Subject: Soapbox Magazine, Issue 2 [1/3]
From: [email-masked] (Chad Skelton)
Date: 30 Mar 93 16:27:58 EST
Newsgroups: alt.censorship

This file is called SOAP0002.TXT, please rename it as such
in any distribution to avoid confusion.
 
---
 
Soapbox
Issue 2
February 1993
 
---
 
a1 - Introduction
 
FEATURES
 
a2 - 'Gays are Taking Your Job
        A look into anti-gay propoganda in Colorado
 
a3 - Who is Al Gore?
        A second look at the new VP.
 
a4 - Who Killed Donald Duck?
        Sanctions in Yugoslavia keep out Disney
 
a5 - Amendment 2 Aftermath
        Colorado copes after the anti-gay law
 
a6 - Bestiality
        Animal Abuse or Sexual Fetish?
 
DEPARTMENTS
 
a7 - Boycott!
 
a8 - The Top 7
 
a9 - 10 Great Taglines
 
a10 - Endnotes
 
---
 
a1
                          INTRODUCTION

Disclaimer
 
"Any opinions expressed in this magazine do not necessarily
reflect the opinions of the editor.  For all we know, they may
not even reflect the viewpoints of the author.  As for facts,
those articles which the editor writes are always attempted to be
accurate, as for other articles, we try to get our articles from
reliable sources, yet we make no guarantees that the information
presented in them will be accurate.  Therefore, if you are using
information in this magazine to create an opinion on an issue,
you may want to double-check the information.  Soapbox is meant
to be a forum for varying opinions.  Some may find these opinions
offensive, or even disgusting."

Letter From The Editor
 
     Well this is the second edition of Soapbox Magazine.  It is
noticeably larger than the first edition (by anywhere from 10-20
pages).  As well, this is the first edition of Soapbox Magazine
that will be available in "HARD COPY".  To save money, the
magazine will be photocopied on small sheets of paper, yet still
easily readable.  In this issue, we have many interesting
articles.  We have one that takes a closer look at Al Gore, the
new VP of the United States.  We also have news clippings from
the Amendment 2 Aftermath in Colorado as well as a sampling of
the hate propoganda making it's rounds in that state.  We take a
closer look at Al Gore, and how he may not be that great of a
politician.  And from VREME, the leading independant Yugoslavian
newspaper, we have a story of how sanctions against Yugoslavia
have shut out the lovable Disney characters!  And we have what is
sure to be a controversial piece - a letter to the editor from an
American University Paper justifying why bestiality shouldn't be
illegal.  Hope you enjoy it!
 
Contributions
 
     If you have something you'd like to contribute to Soapbox. 
Be it articles, criticisms, praise or threats, you can send it to
us in many ways.
 
DIRECT CALL:
 
The home board of SOAPBOX is The Blue Room [ (519)-885-3623, open
4pm to 7am  EST ].  This will allow you to contribute anything
you wish, as well as pick up the latest edition of SOAPBOX
magazine.
 
THE NETS:
 
You can contact me under the alias PROFESSOR MORIARTY on both
OOFNET and CyberCrime International in the General sections.  As
well, you can contact me on usenet at my usenet address:
 
[email-masked]
 
MAIL:
 
Of course, you can also contact us through the mail at the
following address:
 
Soapbox Magazine
c/o Chad Skelton 
379 Dunvegan Drive
Waterloo, Ontario
CANADA
N2K 1W7

Distribution
 
     Soapbox Magazine is always available at my home board [ The
Blue Room / (519)-885-3623, from 4pm to 7am EST ].  Soapbox will
also be posted on Canada's biggest Bulletin Board System : Canada
Remote Systems (CRS).  As well, Soapbox Magazine will be printed
regularly on the following usenet newgroups:
 
alt.conspiracy
alt.censorship
 
If you have usenet, but none of these conferences, either request
the conference, or you can request a copy of Soapbox from:
 
[email-masked] 
 
[ back issues may also be requested from this address ]
 
If you do not have access to a modem, and wish to have this
magazine in hardcopy, send a Self-Addressed Stamped Envelope [
the envelope should be stamped sufficiently for the equivalent of
about 20 8 x 11 sheets of weight ] to:
 
Soapbox Magazine
c/o Chad Skelton
379 Dunvegan Drive
Waterloo, Ontario
CANADA
N2K 1W7
 
If you live outside of Canada, and are unable to get Canadian
stamps, funds equaling 3 Canadian dollars (for those living in
the US) or 5 Canadian dollars (for those living in other foreign
countries) should suffice. 

As well, you can help the distribution of Soapbox by uploading it
to any BBS which doesn't have it available.
 
If you know of a BBS or service which regularly carries Soapbox,
please contact me so that I can list it in those places where it
may be obtained.
 
Copyright
 
All articles may be reprinted if credit is given to Soapbox
Magazine (and any other author or organization which is listed). 
However, if the work is copyrighted (if it has a c. 1993 or the
like) then it may not be reprinted without first receiving
permission from the said writer (this may often be done by
contacting myself).

a2
 
                    GAYS ARE TAKING YOUR JOB!
                 Analysis Provided by Tim Hester

 
---
 
The following comes from Tim Hister over usenet.  It is a look at
the type of hate propoganda which is circulating in Colorado
against homosexuals.  It's an insightful look
 
---

 
The handwriting is on the wall, for Amendment 2.
Yet still, there are those in support of it that resort
to egregious propaganda that would almost make a Klansman
blush.
After Denver district Judge Jeff Bayless' ruling granting
an injunction against Colorado's Amendment 2 going into
effect until a ruling on its constitutionality can be
determined by the courts, you will not be surprised to
find that scurrile material attacking Gays is once again
a cottage industry in Colorado.
Returning to my van after a little shopping at a local
Payless Drug store at 64th and Sheridan, I discovered on
my windshield a prime example.  Apparently the people
that write these things, produce them with about an equal
amount of thought a bird gives to soiling said windshield
with its own brand of excrement.
 
Before I present this to you for your inspection, I ask
that you replace the word "Gay" in the text with your own
personal choice of generally accepted minority group such
as "Black", "Hispanic".  If you want an even more pointed
and profound experience then use the bigots' favorite
derogatory terms.  You know what they are, but I won't use
them here.  I'm not going to give them the pleasure.
 
[comments in brackets are mine._T.H._]
============================================================
 
GIVE A GAY YOUR JOB!

WHAT GAYS DO NOT WANT YOU TO KNOW!
 
Here is the real reason the Gay Community is against Amendment 2
and what they will gain if they get Special, Protected Rights

EXAMPLE:
Three people with similar job skills and experience apply
for the same job.
One applicant is Gay.
 The Employer will hire the Gay person to avoid an expensive
 law suit for discrimination.  Even though the other two
 applicants have slightly better qualifications.
 
[Note that job applications do not even ask sexual orientation.
So
 that puts this in the class of a bogus issue. _T.H._]
 
EXAMPLE:
A company needs to lay off three employees.  The company
should lay off the three employees with the least seniority,
experience and job skills.
 If one of the three employees is Gay, the Company will be forced
 to lay off a more experienced employee with more seniority to
 avoid an expensive law suit for discrimination.
 
[Nevermind the fact that the Company would win the law suit if
indeed it _did_ show that the Gay employee was one of those with
less seniority and experience.  This is the same bogusness as
saying you can't lay off a female employee under the same
circumstances. _T.H._]

GAYS PRACTICE SELFRIGHTEOUS DISCRIMINATION!
 
[er..could this be another way of saying "uppity"?_T.H._]
 
It is time someone speaks out for the common resident of
Colorado.
It is also time for the Gay Community and their supporters to
face the TRUTH with the FACTS!
 
FACT: Colorado has a higher percentage of Gays than most States
      in America!
FACT: Colorado has a higher percentage of Gays than most
      Countries in the World!
FACT: Metropolitan Denver, Boulder, and Aspen all have a higher
      percentage of Gays than most Cities in the World!
 
[So what is that supposed to mean?  There are more Hispanics in
the southwestern states than northern states.  What's the
point?_T.H._]
 
FACT: Gays do not congregate in large numbers unless the
environment is conducive to their life style.
 
[This smacks of "let's drive 'em out of town" in one aspect,
while at the same time ignoring the "FACT" that this is true of
any race or creed.  I guess Mormons congregate in Utah because
the environment is conducive to their life style just as the
Japanese seem to thrive in Japan._T.H._]
    
FACT: Colorado has provided the Gay Community with a healthy
      environment in which to live!  This is proven by the high
      percentage of Gays.
 
[And just what is wrong with providing the citizens of Colorado
with this healthy environment?  Do not we all benefit from
this?_T.H._]
 
FACT: Contrary to what the Gay Community WANTS everyone to       
 
      believe, Amendment 2 DOES NOT discriminate against Gays! 
      Instead, Amendment 2 PROTECTS the Non Gay MAJORITY from
      Gays obtaining; Special, Preferential, and Protected       
      Rights, which would IN FACT discriminate against Non Gays.
 
[Then why, pray tell, does Amendment 2 disallow any claim of
discrimination for homosexuals, lesbians, or bisexuals while
retaining for heterosexuals this right?  (hetero fires homo: homo
can't sue.  Homo fires hetero: hetero can sue.)  You can't argue
that because a homosexual cannot be identified by appearance that
this doesn't apply.  If that argument could fly, then why did the
Colorado Legislature pass the Smoker's Rights Bill in 1990?
Certain companies were firing some employees for legal,
off-the-job behaviour.  It is just as legal to be a homosexual as
it is to be a heterosexual in every city and state in this
country._T.H_]
 
 It is evident with the Boycott of Colorado, the Gay community
has become as selfrighteous as the Religious groups they condemn!
They are also proving to be extremely vindictive by boycotting a
State which has been More than tolerant of Gays.  The Gay
Community does not care how many innocent people they make
suffer, just as long as they get what they want, "Special
Rights"!
 
[And remember too, Arizona had been 'more than tolerant of
Blacks' when they refused to celebrate Martin Luther King's
birthday as a State Holiday!  How many Coloradans for Amendment 2
are among those that agreed with the boycott of Arizona?_T.H._]
 
 The vast Majority of Colorado residents have allowed the Gay
Community to live in peace, prosper, and grow.  In return for
this benevolent treatment, the Gay Community is punishing
everyone who does not practice their minority beliefs.  The Gay
Community is acting like a spoiled child who does not get to make
ALL the rules, thus takes the ball home to make everyone else
suffer.
 
["Gee, we gave the Blacks their freedom, and now they expect to
be able to live in the same neighborhood as the rest of us and
even demand to be able to ride in the front of the bus?  How
rude!" _T.H._]
 
     Just because the Gay Community has become Selfrighteous does
not give them the right to Blackmail a State for selfish reason!
 
[Why not?  Boycotts are perfectly legal.  Shall we pass an
Amendment in order to take care of this "problem" too?  Makes as
much sense as legislation like Amendment 2. _T.H._]
 
To Protect yourself and your family pass this on to as many
people as you know!
 
[Why does this remind me of those strips of paper that motels put
across the toilet seats?  Could it be because Amendment 2 stinks?
 
Instead of a "Welcome to Colorado" sign at the state lines, why
don't we have one that says, "Sanitized for Your
Protection"?_T.H.]
=================================================================
    
 The persons responsible for the production and distribution
 of this piece of garbage don't even have the guts to say who
 they are.  It's distributed in such a cowardly way that you
 know they must be ashamed.
 If their litany of so-called "FACTS" are for real, why don't
 they document their sources?  Even if their data on percentages
 of Gays living in any particular locale are correct, it still
 remains entirely meaningless.
 
 If the voters that put Amendment 2 where it is do not like it
 when they are referred to as "ignorant", why does such
 literature as this exist?  It is not the only example that I
 could show you.  All of us are ignorant of certain things.  The
 term does not mean 'stupid'.  It just means a lack of knowlege.
 
 There is something wrong with a group of people that cannot
 see how sexual orientation is related to racial discrimination
 issues.  They accept that women have been and still are being
 discriminated against because of their sex.  They accept the
 fact that discrimination by age exists.  They even acknowlege
 that discrimination based on religious affiliation happens.
 Laws exist to protect people in all of those groups.  Does
 that mean they have been given "special" rights?  No.
 Gays have not asked for any such thing.  Amendment 2 proponents
 can never seem to produce anything to back that up.
 This is the "Big Lie" technique at its best.  Repeat something
 often enough, and soon people will begin to believe it.
 
 You can fool all of the people some of the time.
 You can fool some of the people all of the time.
 But you can't fool all of the people, all of the time.
 
 Don't be fooled by the raving rhetoric of anti-Gay activists.

     Tim Hester

a3
 
                         WHO IS AL GORE?
                         by Jeff Taylor
                         Copyright 1993
                 email address : c549886@mizzou1
 
---
 
NOTE: I did not become aware of this article until AFTER the US
elections.  The article was written before the US Presidential
elections, and so the tense reflects that.  I assure Soapbox
readers that the delay in making this essay available to the you
was not intentional on my part.
 
- ed.
 
---

I have written the following essay solely for the purpose of
informing progressive and populist voters so they can make a
well-informed decisionon Tuesday.  The information is accurate to
the best of my knowledge.Sources are available upon request.
 
                             *****
 
     Some of my progressive friends tell me that they won't
really be voting for Bill Clinton on Tuesday even though they
mark the Clinton ballot.They'll actually be voting for Al Gore
and against George Bush.  They like Gore because he is --
according to the mainstream media -- the nation's leading
pro-environment politician.  This was one of the main reasons
Clinton chose Gore as his running mate.  If people are planning
to vote for Al Gore, I think they should understand who it is
they're voting for.
 
     Many progressives seem to have a short memory concerning Al
Gore.  I closely followed Gore's 1988 presidential campaign and I
have not forgotten what that campaign revealed about the senator
from Tennessee.  Of the entire "Congressional Quarterly Weekly
Report" article dealing with Gore's June 1987 announcement for
president, only a portion of one sentence deals with
the environment: "Gore also has pursued 'futuristic' issues such
as depletion ofthe ozone layer, that are not on most other
politicians' agendas."  Gore did talk a bit about damage to the
ozone layer and the resulting "greenhouse effect" during the 1988
campaign, but this was not an important part of his run for the
White House.  Plus, while support for the ozone layer is
commendable, it's not a political position which requires much
courage on the part of the candidate.  None of his rivals were
anti-ozone layer and Gore did not antagonize any powerful
corporate interests in his support for the ozonelayer.  Finally,
Gore's concern for the ozone layer did not fit into a larger
environmental context.  It seemed to be an issue that Gore
had picked out to master so he could use "Senate Ozone Layer
Expert" on his resume.  After the environment became a bigger
concern for the American people in 1990, Gore (or a ghost writer)
wrote a book on the larger environmental context, but to me and
many other environmentalists, this seemed to be just an
opportunistic move by an ambitious politician trying to build a
new base for a 1992 presidential campaign.
 
     From 1987 to 1990, I was coordinator of the South Dakota
Greens.  In 1988,I wrote, "In an effort to replace Gephardt as
Dukakis' main rival, Albert Gore Jr. began to continually
emphasize his commitment to 'working men and women' prior to
Super Tuesday voting.  After floundering for a while because he
had no message, Gore first became the strong-enough-on-defense
candidate and later became the champion-of-the-working class
candidate. Like Gephardt, Gore is an excellent example of an
apparent demagogue (i.e., a man who believes in nothing except
his own career)."  After losing the 1988 race, Gore became the
protect-the-environment candidate in preparation for the 1992
race.  In March 1990, I wrote, "...the Establishment is
attempting to co-opt Green issues now that the environment has
become a major grassroots concern (corporations are co-sponsoring
Earth Day, George Bush and Al Gore have turned into
'environmentalists,' etc.)."
 
     I was not the only person in 1990 to notice Gore's sudden
conversion to "environmentalism."  Brian Tokar, author of "The
Green Alternative," wrote, "In the 1990s, everyone wants to be an
environmentalist.  Concern for natureis 'in' these days ...
Senator Al Gore, 1988's leading Democratic hawk, is
now touring the nation giving speeches about global warming and
other important environmental threats....The reason for this
superficial elite awakening to environmental concerns is no
mystery.  Every major public opinion poll of recent years shows a
growing concern with the ecological crisis."  Andre Carothers,
editor of "Greenpeace Magazine," commented, "Fresh green
paint provides camouflage for polluters and confuses voters and
consumers, who are understandably pleased but easily misled when
the people and institutions whose hands are at the helm profess
an interest in the planet."
 
     If Al Gore is a real environmentalist, why didn't he endorse
Jerry Brown for president in 1992?  Brown's environmental
credentials are excellent and he has demonstrated his concern for
the earth for nearly 20 years.  Why did Gore support Clinton, who
has a horrible environmental record as Governor of Arkansas, over
Brown, who has a great environmental record as Governor
of California?  According to the latest "Green Index," Arkansas
ranks dead last among the states, in terms of environmental
policies, while California is #1 (clearly a legacy of Brown's
eight years in office).  When I spoke to him after the final
session of the Democratic National Convention in New York, the
coordinator of Brown's Oregon primary campaign scoffed at Gore's
supposed environmentalism.  He dismissed Gore as a phony
environmentalist.
 
     Albert Gore Jr.'s political mentor is his father, Albert
Gore Sr.  Throughout his congressional career, Gore Sr. was close
to Wall Street insider Bernard Baruch.  Gore Sr. also became a
friend of Arm and Hammer, Chairman of Occidental Petroleum. 
After leaving the Senate, Gore Sr. became Chairman of Island
Creek Coal Company (Lexington, KY) and a director of Occidental
Petroleum (Los Angeles, CA).  Island Creek is a subsidiary of
Occidental.  Gore Sr. continues to be an Occidental board member.
Albert Gore Jr. was a land developer (1971-76) before becoming a
member of Congress.  According to "Who's Who in America," Gore
Jr. has been a livestock e.e tobacco farmer since 1973.
 
     Gore can travel to the Antarctic for a photo op in relation
to the ozone layer or to Brazil for a photo op in relation to
global warming, but he doesn't seem interested in closing down
the nuclear power plants in his own backyard(TN); alienating the
timber companies who are destroying the few remaining old-growth
forests in the Pacific Northwest; renouncing the cruelty
and anti-ecology inherent in the "production," slaughter, and
eating of animals;or apologizing for his role in promoting air
pollution, disease, and death by being a tobacco farmer.
 
     If a person goes back and studies the 1988 presidential
campaign, she or he can learn a lot about the real Al Gore.  A
1987 "CQ Weekly Report" noted,"Although he bills himself as
Southern-bred, Gore was born in Washington, D.C.,where his father
served in Congress from 1939-71.  He attended an elite Washington
prep school and Harvard University....Gore already has impressed
a number of prominent fund-raisers.  In early 1987, he announced
he would not run for president, but later reversed himself,
partly because he got strong encouragement from more than a dozen
members of 'IMPAC '88,' a group of affluent Democratic
fundraisers."
 
     New York City Mayor Ed Koch supported Gore for president in
1988.  Koch announced that Jews would be "crazy" to vote for
rival candidate Jesse Jackson.  Using Koch as a front man, Gore
attempted to divide the common people along racial lines for his
own political gain.  Gore's 1988 campaign was also supported by
"The New Republic," Senator Terry Sanford of NC (former director
of ITT and the American Stock Exchange), and Occidental Petroleum
Chairman Arm and Hammer (friend of Soviet dictators, $100,000
contributor to Nixon '72,friend of Ronald Reagan, and polluter
extraordinaire).  Gore was also reputedly supported by
multi-millionaire Pamela Harriman (who was on hand to greet
Gore after this year's vice presidential debate).
 
     During the 1988 campaign and again this year, Gore has posed
as a populist.  He was raised with a silver spoon in his mouth
and his decision to name his son "Albert Gore III" seems to
indicate a commitment to aristocratic politics, yet on the
campaign trail Gore tries to act like a down-home friend of the
common man/woman.  Regardless of his family background, the proof
is in the pudding.  An examination of who finances Gore's
rhetoric indicates that his populism is just demagoguery.
 
     Let's look at contributors to Gore's 1990 senatorial
campaign.  Gore raised over $2,645,000 during the 1985-90 period.
Of this amount, 83% came from PACs and large contributors.  43%
came from PACs (over $1,147,000).  Small contributors gave only
9% of the total.  67% of the PAC money came frombusiness PACs. 
76% of the large individual contributions came from out-of-state.
 
     Over $307,000 came from lawyers and lobbyists.  Over
$128,000 came frommilitary contractors (e.g., General Electric,
Lockheed).  Over $113,000 came from pro-Israeli government
sources.  Over $109,000 came from insurance sources.  Over
$95,000 came from telephone utilities (many of which are monopolies).
Over $90,000 came from real estate interests.  $85,000 came from
investment sources and over $77,000 came from commercial banks. 
$51,000 came from health care and pharmaceutical sources.  Over
$41,000 came from oil and gas sources (including $12,000 from
Occidental Petroleum).  Over $24,000 came from railroad
companies.  Over $22,000 came from electric utilities.  Over
$18,000 came from waste management sources (including $8,000 from
Waste Management Inc.).
 
     Was all of this money given to Al Gore because the
contributors were afraid he would be defeated for reelection in
1990 if they did not help himout?  It's unlikely.  Gore was
elected with 61% of the vote in 1984 and reelected with 68% of
the vote in 1990.  In 1990, Gore spent almost $2,000,000 on his
campaign, while his opponent spent less than $9,000.  I believe
most of the money was given not because his reelection was in
doubt but because these corporations and rich individuals wanted
to retain access to and control of Senator Gore.
 
     Let's take a closer look at three of Gore's corporate
friends.  They shed an interesting light on Gore's "concern" for
the environment.
 
     In addition to being a major military contractor (including
nuclear weapons), General Electric is one of the "largest
polluters in the country" and the leading designer of nuclear
power plants.  At the time Gore was using GE's money to run for
office, the company was the object of a national boycott by
progressives.
 
     According to James Weinstein of "In These Times," Waste
Management Inc. is "one of the world's most notorious despoilers
of the environment."  Waste Management "owns the largest
hazardous waste landfill in the country -- bought and enlarged
through political influence and backroom deals" and "the landfill
is slowly leaking into one of the largest underground water
reservoirs in the southern U.S."
 
     Occidental Petroleum is a multinational corporation which
sells oil, beef, pork, phosphates, and natural gas.  During the
1970s, Occidental contributed to James Watt's anti-environmental
Mountain States Legal Foundation.  In 1980, Ralph Nader and
Americans Concerned About Corporate Power created a
"Corporate Hall of Shame" which included Occidental.  Occidental
acquired Hooker Chemical in 1968.  Occidental did not warn the
residents of the Love Canal area of NY that Hooker had dumped
thousands of tons of toxic chemical waste there from 1942 to
1953.  From 1953 to 1974, Hooker dumped 80,000 tons of toxic
waste in the Hyde Park area of NY.  In 1981, Occidental settled
an antipollution lawsuit by agreeing to clean up its pesticide
and fertilizer plant in Lathrop,CA and to pay $2.8 million in
"reparations."  During the 1980s, Occidental wanted to rape the
western slope of Colorado in order to make money off shale.  As
the owner of Iowa Beef Processors, Occidental is the nation's
largest cattle slaughtering company.
 
     Al Gore has always been a devoted friend of the Pentagon and
military contractors.  In 1988, Gore boasted of how he differed
on foreign policy and defense issues from "all or virtually all
of his Democratic rivals: support for the Reagan administration's
1983 invasion of Grenada and its policy of escorting ships in the
Persian Gulf, giving non-military aid to the Nicaraguan contras,
flight-testing ballistic missiles and funding the Midgetman
missile.  "Gore has also supported "the B-1 bomber, the MX
missile, chemical weapons, and two new aircraft carriers."  Gore
has also been a supporter of Star Wars research and the
government of El Salvador.  In 1988, Holly Sklar of "ZMagazine"
noted that Gore's policy toward Central America was the
"mostreactionary" of the three leading candidates for the
Democratic nomination and she stated that the nomination of Gore
would be a "Nightmare on Pennsylvania Avenue."
 
     In addition to providing Clinton with a pseudo-environmental
fig leaf,Gore's "military record" is also seen as a plus for the
ticket.  Gore was not, however, a combat soldier in Vietnam. 
Some believe the only reason he agreed to go to Vietnam was to
help out his father's reelection campaign (Gore Jr.appeared in
campaign ads wearing his uniform).  Gore was a journalist during
his brief stay in Vietnam.
 
     Gore supported the Persian Gulf War.  In other words, he
supported the mass murder of hundreds of thousands of men, women,
and children.  He apparently supported the ecocide conducted by
both sides of the conflict (people were aware that great
environmental damage would be caused by a war long before it
began).  After the war ended, Al Gore said, "Few will talk about
the 'wimp factor' now because, in the Persian Gulf, George Bush
acted with boldness and courage."  Gore called the slaughter "one
of our nation's finest moments."
 
     In the late 1980s, neoconservative publishing house Basic
Books issued "The Democratic Imperative: Exporting the American
Revolution" by Gregory Fossedal.  When the book came out,
Fossedal was a former editorial writer for the "Wall Street
Journal" and a current research fellow at the Hoover Institution.
 
Fossedal "refutes the shibboleth that America's experience in
Vietnam has weakened our resolve, citing polls, and other data
that indicate popular support for intervention abroad.  Finally,
he provides a blueprint for a bipartisan foreign policy which, if
successful, could lay the foundation for a Demoratic Century"
(book jacket).  Four persons provide book jacket blurbs praising
Fossedal's work.  Three of the blurb writers are Republicans. 
Wall Street insider and Nixon Treasury Secretary William Simon
recommends the book highly.  Neoconservative Congressman turned
Bush cabinet member Jack Kemp calls the book "a must read." 
Richard Nixon, that famed champion of democracy, says,
"Isolationists of both the left and the right will not like
Fossedal's conclusions: that if the Democratic trend is to
continue,it will be because the United States ensures that it
does by pursuing an activist, even interventionist, foreign
policy."  In other words, the U.S. government needs to be the
policeman of the world, hiding its imperialistic aims behind the
guise of concern for "democracy."
 
     Guess which Democrat pops up in the middle of this grotesque
manifesto for hypocrisy, oppression, and mass murder?  Good ole
Al Gore.  Gore says,"'The Democratic Imperative' is a forceful
analysis of what American foreign policy should stand for, and
how it can prevail."  Even if I knew nothing else about Albert
Gore Jr., for me, his endorsement of this book would disqualify
him from being Vice President of the United States.  If you want
more Grenadas, more Panamas, more Persian Gulfs, more Vietnams,
you should vote for Clinton-Gore.  If you don't, then you
shouldn't.
 
     Like Clinton, Gore is a pretty-boy politician, but his
"pompous, student body-president delivery" turned many voters off
during the 1988 campaign.  His canned, phony style was never more
apparent than during the 1992 vice-presidential debate.  Quayle
was somewhat shrill and Stockdale was a bit bumbling, but at
least they seemed like human beings.  Gore seemed like a robot
designed by General Electric.  I think it's strange that
progressives can generate enthusiasm for a politician who seems
to have made a career out of cold-blooded ambition and
opportunism.  A person who shamelessly exploits a near-fatal
accident involving his young son solely for the sake of political
gain does not deserve our votes.
 
     Some progressives are using the single-issue rationale that
support for abortion rights compensates for a poor record on
everything else.  Not true.  Firstly, there is no evidence that
Clinton and Gore have any interest in promoting gender equality. 
Secondly, both men have flip-flopped on the abortion issue.  They
don't seem to have any deep convictions on the subject.  Thirdly,
the majority of the Supreme Court justices appointed by
Reagan/Bushhave been pro-Roe (O'Connor, Kennedy, Souter). 
Fourthly, it is likely that Bush would once again manifest his
actual pro-choice position and stop placating the right-to-lifers
during a second term.  Fifthly, even if the previous four
arguments don't convince you, it is not a good idea to allow one
issue to negate all of the other issues.  The Clinton-Gore
ticket's support for legal abortion in America should not make
irrelevant the Clinton-Gore ticket's support for mass murder in
Iraq.
 
     If you are a progressive who is using Al Gore as a reason to
vote for Bill Clinton, I ask, "Since when has a plutocratic,
hawkish, yuppiefied dixiecrat been a good reason to vote for a
ticket?"  Vote for Daniels, Perot, Marrou, Fulani, or someone
else, but don't vote for Clinton-Gore.  Even if you think the
Democratic ticket is the lesser evil -- and I'm not convinced it
is -- you're still helping evil if you vote for Clinton-Gore.

a4
  
                     WHO KILLED DONALD DUCK?
             by Ivan Radovanovic and Slobodanka Ast
                            for Vreme
 
---
 
NOTE: The following came to my attention through the electronic
version of Yugoslavia's leading independant publication VREME.  I
realize that there are much more serious issues at stake in the
former Yugoslavia, but most of that is reported in the mainstream
press, and I thought this story would be refreshing.  
 
- ed.
 
---
 
The  cultural  blockade  has  banished  Disney  characters from
Yugoslav newspapers and magazines for children, and it is pushing
Yugoslavia into a spiritual ghetto.
 
On Saturday January 9th, the "Walt Disney Publication" company
(Burbank, California),  informed,  by  telefax,  the  Belgrade 
POLITIKIN ZABAVNIK magazine that,  "until further notice",  it
can, in  no way, use  Disney characters. Saturday was immediately
proclaimed  a very bad day and, for the first time,  life under
sanctions showed its  full awfulness - let's leave aside the fact
 
that there is no oil and heating,  but there is no Donald Duck!
"The telefax informed us that, because of the sanctions and the
pressure by the American  administration, the "Walt Disney"
company, regretfully, has to put out of  force the contract
giving us the licence to  publish the  characters produced  by 
it",  VREME has  been told  by Zeferino Grasi, ZABAVNIK's editor
in  chief. Explaining what this means, Grasi said that  there
would be no more Mickey,  Goofy, Donald and other Disney
characters in the magazine and that MIKIJEV ZABAVNIK, a magazine,
consisting exclusively  of Disney comic  strips, would stop 
coming out. ZABAVNIK has  had a contract  with "Disney" ever 
since 1939, and  Grasi says that all this time the  Californian
company has been extremely fair and that now ZABAVNIK  will be
fair too. This has to  do with fair play, but also with  the fact
that the possible disregard  of what says in the terrible 
telefax could  mean the  loss of  a "Disney"  licence forever.
"This way, we can at least hope  that, when the sanctions are
lifted, we will once  again be able to  use Disney characters",
said  Grasi, adding that the  only thing left  for them  to  do
is to  try something through UNICEF and  to forward a  request
for Donald  and Mickey to  be included among  "children's 
products",  which  are  not  subject  to  sanctions.
Unfortunately, one  should not pin  great hopes on  this (the
people  in ZABAVNIK don't  either), since the  mentioned
children's package  exempt from sanctions  includes only certain 
humanitarian products. Children's comic  strips and  cartoons are
usually,  both  in the  West and  here, classified  as
"business"  which  is  entirely  under sanctions. Natasa Zecar,
POLITIKA's  deputy director has  told VREME that  even the oldest
newspaper in the country will have  to stop giving those two
famous mini comic strips with Disney characters  (Donald and
Mickey), mostly for the same reason for which ZABAVNIK is
stopping to use Disney characters. "So that we  would be able to 
use them tomorrow", said  Mrs.Zecar. POLITIKA has had a contract
with "Disney" since 1932. That the whole story is not just a
practical joke was,  unfortunately, confirmed by Peter Nelly, the
lawyer of the "Walt Disney publication" company. In a statement
given to VREME's correspondent  in the United States,  Mr.Nelly
shortly confirmed that "comic strips, cartoons and all
publications of this company can no longer be printed, 
distributed or used in any form  on the territory of Serbia and
Montenegro".  The reason is clear, said  Mr.Nelly: the United
Nations sanctions. And finally: "The decision of the Walt Disney
company comes into  force immediately". Therefore, this  means -
goodbye Donald! "The  end   of  civilization!",  said   an 
admirer  of   Mickey  Mouse. "Horrible!", said  Jadranka Tomic, a
school psychologist. According  to her,  as regards  children's
development,  this decision  is even cruel. "There is no second
chance for  childhood. This means that the effect of this  kind
of  move is  long-term and  terrible and  for this reason the
question being asked  is - can anyone take away  children's joy.
This is even contrary to the UNICEF Charter on children's
rights". VREME's other collocutors were also mostly interested in
the point of banishing Donald Duck from Yugoslavia. Milena
Dragicevic-Sesic, a sociologist of culture, considers that such a
measure shows that the world community is helpless when it comes
to resolving the problem of Yugoslavia by political means. "Even
though the comparison may  sound inappropriate, all this sounds
to me like the story about the parent who doesn't know how to
deal with his child  so  he  starts  forbidding  the  child  to 
go  out  or  to watch television. This is, in fact,  a veritable
cleansing of the conscience". According to  Mrs.Dragicevic-Sesic,
a special  problem is the  fact that such moves produce effects
that are quite opposite from the wanted ones. "The  blockade
leads  to tighter  national cohesion,  to the  feeling of being
persecuted and it strengthens  the conservative spirit which
calls for  patriotism in  culture and   cultural work.  The way 
of evaluating artistic work also changes so that new ideological
values - for instance the strengthening of the national spirit -
become the main criteria". On the  example of  Donald Duck  and
other  Disney characters, according to Mrs. Dragicevic-Sesic, 
this literally means  that, in future,  our kids will not be
brought up on  universal values (most of Disney's best known
works are based  on Andersen's or the Grimm  brothers' fairy
tales), but on our "specific values", which are most often of
poor quality. The fact that,  with the  embargo in  culture,  the
world is  creating space  in Yugoslavia precisely for those
forces  which it is fighting against with sanctions, for  the
moment doesn't  seem to bother  anyone in that  same world. "All
this  is simply disputable from the  ethical point of view", said
professor  Ratko Bozovic, a  sociologist of culture.  "If we
adults are to  blame for having elected  people who are not 
acceptable for the rest of  the world, how  does one prove  the
guilt of  our children? The idea about repression against
children  is certainly contradictory and I believe  that what  we
have  here is  a loss  of measure  in rights  and obligations,
and  not just here,  but in the  international community as
well". Mr.Bozovic  has even sharper  words for the  banishment of
Donald Duck - "a  spiritual ghetto" and "war against our  future"
- and he also has an explanation  for these words. He says that 
an embargo on culture kills freedom ("which cannot exist  without
culture") and opens up space for  ignorance, which  always
strengthens  autocratic rule.  "This means they are strengthening
precisely that autocratic rule here and that they are creating
new trouble for those who are absolutely innocent, and also
largely for  themselves, since they  are pushing us  straight
towards an abyss  and are  turning us  into  a  militant
opposition  to the  entire world".  No matter  what happens  it
will,  certainly, be without Donald Duck.  Kids  (and  fans)  can
do  nothing  but  turn to old comic books collected a long time
ago.           

 /--------------------------------------------------------------\
| Chad Skelton - "To Go Where No Message Has Gone Before"        |
|  Call THE BLUE ROOM at (519)-885-3623 / 4pm to 7am daily (EST) |
|       email address: [email-masked]       |
 \--------------------------------------------------------------/