HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: tzs@carson.u.washington.edu (Tim Smith)
Subject: Re: I Have Been Forbidden to Speak the Truth From THIS Account
Organization: University of Washington School of Law, Class of '95
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 01:23:37 GMT

Satya Prabhakar writes:
>ATT should have posted the following notice to the general public,
>instead of censoring some kinds of thought:
>
>"AT&T neither shares nor is responsible for any opinions expressed
>by ATT employees on USENET. ATT provides these facilities to ATT 
>employees as a privilege to foster free exchange of information. If
>you are offended by any opinion of an ATT employee, please take
>it up with him/her or IGNORE such postings. ATT does not censor
>postings or curb rights based on the nature of opinion. If an
>ATT employee threatens bodily harm to any of you, it is a felony.
>Please contact ATT System Adminstration immediately.""

Disclaimers don't work: people still associate the site with the
postings.  If you want to see this experimentally, pick some
group and post something very offensive.  (Post some KKK literature
in soc.culture.african.american, for example, and make sure it uses
the word "nigger" a lot).  A significant fraction of the responses
will refer to you as "some asshole from [insert your organization
here]."

If I were running a company and wanted to provide Usenet access to
my workers, I'd set up two accounts for each person.  The first
account would be a normal-looking account.  The second account would
be for postings and email that the company doesn't want to be associated
with.  Postings and email from this account would have faked return
addresses so that they look like they come from some machine not
associated with the company, and employees would be asked to leave
the company name out of their signature for postings from this account.
As long as they complied, they would be free to post *anything* (well,
anything legal).

--Tim Smith
Xref: sparky alt.conspiracy.jfk:3735 alt.conspiracy:11891 alt.activism:18401 alt.society.civil-liberty:6464 alt.individualism:5925 alt.censorship:8595 talk.politics.misc:58309 misc.headlines:6920 soc.culture.usa:8262
From: jon@Turing.ORG (Jon Gefaell (KD4CQY))
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.individualism,alt.censorship,talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa
Subject: Re: I Have Been Forbidden to Speak the Truth From THIS Account
Date: 5 Nov 92 19:44:30 GMT
Organization: The Turing Project, Charlottesville Virginia.

In article <1992Nov4.092414.1761@di.unipi.it> Nico Tranquilli <ntranqu@caticsuf.cati.csufresno.edu> writes:
>In article <1992Oct30.144943.15390@cbnewsl.cb.att.com> John DiNardo,
>jad@cbnewsl.cb.att.com writes:
>>
>> [garbage deleted]
>
>You're not speaking the truth : you're just wasting bandwidth with all
>these useless, worthless, meaningless, annoying ... things. So, netters,

I'm always humored by this concept of 'wasting bandwidth' So curious, and
such a complete non sequitor...


>let's add
>'John DiNardo' to our kill files...


There you go! Excercise your perogative! Bravo...
Organization: University of Illinois at Chicago
Date: Friday, 6 Nov 1992 18:01:49 CST
From: <U54778@uicvm.uic.edu>
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Subject:    Unreadable posts.

I have a question for all you net honchos out there.  For a long time, I have
been unable to even read DiNardo's posts.  I get a msg to this effect whenever
I try and it prevents me from saving those same files.
And to add more mystery, even some of the postings on DiNardo's posts are
marked unreadable.
  I can understand if some sysadmin is flagging the original posts as
"no can touch", technically but why would they flag the controversy over
this move?
  Does anyone have an answer?  I am on a large mainframe running VM so
Unix tech items do not apply (or do they?).
ALAN ROGERS
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.individualism,alt.censorship,talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa
From: josh@Happy-Man.com (Joshua_Putnam)
Subject: Re: I Have Been Forbidden to Speak the Truth From THIS Account
Reply-To: Joshua_Putnam@happy-man.com
Organization: Happy Man Corp., Vashon Island, WA 98070-7399
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 23:59:26 GMT

In <1992Nov6.194926.693@dartvax.dartmouth.edu> guy@coos.dartmouth.edu (Guy Schiavone) writes:

>The issue at hand is whether a large corporation should be
>allowed to selectively impose on the basic rights of its employees, with
>the effect that only those political beliefs deemed acceptable by the
>corporation are expressed.  

Let's put it a bit differently: is your employer obligated
to pay for the exercise of your right to free speech, even
if by doing so on company equipment you generate complaints
directed to the company, not just yourself?

Should the company also pay for stationery and postage for
you to write personal letters to the editor of the local
paper, to politicians, and to other businesses, even though
your use of company letterhead and envelopes would generate
complaints to the company, not just yourself?

Should the company foot the bill when you decide to call
radio talk shows from the office?

Should you get free use of the company photocopier for
mass-producing flyers unrelated to your work?

There certainly is a basic right to free speech.  Is there a
basic right to have your employer pay for the exercise of
your free speech rights on company time & equipment?  

I doubt it.

Business equipment is bought for the purpose of earning
money.  If a business decides that its interests in a happy
workforce would be furthered by allowing limited personal
use of this equipment, this does not eliminate the original
profit-making purpose of the equipment.  If your personal
use of the equipment produces ill-will and consumes other
workers' time following up on complaints, it is perfectly
reasonable for the company to ask that you use your own
photocopier, letterhead, typewriter, or telephone.  Why are
computers any different?
-- 
 Joshua_Putnam@happy-man.com    Happy Man Corp.  206/463-9399 x102
 4410 SW Pt. Robinson Rd., Vashon Island, WA  98070-7399  fax x108
 We publish SOLID VALUE for the intelligent investor.  NextMail OK
Info free; sample $20: Send POSTAL addr: Solid-Value@happy-man.com
Xref: sparky alt.conspiracy.jfk:3729 alt.conspiracy:11873 alt.activism:18357 alt.society.civil-liberty:6456 alt.individualism:5916 alt.censorship:8561 talk.politics.misc:58044 misc.headlines:6899 soc.culture.usa:8229
From: ccasm@cc.newcastle.edu.au
Subject: Re: Zapruder Film
Organization: University of Newcastle, AUSTRALIA
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 23:06:25 GMT

Has there ever been a detailed commentary of the Z film by Zapruder himself?

I would like to know such things as when he first realised he was filming an
assassination, whether he saw JFK react prior to going behind the sign, whether
he agrees with the Alvarez sound analysis, and so on.


Big Al...

Xref: sparky alt.conspiracy.jfk:3760 alt.conspiracy:12002 alt.activism:18494 alt.society.civil-liberty:6488 alt.individualism:5962 alt.censorship:8677 talk.politics.misc:58905 misc.headlines:6961 soc.culture.usa:8349
From: tzs@carson.u.washington.edu (Tim Smith)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.individualism,alt.censorship,talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa
Subject: Re: I Have Been Forbidden to Speak the Truth From THIS Account
Date: 8 Nov 92 07:30:24 GMT
Article-I.D.: u.1992Nov8.073024.11660
Organization: University of Washington School of Law, Class of '95

guy@coos.dartmouth.edu (Guy Schiavone) writes:
>in your original reply.  Note in the above that I am responding to
>Tim Smith's argument that "There are dozens of Usenet sites that would
>be happy to give DiNardo access to express himself... He has had no right
>interfered with."  Note my response in the above: "I find the fact
>that there may or may not exist other sites that provide John DiNardo
>access totally irrelevent to the issue at hand."
>
>  I am contending that Tim Smith has committed the fallacy of
>ignoratio elenchi.  His argument supports the conclusion that
>John DiNardo has not been denied free speech by *every* Usenet
>site.  His argument does nothing to support the conclusion that
>AT&T has not denied John DiNardo a right to speak.

But it's not irrelevant.  AT&T has a right to use their equipment however
they see fit.  They only argument that seems to make sense for DiNardo
having a *right* to use AT&T's equipment in a way that causes them
harm (they were getting complaints, remember) is that using their
equipment is the only reasonable way for him to speak to the audience
he wishes to speak to.  I believe, for example, that union organizers
have been allowed access to the private property of companies because
there was no other reasonable way to talk to the workers.

When balancing two rights (AT&T's property rights vs. DiNardo's speech
rights), the existence of other methods for DiNardo to easily reach his
target audience is quite relevant.

--Tim Smith
Xref: sparky alt.conspiracy.jfk:3758 alt.conspiracy:11998 alt.activism:18488 alt.society.civil-liberty:6486 alt.individualism:5960 alt.censorship:8674 talk.politics.misc:58883 misc.headlines:6958 soc.culture.usa:8345
From: wolfe@wolves.uucp (G. Wolfe Woodbury)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.individualism,alt.censorship,talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa
Subject: Re: I Have Been Forbidden to Speak the Truth From THIS Account
Date: 8 Nov 92 02:14:21 GMT
Organization: Red Wolfe @ The Wolves Den
X-Md4-Signature: ec7dfa31b507cc2907d7c5324871cdab

<4NOV199213021375@csa1.lbl.gov> sichase@csa1.lbl.gov (SCOTT I CHASE) writes:
>I certainly concede that AT&T is within its rights to restrict access to 
>its hardware.  The Constitution does not guarantee you the right to use
>other people's property to excersize your right to free speech.
>
>But I wonder if this is really the best state of affairs.  The Founding
>Fathers worded the First Amendment at a time when free speech only
>required a loud voice and a rock to stand on.  It's not that simple
>today.  Can a person truly have the right to express his opinions to his
>fellow Americans if he does not have access to the dominant method of 
>communication?  

AT&T is not preventing JD from access to the net.  They have not told
him that he can't post his material, they have simply said that he can't
use their money to do it.

AT&T will, quite gladly, sell him a phone line, and even sell him a
computer to continue his crusade on his own time. :-)

In the event tha JD gets off his high horse and finds a way to continue
his commentary from an location that doesn't mind his foibles, I'm
certain that (as long as he doesn't identify himself as representing
AT&T in any way) AT&T will not restrain his actions.
-- 
G. Wolfe Woodbury @ The Wolves Den, Durham NC	[This site is NOT affiliated  ]
wolfe@wolves.durham.nc.us			[with Duke University! Idiots!]
UUCP: ...!duke!wolves!wolfe      <Standard Disclaimers apply>
    Above All, we celebrate!  --Celebrate the Circle, Statement of Purpose.
Xref: sparky alt.conspiracy.jfk:3734 alt.conspiracy:11890 alt.activism:18399 alt.society.civil-liberty:6463 alt.individualism:5924 alt.censorship:8593 talk.politics.misc:58303 misc.headlines:6919 soc.culture.usa:8261
From: tzs@carson.u.washington.edu (Tim Smith)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.individualism,alt.censorship,talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa
Subject: Re: I Have Been Forbidden to Speak the Truth From THIS Account
Date: 5 Nov 92 19:37:27 GMT
Article-I.D.: u.1992Nov5.193727.27547
Organization: University of Washington School of Law, Class of '95

guy@coos.dartmouth.edu (Guy Schiavone) writes:
>rights vs. John DiNardo's basic human right to express himself freely.

There are dozens of Usenet sites that would be happy to give DiNardo
access to express himself.  Some are free.  Some charge a few dollars
a month.  Some charge more.  He has had no right interfered with.

--Tim Smith
Xref: sparky alt.conspiracy.jfk:3743 alt.conspiracy:11929 alt.activism:18446 alt.society.civil-liberty:6472 alt.individualism:5942 alt.censorship:8632 talk.politics.misc:58584 misc.headlines:6935 soc.culture.usa:8301
From: guy@coos.dartmouth.edu (Guy Schiavone)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.individualism,alt.censorship,talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa
Subject: Re: I Have Been Forbidden to Speak the Truth From THIS Account
Date: 6 Nov 92 19:49:26 GMT
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH



In <1992Nov5.193727.27547@u.washington.edu>
  tzs@carson.u.washington.edu (Tim Smith) writes:

>guy@coos.dartmouth.edu (Guy Schiavone) writes:

>>In this case we have a conflict between the rights of two parties:
>> AT&T's property rights vs. John DiNardo's basic human right to
>>express himself freely.

>There are dozens of Usenet sites that would be happy to give DiNardo
>access to express himself.  Some are free.  Some charge a few dollars
>a month.  Some charge more.  He has had no right interfered with.
>
>--Tim Smith

  I have seen this argument put forth several times and I would like
to address it.  I find the fact that there may or may not exist other
sites that provide John DiNardo access totally irrelevent to
the issue at hand.

 The following is an illustration of my point.  I currently reside in the
State of New Hampshire.  Let's say the State of New Hampshire implements
an amendment to its constitution that eliminates my right to free speech.
Could they justify this amendment on the grounds that I could always
travel to Vermont to speak freely, and thus, they are not *really* denying
my right to free speech?  Of course not.

 The issue at hand is whether a large corporation should be
allowed to selectively impose on the basic rights of its employees, with
the effect that only those political beliefs deemed acceptable by the
corporation are expressed.  I believe that such policies damage our society
and our system of democracy.  I also believe that the corporations have
a responsibility to aid and work within our system of democracy.  Therefore,
I believe that AT&Ts decision to silence John DiNardo is irresponsible.  It
is also unjust in that no financial cost has been incurred by AT&T due
to the specific content of John DiNardo's posts.  AT&T is practicing a
form of censorship that has no place in a free and democratic society, and
I look forward to the day when such practices are eliminated, either
voluntarily or by force of law.

   -Guy Schiavone
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
From: dona@bilver.uucp (Don Allen)
Subject: Re: John DiNardo and AT&T
Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 05:01:40 GMT

In article <92313.212648CXH181@psuvm.psu.edu> Chris Hoffman <CXH181@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:
>Could it just be that AT&T or some of the big cheeses within AT&T know
>something we don't?  Was JD getting close to something or someone?  Or maybe
>AT&T just got some pressure from part of the government.  Try tossing those
>ideas around in your heads for a while.
>
>-- Chris Hoffman
>
>Responses are more than welcome - that includes flamers.
>
>cxh181@psuvm.psu.edu These ideas are all mine and I didn't say YOU had to
>like them.  I do, and that's all that really matter to me.

If memory serves, I definately recall seeing that AT&T has Trilateral
connections..

I posted a chart on this earlier this year showing the business
connections part of the TLC..I'll see about digging it up and posting
it. 

Don


-- 
<*> Don Allen <*>             1:363/81.1 - Fidonet #1 - Homebody BBS
dona@bilver.uucp - Internet   1:363/29.8 - Fidonet #2 - Gourmet Delight
88:4205/1.1  - MUFON Network  1:3607/20.2  -- Odyssey - Alabama UFO Net
NSA grep food: Aviary, Ed Dames, Los Alamos - Majestic - Jason - RIIA - UN
Lines: 17
Date: Thu,  5 Nov 92 09:10:23 MST
From: gritton@alaska.et.byu.edu (Jamie Gritton)
Organization: Brigham Young University, Provo UT USA
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.individualism,alt.censorship,talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa
Subject: Re: I Have Been Forbidden to Speak the Truth From THIS Account
Reply-To: gritton@byu.edu
	<1992Nov05.000544.28303@watson.ibm.com>

johniac@johniac.austin.ibm.com (John Iacoletti/100000) writes:

> This is all true, but it should be pointed out that it takes the ultimate
> jerk to bitch and moan to somebody else's sysadmin because he is too lazy or
> stupid to figure out how to use a kill file.

   I for one offer my thanks to such "ultimate jerks". I'm no more
than slightly annoyed by seeing these articles when I read my news.
I'm strong enough to hit the 'd' key when I see one of the many
propaganda titles in soc.culture.usa.
   But I also have a news spool to take care of. All the kill files in
the world won't clear up the wasted space these reprints take on my
system and many others. But positive efforts like notifying a sys
admin of such wasteful behavior can help, if only on a case-by-case
basis.
--
James Gritton - gritton@byu.edu - I disclaim
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
From: greco@elec.uq.oz.au (John Greco)
Subject: I Killed JFK
Organization: Prentice Centre, University of Queensland
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 04:53:53 GMT

Get a life dickheads. He's dead.
Xref: sparky alt.conspiracy.jfk:3744 alt.conspiracy:11943 alt.activism:18453 alt.society.civil-liberty:6473 alt.individualism:5943 alt.censorship:8639 talk.politics.misc:58630 misc.headlines:6938 soc.culture.usa:8308
From: wix@eskimo.celestial.com (Dennis Wicks)
Subject: If it were I - Was: Re: Dallas TV coverage that d
Organization: >>> Eskimo North (206)-FOR-EVER <<<
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 03:04:05 GMT

In article <3948.1176.uupcb@spacebbs.com> mark.stevens@spacebbs.com (Mark Stevens)  writes:
>
>If I'm not mistaken there was a still professional photograher that
>took pictures during the assination but the FBI confiscated his
>photos and he has never seen them since.
>                 
Based upon the above, and other things I have read here, if I ever
happen to get some fantastic pictures of anything important, I am
going to do the following:

1 - Leave, quickly!
2 - Get the film developed.
3 - get the negatives duped, several times.
4 - Get many prints made.
5 - Hide them in as many different places as I can think of.
6 - Then and only then, let the concerned authorities know that
    I _might_ have some pictures they just _possibly_ would
    be interested in.

ObGroup:  With all the films that were "confiscated" and have
since disappeared, how did the Zapruder film manage to survive
and become available?
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.individualism,alt.censorship,talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa
From: jon@Turing.ORG (Jon Gefaell (KD4CQY))
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.individualism,alt.censorship,talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa
Subject: Re: I Have Been Forbidden to Speak the Truth From THIS Account
Date: 5 Nov 92 19:48:00 GMT
Organization: The Turing Project, Charlottesville Virginia.

In article <wb9omc.720890241@dynamo.ecn.purdue.edu> wb9omc@dynamo.ecn.purdue.edu (Duane P Mantick) writes:
>
>	Perhaps those folks with some resources can figure out a way
>to help John without insulting anyone or pissing off any sysadm's.

Mr. DiNardo has been offered an account on The Turing Project. While
I certainly understand ATT's excercising their corporate perogative to
limit and otherwise control access to their machines, Turing's stated
objective is to give a point of access for individuals to express them-
selves without restriction.

We will be terribly honored if John will take us up on this offer.
From: grant_jo@ripple.enet.dec.com (Joel Grant)
Subject: I Killed JFK
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: 13 NOV 92 07:01:47 PDT


In message <greco.elec.uq.oz.au>  John Greco writes:

> Get a life dickheads.  He's dead.

Napolean is dead.  Caesar is dead.  Churchill is dead.  Come to
think of it, the study of history is principally the study of
the actions of dead people.  And, in this case, the actions that
led to President Kennedy's death.  

Now go, and sin no more.

BTW - I am told that a private firm called Congressional Information
Service has Congressional publications and documents on microfiche.
I presume this would include documents such as the HSCA hearings and
exhibits.  Does anyone have an address and/or telephone number for
this firm.  Thanks.

Joel Grant (speaking on his own behalf)

Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conpsiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.censorship,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa,misc.activism.progressive
From: femanrs@lims02.lerc.nasa.gov (BRUCE MANNERS)
Subject: Re: I Have Been Forbidden to Speak the Truth From THIS Account
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: NASA Lewis Research Center
Date:  5 Nov 1992 11:12 EST  

I missed the original post so I may not have the facts correct, but why let 
that stop me from posting?...


Has it occured to anyone that the original poster may have lost his
net access because he is not doing the work he was hired to do?  I don't see 
any reason that AT&T or any employer are obligated to fund anybodies 
public speaking opportunities unless that is what they have been hired to do. 
If a company does, then GREAT!

(Yes, I realize that my employer does allow me net access, but my 
productivity better not drop...)

Oh well... Flame away because I won't be here to be burned...

**************************************************************************

Bruce Manners                                          Juglito, ergo sum

**************************************************************************
Xref: sparky alt.conspiracy.jfk:3730 alt.conspiracy:11876 alt.activism:18376 alt.society.civil-liberty:6459 alt.individualism:5919 alt.censorship:8567 talk.politics.misc:58110 misc.headlines:6903 soc.culture.usa:8237
From: brockr@muvaxa.rferl.org (Train, Learn, Climb, Ride)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Subject: Re: I Killed JFK
Date: 13 Nov 92 14:37:00 GMT
Organization: Radio Free Europe
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <greco.721630433@s1.elec.uq.oz.au>, greco@elec.uq.oz.au (John Greco) writes...
>Get a life dickheads. He's dead.

This, of course being sent by an Aussie he's to be excused.  We must remember
that most Aussies are direct decendants of criminals so one must realize
that there are a few screws loose here, if not all.
  Get the hint Aussie?
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.individualism,alt.censorship,talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa