HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: biow@cs.umd.edu (Christopher Biow)
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia
Subject: Re: WHAT?!?!?!
Date: 27 Dec 92 18:31:12 GMT
Organization: U of Maryland, Dept. of Computer Science, Coll. Pk., MD 20742

>[post implying that lack of news media coverage of Somalia famine
> (until recently) implies something about its political orientation]

Most extraordinary cases of human suffering received little to no
press attention. Famine and genocide have occurred and been under-
reported in (feel free to add to the list):

  Cambodia, Nigeria, Burundi, E. Timor, Uganda, Ethiopia, China, 
  Vietnam, Somalia, Sudan, Chad.

The governments (or lack thereof) have been of all alignments, 
from overtly fascist, to darlings of the Left. In general, such 
suffering is simply not news--it sells no commercials.

Only when the suffering is inter-racial (races that the consumers 
can identify, that is) does it command press attention. When the
Tutsui killed 100,000 Hutu in Burundi, press coverage was nil. Few
if any Americans can tell a Hutu from a Tutsui. When S. African 
police shoot a black demonstrator, THEN it is news. In WWII, when
the Japanese sacked, raped, and looted Chinese cities, western 
press coverage was nil. When they sacked Nanking, and raped
two British (white) nurses, the international outcry was enormous.

As with any consipiracy theoretical approach, such press silence
can be used to justify your favorite theory, on any side of the 
political spectrum.
From: andyw@meaddata.com (Andy Welter)
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia
Subject: Re: Survival of the fittest...
Date: 29 Dec 1992 21:16:49 GMT
Organization: Mead Data Central, Dayton OH
Distribution: world
Reply-To: andyw@meaddata.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: geronimo.meaddata.com

On the topic of teaching Somalians to be self sufficient... 

I don't think that the problem is that Somalians don't know how to deal with 
drought. I think it is that the civil disruptions have prevented them from 
successfully farming.  Its dangerous to be out working in your fields when
there are gunmen robbing and pillaging, and its tough to get seed grain
if you can't get any trucks through without them being robbed.

I read last year or so that people are starving in the Sudan in part because 
the govt. was using aircraft to strafe farmers as they worked in their
fields in rebel controlled areas.  Farmers had to work at night... tough
to raise much food under those conditions.

Don't know how much of this applies to Somalia, but this was/is happening
in the Sudan.

---
|Andrew Welter	     |  All views are mine and not |      (513) 865-6822   
|Mead Data Central   |    that of my employer      |      pd&o-ps-ts-dsp       
|P.O. Box 933        |                             |     andyw@meaddata.com
|Dayton, Ohio  45401 |          	           | ...!uunet!meaddata!andyw

Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia
From: m23364@mwunix (James Meritt)
Subject: Re: Survival of the fittest...
Organization: MITRE Corporation, McLean VA
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 13:30:22 GMT

In article <1992Dec18.211045.312@spectrum.xerox.com> powers@xerox.com writes:
}In article @byu.edu, jensen@baloo.ee.byu.edu (Curtis Jensen) writes:
}>Are we really HELPING these people, or are we just prolonging their
}>suffering and starvation?  Just GIVING these people food will
}>cause the somalians to do what they do best ... make MORE starving children.
}
}This is blatant racism Mr. Jensen.

OK.  True or false, though?

Poor argument technique.  If you have no counter for the instance, attack the messanger.
REAL old methodology...


Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia
From: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Subject: Re: WHAT?!?!?!
Reply-To: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 00:13:51 GMT

In article <1992Dec22.182540.5282@sunova.ssc.gov> rocko@ireland.ssc.gov (Rick O'Leary) writes:
>
>Andy, 
>
>Are you watching U.S. T.V.???????  Are you blind?
>
>U.S.T.V. is the most LEFT_WING liberal loony bin in all the fruited planes.
>
>If the U.S. hadn't done something you LEFT_WING NUTS would be screaming for
>
>help.
>
>Get a grip.

TV is left-wing?  No, pardon, LEFT_WING?

Oh, joy, another one of those insightful critiques of the media from
the Right!  'Tis the season....



--
"What does not kill me only makes me stronger, right?"
	"Ooooh, no. You're weak as a kitten!"
From: biow@cs.umd.edu (Christopher Biow)
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia
Subject: Re: WHAT?!?!?!
Date: 23 Dec 92 15:44:13 GMT
Organization: U of Maryland, Dept. of Computer Science, Coll. Pk., MD 20742

In article <1992Dec23.035545.11276@news.columbia.edu> egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy) writes:
>In article <63023@mimsy.umd.edu> biow@cs.umd.edu (Christopher Biow) writes:
>>In article <1992Dec23.001351.4714@news.columbia.edu> egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy) writes:
>>>In article <1992Dec22.182540.5282@sunova.ssc.gov> rocko@ireland.ssc.gov (Rick O'Leary) writes:

>>>>U.S.T.V. is the most LEFT_WING liberal loony bin in all the fruited planes.

>>>TV is left-wing?  No, pardon, LEFT_WING?

>>Seems its presentation is to the left of some observers,
>>and to the right of others. All we need to answer this 
>>question is a simple deliniation of exactly where on 
>>the political spectrum the ultimate truth lies.


>:-)

>Quite true, though I'd say that a simple, one-dimensional "left-right"
>probably isn't enough (Where do the Libertarians fit?  A wheat farmer
>favoring price supports (i.e., gov't intervention) and "family
>values"?  The New Paradigmists?).  Not to mention defining what "left"
>and "right" actually mean for each issue (Where does censorship of
>pornography lie, for instance?  Some feminists will ally with "family
>value" conservatives.).

Good point in your post. I know one person who has attempted
to produce a useful two-dimensional model, in which the conventional
left-right axis is added to a "freedom vs. egalitarian" axis. He
contends that all major political alignments lie within a bow-tie
shaped area of that space.

When it comes down to press prejudice (literal meaning), it does 
depend upon viewpoint. 

The old Whole Earth Catalog carried all manner of products and
books. Within each category of product, they would provide an 
introduction, intended to aid the customer in choosing the 
appropriate product. In the introduction to the catalog, they
suggested the following metric for evaluating the efficacy of
their product advice:

   Look up a product area in which you have personal expertise. 
   Evaluate the quality of the advice given. Then expect the 
   advice given for areas you don't know to be of similar quality.

Applied to the press, this metric is devastating. Press treatment
of subjects in which I have extensive personal knowledge varies from
poor to aggressively awful. Reporters have a deadline to meet, by 
which time they must produce an "interesting" article. So long as
they minimize the factual errors that can be caught by the average
reader, they are okay. But miss a deadline to get a fact right, and
they end up employed as short-order cooks.

Notably, I have found two sources that seem less affected by this
phenomenon: the BBC and _The_Economist_. I guess a bit of quality 
journalism is needed to balance out the British tabloid press.

 
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia
From: pdchapin@unix.amherst.edu (PAUL D CHAPIN)
Subject: Re: A pacifist's call for conditional support for US action in Somalia
Organization: Amherst College
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL7]
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 14:58:23 GMT

Foxvog Douglas (dfo@tko.vtt.fi) wrote:
: Do i have some complaints about the implementation of this program?
: Certainly.  I would want the US troops to put on the blue helmets and be
: under UN, not US control.  I greatly oppose the US demanding and the UN
: Security Council granting the right to use "any means necessary."

I'm not a big supporter of the idea of US troops taking orders out of the
normal chain of command.  This would mean that they would no longer be 
under the command of the US President.  However, given the relatively small
numbers, we could probably work something out. I also wouldn't worry too
much about the "any means necesary" right.  I expect that's mostly legalese
to keep the local command for having to run the the security council every
time it drives down a new road.  The rules of engagement should give a good
idea of what the US is and is not prepared to do.
: 
: I would support the replacement of the US troops by troops under UN
: control as soon as possible.  When the food convoys are travelling 
: regularly in an undisturbed fashion and UN troops come in to guard
: them, the US should get out.  The US does not have the responsibility 
: or right to install a government of its choosing.

This is the position of the US government, which is probably too optomistic
about how soon it can get the troops out.  Interestingly, it's the UN 
Secretary General who seems to want to the get the US involved in settling
the civil war.  The US only wants limit the impact of the war on civilians.
The US government has flatly said it was not going to try to disarm the
clans, create a new police/military force, or establish a new government.  
: 
: It is true that Somalia has a strategic location at the entrance to the
: Red Sea, the sea route to/from Europe.  It is well located near Saudi
: Arabia and other oil producing states.  It has former US (previously
: Soviet) air and naval bases which could be easily restored.  I would
: oppose the US rebuilding these bases or attempting to achieve ANY
: permanent military presence.  

I can't image why we'd want to.  The bases are all shot to shit and with
the Gulf states aware of the advantages of good US relations, we don't really
need anything in Somalia.  
: 
: The publicly announced objectives and reasons for the action DO make
: sense and are appropriate.  I support them while opposing any hidden
: agenda for a permanent US presence in the area.  I would urge all others
: who have a fully justified opposition to US military actions to take
: similar positions.  



Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia
From: tlb2665@usl.edu (Burleigh Thomas L)
Subject: Re: Survival of the fittest...
Organization: University of Southwestern Louisiana
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 22:20:52 GMT

>}In article @byu.edu, jensen@baloo.ee.byu.edu (Curtis Jensen) writes:
>}>Are we really HELPING these people, or are we just prolonging their
>}>suffering and starvation?  Just GIVING these people food will
>}>cause the somalians to do what they do best ... make MORE starving children.

 This reminds me of that old saying about giving a man a fish verus
teaching him how to fish.  (He'll be hungry again or he need never be
hungry again, respectively.)
 I'm just wondering what we are doing to help the Somalis become more
self-sufficient in their own food production.  Are there any such education
programs for the Somalis as part of Restore Hope? (Or any civilian relief
efforts?)

--
 _____           _                         | InterNet: tlb2665@usl.edu
   |   _  __    |_|     __  |  _  .  _  |_ | Voice: (318) 261-1414
   |  | | |||   | | | | | ' | |-' | |_| | ||"Reality is a collective
   '  '-' '''   '-' '-' '   ' '-' ' ,_| ' '|hunch." -- Lily Tomlin
From: kirby@xerox.com (Mike Kirby)
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia
Subject: Re: Somalia
Date: 30 Dec 92 16:02:51 GMT
Reply-To: kirby@xerox.com
Organization: Xerox Corporation, Webster NY

In article 1hrcqcINNp4v@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu, al037@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Dave Polewka) writes:
>
>In a previous article, perlman@qso.Colorado.EDU (Eric S. Perlman) says:
>
>>>The votes should be weighted according to how much income tax
>>>the voter pays.  The way it is now, the have-nots vote to pick
>>>the pockets of the haves.  We'll NEVER have peace that way.
>>
>>By this logic, people like Donald Trump or Michael Jackson have
>>thousands of times as many votes as the average schmoe on the street.
>>That's not what democracy means.  Nor is it fair.
>
>You don't judge a proposal on its own merits; you judge
>by comparing it to what you already have.  What other
>peace proposal do you have?
>
>-- 
>=======================
>"Endeavor to persevere"
>=======================


By and large we already have vote weighting by income group.  Since the more
wealthy people tend to participate more in the political process, (and vote)
while the poorer people tend to ignore it.  The concerns of the wealthy are
taken into account much more than those of the poor.  

A better solution would be to convince more people to vote so that appeals 
to one class or group of people would be for naught because they are in
the minority.  This would require our polititions to actually formulate
policy based on majority will as well as require our politicians to actually
try to lead and convince large segments of the population to change their
point of view.  Something that hasn't been done in 4 years.

I do believe that this is swaying off the topic a little.  Doesn't really
have much to do with somolia.

Mike Kirby
Xerox Corp
E-Mail: kirby.roch803@xerox.com
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia
From: m23364@mwunix (James Meritt)
Subject: Re: Survival of the fittest... (oops)
Organization: MITRE Corporation, McLean VA
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 13:48:14 GMT

In article <1992Dec21.190030.13596@spectrum.xerox.com> powers@xerox.com writes:
}My apologies Mr. Jensen, I thought the followup was from you. If 
}you, James (Jim?) agree with the original post would you mind
}explaining such a position?

I made no comment on the original position, just the argument method.

Like it or not, while Malthus is dead, his work lives on.


Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia
From: rudyw@Ingres.COM (Rudy Walter)
Subject: Motivation / Islamic Fundamentalist factor
Reply-To: rudyw@Ingres.COM (Rudy Walter)
Organization: Ingres, an ASK Company, Alameda CA 94501
Date: 21 Dec 92 23:11:20 GMT


An article in my Sunday paper reported on potential clashes between U.S.
forces and muslim fundamentalists who had in recent months gained a
foothold in some port cities after being invited to help stabilize the
situation (with some apparent success). While the emphasis of the article
was on the fact that the current rescue operation might be threatening
the success of some of those groups, it dawned on me that here was a 
solid motive in the "why now, why here" debate. Thwarting a successful
attempt by Islamic fundamentalists to expand (especially to a critical
geographical location) has always appeared to be high on the U.S. list of
priorities and what could be better than doing it while also providing
humanitarian aid. I can imagine more than one policy advisor exclaiming
"there just doesn't seem to be a downside to this".

Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia,alt.politics.org.un,alt.president.clinton,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.bush
From: niepornt@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (David Marc Nieporent)
Subject: Re: Somalia
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 08:25:14 GMT

In <1h29tiINN69d@CATHY.NA.CS.YALE.EDU> yarvin@cs.yale.edu (Norman Yarvin) says:
>egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy) writes:

>>The UN contingent that will be deployed in Somalia will be stronger than
>>the 100 Pakistani there before the Marines landed.  The US commitment
>>has spurred other nations to chip in about 13K - 22K troops.  I don't
>>expect all of them to stay there, but what will remain should be
>>considerably more powerful than the warlords.

>No.  In any conflict with "peacekeepers" the warlords would have the
>advantage of surprise, which is worth ... well, it's worth a lot.

>The only question would be whether they knew how to take advantage of it.

>And you still seem to think we will disarm the warlords.  Explicit
>government statements to the contrary notwithstanding.  Even the fact that we
>discovered a cache of weapons belonging to Aideed or one of the others, and
>then withdrew without confiscating them, does not seem to have enlightened
>you.

But no one can say that this policy will continue; certainly not with a
new president taking office.  UN Secretary General Boutros-Ghali (sp?)
is pushing for the US to disarm them.  Clinton may listen, if Bush doesn't.

>>Because Bush is an asshole, to put it bluntly.  The Kurds were killed
>>in part because of an exercise in realpolitik ("balance of power" and
>>all that)

>The Kurds were killed because we did not care to make Iraq into a colony.
>Would you rather we had?

Whether or not it was a good idea to help the Kurds, this isn't
accurate.  They were killed because for the US to protect them, as they
set up their autonomous area, would have made Turkey, as well as Syria,
extremely upset; they were afraid it would give inspiration to their own
Kurdish minorities.  

The other reason was that we were afraid it would lead to the
partitioning of Iraq by Turkey, and more importantly, by Iran.  And we
were extremely worried about Iran and the spread of Iranian Shiite
fundamentalism to the "moderate" Gulf states.

-- 
David M. Nieporent   | Is it too early to start making predictions for 1993?
niepornt@phoenix.    | Probably, but that never stopped me before.
   princeton.edu     | ALE: Baltimore ALW: Chicago NLE: Montreal NLW: Atlanta
Baltimore Orioles 93 | AL MVP: Cal Ripken  AL Cy Young: Mike Mussina
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia
From: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Subject: Re: somalia
Keywords: no reply
Reply-To: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 00:19:37 GMT

In article <1992Dec18.210630.24072@lynx.dac.northeastern.edu> awells@lynx.dac.northeastern.edu (Andrew V. Wells) writes:
>In article <1992Dec18.172658.9903@news.columbia.edu>, egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy) writes:
>
>> 
>> I'm a right-wing ideologue?
>> 
>
> Ah, yes, that indescribible moment of self-discovery!

This is one of the more surreal moments I've had on the net, I think,
what with my postings history.  I'm going to pause for a moment, and
note that knee-jerk liberalism is about as irritating to me as
knee-jerk conservatism.  Perhaps more so, because I expect more of
liberals, but that's just my bias.

Somalia appears to be primarily a humanitarian operation.  There may
be hints here and there of Pentagon mission-seeking and a desire by
Bush to go down in the history books on a kind note, but these signs
are minor compared to the substance of the mission, the security of
food shipments to famine areas.  Certainly the old suspicious of US
hegemonic ambitions do not apply here, and are relics of Cold War
liberal attitudes.  We cannot condemn each and every deployment of
troops automatically and without sharp argument.  Mr. Wells has
perhaps given us an example of the calcified mind-set we should avoid
if we wish to continue to argue well and relevantly.


--
"What does not kill me only makes me stronger, right?"
	"Ooooh, no. You're weak as a kitten!"
Xref: sparky alt.current-events.somalia:745 talk.politics.mideast:24326
From: echo@ucscb.UCSC.EDU (Super U.S. citizen, super achiever . . .)
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia,alt.politics.org.un,alt.president.clinton,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: Defense Contractors (was Re: Somalia)
Date: 28 Dec 1992 21:57:22 GMT
Organization: University of California; Santa Cruz
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucscb.ucsc.edu


In article <18DEC199203573221@utarlg.uta.edu> b645zaw@utarlg.uta.edu (General Boycott) writes:
>In article <BzFnKx.DvF@ns1.nodak.edu>, 
>green@plains.NoDak.edu (Brad Green) writes...
>
>>Clinton whines about IBM losing 25,000 jobs, but even CNN and other news
>>groups admit that IBM hasn't kept up with the competition.  What's he want
>>us to do, subsidize an unprofitable business?  It's a shame to lose the jobs,
>>but that's the way it works, you don't stay competitive, you lose.  I wonder
>>if that's why Scully is hanging on to Slick's coattails.

Could just be that Scully realizes that conservative laissez-faire economics
based on "the invisible hand" is a fool's dream on the scale of the theory
"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs".  Each
assumes that the beneficient nature of man will "automatically" balance the
functioning of the system.  Which in both cases is obviously not true.

>Dunno, but I used to be intrigued with the Newton and PDA's.
>I'll be takin' my business elsewhere than apple or even taligent now
>as long as scully is around. 
>
>-= the hazards of mixing business and politics =-

For example, laissez-faire economics assumes the existence of a perfect
free market and perfect knowledge of each product, with the consumer's
buying decisions based on the merits and pricing of each product.  But
General Boycott, apparently an advocate of free-market economics, has
speared his own theory by distorting market dynamics because of his
disagreement with Sculley's political bent (which is actually conservative
at its root!).

Conservatives can be such dingbats.

-- 
  //          ---<--@     PRS             -Echo
\X/                                        The Potato-Salad-Eatin' Fool.
INTERNET: echo@ucscb.ucsc.edu              AT&T: (408) 338-4297 home
                                                 (408) 431-5387 work
"Pretty duplicitous, lookin' at evil, media-eventing,
 Heartless and they were super U.S. citizen, super achiever"
Xref: sparky alt.current-events.somalia:696 alt.politics.org.un:204 alt.president.clinton:1224 talk.politics.misc:65053 alt.politics.bush:14843