HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: bj368@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Mike E. Romano)
Subject: The NIMBY and his LULU
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, (USA)
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 92 03:31:39 GMT


LULU dear,  it's been a year,
     since I protested your
     existence.

NIMBY love,  you are a dove,
     and complaints galore
     comprise your love.

But LULU dear, please decline
     to disappear for good,
     'ere I'll pine...
     would prevent
     another hundred letters to the president.

-- 
            Mike Romano     Univ. Calif. Berkeley
From: jym@anableps.berkeley.edu (Jym Dyer)
Newsgroups: talk.environment
Subject: Re: Maoist View of Earth First!
Date: 13 Aug 92 06:08:39 GMT
	<JMC.92Aug8003951@SAIL.Stanford.EDU> <1613bhINN80t@agate.berkeley.edu>
Organization: Hidden
NNTP-Posting-Host: anableps.berkeley.edu
Agenda: Hidden

=-= I've had several people inform me that my list of Top Ten
Answers cheated, by repeating the exhortation that Professor
McCarthy "get a life."  Fair enough.  Here's a replacement
for Answer #5:

 5  Please explain how a movement for social change can hide
    those changes from the society it would change?

=-= I've had the predictable responses, including one from the
Prof. himself, suggesting the ever-present "hidden agenda."  For
the humorless, the clueless, and for the record, Answer #1 was
the serious one:

> 1  It [movements for social change] was a generic term,
>    nothing more, nothing less.

=-= One amusing consequence of this thread is that one partic-
ularly boneheaded individual saw me making fun of the Maoists
for not knowing how to write their own jargon, and decided that
this constituted evidence that environmentalists (i.e., me),
were a bunch of communists and socialists.

=-= I'm beginning to understand why some people act as if
natural resources are limitless:  they have unlimited access
to a resource within themselves.  Too bad that resource is
stupidity . . .
    <_Jym_>
From: harelb@math.cornell.edu (misc.activism.progressive co-moderator)
Newsgroups: talk.environment
Subject: NAFTA: U.S., MEXICO, CANADA REACH NAFTA ACCORD
Date: 13 Aug 92 06:27:01 GMT
Organization: misc.activism.progressive on UseNet ; ACTIV-L@UMCVMB

[From PeaceNet's trade.news via misc.activism.progressive]
 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Topic 141       TRADE.NEWS 8-12-92 
kmander Updates on GATT & NAFTA Negotiations     9:53 am  Aug 12, 1992 
 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

			 TRADE NEWS BULLETIN
		      Wednesday, August 12, 1992

_________________________________________________________ 
NAFTA News Summary 
_________________________________________________________ 
U.S., MEXICO, CANADA REACH NAFTA ACCORD 

The U.S., Mexico and Canada have completed negotiations on the  
creation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).   
According to sources, trade ministers from the three countries  
struck the deal at 1 a.m. today, after 14 months of negotiations. 

In a Rose Garden ceremony this morning, President Bush  
initialed the agreement, saying NAFTA was part of his long term  
plan to improve the U.S. economy. "Level the playing field and  
the American worker can out-think, out-work, and out-produce  
anyone, anywhere," Bush said.  Mexican and Canadian officials  
also attended the ceremony before travelling to their home  
capitals for more news conferences.  

Mexican President Carlos Salinas de Gortari and Canadian Prime  
Minister Brian Mulroney will initial the accord and then it will  
be sent to the legislative bodies of the three countries.  In the  
U.S., 40 industry advisory groups will review the agreement  
before it goes to Congress.  The draft text is not expected to be  
shown to Congress before September 8, and not considered for  
ratification until next spring at the earliest. 

Details of the agreement, which includes some 20,000  
regulations, were not available. 

Source: "Free Trade Pact With Mexico Reached," UPI, August 12,  
1992; Keith Bradsher, "Free Trade Accord for North America Is  
Expected Today," NEW YORK TIMES, August 12, 1992.;  Kenneth  
H. Bacon, "Bush Expected to Announce Trade Treaty," WALL  
STREET JOURNAL, August 12, 1992, p. A2; "White House Says  
NAFTA Pact Likely Wednesday," REUTER, August 11, 1992. 

_________________________________________________________ 
Produced by: 
Kai Mander     
The Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy (IATP) 
1313 Fifth Street SE, Suite #303 
Minneapolis, MN 55414-1546 USA 

Telephone:(612)379-5980 Fax:(612)379-5982  
E-Mail:kmander@igc.org 
_________________________________________________________ 

Xref: sparky talk.environment:3284 talk.politics.misc:40387 alt.politics.clinton:2156
From: sims@possum.den.mmc.com (John Sims)
Newsgroups: talk.environment,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: Gore Calls for a Real Environmental President
Date: 18 Aug 92 16:00:20 GMT
Organization: Martin Marietta Astronautics, Denver

gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman) writes:

>In article <w06ma=+.esprit@netcom.com> esprit@netcom.com (Alan F. Perry) writes:
>>OK, let me explain a little bit about how things work in this country.
>>
>>Al Gore is a U.S. Senator representing the state of Tennessee.  As such,
>>he has NO control over what goes on in Tennesee.  A U.S. Senator can only
>>pass laws for the Federal government.

>Perhaps you are not aware that TVA is a *Federal* project.

>Gary

Oh, Thank you, Thank you, Thank you!!!!!!  I wasn't aware of such facts.
Now, let me get this straight.  As a Senator representing his state,
Prince Albert has absolutely NO influence on matters in his home state.
Did I get that right?  Jeepers, why do most people rely on their
senators and representatives to get things done in their home state?  

Now, so "A U.S. Senator can only pass laws for the Federal Government",
and as you so aptly pointed out, TVA is a *Federal* project.  So Al is
then equally unable to do anything there, either?  Gosh, I didn't
realize the Senate was such an impotent organization.  So Al can't
affect things back in his "home" state, and he can't work at the
*Federal* level, that's the rationale for why we should elect him to be
"a heartbeat away from the presidency?"  

In the meantime, the forests in my home area continue to die.....

John
-- 
John Sims    sims@pogo.den.mmc.com
From: Ecology Center Fund <ecologycntr@igc.org>
Newsgroups: talk.environment
Date: 13 Aug 92 08:58 PDT
Subject: Re: Maoist View of Earth First! (wa
Nf-ID: #R:JMC.92Aug8003951@sail.stanford.e:1740949070:cdp:1483100112:000:989
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!ecologycntr    Aug 13 08:58:00 1992


John;

I don't know if this will set your mind at ease or not, but:

My own environmentalist strategy includes the abolition of the
capitalist economic system.  I include so-called "soviet
communism" as a subset of the set "capitalism".  The abolition of
private ownership of land is an essential plank in my eco
platform.  (I will accept an amendment, however, allowing
ownership of land in parcels less than 200 acres.)  The abolition
of money and of centralized social planning are another two essential
tenets of my philosophy.

However, your assertion that these kinds of social goals are an
endemic hidden agenda within the environmental movement is sadly
inaccurate. Too much of the environmentalist spectrum of thought
fails to make the connection between environmental destruction and
the essentially colonialistic nature of most current human
societies.  You'd be surprised at how much closer most
environmentalists are to your way of thinking than to mine.

Feel better?

Chris

Xref: sparky talk.environment:3283 talk.politics.misc:40329 alt.politics.clinton:2132
From: gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman)
Newsgroups: talk.environment,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: Gore Calls for a Real Environmental President
Date: 17 Aug 92 16:48:57 GMT
Reply-To: gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Gannett Technologies Group

In article <w06ma=+.esprit@netcom.com> esprit@netcom.com (Alan F. Perry) writes:
>In article <1992Aug14.192539.19672@den.mmc.com> sims@possum.den.mmc.com (John Sims) writes:
>>
>>Not too surprising, though.  I grew up in the Tennessee valley area.
>>The TVA runs a coal-fired electricity generating plant on the river,
>>about 10 miles from my mom's house.  The environment hasn't fared very
>>well, with lots of the forest being damaged by SO2, ash, etc.  Uncle
>>Albert doesn't seem to care enough about the environment to clean up
>>his own back yard, especially when TVA is one of the larger employers
>>in the area.
>
>OK, let me explain a little bit about how things work in this country.
>
>Al Gore is a U.S. Senator representing the state of Tennessee.  As such,
>he has NO control over what goes on in Tennesee.  A U.S. Senator can only
>pass laws for the Federal government.

Perhaps you are not aware that TVA is a *Federal* project.

Gary
From: jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (John McCarthy)
Subject: Re: Population Growth and the Bet that Paul Ehrlich Lost
Reply-To: jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University
	<JMC.92Aug20232000@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
	<1992Aug21.220646.26704@vexcel.com>
Date: 21 Aug 92 16:19:00

I'm impressed by Simon's boldness as well as by the cowardice of the
doomsayers.  Simon had to stick his neck out very far to get a bet.

--
John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305
*
He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.

Newsgroups: talk.environment,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton
From: crisp@netcom.com (Richard Crisp)
Newsgroups: talk.environment,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: Gore Calls for a Real Environmental President
Date: 14 Aug 92 22:11:04 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)

In article <1992Aug14.192539.19672@den.mmc.com> sims@possum.den.mmc.com (John Sims) writes:
>In article <-b3marn.crisp@netcom.com> crisp@netcom.com (Richard Crisp) writes:
>>Now this is very interesting. Here we have the VP candidate telling
>>us we need an environmentally conscious president. I find it very
>>ironic that Bill Clinton's home state, Arkansas, has rivers polluted
>>with chicken feces and yet Bill is tooling around on private jets
>>owned by the company doing the polluting! So the Republicans are 
>>protecting the polluters instead of the people? Hogwash!
>>
>>This Gore guy sure is good at exposing the fact that his boss-hopeful
>>is talking out of both corners of his mouth!
>
>Not too surprising, though.  I grew up in the Tennessee valley area.
>The TVA runs a coal-fired electricity generating plant on the river,
>about 10 miles from my mom's house.  The environment hasn't fared very
>well, with lots of the forest being damaged by SO2, ash, etc.  Uncle
>Albert doesn't seem to care enough about the environment to clean up
>his own back yard, especially when TVA is one of the larger employers
>in the area.
>
>John
>-- 
>John Sims    sims@pogo.den.mmc.com

It is fascinating how the truth eventually comes out. If a candidate
sounds too good to be true (like Clinton), he probably is!

-- 
Richard Crisp           Cupertino, Ca.           crisp@netcom.com
(415) 903-3832 wk "I accelerate for Liberals"  (408) 253 4541 fax

While his VP wannabe is calling out for an "Environmental President",
Arkansas Governor Bill Clinton's home state's rivers are contaminated
with chicken feces that came from the company that has time and again
ferried him around in their private jets. Gore claims that Bush and the
Republicans protect the polluters and not the people, yet his boss to be
is the one guilty of the very sin he despises. Keep up the good work, Al!
Newsgroups: talk.environment,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton
From: dean@vexcel.com (dean alaska)
Subject: Re: Gore Calls for a Real Environmental President
Organization: VEXCEL Corporation, Boulder, CO
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 18:18:04 GMT

In article <w06ma=+.esprit@netcom.com> esprit@netcom.com (Alan F. Perry) writes:
>In article <1992Aug14.192539.19672@den.mmc.com> sims@possum.den.mmc.com (John Sims) writes:
>>In article <-b3marn.crisp@netcom.com> crisp@netcom.com (Richard Crisp) writes:
>>>In article <1992Aug11.031138.13065@samba.oit.unc.edu> Nigel.Allen@bbs.oit.unc.edu (Nigel Allen) writes:
>>>>Press release from the Clinton/Gore Campaign.
>>>>
>>>> Gore Calls for a Real Environmental President 
>>>> To: National Desk, Political and Environment Writer 
>>>> 
>>>>   LITTLE ROCK, Ark., Aug. 7 /U.S. Newswire/ -- Following is a 
>>>>statement of Sen. Al Gore: 
>>>> 

	[2 paragraphs deleted}

>>>>   Ironically, the Japanese are saying that the fastest growing 
>>>>market in the history of world business is the market for the new 
>>>>products, processes, and technologies that protect the environment 
>>>>and encourage economic progress.  We can take advantage of that 
>>>>opportunity or we can face a future polluted by the Bush-Quayle 
>>>>administration's short-sighted self interest in protecting the 
>>>>polluters instead of the American people. 
>>>

This post has had various comments about Clintons poor environmental
record and various aspects about Gore's book.  Does anyone have a
comment about the paragraph that I retained above?  Any political
speech by _any_ politician is going to have fluff in it, but the
content of this paragraph is important.  It leads to the idea that
environmentalism and jobs are not competing concerns, but that they
can work together.  The Bush/Quayle team doesn't seem to think so.

-- 

		dingo in boulder	(dean@vexcel.com)
From: harelb@math.cornell.edu (misc.activism.progressive co-moderator)
Newsgroups: talk.environment
Subject: NAFTA: LAWMAKERS, LABOR, ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS RIP NAFTA
Date: 13 Aug 92 06:28:19 GMT
Organization: misc.activism.progressive on UseNet ; ACTIV-L@UMCVMB

[From PeaceNet's trade.news via misc.activism.progressive]
 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Topic 141       TRADE.NEWS 8-12-92 
kmander Updates on GATT & NAFTA Negotiations     9:53 am  Aug 12, 1992 
 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

			 TRADE NEWS BULLETIN
		      Wednesday, August 12, 1992

_________________________________________________________ 
LAWMAKERS, LABOR, ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS RIP NAFTA 

As word spread that a NAFTA deal was imminent, U.S.  
lawmakers and labor, consumer safety and environmental  
groups criticized the free trade treaty.   

Senator Max Baucus (D-Montana) said the agreement should be  
reworked to strengthen "inadequate" environmental and labor  
safeguards.  Citizens' groups criticized the secrecy of the  
negotiations and asked the Bush Administration to release the  
NAFTA text for closer scrutiny.  "The environmental and health  
impacts could be enormous.  We need the text to judge whether  
it meets the standards we have communicated to the  
Administration and Congress on these issues," said John Audley,  
trade analyst with the Sierra Club. 

Environmental Protection Agency Administrator William Reilly  
denied that NAFTA would endanger the environment, arguing  
that a failure to implement a treaty could be the  
"environmental mistake of the decade."  Bush Administration  
officials contend the agreement includes clauses to help ensure  
industrial development without damaging the environment. 

Source: Michelle Mittelstadt, "Free Trade," AP, August 12, 1992;  
"NAFTA Announced Behind Secrecy Veil, Citizens' Groups  
Challenge Bush to  Release Text," CITIZENS' TRADE WATCH  
NEWS RELEASE, August 12, 1992; "Agreement Includes  
Environmental Clause," UPI, August 11, 1992. 

_________________________________________________________ 
Produced by: 
Kai Mander     
The Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy (IATP) 
1313 Fifth Street SE, Suite #303 
Minneapolis, MN 55414-1546 USA 

Telephone:(612)379-5980 Fax:(612)379-5982  
E-Mail:kmander@igc.org 
_________________________________________________________
From: Steve.Hayes@p0.f20.n7101.z5.fidonet.org (Steve Hayes)
Newsgroups: talk.environment
Subject: Re: Cost of transit systems vs highways
Date: 16 Aug 92 21:10:00 GMT
Organization: FidoNet node 5:7101/20.0 - Unisa Editorial, Pretoria

On 08-15-92  13:54 M00209@MBVM.Mitre.Org said to All

 M0> That has been the universal experience in Toronto, from the opening of
 M0> the original Yonge Street Subway through every extension since.  When
 M0> the Subway started running, pedestrian traffic, local business and land
 M0> values have always increased.  The development around Eglinton when the
 M0> original line opened was a phenomenon that wasn't anticipated by the
 M0> planners, but has since been repeated with every new addition to the
 M0> system. 

Something similar happened in Durban, or the reverse. The city council wanted to build a big road through the main station, and the railways wanted a through running station instead of a dead end one. So they closed the main station and moved it a couple of miles out of the centre of town, to an area where, under the apartheid laws, a lot of poor people who weren't white had been expropriated for a pittance and now the government was making a killing selling the land to people for offices and factories.

People got the original station building preserved, which defeated the plan for the road, which now does a detour round it. But because the station is closed, more people come to town by car, so the road doesn't solve the traffic problem either.

All in all the worst of all worlds.

 
... I'm NOT fat - I'm circumferentially challenged!

--  
INTERNET: Steve.Hayes@p0.f20.n7101.z5.fidonet.org
via:  THE CATALYST BBS in Port Elizabeth, South Africa.
       (catpe.alt.za)   +27-41-34-1122 HST or +27-41-34-2859, V32bis & HST.
Newsgroups: talk.environment,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton
From: gerard@caliban.soest.hawaii.edu (Gerard Fryer)
Newsgroups: talk.environment,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: Gore Calls for a Real Environmental President
Date: 18 Aug 92 02:12:00 GMT
Organization: Scum Of the Earth and Senile Tenured

In article <+29m_yp.crisp@netcom.com>, crisp@netcom.com (Richard Crisp) writes:
|> 
|> Of course the Japanese have probably the worst environmental 
|> record of the indstrialized nations: they hunt whales, overfish
|> the oceans, completely wipe out hardwood forests, dump poisonous
|> junk in their rivers etc. Environmentally they are as bad as they
|> come.
|> 

Absolutely true.  Japanese big business wouldn't turn environmentalist
unless there was a long-term profit in it for them.  With the U.S.
apparently uninterested in the technology of environmental cleanup, the
Japanese and the Germans think they can make a killing.  They appear to
be right.
-- 
Gerard Fryer  (g.fryer@soest.hawaii.edu)
School of Ocean & Earth Science & Technology
University of Hawaii at Manoa
Xref: sparky talk.environment:3265 wi.general:152 milw.general:272
From: trimper@edsi.plexus.COM (Greg Trimper)
Newsgroups: talk.environment,wi.general,milw.general
Subject: Re: Recycling styrofoam?
Date: 15 Aug 92 02:29:22 GMT
Article-I.D.: edsi.1992Aug15.022922.16486
Distribution: wi
Organization: Enterprise Data Systems Incorporated, Appleton WI

dave@opus.csd.uwm.edu (Dave Rasmussen) writes:

>No, I plan to reuse the peanuts. I was more interested in what to do
>with injection molded styrofoam. 

Reuse it as well.  If you cant find something that fits neatly in it,
break it, carve it with a knife, etc.

Greg Trimper   trimper@edsi.plexus.com
From: kaminsky-david@CS.YALE.EDU (David Kaminsky)
Subject: Air Quality List
Organization: Yale University Computer Science Dept., New Haven, CT 06520-2158
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 17:39:43 GMT

	Can someone please send me a list (or reference to one) of
the cities in the US ranked by the air quality?  Please send
responses to kaminsky@cs.yale.edu.


Thanks,
David


Newsgroups: talk.environment
From: bj368@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Mike E. Romano)
Subject: Re: Recycling window glass
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, (USA)
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 92 22:47:01 GMT


I used to work in a recycling operation a few years ago.
We were told that window glass usually contained lead and therefore
was not suitable to recycling with the glass bottles.
-- 
            Mike Romano     Univ. Calif. Berkeley
Xref: sparky talk.environment:3267 misc.legal:16045 alt.activism:14859
From: Nigel.Allen@bbs.oit.unc.edu (Nigel Allen)
Newsgroups: talk.environment,misc.legal,de.general,del.general,alt.activism
Subject: NRDC Wins Texaco Water Pollution Case; $1.7 Million Penalty
Date: 15 Aug 92 16:50:29 GMT
Organization: Echo Beach

Here is a press release from the Natural Resources Defense Council.
 
 NRDC Wins Texaco Water Pollution Case; $1.7 Million Penalty is One
of Top Citizen Suits Ever
 To: National Desk, Environmental Writer
 Contact: Patrick Stern, 212-727-2700,
          Kit Kennedy, 508-548-2882, or
          Karen O'Malley 212-727-2700, of the
          Natural Resources Defense Council, or
          Grace Pierce of the Delaware Audubon Society, 302-674-5568

   DELAWARE CITY, Del., Aug. 13 /U.S. Newswire/ -- The Natural
Resources Defense Council and Delaware Audubon Society today won a
ruling from a federal court against Texaco Refining and Marketing
Inc. (TRMI) for continuous pollution of the Delaware River.
  The judge found that TRMI had committed hundreds of violations
under the Clean Water Act, and ordered Texaco to pay a $1.68 million
penalty to the U.S. Treasury.  The judge also ordered Texaco to
comply with the water pollution laws, and to improve its water
pollution investigation practices.
   "The judge's decision is a stunning affirmation of the importance
of citizen's suits in enforcing the Clean Water Act against big
corporate polluters," said Kit Kennedy, NRDC senior project attorney.
"Despite the fact that TRMI committed hundreds of violations over a
nine-year period, they were allowed to keep polluting without paying
a penny in fines until NRDC and Audubon won this decision."
   The suit, originally filed in 1988, accused TRMI's oil refinery of
polluting the Delaware River since 1983.  The illegal pollution
discharges included toxic pollutants such as phenol and ammonia.
Some of the violations were as much as 2000 percent over the legal
limit.
   The $1.68 million penalty is one of the largest levied ever in a
citizen's enforcement suit under the Clean Water Act against a
corporate polluter.  TRMI must now comply with the water pollution
laws or face court sanctions.
   Judge Jane Roth, of the U.S. District Court for the District of
Delaware, said in the ruling that TRMI's internal investigation
procedures were "inconsistent and less than thorough" when assessing
the source of water pollution problems.  She found that Texaco relied
on "supposition" rather than thorough investigations.  Roth found
that a court order enjoining TRMI from further violations was
necessary to vindicate the public interest.
 -30-

--
   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:  bbs.oit.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80
From: bj368@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Mike E. Romano)
Newsgroups: talk.environment
Subject: The NIMBY and his LULU
Date: 19 Aug 92 02:14:34 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, (USA)


LULU dear, it's been a year
     since I protested your
     existence.
NIMBY love, you are a dove,
     and complaints galore
     comprise your love.
But LULU dear, please decline
     to disappear for good
     'ere I'll pine...
Since that event
     woul prevent
     another hundred letters to the president.

NIMBY = not in my backyard'er    LULU = locally unwanted land use
-- 
            Mike Romano     Univ. Calif. Berkeley