HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: sbradley@scic.intel.com (Seth Bradley)
Subject: Re: Bush team said to skew latest economic-growth data
Organization: Intel Corporation
Distribution: alt
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 15:02:02 GMT

In article <1992Nov16.231807.12565@pony.Ingres.COM> reb@Ingres.COM (Phydeaux) writes:
>In article <1992Nov16.183456.19709@scic.intel.com> sbradley@scic.intel.com (Seth Bradley) writes:
>>found this out while doing some research for a paper.  If anyone wants to
>>know the definitions for the 7 figures, I could post it.
>Please do!  (along with any figures you may happen to have!)

The following is from "America's Deilemma: Jobs Vs. Prices" by Alfred L.
Malabre, Jr. (highly recommended for a better understanding of unemployment
and inflation numbers):

The Bureau of Labor Statistics publishes 7 numbers for unemployment each
month.  U-1 shows persons unemployed 15 weeks or longer as a percant of
the total civilian labor force; U-2 shows job losers as a percent of the 
civilian labor force; U-3 expresses unemployed houshold heads as a percent
of the household-head labor force; U-4 shows unemployed full-time jobseekers
as a percent of the full-time labor force; U-5, the rate that grabs the
headlines, gives the total unemployed as a percent of the civilian labor
force; U-6 shows the jobless rate for full-time jobseekers plus those 
seeking part-time jobs for economic reasons; U-7 shows what the overall
unemployment rate would be if so-called discouraged workers, persons given
up looking for work but would like a job, are included.
-- 
Seth J. Bradley, Senior System Administrator, Intel SCIC
Internet: sbradley@scic.intel.com   UUCP: uunet!scic.intel.com!sbradley
----------------------------------------
"A system admin's life is a sorry one.  The only advantage he has over
Emergency Room doctors is that malpractice suits are rare.  On the other
hand, ER doctors never have to deal with patients installing new versions
of their own innards!"  -Michael O'Brien
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy
From: sbradley@scic.intel.com (Seth Bradley)
Subject: Re: Censoring John Dinardo ... Restore his access
Organization: Intel Corporation
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 16:09:25 GMT

In article <1eq807INN1uv@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> aq817@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Steve Crocker) writes:
>
>Seth, are the 4 points you posted from news.announce.newusers
>to be considered official policy statements of usenet, or just
>some individuals opinion? Inquiring minds want to know.

They are official policy in so far as there is any official
usenet policy, as there is no central authority - however,
the messages posted to news.announce.newusers were written
primarily by people who were instrumental in getting the net started
in the first place, and they are generally considered to be
authoritative.
-- 
Seth J. Bradley, Senior System Administrator, Intel SCIC
Internet: sbradley@scic.intel.com   UUCP: uunet!scic.intel.com!sbradley
----------------------------------------
"A system admin's life is a sorry one.  The only advantage he has over
Emergency Room doctors is that malpractice suits are rare.  On the other
hand, ER doctors never have to deal with patients installing new versions
of their own innards!"  -Michael O'Brien
Xref: sparky alt.conspiracy:12311 soc.culture.jewish:20443
From: thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy,soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Jews in Banks
Date: 19 Nov 92 00:33:09 GMT
Article-I.D.: midway.1992Nov19.003309.26633
Reply-To: thf2@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations

In article <1992Nov18.175600.1908@ccsvax.sfasu.edu> f_gautjw@ccsvax.sfasu.edu writes:
>In article <1992Nov18.003922.5269@ennews.eas.asu.edu>, makowsky@enuxhb.eas.asu.edu (David Makowsky) writes:
>> 	He was fired because the whole thing was a lie.
>
>	How can you be so dogmatic in your belief that he was lying?
>Evidently Harry Katz, member of AIPAC, thinks the lobby has indeed
>acquired "disproportionate political power" as he said or I hardly
>think he would have gone to the trouble to start taping conversations.

Maybe Harry Katz wanted attention?  Or maybe, indeed, Harry Katz decided
that he didn't like AIPAC, and wanted to embarass them.  I believe
Katz prompted the AIPAC guy to say what he said.

We've seen the same thing, when Gennifer Flowers tried to get Clinton
to say something bad about Cuomo so she could sell her tape for more
money.

>	I hardly need to make up a lobbying group to express my opinion
>that a major part of our problem is lobbying groups.  And regardless of
>who likes it or not, I am free to speak out against the abuse of powers
>by special interest groups, of which AIPAC is just one--although it is
>a powerful one, which are so damaging to the best interests of this
>nation.  Frankly, I am tired of government by lobby and special interest
>group.  If being a loyal citizen who would like to see government restored
>to the people is a crime, then I plead guilty.  If you prefer government
>by lobby, fine.

So did the founding fathers of this country.  Read the Federalist papers
sometime.

And I would argue that what AIPAC does *is* in the best interests of
this country, but that's for another newsgroup.
-- 
ted frank                     | thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu 
standard disclaimers          | void where prohibited
the university of chicago law school, chicago, illinois 60637
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy
From: pcollac@pyrnova.mis.pyramid.com (Paul Collacchi)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Subject: Re: I Have Been Forbidden to Speak the Truth From THIS Account
Date: 19 Nov 92 03:26:25 GMT
Reply-To: pcollac@pyrnova.mis.pyramid.com (Paul Collacchi)
Distribution: usa
Organization: Pyramid Technologies, Mt. View, California.

Is it the case the AT&T could be found liable for something that
John wrote?  By what principal of law?

Paul Collacchi
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
From: jmk@cbnews.cb.att.com (joseph.m.knapp)
Subject: Re: "Frontline" re JFK
Organization: AT&T
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 15:14:49 GMT

dxc4@po.CWRU.Edu (David Condon) writes:
>In a previous article, schuck@fraser.sfu.ca (Bruce Jonathan Schuck) says:
>>jmk@cbnews.cb.att.com (joseph.m.knapp) writes:
>>
>>>It should be noted though that the electoral score was JFK 303, RMN 219,
>>>and Byrd 15, so Illinois' 27 electoral votes were not decisive and any
>>>help from Chicago graveyards is a moot point.
>>
>>Well.... 303 - 27 = 276
>>         219 + 27 = 246 
>>
>>One more 15 electoral vote [or more] switch to Nixon 
>>and a win in Illinois for Nixon *would* have been decisive!
>
>Well Texas would have taken care of that, where irregularities were also
>suspected.
>

Texas had 24 EVs in 1960, so if Nixon won Illinois and Texas, he would have
had 219 + 27 + 24 = 270 EVs, or one more than he needed to win. How close
was the popular vote in Texas?

---
Joe Knapp   jmk@cbvox.att.com
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
From: busta@vicki.enet.dec.com
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Subject: Re: 29th Anniversary of the Assasination
Date: 17 Nov 92 15:42:34 GMT
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation


In article <16NOV199215390225@nssdca.gsfc.nasa.gov>, bwood@nssdca.gsfc.nasa.
gov (William Wood) writes...
>Dear Rob,
> 
>  The family 'used' to have annual rituals there on the 22nd.  
>However, in recent years they have choosen to remember JFK on
>his birthday instead.  I was at Arlington last Wednesday (Vets
>Day), and I'll be there again this Sunday.. This time @ JFK's
>grave, as I have for the past 29 years.  Drop me a (e-mail)
>line if I can be of further help.  Bill


  A quick question for you Mr. Wood. You wouldn't, by chance, be the William
 Wood, CIA or ex-CIA, who once went to work on attempting to discredit 
 Jim Garrisons' investigation in the late sixties, are you? I mean, if you
 are the same man, I would doubt you would admit having worked for the `company'
 as a matter of standard procedure. It seems rather strange to me that a lot
 of the suspects in Mr. Garrisons' investigation also later ended up working
 for NASA...........


  Whatever your reply, I'll be skeptical...............;^)


 Regards,

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

Paul R. Busta	Busta@vicki.enet.dec.com                       Salem,N.H.  
		--or-- ...!decwrl!vicki.enet.dec.com!busta    603-894-3962
		--or-- busta%vicki.enet@decwrl.dec.com

         "One only sees what one observes, and one observes only 
              those things which are already in the mind."
From: aq817@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Steve Crocker)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Subject: Re: Site at UC San Francisco cut off from this group - why?
Date: 21 Nov 1992 06:57:22 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


A while back I posted some email from a person whose site had been
mysteriously cut off from alt.conspiracy.jfk. I received this email
in response, which I am posting here with permission. Note the odd
circumstances according to which John's articles are sometimes 
unavailable. This is not the first time I have heard this complaint.
Would forged cancellation messages account for this problem?

At John's suggestion, I am requesting that anyone who has noticed
this problem, or variants such as completely missing series installments, 
drop one of us a note. Mail to jad@Turing.ORG (John) or ad626@yfn.ysu.edu 
(me) or aq817@cleveland.freenet.edu  (me again). Messages to John will 
probably get more prompt attention, since I normally have access only 
on weekends.

<begin repost>

Date: Tue Nov 17 15:06:33 1992
From: ICCMH@ASUACAD.bitnet
Subject:      Re: Site at UC San Francisco cut off from this group - why?
To: ad626@yfn.ysu.edu


Hi, I've never posted before, so please forgive me if this is messed up
somehow.  I thought you might be interested in the availability of this
news group here at Arizona State University.  Some days the newsgroup is
not available at all, that is, it just doesn't appear on the list from
which I select what I want to read.  Then the next day, it will be back,
with many articles in it to read.  Is this because there is no new, unread
articles in the group?   Also, in regard to the articles about John DiNardo
and AT & T, sometimes this system lets me read them, and sometimes it says
"Sorry, this article cannot be displayed".  However, I have not been able
to figure out what criteria the censors (?) use to limit access, as some
articles that I can read are in response to others.  Sometimes I can even
read what is posted by JAD, himself, and other times, I can't.  Does any
of this mean anything?

[poster's name and particulars deleted at her request]

<end repost>

-Steve
From: dxc4@po.CWRU.Edu (David Condon)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Subject: Re: "Frontline" re JFK
Date: 22 Nov 1992 22:17:46 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: dxc4@po.CWRU.Edu (David Condon)
NNTP-Posting-Host: thor.ins.cwru.edu


In a previous article, schuck@fraser.sfu.ca (Bruce Jonathan Schuck) says:

>jmk@cbnews.cb.att.com (joseph.m.knapp) writes:
>
>><U54778@uicvm.uic.edu> writes:
>>>                                             Add to this the rumored story
>>>of the Mafia influence in the South and in Chicago which put JFK over the
>>>top in the election with a slim 6 figure lead.
>
>>It should be noted though that the electoral score was JFK 303, RMN 219,
>>and Byrd 15, so Illinois' 27 electoral votes were not decisive and any
>>help from Chicago graveyards is a moot point.
>
>Well.... 303 - 27 = 276
>         219 + 27 = 246 
>
>One more 15 electoral vote [or more] switch to Nixon 
>and a win in Illinois for Nixon *would* have been decisive!

Well TExas would have taken care of that, where irregularities were also
suspected.


>
>Thats assuming electoral votes are all or nothing, and since I'm
>Canadian, correct me if I'm wrong on that.
>
>
>-- 
>......
>
>
-- 
         I just know that something good is gonna happen
         I don't know when,
         But just saying it could even make it happen ...      _o_
                                                                |<
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
From: dansmith@mcopn2.dseg.ti.com (Dan Smith)
Subject: Secret Service Assassin
Reply-To: dansmith@mcopn2.dseg.ti.com
Organization: Texas Instruments, Inc.
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 19:14:06 GMT

Hey guys, I recently saw a new book that seems to speculate that a secret service
guy riding one or two cars back in the motorcade shot JFK from behind for the
fatal shot. Any more info on this theory? Has anyone read this book? What do you
think of the theory and what is the actual theory? The book shows a picture of the
motorcade with this guy holding his rifle up a little bit. This didn't mean much to
me but I'm curious to here more about this theory.


Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
From: indiana@ac.dal.ca
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Subject: "Frontline" re JFK
Date: 18 Nov 92 00:30:54 -0400
Organization: Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada


   PBS "Frontline" has just aired a program about Frank Ragano, lawyer for
Santos Trafficante and Jimmy Hoffa, which supports the Robt. Blakie view
that the Mafia "hit" JFK, using "nut" Oswald.  (Swipe taken at Jim Garrison).
  
   Detroit PBS will re-broadcast this program tonight at 1 or 2a.m.EST.
  
   Catch a re-broadcast if you can.  Would be most interested to read
your posted reactions to it.
  
   (Only 3 items in the JFK newsgroup tonight !!! )
Xref: sparky alt.conspiracy.jfk:3849 alt.conspiracy:12345 alt.activism:19019
From: dxc4@po.CWRU.Edu (David Condon)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,alt.activism
Subject: Re: I Have Been Forbidden to Speak the Truth From THIS Account
Date: 20 Nov 1992 04:25:30 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: dxc4@po.CWRU.Edu (David Condon)
NNTP-Posting-Host: thor.ins.cwru.edu


In a previous article, pcollac@pyrnova.mis.pyramid.com (Paul Collacchi) says:

>Is it the case the AT&T could be found liable for something that
>John wrote?  By what principal of law?

Because (hypothetically, if somebody actually did sue, which is unlikely
because most of the people John quotes from are only too happy to see their
ideas being given a hearing in another medium, and the interviewer for
Pacifica radio, Gary Null, said as much to John), but hypothetically,
AT&T "published" John's words by disseminating them over the net. That's
why we should all push for electronic networks to be legally considered 
common carriers.
-- 
         I just know that something good is gonna happen
         I don't know when,
         But just saying it could even make it happen ...      _o_
                                                                |<
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
From: ccasm@cc.newcastle.edu.au
Subject: Re:    REEVALUATION OF CASTRO/CONSIDERATION OF RAGGONO
Organization: University of Newcastle, AUSTRALIA
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 00:55:25 GMT

In article <92324.035400U54778@uicvm.uic.edu>, <U54778@uicvm.uic.edu> writes:
> Two subjects in the arena of speculation.  Fact police, please remain calm.
> 
> The latest Frontline centering around Raggono's tale was very interesting.
> Since I have already come across most of what Raggono testifies to, I was
> mainly intrigued by how much they covered of Raggono's close relationship
> with Hoffa and Trafficante through the years.  One does have to pause for
> thought with the ending scene, where they tell you that Raggono is up for
> sentencing again.  Is he telling us true tales because it is part of his
> deal with the gov.?  Or is he telling us convincing fibs for the same
> reason?
>   After reading Davis, Moldea and others, it is hard to believe that
> the Mafia did not have something to do with the assassination.  And after
> reading Seth Kantor and others, it seems pointless to claim that Ruby
> had no connections to the mob.  But the "Mafia did it" scenario always
> feels to me to be lacking finality to it.
> other scenarios delete......

The scenario that never seems to get aried here is the one I favour. It goes
like this:

This was a political hit. JFK was a politician, who may have made promises to
the mob which he couldn't or didn't feel obliged to keep ( did they really get
him elected?). JFK was a Democrat (how come with his establishment background?)
Bush and Nixon were Republican politicians. The CIA was a political/ideological
body which became an "army". The Pentagon was a defence organisation that
realised it needed to influence politics. JFK was changing politics, foreign
policy, the economic viability of what used to be called "The Establishment" in
the 1960's and the influence of the mafia.

Is it surprising that what has been happening sine the days of Rome was to be
the fate of a leader who did not represent these strong but covert political
forces. 

So if the leaders of the CIA misused their position to collude with the
leader/s of the mob to make JFK an offer he couldn't refuse, it should come as
no surprise. Others see it as a political coup.

Did "they" win? Well the CIA did. The mob did. Nixon, Bush, Reagan did. The
Pentagon did. The FBI, I don't think so. Cuba -no. Russia - no. The oilmen did
until the arabs took over in the mid-70's. The bankers did. The Democrats did
not. 

Did I miss anyone? Perhaps some secret society - wasn't Bush part of one from
his university days (comments invited). 

So my view is that given the circumstances a political solution was found. Who
benefited most were the supporters of the coup (obviously). 

Will Clinton be able to avoid the politics of his opponents?


Big Al.....
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
From: black@jazz.concert.net (Rob Black)
Subject: Observing the 29th Anniv.
Organization: MCNC Center for Communications -- CONCERT Network
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 18:55:02 GMT

Hello to all! I was wondering if there is any interest in meeting
at the gravesite at Arlington Cemetary on Sunday for some kind of
remembrance.

I'll be up there as will one other netter I know. Seeing as how it
will be the 29th anniversary of JFK's death, I think it would be 
appropiate to do something. I think I'd like to shoot for noon
for whatever we do.

If anyone else is interested, please e-mail me at black@concert.net

Even if you can't come I would welcome any ideas you would have
about what we could actually do once we all met.


Rob
From: jmk@cbnews.cb.att.com (joseph.m.knapp)
Subject: Re: "Frontline" re JFK
Organization: AT&T
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 14:45:43 GMT

<U54778@uicvm.uic.edu> writes:
>                                             Add to this the rumored story
>of the Mafia influence in the South and in Chicago which put JFK over the
>top in the election with a slim 6 figure lead.

It should be noted though that the electoral score was JFK 303, RMN 219,
and Byrd 15, so Illinois' 27 electoral votes were not decisive and any
help from Chicago graveyards is a moot point.

>            We need more than just another sensational story.
>ALAN ROGERS

True. The perennial bimbo stuff is mostly rehash and good only for 
mental masturbation.

---
Joe Knapp   jmk@cbvox.att.com
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
From: Mike_Quigley@mindlink.bc.ca (Mike Quigley)
Subject: Home Movies at Dealey Plaza
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 05:32:18 GMT

I'd like to know what other home movies were taken in the area of the
assassination, aside from the Zapruder film. Do any of these other films
appear anywhere? It would be nice if someone could issue a CAV laser disk so
the Zapruder (and other) films could be studied in frame-by-frame detail.
This would be an ideal medium, containing photos and other documents relating
to the assassination. (Maybe a CD ROM would be better?)

Speaking of laser disks, I hear that an extended version of Stone's film is
in the works, which will contain 17 more minutes of footage which never made
it into the theatrical version. The rumoured price of this set is around
$150, making me suspect the whole thing will be in the CAV mode which allows
for freeze-frame, slow motion and other special effects.
From: sdevries@fys.ruu.nl (Sjoerd de Vries)
Subject: Re: PBS special
Organization: Physics Department, University of Utrecht, The Netherlands
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 19:56:27 GMT

In <17504@pitt.UUCP> geb@cs.pitt.edu (Gordon Banks) writes:

>I caught the tail end of a PBS show on the assassination
>last night.  Conclusion: the Mafia had something to do with
>it.  That's the first time I've seen PBS air something supporting
>the conspiracy.  Sorry I missed the first part of it.

>Cyril Wecht spoke here yesterday on the medical evidence.
>Nothing new for me really, just more reinforcement on how
>totally impossible the single bullet theory is.

Lately, I have been reading "Mortal Error"  written by Bonar Menninger,
based on the theories of Donahue. This book
succeeds in making me feel the single bullet theory is not
as totally impossible as I originally thought.

What are the main arguments against the single bullet theory?

1. the time between Kennedy's and Connally's first reactions
   to their wounds, set by critics at before z225 and at z237
   resp. So at least 12 frames, that is 0.7 sec, but possible
   1.6 sec or more.
2. the zig zag track of the bullet
3. the fact that the bullet was nearly pristine after passing through
   two bodies and braking some bones

What are Donahue's answers to these arguments?

1. At z-225 Kennedy reacts to a ricochet shot, the one that missed
   the car. The debris of this shot hit bystander James Tague
   and  some landed in the car, and were found there later, free
   of blood and tissue.
   At z-236 both Kennedy and Conally are hit. So we don't have any
   timing problem.
2. In fact, there is no zig zag movement. Conally was seated on a
   jumpseat that was clearly to JFK's left (a photograph of the
   empty car in the book shows this very well). Donahue claims
   the displacement is about one feet (if I'm not mistaken, it may be
   more).
   At z-236 all wounds line up.
3. The bullet is not pristine; it is flattened at the base, with some
   lead extruding and it is bent. Donahue argues that only at high
   velocities the bullets will show the mushroom effect. Before the
   bullet hit Conally's rib it had slowed down considerably. I believe
   this is the same argument Mitchell used before. I haven't heard of
   a proof of the contrary.
   
What's your opinion about this, guys?
-- 
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Sjoerd C. de Vries                            | If all else fails |
| Utrecht Biophysics Research Institute         | we can whip the   |
| Dept. of Medical and Physiological Physics    | horses' eyes      |
From: ac985@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Joel Tscherne)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Subject: JFK Director's Cut Coming
Date: 21 Nov 1992 03:02:12 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: ac985@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Joel Tscherne)
NNTP-Posting-Host: slc4.ins.cwru.edu


For those who haven't heard, Warner Home Video will be releasing a
director's cut of JFK, which will include extra footage.  One rumored
scene to be included is Garrison's appearance on the Johnny Carson show
(although re-titled in the film) featuring John Larroquette as the host.

The laserdisc version will be CAV, which will allow frame-by-frame
study.  It will also include a documentary on the assassination.

-- 
===============Joel Tscherne:  ac985@cleveland.freenet.edu===============