[net.nlang] Reply to 'Update #2 on technical travel to Nicaragua'

cmullen@gold.dec.com (Cynthia Mullen, at DTN 297-4818) (07/01/86)

Recently someone from tecNICA has again started recruiting volunteers for
Nicaragua, on many addresses on USENET.  When this began before, a lot 
of people complained, a lot of bad feeling was generated, and the consensus
was that such articles should be restricted to net.politics.  Now someone 
has the gall to issue "Update # 2" repeating the pitch to support Nicaragua.

I'm disgusted. By disregarding the outcry against politicizing USENET,
these Nicaraguan supporters are doing just what their political comrades
do: they take advantage of existing structures, existing forums of free
exchange of ideas, to propagate ideas that would undermine the very
structures they abuse.  They break any rules they want, THEY don't have
to follow the USENET conventions.  Again they are like their political
counterparts - what Communist government ever followed the rules of democracy
or kept any treaty it made?  Nicaragua is following that path - the leftists
kicked out or killed the people who helped bring about the overthrow of
Samoza.  America gave millions of dollars to the new government, but Ortega
took over and invited Russians and Russian influence there.  Does anyone
really want to see us supporting the present government of Nicaragua? 

I'd like to see us flood their telephone numbers with complaints, and I
hope that those of us who see through their lies will be willing to 
take a stand, even here, on the unbloody battlefield of USENET.


decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-gold!cmullen

patcl@hammer.UUCP (Pat Clancy) (07/03/86)

In article <3968@decwrl.DEC.COM> cmullen@gold.dec.com (Cynthia Mullen, at DTN 297-4818) writes:
>Recently someone from tecNICA has again started recruiting volunteers for
>Nicaragua, on many addresses on USENET....
>I'm disgusted. By disregarding the outcry against politicizing USENET,
>these Nicaraguan supporters are doing just what their political comrades...
[continues with further ravings about Nicaraguan Communists plotting to
take our Precious Bodily Fluids, or something to that effect]

If you're so concerned about politicizing USENET, why did you
post this puerile diatribe? If we can put up with headhunters
essentially having free use of the net for profit, surely solicitation
of volunteers by a non-profit organization is permissible.

jeffp@phred.UUCP (Jeff Parke) (07/03/86)

In article <3968@decwrl.DEC.COM> cmullen@gold.dec.com (Cynthia Mullen, at DTN 297-4818) writes:
>Recently someone from tecNICA has again started recruiting volunteers for
>Nicaragua, on many addresses on USENET.  When this began before, a lot 
>of people complained, a lot of bad feeling was generated, and the consensus
>was that such articles should be restricted to net.politics.  Now someone 
>has the gall to issue "Update # 2" repeating the pitch to support Nicaragua.
> <etc and soforth>

So who is polluting the network with a lot of disputable political trash?  The
posting Cynthia referred to seemed more an opportunity for open-minded
people to go work somewhere for free, albeit a controversial location.  Maybe
net.jobs should only be used for paying jobs, but other than that, I find it
unfortunate that such an objective posting should bring on such an outrageous
diatribe.

Standard Disclaimers apply.

{ seismo!hpscda!hplsla ..OR.. ihnp4!sun!fluke } !tikal!phred!jeffp {Jeff Parke}

steven@mcvax.uucp (Steven Pemberton) (07/07/86)

> Recently someone from tecNICA has again started recruiting volunteers for
> Nicaragua, on many addresses on USENET.  [...]
> Now someone has the gall to issue "Update # 2" repeating the pitch to
> support Nicaragua.
[...]
> I'd like to see us flood their telephone numbers with complaints, and I
> hope that those of us who see through their lies will be willing to 
> take a stand, even here, on the unbloody battlefield of USENET.

I found the posting informative and interesting, and though not useful to me
personally, inoffensive - certainly less offensive than the followup quoted
above. I think they should be allowed to post such articles.

Steven Pemberton, CWI, Amsterdam; steven@mcvax

jeffw@midas.UUCP (Jeff Winslow) (07/07/86)

In article <3968@decwrl.DEC.COM> cmullen@gold.dec.com (Cynthia Mullen, at DTN 297-4818) opines:

>I'd like to see us flood their telephone numbers with complaints, and I
>hope that those of us who see through their lies will be willing to 
>take a stand, even here, on the unbloody battlefield of USENET.

You can do whatever you damn please, but if you're going to argue over
political opinions, do it in net.politics. It's unfortunate that the poster
of the original article is so obnoxious as to post it to several groups,
knowing full well that unthinking people will post followups to all of 
those same groups. However, there is no need for those with opinions 
different from those expressed in the original article to compound the
crime by carrying on this useless controversy outside of net.politics. I
apologize to the readers of the several groups this article will appear
in, but I hope they will forgive me when they realize that my main point
is:

CARRY ON POLITICAL ARGUMENTS IN NET.POLITICS ONLY !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I believe they will agree. 

					Jeff Winslow

arlan@inuxm.UUCP (07/08/86)

> In article <3968@decwrl.DEC.COM> cmullen@gold.dec.com (Cynthia Mullen, at DTN 297-4818) writes:
> >Recently someone from tecNICA has again started recruiting volunteers for
> >Nicaragua, on many addresses on USENET....
> >I'm disgusted. By disregarding the outcry against politicizing USENET,
> >these Nicaraguan supporters are doing just what their political comrades...
> [continues with further ravings about Nicaraguan Communists plotting to
> take our Precious Bodily Fluids, or something to that effect]
> 
> If you're so concerned about politicizing USENET, why did you
> post this puerile diatribe? If we can put up with headhunters
> essentially having free use of the net for profit, surely solicitation
> of volunteers by a non-profit organization is permissible.

If you fail to see that hiring people on the net is a contirubtion to the
US economy, while soliciting techniREDS is leading to the destruction of free
enterpr9ise in Nicaragua and eventually here, then you are an idiot as well
as the fool your statements make you appear to be.

No, adherenets of suppression whoever they are should not be allowed to use
this net to hire/solicit volunteers for the butchers of Nicaragua, who have
slaughtered some 10,000 plus Mosquito Indians, and who are turning their
territory into a Gulag outpost.
I would like to see the posters of such trash prohibited from taking
advantage of this net to support communists, Sandinista or otherwise.

Would you all stand by while South AFrican supporters of apartheid asked for
onlyu@only technical support, say ApartAid?  Of course not; your institutions
would pull your plug.  While SA cannot ever hurt us, the reds can and will, so
the same logic should apply.  Shut the hell up about hiring for the Reds or
get off the net.

Direct flames to bin/ortega/nicaragua/hell
--arlan andrews

apak@oddjob.UUCP (Vomit) (07/08/86)

In article <389@inuxm.UUCP> arlan@inuxm.UUCP (A Andrews) writes:
>If you fail to see that hiring people on the net is a contirubtion to the
>US economy, while soliciting techniREDS is leading to the destruction of free
>enterpr9ise in Nicaragua and eventually here, then you are an idiot as well
>as the fool your statements make you appear to be.
>No, adherenets of suppression whoever they are should not be allowed to use
>this net to hire/solicit volunteers for the butchers of Nicaragua, who have
>slaughtered some 10,000 plus Mosquito Indians, and who are turning their
>territory into a Gulag outpost.
>I would like to see the posters of such trash prohibited from taking
>advantage of this net to support communists, Sandinista or otherwise.
>Would you all stand by while South AFrican supporters of apartheid asked for
>onlyu@only technical support, say ApartAid?  Of course not; your institutions
>would pull your plug.  While SA cannot ever hurt us, the reds can and will, so
>the same logic should apply.  Shut the hell up about hiring for the Reds or
>get off the net.
>--arlan andrews
The above posting is ignorant, arrogant and disgusting. Note that:
(1) There has not been any `slaughter' of Mesquito Indians in Nicaragua, 
let alone 10,000 deaths. This is simply an invention by the poster.
Minimal research in an almanac of world events, or in the reports of human
rights organisations re Nicaragua, will confirm this. (Many Mesquito *were*
forcibly resettled.)
(2) If Nicaraguans don't want a free enterprise system, that's their decision.
It is no crime to be anti-capitalist.
(3) The only possible threat that Nicaragua could pose to free enterprise in
the U.S. is as an example which the U.S. people decide to follow. 
(4) The posting displays an irrational fear of "Reds"; indeed, the entire
posting is made up of lies (slaughter allegation, "turning their territory
into a Gulag outpost"-whatever that is supposed to mean), abuse 
(posters of such
trash), and the invocation of alleged demons (Reds, communists).

jack@glasgow.UUCP (07/08/86)

*I* was pleased to see the tecNICA article. If it has been posted to
net.politics nobody in Europe would have seen it, since US neofascists
have forced us to cut that off.
I don't see too many flames about people being recruited for military work; is
working in Nicaragua unacceptably political in a way that building machines
for burning Soviet civilians to death isn't?

jack

jim@ccd700.UUCP (prototype account) (07/09/86)

In article <2144@hammer.UUCP>, patcl@hammer.UUCP writes:
> In article <3968@decwrl.DEC.COM> cmullen@gold.dec.com (Cynthia Mullen, at DTN 297-4818) writes:
> >Recently someone from tecNICA has again started recruiting volunteers for
> >Nicaragua, on many addresses on USENET....
> >I'm disgusted. By disregarding the outcry against politicizing USENET,
> >these Nicaraguan supporters are doing just what their political comrades...
> [continues with further ravings about Nicaraguan Communists plotting to
> take our Precious Bodily Fluids, or something to that effect]
> 
> If you're so concerned about politicizing USENET, why did you
> post this puerile diatribe? If we can put up with headhunters
> essentially having free use of the net for profit, surely solicitation
> of volunteers by a non-profit organization is permissible.

I think the point (albeit somewhat convoluted) of Ms. Mullen's article
was that it's OK to politicize, provided you do it in the proper
newsgroups. However, after making this valid point, she proceded to
violate it by politicizing a totally apolitical newsgroup!

Perhaps she should have posted to net.puerile-diatribe, or something
functionally equivalent.

Jim Sitek

"If there's one thing worse than being talked about, it's not being
talked about."
					Oscar Wilde as portrayed by
					Graham Chapman

timm@zaphod.UUCP (07/10/86)

In article <3968@decwrl.DEC.COM> cmullen@gold.dec.com (Cynthia Mullen, at DTN 297-4818) writes:
>to follow the USENET conventions.  Again they are like their political
>counterparts - what Communist government ever followed the rules of democracy
>or kept any treaty it made?  Nicaragua is following that path - the leftists
>kicked out or killed the people who helped bring about the overthrow of
>Samoza.  America gave millions of dollars to the new government, but Ortega
>took over and invited Russians and Russian influence there.  Does anyone
>really want to see us supporting the present government of Nicaragua? 
>
I support the Nicaragua government although I don't support abusing 
usenet conventions.  I am *very* against American policy and intervention
in the region and dislike the holier than thou attitude of American
support versus Russian.  I am Canadian though and have somewhat of
a less biased opinion.  I'm curious about how many non-Americans
support American policy in Nicaragua.  Most of the news and editorials
I see in Canada about the conflict seems to highlight American 
exagerations and/or lies about events and tends to favor a non-military
solution and letting the region sort out its own problems.
-- 
A Canadian is someone who knows how to make love in a canoe.

Tim Melanchuk		{ihnp4|alberta}!sask!zaphod!timm

richa@tekecs.UUCP (07/10/86)

In article <7006@boring.mcvax.UUCP> steven@boring.uucp (Steven Pemberton) writes:
>
>> Recently someone from tecNICA has again started recruiting volunteers for
>> Nicaragua, on many addresses on USENET.  [...]
>> Now someone has the gall to issue "Update # 2" repeating the pitch to
>> support Nicaragua.
>[...]
>> I'd like to see us flood their telephone numbers with complaints, and I
>> hope that those of us who see through their lies will be willing to 
>> take a stand, even here, on the unbloody battlefield of USENET.
>
>I found the posting informative and interesting, and though not useful to me
>personally, inoffensive - certainly less offensive than the followup quoted
>above. I think they should be allowed to post such articles.
>
>Steven Pemberton, CWI, Amsterdam; steven@mcvax


DITTO!!

	CAN WE GET THIS STUFF OFF THE INAPPROPRIATE GROUPS and
	  PUT IN net.politics.  If it even belongs there.

I think people on the net are intelligent enough to decide for themselves
good jobs from bad, whom they want to work for and where. 

-- 
	 ******************************************************

	   Rich Ahrendt - Vaxlab Network Operations 
	   Graphics Workstations Division

	   USENET / UUCP: {ihnp4, ucbvax, decvax, uw-beaver}!
                           tektronix!tekecs!richa
	 ******************************************************

kim@mips.UUCP (07/11/86)

[ ... ]

Could both (all) sides of this "discussion" please keep it out of
"net.micro.pc" ... please?

Thank you,
/kim
-- 

UUCP:  {decvax,ucbvax,ihnp4}!decwrl!mips!kim
DDD:   408-720-1700 x231
USPS:  MIPS Computer Systems Inc,  930 E. Arques Av,  Sunnyvale, CA 94086
CIS:   76535,25

kamath@reed.UUCP (07/11/86)

References:




Ok.  Thanks for the info.  Now please take the ensuing discussion
elsewhere.  Please do not put it in net.micro.apple.

________________________________________________________________________________

Sean Kamath

UUCP {ihnp4,decvax,ucbcad,hplabs}!tektronix!reed!kamath

US Snail:  Box 395 Reed College,
           Portland, OR  97202
           (503) 239-7458

tos@psc70.UUCP (Dr.Schlesinger) (07/11/86)

 >the same logic should apply.  Shut the hell up about hiring for the Reds or
 >get off the net.

     It is fascinating how consistently the "defense of American values" seems
to take this kind of form. What more need one say?

Tom Schlesinger, Plymouth State College, Plymouth, N.H. 03264
uucp: decvax!dartvax!psc70!psc90!tos

allen@mmm.UUCP (07/11/86)

In article <389@inuxm.UUCP> arlan@inuxm.UUCP (A Andrews) writes:
> then you are an idiot as well as the fool your statements make you appear
> to be.

	From the mouths of babes ..

>No, adherenets of suppression whoever they are should not be allowed to use
>this net to hire/solicit volunteers for the butchers of Nicaragua,
 ...
>I would like to see the posters of such trash prohibited from taking
>advantage of this net to support communists, Sandinista or otherwise.
 .....
> Shut the h**l up about hiring for the Reds or get off the net.

Ugh, surely you don't mean to SUPPRESS these messages ?

Sometimes it's enough to make you believe in censorship. Generally though the
piercing logic of your arguments, and your unique spelling, coupled with your
amazing use of short illustrative words (hell, idiot, fool, Reds, etc) show
a particularily unique mentality. Have you ever considered writing for a
living. Maybe you should show your work to the American Spectator, or the
National Enquirer! Such work can often be submitted to several sources,
with only minor changes in key wording ( Red Menance -> Evil Empire,
Totalitarian Regime -> Communist Dictatorship, Nicaragua -> Lebanon ->
Syria,  South Africa -> Israel -> Honduras, etc) drastically increasing
your writing throughput.

This message has been brought to you by the Butchers For Nicaragua,
a non-profit organization dedicated to taking advantage of the net for
the express purpose of posting Red trash. And now for something completely
different ....

-- 
	Kurt W. Allen
	3M Center
	ihnp4!mmm!allen

sas@valid.UUCP (Scott Schoenthal <sas>) (07/12/86)

> In article <389@inuxm.UUCP> arlan@inuxm.UUCP (A Andrews) writes:
> > .. diatribe

In the future, please restrict this discussion to net.politics.  Thank you.

(My apologies to net.nlang, net,travel, net.micro.pc, net.micro.apple,
 net.database, net.wanted, and net.jobs for cluttering your newsgroups.)

			Scott Schoenthal
			Valid Logic Systems
			2820 Orchard Pkwy.
			San Jose, CA 95134
__________
			Valid:  sas@centre
			UUCP:   ..!{ihnp4,pyramid,amd,hplabs}!pesnta!valid!sas

tim@ism780c.UUCP (07/12/86)

Come on people!  Even if the original article did belong in all these
groups, these followups do not!  The referenced articles should have
been only in net.politics.  I would like to be able to read technical
groups without seeing long articles arguing about the situation in
Nicaragua.
--
Tim Smith                       USENET: sdcrdcf!ism780c!tim || ima!ism780!tim
"hey, bay-BEE'...hey, bay-BEE'" Compuserve: 72257,3706
                                Delphi || GEnie: mnementh

mwicks@sun.UUCP (07/18/86)

  In article<3968@decwrl.DEC.COM> <601@zaphod.UUCP>timm@zaphod.UUCP (Tim Melanchuk) writes:
> I support the Nicaragua government although I don't support abusing 
> usenet conventions.  I am *very* against American policy and intervention
> in the region and dislike the holier than thou attitude of American
> support versus Russian.  I am Canadian though and have somewhat of
> a less biased opinion.  I'm curious about how many non-Americans
> support American policy in Nicaragua.  Most of the news and editorials
> I see in Canada about the conflict seems to highlight American 
> exagerations and/or lies about events and tends to favor a non-military
> solution and letting the region sort out its own problems.
> -- 
> A Canadian is someone who knows how to make love in a canoe.
> 
> Tim Melanchuk		{ihnp4|alberta}!sask!zaphod!timm
  
       
      I fail to see the significance in posting this article to net.travel.
  It appears to me to be purely a POLITICAL statement that I should see in
  net.politics, if I so desire. Why this is posted to 10 different groups
  is beyond me.

  Michael L. Wicks