HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: press2@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (barry.o.olson)
Subject: Re: MESSAGE TO CLINTON
Organization: AT&T
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 22:03:23 GMT




I love it! Blow some smoke around the party HQ and say "It's
ok, I didn't inhale and I didn't enjoy it". Great(and suits
running willy-nilly:-).
I wish I could vote in Wisconsin, the state needs some house-
cleaning. Go Greens'

barry--
Xref: sparky talk.politics.drugs:2811 alt.drugs:7407
From: SD_NORML.usenet@ucsd.edu
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs,alt.drugs
Subject: Follow-up post from San Diego NORML
Summary: SD NORML fax not working.  Phone #s given.
Keywords: public access TV, videotape, fax, NORML, TCI
Date: 9 Apr 92 06:25:35 GMT
Followup-To: talk.politics.drugs
Distribution: usa
Organization: San Diego County NORML
NNTP-Posting-Host: lumina.ucsd.edu
Originator: usenet@lumina.ucsd.edu

Our previous post forwarded by Paul Hager (thank you Paul!)
has an error:  *our fax is no longer in commission*.  
Sorry if it has caused any inconvenience.

Inquiries about our 30 minute show "The Hemp Solution"
can be made via our phones:  (619)281-8586 or (619)571-0088
or via snail mail:  PO Box 171396, San Diego CA 92197

I forgot to mention in the previous post that this offer
is not for the purpose of making money, but for helping 
to spread the word about hemp, especially in view of the 
recent interest in using public access stations.  It also
would certainly be appropriate to use HCRC's spots as
commercial breaks  ;-)

(ps -- Stuart Reges, welcome back!)

-- 
San Diego County NORML.  snail mail:  PO Box 171396, San Diego CA 92197
phones:      (619) 281-8586 or 571-0088.                no email (yet).
Survival lesson:  keep your membership lists safe!  One of our leading
members was busted, and the police confiscated a hardcopy of his list.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs,alt.drugs
From: ileicht@jarthur.claremont.edu (Spiff)
Subject: Hemp Paper
Organization: Harvey Mudd College, Claremont, CA 91711
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 02:45:10 GMT

I received a lot of mail after mentioning that our local Hemp Legalization
orginazation was getting hemp paper.

I asked where we got it from and this is the answer:

Bach Business Alliance For Commerce in Hemp
213-661-9978

You want to talk to larry..

as I understand supply is very limited. I am hoping that if enouh
people express interest that they will be able to stock a larger supply
and make some more $$'s...


Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs
From: press2@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (barry.o.olson)
Subject: Re: Clinton's Marijuana Use
Organization: AT&T
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 03:17:03 GMT
Summary: clinton-- deflated balls-- stand for the truth

In article <1992Apr4.070034.7081@zip.eecs.umich.edu>, baillod@sparky.eecs.umich.edu (Brad Baillod) writes:
> In article <42539@teda.Teradyne.COM> eisenhof@zax.teraida.UUCP (Karl Eisenhofer) writes:
> >About Clinton's admission, he states that he didn't inhale the smoke.  I
> >think that this just proves that he is liar.  He either inhaled the smoke
> >and thus tried it, or he didn't inhale and thus didn't try it.  In either
> >case, he lied.

[much deleted in defense of politicians needing deflated balls 
for survival]

> 
> the issue of the day, drugs, no matter how small the incident or how mild
> the drug.  Given the hysteria with which the media presents this issue, I'd
> say Clinton's hedging is totally justified.
> 
How low can we go? Why is it necessary for a political runner to
lie and conceal his/her past to get elected? I would have more
respect for the man if he said, "Sure, I smoked some pot when
I was in england and I liked it". Huge gasps and wisps of methane
fill the air from the crowd. Then he says, "prove to me that pot
is as evil as the PDFA or some politicans would have us believe".
Well, the cat is out of the bag, studies will be gone over, and
Clinton would look even better for standing up for his beliefs.
But the guy has no beliefs, he spouts was his paid program directors
tell him, the man is a papermache automaton with deflated...  lls.

And, he really painted himself into a corner with his I broke no
laws statement. What was he hoping to accomplish with that? I can
sympathize with your position, but I'm sorry too, if these guys
must rely on covering up their past with More Lies, we have sunk
so low. Many others must believe as you have said in your post, or
Clinton wouldn't be so far ahead in the polls. No doubt that is
why our country is so srewed up. As corporations would have us
believe, "Perception is everything, truth is used as a tool to
manipulate perception".

Thinking of moving to the moon-- barry--
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs
From: russotto@eng.umd.edu (Matthew T. Russotto)
Subject: Re: Pres. for DRUGS
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 92 16:08:55 GMT
Organization: College of Engineering, University of Maryland, College Park

In article <1992Apr13.205354.21298@nntp.hut.fi> jkp@cs.HUT.FI (Jyrki Kuoppala) writes:
>>	If one counts all the candidates, then the Libertarian candidates 
>>(Andre Marrou, VP Nancy Lord) are the only ones who are truly 
>>pro-legalization. I don't know who'd be best to be for in the primaries, 
>>other than not Bush or Buchannan (i.e., not Republicans).
>
>What's Larry Agran's position?  He seems to have different views from
>others, and even though he is running in the lines of the Party
>(Demopublican), he's been arrested for wanting to speaking in
>conventions (of the Demo-wing) and the party doesn't seem to like him
>much, so it's probably a plus.

Neither wing of the party likes David Duke much, either.  Not much of
a plus.  From what I have seen, Agran is just a left-wing democrat.

-- 
Matthew T. Russotto	russotto@eng.umd.edu	russotto@wam.umd.edu
Some news readers expect "Disclaimer:" here.
Just say NO to police searches and seizures.  Make them use force.
(not responsible for bodily harm resulting from following above advice)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs
From: dave@locus.com (Dave Butterfield)
Subject: Re: drunk driving Victimless?
Organization: x
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1992 17:05:50 GMT

In article <olson.703441419@acf9> olson@acf9.nyu.edu (David Olson) writes:
>
>Until you hit someone, driving drunk *is* a victimless crime.  

Let me identify the victims for you:

The motor vehicle laws, including traffic laws, equipment roadworthiness
laws, and driver competency requirement laws, all work together to create
a public road system that carries a certain degree of risk, which risk we
as a society, via our government, have decided is acceptable.  Under the
standards we have legislated (via our government representatives), we do
not accept the risk of drunk drivers, and we prohibit them from the public
roadways.

In Insurance, there is a concept that you can "sell" some of your risk
(which has negative value) to another party (e.g. an insurance company).
You sell some of your risk to the insurance company, and you pay them
the amount of negative financial value that risk was worth.

When you drive drunk, you non-consensually increase the risk of other
drivers, pedestrians, and owners of property adjoining the roadway,
to a level of risk that is higher than it would have been had you
stayed within the legislated standards.

Since that increased risk has negative financial value to those other 
people, you have caused them damages.  Therefore those people are your
victims.

If more people drove drunk, our risks would increase, our costs would
increase, and our insurance would increase.  Drunk drivers as a class
cause financial damage to all drivers.

Dave
-- 
	Only resort to the rules when absolutely necessary.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs
From: mea@cbnewse.cb.att.com (mark.e.anderson)
Subject: New PDFA Commercial
Organization: AT&T
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 01:41:31 GMT

I just saw a new PDFA commercial linking the spread of Aids
with drug use.  The commercial shows a guy and girl getting
hot and heavy in passion.  It then tries to link the passion
generated to have unprotected sex with drug use.  I didn't
tape it so I'm kind of relying on memory but it struck me
as *the* dumbest commercial I have ever seen.  This one even
tops the commercial featuring the 14 year old boy in a coma.

Just guessing here but I think this one will backfire big time
on PDFA.  I suspect that the dumbest WOD supporter will see
through this smokescreen.

Mark
mea@ihlpl.att.com
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs
From: press2@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (barry.o.olson)
Subject: Re: Follow-up post from San Diego NORML
Organization: AT&T
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 02:22:11 GMT
Keywords: public access TV, videotape, fax, NORML, TCI

In article <1992Apr9.003491.usenet@ucsd.edu>, SD_NORML.usenet@ucsd.edu writes:
> San Diego County NORML.  snail mail:  PO Box 171396, San Diego CA 92197
> phones:      (619) 281-8586 or 571-0088.                no email (yet).

> Survival lesson:  keep your membership lists safe!  One of our leading
> members was busted, and the police confiscated a hardcopy of his list.

What good is a copy of a mailing list to the cops? Is it illegal
now to be a member of NORML? Please, no flames, I'm just ignorant
on this statement made about mailing list safety. E-mail if posting
would be criminal:-)

barry--
From: geraldb@tau-ceti.isc-br.com (Gerald Bryan (Denver))
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs
Subject: Re: Problems with Impairment Testing
Date: 17 Apr 92 15:10:34 GMT
Organization: ?

In article <1992Apr16.014242.7882@casbah.acns.nwu.edu> asbestos@nwu.edu (Michael A. Atkinson) writes:
>press2@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (barry.o.olson) writes:
>>I have been involved in two accidents in all this time, both
>>caused by two extremely pickled drivers.                ^^^^
> ^^^^^^ ^^ ^^^ ^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^
>What does that tell you?

Just say no to pickles ?
-- 
"Truth is simply the understanding of seeking" -- da Free John
From: press2@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (barry.o.olson)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs
Subject: Re: Clinton's Marijuana Use
Date: 8 Apr 92 02:53:01 GMT
Article-I.D.: cbnewsd.1992Apr8.025301.12545
Organization: AT&T

In article <1992Apr7.164646.263@cnsvax.uwec.edu>, drumm@cnsvax.uwec.edu writes:
> In article <1992Apr7.031703.8720@cbnewsd.cb.att.com>, press2@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (barry.o.olson) writes:
> 
> > How low can we go? Why is it necessary for a political runner to
> > lie and conceal his/her past to get elected? I would have more
> > respect for the man if he said, "Sure, I smoked some pot when
> > I was in england and I liked it". Huge gasps and wisps of methane
> > fill the air from the crowd. Then he says, "prove to me that pot
> > is as evil as the PDFA or some politicans would have us believe".
> > Well, the cat is out of the bag, studies will be gone over, and
> > Clinton would look even better for standing up for his beliefs.
>   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^                             
> Sorry, not a chance.  Clinton would be roasted alive.  All kinds of
> *political* groups would be interviewed on TV saying that marijuana 
> causes brain damage, birth defects, etc. and they would have the 
> references to prove it. (the references would be 15 years old, but
> who is going to look them up?)

True enough, but it would definitely spur open discussion, something
that is lacking now. The door would open for the other groups to
jump in also. I think that would be a good thing.
In the end I believe the truth of MJ would prevail.
Clinton would still retain his job as governor too. If he needs
the whitehouse strong enough that he must lie to cover up his
past, then he is not worth the vote(imo of course). Even the sex
charge against him, why not say, "sure we had affairs, but that
is past and this is now". Why the weaseling. Anyway, I would not
want to see him in office anymore than george(coverup)bush who 
occupies now.

> 
> Not one researcher who values her income would stand up for the truth.
> They have to feed their families like everyone else.
> 

I don't know about that. Once discussion got rolling, people could
be bolstered to get involved by the "show of force" of the arrogant.

barry--
From: kkruse@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Korey J. Kruse)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs
Subject: Re: Details on that Maine town that voted to relegalize MJ (from AP)
Date: 11 Apr 1992 21:24:40 -0500
Organization: Kansas State University
NNTP-Posting-Host: matt.ksu.ksu.edu

In article <1992Apr11.102831.22247@samba.oit.unc.edu> Scott.Maxwell@bbs.oit.unc.edu (Scott Maxwell) writes:
>Note the interesting arithmetic in there. Maine's MJ is valued at $250
>million or more; let's say the actual value is $300 million. Last year alone, 
>they seized $50 million worth of it. That's one sixth of the total -- which
>Amoroso says is a "small percentage." The "small" is debatable, but at that
>rate they'll get rid of virtually all of Maine's MJ in 6 years -- a fairly 
>respectable pace, one would think .....

At that rate...about 17% of total marijuana confiscated every year....
after 6 years at this rate, assuming no additional marijuana is grown,
and the marijuana that is not confiscated is not used, would still leave
still about 100 million dollars of marijuana in the state.  But actually
this is all bullshit.    Next year $300 million dollars of pot will
still be grown in maine and depending on the efforts of the drug
warriors between 15% and 20% will be confiscated.   The drug warriors
will NEVER get all of the pot....or even get close....as long as people
still have their rights to privacy as granted by the US constitution.
>
>Of course, law enforcement agencies do tend to overestimate (read "lie about")
>the value of the drugs they sieze. Amoroso's comments ought to be taken as
>further indication of that, as if any were needed.
Of course.    If they confiscate 10000 hits of LSD they will report the
street value as $60000, but this is only if they guy with 10000 hits
plans on selling every one individually at the highest price available.
This never happens.   I'd guess the actually street value of 10000 hits
would be closer to $6000 or less if a person tried to get rid of them  a
all in one transaction.   The same goes for every Kilo of cocaine they
seize.....and also for marijuana.   People who have bricks of pot will
not sell by the joint....they sell by the pound.   But the police have
to make what ever figures they have seem like a huge gain for the WoD.
They know as well as everyone else that America is not getting its
money's worth for the WoD.   Billions of dollars are spent and still
people smoke pot.   Why don't they just give up ?   Probably because its
now a business that employs tens of thousands of warriors.   They could
be put better to use by digging ditches and filling them up.   When will
they every learn ?
--
    _   _   _                _       _   _    kkruse@ksuvm.bitnet
|/ | | |_) |_ \ /     |  |/ |_) | | (_` |_    kkruse@ksuvm.ksu.edu
|\ |_| | \ |_  |    (_|  |\ | \ |_| ._) |_    kkruse@matt.ksu.edu
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs
From: asbestos@nwu.edu (Michael A. Atkinson)
Subject: Re: RFC on what-to-say-to-the-cops article (LONG)
Organization: Chaos
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1992 23:14:18 GMT

lee@wang.com (Lee Story) writes:

>This is a fascinating and careful article, but it seems to blur the
>very important distinction between what is illegal and what is merely
>unsafe.  It states in reference to home searches by police:

>  You can refuse to consent to a search (4th
>  Amendment), but you can't physically stop them.

>There are several other instanced of "you can't physically..." in
>similar contexts.

>Now, I can understand that meeting trespass with deadly force may be
>illegal, 

Not everywhere.  In Nevada, f'rinstance, deadly force is legal if the
trespassers don't leave (with none of your property) under their own power.

>         but how can meeting trespass with hog-tying and running the
>errant cops off your property on a rail (gently, of course) be anything
>but asserting your property rights?

This seems to me to be constitutional.  It will, however, get you shot.  If
you avoid being shot, you will not avoid going to jail.  It's unlikely that
in today's fucked up courts a judge would not instruct the jury to convict
you no matter what (another argument for FIJA).

>Could someone more experienced in the law please comment?

Again: I am not a lawyer and I will not be held responsible for anything I
say, ever.

-- 
Michael A. Atkinson | "Why do bad things happen to good people?" I hear you 
asbestos@nwu.edu    |  cry, to which I say, "SHUT THE HELL UP!" - D.S. Cahr

      A Libertarian, an NRA member, and a firearms owner.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs
From: madigan@mathq.albany.edu (Kevin Madigan)
Subject: Re: question about mj study
Reply-To: madigan@mathq.albany.edu (Kevin Madigan)
Organization: Dept of Math & Stat, SUNYA, Albany, NY
Distribution: talk.politics.drugs
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 92 16:46:50 GMT

In article <891034d.46.703465253@ace.acadiau.ca> 891034d@ace.acadiau.ca (PETER F. DEARMAN) writes:
>In article <1992Apr15.190723.14519@sarah.albany.edu> madigan@mathq.albany.edu (Kevin Madigan) writes:
>>From: madigan@mathq.albany.edu (Kevin Madigan)
>>Subject: question about mj study
>>Date: 15 Apr 92 19:07:23 GMT
>
>>A few weeks ago I was digging around in a library and saw a journal
>>called "Addiction". In the Jan or Feb 1991 issue there was an article
                             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>claiming that MJ smoking was hazardous to long term health.
>
>The chromosome damage study is crap. 
>
>     (deleted stuff, stuff I already know)
>
>

I do not know if this study uses the discredited Nahas study as a 
reference. I am under the impression that this was a new study - done
recently. Does anyone have info on this? Don't quote "Emperor" or such 
things, I'm already converted. I want to know if the study in this article
is recent and accepted. Perhaps I will dig it up and try to figure it out
myself. I was hoping to avoid that (I have very little understanding/
patience with lab. science articles) by getting some info from t.p.d.
Thanks,
Kevin Madigan
From: gmw0622@zeus.tamu.edu (Mr. Grinch)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs
Subject: Re: Noriega Convicted
Date: 13 Apr 92 20:02:00 GMT
Organization: GrinchCo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <1993@tau-ceti.isc-br.com>, geraldb@tau-ceti.isc-br.com (Gerald Bryan (Denver)) writes...
 >This is interesting.  523 people were killed in order to bring to trial a man
 >who is not even facing the death penalty himself.
 > 
 >Isn't this patently absurd ?
 >-- 
 >"Truth is simply the understanding of seeking" -- da Free John

Gets crazier.  Over 500 years of sentences were waived in order to get 
testimony against him,  and over $20 million in seized assets freed. Virtually 
everyone who testified against him had some sort of sentence waived or 
reduced,  including one guy who was sentenced to "life with no possibility of 
parole" and is on the loose now.  A major victory against drug lords indeed.

Mr. Grinch
Xref: sparky talk.politics.drugs:2842 alt.drugs:7462
From: press2@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (barry.o.olson)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs,alt.drugs
Subject: Re: TCI ---  Their reply to my letter
Date: 11 Apr 92 01:50:08 GMT
Followup-To: talk.politics.drugs
Organization: AT&T



Oh Oh, now you did it. You questioned TCI's policy on their
drug free work policy, and their views on alcohol use of their
employees. Well, at least you got a reply. I;m still waiting
for mine.

barry--
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs
From: lewis@aera8700.mitre.org (Keith Lewis)
Subject: Propaganda to help end the drug war?
Organization: The MITRE Corporation
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1992 16:43:24 GMT

Have you heard about Willie Horton II?  That's not his name, but he's a
felon that Bill Clinton furloughed who went out and hijacked a private
plane and killed people.  

Furlough programs exist for two reasons:

1.  Rehabilitation.
2.  Shortage of prison space.

For the second straight presidential election, the republicans are going to
be pointing the finger at the democrats for abusing reason #1 (freeing
violent convicts who were not on their way to rehabilitation), completely
ignoring reason #2.

What we need to do is find a furlough program that exists due to "mandatory
minimums" for drug offenders.  Then find a "Willie Horton" among those
released.  If such a situation exists, it would show how completely innocent
people are victims of the War on Some Drugs.

Does anybody know of such a situation?  The District of Columbia is
releasing people right and left to stay below the court-ordered maximum
prison capacity.  Are any of those released (non-drug) felons killing
people?

Keith Lewis             klewis@mitre.org          "Mr. Cheap"
I think I've lost my -- ummmmm --
                                  Train of thought?
                                                     Yeah!  That's it!
The above may not (yet) represent the opinions of my employer.
From: lpb@STRATUS.SWDC.STRATUS.COM (Len Bucuvalas)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs
Subject: WILL GVT RESORT TO ELECTRONIC IMPLANTS?
Date: 15 Apr 92 00:10:32 GMT

Shoot first if they do! ;^)

Samurai_Writer



----- Begin Included Message -----
Article 93648 of talk.politics.misc:
From: press2@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (barry.o.olson)
Subject: Re: Clinton
Organization: AT&T
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1992 04:35:46 GMT

In article <1992Apr15.030116.29262@ddsw1.MCS.COM>, zane@ddsw1.MCS.COM (Sameer Parekh) writes:
> 
> 	This is my opinion about Clinton, (I think I got it from you
> net-folk...) and why I don't think he should be president.
> 
> 	He says, "He tried pot and didn't inhale and didn't like it."  From
> this, it seems that he didn't want to try it to begin with, because he
> didn't inhale, and others coerced him into doing this.  I don't mind if a
> President has used marijuana or not, but somone who was willing to be
> coerced?  I don't think someone that weak should be President..
> 	Rebuttals?
> 	

It is certainly another good theory, as good as any.

I heard a joke on Saturday Night Live about Jerry Brown.
It was reported that he smoked pot once, but he didn't exhale!

barry--
Xref: sparky talk.politics.drugs:2964 alt.drugs:7719 alt.activism:7752
From: stevec@orodruin.tivoli.com (Steve the not-so-foolhardy)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs,alt.drugs,alt.activism
Subject: Celebrate Medical Marijuana
Date: 15 Apr 92 04:27:29 GMT
Followup-To: talk.politics.drugs
Organization: TIVOLI Systems Inc


This is from a flyer that I received the other day.  I don't suppose
I'll be able to make it, but anyone who is interested and able, please
go!


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

			      Celebrate
			  Medical Marijuana
			  Earth Day Festival
				   
	The International Medical Marijuana Resoration Project

				 Free
			Music * Art * Speakers

  80% of voting San Franciscans voted to Legalize Medical Marijuana!
Join us in this gala environmental event, crusading for a more just and
			 compassionate world.

		     Dolores Park * San Francisco
		    April 26, 1992 * Noon to 5 pm
				   
      Sponsored by The Medical Marijuana Restoration Association
	For more information contact Dennis at (415) 864-1961


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

steve

does it matter when it's over, if the truth was even right?
						-robert hunter

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
| steve cochran			|	stevec@orodruin.tivoli.com	|
| tivoli systems		|	(512) 794-9071			|
| 6034 west courtyard drive	|	(512) 794-0623 fax		|
| suite 210			|	(512) 469-9873 home		|
| austin, tx 78730		|					|
-------------------------------------------------------------------------