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}
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
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: 76535,25tos@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: mnementhmwicks@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