HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: alt.censorship
Subject: Re: Banning the Beatles?
From: erkamp@janus (Bob Erkamp)
Date: 14 Dec 92 09:39:37 MDT
Reply-To: erkamp@janus
 <1992Dec5.145700.6081@sun0.urz.uni-heidelberg.de>,<1992Dec10.203840.8210@seachg.uucp>
Organization: Alberta Research Council

In article <1992Dec10.203840.8210@seachg.uucp>, chrisb@seachg.uucp (Chris Blask) writes:
>I would like to take a moment to distract from this ongoing thread about
>whether we can censor fools on alt.censorship.  We have here a wonderful
>topic with vast tracts of un-argued (at least by me) territory, how about
>some other pertinent threads?
>
>For instance, I caught something out of the corner of my ear this morning
>about a radio station in Ottawa (?) banning a Beatles song, but I didn't
>get the detail on the article.  Anyone in Canada hear this?  Anyone else
>have any comments or instances of censorship that would be worth fighting
>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
Xref: sparky alt.censorship:9651 talk.politics.drugs:7976
From: martin@pharaoh.cyborg.bt.co.uk (Martin Gorman)
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,talk.politics.drugs
Subject: Re: Teacher says no to legalization
Date: 15 Dec 92 16:57:47 GMT
Organization: British Telecom

bigbro@netlink.cts.com (Kenneth Sullivan) writes:

>> 
>> 
>> 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.

There's plenty on this in alt.atheism (in the FAQ as well I think)
Newsgroups: alt.censorship
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [soc.men, et al.]  Re: Jim Bowery's offensive posting
Followup-To: alt.censorship,soc.men,soc.motss,soc.culture.new-zealand
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 13:45:22 GMT

[A repost - Carl]

From: dswartz@sw.stratus.com (Dan Swartzendruber)
Newsgroups: soc.men,soc.motss,soc.culture.new-zealand
Subject:  Re: Jim Bowery's offensive posting
Date: 11 Dec 92 16:32:31 GMT

In article <eumLVB2w165w@netlink.cts.com>, system@netlink.cts.com (System Administrator) writes:
> 
> We have been receiving a number of requests to censure Mr. Bowery for
> his post (F81iVB1w165w@netlink.cts.com).  
> 
> NetLink is a public access system, and provides access for people to
> exchange ideas and opinions -- any opinions, not just those that are
> "politically correct."  
> 
> However, Mr. Bowery's post was in violation of soc.motss charter and
> was also innapropriate for the other groups as well.  He has been 
> counseled about proper net etiquette, and had his posting access temporarily
> suspended.
> 

Great.  So in other words, he's free to say whatever he wants.  Except he isn't.
Ever consider a career in politics?

And no, I didn't think his posting was anything other than hateful garbage.

-- 

#include <std_disclaimer.h>

Dan S.
-- 
Carl Kadie -- I do not represent any organization; this is just me.
 = kadie@cs.uiuc.edu =
Xref: sparky alt.censorship:9683 alt.feminism:6181
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,alt.feminism
Subject: Re: [alt.feminism] Feminist Censorship in Canada
From: glazier@isr.harvard.edu (Andrew Baker Glazier)
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 92 18:24:45 GMT
Organization: Harvard University, Cambridge, MA

In article <1992Dec17.034459.1765@cs.sfu.ca> jamie@cs.sfu.ca (Jamie Andrews) writes:
>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.

You're missing his point entirely. As far as I can tell, what he's trying
to say is that the feminists do not represent a majority or even a
significant minority of the stations' listeners. What they DO represent is
a small, extremely vocal group of people who seek to control what the rest
of the listeners can listen to, which makes them no better than the PMRC or
the (im)Moral Majority 
-- 
"A horse! A horse! Somebody give me a horse, man, because|glazier@ 
I come to bury this dirtball, not to praise him. Whaddya |harvard.isr.edu
think I am? Whether it's nobler for the mind to make people suffer with all
these totally outrageous arrows arrows for a fortune, or what!" -- D.R.
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 22:33:05 GMT

In <1991Dec16.152546.14765@news.iastate.edu> i1neal@exnet.iastate.edu (Neal Rauhauser -- ) writes:


>>|> 	1) The policy was not developed by the Comp Ctr committee which
>>|> 	   developed the original "open learning environment" policy.
>>|> 
>>|> 	2) The policy was brought to the Comp Ctr Newsgroup committee
>>|> 	   who did not approve it.
>>|> 
>>|> 	3) The policy was brought to the University Computation Advisory
>>|> 	   Committee (Computation Center Advisory Sub-Committee) who
>>|> 	   did not approve it.
>>
>> So who did approve it?   
>>
>>--
>>Dick


>     Absolutely necessary information! Who drafted this plan? Who approved 
>it? If someone reading this knows but can't say directly because of
>employment considerations, my phone number is 233 - 5164, the answering
>machine (with my girlfriends voice on it, don't be fooled) will listen politely
>to whatever you have to say :-)



>    I think the following steps ought to be taken:


>	1. organizational meeting, I know most of you, but we need
>	   a good (unmonitored) meeting about this :-)

>	2. some sort of press, beyond the Daily, covering this censorship.
>	   I know the nice AP lady here in town, I'm sure all of you
>	   have similar ideas - "Censorship @ state university - page 3
>	   of Today section in the register"

>	3. Identification of parties involved. I want to know who
>	   picked the groups to be blocked, and I want to know who
>	   approved this.

>	4. Contact the Gay etc etc, whatever the acronym is this month,
>	   and let them know that a.s.motss is going to be cut -
>	   I'd say this is grounds for a discrimination suit.

>	5. Start a student organization dedicated to the protection
>	   of ISU students from impure influences ... and my choice
>	   for first target is going to be removal of all copies of
>	   the bible from the library - someone please track down
>	   a list of the erotic parts (yes, really, I think some are
>	   in the song of solomon). I mean really, if we're gonna
>	   have censorship, lets get everything in one fell swoop,
>	   right ;-)


>     Well, that'll do for a start. Looking forward to Tuesday :-)

>--
>   Neal   i1neal@exnet.iastate.edu
> "A poor fool indeed is he who adopts a manner of thinking (meant) for others!"
>   - Donatien-Alphonse-Francois de Sade
>"Despite the sunrise, the darkness never goes from some men's eyes"
Newsgroups: alt.censorship
From: dave@bradley.bradley.edu (David Vessell)
Subject: Re: I've just been repremanded by net.big.brother
Organization: Bradley University
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 92 21:21:39 GMT

peewee@infoserv.com (Philip Stromer) writes:

>Centrists are the only real hope for progress.  Vote Libertarian !!!

I think you're the first person who has ever referred to Libertarians as
centrists.  I'm not arguing (being a Lib myself) but I had to laugh....

-- 
 davE.   Making the world safe for intelligent dance music.  dave@bradley.edu.
########## David L. Vessell -- Bradley University Computing Services #########
    "The opposite of love is not hate but indifference." -- Sigmund Freud
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,alt.feminism
From: julie@eddie.jpl.nasa.gov (Julie Kangas)
Subject: Re: [alt.feminism] Feminist Censorship in Canada
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, CA
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 22:25:28 GMT

In article <1992Dec16.194150.1112@cs.sfu.ca> jamie@cs.sfu.ca (Jamie Andrews) writes:
>- 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.

Mob rule.  Gotta love it.

Julie
DISCLAIMER: All opinions here belong to my cat and no one else
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: kadie@eff.org (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: Re: Jim Bowery's offensive posting
Originator: kadie@eff.org
Organization: The Electronic Frontier Foundation
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 00:06:20 GMT

In article <Bz979o.588@cs.uiuc.edu> kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie) writes:

>[...] I do not favor for "completely unrestricted free speech."

joemays@bsu-cs.bsu.edu (Joseph F. Mays) writes:

>[...]  What restrictions would you place on free speech? [...]

I'm content with restrictions on speech that "is intended to produce
'imminent lawless action' and it is 'likely to produce such action.'"

ANNOTATED REFERENCES

(All these documents are available on-line. Access information follows.)

=================
law/brandenberg-v-ohio
=================
* Expression -- Advocating Lawbreaking -- Brandenberg v. Ohio

In e-mail, a correspondent expressed the view that there was no right
to speech that advocated violence. This response is based on U.S. law.
It is a summary of the ACLU's Bill of Rights Briefing Paper #10:
Freedom of Expression. The Supreme Court's standard is that speech may
not be suppressed or punished unless it is intended to produce
'imminent lawless action' and it is 'likely to produce such action.'

=================
=================

If you have gopher, you can browse the CAF archive with the command
   gopher gopher.eff.org

These document(s) are also available by anonymous ftp (the preferred
method) and by email. To get the file(s) via ftp, do an anonymous ftp
to ftp.eff.org (192.88.144.4), and get file(s):

  pub/academic/law/brandenberg-v-ohio

To get the file(s) by email, send email to archive-server@eff.org.
Include the line(s) (be sure to include the space before the file
name):

send acad-freedom/law brandenberg-v-ohio



-- 
Carl Kadie -- I do not represent EFF; this is just me.
 =kadie@eff.org, kadie@cs.uiuc.edu =
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 22:35:58 GMT

In <1991Dec16.210727.2682@news.iastate.edu> spam@iastate.edu (Michael L Begley) writes:

>In article <david.692915520@colt.cc.iastate.edu> david@iastate.edu (David M. Martin Jr.) writes:

>>>	4. Contact the Gay etc etc, whatever the acronym is this month,
>>>	   and let them know that a.s.motss is going to be cut -
>>>	   I'd say this is grounds for a discrimination suit.
>>
>>Huh?  Discrimination suit?  That would require both actual
>>discrimination (of which I see none) and a law prohibiting it in this
>>form (which we certainly don't have).

>The reason I contacted the LGBA is because they not only promote acceptance
>of homosexual lifestyles, but they also promote overall sexual awareness.
>The censorship of alt.sex.motss affects their first aim, by limiting people's
>ability to discuss homosexual lifestyles.  The censorship of the other groups
>affects their secondary aim, by limiting peoples ability to discuss sex.

>I'm writing with no representation of the LGBA, only my perception of their
>goals.  I have not yet gotten a response from them; I called this morning
>and talked to the answering machine.  They`re working limited hours this week,
>so the message may not have been receved.  Perhaps someone out there in
>isu.cc.generaland can speed this up...
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,alt.sex,alt.sex.movies
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: "Court strikes down child pornography law"
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 22:01:13 GMT

According to a UPI articles in clari.news.law.civil:

[...]
>	The U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco said the
>Protection of Children Against Sexual Exploitation Act of 1977 violated
>the First and Fifth amendments because it did not require that people
>convicted under the law know the age of the performers.
[...]

The case involved distribution of Traci Lord's movies.

- Carl
-- 
Carl Kadie -- I do not represent any organization; this is just me.
 = kadie@cs.uiuc.edu =
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 22:34:13 GMT


Newsgroups: soc.rights.alien,alt.censorship,alt.conspiracy
From: tt@tarzan.jyu.fi (Tapani Tarvainen)
Subject: Re: "Censorship by Visa Denial"
Originator: tt@tarzan.math.jyu.fi
Organization: University of Jyvaskyla
	<1992Dec7.195019.23014@netcom.com>
	<1992Dec12.153411.19788@athena.mit.edu>
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 12:51:42 GMT

In article <1992Dec12.153411.19788@athena.mit.edu> wdstarr@athena.mit.edu (William December Starr) writes:

> If the government wants
>to keep someone out, let them show probable cause to believe that if
>allowed to enter he'll perform acts which, if performed by an American
>citizen, would be legally suppressible or punishable.

How do you like this formulation:

`No alien may be denied a visa or excluded from admission to the
United States ... because of any past, current or expected beliefs,
statements or associations which, if engaged in by a US citizen in the
United States, would be protected under the Constitution.'

That was signed into law by President Reagan on 22 December 1987.

It was later amended by Congress to exclude immigrants, and I
have no idea about its present status.  (Did _anybody_ notice
my earlier and longer posting about this??)
--
Tapani Tarvainen  (tt@math.jyu.fi, tarvainen@finjyu.bitnet)
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: peewee@infoserv.com (Philip Stromer)
Newsgroups: alt.censorship
Subject: Re: I've just been repremanded by net.big.brother
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 92 22:47:31 PST
Distribution: world
Organization: Friends of Lenny Bruce

	>I think you're the first person who has ever referred to 
	>Libertarians as centrists.  
	
I know.  For some reason, we're usually lumped together at the        
far right, along with Atila The Hun.  But since Libertarians are
usually LIBERAL on social issues and CONSERVATIVE on fiscal
issues, I consider us to be CENTRISTS.  

--Philip Stromer (peewee@infoserv.com)
Newsgroups: alt.censorship
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [soc.men, et al.]  Re: Jim Bowery's offensive posting
Followup-To: alt.censorship,soc.men,soc.motss,soc.culture.new-zealand
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 13:45:36 GMT

[A repost - Carl]

Newsgroups: soc.men,soc.motss,soc.culture.new-zealand
Subject:  Re: Jim Bowery's offensive posting
From: derek@nezsdc.icl.co.nz (Derek Tearne)
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 92 22:16:27 GMT

In article <1gafqvINNe3j@transfer.stratus.com> dswartz@sw.stratus.com (Dan Swartzendruber) writes:
>In article <eumLVB2w165w@netlink.cts.com>, system@netlink.cts.com (System Administrator) writes:
>> 
>> We have been receiving a number of requests to censure Mr. Bowery for
>> his post (F81iVB1w165w@netlink.cts.com).  
>> 
>> NetLink is a public access system, and provides access for people to
>> exchange ideas and opinions -- any opinions, not just those that are
>> "politically correct."  
>> 
>> However, Mr. Bowery's post was in violation of soc.motss charter and
>> was also innapropriate for the other groups as well.  He has been 
>> counseled about proper net etiquette, and had his posting access temporarily
>> suspended.
>> 
>
>Great.  So in other words, he's free to say whatever he wants.  Except he isn't.
>Ever consider a career in politics?
>
>And no, I didn't think his posting was anything other than hateful garbage.

I think sometimes we shoot ourselves in our collective feet when we stop 
people like this from posting.  If we exclude them from our vision we tend
to forget that they exist.  Then we live in quiet complacency thinking society
is free from nutters.      

Let him post - let him get shot down in flames - maybe he has a thick skin 
and won't notice - but - just maybe - after repeatedly being informed of the
distance from the <usenet> societal norm which his postings take him - he 
may change his attitudes.  Sometimes peer group pressure can be a positive 
thing.  


After all there are always kill files (a freudian name if ever there was one).


-- 
Derek Tearne.   --   derek@nezsdc.icl.co.nz   --    Fujitsu New Zealand   -- 
 _______
 _______} This is a Usenet condom<tm>.  Roll the condom over the .signature 
	  file before posting to protect yourself from .sig retro-virii
-- 
Carl Kadie -- I do not represent any organization; this is just me.
 = kadie@cs.uiuc.edu =
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,talk.politics.drugs,talk.politics.misc
From: mea@cbnewse.cb.att.com (mark.e.anderson)
Subject: Re: Khat
Organization: AT&T
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 23:38:25 GMT

In article Chuck.Lavazzi@launchpad.unc.edu (Chuck Lavazzi) writes:
>In article  jkp@cs.HUT.FI (Jyrki Kuoppala) writes:
>>In article <18287@borg.cs.unc.edu>, bell@liszt (Andrew Bell) writes:

>>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.

>	I have two possible responses to this, based on two opposing
>assumptions:
>1) (assumes this was a joke):  you should attach smileys.  As it is, this
>reads way too much like something that would be posted in all seriousness
>by one of the geeks over in alt.fan.rush-limbaugh.

Assume it was a joke.  Jyrki posts here all the time and it appears
he has become so enraged that  he must resort to sarcasm.

I agree.  The US is about to take a truly positive humanitarian mission
and mess it up.  

It's kind of sad.

Mark

Newsgroups: alt.censorship,talk.politics.drugs,talk.politics.misc
From: Chuck.Lavazzi@launchpad.unc.edu (Chuck Lavazzi)
Subject: Re: Khat
Organization: University of North Carolina Extended Bulletin Board Service
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 17:05:08 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.
>
	I have two possible responses to this, based on two opposing
assumptions:
1) (assumes this was a joke):  you should attach smileys.  As it is, this
reads way too much like something that would be posted in all seriousness
by one of the geeks over in alt.fan.rush-limbaugh.
2) (assumes this was serious):  get a grip.  The source quoted (which you
obviously never heard) was an MD and professor at an American university who
had spent some time in Somalia pre-choas.  Unlike you, he actually knew what
he was talking about.

Chuck

--
   The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
     North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
        Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
           internet:  laUNChpad.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80
Xref: sparky alt.censorship:9586 alt.feminism:5921
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 23:25:37 EST
From: <SWG101@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,alt.feminism
Subject: Re: [alt.feminism] Feminist Censorship in Canada

Feminists are calling the banning of this Beatle's song a victory.
They claim that this song is bad because it promotes violence against women.
Hitler claimed the Jews were bad because they were (he said) the cause of
Germany's problems.
What happened in Ottawa is dangerous.  It indicates that there is a radio
station that may ban any song which some listeners find offensive.  I think
that someone could be offended by just about any song, you can read anything
you want into the lyrics of any song.
What happened in Ottawa was NOT feminism, it was FASCISM.
Newsgroups: alt.censorship
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: Re: IPS:ZIMBABWE: FILM CENSORSHIP, NO SEX PLEASE WE'RE ZIMBABWEAN
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 21:21:08 GMT

There is an interesting thread in soc.culture.african about
film censorship in Zimbabwe.

- Carl


-- 
Carl Kadie -- I do not represent any organization; this is just me.
 = kadie@cs.uiuc.edu =
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,talk.politics.drugs,talk.politics.misc