HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man)
Newsgroups: alt.activism
Subject: Re: University of California settles lawsuit for $25,000
Date: 13 Aug 92 18:11:44 GMT
Organization: Demonic Possesions, Inc.

In article <16b8beINNoi5@agate.berkeley.edu>, mitja@hera.Berkeley.EDU (Mitja Baumhackl) writes:
> 
>>From SF Chronicle, Tuesday, August 11, 1992 p. A16 (Bay Area Report)
> 
> BERKELEY - Two men arrested for allegedly vandalizing property near People's
> Park received $25,000 from the University of California in a lawsuit settlement.
> 
> David Kamola, 33, and Christopher Mackinney, 36, allegedly drew anti-UC
> slogans on a sidewalk adjacent to People's Park last year.  UC police held
> them in custody for eight hours after their arrest.  No charges were ever
> filed.
> 
> Both men filed a suit against the university on the grounds that their First
> Amendment rights were violated.
> 
> "It's pretty clear the reason why they were arrested was because they were
> at People's Park," said David Beauvais, Kamola's attorney.
> 
> Carla Shapreau, attorney for the UC Regents, said the men taunted police
> officers and provoked the incident by trying to incite a large crowd that
> had formed at the scene.
> 
> "This is a bogus claim," she said.  "These individuals set these officers
> up and provoked this incident.  The officers acted reasonably and with
> probable cause."
> 
> Worried that a long, drawn out trial might waste taxpayers' dollars, UC
> decided to settle the matter, said Shapreau.
> 
> ---------------------------
> Well, yet another instance where we can see how UC and the City of Berkeley
> ignored the First Amendment as they rolled 350 armed officers into town
> during the People's Park demonstrations...watch out soon for the
> settlement of BAUMHACKL V. CITY OF BERKELEY.

	You seem to be under the deluded impression that payment equals
veracity.  It's just another form of greenmail.

Brett                                                      
_______________________________________________________________________________
Proconsul Computer Consulting                                        CHA-CHING!
Better, Cheaper, Faster					       (Pick any two :)
Disclaimer:								   NOT!
Newsgroups: alt.activism
From: cmr@world.std.com (Charles M Richmond)
Subject: Re: More on Phone Zap
Organization: Integrated International Systems Corp. One Longfellow Place, Suite 3309, Boston, Ma.
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1992 12:00:35 GMT

Boycott - to engage in a concerted refusal to have dealings with


What you folks are talking about is the oposite. You are forcing attention
upon another. Whether it is moral or justified or not, it is not a boycott.


Harass - 1: to worry and impede by repeated raids.
	 2a: exhaust , fatigue.
	 2b: to annoy persistently.


This does seem to define both actions better.


As an aside; people normally respect views that are stated intelligently
and accurately much more than they do views that are stated with obvious
errors and grossly incorrect usage.


Charlie


-- 
*****************************************************************************
*  Charles Richmond 	Integrated International Systems Corporation        *
*  cmr@world.std.com	(Temporary) cmr@chiechan.mro4.dec.com		    *
*  Specializing in UNIX, X, Image Processing, and Communications.           *
Xref: sparky alt.activism:15040 soc.culture.latin-america:3127 talk.politics.misc:40466
From: bunker@physun.physics.mcmaster.ca (Alex Bunker)
Newsgroups: alt.activism
Subject: Re: Ban Guns Now - Make life easier for us
Date: 14 Aug 92 20:56:49 GMT
Organization: Dept. of Physics & Astronomy, McMaster University

In article <6703@pharaoh.cyborg.bt.co.uk> martin@pharaoh.cyborg.bt.co.uk (Martin Gorman) writes:
>rivero@mdcbbs.com writes:
>>If guns are outlawed, only the outlaws will have them.
>>The regular citizens will be defenseless. That's an open invitation to
>>military coup and the subordination of the democratic process to fascism.
>>That's been the pattern, without exception, in all modern nations that
>>had a standing army and an unarmed civil population.
>>
>Guess I must have been asleep when it happened here in the UK.

IS this guy (the >>) guy for real???? the vast majority of democratic countries
have a standing army and an unarmed poulace. And if you think you and your
neighbors can thwart a military coup with your handguns:

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA AH AH HA HA HA HA!!!!!!!!!!

ALEX
.
Newsgroups: alt.activism,sci.econ,talk.politics.misc
From: rja@redwood26.cray.com (Russ Anderson)
Subject: Triple dip? (Re: Derailing the Reagan Revolution, part I: Reverse Reaganism)
Originator: rja@redwood26
Organization: The 1991 World Champion Minnesota Twins!
Date: 21 Aug 92 08:27:08 CDT


In demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man) writes:

> Most of the following is taken from _Forbes_, August 17, 1992.
Interview with Nobel Prize-winning economist Milton Friedman.

> FORBES: How's the economy?

> 	Friedman: If you look closely, and pay attention to the short-term
> money supply movement, it looks very scary.
> 	President Bush has a policy I've been calling reverse Reaganism.  It
> promises slow growth in the 1990s.  Now, on top of that, the short-term cycle
> came down sharply, then started to go up, but has been severely retarted by
> slow monetary growth.  It may indeed turn into another recession.
                         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 	[Federal Reserve Chairman Alan] Greenspan has ben more successful than
> Volcker in avoiding excessive volatility in the money supply.  But while I
> share his objective of long-run zero inflation, in the short run the money
> supply has grown much too slowly....

      Money Supply Growth Rates (Source: Federal Reserve Board)

M2 growth (4Q/4Q)  M3 growth (4Q/4Q)
-----------------  -----------------
1988  5.2%         1988  6.4%
1989  4.8%         1989  3.6%
1990  4.0%         1990  1.7%
1991  2.8%         1991  1.2%
 *    1.4%          *   -0.3%   (* 11/91-6/92)
-----------------  ------------------

Even more ominous is that the 3 month growth rates through June 1992 
(from the chart) shows:   M2 -1.8%  M3 -3.0%

Now I may not be a rocket scientist, but if M2 and M3 growth rates are
going negative, the Fed will have to respond with *yet another* drop
in interest rates (M1 3-month growth rate dropped from 20% in March
to 6% in June) to try to increase M2 & M3.

I also find it hard to believe that the economy can maintain positive
economic (GDP) growth in the face of negative M2 and M3 rates.  
(*Deflation* even looks like a possibility.)


What do all you net.economists think?

-- 
Russ Anderson    |  Disclaimer: Any statements are my own and do not reflect
------------------              upon my employer or anyone else.  (c) 1992
EX-Twins' Jack Morris, 10 innings pitched, 0 runs (World Series MVP!)
Xref: sparky alt.activism:15144 talk.politics.drugs:5896 alt.society.civil-liberty:5594
From: murray@sun13.scri.fsu.edu (John Murray)
Newsgroups: alt.activism,talk.politics.drugs,alt.society.civil-liberty
Subject: Re: Broward County Sheriff (was Re: SWAT...)
Date: 20 Aug 92 15:50:10 GMT
Reply-To: murray@sun13.scri.fsu.edu (John Murray)
Followup-To: alt.activism
Organization: SCRI, Florida State University

In article <1992Aug17.035229.17253@infonode.ingr.com> pat@fitz.uucp (Patrick Fitzgerald) writes:

>I seem to remember an incident in Florida, where police tactics backfired
>(literally).  The police pulled over a car (driven by suspected drug
>dealers), and decided to search the trunk of the car; however, the trunk
>blew up in their faces when they opened it.  While this is tragic, it was
>bound to happen since the courts let them stomp all over our rights (car
>trunk searches are legal without probable cause).
>
>I don't know if this is true, anyone else?

Yes, true. Happened near here (Tallahassee) on Interstate 10. A car was pulled
over and the occupants were on their way in to custody, and a state trooper
was killed while searching the trunk. It came out later that a microwave oven
had been rigged with explosives. The people in the car were delivering it to
Tallahassee for some acquaintances in Miami; it was a present for some, shall
we say, business associates of the Miamians.

You might say this was a case of a law enforcement official getting caught in
the crossfire between the drug gangs. If I weren't so cynical, I might think
that this incident would cause some lights to go on in certain brains.

-- 
Disclaimer: Acting independently of any group or organization.
John R. Murray murray@vs6.scri.fsu.edu  | Hello, I am a damaged .signature
Supercomputer Computations Research Inst| virus. Copy me into yours, and
Moderator comp.graphics.research        | join in the !rm -rf un *;A#$!&zQ *^P%o
Newsgroups: alt.activism,alt.politics.bush,talk.politics.guns
From: dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger)
Subject: Re: FOCA: And I quote.....
Followup-To: talk.abortion
Reply-To: dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger)
Organization: North Carolina State University
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 13:46:06 GMT

Oh hey Mr. Margolis, look here at the original post.  Mr. Anderson
incorrectly states that "third trimester" abortions are "post-viability"
abortions.  Post-viability abortions include those performed in the 
third trimester and the late second trimester, if we assume that the 
third trimester begins at 24 weeks of pregnancy.  

And in this country, we do have virtual abortion-on-demand throughout 
the term of pregnancy.


In article <1992Aug16.232711.3481@anasazi.com> 
john@anasazi.com writes:
>
>In article <Aug11.054758.30153@yuma.ACNS.ColoState.EDU> sa114984@longs.LANCE.ColoState.EDU (Steven Arnold) writes:
>]In article <1992Aug6.123139.16032@hemlock.cray.com>,
>]rja@redwood26.cray.com (Russ Anderson) writes:
>]> 
>]> In article <Aug06.053904.68099@yuma.ACNS.ColoState.EDU>,
>]sa114984@longs.LANCE.ColoState.EDU (Steven Arnold) writes:
>]
>]> Given that there are only 3 doctors in the US perform 3rd trimester (post-
>]> viability) abortions in the US, and then only for medical reasons (source:
>]> 60 Minutes), I doubt your claim that "what we end up with is virtual 
>]> abortion-on-demand from conception to birth".
>
>Hmmm... that's odd. I heard a PRO-CHOICE advocate state that 1% of
>abortions in the US are in the 3rd trimester. These must be very
>busy and rich doctors.
>
>
>-- 
>John Moore NJ7E, 7525 Clearwater Pkwy, Scottsdale, AZ 85253  (602-951-9326)
>john@anasazi.com ncar!noao!asuvax!anasaz!john anasaz!john@asuvax.eas.asu.edu
>"Government is the agent of those who are too refined to do their own mugging."
>  Joseph Sobran


Newsgroups: alt.activism,alt.drugs
From: fitz@wang.com (Tom Fitzgerald)
Subject: Re: GOP Convention, Houston
Organization: Wang Labs, Lowell MA, USA
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 92 01:52:49 GMT

cedman@714-725-3165.nts.uci.edu (Carl Edman) writes:

> Rush Limbaugh is a gutter conservative. Such people may be currently
> powerful but in the long run people with ideas and who are able to think,
> to write and to argue like Milton Friedman or William F Buckley are likely
> to have greater influence.

Oh come on.  Buckley is writing articles while G. Bush is appointing
federal judges.  In the long run, prohibitionism will fade, but it'll have
no more to do with a "conservative" effort than the end of alcohol
prohibition did.  Eventually, people will figure out that they've been
lied to.  But it'll take a while, and it'll take longer as long as the
current Republican group is in office.

> The forfeiture laws are a mockery. But again you'll find most conservative  
> intellectuals agreeing with you.

"Most"?  You've named three, I think that's about it.  The vast majority of
Conservative intellectuals (especially the George Will clones) haven't said
a thing against forfeiture, and they're all solid law-n-order advocates.

> Don't be quite so pessimistic about the Supreme Court. This Supreme Court
> cares a lot more about what the constitution actually says than any SC has
> in over sixty years and is considerably less likely to bend it to suit
> current political moods.
> If you are looking for evidence, just look at Scullias
> opinion in the recent first ammendment which certainly must count as one of
> the great victories in this area in the last decades

Son, you're dreaming.  This court is also the one that ruled that evidence
obtained without a warrant could be admitted if police mistakenly thought
they didn't need one (Scalia also wrote the opinion on that one); and that
the police could beat a confession out of a suspect and have it admitted.
Combined with the affirmation of forfeiture cases, there have been far more
anti-rights rulings by this court than pro-rights, and there's no reason to
expect that to change.

-- 
Tom Fitzgerald   Wang Labs       fitz@wang.com   "I went to the universe today;
1-508-967-5278   Lowell MA, USA                   It was closed...."
Xref: sparky alt.activism:15259 soc.culture.latin-america:3188 talk.politics.misc:41217 alt.politics.elections:11243 misc.headlines:5838
From: harelb@MATH.CORNELL.EDU (misc.activism.progressive co-moderator)
Newsgroups: alt.activism,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.bush,misc.headlines,talk.politics.misc
Subject: "STRONG FAMILY VALUES" (II)
Date: 18 Aug 92 22:15:02 GMT
Followup-To: alt.politics.elections
Organization: misc.activism.progressive on UseNet ; ACTIV-L@UMCVMB


Duration of nationally provided paid maternity leave in weeks,1988:

          ======================
          COUNTRY          WEEKS  
          ======================

          United Kingdom      40  
          Finland             38  
          Denmark             28  
          France           16-28  
          Italy               22  

          Norway              20  
          Canada           17-18  
          Austria             16  

          Belgium             14
          Germany             14
          Ireland             14
          Japan               14
          Spain               14

          Netherlands         12
          Sweden              12
          Switzerland       8-12



          United States        0

Source: International Labor Organization, "Work and Family: The Child Care
Challenge," Conditions of Work Digest, vol. 7, February 1988.

 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
From page 11 of:


 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -  
_We're Number One, Where America Stands -- and Falls -- in the New    
World Order_ by Andrew L Shapiro.   

New York, May 1992, Vintage Books, a division of Random House.   
$10 paperback. ISBN 0-679-73893-2  
 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -   

    "America is becoming a land of private greed and public squalor.   
    This book is an indispensable road map through the wreckage. The   
    facts it reveals will startle you. They may depress you. But   
    ideally they'll fire you up to help rebuild this nation."   

                        -Robert B. Reich, author of The Work of Nations   

Xref: sparky alt.activism:14776 alt.desert-storm:1687 alt.politics.elections:10532 talk.politics.misc:39547 talk.politics.mideast:18554
From: zenith89@bwdlh130.bnr.ca (Chris VanFleet)
Subject: Re: reagan
Reply-To: zenith89@bwdlh130.bnr.ca ()
Organization: Bell-Northern Research, Ltd., Ottawa, CANADA
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 14:25:07 GMT

In article <cass8806.233@elan.glassboro.edu> cass8806@elan.glassboro.edu (KYLE CASSIDY) writes:
>	i suppose everyone saw the convention last night. i think my blood 
>pressure rose perceptably. pat buchannan, what a man -- i couldn't have said 
>anything any more damming about the republican party than what came out of 
>that mans mouth. whose side is he on anyway? 

He's on the side of those who work for a living. He's NOT on the
side of the layabouts who prefer government cheques or stealing
instead of working.

Xref: sparky alt.activism:15008 alt.individualism:5271 talk.politics.misc:40384
From: fulton@copper.ucs.indiana.edu (Ben Fulton)
Newsgroups: alt.activism,alt.individualism,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Age of Consent
Date: 18 Aug 92 16:38:49 GMT
Organization: Indiana University

In <1992Aug18.153613.17858@cs.brown.edu> pcm@cs.brown.edu (Peter C. McCluskey) writes:

>|> 	And who is to decide what is coercion? 
>|> 	Is it coercion to promise a four year old some candy for "playing"
>|> with Uncle Miltie? Is it coercion if a child lets grandpa fondle her 
>|> because she wants to please him? 

>If either the parents or the child say it is coercion, then I would consider
>it coercion. Do you have a better answer?

If the parents decide it is not coercion, we are left with the child's 
decision.  Do you honestly believe a four-year old is capable of making
an informed decision about what is or is not coercion?

>|> 	What if that new guardian is a pimp, a neighbor with a grudge
>|> against the child's parents, or a sex offender? Are _those_ choices sane
>|> ones?

>I suggest that we define "guardian" to mean someone who will make
>a legally binding committment to support the child until maturity,
>i.e. finance the child's education, medical costs, etc. at levels
>comparable to what the child's parents would have. This would eliminate
>most of the undesirable people that you are concerned about.

I suspect it would not eliminate pimps, and probably not neighbors with 
grudges, if the grudges are strong enough.

ben
fulton@copper.ucs.indiana.edu
"Get the hell out of my way!" - John Galt
From: martin@pharaoh.cyborg.bt.co.uk (Martin Gorman)
Newsgroups: alt.activism
Subject: Re: Ban Guns Now - Make life easier for us
Date: 13 Aug 92 16:36:53 GMT
Organization: British Telecom

rivero@mdcbbs.com writes:
>If guns are outlawed, only the outlaws will have them.
>The regular citizens will be defenseless. That's an open invitation to
>military coup and the subordination of the democratic process to fascism.
>That's been the pattern, without exception, in all modern nations that
>had a standing army and an unarmed civil population.
>
Guess I must have been asleep when it happened here in the UK.
From: jym@remarque.berkeley.edu (Jym Dyer)
Newsgroups: alt.activism,ucb.peoples-park
Subject: INFO: The Other Lawsuit (was: UC settles lawsuit for $25,000)
Followup-To: alt.activism.d,ucb.peoples-park
Date: 12 Aug 1992 16:01:41 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu
Keywords: People's Park

> David Kamola, 33, and Christopher Mackinney, 36, allegedly
> drew anti-UC slogans on a sidewalk adjacent to People's Park
> last year. . . . Both men filed a suit against the university
> on the grounds that their First Amendment rights were
> violated.

=+= Yet another lawsuit has been filed by UC against activist
David Nadel.  Nadel made a statement to the effect that he would
not be surprised if somebody vandalized the volleyball courts
that UC put up in People's Park.  When the courts were indeed
vandalized, UC filed a lawsuit against Nadel for "inciting" it.

=+= This is widely viewed as a SLAPP lawsuit.  UC hasn't a
snowball's chance in Hell of winning the lawsuit (thanks to the
First Amendment), but it can run up Nadel's legal expenses.
Out of all the People's Park activists who've mentioned the
likelihood of vandalism, they chose Nadel, presumably because
he's the only one with assets:  Nadel owns Ashkenaz, Berkeley's
finest dance club.
    <_Jym_>
From: aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer)
Subject: Re: Catastrophe In Iraq : Followup
Organization: Evil Geniuses for a Better Tomorrow
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 12:45:46 GMT

In article <1992Aug14.011034.4856@oracle.us.oracle.com> rchilder@us.oracle.com (Richard Childers) writes:

>>So Harel, what would you have us do about all this now? So far you
>>have been strangely silent about this.

>So, Allen, what would you have us do about all this now? So far you
>have been deranged and violent about this.	(-:

I thought that was clear. We should continue the embargo until Iraq
complies with the terms of the ceace fire.

I was just wondering if Harel agreed but he seems unwilling (unable?)
to express himself on this issue.

  Allen
-- 
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Allen W. Sherzer | "If they can put a man on the Moon, why can't they     |
|  aws@iti.org     |  put a man on the Moon?"                               |
+----------------------252 DAYS TO FIRST FLIGHT OF DCX----------------------+
Xref: sparky alt.activism:15122 talk.politics.misc:40733 soc.culture.latin-america:3159
From: bfrg9732@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Brian F. Redman)
Subject: Re: Never again. How soon we forget.
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 14:50:57 GMT

kmcvay@oneb.almanac.bc.ca (Ken Mcvay) writes:

>>>>>	This is pathetic, and somewhat sick.
>>>	2) It wasn't in repsonse to what you posted, but what Brian did.
>>
>>  I know that, but the questions are still valid and the "pro-
>>  interventionists" are still evading them.  

>Here's some solid political advice, certain to assuage the concerns of the
>poltical left - there is clearly only one policy which we can adopt, and
>that is to endlessly pontificate about how to help, in the hope everyone
>will be dead before we have to get off our ass and actually _do_ anything.

>With some judicious political prattle, we can adopt the high moral
>appearance of wanting to help stop the killing, while doing nothing of the
>sort, thus placating everyone opposed to intervention.

>It might help to televise the killing every night on news specials, with
>sports commentators instead of news commentators - given the end of the
>Olympic Games, there are now lots of them available for work.

I call your attention to an article in this week's NEWSWEEK magazine
entitled "It's All Too Easy to Get Sucked Into War." (August 17, 1992
issue, page 20, by David H. Hackworth). The author, David H. Hackworth,
was part of a U.S. force which was involved in fighting against 
Yugoslavian guerrillas between 1945 and 1953. "In a half century of
wandering around battlefieds, I've never met fiercer fighters. They
could easily suck the United States into a ground war -- hook, line
and body bag." writes Hackworth.

Hackworth points out that, fresh from a victory in the Gulf War, we
have a tendency to assume that any conflict in the Yugoslav republics
will be similarly antiseptic: "...the idea is that we can deal with
Serbia from the air. The plan, if it comes to that, would be to
replay the gulf war with all its laser and stealth wonder toys:
totally antiseptic, almost bloodless and oh, by the way, a boon for
the depressed U.S. defense industry, which is a heavy-duty political
contributor." The author proceeds to point out why any involvement
in Yugoslavia would *not* be a replay of the Desert Storm scenario.
He demonstrates that any U.S. military committment would inevitably
result in a committment of U.S. ground troops.

Hackworth writes that "...Yugoslavia is an impossible mission." Drawing
on his lifetime of military experience he warns that military 
involvement in the region is tantamount to getting dragged into
an unwinnable war. "...Yugoslavian soldiers, irregular or regular,
are the meanest mothers in the valley of death and the last tigers
the United States ever wants to try to tame."

Hackworth ends the article by suggesting that rather than risk
military disaster, we could "airdrop bundles of food and water to
the poor people who are trapped in the quagmire below."

Brian Redman
(bfrg9732@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu)
"Ah yes, Armageddon. I remember it well."

h

Newsgroups: alt.activism,talk.politics.drugs,alt.society.civil-liberty