley.bradley.edu)
Xref: sparky alt.censorship:9611 alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk:3720
From: morgan@ms.uky.edu (Wes Morgan)
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
Subject: Re: I've just been repremanded by net.big.brother
Date: 13 Dec 92 17:29:43 GMT
    <BETSYS.92Dec12211548@ra.cs.umb.edu> <1992Dec13.144427.25801@eng.umd.edu>
Organization: University of Kentucky Engineering Computing Center

russotto@eng.umd.edu (Matthew T. Russotto) wrote:
>betsys@cs.umb.edu (Elizabeth Schwartz) writes:
>>Around here, we call polite requests TEACHING.
>
>Does your university have the catchall "refusal to obey the reasonable
>request of a universal official" in its disciplinary code?  If so, a
>'polite request' is an order, no matter what else it may be.  

So, we've been stripped of any personal nature by our position within
the University?  Is our every statement a direct order?  If I say "could
you please send just one or two jobs to the printer at one time?", it's
an order?

I don't like giving orders; students aren't part of my chain of command. 8)
Besides, I have no desire to turn into some dictator who can only say no;
I get a big kick out of saying yes!

>You need
>to have that removed from the code before you can reasonably say that
>it is not a demand and not a threat.

You need to realize that, despite your bad experience(s) with sysadmins,
not every sysadmin is some petty tyrant exercising monolithic control
over their domain of systems.  I accomplish far more by NOT invoking 
policy statements than I ever could as a "policy watchdog".  It's give
and take, and my users (mostly students) understand and respect that.

>If it doesn't have it, then a polite request is just a polite
>request-- and may be refused without University-sanctioned
>consequences.

Exactly!  I make polite requests all the time, most of them coming in
situations which are not clearly delineated in policy.  (We're back
to the J-word again -- judgement)  If a real problem ensues/persists,
I'll get with the appropriate people and MAKE a policy to cover it;
in that case, I can't really do anything until the users are made aware
of the policy, right?  In any case, I can't go back and retroactively
punish users for deeds committed before the policy was there.....

>>   If we tell someone that his behavior makes him sound like a jerk,
>>and reflects badly on him, that's an opinion. 
>
>If you also tell him that his behavior may violate university
>standards, and ask him to cut it out, that's an order, backed up by
>the threat of university sanction.

So, you want to see a hearing for each and every possible violation?
That's what it sounds like.  

--Wes

-- 
MORGAN@UKCC         |       Wes Morgan       |        ...!ukma!ukecc!morgan 
morgan@ms.uky.edu   | Engineering  Computing |   morgan@wuarchive.wustl.edu
morgan@engr.uky.edu | University of Kentucky | JWMorgan@dockmaster.ncsc.mil
  Mailing list for AT&T StarServer S/E  - starserver-request@engr.uky.edu
Xref: sparky alt.censorship:9700 news.admin.policy:806 comp.org.eff.talk:7769
From: jamie@cs.sfu.ca (Jamie Andrews)
Subject: Re: [alt.feminism] Feminist Censorship in Canada
Organization: CSS, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 19:41:50 GMT

- A radio station in Ottawa played a Beatles song.
- Some listeners complained it was misogynistic.
- The radio station announced it would no longer play the song.
- The listeners were happy & kept listening to the station.
- The advertisers were happy because the listeners kept
  listening to the station.
- The station was happy because it had found a new way of
  pleasing its listeners & advertisers.

     Sounds like free enterprise in action, folks, not
"feminist censorship in Canada."

     And BTW, it could also happen in the good old
free-enterprise US of A.  At least I hope it could.

--Jamie.
Xref: sparky alt.censorship:9599 alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk:3713
From: betsys@cs.umb.edu (Elizabeth Schwartz)
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
Subject: Re: I've just been repremanded by net.big.brother
Date: 13 Dec 92 02:15:48 GMT
	<1992Dec11.192941.4095@bradley.bradley.edu> <Bz46zJ.JJE@cs.uiuc.edu>
	<1992Dec11.231840.15791@bradley.bradley.edu>
Organization: University of Massachusetts at Boston

Around here, we call polite requests TEACHING.
Yes teaching. We're a university and we are a community. In addition
to the technical aspects of software engineering, we explicitly do
teach some things about working in groups and being part of an
academic community.
  One of the things we have to teach (have meaning possess) is the
knowledge that reasoned and persuasive argument is more effective than
name-calling; that obscenity will drive away more listeners than it
will impress.
  It's not necessary to see a veiled threat in the remark about
standards. Our message is not "Learn everything we have to teach or
you will be expelled" but rather "We will try to teach you as best we
can what you need to survive and prosper as an educated person."
   If we tell someone that his behavior makes him sound like a jerk,
and reflects badly on him, that's an opinion. 
  If we're threatening to shut off an account, we give CLEAR warning,
with an explicit statement of the rules violated, not some vague
threat.
  Betsy
PS I wouldn't assume anything about Boston. There are something like
150 schools around here, of all stripes and policies. 

  
   
--
System Administrator                  Internet: betsys@cs.umb.edu
MACS Dept, UMass/Boston               BITNET:ESCHWARTZ%UMBSKY.DNET@NS.UMB.EDU
100 Morrissey Blvd                    Staccato signals
Boston, MA 02125-3393                      of constant information....
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,alt.feminism
From: mec6@quads.uchicago.edu (rini)
Subject: Re: [alt.feminism] Feminist Censorship in Canada
Reply-To: mec6@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 04:47:54 GMT

In article <92346.232537SWG101@psuvm.psu.edu> <SWG101@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:

>Feminists are calling the banning of this Beatle's song a victory.
...
>What happened in Ottawa was NOT feminism, it was FASCISM.

Boy, I hope y'all got just as riled up about that stink with the "Cop
Killer" song.

Newsgroups: alt.censorship,talk.politics.drugs
From: mam@jcnpc.cmhnet.org (Mike A. McAngus)
Subject: Atheist citizens (was Re: Teacher says no to legalization)
Organization: Homebrew Virtual Reality Labs
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 18:18:20 GMT

Kenneth Sullivan (bigbro@netlink.cts.com) wrote:
: >
: >
: > Jeff Oesterle
: >
: > ================
: > "No, I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens,
: > nor should they be considered patriots.  This is one nation under God."
: >                                          - George Bush
: > <choke> <cough> Say WHAT?!?!?!?
: > ================
: >
: > (Disclaim, disclaim, disclaim.)
:
: woah! did Bush really say that?? when was this, what was the occision,
: stupid statments night?  wow...it just boggles the mind....geez thats
: like saying a monarchist sympathiser is not an American because we
: originally rebelled agaisnt England.

It is sad but true.  On August 27, 1987, then Vice President George Bush had 
the following exchange with reporter Robert I. Sherman during a news conference
at O'Hare Airport:

RIS : What will you do to win the votes of the Americans who are Atheists?
GHWB: I guess I'm pretty weak in the Atheist community.  Faith in god is 
      important to me.
RIS : Surely you recognize the equal citizenship and patriotism of Americans 
      who are Atheists.
GHWB: No, I don't know that Atheists should be considered as citizens, nor 
      should they be considered patriots.  This is one nation under God.
RIS : Do you support as a sound constitutional principle the separation of 
      state and church?
GHWB: Yes, I support the separation of church and state.  I'm just not very 
      high on Atheists.

Information obtained from:
  American Atheists General Headquarters
  P.O. Box 140195
  Austin, TX  78714-0195
  Phone:  512-458-1244

What is sad is the fact that the "Under God" part of "One Nation Under God" was
added to the Pledge of Allegiance on June 14, 1954 (i.e. during George Bush's 
lifetime) and the Motto of the U.S. was changed to "In God We Trust" from "E 
Pluribus Unum" on July 30, 1956.  Still, George Bush and other conservative
christians treat these two phrases with more deference than they give to the
First Ammendment.

There are a couple more citations about the Bush Quote in the alt.atheists FAQ.
-- 
Mike A. McAngus	(mam@jcnpc.cmhnet.org) 

Like I really need another time-consuming hobby.
This Posting Exploits Illiterates.
From: satan@bigwpi.WPI.EDU (Matthew James Meyer)
Newsgroups: alt.censorship
Subject: IS LABELING CENSORSHIP
Date: 11 Dec 1992 19:11:27 GMT
Organization: Worcester Polytechnic Institute
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: bigwpi.wpi.edu



Labeing is NOT censorship, BUT...


labeling facilitates censorship.  People who support lableing say that the
labels provide for them a way to recognize what it is they are buying and
what it might contain - and that is true.  What is also true is that labeling
facilitates the act of censorship:

case in pt.  - Somewhere in Florida, whether it be the state as a whole or
		some city or county, a law was passed BANNING the sale of
		records, tapes, cd's, that had the 'parental advisory' 
		sticker on them.  Some store owners were arrested for selling
		these 'BANNED' albums.  

		I don't remember if it was city or state or whatever and 
		i don't know if the law is still in effect.  this occured
		back when 2 - Live Crew was big.

case in pt.  - NC-17 - this new rating was developed because the X rating
			has the stigma of pronography to it.  Pornos
			often bill themselves as XXX and all that shit when
			they haven't even been rate by the offical motion 
			picture whatever association.  Because of this, any
			movie that isn't a porno, that gets an X rating is
			doomed to fail at the box office.  That's why 
			SEx. lies, and vidoetape was not rated, and why 
			several quality films have been cut and recut so that
			they can get R ratings.  In adfdition some film houses
			will refuse to show X or even nc-17 shows, but since
			they are private busineesses they are allowed. 
			(irealize this isn't entirely coherent, i keep getting
			interuppted).  

anyway, i agree that people should have access to information regarding the
content of a product (ie films and albums) but this information should not
be used to facilitate censoring.  The rating systems we have now, and they 
way they are approached by gov't and public interest groups reflect 
censorship-style activities. 


my $0.020000000000000000000002  worth



-- 
*******************************************************************************
* satan@wpi *
*           * my lips may promise, but my heart is a whore - nin
*******************************************************************************
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk