HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: nelson_p@apollo.hp.com (Peter Nelson)
Subject: Re: High costs of college education
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 12:50:59 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Corporation, Chelmsford, MA

In article <1992Oct1.202819.5067@raven.alaska.edu> fsmgs@camelot.acf-lab.alaska.edu (Michael Schmahl [Black-Robe Mage]) writes:
>>From the University of Alaska, Fairbanks Campus
>
>        We are asking you to participate in a nationwide peaceful
>demonstration against the high costs of college education.

  But note that this is nearly the same as demonstrating FOR more
  tax funding for higher education.    I hope the students who are
  doing this have done the numbers and have some specific suggestions
  about how this should be paid for.


---peter
From: sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth)
Subject: Re: **** ANOTHER COVER-UP - Please read this... ****
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 02:24:14 GMT

Well, if our President is unprincipled, then Hussein is totally evil (sent the
heads of executed people to their families!!).

Simon

Newsgroups: alt.activism
From: dave@gergo.tamu.edu (Dave Martin)
Subject: Re: **** ANOTHER COVER-UP - Please read this... ****
Followup-To: alt.activism
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: Geochemical & Environmental Research Group, Texas A&M University
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 13:17:00 GMT

In article <80753@ut-emx.uucp>, wolfone@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Patrick Chester) writes...
}Chemical warfare is very different from conventional warfare. One major 
}difference is that chemical warfare is banned under the Geneva Convention
}of 1925(date?). [...]

Ahem. In my opinion, it doesn't matter what the Geneva Convention bans with
regards to warfare or treatment of prisoners. This is war, after all. There
are no rules.

}As to your talk about civility in warfare. Civility has little to do with  
}warfare. You must do what is necessary to win, but only what is necessary
}to your strategic needs. If you must fight to win, then fight. If you must
}retreat to survive and later win, then RLAMF. Sympathy *or* anger towards
}your enemy can ruin your chances of victory. Emotion should have little to do
}with your war strategy. Of course, emotion has a lot to do with other aspects
}of warfare such as commanding soldiers but I don't have time to write a book.
}I recommend you study Sun Tzu's _The_Art_of_War_ for further studies. Don't
}be afraid, you won't be "contaminated" by militarism. With your attitude 
}towards war, you have little to fear in that respect. Just remember the
}quote from B.H. Liddell Hart: "If first you want peace, then understand war."

Don't assume that one does not understand something simply because their
opinions on the topic differ from your own. For some things, familiarity
does not breed acceptance.

}By the way, would you stop calling war a game? I know it's probably a tool  
}for propaganda purposes since it makes those who currently support a war 
}look cavalier towards the violence...or tries to. It doesn't help you very
}much and makes YOU look cavalier to war IMHO. War is not a game. Nor should
}it ever be thought as such. 

Ah, but it *is* a game. Look at your own remark that chemical warfare is
banned by the Geneva Convention. War does not have rules -- games have
rules. Games are played by those who sit safely out of range, moving their
pawns across the board. I did not claim that war was a fun game (for the
pieces) or that it was a very good game, or that it should be thought of
as such. But it is a game, and a deadly one at that. 

 -                                                                     -
 - Dave Martin - Geochemical & Environmental Research Group, Texas A&M - 
 - DAVE@GERGA[GERGO,GERGI].TAMU.EDU - BROOKS@TAMVXOCN.BITNET - AOL:DBM -
 -                                                                     -
Newsgroups: alt.activism
From: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Subject: Re: **** ANOTHER COVER-UP - Please read this... ****
Reply-To: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 02:45:22 GMT

In article <1992Oct2.020442.1944@ringer.cs.utsa.edu> sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth) writes:
>
>Those "human beings" massacred civilians in Kuwait.  The invasion was
>unprovoked.  When I read about what the Iraqi troops were doing to the
>civilian population, my sympathies wore thin quickly.

One may wonder where your sympathies where when the Iraqi Army
massacred the Kurds.  One certainly wonders where Bush's sympathies
were.

>
>You know, we could have used nuclear weapons--the 42 day war would have
>been a 30-minute war, and the Iraqis killed wouldn't have suffered-1 million
>degree heat does that.  But our policy wouldn't have allowed that--it's amazing
>the things our technology with allow us to do that our policy prohibits us
>from carrying out.

Wow.  The occassion burst of Usenet silliness in that last paragraph.


--
"Sounds interesting....  Sounds interesting...."
				-- Homer Simpson
From: atfurman@cup.portal.com (A T Furman)
Newsgroups: alt.activism
Subject: Re: FREE-ENERGY Technologies
Date: Sun,  4 Oct 92 23:30:21 PDT
Organization: The Portal System (TM)

In article <1992Sep29.180411.1409@cnsvax.uwec.edu> mcelwre@cnsvax.uwec.edu writ
es:

)               ...A fourth type of Free-Energy device is the "McClintock 
)          AIR MOTOR" (U.S. Patent #2,982,261), ...

Gad.  If Mr. McElwaine could somehow attach this device to his head, he
could become an energy utility...

)               The government should SUBSIDIZE research and development 
)          by Inventors and universities, subsidize private production 
)          (until the producers can make it on their own), and subsidize 
)          consumption by low-income consumers of Free-Energy hardware...
)          is the People that government should serve, rather than the 
)          big corporation$ and bank$. 

While all of you are laughing your asses off at this, I urge you to
meditate on how our Federal Reserve system is to economics what Mr
McElwaine's proposal is to physics.  A government bureaucracy (yeah, I
know, the "populists" claim the Fed is actually owned by the Dirty Jew
Bankers) prints money to buy Treasury securities.  Before the ink has
had a chance to dry, Big Brother spends this new money on His favorite
bootlickers ("investments in America's future").

A couple hundred years ago, if you were to harangue some random person
about how the State could create wealth *ex nihlo* by printing pieces of
paper with "legal tender" on them, you would get much the same reaction
that Mr McElwaine gets today.  Centuries of *economic populist* agitation
against the U$URER$ WHO EXPLOIT THE HONEST, HARDWORKING FARMERS,
INDUSTRIALISTS, AND FARMERS through the oppression of the GOLD $TANDARD,
to the point of CRUCIFYING THE PEOPLE ON A CRO$$ OF GOLD, etc. etc.,
have led to the outright armed robbery (in 1934) of Americans' gold
bullion, and a pure fiat paper currency (since 1971), e.g. the economic
equivalent of the famous Deutsche Reichsmark of 1923.

In fact, I couldn't come up with a more vicious parody of economic
populism than the "thermodynamic populism" harangue that Mr McElwaine has
offered us.  And don't forget, the Fed, the Treasury Department, and 
who knows how many other bureaucracies have research staffs working
on "maintaining aggregate demand" and other economic "free energy"
interventions.


Bibliography
------------

_The Mystery of Banking_ by Murray Rothbard (out of print; look in libraries)

_The Great Reckoning_ by Davidson and Rees-Mogg (check bigger bookstores)


    Alan T. Furman         | VOTE LIBERTARIAN!!  Marrou/Lord in 92!!
---------------------------+----------------------------------------
  atfurman@cup.portal.com  |   (800)682-1776 for more information
Xref: sparky alt.activism:17176 alt.desert-storm:1890 alt.politics.clinton:8491
From: vsg001@acad.drake.edu
Newsgroups: alt.activism,alt.desert-storm,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: **** ANOTHER COVER-UP - Please read this... ****
Date: 6 Oct 92 01:18:57 GMT
Organization: Drake University, Des Moines, Iowa, USA

In article <1992Oct3.190747.6478@news.columbia.edu>, egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy) writes:
> In article <14083.2acc9ef4@ohstpy.mps.ohio-state.edu> vancleef@ohstpy.mps.ohio-state.edu writes:
>>
>>Republiclone slime. Eat shit and die.
> 
> There, there.  We should at least try to maintain a reasonable
> amount of civility in the discussion, something the Young Republicans
> can't manage.  (Michael Lewis, in the New Republic sometime last month,
> painted this, uh, unfriendly portrait of the YR in Houston.)

That's strange... I thought that Garrett was a Democrat. And he seems to be one
of the very few people who loses his temper on a regular basis, so, your
arguement that civility is something that [Young](you mean College) Republicans
can't handle is rather baseless, isn't it? 
  
> "Sounds interesting....  Sounds interesting...."

Indeed.
Disclaimers.Disclaimers.
		--VSG001@acad.drake.edu (Vince Goddard-ARCH Conservative)
Newsgroups: alt.activism,talk.politics.misc,talk.environment
From: pswanson@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Paul Swanson)
Subject: Re: The Decline of America: Energy Policy (II)
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1992 12:28:56 GMT

In article <1992Sep23.190713.4317@desire.wright.edu> demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man) writes:
>
[stuff deleted to get to the point]
>
>  Oil doesn't change composition based on where it comes from!
>
My goodness, what an ignorant statement.  Oil most certainly does change
composition based on where it comes from.  If you'll notice, the oil
market is based on 'light, sweet crude' or 'North Sea Brent'.  A little
deduction will lead one to the conclusion that there must be a
difference in composition or crude oil would be sold simply as 'crude
oil'.

Paul.
Newsgroups: alt.activism,alt.desert-storm,alt.politics.clinton
From: sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth)
Subject: Re: **** ANOTHER COVER-UP - Please read this... ****
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 02:08:39 GMT


Think of the trench warfare of World War I--soldiers fought sometimes within
sight of each other, and in some fighting were bayoneting each other to death,
not to mention the use of chlorine and mustard gas which kills very slowly.

Desert Storm in no way approached this.

Simon

Xref: sparky alt.activism:16932 alt.desert-storm:1814 alt.politics.clinton:7809
Newsgroups: alt.activism,alt.desert-storm,alt.politics.clinton
From: mfriedma@uucp (Michael Friedman)
Subject: Re: **** ANOTHER COVER-UP - Please read this... ****
Organization: Oracle Corporation
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 23:34:41 GMT
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by an unauthenticated user
              at Oracle Corporation.  The opinions expressed are those
              of the user and not necessarily those of Oracle.

In article <1992Sep29.230412.14917@oracle.us.oracle.com> rchilder@us.oracle.com (Richard Childers) writes:
>mfriedma@uucp (Michael Friedman) writes:

>>>Did we really _need_ to bury _anyone_ ?

>>>I suspect that we could have waited them out, no ?

>>Richard, maybe you weren't reading the papers when this all happened.

>Maybe I didn't swallow what I was given to consume.

>>Mind explaining why bombing would have been any more humane than the
>>attack that we did launch?

>What gives you the idea that it is ?

>>Or are you suggesting that we should have stopped shooting at them
>>altogether?  In that case they could have sat there for the next year.

>Where would they go ?

Nowhere.  That was my point.  I which case we would not ahve freed
Kuwait.

Your point, therefore, seems to be that we should not have freed
Kuwait becasue we had to kill too may Iraqi soldiers to do it.  

Is that correct?
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am not an official Oracle spokesman.  I speak for myself and no one else.
Newsgroups: alt.activism,alt.politics.clinton
From: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Subject: Re: **** ANOTHER COVER-UP - Please read this... ****
Reply-To: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 22:16:41 GMT

In article <1992Oct2.135129.1@ulkyvx.louisville.edu> cdpert01@ulkyvx.louisville.edu writes:
>In article <1992Oct2.153309.5990@news.columbia.edu>, egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy) writes:
>> 
>> We did not actively support the Soviet regime, at least in the
>> pre-Yeltsin days.  This wasn't quite the same with Iraq.
>> 
>     You may change your opinion on our (the U.S.) relationship with
>previous Soviet regimes after reading the three volumes of
>_Western_Technology_and_Soviet_Economic_Development_ by
>Antony C. Sutton.  Sutton claims that Western governments and 
>firms have been responsible for the bulk of the technical "progress"
>made in the Soviet Union from 1917 to 1970 (the books were written
>in 1973) -- including the transfer of military technology against
>the wishes of the Department of Defense.

Please clarify.  Do you have any details?



--
"Sounds interesting....  Sounds interesting...."
				-- Homer Simpson
Newsgroups: alt.activism
From: adamsr@netcom.com (Rick Adams)
Subject: Re: PAT Bill - an assault on our rights?
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 92 17:45:19 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Keywords: Legislation, education, rights, senate

Thus spake hines@socrates.ucsf.edu (Wade Hines): 

>adamsr@netcom.com (Rick Adams) writes:
>> 
>some deletions ...
>
>>families where they were forced to get rid of guns in order to get their 
>>children back. What will happen if these social workers get into every 
>>home where there are children? As we know, 1/2 of all households have a 
>>firearm. Parents will be forced to choose between their guns and their 
>>children!
>
>IS THIS A DIFFICULT CHOICE???  (HINT IF YOU ARE HAVING TROUBLE
>CHOOSING, YOUR CHILDREN ***ARE*** AT GREAT RISK) :| (I'M NOT 
>SMILING)
>
	I didn't write the above line, it was part of the quoted material.
Despite this, I will respond as though I =did= write it:

	It =would= be a difficult choice. Not because I'm a gun advocate - I
don't even own a firearm, nor do I feel any personal need to own one. The
choice, however, would be between relinquishing my Constitutional rights or
my Parental ones - and =that= is a totally different matter!

	Given =that= choice, if you AREN'T having trouble choosing, your
FREEDOM is at great risk!

	And I'm not smiling either.

-- 

                       -=*=- -=*=- -=*=- -=*=- -=*=-
            The only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised
      over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to
      prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is
      not a sufficient warrant.                         John Stuart Mill
                       -=*=- -=*=- -=*=- -=*=- -=*=-
          Rick Adams -=*=- adamsr@ais.org -=*=- adamsr@norwich.bitnet
Xref: sparky alt.activism:16907 alt.politics.clinton:7730 alt.desert-storm:1808
From: fcrary@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Frank Crary)
Newsgroups: alt.activism
Subject: Re: Who's "free-er"? Intrnat'l response wanted!
Date: 27 Sep 92 17:48:54 GMT
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder

In article <6777@transfer.stratus.com> cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares) writes:
>No, it isn't, as decided in Perpich v. Department of Defense. 110 S.Ct. 2418 
>(1990).  Perpich (governor of Minnesota) attempted to refuse the federalization
>of "his" Guard to participate in Desert Storm.  He lost.  This pretty much
>puts to bed the question of whether the National Guard qualifies as a "state
>militia."

Exactly correct, except for one detail: It wasn't Desert Storm, but one
of Reagan's National Guard "training exercises" in Honduras.

                                                      Frank Crary
                                                      CU Boulder
Xref: sparky alt.activism:16900 talk.politics.misc:48496 misc.headlines:6436
From: drm@esl.com (Don McGregor )
Newsgroups: alt.activism,talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines
Subject: Re: taxes. (Was: Re: A Simple Thought Experiment)
Date: 29 Sep 92 19:17:26 GMT
Reply-To: drm@esl.com
Followup-To: alt.activism
Distribution: na

In article <1992Sep29.155354.13307@midway.uchicago.edu>  
thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Citecheck Hell) writes:
Had a bad experience in the summer job?

[True enough, but whether it's 52% or 36%, don't you think it's FAR too  
much? Do you really get 1/2 or 1/3 of your desires from the government?] 
>
>I've probably gotten more.Government paid for the first twelve years of
>my education, greatly subsidized the two universities I've went to since,

The Federal budget is over $1 trillion, and state and local budgets are in  
addition to that.  They can easily provide for a reasonable national  
defense, federal courts, roads, and a voucher for education within that  
limit.  Probably even a social safety net, though not one that is  
inclusive of the middle class.  Just the poor.

They might have to sacrifice a  few things like farm price supports and  
the national helium reserve, but c'est la vie.  I doubt that we'd return  
to a state of nature if the government cut back to approximately the level  
of intervention in society that existed in 1980, 1970, or even 1960  
(though some might dispute the last date).

--
Don McGregor|"Government isn't a philosophical concept,it's a utility, a
drm@esl.com |service industry--a way to get roads built and Iraqis killed"
Newsgroups: alt.activism
From: aq817@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Steve Crocker)
Newsgroups: alt.activism
Subject: Re: NLNS: ANTI-RACIST SKINHEADS
Date: 6 Oct 92 06:53:16 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


Chip, I have still not seen any convincing evidence that it was
the NCLC rather than the SWP who initiated the violence in operation
mop-up. And LaRouche and his people have NEVER, to my knowledge
claimed the RIGHT 
to beat people up over ideological differences, which is what I take
the "anti-racist skins" to be saying.
-Steve
From: rdc30@nmrdc1.nmrdc.nnmc.navy.mil (Code-03 LCDR Michael E. Dobson)
Newsgroups: alt.activism,alt.job.gooley,misc.jobs.offered,rec.pets
Subject: Re: it's too early
Keywords: morning
Date: 1 Oct 92 12:45:03 GMT
Organization: Naval Medical Research & Development Command

In article <1992Sep29.135316.9654@fcom.cc.utah.edu> big daddy hate box writes:
>so...i get up at six in the damned morning, way too early for any sane grad 
>student. there is a conference today up at one of the ski resorts to start off 
>the new year and get the program rolling for the first year students. swell. i 
>had to get up so early because i needed to develop some film of an experiment i 
>did yesterday. so far so good except that the film looks like crap. the 
>background is so high i don't know if i will be able to get anything useful out 
>of this experiment. damn, i love science. hope you all get a better start than 
>i did. (disgusting play for pity) ciao etc.
>

Well gee patrick, but you've really got to pay more attention to the
washing steps and not spend so much time in t.b.  Maybe a trip into
bionet.molbio.methds-reagnts is in order?  Maybe you should stop sniffing
the phenol from your mini-preps and keep your probes further from your
brain?

Mike "my probes are 2.34 X 10^6 dpm/picomole" Dobson
and my ring badge is always negative too.
Xref: sparky alt.activism:17205 alt.desert-storm:1897 alt.politics.clinton:8577
From: vsg001@acad.drake.edu
Newsgroups: alt.activism,alt.desert-storm,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: **** ANOTHER COVER-UP - Please read this... ****
Date: 6 Oct 92 07:45:34 GMT
Organization: Drake University, Des Moines, Iowa, USA

In article <1992Oct6.035805.10042@news.columbia.edu>, egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy) writes:
> In article <1992Oct5.191857.1@acad.drake.edu> vsg001@acad.drake.edu writes:
>>In article <1992Oct3.190747.6478@news.columbia.edu>, egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy) writes:
> 
> My Young Republicans reference was to a very amusing article in TNR
> by Michael Lewis.  BTW, _Liar's Poker_ is a very funny book, too.
> Oh, I recall this quote by a Republican official during Houston, as
> reported by the NYT.  He was walking by the YR as they were yelling
> something, nodded his head towards them, and said, "Hitler Youth," to
> the NYT reporter.  I found this amusing, but then, I would.
TNR huh, well, that's a non-partisan paper! I looked the article up, I have
friends who are religious subscribers to the TNR, and they knew exactly the
article you were refering too. Yes, it was funny. (Yes Conservatives can laugh
at themselves, it's Liberals like Garrett who need to learn this) As for the
NYT, well, any paper that donates $400,000 to the DNC would enjoy such drunken
humor. (At least I assume that he was drunk)  
>>Disclaimers.Disclaimers.
>>		--VSG001@acad.drake.edu (Vince Goddard-ARCH Conservative)
ARCH implies emphaisis. 
> Missed your .signature in your previous post, Vince.  Why is "ARCH"
> capitalized?
Sorry, I was working on my macro prog., and forgot all about it. 
> --
> "Sounds interesting....  Sounds interesting...."
> 				-- Homer Simpson
Disclaimers.Disclaimers.
Newsgroups: alt.activism,alt.desert-storm,alt.politics.clinton
From: sdr57@cas.org ()
Subject: Re: **** ANOTHER COVER-UP - Please read this... ****
Organization: Chemical Abstracts Service, Columbus, Ohio
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 13:52:05 GMT

In article <1992Sep29.224443.14036@oracle.us.oracle.com> rchilder@us.oracle.com (Richard Childers) writes:
>mccullou@cae.wisc.edu (Mark McCullough) writes:
>
>>soldiers.  Okay, you can go to the hundreds of families and explain to
>>them why a certain soldier won't be coming home, because you were more
>>worried about using conventional strategies than minimizing casualties.
>>Why in some military groups, that idea could lose you your command, if
>>not all.  A commander with that attitude _should_ be relieved of command.
>
>I refer you to a military classic widely regarded throughout the world.
>It's called _The Art Of War_, attributed to an individual named Sun Tzu,
>whose existence cannot be authenticated but whose writings were revered by
>American generals and Mao Tse Tung, alike.
>
>He has some harsh things to say about your kind of attitude.
>
>-- richard
>
>--
>=====
>-- richard childers            rchilder@us.oracle.com          1 415 506 2411
>         oracle data center  --  unix systems & network administration
>                    Klein flask for rent. Inquire within.

Mr. Childers

I am confused by your comment. Are you saying that Sun Tzu
advocated the expenditure of the lives of one's own troops
in order to preserve the lives and/or reputations of the
enemy's troops? May I ask what translation you are reading?

******************************************************************************
Renegade academician. They're a dangerous breed when they go feral,
academics are...a chemist, too.
		    -(James P. Blaylock in "Lord Kelvin's Machine")

My organization hasn't agreed with any of my opinions so far, and
I doubt they'll start now.

Stanley "Ya nee speon" Roberts