HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: pprior@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Paul A Prior)
Subject: Re: KKK - free speech (original poster)
Organization: The Ohio State University
Distribution: oh
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1992 17:19:37 GMT

In article <1992Apr11.074048.4656@ucunix.san.uc.edu> schectr@ucunix.san.uc.edu (ROBB SCHECTER) writes:
>
>
>(From that "concerned person")
>
>There's been discussion about freedom of speech.   (Now, not that I
>   represent anyone but myself...)   I think this pertains ONLY to the 
>   government.  In fact, I know it does.  We can't sue someone down the
>   street for depriving us of our freedom of speech, but we can sue the
>   government.
>
>I've been a long time member of the ACLU.  Any freedoms (speech, right to
>   bear arms, etc...) deals with the interface between any group and the
>   government.  The is an important distinction.

It may be an important consideration as a matter or procedure and/or
law, but in my eyes the philosophical implications of impedeing the 
free flow of ideas are of the same magnitude (of perhaps even more)
when performed by citizens.

-- 
--------pprior@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu----(614) 297-8474----------------
Paul A. Prior    Ban anchors, not reef tanks   "With friends like this,   
2nd year medical student		          who needs anemones?"
The Ohio State U. College of Medicine   Tobacco Kills- Please don't smoke!
Newsgroups: oh.general,alt.society.civil-liberty
From: pprior@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Paul A Prior)
Subject: Re: Help stop the KKK
Organization: The Ohio State University
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 18:48:52 GMT

In article <1992Apr10.160932.8430@meaddata.com> paulm@meaddata.com (Paul Marchant) writes:
>In article <1992Apr10.111523.21899@athena.mit.edu>, wdstarr@athena.mit.edu (William December Starr) writes:
>|> 
>|> In article <1992Apr9.231712.18074@ucunix.san.uc.edu>, 
>|> schectr@ucunix.san.uc.edu (ROBB SCHECTER) said:
>|> 
>|> > - On University of Cinncinati campus, we have started organizing a
>|> > counter-demonstration.  The general idea is for it to be
>|> > confrontational but not violent.
>|> 
>|> > - We hope to mass enough people to drown out any speeches, and
>|> > defeat any recruiting efforts the Klan will make.
>|> 
>|> "Hi there... we're a group of citizens who are concerned about the
>|> Klan's negative attitudes towards the civil liberties of others, so
>|> in order to protest against their attitudes we're going to try to
>|> deprive them of their rights to freedom of speech."
>|> 
>|> Bleah.
>|> 
>|> -- William December Starr <wdstarr@athena.mit.edu>
>
>Well, Bill, I think you have things confused here. If the group were
>interested in depriving them of their right to freedom of speech, then
>they might has said something like: we'll shoot anyone who wears a
>white sheet, phyically block the march, violently attack them, etc...
>
>What they are planning on doing, it counter-demonstrate, i.e. exercise
>their rights to freedom of speech as well. Perhaps you'll decide to
>join the two groups and witness the exercising of rights in person.
>
Shouting down tactics and "confrontational" goals are seemingly ever
popular strategies in today's society when you disagree with another
group's platform.  For Queer Nation's shameless lambasting of priests
during Catholic Mass to the shouting down tactics used by other groups
to disallow political candidates to speak their minds, it seems to me,
as noted by William Starr, that it reeks of hypocrisy.

Let me be on record as being disgusted with the ignorant beliefs of the 
KKK, and I'm not voicing an attack on QN or any other group as well.  
I just hate to see well meaning people attemping (as is the current
vogue) to destroy the 1st ammendment rights of whoever they happen
to disagree with.

After all, what happened to the philosophy of "I may disagree with your
positions and beliefs, but I will fight to the death to preserve your
right to express them"?  Today it's more like "You offend me, so I'm going
to prevent you from speaking, whether by legislation, litigation, or 
simple mob participation."



-- 
--------pprior@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu----(614) 297-8474----------------
Paul A. Prior    Ban anchors, not reef tanks   "With friends like this,   
2nd year medical student		          who needs anemones?"
The Ohio State U. College of Medicine   Tobacco Kills- Please don't smoke!
Newsgroups: oh.general,alt.society.civil-liberty
From: wdstarr@athena.mit.edu (William December Starr)
Subject: Re: Help stop the KKK
Organization: Northeastern Law, Class of '93
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 11:15:23 GMT


In article <1992Apr9.231712.18074@ucunix.san.uc.edu>, 
schectr@ucunix.san.uc.edu (ROBB SCHECTER) said:

> - On University of Cinncinati campus, we have started organizing a
> counter-demonstration.  The general idea is for it to be
> confrontational but not violent.

> - We hope to mass enough people to drown out any speeches, and
> defeat any recruiting efforts the Klan will make.

"Hi there... we're a group of citizens who are concerned about the
Klan's negative attitudes towards the civil liberties of others, so
in order to protest against their attitudes we're going to try to
deprive them of their rights to freedom of speech."

Bleah.

-- William December Starr <wdstarr@athena.mit.edu>
Newsgroups: oh.general
From: Douglas Line <dline@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>
Subject: Car for sale!
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 12:44:03 GMT


	Hello, I've got a '79 Oldsmobile Toronado for sale. It's in good shape
and has power everything. This would be a good car for someone to fix up and
put away in the garage and sell for a million in acouple of years. It has
three rust spots (small now) and it could use a new paint job. It has been a
great car and currently has 90,000 miles on it. I'm asking around 1300.00, but
I am flexable. I live in Columbus and you can reply to me by e-mail or call
(614) 777-4171. I have amachine so you can call anytime and leave a message.
I'm home in the evenings after 8:00.
Newsgroups: oh.general
From: jhoskins@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (James M Hoskins)
Subject: Re: Help stop the KKK
Organization: The Ohio State University
 <1992Apr10.202229.28375@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 20:50:04 GMT

In article <1992Apr10.202229.28375@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> dpollard@magnus.a
cs.ohio-state.edu (Dennis B Pollard) writes:
>I don't feel that the concerned student at UC desire to prohibt the KKK's
>speech, my reading of the post was simply a call for a counterdemonstration.
>
>Correct me if I'm wrong.
>
>Dennis Pollard

The statement from the UC student was:

"We hope to mass enough people to drown out any speeches, and defeat any 
recruiting efforts the Klan will make."

I believe you could be wrong, I know for sure that the KKK is!
Xref: sparky oh.general:195 soc.culture.jewish:7996
Newsgroups: oh.general,soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: KKK - free speech
From: schectr@ucunix.san.uc.edu (ROBB SCHECTER)
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 92 18:38:19 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Cincinnati

In article <1992Apr14.064619.27417@wariat.org> sjsobol@wariat.org (Steven J. Sobol) writes:
>In article <1992Apr12.042621.28728@ucunix.san.uc.edu> schectr@ucunix.san.uc.edu (ROBB SCHECTER) writes:
>
>>   Instead of all the argument about whether the 1st ammendment appiles to
>><insert here> how about this:
>>
>>   If this was WWII, and I was in a Jewish guerilla group doing what it
>>could to sabotage Nazi functions, this would be honorable.
>>   So;  how is this different?  Are we not at war with them?  Have they not
>>declared war upon us?  
>
>Exactly. Absolutely right. We are not at war with them, therefore the first
>amendment still applies (sorry for bringing that up again).
>
>I'm Jewish too. I'm not too comfortable with the KKK, either, but, they
>do have rights.
>
   Please back this up.  How are we NOT at war? 
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Robb Shecter      University of Cincinnati     schecter@ucunix.san.uc.edu
Newsgroups: oh.general
From: mellis@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Michael E Ellis)
Subject: KKK rally and why not counterdemonstrate?
Organization: The Ohio State University
Distribution: oh
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 23:20:08 GMT


I believe that if there was a huge counterdemonstration at the KKK rally, then 
the Klan organizaers would be tickled pink.  Reason: the Klan, according to the
Grand Wizard that presided over the Colorado Klan rallies that received the 
national press attention said that they wanted to show the rest of the world 
that they were not the militant ones in this society.  Rather, it was those 
groups that fostered these movements to keep all alternate groups silent.  They
want people to come and make noise and shout and even fight against them.

My questions is:  Why play into their hands?  If everyone would simply ignore 
them as they do the political condidates running for affice, the Klan would 
disappear into oblivion as do these political wannabees.
Xref: sparky oh.general:198 soc.culture.jewish:8010
From: mleugers@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Mary Leugers)
Subject: Roundtable 4/15/92:  Global Telecommunications
Organization: The Ohio State University
Distribution: oh
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 16:20:28 GMT

          The Center for Advanced Study in Telecommunications (CAST)
                           at The Ohio State University
                                      presents:


      Policy, Competition, and Collaboration in Global Telecommunications 

                         A Roundtable Presentation by
                              Dr. David Nchia 
                      Assistant Professor, Communication, 
                               Hanover College

                           Wednesday April 15, 1992
                           Room 210E  Baker Systems
                               1971 Neil Avenue
                            11:30 a.m. - 1:00 p.m.
                         presentation begins at noon

A common feature of the "changing global communications environment," as it is 
often referred to as, is the introduction of various communication/information 
technologies and/or services that extend beyond national boundaries.  The 
emerging global remote sensing satellite data industry is a good example of 
what this environment may look like.  In 1991, David Nchia completed a study 
that examined national and international efforts to develop a new regulatory 
structure that will cope with changes in remote sensing technology, promote 
social and economic growth, and reconcile the interests of various parties 
within the international community.  The insights gained from the 
international debate on remote sensing will serve as a backdrop for this 
discussion on the prospects of achieving harmony in the global 
telecommunications environment through policy, competition, and/or 
Newsgroups: oh.general
From: brian@murex.cis.ohio-state.edu (Brian K Smith)
Subject: Re: KKK - free speech (original poster)
Organization: The Ohio State University, Department of Computer and Information Science
Distribution: oh
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1992 16:56:24 GMT

  Robb Shecter schectr@ucunix.san.uc.edu writes:
> There's been discussion about freedom of speech.   (Now, not that I
>   represent anyone but myself...)   I think this pertains ONLY to the 
>   government.  In fact, I know it does.  We can't sue someone down the
>   street for depriving us of our freedom of speech, but we can sue the
>   government.
  Oh come on!  
> I've been a long time member of the ACLU.  Any freedoms (speech, right to
>   bear arms, etc...) deals with the interface between any group and the
>   government.  The is an important distinction.
  It falls to the govenment to protect our rights.  This means the law should
protect each individual's right to free speech from other individuals.  And
this goes for other rights as well.  I can see this specious logic applied to
Locke's three inalienable rights: life, liberty, and property (changed to
the pursuit of happiness by our founding fathers, so they wouldn't have to
pass out land to everyone :-)  )  Imagine the exchange, if our laws had
followed from this:

Neighbor (running away after shooting you):  ho ho ho! (a very jolly neighbor)
 
You: Officer, He shot me! Stop him!  (okay, this is cheap melodrama)

Officer: Sorry son, he's not in any way, shape, or form affliated with the
   government, so I can do a thing to stop him.  Even if I could, you see,
   I'm part of the government, so I have to protect his life from me, so even
   then I couldn't do anything.

You (bleeding):  So what can I do?

Officer: Get a gun.  But better not get it from a private vendor, they can
  choose if you can bear arms or not.  Try the government, they have to let
  you have one.
Newsgroups: oh.general
From: sthomas@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Sandra D Thomas)
Subject: Re: KKK rally and why not counterdemonstrate?
Organization: The Ohio State University
Distribution: oh
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1992 02:35:43 GMT

In article <1992Apr10.232008.409@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> mellis@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Michael E Ellis) writes:
>
>I believe that if there was a huge counterdemonstration at the KKK rally, then 
>the Klan organizaers would be tickled pink.  Reason: the Klan, according to the
>Grand Wizard that presided over the Colorado Klan rallies that received the 
>national press attention said that they wanted to show the rest of the world 
>that they were not the militant ones in this society.  Rather, it was those 
>groups that fostered these movements to keep all alternate groups silent.  They
>want people to come and make noise and shout and even fight against them.
>
>My questions is:  Why play into their hands?  If everyone would simply ignore 
>them as they do the political condidates running for affice, the Klan would 
>disappear into oblivion as do these political wannabees.

I think that is very interesting that a group of "educated" people could
turn a discussion of the KKK into a discussion about philosophy.  For 
those of you new to this country or fortunate enough not to have to
deal with them, let's not forget: people have been killed in the name
of their cause- they're CRIMINALS, and to quote the familiar example,
freedom of speech does not mean you can shout "fire" in a crowded thatre.
Even though they are not directly promoting criminal acts in their
rallies, initiation into the organization would put people at high risk for
being invoived in criminal activities.  If members of the Crypts (a VICIOUS
drug dealing gang) were to hold marches for recruitment, and people showed
up to protest, would you be debating free speech?  IF so, why don't you 
spend some time in any inner city neighborhood thhat's been ravaged by
crack- maybe you would understand better.  In getting the "intellectuals"
of this country to think about their philosophical arguments rather than
who they really are- they breehatred and thrive on cowardice- w nobody
ever got lynched on the public square at high noon, or had a cross put
on their lawn with TV cameras watching.  These cowards can't be caught
in the act often, but we can and should let them know that their facade
of decency isn't being accepted.

Sandra Thomas
Newsgroups: oh.general
Subject: Re: KKK - free speech (original poster)
From: schectr@ucunix.san.uc.edu (ROBB SCHECTER)
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 92 17:13:24 GMT
Organization: University of Cincinnati

In article <1992Apr11.164540.2088@cis.ohio-state.edu> brian@murex.cis.ohio-state.edu (Brian K Smith) writes:
>
>  Robb Shecter schectr@ucunix.san.uc.edu writes:
>>   street for depriving us of our freedom of speech, but we can sue the
>>   government.
>  Oh come on!  
>> I've been a long time member of the ACLU.  Any freedoms (speech, right to
>>   bear arms, etc...) deals with the interface between any group and the
>>   government.  The is an important distinction.
>  It falls to the govenment to protect our rights.  This means the law should
>protect each individual's right to free speech from other individuals.  And
>the goes for other rights as well.  I can this specious logic applied to
>Locke's three inalienable rights: life, liberty, and property (changed to
>the pursuit of happiness by our founding fathers, so they wouldn't have to
>pass out land to everyone :-)  )  Imagine the exchange, if our laws had
>followed from this:

   (Story about assault being legal follows).

-  I think there's no point to that story. Assault is illegal.  I was tell-
ing you the law already, as it stands.

-  Anyhow; Is there ANY situation that you could justify action (covert or
not) from a group to disable or thwart another group (or group's activities?)

-  (To answer my own question)  There is to me;  The KKK and others are training
NOW, to kill people like ME.  This is not abstract or distant to me, it is
immediate and dangerous.

Robb Shecter      University of Cincinnati     schectr@ucunix.san.uc.edu

Newsgroups: oh.general
From: skosnik@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Sally J Kosnik)
Subject: Eric Clapton Tickets
Organization: The Ohio State University
Distribution: oh
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1992 19:56:00 GMT


I am looking to buy 4 tickets to the Eric Clapton concert to be held in
Cincinnati on Saturday, May 23.  The price is negotiable.  Please contact me as
soon as possible by E-mail at:
                                    skosnik@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu

I will look forward to hearing from you.

Thanks!!!

Niki
Newsgroups: oh.general
From: stucki@retina.cis.ohio-state.edu (David J Stucki)
Subject: Re: KKK rally and why not counterdemonstrate?
Originator: stucki@retina.cis.ohio-state.edu
Organization: Ohio State University Computer and Information Science
Distribution: oh
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1992 17:24:18 GMT

In article <1992Apr10.232008.409@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> mellis@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Michael E Ellis) writes:


   I believe that if there was a huge counterdemonstration at the KKK
   rally, then the Klan organizaers would be tickled pink.  Reason: the
   Klan, according to the Grand Wizard that presided over the Colorado
   Klan rallies that received the national press attention said that they
   wanted to show the rest of the world that they were not the militant
   ones in this society.  Rather, it was those groups that fostered these
   movements to keep all alternate groups silent.  They want people to
   come and make noise and shout and even fight against them.

If this is true, then the most promising course of action to achieve this
would be for the KKK to have some of its own members pose as
organizers of counterdemonstrations.

   My questions is: Why play into their hands?  If everyone would simply
   ignore them as they do the political condidates running for affice,
   the Klan would disappear into oblivion as do these political
   wannabees.

If everyone realized this, the possibility I described above could still lead
to national media attention. In other words, they don't need us.

dave...

David J Stucki	   /\ ~~ /\  ~~	 /\  ~~	 /\  ~~	c/o Dept. Computer and 
537 Harley Dr. #6 /  \  /  \ 	/  \ 	/  \   	/   Information Science
Columbus, OH  43202   \/    \  /    \  /    \  /    2036 Neil Ave.
stucki@cis.ohio-state.edu ~  \/  ~~  \/	 ~~  \/	    Columbus, OH 43210

There is no place in science for ideas,
there is no place in epistemology for knowledge,
and there is no place in semantics for meanings.  -- W.V. Quine
Newsgroups: oh.general
From: brian@lilac.cis.ohio-state.edu (Brian K Smith)
Subject: Re: KKK - free speech (original poster)
Organization: The Ohio State University, Department of Computer and Information Science
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1992 21:10:38 GMT

>
>- I think there's no point to that story. Assault is illegal.  I was tell-
>ing you the law already, as it stands.
>
  My point is not to say assault is legal, but only to illustrate that the
spirit of the Declaration of Independence, Constitution, and the ideas before,
that built our government, were not to protect us soley from government, but
mainly from ourselves.
  We have consented to have government not merely to protect ourselves from
government. If this were so, there would be no reason to have government.
Government exists to: 
  1) protect our life/property (be it from threats internal to the state or
     external to the state)
  2) to be an indifferent judge (to determine what is right by imposing laws)
  3) to enforce legal decisions
 (above paraphrased from Locke's Second Treatise of Government, 1690.  relevant
  here since many of Locke's ideas were incorporated into our government)
>
>- Anyhow; Is there ANY situation that you could justify action (covert or
>not) from a group to disable or thwart another group (or group's activities?)
                                   I'll limit this just to speech ^^^^^^^^^^^
  Yes.  Of course the answer is yes with an ANY in that question.  But in this
particular situation, no I cannot justify the action of censoring the Klan just
because of what they say.  At least not with the 'freedom of speech' that this
country supports.  With freedom of speech we must also let those who don't
don't share our viewpoint have the stand.  I am certain that, if they had
their way, the Klan would have supressed equal rights speakers. (And try they
did)  And just as we can't let our rights be taken away, we cannot abridge
the offending group's right to freedom of speech.  Our power is in having
the right to speak out against them.
>
>- (To answer my own question)  There is to me;  The KKK and others are training
>NOW, to kill people like ME.  This is not abstract or distant to me, it is
>immediate and dangerous.
>
  This is where points 2 & 3 come in.  If actions of a group's speech (ie.
direct threat, malicious orders) affect us in detrimental way, it is up to
the government to make a decision and enforce it.  The constitution leaves
it up to the government to be an unbiased judge, for just as the Klan is too
strong in one direction, we may be too strong in the other.


Newsgroups: oh.cast