FAGGOTS SPREAD AIDS-WHY PROTECT THEM?

72 views
Skip to first unread message

William Grosvenor

unread,
May 15, 1996, 3:00:00 AM5/15/96
to

Dr.Grant Hill,MP, is completely correct in stating that faggots spread
disease.

He is far too polite,since I am sure he also has read the acclaimed
documentary book "AND THE BAND PLAYED ON",which also became a movie,
which details how AIDS was spread worldwide,deliberately,by the faggot
with Air Canada.This was even supported by the government of Canada.

Now,normal people all over the world must pay for these perverts and the
astronomic costs for their medical care until they get cremated.

I feel that they should NOT GET SPECIAL RIGHTS,even if the faggot loving
Canadian government wants to give them.

Is there any real use for disease spreading faggots?

In the old days faggots were burned,so is this practical now?

Mary Ortch

unread,
May 15, 1996, 3:00:00 AM5/15/96
to

In article <3198F7...@compusmart.ab.ca>, William Grosvenor
<acu...@compusmart.ab.ca> wrote:

> Dr.Grant Hill,MP, is completely correct in stating that faggots spread
> disease.

But he is misleading because he ignores the fact that drug users spread
aids, heterosexuals spread aids, transfusions spread aids....... He is
only telling part of the truth. Remember "A little knowledge is a
dangerous thing" means that if you only know a small part of the truth
then it is dangerous. And you know a very very little bit of the whole
picture. Instead of whining on the internet why not read a few books
first.


>
> In the old days faggots were burned,so is this practical now?

No. No more practical than burning you for the hatred you are spreading.
You really do seem like a closet homosexual.

Chris Pierson

unread,
May 15, 1996, 3:00:00 AM5/15/96
to

In article <3198F7...@compusmart.ab.ca>,
William Grosvenor <acu...@compusmart.ab.ca> wrote:
>I feel that they should NOT GET SPECIAL RIGHTS,even if the faggot loving
>Canadian government wants to give them.

Ah, I knew _this_ would happen: petulance. Well, guess what, Sparky: they
have no special rights. They're just working their way up to equal
footing with the rest of us. But point-missing chuckleheads like yourself
never quite understand that, do you?

>Is there any real use for disease spreading faggots?

>In the old days faggots were burned,so is this practical now?

I hope to God you never catch tuberculosis, or influenza, or some other
disease that's more infectious than HIV. If you do, by your "reasoning,"
you'll have to do the old Self-Immolation Special.

Hm. Maybe I _do_ hope you catch TB or the flu, after all.

You're entitled to your opinion, Mr. Grosvenor. Now shut the fuck up.


--
****************************************************************************
Chris Pierson ** "No one hands me my gun and says, 'run.' _No one_."
Freelance Editor ** --Britt (James Coburn), The Magnificent Seven
****************************************************************************

John Morris

unread,
May 15, 1996, 3:00:00 AM5/15/96
to

On Wed, 15 May 1996 04:12:32 +0700, William Grosvenor
<acu...@compusmart.ab.ca> wrote:

[snip]

>In the old days faggots were burned,so is this practical now?

Mr. Grosvenor, are you advocating that homosexuals should be killed
for being homosexual?

--
John Morris <jmo...@gpu.srv.ualberta.ca>
at University of Alberta <Scripture veteris capiunt exempla futuri>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Nizkor Project: An Electronic Holocaust Resource
File archives - ftp://ftp.almanac.bc.ca
Web page - http://nizkor.almanac.bc.ca

Jason Silverman

unread,
May 15, 1996, 3:00:00 AM5/15/96
to

In article <MOrtch-1505...@purgatorio.chem.ualberta.ca>,
MOr...@gpu.srv.ualberta.ca (Mary Ortch) wrote:

> In article <3198F7...@compusmart.ab.ca>, William Grosvenor
> <acu...@compusmart.ab.ca> wrote:
>

> > Dr.Grant Hill,MP, is completely correct in stating that faggots spread
> > disease.

Grant Hill is in fact not a doctor, but a player with the Detroit
Pistons. Get it straight, troll.

> But he is misleading because he ignores the fact that drug users spread
> aids, heterosexuals spread aids, transfusions spread aids....... He is
> only telling part of the truth. Remember "A little knowledge is a
> dangerous thing" means that if you only know a small part of the truth
> then it is dangerous. And you know a very very little bit of the whole
> picture. Instead of whining on the internet why not read a few books
> first.

In fact, he is negligently misleading in a way that ought to be criminal.
In fact, I think all homosexuals should bring a class actions suit against
this quack for slander. It has long been documented that the groups other
than homosexuals -- intravenous drug users and *heterosexual women* (who
are being infected by heterosexual men) -- have the highest rate of
infection. This has been a known fact for years now. The homoseual
community has been extremely responsible in AIDS education and prevention
measures. In fact, were it not for efforts by gays and lesbians, the AIDS
situation would be far worse.

> > In the old days faggots were burned,so is this practical now?
>

> No. No more practical than burning you for the hatred you are spreading.
> You really do seem like a closet homosexual.

In fact Mary, not only might billy be a closet homosexual, I think maybe
he just might be a little (ahem) resentful about (ahem) a certain disease
that one might catch from (ahem) junkie prostitutes whose services one
might engage after realizing that one is too much of a loser to get it for
free (AHEM). Or perhaps he is in denial about intravenous drug users
because, after all, many people's (ahem) fathers came back from the War as
(ahem) junkies themselves. But of course I am not implying anything about
billy.

I do think, however, billy is a little confused that "faggot" is both a
derogatory term for homosexuals, which do not burn well, as well as a term
used "in the old days" for a bundle of kindling, which does burn well.
billy should learn english.

Anyway, William Grosvenor is a troll who is too cowardly to respond to
followups and is only interested in getting e-mail, regardless of the
content. So I'll oblige him.


--Jason
posted/emailed

John Bartol

unread,
May 15, 1996, 3:00:00 AM5/15/96
to

In article <3198F7...@compusmart.ab.ca>,
William Grosvenor <acu...@compusmart.ab.ca> wrote:

[a bunch of nonsense. Some points of which could spark reasoned debate except
for the inflammatory, nonsensical, paranoid, ravings of an apparently
deranged, pitifully insecure, madman :-) ]

Having watched the movie Toy Story, one phrase comes to mind which is
applicable, I think, to 'Mr. Grosvenor':


You, sir, are a sad, strange, little man.

--
"There is a huge difference between disliking somebody - maybe even disliking
them a lot - and actually shooting them, strangling them, dragging them
____________ through the fields and setting their house on fire. It was a
John Bartol \___ difference which kept the vast majority of the population
jb...@zadall.com\ alive from day to day." [DGHDA by Douglas Adams]


Darin McBride

unread,
May 15, 1996, 3:00:00 AM5/15/96
to

Mary Ortch (MOr...@gpu.srv.ualberta.ca) wrote:
> In article <3198F7...@compusmart.ab.ca>, William Grosvenor
> <acu...@compusmart.ab.ca> wrote:

> > Dr.Grant Hill,MP, is completely correct in stating that faggots spread
> > disease.

> But he is misleading because he ignores the fact that drug users spread


> aids, heterosexuals spread aids, transfusions spread aids....... He is
> only telling part of the truth. Remember "A little knowledge is a
> dangerous thing" means that if you only know a small part of the truth
> then it is dangerous. And you know a very very little bit of the whole
> picture. Instead of whining on the internet why not read a few books
> first.

Remember: over 80% of AIDS cases were gained through homosexual means.
Only 8% of AIDS cases were caused by heterosexual sex. Assuming the
outrageous ratio of 1:9 homosexual to heterosexuals (estimates range
from 2% to 10% of the population, so 5% would be a more likely estimate
than the 10 we're going to use), that means that a hundred times more
homosexuals have AIDS from their sex than heterosexuals do from theirs.


> >
> > In the old days faggots were burned,so is this practical now?

For the same reason I am against capital punishment, no - you could be
wrong.

> No. No more practical than burning you for the hatred you are spreading.
> You really do seem like a closet homosexual.

You seem like a bigot. I have yet to see a non-bigot claim that a
homophobe is a 'closet homosexual'.

--
Darin McBride:mcb...@ee.ualberta.ca/mcb...@tower.bohica.net

Enjoy each day as if it were your last, care about each moment as if
it were your last for one day, one moment, you *will* be right!

Tips & Tricks for IBM Hardware, MSDOS, OS2, Windows (including Win'95):
http://www.ee.ualberta.ca/~mcbride/tiptrick.html

low...@smartt.com

unread,
May 15, 1996, 3:00:00 AM5/15/96
to

William Grosvenor <acu...@compusmart.ab.ca> wrote:

>Dr.Grant Hill,MP, is completely correct in stating that faggots spread

The best way to deal with folks like this is to not debate or argue
with them. Don't even waste your time composing a rebuttle to flame
bait like this...

David Reilley

unread,
May 15, 1996, 3:00:00 AM5/15/96
to

In article <DrGIn...@zadall.com> jb...@zadall.com (John Bartol) writes:
>From: jb...@zadall.com (John Bartol)
>Subject: Re: FAGGOTS SPREAD AIDS-WHY PROTECT THEM?
>Date: Wed, 15 May 1996 17:16:25 GMT

>In article <3198F7...@compusmart.ab.ca>,
>William Grosvenor <acu...@compusmart.ab.ca> wrote:

>[a bunch of nonsense. Some points of which could spark reasoned debate except
> for the inflammatory, nonsensical, paranoid, ravings of an apparently
> deranged, pitifully insecure, madman :-) ]

>Having watched the movie Toy Story, one phrase comes to mind which is
>applicable, I think, to 'Mr. Grosvenor':


> You, sir, are a sad, strange, little man.

Defective chip.

Larry Myles

unread,
May 15, 1996, 3:00:00 AM5/15/96
to

William Grosvenor <acu...@compusmart.ab.ca> wrote:

>Dr.Grant Hill,MP, is completely correct in stating that faggots spread

>disease.

Hey Willy...
I want you to spend a few bucks and get Laurie Garrett's "THE COMING
PLAGUE".. In it, I think that you might be surprised to learn..that we
are ALL capable of spreading disease. But..rats, mosquitoes, etc are
*way* better at it than any human.

>He is far too polite,since I am sure he also has read the acclaimed
>documentary book "AND THE BAND PLAYED ON",which also became a movie,
>which details how AIDS was spread worldwide,deliberately,by the faggot
>with Air Canada.This was even supported by the government of Canada.

Ahhhh...I watched that special. And do you really think that the
faggot in question even knew what he had in the first place. And even
the doctors hadn't figured out what was going on in the first year or
more. I know that meanwhile the gay blade was out there porking any
male that bent over....but as to him knowing he had a vicious
disease..and then passing it along willingly...nah.

>Now,normal people all over the world must pay for these perverts and the
>astronomic costs for their medical care until they get cremated.

I hate to break this to you...but the faggots have their group pretty
much under control. It's us normal guys who are now spreading the
disease around....I know that this doesn't sit well with your
pitch...but it happens to be the truth.

>I feel that they should NOT GET SPECIAL RIGHTS,even if the faggot loving
>Canadian government wants to give them.

I couldn't agree with you more on that point. But at the same time, I
would want the faggots to get equal rights. Judging from your
tirades, I would think that the government might not have any choice
though...if only because your hatred of faggots if multiplyed by other
homophobics could be read as a real threat to the deviants. So..

>Is there any real use for disease spreading faggots?

Yes, actually. As a lot of the homo's are quite the talented bunch. I
find their contribution in society very healthy. I am not too much
into their sexual deviancy, but as long as it doesn't become a
mandatory practice, I'm willing to be on their side when it comes to
fighting abuse and bias.

>In the old days faggots were burned,so is this practical now?

Hell, they used to burn witches too. And during the Grand
Inquisition...anyone with a brain that wanted to explore science was
burnt as well. You see, in that case...the religionist morons were
becoming afraid that the plebs were hipping up to the fact that a
belief in goD was a believe in superstitious mythology.

larry


cjo...@freenet.edmonton.ab.ca

unread,
May 15, 1996, 3:00:00 AM5/15/96
to

[Newsgroups removed: tor.general, alt.revisionism, van.general]
Several points, Mr. Grosvenor:

William Grosvenor (acu...@compusmart.ab.ca) wrote:
: Dr.Grant Hill,MP, is completely correct in stating that faggots spread
: disease.

No more than the rest of the general population. One could make
the point that heterosexuals are contributing more to the decline of the
globe, by virtue of the fact that heterosexuals tend to have children,
while homosexuals don't. However, I won't make that point.

: He is far too polite,since I am sure he also has read the acclaimed

: documentary book "AND THE BAND PLAYED ON",which also became a movie,
: which details how AIDS was spread worldwide,deliberately,by the faggot
: with Air Canada.This was even supported by the government of Canada.

Yet another point: the US government (and I have read the book as
well), did not give funding for AIDS research until the late-early (read:
late in the early) 80s. This was several years after there was evidence
that a disease was out there. This was several years after there was
evidence that people were dying. This was with the *willful* connivance
of the Reagan governement and its right-wing hangers-on (Mr. Grosvenor, I
take it you support them). They are responsible for the loss of lives,
the spread of AIDS, and the contamination of the blood system (which is a
whole other topic in and of itself). In short: Reagan commited murder.
No - he committed mass murder.

: Now,normal people all over the world must pay for these perverts and the

: astronomic costs for their medical care until they get cremated.

I could say, but I won't, that you appear to be either a) an
extreme masochist, who enjoys recieving messages which explain in great
detail where you are incorrect, and lambasting you for what appear to be
willful factual errors, or b) someone, along the lines of Mr. Bumble in
Oliver Twist, who is self-important, arrogant, and believes that they are
so important to the world that it simply could not have gone on, and
simply won't go on, when they are no longer around.

Further, do you happen to know what the costs are to perform
heart surgery? to perform surgery and treat cancer? No? I'm not
surprised. The costs (presumably overwealming caused by heterosexuals)
are staggering, and dwarve those associated with the treatment of AIDS.
At least, with AIDS, there's a fair chance that you won't live long.
(This may sound cruel, but I think the worst possible life is one in
which you are completely incapable of doing anything, enjoying anything,
etc...) With heart attacks, stroke, Alzheimer's, etc... (which,
according to your hypothesis are *heterosexual* diseases), modern
medicine allows the victims to remain alive for a comparatively longer
time, thus raising costs to society. This leads logically to the result
that we should kill anyone who puts a strain on our health-care
resources. Mr. Grosvenor, would you like to be the first to volunteer?

: I feel that they should NOT GET SPECIAL RIGHTS,even if the faggot loving

: Canadian government wants to give them.

Who said anything about special rights? *EVERYONE* is entitled
to be treated with dignity, respect, and with at least a modicum of
compassion. You, sir, do not appear to treat anyone ecept yourself in
that manner. You, sir, (and I'm using "sir" extremely loosely) appear to
be an old-fashioned bigot, with a phobia of everything and anyone who
does not dress, eat, look, act, nor think like you do. Actually, I think
that may be slightly harsh - to bigots. You are not on their level. At
least they do not try to support their theories with pseudo-scientific
"facts", but say plain out, "this is what I think".

I am not in favour of special rights for anyone, but I think
anyone with brains that are not constituted of pablum or rocks can see
that homosexuals have been discriminated against in our society, and
deserve protection for people like you. Just like anyone else.

: Is there any real use for disease spreading faggots?

Perhaps one should ask the question: "Is there any real use for
hate-mongering people like you, Mr. Grosvenor?"

: In the old days faggots were burned,so is this practical now?

Fill this one in yourself. Step right up, we've reserved a spot
for you, William.

--
/---- Chris Jones ----v- PGP Fingerprint --------------------------------\
|42 -It's the answer! | 95 2F 8F 26 F9 CA 4B 1A D1 CA C1 5E F9 76 59 AB |
\---------------------^--------------------------------------------------/

Mary Ortch

unread,
May 15, 1996, 3:00:00 AM5/15/96
to

In article <jsilver-1505...@lsdiala07.it.luc.edu>,
jsi...@orion.it.luc.edu (Jason Silverman) wrote:

> > In article <3198F7...@compusmart.ab.ca>, William Grosvenor

> > <acu...@compusmart.ab.ca> wrote:
> >
> > > Dr.Grant Hill,MP, is completely correct in stating that faggots spread
> > > disease.
>

> Grant Hill is in fact not a doctor, but a player with the Detroit
> Pistons. Get it straight, troll.
>

> > But he is misleading because he ignores the fact that drug users spread
> > aids, heterosexuals spread aids, transfusions spread aids....... He is
> > only telling part of the truth.

> In fact, he is negligently misleading in a way that ought to be criminal.
> In fact, I think all homosexuals should bring a class actions suit against
> this quack for slander.

It ought to be criminal. But I doubt it is. I think the best that can be
hoped for is to have his license removed by the Board of Doctors dumb
enough to have given him his license in the first place (I think that some
action has been taken on that front already, though extra pressure would
always be helpful).


> > > In the old days faggots were burned,so is this practical now?
> >

> > No. No more practical than burning you for the hatred you are spreading.
> > You really do seem like a closet homosexual.

> I do think, however, billy is a little confused that "faggot" is both a


> derogatory term for homosexuals, which do not burn well, as well as a term
> used "in the old days" for a bundle of kindling, which does burn well.
> billy should learn english.

Yep. On second reading I guess it was his attempt at a (very) sick and
twisted play on words. However given the virulence of his earlier posts I
had assumed he was not clever enough to think of it on his own. Is it
possible that Grosvenor is just a 'bot' of some sort which cross-posts
rehashes of press releases from the Reform and Republican parties. I have
yet to see any real attempt at discourse, always a good sign of a bot (or
an intellectually deficient troll)

>
> --Jason
> posted/emailed

Larry Myles

unread,
May 15, 1996, 3:00:00 AM5/15/96
to

>But he is misleading because he ignores the fact that drug users spread
>aids, heterosexuals spread aids, transfusions spread aids....... He is

>only telling part of the truth. Remember "A little knowledge is a
>dangerous thing" means that if you only know a small part of the truth
>then it is dangerous. And you know a very very little bit of the whole
>picture. Instead of whining on the internet why not read a few books
>first.

Actually...a lot to comment on here. First of all, I know how you all
hate anecdotal evidence....but two friends of mine who are heroin
addicts are dying. One with Aids, and the other with
Hepatitis...whatever the one is that is deadly. Neither guy is a
crease-shooter...but they did use dirty needles.

As well, homo's seem to have it under control..the spread of aids, I
mean. Hetro's don't.

As well...there are homepages galore on Aids and how to learn about
it, etc. all over the Internet. There is no excuse for venting
anti-faggot messages dressed up as concern about disease. The
knowledge is here, and Yahoo can find it for you.

>No. No more practical than burning you for the hatred you are spreading.
>You really do seem like a closet homosexual.

I don't think that there is any doubt about it. So..with that in
mind, try being kinder to poor old William. For, he's either toying
with us...or he's a man in anguish. I can picture him not doing well
with women...and jacking off at night..just before he comes, the butch
like babe he was jacking to places a cock in his mouth\anus, etc.

This is one hell of a way to live your one life on this earth...so
when it comes to homophobic guys, I've got time for them...because
they are just sick folks who are afraid to confront their own
sexuality.

larry


Larry Myles

unread,
May 15, 1996, 3:00:00 AM5/15/96
to

>Grant Hill is in fact not a doctor, but a player with the Detroit
>Pistons. Get it straight, troll.

ROTFL....didn't know that..how funny!

>In fact, he is negligently misleading in a way that ought to be criminal.
>In fact, I think all homosexuals should bring a class actions suit against

>this quack for slander. It has long been documented that the groups other

No. No way!! The InterNet is a perfect place for these isolated
closet queens. Willy is one sick and bitter puppy. He is more than
likely a homo who hasn't admitted it to himself. I find that a sad,
sad place to be. Only through discourse can Willy find that we don't
hate him because of his illness. And, we won't hate him for being a
faggot either.

But sue him, or taunt him...and you will wind up lighting a fuse on
what appears to be a very tightly wrapped individual. Bear with
him...

>than homosexuals -- intravenous drug users and *heterosexual women* (who
>are being infected by heterosexual men) -- have the highest rate of
>infection. This has been a known fact for years now. The homoseual
>community has been extremely responsible in AIDS education and prevention
>measures. In fact, were it not for efforts by gays and lesbians, the AIDS
>situation would be far worse.

Bravo!! Of course, most of us know this...but it was nice to have it
on screen so well put.

>In fact Mary, not only might billy be a closet homosexual, I think maybe
>he just might be a little (ahem) resentful about (ahem) a certain disease
>that one might catch from (ahem) junkie prostitutes whose services one
>might engage after realizing that one is too much of a loser to get it for
>free (AHEM). Or perhaps he is in denial about intravenous drug users
>because, after all, many people's (ahem) fathers came back from the War as
>(ahem) junkies themselves. But of course I am not implying anything about
>billy.

Nah...a guy like him would be too confused to even get a whore. He's a
(closet) faggot..and I'm sure that one good look at a split beaver
would cause his little penis to shrivel up into his gut. Again..allow
the guy some room to discover his own sexuality. Nothing wrong with
him being a homo...

larry


Mary Ortch

unread,
May 15, 1996, 3:00:00 AM5/15/96
to

In article <4ndee6$14...@pulp.ucs.ualberta.ca>, mcb...@ee.ualberta.ca
(Darin McBride) wrote:

> Mary Ortch (MOr...@gpu.srv.ualberta.ca) wrote:
> > In article <3198F7...@compusmart.ab.ca>, William Grosvenor
> > <acu...@compusmart.ab.ca> wrote:

> > > Dr.Grant Hill,MP, is completely correct in stating that faggots spread
> > > disease.

> > But he is misleading because he ignores the fact that drug users spread
> > aids, heterosexuals spread aids, transfusions spread aids....... He is
> > only telling part of the truth


>

> Remember: over 80% of AIDS cases were gained through homosexual means.
> Only 8% of AIDS cases were caused by heterosexual sex. Assuming the
> outrageous ratio of 1:9 homosexual to heterosexuals (estimates range
> from 2% to 10% of the population, so 5% would be a more likely estimate
> than the 10 we're going to use), that means that a hundred times more
> homosexuals have AIDS from their sex than heterosexuals do from theirs.

What are you saying??????

You really must clarify your points better. Are you saying that at this
point in time 80% of AIDS cases are Homosexual? Because this is vastly
different than saying 80% of new cases of AIDS are Homosexual in origin.
Where does the 80% figure come from? I really find it extremely hard to
believe that 80% of NEW cases of AIDS are Homosexual in nature. I think
the fastest rising cases are among IV drug users. The fact that at this
point in time 100x more Homosexuals have aids (a figure I would really
want a better source on before I believed) has absolutely nothing to do
with transmission rates. One is a static average and the other is a time
weighted rate. Have you ever read the Mismeasure of Man by J. Gould. Its
usually found in the Science section of bookstores. I think you might get
good use from it.


>
>
> > >
> > > In the old days faggots were burned,so is this practical now?

> > No. No more practical than burning you for the hatred you are spreading.

> > You really do seem like a closet homosexual.
>

> You seem like a bigot. I have yet to see a non-bigot claim that a
> homophobe is a 'closet homosexual'.

I'm biggoted for wondering where his hatred of homosexuals comes from? If
you were well read you would know that there are cases of virulent
(sometimes murderous) homophobes who were closet homosexuals.

You seem poorly educated. I have yet to see you properly quote and
reference statistics or show a broader understanding than what might be
garnered from CNN. Get an education, your money has been wasted so far.

Darin McBride

unread,
May 16, 1996, 3:00:00 AM5/16/96
to

Mary Ortch (MOr...@gpu.srv.ualberta.ca) wrote:
> In article <4ndee6$14...@pulp.ucs.ualberta.ca>, mcb...@ee.ualberta.ca
> (Darin McBride) wrote:

> > Remember: over 80% of AIDS cases were gained through homosexual means.
> > Only 8% of AIDS cases were caused by heterosexual sex. Assuming the
> > outrageous ratio of 1:9 homosexual to heterosexuals (estimates range
> > from 2% to 10% of the population, so 5% would be a more likely estimate
> > than the 10 we're going to use), that means that a hundred times more
> > homosexuals have AIDS from their sex than heterosexuals do from theirs.

> What are you saying??????

I'm saying that to catch the AIDS virus, you practically have to be a
homosexual (male is also the better gender to catch it as well, assuming
homosexual methods...)

> You really must clarify your points better. Are you saying that at this
> point in time 80% of AIDS cases are Homosexual? Because this is vastly
> different than saying 80% of new cases of AIDS are Homosexual in origin.
> Where does the 80% figure come from? I really find it extremely hard to
> believe that 80% of NEW cases of AIDS are Homosexual in nature. I think
> the fastest rising cases are among IV drug users. The fact that at this
> point in time 100x more Homosexuals have aids (a figure I would really
> want a better source on before I believed) has absolutely nothing to do
> with transmission rates. One is a static average and the other is a time
> weighted rate. Have you ever read the Mismeasure of Man by J. Gould. Its
> usually found in the Science section of bookstores. I think you might get
> good use from it.

<sigh> You want clarification, and then you go assuming something
wrong. And THEN you have the gall to say "I really find it extremely
hard to believe..." - in other words, you've made up your mind, end of
story?

> > > No. No more practical than burning you for the hatred you are spreading.
> > > You really do seem like a closet homosexual.
> >
> > You seem like a bigot. I have yet to see a non-bigot claim that a
> > homophobe is a 'closet homosexual'.

> I'm biggoted for wondering where his hatred of homosexuals comes from? If

No, you're biggoted for calling him a 'closet homosexual.'

> you were well read you would know that there are cases of virulent
> (sometimes murderous) homophobes who were closet homosexuals.

And, from your post, I'm to assume this is a COMMON occurance - common
enough that most, if not all, anti-homosexuals are really closet
homosexuals?

> You seem poorly educated. I have yet to see you properly quote and
> reference statistics or show a broader understanding than what might be
> garnered from CNN. Get an education, your money has been wasted so far.

Congrats - you've insulted almost every part of me. I'm waiting for the
final two insults so I know I've been fully insulted: something about my
mother, and me being a Nazi.


In a story appearing in the Wall Street Journal (WSJ), May 1, 1996, it
seems the efforts to shout a warning about the AIDs epidemic have
backfired on the homosexual community. In 1987 the Center for
Disease Control (CDC) began issuing warnings how anyone could
catch AIDs. As such, funds to help fight the epidemic (as well as find
a cure) have been used to address the general population, rather
than being concentrated where they can do the most good.

The problem lies with what the odds are of catching AIDs. For the
typical heterosexual American, the odds of catching AIDs from an
extra-marital sexual encounter are 1 in 5 million w/o a condom, and 1
in 50 million w/ one, per one study. But for homosexual, bisexual,
and intravenous drug users, the odds are 1 in 50. Over 83% of all
AIDs victims fall into these latter categories. Because of this, money
has basically been wasted warning a population about something that
has less likely hood of killing them than a lightning bolt, while the real
victims are not receiving adequate information or assistance.


In a story about HIV and AIDs that appeared in the April, 1996 edition
of the Concerned Women for America's monthly newsletter, CWA
tells how homosexual advocacy groups and the CDC combined to
expand the scope of the definition of what AIDs was. By doing so,
they had planned to make most Americans think the problem was
universal so that more resources would be thrown at it than would be
if Americans continued to perceive AIDs as a homosexual only
problem. The story cited examples of HIV infected people - including
newborn infants - who either shrug off the disease or continue to lead
normal lives in spite of it. Combine this with what the WSJ said and it
appears that the effort to politicize AIDs backfired on the homosexual
community.

The CWA story further went to say that HIV may not be the sole
source of AIDs. The article went into some of the details about the
behavior of homosexuals, and how the consequences of their
behavior, not HIV or not HIV alone, is short circuiting and
destroying their immune system. Some of the behavior includes
multiple sex partners, with the associated risk of contracting any of
the now more than 60 different sexually communicated diseases as
well as other socially communicable diseases, the use of 'nitrates'
and other dangerous mind altering substances to enhance the
euphoria of sex, and the consumption of each other's semen, feces
and urine. Also, the anti-AIDs drug AZT may actually be contributing
to the problem as well.

While not a main subject of the report, the CWA article briefly
touched on the affects of AIDs to cognitive capacity. In response to
concerns about whether people with AIDs should continue to serve in
the military, the story contained a side note how even in the early
stages AIDs affected the mental capacity of it's victims. The thorny
issue facing the homosexual community is this: Military life is a
tough, disciplined life where the lives of many people frequently rests
in the hands of a few. This is especially true in today's high tech
world. If HIV causes AIDs, then people with HIV must be removed
from the military immediately before their reduced mental capacity
injures or kills someone. On the otherhand, if HIV does not lead to
AIDs, then it becomes obvious that behavior does, which will almost
certainly eliminate public sympathy for their cause.

--
Darin McBride:mcb...@ee.ualberta.ca/mcb...@tower.bohica.net

Plan for your future - you'll live the rest of your life there!

jc maillet

unread,
May 16, 1996, 3:00:00 AM5/16/96
to

In article <3198F7...@compusmart.ab.ca>, William Grosvenor
<acu...@compusmart.ab.ca> wrote:


> Now, normal people all over the world must pay for these perverts and the

> astronomic costs for their medical care until they get cremated.

well what's wrong with you paying ?! you don't seem to be the type with
half a fucking brain to know how to enjoy life, so you may as well work to
pay the bills ... and you're gonna keep on doing it until I say it's time
to play real ball.

> I feel that they should NOT GET SPECIAL RIGHTS, even if the faggot loving

> Canadian government wants to give them.


actually, the government is there to help the meek, really. Fags,
Niggers, Artsies, we all fall outside the boundary established by your
type of normalyte. In fact, survival of the fittest is right around the
corner bro, the entangled web you and your whitey cowards have set up to
defend your limp position is crumbling cause you can't even love
yourselves enough to keep it together.

> Is there any real use for disease spreading faggots?
>

> In the old days faggots were burned,so is this practical now?

bill, can I call you bill asshole ? thanks for making your position clear
- now climb into the jar and go back to sniffing your toes.

--
s'tie d'maudit calice de tabarnaque d'enfant d'chienne de siboire ...

old quebecois saying

John Maloney

unread,
May 16, 1996, 3:00:00 AM5/16/96
to

Darin McBride (mcb...@ee.ualberta.ca) wrote:
: I'm saying that to catch the AIDS virus, you practically have to be a

: homosexual (male is also the better gender to catch it as well, assuming
: homosexual methods...)
So are you saying that heterosexuals are immune to AIDS???

: No, you're biggoted for calling him a 'closet homosexual.'
Nah...the truth must needs be in the light. People who are so
obsessive about homosexuals and virulently hostile towards them must be
denying whatever homosexuality that they themselves must possess.


Jason Silverman

unread,
May 16, 1996, 3:00:00 AM5/16/96
to

In article <4nen34$m...@pulp.ucs.ualberta.ca>, mcb...@ee.ualberta.ca

(Darin McBride) wrote:

> In a story appearing in the Wall Street Journal (WSJ), May 1, 1996, it
> seems the efforts to shout a warning about the AIDs epidemic have
> backfired on the homosexual community. In 1987 the Center for
> Disease Control (CDC) began issuing warnings how anyone could
> catch AIDs. As such, funds to help fight the epidemic (as well as find
> a cure) have been used to address the general population, rather
> than being concentrated where they can do the most good.
>
> The problem lies with what the odds are of catching AIDs. For the
> typical heterosexual American, the odds of catching AIDs from an
> extra-marital sexual encounter are 1 in 5 million w/o a condom, and 1
> in 50 million w/ one, per one study. But for homosexual, bisexual,
> and intravenous drug users, the odds are 1 in 50. Over 83% of all
> AIDs victims fall into these latter categories. Because of this, money
> has basically been wasted warning a population about something that
> has less likely hood of killing them than a lightning bolt, while the real
> victims are not receiving adequate information or assistance.

I find it curious that such a blatantly ridiculous story was published in
the Wall Street Journal, but then again, they do have to cater to stupid
business types. In terms of AIDS education, it is well enough distributed
so that it reaches all groups, even the ones that might not need it at all
(I'm sure plenty of nuns are exposed to AIDS educational ads -- so
what?). So to say that AIDS education for the highesdt risk groups has
somehow been compromised is utterly implausible. I also find your
statistics implausible, and I doubt that the study cited was both recent
and respectable.

YAWN! CWA is a slanted, reactionary rag. I won't even waste my time
debating those points raised therein, as the newsletter is utterly
irresponsible and not worthy of intelligent discussion.

Larry Myles

unread,
May 16, 1996, 3:00:00 AM5/16/96
to

>actually, the government is there to help the meek, really. Fags,
>Niggers, Artsies, we all fall outside the boundary established by your
>type of normalyte. In fact, survival of the fittest is right around the
>corner bro, the entangled web you and your whitey cowards have set up to
>defend your limp position is crumbling cause you can't even love
>yourselves enough to keep it together.

I may have couched it differently...but I must agree. As far as the
fittest surviving, I'm happy that others think this is the way it
will....and (relatively) soon as well. I'm not sure of my
chances...but that's ok. As far as lads like Willy go...they'll be
tits up after the first wave.

I can easily picture a scenario not unlike old China...power groups
controlling both urban and rural areas. Could be interesting.

larry


colin newell

unread,
May 16, 1996, 3:00:00 AM5/16/96
to

William Grosvenor (acu...@compusmart.ab.ca) wrote:

: In the old days faggots were burned,so is this practical now?


I never liked derogatory terms like "faggot".
Although heterosexual and married, I accept alternate
life styles and assume only an angry little man
like grosvenor would spread hatred like he does
because of serious personal or emotional problems.

William has offered to meet with me in Victoria or anywhere
for that matter to discuss his opinions in person over java .
If, that is, he still has the courage..

--
Robert Colin Newell
http://espresso.ts.uvic.ca
The Coffee Expert's Web Page

colin newell

unread,
May 16, 1996, 3:00:00 AM5/16/96
to

: <acu...@compusmart.ab.ca> wrote:

the following was snipped off grosvenors web page.....

DEATH PENALTY to be provided for serious crimes, whether by males or
females, such
as for drug trafficking, multiple murder, repeat drunk driving, sexual
perverts, serious
sexual attacks, armed robbery, as well as criminal negligence resulting
in serious injury or
death.


I urge all USENET readers to send their opinions on this hate
material to the webm...@compusmart.ab.ca

colin newell

unread,
May 16, 1996, 3:00:00 AM5/16/96
to

William xxxxxxx (acu...@compusmart.ab.ca) wrote:
: Dr.xxxxx ,MP, is completely correct in stating that xxxxx spread
: disease.


A case in point : The above users account WILL not be renewed at the
end of this month. All sys-admins take note. You and your ISP can
be taken to court for distribution of hate related material.
ISP's are 3rd party publishers and are accountable to a degree
for the material that they propagate.

There is a real line where free speech crosses into the realm
of hatred. Heed the wake-up call.

--
Robert Colin Newell
http://www.octonet.com/~coffee/

cap...@cuug.ab.ca

unread,
May 16, 1996, 3:00:00 AM5/16/96
to

In article <4nfj3q$j...@milo.vcn.bc.ca>, colin newell <rne...@vcn.bc.ca> wrote:
>William Grosvenor (acu...@compusmart.ab.ca) wrote:
>
>: In the old days faggots were burned,so is this practical now?
>
>
>I never liked derogatory terms like "faggot".
>Although heterosexual and married, I accept alternate
>life styles and assume only an angry little man
>like grosvenor would spread hatred like he does
>because of serious personal or emotional problems.

Agreed.


>
>William has offered to meet with me in Victoria or anywhere
>for that matter to discuss his opinions in person over java .
>If, that is, he still has the courage..
>
>
>

>--
>Robert Colin Newell
>http://espresso.ts.uvic.ca


>The Coffee Expert's Web Page

I have some iidea of his personal problems, another netter showed me an
article in some other newsgroup posted by Grosvenor. Looking at this
article, please rethink the idea of meeting him in person. he may have
deviant sex on his mind, especially if you're a women, and I don't think
it would matter to him if you are married. The following article that was
sent to me via e-mail was from another netter who agrees that Grosvenor
does have some very serious problems. The articles may give you some
insite as to what those problems are.

- start.

This is out of pen.pals ,I thought It's funny.ha ha
It's a few snippets Bill wrote
:56 year old, mature professional presently living in frozen northern
:Am not interested in marriage, but will consider alternatives,even in
:other countries.
(Snippola)
:I can also correspond in German. Man kann mir sogar auf Deutsch schreiben.
:Looking forward to replies from interested,mature ladies.
:William Grosvenor, 9208 - 137 Avenue, REDMONTON - Alberta, CANADA T5E 1Y5
He went and did his habitual misspelling of Edmonton.
(snippage)
1. This is were he subjests killing feminists.

Subject: Re: Question for Anti-Choicers
From: william grosvenor <acu...@compusmart.ab.ca>
Date: 1996/03/03
Message-Id: <4hc957$p...@bert.compusmart.ab.ca>
References: <4h63qq$1...@cloner2.ix.netcom.com> <4habq3$5...@nntp.texas.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-Ascii
Organization: International Institute of Management Inc.
Mime-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups:
alt.feminism,soc.men,talk.abortion,alt.religion.christian,talk.philosophy.mi
sc,alt.abortion.inequity,tor.general
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1 (Windows; U; 16bit)

Looks like the feminazis accuse anyone opposing their murder of unborn
children of being nazis,when they are the real killers.

They then try to obfuscate issues by accusing men of gender bias,as
though men have no compassion for infants!!!

Personally,I feel that if the fembos are so strongly in favour of killing
babies,perhaps we should exterminate them,plus all thier butcher friends
making millions off the murders of the babies.

After all, a dead abortionist will never re-offend.

end

Grosvenor has some gall if he can condemn other people for the very
things he represents.

Caprina
--
"Look down,
And show
Some mercy if you can!

"Look down!
Look down
Upon your fellow man!" - "Les Miserables" Musical.

Darin McBride

unread,
May 16, 1996, 3:00:00 AM5/16/96
to

Jason Silverman (jsi...@orion.it.luc.edu) wrote:
> In article <4nen34$m...@pulp.ucs.ualberta.ca>, mcb...@ee.ualberta.ca
> (Darin McBride) wrote:
>
> > In a story appearing in the Wall Street Journal (WSJ), May 1, 1996, it
> > seems the efforts to shout a warning about the AIDs epidemic have
> > backfired on the homosexual community. In 1987 the Center for
> > Disease Control (CDC) began issuing warnings how anyone could
> > catch AIDs. As such, funds to help fight the epidemic (as well as find
> > a cure) have been used to address the general population, rather
> > than being concentrated where they can do the most good.
> >
> > The problem lies with what the odds are of catching AIDs. For the
> > typical heterosexual American, the odds of catching AIDs from an
> > extra-marital sexual encounter are 1 in 5 million w/o a condom, and 1
> > in 50 million w/ one, per one study. But for homosexual, bisexual,
> > and intravenous drug users, the odds are 1 in 50. Over 83% of all
> > AIDs victims fall into these latter categories. Because of this, money
> > has basically been wasted warning a population about something that
> > has less likely hood of killing them than a lightning bolt, while the real
> > victims are not receiving adequate information or assistance.

> I find it curious that such a blatantly ridiculous story was published in
> the Wall Street Journal, but then again, they do have to cater to stupid

Perhaps it's just you who are blatantly ridiculous.

> business types. In terms of AIDS education, it is well enough distributed
> so that it reaches all groups, even the ones that might not need it at all

So the ones who don't need it... isn't that a waste of educational
funding? Shouldn't we have spread the funding in a proportional method
to target those at higher risk with more persuasive education?

> (I'm sure plenty of nuns are exposed to AIDS educational ads -- so
> what?). So to say that AIDS education for the highesdt risk groups has
> somehow been compromised is utterly implausible. I also find your

Compromised? No, only insufficiently funded proportionally speaking.

> statistics implausible, and I doubt that the study cited was both recent
> and respectable.

Doubt all you want. You seem to be reactionary and narrow-minded enough
to throw out anything that doesn't fall into your belief structure.

> YAWN! CWA is a slanted, reactionary rag. I won't even waste my time
> debating those points raised therein, as the newsletter is utterly
> irresponsible and not worthy of intelligent discussion.

And, sir, neither are you.

Rich Graves

unread,
May 16, 1996, 3:00:00 AM5/16/96
to

rne...@vcn.bc.ca (colin newell) writes:
>There is a real line where free speech crosses into the realm
>of hatred. Heed the wake-up call.

You mean like, wake up and smell the coffee?

Oh, I think assholes like "Mr. Grosvenor" should be able to talk about
"faggots" in public. It shows their true character.

>Robert Colin Newell
>http://www.octonet.com/~coffee/

>The Coffee Expert's Web Page

I prefer http://www.math.columbia.edu/~bayer/coffee.html, which is linked
from your page. It's got a pretty blue ribbon on it.

-rich
http://www.c2.org/~rich/Not_By_Me_Not_My_Views/rebuttal.html

cjo...@freenet.edmonton.ab.ca

unread,
May 16, 1996, 3:00:00 AM5/16/96
to

04.it.luc.edu> <4ng0fi$13...@pulp.ucs.ualberta.ca>
Organization: Edmonton FreeNet, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Distribution:

Darin, I respect your right to have your opinions, no matter how
outlandish, moronic, or idiotic I may find them. Please note: I'm going
to try to stay on a strictly rational basis, and avoid personally
attacking you. On occasion, though, I must confess to wondering whether
or not you are another account for our good friend, Mr. Grosvenor. But, at
least you give (some) (supposed) supporting evidence.

Darin McBride (mcb...@ee.ualberta.ca) wrote:
: Jason Silverman (jsi...@orion.it.luc.edu) wrote:
: > In article <4nen34$m...@pulp.ucs.ualberta.ca>, mcb...@ee.ualberta.ca
: > (Darin McBride) wrote:
: >
: > > In a story appearing in the Wall Street Journal (WSJ), May 1, 1996, it


: > > seems the efforts to shout a warning about the AIDs epidemic have
: > > backfired on the homosexual community. In 1987 the Center for
: > > Disease Control (CDC) began issuing warnings how anyone could
: > > catch AIDs. As such, funds to help fight the epidemic (as well as find
: > > a cure) have been used to address the general population, rather
: > > than being concentrated where they can do the most good.

Note: Heterosexuals are *NOT* immune to AIDS. If examples are
needed, the Krever inquiry should be able to provide adequate numbers.

: > > The problem lies with what the odds are of catching AIDs. For the


: > > typical heterosexual American, the odds of catching AIDs from an
: > > extra-marital sexual encounter are 1 in 5 million w/o a condom, and 1
: > > in 50 million w/ one, per one study. But for homosexual, bisexual,
: > > and intravenous drug users, the odds are 1 in 50. Over 83% of all
: > > AIDs victims fall into these latter categories. Because of this, money
: > > has basically been wasted warning a population about something that
: > > has less likely hood of killing them than a lightning bolt, while the
: > > real
: > > victims are not receiving adequate information or assistance.

I would have to seriously doubt these statistics, as they do not
have any source, nor have you told us their age. However, one could
point out that of course it's more likely that homosexuals, bisexual, and
intravenous drug users will have a higher rate, simply because there are
fewer people in those groups. If there are equivalent numbers in both
the aforementioned and the heterosexual groups, the chances will be
correspondingly higher in the homosexual, bisexual, and drug user groups.

: > I find it curious that such a blatantly ridiculous story was published in


: > the Wall Street Journal, but then again, they do have to cater to stupid

: Perhaps it's just you who are blatantly ridiculous.

Let's try to keep this rational and objective. Flaming will
*not* help anyone.

: > business types. In terms of AIDS education, it is well enough distributed


: > so that it reaches all groups, even the ones that might not need it at all

Mr. Silverman has a point here: is it not better to warn
everyone, in the event that the disease entered the general population,
instead of remaining relatively confined to the homosexual, bisexual, and
intravenous drug user communities, as it did? If the education is
restricted to those groups which are believed to be at risk, but the
disease actually infects other groups, would that not be the waste of
funding, as noted in your next paragraph?

: So the ones who don't need it... isn't that a waste of educational


: funding? Shouldn't we have spread the funding in a proportional method
: to target those at higher risk with more persuasive education?

See previous paragraph.

: > (I'm sure plenty of nuns are exposed to AIDS educational ads -- so


: > what?). So to say that AIDS education for the highesdt risk groups has
: > somehow been compromised is utterly implausible. I also find your
: Compromised? No, only insufficiently funded proportionally speaking.
: > statistics implausible, and I doubt that the study cited was both recent
: > and respectable.

: Doubt all you want. You seem to be reactionary and narrow-minded enough
: to throw out anything that doesn't fall into your belief structure.

One could make the same point about you, Darin. Without the
citation to *respectably conducted* research, published in a respected
scientific journal, the statistics are worthless, and invalid.

: > YAWN! CWA is a slanted, reactionary rag. I won't even waste my time


: > debating those points raised therein, as the newsletter is utterly
: > irresponsible and not worthy of intelligent discussion.
: And, sir, neither are you.

Mr. Silverman has yet another point here, although he (perhaps)
did not present it in a coherent manner. If I understand him correctly,
he is stating that CWA has a particular viewpoint which it tends to
stress, and which may colour the statistics, opinions, etc that you have
quoted.

cap...@cuug.ab.ca

unread,
May 16, 1996, 3:00:00 AM5/16/96
to

In article <4nfsk5$k...@milo.vcn.bc.ca>, colin newell <rne...@vcn.bc.ca> wrote:
>William xxxxxxx (acu...@compusmart.ab.ca) wrote:
>: Dr.xxxxx ,MP, is completely correct in stating that xxxxx spread
>: disease.
>
>
>A case in point : The above users account WILL not be renewed at the
>end of this month. All sys-admins take note. You and your ISP can
>be taken to court for distribution of hate related material.
>ISP's are 3rd party publishers and are accountable to a degree
>for the material that they propagate.
>
>There is a real line where free speech crosses into the realm
>of hatred. Heed the wake-up call.
>
>--

>Robert Colin Newell
>http://www.octonet.com/~coffee/
>The Coffee Expert's Web Page

Here here!!
Thanks for helping in the fight against hate! Let's make sure the next
isp he joins is well aware of his agenda, let's do what we can to prevent
more of this sort of thing from happening in future!!

Jason Kodish

unread,
May 16, 1996, 3:00:00 AM5/16/96
to

In article <4ncqar$m...@gold.interlog.com> cpie...@interlog.com writes:
>
>
>You're entitled to your opinion, Mr. Grosvenor. Now shut the fuck up.
>

He's already done the self-immolation special. He's being banned from
every ISP in the city....(though the specifics behind it, I have yet to
learn)


>
>--
>****************************************************************************
>Chris Pierson ** "No one hands me my gun and says, 'run.' _No one_."
>Freelance Editor ** --Britt (James Coburn), The Magnificent Seven
>****************************************************************************
>

--
Jason Kodish
Thirring Institute for Applied Gravitational Research
-----------------------------------------------------
Time is awake when all things sleep
Time stands straight when all things fall
Time shuts in all and will not be shut.
Is, was, and shall be are Time's children
O Reasoning,be witness, be stable--VYASA,the Mahabarata (AD 400)

Scott Marsden

unread,
May 17, 1996, 3:00:00 AM5/17/96
to

mcb...@ee.ualberta.ca (Darin McBride) wrote:


>> > In the old days faggots were burned,so is this practical now?

>For the same reason I am against capital punishment, no - you could be
>wrong.

Just what are you saying!? That all homosexuals are worthy of death,
but seeing as how there is no way to prove someone is a homosexual,
then genocide is not right?

A sane person would answer, "no -- the entire idea is wrong."


Larry Myles

unread,
May 17, 1996, 3:00:00 AM5/17/96
to


>I never liked derogatory terms like "faggot".

Tough. Who appointed you my censor?

>Although heterosexual and married, I accept alternate
>life styles and assume only an angry little man
>like grosvenor would spread hatred like he does
>because of serious personal or emotional problems.

Wee Willy is more than likely a closet case. Once out..he might just
be a little more tolerant of his fellow faggot. I've come across your
type before...all too ready to call confused folks like Willy a
hate-monger.
Even if he is..are you not in the least bit curious as to why Wee
Willy is the way he is? I sure as hell am...and as there are
thousands of newsgroups, I am happy that Willy is here pitching his
tirade.

>William has offered to meet with me in Victoria or anywhere
>for that matter to discuss his opinions in person over java .
>If, that is, he still has the courage..

Yes, well don't bend over...

larry

>--
>Robert Colin Newell
>http://espresso.ts.uvic.ca

TheNutHouse

unread,
May 17, 1996, 3:00:00 AM5/17/96
to

In article <3198F7...@compusmart.ab.ca>, acu...@compusmart.ab.ca says...
>
>Dr.Grant Hill,MP, is completely correct in stating that faggots spread
>disease.
>
Funny he didn't mention anything about the Red Cross.


tom moran

unread,
May 17, 1996, 3:00:00 AM5/17/96
to

rne...@vcn.bc.ca (colin newell) wrote:

>William xxxxxxx (acu...@compusmart.ab.ca) wrote:
>: Dr.xxxxx ,MP, is completely correct in stating that xxxxx spread
>: disease.
>
>
>A case in point : The above users account WILL not be renewed at the
>end of this month. All sys-admins take note. You and your ISP can
>be taken to court for distribution of hate related material.
>ISP's are 3rd party publishers and are accountable to a degree
>for the material that they propagate.
>
>There is a real line where free speech crosses into the realm
>of hatred. Heed the wake-up call.
>

>--
>Robert Colin Newell
>http://www.octonet.com/~coffee/


>The Coffee Expert's Web Page

Who determines what constitutes "hate"? On this group you are
charged with "hate" crimes if you post something with lots of support
or just make negative inference on spoken words.
You say "There is a real line where free speech crosses the realm
of hatred". Do you have some sort of formula that can prove it?

Zeljko 'Zed' Zidaric

unread,
May 17, 1996, 3:00:00 A