HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: steve@aqua.ocunix.on.ca (Steve Cooper)
Newsgroups: can.general
Subject: Re: Television commercials in the shakycam style
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 92 00:15:34 GMT
Organization: The Aquarium, Ottawa, Ontario

landolt@nexus.yorku.ca (Paul Landolt) writes:

> thood@corvus.matrox.com (Thomas Hood) writes:
> >We always go the distance.
> >Right up to the wall.
> >There's nothing half-way about it.
> >[Pause]
> >"Ex" says it all.
> 
> >What do "we" mean by "go the distance"?  Is this a reference to the
> >Brewer's Retail monopoly?   "Right up to the wall" sounds threatening:
> >perhaps we are rounding up Blue-drinkers for the firing squad along the way?
> >And why are we singing a beer theme-song in a back yard with a strange echo?
> 
> >I'm confused.
> Confused? Don't be.
> 
> Ex seems to be selling it self as the blue (ahem) collar beer.  Factory
> workers in the bar, after work or a baseball game (against another shop)
> having a beer together.
> 
> Union. We always go the distance. We work hard, and Ex is our beer.
> 
> That's how I read it.  Very different than the Amstel, geared towards
> the yuppies, Black Label, towards the trendoids, and Molson/Blue Draft, geare
> towards cool people. Coors (+ Light), Canadian (+ Light), and Blue seem to
> directly attack the 18-35 year-old life style market.
> 
> and you thought it was just BEER!! IT'S A WAY OF LIFE, DAMMIT!!!!
> 
> -- 
> J. Paul Landolt - Guest of:         | If it ain't broke, don't fix it...
> York University - Toronto, Canaidia | ...unless you're a consultant  
> +1 416 736 5257                     | ----------------------------------
> InterNet: landolt@nexus.yorku.ca    | My opinions. All mine. So sue me.

Yup.  Marketing and target markets is where it's at.  Guess which beer is 
marketed at the young, fun-loving crowd in Quebec?     50!!

============================================================================
                     steve@aqua.ocunix.on.ca
The Aquarium BBS  (613)736-1481  1200-14400 bps  V.32bis  V.42bis  HST
                      Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
============================================================================
From: sbuckley@fraser.sfu.ca (Stephen Buckley)
Newsgroups: can.general
Subject: Re: Zundel
Date: 30 Aug 92 06:25:56 GMT
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada

labach@acs.ucalgary.ca (Terence Michael Labach) writes:

>In article <skenny.715018264@femto.engr.mun.ca> skenny@pico.engr.mun.ca (Shawn Kenny) writes:

>> In reference to the original posting, I didn't catch the story on the
>> National but from memory Zundel wasn't charged under Canada's "hate law"
>> but something else. The judge noted this in the concluding statement.
>> Wasn't this the difference between the Kiegstra case and Zundel's?
>> Anybody out there with some info on this???... to prevent a foot-in-mouth
>> epidemic?

>He was charged with spreading "false news".  In essence, lying.  I can
>think of some circumstances where lying should be against the law, but
>this isn't one of them.

  what would be such a circumstance?
Newsgroups: can.general
From: stephane@xrtll.uucp (Stephane Deschenes)
Subject: Advertising Was: Television commercials..
Organization: WCOM Public Access Unix - Toronto
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 15:08:16 GMT

In article <1992Aug22.152351.19553@imax.imax.com> dave@imax.imax.com (Dave Martindale) writes:
>>Yikes, says me.  And so should you.  When you see an ad with a 
>>whole-lotta-shakin'-goin'-on, beware.  It's not real.  It's fake.
>>Change the channel and watch a documentary.
>
>Ads are not real.  Ads lie.  When was the last time you saw an ad
>that told the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
>
>(well, there is the occasional public service message that really is
>in the public service, but they're pretty rare).

Of course, all of us advertising agency people lie all the time.  As a
matter of fact, we also practice satanism.  Before I release any ad,
I always sacrifice a virgin or two to Satan.  It makes the advertising 
much more powerful.  It isn't easy to continuously brainwash and
manipulate you people.  It takes a lot of evil powers.

Last week, the artist which we keep chained in our dungeon to airbrush
various sexual symbols (breasts, penises, Satanic symbols, etc) into 
icecubes and other hidden places, escaped.  Of course we had to have
him killed lest he reveal all those secrets which many people suspect
already.

In fact, you should know that the various government and media bodies
which approve television commercials (CRTC, Telecaster committee, CBC,
Liquor Boards, Consumer and Corporate Affairs, Association of Canadian
Advertisers, etc) are all Satan worshippers.  How else 
could they approve all those ads which are full of lies.  So are the lawyers
who also approve the ads.

In fact, aren't you since you watch the ads???


-- 
========================================================
Stephane Deschenes     stephane@xrtll.uucp
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
========================================================
Newsgroups: can.general,can.politics,soc.culture.canada
From: thood@corvus.matrox.com (Thomas Hood)
Newsgroups: can.general
Subject: Re: It has to go in somebody's back yard.
Date: 4 Sep 92 14:26:15 GMT
Organization: Matrox Ltd.

jmorriso@ee.ubc.ca (John Paul Morrison) writes:

>Maybe this cynical, but why should they? If it's private property,
>it's my business what I do with it. If it's public property, people
>in the area should decide what's appropriate use for public land.

It's not cynical at all.  The solution is: if you want people to
accept something they don't want, you must offer them something
they do want in return, such as money.  The province should call
for tenders and build the incinerator in the municipality that
charges the lowest fee.  This fee would part of the cost of the
incinerator -- a cost rightly charged to the provincial government
because the municipality would be bearing the environmental cost for
the good of the province as a whole.

If the bids are all too high ... find a cheaper way to deal with
garbage.

--
Thomas Hood                                                    thood@matrox.com
Montreal
From: "steve hartwell" <steve.hartwell@canrem.com>
Newsgroups: can.general
Subject: zundel
Date: 3 Sep 92 15:20:25 EST
Reply-To: "steve hartwell" <steve.hartwell@canrem.com>
Distribution: can
Organization: Canada Remote Systems





 Name withheld, of inquirer, but the question needs answering in the
 newsgroup.


UG>  Newsgroup: Private mail
UG>    Subject: zundel
UG>
UG>In article <1992Sep1.709.6540@dosgate> you write:
UG>>
UG>> My parents' generation went to War, fought and Died, to stop
UG>> Nazis from 'purifying' the earth, as is going on in the Baltic
UG>> regions right now - where one Canadian Peacekeeper has been
UG>killed, > and several gravely wounded fighting that same type of
UG>Nazism. >
UG>Can you provide more information about this Baltic death?
UG>(Was it in Finland, Estonia, Latvia, or Lithuania?)
UG>Or, do you intend to use Balkan?
UG>(Greece, Macedonia, ex-Yugoslavia?)

 Many thanks for asking me - you are absolutely correct, I goofed.
 Figures. First message I send in the newsgroup, and goof.

 I meant Balkan ex-Yugoslavia.

 Thankyou for bringing that to my attention.
 from       steve.hartwell@canrem.com

---
  ACCESS/MAIL 1.00 #0274  Tagline frequencies are Open....
--
Canada Remote Systems  - Toronto, Ontario/Detroit, MI
World's Largest PCBOARD System - 416-629-7000/629-7044
Newsgroups: can.general
From: labach@acs.ucalgary.ca (Terence Michael Labach)
Subject: Re: Zundel
Originator: labach@acs5.acs.ucalgary.ca
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 15:07:04 GMT
	<LABACH.92Aug28085017@acs5.acs.ucalgary.ca>
	<skenny.715018264@femto.engr.mun.ca>
	<LABACH.92Aug28125532@acs5.acs.ucalgary.ca> <sbuckley.715155956@sfu.ca>
	<LABACH.92Aug30210114@acs5.acs.ucalgary.ca> <sbuckley.715478073@sfu.ca>
Organization: The Bobby Jurasin Fan Club

In article <sbuckley.715478073@sfu.ca> sbuckley@fraser.sfu.ca (Stephen
Buckley) writes: 
> Terence Michael Labach writes:
> >Stephen Buckley writes: 
> >> 
> >> what would be such a circumstance?
> 
> >How about a nuclear breeder reactor owner assuring his employees that
> >plutonium is harmless and that they don't need to waste company money on
> >protective gear?  (Admittedly, far-fetched, but you get the drift...)
> 
> yeah, but i'm concerned that our culture now finds historical truth
> to be less important to be still grouped in the category for which
> lying is wrong.

Lying about historical truth is wrong. (forgive me if I don't explain
why I believe this as it really isn't important to the discussion).
What the Zundel case is concerned with is whether lying in such an event
should be illegal.

Zundel is dangerous and a liar, and we should take every opportunity to
explain why he's wrong and demonstrate that his statements come not from
the historical record but from his attempt to rewrite history.  But let
the government decide what may and may not even be discussed and we have
the framework for dictatorship.

Anyone who says "Oh, the law would never be used to silence dissent" had
better worry about a far-reaching and imprecise law that could be
misused quite easily without breaking the letter of the law.

- terry -
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"It is well known that every bureaucracy has an organic need to doll up
 the facts."
 - Leon Trotsky
Newsgroups: can.general,can.politics,soc.culture.canada
From: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)
Subject: Re: Election sun rising
Originator: clewis@bcarh1d7
Organization: NEVER!
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 19:51:20 GMT

In article <1992Sep2.121150.7314@cl.cam.ac.uk> iaf@cl.cam.ac.uk (Innes Ferguson) writes:
>Like so many other aspects of the political framework in Canada, I'm
>guessing Canada imported the system of choosing election dates from 
>the British. It's sad how British-like (read undemocratic) Canada's
>political institutions are even today (the Senate being the prime example).

"British-like" == "undemocratic"?  I think I'll skip flaming this one.
Other than to point out that more democratic countries follow the British
model than the American.  Italy, Germany, Australia, India etc. are closer
to the British model than the American.  The American model has the dubious
honour of being followed by more less democratic countries...  like Mexico
or farther south.  Like their friends in El Salvador.

Besides, the Senate is being rather drastically changed in a little while.

>The solution, in this case, would be to copy the US: have fixed terms
>of office. That way the debate about whether the PM should act primarily
>in the interests of his/her party rather than in the interests of the people
>(hence the word "democracy" and all that) wouldn't arise.

Of course it would still arise.  The government in power merely has to adjust
their timetables a bit to coincide with the elections.  Or, simply know that
every 4th November is when to break out the goodies - "Read my lips - no
new taxes!".  US presidents do it all the time.

Furthermore, when you get a shmuck, you're stuck with him until the end of the
term.  Unless you manage to impeach him.  Then you get stuck with an
unelected president until the end of the term.  Is that any better?

The British system has the advantage of being able to abort ineffective
(read unable to govern) governments quickly.  The advantage of being able
to call elections when you're at the peak of popularity isn't necessarily
an advantage - as Peterson found out.   A lot can change in the 90 day runup
to an election - as Bush is finding out now.

During the years that Nixon was frantically trying to cover his ass over
Watergate and nothing much else was getting done, Canada, Britain and Germany
each went through two governments.

It's still a crapshoot.  And I prefer the option of early termination...

And besides, with a 15% or thereabouts approval rating of Mulroney, what're
you worried about?
Newsgroups: can.general
From: clamen+@CS.CMU.EDU (Stewart Clamen)
Subject: Re: Zundel
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University
	<1992Aug28.112723.29850@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca>
	<LABACH.92Aug28085017@acs5.acs.ucalgary.ca>
	<skenny.715018264@femto.engr.mun.ca>
	<LABACH.92Aug28125532@acs5.acs.ucalgary.ca>
Reply-To: clamen+@CS.CMU.EDU
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 20:39:28 GMT
X-Posted-From: byron.sp.cs.cmu.edu
X-Posted-Through: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

In article <LABACH.92Aug28125532@acs5.acs.ucalgary.ca> labach@acs.ucalgary.ca (Terence Michael Labach) writes:

   In article <skenny.715018264@femto.engr.mun.ca> skenny@pico.engr.mun.ca (Shawn Kenny) writes:

   > In reference to the original posting, I didn't catch the story on the
   > National but from memory Zundel wasn't charged under Canada's "hate law"
   > but something else. The judge noted this in the concluding statement.
   > Wasn't this the difference between the Kiegstra case and Zundel's?
   > Anybody out there with some info on this???... to prevent a foot-in-mouth
   > epidemic?

   He was charged with spreading "false news".  In essence, lying.  I can
   think of some circumstances where lying should be against the law, but
   this isn't one of them.

One of the people (I think it was an official in the Ontario branch of
the Canadian Jewish Congress) interviewed last night on CBC Radio's AS
IT HAPPENS (available in the USA on many APR affiliates) expect
Ontario to now charge him under the Hate Crime laws, which have been
ruled constitutional.


--
Stewart M. Clamen			Internet:    clamen@cs.cmu.edu
School of Computer Science		UUCP: 	     uunet!"clamen@cs.cmu.edu"
Carnegie Mellon University		Phone: 	     +1 412 268 2145
5000 Forbes Avenue			Fax:	     +1 412 268 5739
Pittsburgh, PA 15213-3891, USA
Organization: Queen's University at Kingston
Date: Friday, 28 Aug 1992 22:42:18 EDT
From: Bob Burge <BURGER@QUCDN.QueensU.CA>
Newsgroups: can.general
Subject: Re: Can an accident occur without someone breaking the law?

Sure.  Especially in Ontario, with no-fault, in a parking lot. *grin*

Bob Burge                                  Internet: burger@qucdn.queensu.ca
Opinion Research Unit - Queen's University - Kingston - ON - Canada - K7L3N6
Newsgroups: can.general
From: klassen@sol.UVic.CA (Melvin Klassen)
Subject: Re: E-Mail addresses of Ontario Government?
Organization: University of Victoria, Victoria, B.C. CANADA
Distribution: can
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 92 00:10:29 GMT

In article <*> remilld@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Jason Remillard) writes:
>
> Does anyone know of E-Mail addresses of Ontario Government personnel.  
> I would like to contact my old boss in Dryden, Ontario...
> Is there a gateway I have to go through??

Ask Gary van Rassel <postmaster@GovOnCa.Gov.On.Ca> for specific help.
Newsgroups: can.general
From: clewis@bcarh1d7.bnr.ca (Chris Lewis)
Subject: Re: Zundel
Organization: Bell Northern Research
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 19:30:43 GMT

In article <12727@hans> hans@Software.Mitel.COM (Hans Johnsen) writes:
>dkmiller@unixg.ubc.ca (Derek K. Miller) writes:
>>Zundel was charged under the "spreading of false news" law, and Keegstra
>>under the "promoting hatred" law. They are different, and the Supreme
>>Court has ruled that the first is too vague and violates freedom of speech
>>provisions of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms;

>I'll just add, in case you think that laws against lying cannot be
>abused, that the law was (I'm fairly sure) written to protect the
>monarchs from damaging rumours. While this may be a "nice" thing
>to do, I think only Dave Yadallee would support a law like that.

'Fraid not.  Neither of these laws are very old.  15 years at most.
And neither of them have ever been used before.  Neither of them would
be applicable to monarchs anyways.  (Do you consider the Queen to
be an "identifiable group"?)

Hell, if they were invented to "protect the monarch", doncha think Britain
would have similar laws?   It's obvious that they don't.
Newsgroups: can.general,soc.culture.canada
From: masonp@physun.physics.mcmaster.ca (Peter Mason)
Subject: Re: Tragedy at concordia and a net-proposal to prevent furthur incidents
Organization: Dept. of Physics & Astronomy, McMaster University
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 13:31:37 GMT


>This is not flame but just fact. Handguns (which were used by Fabrikant
>in the shooting) are not at all "far too easy to get" legally in Canada.
>In fact, Canada has one of the strictest law concerning legal ownership
>of handguns. Check this out for yourself by calling your local police
>and ask for a handgun permit. I could post an outline of the process
>required to obtain a handgun permit if there is enough interest in this 
>group.

Please don't.  Please.
Guns suck.

peace,


Peter

-- 
----------------------------------
Peter Mason
masonp@nukie.physics.mcmaster.ca
Hamilton, Ontario (ack! pthhht!), Canada
Xref: sparky can.general:4212 misc.consumers:15810
From: zlsiida@fs1.mcc.ac.uk (dave budd)
Newsgroups: can.general,misc.consumers
Subject: Re: Pyramidal mail-order scam
Date: 28 Aug 92 09:01:59 GMT
Organization: Manchester Computing Centre

In article <1992Aug27.142737.6730@bcrka451.bnr.ca> janick@bcrkd13.bnr.ca (Janick Bergeron) writes:

>I just received a letter for a pyramidal mail-order scam. It claims to
>be entirely legal (even says to refer to Title 18, Section 1302 of the
>US Postal and Lottery Code) but I'm convinced it is not (and this is
>Canada where the law may be different).

>I have phoned Canada Post but they simply told me to send them a copy
>of the letter and envelopped it was sent in to them and the local
>police.

>It seems that it was send to everyone in the villages in my area (easy
>to look-up address in a phone book and the postal code is the same for
>everyone) and I want to send a letter to the editor of the local
>newspaper to tell people not to fall for it. I'd like to support my
>letter with a reference to the actual law prohibiting these scams.

>Can anyone help me there ?

>The details are simple:

>You send $5 (cash) to 4 different addresses to order a copy of the
>following reports (one per address):

>"How to make $250,000 through multi-level mail order sales"
>"Major corporations and multi-level sales"
>"Sources for the best mailing lists"
>"Evaluating multi-level sales programs"

>Then the usual stuff: put your name in position #1 then shift the other
>names down by one, dropping the name #4. Send copies of the reports you
>have received when people send you their orders.

>Interesting twist: the instructions specifically ask you to keep
>sending more programs until you receive at least 15-20 orders for
>report #1 and 100 for report #2. They want to make sure this thing
>keeps going and garantees returns.

>--
>Janick Bergeron    Bell-Northern Research, Ltd       Ph.: (613) 763-5457
>System Timing   P.O. Box 3511, Station C, Stop 049   Fax: (613) 763-7241
>Verification     Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, K1Y 4H7  email:  janick@bnr.ca 
>library quote; use quote.funny;                  use std.disclaimer.all;

This pyramid/chain is active in the UK as well: I got my invitation to join 
last week.  Why is it bad? Coz the claimed response figures, to make your 
profit, are almost certainly bogus, especially once the chain has been going 
a while and most of the suckers have been taken in; and the product being 
sold (to keep it legal) is totally crap - a few leaflets which basically 
tell you how to get hold of and resell mailing lists and how to set up chain 
letter scams.

+---------------------------------------------------------------------+
|  What should always be remembered about England is that from 1950   |
|  to 1957 one of the most popular acts on RADIO was a VENTRILOQUIST  |
|  Dave Budd, MCC, Oxford Rd, Manchester, England   (44)061-275-6033  |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------+
From: steven@spxtech.qc.ca (Steve Potter)
Newsgroups: can.general
Subject: Re: What are the most dangerous (legal) things to do in traffic?
Date: 3 Sep 92 15:20:58 GMT
Organization: Securiplex Technologies Inc., Montreal, Canada
X-Bytes: 2525

From article <1992Sep2.230521.19263@unixg.ubc.ca>, by buckland@ucs.ubc.ca (Tony Buckland):
>  Here's one that I commented on in a private e-posting, and which
>  I ran into three times today alone.  I want to turn left, into
>  a multi-lane street.  The law requires me (when there aren't
>  special multi-left-turn-lane arrangements) to turn into the
>  leftmost lane.  But it can be almost worth my life to do so if
>  I then intend to change lanes to the right, because somebody
>  turning left behind me is almost inevitably making an illegal
>  turn into a further-right lane, and doing it fast.  Unless I
>  want to be trapped in the left lane, I have to really belt it
>  to stay ahead of him.  It can be safer to break the law myself,
>  and turn into the lane I intend to occupy (or I could be patient
>  and turn left legally at a moderate speed and just hope I'll be
>  able to move right before I miss my next right turn; or I could
>  be devious and make three rights instead of a left).

IMHO, when no "multi-left-turn arrangement" or lane markings for more
than one left lane have been provided; one should always use the left
most lane to approach the junction. One turns into the right most lane,
giving way to traffic from the opposite direction, of course. One must
give way to traffic from the opposite direction whether it is coming
straight through or turning to its right - regardless of which lane it
wants after completing its turn.

Traffic coming from the opposite direction (from in front, prior to
making the turn) _ALWAYS_ has right of way!

People who turn left in front of oncoming traffic are making illegal
and dangerous turns - regardless of which lane they want. Even if
just about everybody does it!

People who do not occupy far left lane when no additional lanes have
been indicated for making a left turn, even if "destination" road has
multiple lanes, are also making illegal and dangerous turns.

Another rule that I have far too often seen broken is "Never enter a
junction or intersection unless your exit is clear!" - People don't want
to get caught behind that red light - even if it means blocking the
junction for everybody else!  :-(

That's my fourpence worth!

Cheers!

-- 
  ///==================================================================\\\
  ||| Steve Potter:         steven%spxtech@CAM.ORG                     |||
  ||| Expertise/Experience: Computer Systems Engineering / Real Ale /  |||
  |||                       Politics in Education in Quebec            |||
Newsgroups: can.general
From: dkmiller@unixg.ubc.ca (Derek K. Miller)
Subject: Re: Zundel
Organization: University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 20:46:52 GMT

In article <skenny.715018264@femto.engr.mun.ca> skenny@pico.engr.mun.ca (Shawn Kenny) writes:
>In reference to the original posting, I didn't catch the story on the
>National but from memory Zundel wasn't charged under Canada's "hate law"
>but something else. The judge noted this in the concluding statement.
>Wasn't this the difference between the Kiegstra case and Zundel's?
>Anybody out there with some info on this???... to prevent a foot-in-mouth
>epidemic?
>
>--
>=================================
>skenny@pico.engr.mun.ca
>St. John's, NF, CANADA
>"Have a touton or do without'n !"

Zundel was charged under the "spreading of false news" law, and Keegstra
under the "promoting hatred" law. They are different, and the Supreme
Court has ruled that the first is too vague and violates freedom of speech
provisions of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms; and that the second is
fine. Absolute freedom of speech does not exist in Canada (nor anywhere
that I can determine), for the hate and pornography laws (not to mention
those on slander and libel) do restrict speech and writing somewhat.

      :=:=> Derek K. Miller                 dkmiller@unixg.ubc.ca
      Researcher, Alma Mater Society        thegrodd@tz.ucs.sfu.ca
      University of British Columbia, Canada

Newsgroups: can.general,can.politics,soc.culture.canada