HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: pnews@igc.apc.org (Hank Roth)
Newsgroups: alt.society.revolution
Subject: NO MORE GREENSBOROS!
Date: 22 Jan 93 01:09:00 GMT
Nf-ID: #N:cdp:1672200004:000:2192
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!pnews    Jan 21 17:09:00 1993


/* Written  5:07 pm  Jan 21, 1993 by pnews in igc:p.news */
/* ---------- "NO MORE GREENSBOROS!" ---------- */
<<< via P_news/p.news >>>
{From WORKERS VANGUARD, biweekly of the Spartacist League of the 
U.S., Box 1377, GPO, NY, NY 10116 (November 1992)}
 
GREENSBORO MARTYRS 
 
Thirteen years have passed since the Greensboro Massacre. In 
broad daylight, the KKK/Nazi death squad drove up to a black 
housing project in Greensboro, NC, where an anti-Klan rally was 
gathering. With cool deliberation, the killers took their 
weapons out of the trunk, aimed, fired, and drove off. Five 
leftists, civil rights activists and union organizers lay dying 
in pools of blood, others were wounded or maimed for life. These 
were the opening shots, carried out under the Democratic Carter 
administration, of the Reagan years' war on labor and blacks. 
 
Greensboro was a conspiracy of the fascists and their patrons in 
the capitalist state. From the outset, the KKK and Nazis were 
aided and abetted by the government, from the G-man who helped 
train the killers and plot the assassinations to the "former" FBI 
informer who rode shotgun in the motorcade of death and the 
Greensboro cop who brought up the rear. Two successive all-white 
juries acquitted the killers of all charges, affirming once 
again the meaning of "justice" in this racist capitalist state. 
 
"Greensboro" --- the name cries out for justice, for vengeance. 
When the liberals claim it was a "shootout" and say to ignore the 
fascists, when the lynchers say they want to parade in their 
white sheets in our neighborhoods, we remember Greensboro by 
mobilizing to stop them. Immediately after the massacre, when the 
fascists sought to march in black Detroit, we organized a 
labor/black mobilization to stop them, as we have done from 
Washington and Philadelphia to Chicago and San Francisco. 
 
We honor the Greensboro martyrs --- Cesar Cauce, Michael Nathan, 
Bill Sampson, Sandi Smith, James Waller --- and rededicate 
ourselves to the fight against fascist terror. The working class 
in power, the third American revolution, will ensure there shall 
be NO MORE GREENSBOROS!
 
                       3 November 1979
From: jack@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk (Jack Campin)
Newsgroups: alt.society.revolution
Subject: Re: M.A.P. PURGES MIM
Date: 27 Jan 93 15:23:41 GMT
Reply-To: jack@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk (Jack Campin)
Organization: COMANDOS Project, Glesga Yoonie

Hank Roth <pnews@igc.apc.org> wrote:
> While Harel [Barzilai] won't permit debate over this in M.A.P. or posting
> by MIM [...]  And as he would have it, other *left* groups, i.e. RCP would
> also be purged, so that a sanitized version of the LEFT would be all that's
> LEFT. [...]  because MIM and WWP have come out in support of SL, a people's
> communist movement in Peru, Harel deems that "moral cowardice" and
> "cheerleading" for SL (and anyone who posts their articles are also
> resorting to "moral cowardice".) and are not worthy of posting to M.A.P.

Out of this alphabet soup I can work out that SL is Sendero Luminoso and
M.A.P. is misc.activism.progressive.  RCP is presumably Revolutionary
Communist Party, but do you mean the US or British one?  (they are not
aligned together, so it matters).  And MIM and WWP are a complete mystery
to me.  Explain?

-- 
--  Jack Campin    room G092, Computing Science Department, Glasgow University,
17 Lilybank Gardens, Glasgow G12 8RZ, Scotland   TEL: 041 339 8855 x6854 (work)
INTERNET: jack@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk or via nsfnet-relay.ac.uk    FAX: 041 330 4913
BANG!net: via mcsun and uknet     BITNET: via UKACRL    UUCP: jack@glasgow.uucp
Newsgroups: alt.society.revolution
From: shaffer@achilles.ctd.anl.gov (Michael A. Shaffer)
Subject: Good Grief!
Organization: Argonne National Laboratory
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 17:59:36 GMT


I didn't know this was a list for leftist revolution only. Guess I
will keep looking for the Libertarian revolutionaries.

				mike
From: gmw0622@rigel.tamu.edu (Mr. Grinch)
Newsgroups: alt.society.revolution
Subject: quote
Date: 21 Jan 1993 11:41 CST
Organization: GrinchCo
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: rigel.tamu.edu
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    

	Mr. Clinton in his innauguarl adress said,  "Thomas Jefferson believed
that to preserve the very foundations of our nation,  we would need
dramatic change from time to time.  Well my fellow Americans,  this is
our time.  Let us embrace it.

	This is pretty clearly a refernce to a Jefferson quote which I'm
sure many of you are familiar with,  it goes something like,  "The tree
of liberty must have its roots watered from time to time with the blood of
patriots and tyrants".

	Just what is our President calling for us to do?

Mr. GRinch
From: pauls@css.itd.umich.edu (Paul Southworth)
Newsgroups: alt.society.revolution
Subject: Re: Good Grief!
Date: 23 Jan 1993 20:13:22 GMT
Organization: University of Michigan ITD Consulting and Support Services
NNTP-Posting-Host: stimpy.css.itd.umich.edu

In article <1993Jan22.175936.18234@mcs.anl.gov> shaffer@achilles.ctd.anl.gov (Michael A. Shaffer) writes:
>
>I didn't know this was a list for leftist revolution only. Guess I
>will keep looking for the Libertarian revolutionaries.


If you want a libertarian revolution, don't just look for one, *be* one.
If you want to propose libertarian revolutionary ideas, I think people
would be happy to talk about them.  I'm definitely in that boat, though
I doubt that I will agree with you.

Don't complain, speak your mind and see what happens.
From: hippee@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu
Newsgroups: alt.society.revolution
Subject: Re: quote
Date: 25 Jan 93 21:33:01 CST
Organization: University of Kansas Academic Computing Services

In article <1993Jan25.002216.13822@nntp.hut.fi>, jkp@cs.HUT.FI (Jyrki Kuoppala) writes:
> In alt.society.revolution <21JAN199311411917@rigel.tamu.edu>, gmw0622@rigel (Mr. Grinch) writes:
>>	Mr. Clinton in his innauguarl adress said,  "Thomas Jefferson believed
>>that to preserve the very foundations of our nation,  we would need
>>dramatic change from time to time.  Well my fellow Americans,  this is
>>our time.  Let us embrace it.
>>
>>	This is pretty clearly a refernce to a Jefferson quote which I'm
>>sure many of you are familiar with,  it goes something like,  "The tree
>>of liberty must have its roots watered from time to time with the blood of
>>patriots and tyrants".
>>
Not being a big Clinton fan, nonetheless, I had thought that he referred to the
also famous phrase concerning the overturning of all laws, traditions, and 
customs every twenty years, a proposal that I could find myself agreeing with.

Hippee@KUHUB.cc.ukans.edu
From: pnews@igc.apc.org (Hank Roth)
Newsgroups: alt.society.revolution
Subject: M.A.P. PURGES MIM
Date: 27 Jan 93 03:51:00 GMT
Nf-ID: #N:cdp:1672200005:000:2952
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!pnews    Jan 26 19:51:00 1993


/* Written  7:48 pm  Jan 26, 1993 by pnews in igc:p.news */
<<< via P_news/p.news >>>

The letter following this was posted by Harel to M.A.P. to 
demonstrate support for his position. While Harel won't permit 
debate over this in M.A.P. or posting by MIM, he nevertheless is 
piling up everything he can to justify what the writer of this 
post [to follow] refers to supportively, as "N. American left 
efforts to purge these apologists from the U.S. left". And as he 
would have it, other *left* groups, i.e. RCP would also be 
purged, so that a sanitized version of the LEFT would be all 
that's LEFT. For leftists, like Harel [ET AL] to condemn Stalin, 
as he did in a previous post vis-a-vis this topic, they [Harel & 
company] certainly behave like Stalinists, with their call for 
purging MIM and RCP, among others and all their name-calling. I'm 
not defending MIM per se. MIM also resorts to it's share of name-
calling. But, because MIM and WWP have come out in 
support of SL, a people's communist movement in Peru, Harel 
deems that "moral cowardice" and "cheerleading" for SL (and 
anyone who posts their articles [referring to Kelly and to me] 
are also resorting to "moral cowardice".) and are not worthy of 
posting to M.A.P. NO DEBATE [he says]! 

That does amount to `paternalistism', censorship and 
anti-communism and I oppose it on those grounds. 

Does M.A.P. speaking through Harel also oppose the PLO for 
resorting to violence in its war for liberation against the 
Israelis? NO. I'm reminded of the confused answer to the 
question: Who is the `freedom fighter' and who is the 
`terrorist'?  Is it whoever M.A.P. and AI say it is? 

I'll decide for myself, thank you.---Hank Roth 

************************************************************************
From: MIKESH <MIKESH%EARLHAM.bitnet@MIZZOU1.missouri.edu>
TO: Harel <misc.activism.progressive> M.A.P.
Subject: Against MIM

---------------------- Original note follows ---------------------------
To Rich and Harel:

I fear that by this time you two have received innumerable 
threats of death for your wise decision to remove MIM from Activ-
L.  After attending the Rethinking Marxism conference in November 
I became so fed up with liberals insistent on extremist free 
speech that I began to wonder where good sense had fled (the 
conference permitted the irritating prescence of the RCP). 

I am friends with one of the chief propagandists for Sendero in 
the U.S. (Carol Andreas, "When Women Rebel") and I am quite 
satisfied with N. American left efforts to purge these apologists 
from the U.S. left. 
               
Interestingly, Chomsky signed some letter criticising the 
Peruvian govenment for its "AUTOGOLPE" last year.  The letter, 
while solid enough, seemed to be the work of Andreas and her 
cohorts.  The letter was published in the Nation. 

Cheers,

Michael Shellenberger
Student

##################################################################
From: yee@mipg.upenn.edu (Conway Yee)
Newsgroups: alt.society.civil-liberty
Subject: Re: The thread about female circum cicumcision
Date: 26 Jan 93 21:13:31 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania

>If that is your argument, than why did you even bring up female 
>circumcision as a specific? It seems as though it might be better 
>to simply argue your overwhelming point and only use circumcision 
>and child abuse cases as examples.

Actually, there is an excellent reason for pointing to specifics.
Let me take an example.  Few would argue that the 1st amendment
rights of the freedom of speech is important; to argue against it
would be sacriligious.  Many however, argue that pornography should
be banned.  Therein lies a contradiction.  Another example is that
in a "democratic" country such as Germany, the Nazi party is banned.
Political groups and music groups espousing Nazi precepts are suppressed.
Does this sound like a democracy?  I don't think so.  Wrt to the latter
example, the Anti-defamation League of Bnai-Brith (sp), an organization
dedicated to the preservation of the civil right of Jews is openly 
espousing the view that the civil rights of Nazi's should be violated
(source: an article in NY Times a couple of weeks ago).

This is why specific examples must be used when defending civil rights.

>I would argue for children to be granted (officially) all of the
>rights that adults now enjoy

>You seem to say that the government must not interfere beccause the parents
>know best; I say each person knows best what to do for him or herself and has
>the right to be wrong.

I disagree.  While a "child" 17.5 years may actually have the ability
to give informed consent, a child of 6 months obviously does not.  To
give this child of 6 months all the rights and responsibilities of a
full citizen would be hazardous to the child (and to the rest of
society).

I do not disagree, however, that the criteria used to establish
majority status (i.e. chronological age) is faulty but it is the
best that we can do at this time.

>I would not outlaw female circumcision, but our court system
>should allow those injured people to sue their parents if they so desire.

I agree.

-- 
411 Blockley Hall      |                    Conway Yee, N2JWQ
418 Service Drive      | yee@ming.mipg.upenn.edu    (preferred)
Philadelphia, PA 19104 | cy5@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (forwarded to above)
(215) 662-6780         |
Newsgroups: alt.society.civil-liberty
From: margoli@watson.ibm.com (Larry Margolis)
Newsgroups: alt.society.civil-liberty,talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Pro-choice wins a round.
Date: 26 Jan 93 23:09:45 GMT
Reply-To: margoli@watson.IBM.com
Followup-To: alt.society.civil-liberty
Organization: The Village Waterbed
News-Software: IBM OS/2 PM RN (NR/2) v0.16f by O. Vishnepolsky and R. Rogers
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM

In <330@ininx.UUCP> jkreznar@ininx.UUCP (John E. Kreznar) writes:
>In article <1993Jan23.094931.14067@watson.ibm.com>, margoli@watson.ibm.com (Larry Margolis) writes:
>> In <329@ininx.UUCP> jkreznar@ininx.UUCP (John E. Kreznar) writes:
>
>> >It used to be that you had a choice on whether to support abortion
>> >counseling.  Now, unless you have managed to remain free of the
>> >clutches of the United States Government, you no longer have that
>> >choice.  This means that part of your toil is applied, by way of
>> >taxation, in support of abortion counseling, whether or not you would
>> >so choose on your own.
>
>> Seems like you're confusing "pro-choice" (which refers to in favor of keeping
>> the availability of abortion as a legal choice) with "libertarian".
>
>I am merely observing that the disposition of one's toil is certainly
>a personal matter,

And I'm observing that that has nothing to do with "pro-choice" as it's
generally used, so it's not clear why you're pushing libertarianism in
talk.abortion.
--
Larry Margolis, MARGOLI@YKTVMV (Bitnet), margoli@watson.IBM.com (Internet)
From: uns002@cent1.lancs.ac.uk (University Radio Bailrigg)
Newsgroups: alt.society.civil-liberty
Subject: SUPPRESSION OF MEDIA FREEDOM - PLEASE READ
Date: 21 Jan 93 22:20:55 GMT
X-Received: by usenet.pa.dec.com; id AA21197; Thu, 21 Jan 93 14:44:31 -0800
X-Received: by inet-gw-1.pa.dec.com; id AA16949; Thu, 21 Jan 93 14:44:27 -0800
X-Via: uk.ac.lancaster.central1; Thu, 21 Jan 1993 22:19:58 +0000
X-To: alt.society.civil-liberty.usenet
X-The-Campus-Radio-Station-Of-Chioce: URB!
X-Message-Sent-By: James Masterton
X-Listen-To-Us-On: 963Khz MW
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL20]
X-Content-Type: text
X-Content-Length: 2180


		IMPORTANT! Serious posting from an English college.

	Today (Thu 21 Jan) University Radio Bailrigg in Lancaster was
closed down by its own student Union.

The basic premise behind this is that the Union do not like URB making money
off its own back. For this reason they have changed the locks and stopped us
broadcasting.
	We have a highly successful deal with a local nightclub, for which
	we provide Djs and publicity. This knocks spots out of the Union-run
nightclub in the area, which offers jobs to the entire Exec, who stand to lose
if their club performs poorly... You can sense their motives now.

	With no warning given of any grievance they had with us, they simply
	stormed our station and closed it down. This occured late at night,
not during office hours, but after an Exec meeting from which independent
observers were excluded (democracy?). The mass meeting held two days
previously was not consulted.

	We need your help.

	This is a dangerous precedent. With funding from unions minimal and
	soon to disappear (union budgets are tight and the pressure on radio
	stations is ever-increasing), how else are we to operate a
	radio station?

We are therefore putting this out as a general appeal to as many
free-thinkers as possible to please, if you could spare just a few
pounds/dollars/whatever and a few minutes of your time to send a fax of
support and protest to the Students Union at Lancaster University, UK on
the following number:

		+44 524 846 732

This will help to show the union that they are not able to simply ride
roughshod over a few individuals and there are people all over the world
who feel as strongly as we do over this travesty of democracy

	Your help will be greatly appreciated. This is NOT a joke.

Thankyou in advance....

-- 
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|               University Radio Bailrigg at Lancaster University              |
|      e-mail : uns002@uk.ac.lancs.cent1 (JANET)                               |
|               uns002@lancaster.ac.uk   (INTERNET)                            |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
Newsgroups: alt.society.civil-liberty,talk.abortion
From: margoli@watson.ibm.com (Larry Margolis)
Subject: Re: Pro-choice wins a round.
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 09:49:31 GMT
News-Software: IBM OS/2 PM RN (NR/2) v0.16f by O. Vishnepolsky and R. Rogers
Reply-To: margoli@watson.IBM.com
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: The Village Waterbed

In <329@ininx.UUCP> jkreznar@ininx.UUCP (John E. Kreznar) writes:
>
>Because it presumes to compel membership, government is a way of
>supplanting the personal choices of anyone subject to its rule with
>the choices of someone else.  To the extent that the government is a
>democratic one, personal choice is supplanted with collective choice.
>
>In most departments of government activity, one assumes that advocates
>of that activity _intend_ for subjects of the government to be
>deprived of their personal choice.
>
>But this cannot apply to advocates of tax-funded abortion counseling,
>because they do so _in the name_ of pro-choice.
>
>Nor can it apply to advocates of tax funding for abortion, for the
>same reason.
>
>How do these advocates rationalize this contradiction?
..
>It used to be that you had a choice on whether to support abortion
>counseling.  Now, unless you have managed to remain free of the
>clutches of the United States Government, you no longer have that
>choice.  This means that part of your toil is applied, by way of
>taxation, in support of abortion counseling, whether or not you would
>so choose on your own.
>
>Notice that the perspective from which these questions are asked is
>profoundly pro-choice.  Please do not respond if you do not understand
>this.

Seems like you're confusing "pro-choice" (which refers to in favor of keeping
the availability of abortion as a legal choice) with "libertarian".
--
Larry Margolis, MARGOLI@YKTVMV (Bitnet), margoli@watson.IBM.com (Internet)
Newsgroups: alt.society.civil-liberty
From: greeny@top.cis.syr.edu (J. S. Greenfield)
Subject: Re: The thread about female circum cicumcision
Organization: Syracuse University, CIS Dept.
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 17:10:08 EST

In article <105810@netnews.upenn.edu> yee@mipg.upenn.edu (Conway Yee) writes:
>
>Remember the purpose of the services set up by the government: they are there
>to protect the innocent child from "abusive" parents.  Does anyone think that
>this goal is not laudable?  No.  But look at the practical effect of such an
>agency.  Here we have a systemic institutionalization of bureaucratic 
>terrorism.  Is the cure worse than the disease?
>
>This is why I believe that female circumcision should not be banned by the
>government.  Governments can not be trusted with power over its people.

So you *are* opposed to *any* government action, right?  Can you just
explicitly state whether or not you believe that governments should have
any power to do anything?

-- 
J. S. Greenfield                                         greeny@top.cis.syr.edu
(I like to put 'greeny' here, 
but my d*mn system wants a 
*real* name!)                        "What's the difference between an orange?"
Xref: sparky alt.society.civil-liberty:7466 comp.org.eff.talk:9056 alt.privacy:3000 alt.politics.usa.misc:903 talk.politics.misc:68929 alt.censorship:10055 alt.security:5338
From: tdarcos@digex.digex.com (Paul Robinson)
Newsgroups: alt.society.civil-liberty,comp.org.eff.talk,alt.privacy,alt.politics.usa.misc,talk.politics.misc,alt.censorship,alt.security
Subject: Re: [aus.aarnet et al] PAX Anonymous & Encrypted Service shutdown
Date: 21 Jan 1993 13:19:25 GMT
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA
Distribution: inet
NNTP-Posting-Host: access.digex.com
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3

Subject: Re: [aus.aarnet et al] PAX Anonymous & Encrypted Service shutdown
Newsgroups: alt.society.civil-liberty,comp.org.eff.talk,alt.privacy,alt.politics.usa.misc,talk.politics.misc,alt.censorship,alt.security
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA
Distribution: 

kgspence@mtu.edu (Phi Phi 211) writes:
: In article <1993Jan15.011510.14793@nntp.hut.fi> jkp@cs.HUT.FI (Jyrki Kuoppala) writes:
: >The anonymous and encrypted mail service at PAX has been shutdown.
: 
: 
: Sigh, it's too bad that something so good had to be removed by those who
: can't deal w/ the fact that users deserve privacy. ( I know I'm opening my
: self up to flames here, but seriously if I were doing something so bad I'd
: have to worry about admins snooping my mail, I think I'd find other ways than
: mail to do it.)

I don't see why that you should be flamed about this.  As the FAQ on the
Finland Service mentioned, there are reasons for wanting privacy such as
those who post to incest survivors groups.

I'd love to try setting up a domain for this purpose from a commercial
supplier.  It's too bad MCI Mail is so expensive for sending messages or
this would be perfect.  And be an excellent test case.

: 
: Could someone email me the address of the anon service in finland? Or
: any other anon email services?
: 

help@anon.penet.fi
Newsgroups: alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.politics.usa.constitution,alt.politics.usa.misc,talk.politics.misc
From: phz@cadence.com (Pete Zakel)
Subject: Is it time to legalize *all* drugs yet?
Organization: Cadence Design Systems, Inc.
Distribution: usa 
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 22:04:35 GMT

In article <bob1.726962593@cos> bob1@cos.com (Bob Blackshaw) writes:
>I haven't made up my mind on legalization yet, but the above kind of

I have.  Basically, I feel laws against simple possession and use of drugs
in the privacy of one's home violate at LEAST four basic rights:

	1) The right to self-determination

	2) The right to pursue happiness

	3) The right to privacy

	4) The right to be left alone

Therefore, such laws are ALREADY unConsititutional -- the Supreme Court just
hasn't been able to see sufficiently beyond their short-sightedness to be
able to recognize it.

>Just wish there
>was a good way of spotting a driver high on crack.

Just as I wish there was a good way of spotting a driver whose attention is
being diverted by anger, who is impaired from lack of sleep, whose physical
condition (age or illness) impairs driving ability, or who is about to drop
a lit cigarette into his or her lap.

And don't forget that not all drugs impair driving ability to the same degree,
and some drugs actually ENHANCE driving ability.  I think impairment should
be measured by impairment testers, not by measuring percentage of certain
chemicals in one's bloodstream.  It is entirely possible that some people have
sufficient driving ability at .08% blood alcohol while others are sufficiently
impaired at .07% (but the .08% person would automatically suffer penalties
while the .07% person wouldn't -- which is patently unfair if the blood
alcohol percentage doesn't reflect actual driving ability).  An imparment
tester would be a much better device for showing impairment, and would have
the advantage of not needing to show the *reason* for the impairment.

-Pete Zakel
 (phz@cadence.com or ..!uunet!cadence!phz)

Always borrow money from a pessimist; he doesn't expect to be paid back.





























Answer: The drug that enhances driving ability in many cases is caffeine.