HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Organization: Queen's University at Kingston
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1992 22:12:38 EST
From: andy <2893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA>
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: S.C.J. &"Feminazis" and the "abortion holocaust"
 <1992Nov20.161350.28489@wam.umd.edu>

In article <1992Nov20.161350.28489@wam.umd.edu>, aap@next03wor.wam.umd.edu
(Alberto Adolfo Pinkas) says:
>
>In article <eharbin.722262693@convex.convex.com> eharbin@convex.com
>(Edward Harbin) writes:
>> In <1efg8sINNcc9@MINERVA.CIS.YALE.EDU> starr-daniel@yale.edu (Daniel
>Starr) writes:
>> >(The application to the attempted genocide comes from our viewing
>ourselves
>> >as a united community, and seeing that community utterly devastated.)
>Even
>> >if every fetus aborted were a murder (even that's a poor usage, because
>> >murder implies intent to kill, which the aborting woman doesn't have
>because
>> >she doesn't think the fetus is alive...), I find it very difficult to
>imagine
>>
>> They think the fetus is alive, I'm sure, but not human. The nazis took
>the
>> same position with respect to the Jews. That's the awful thing, the
>exceptional
>> thing - not just the body count, not even the attempt to exterminate
>entirely,
>> but the denial of humanity. And the use of the word holocaust - however
>> effective or ineffective as a polemical device - reflects the fear and
>> trembling many of feel at a society that is beginning to define its
>members
>> away.
>
>
>---------------
>
>I would like to see this tread out of s.c.j.
>There is no point on arguing with a bunch of catholics about this.
>I guess that bringing this tread here will only result on getting
>ourselves insulted.
>
>Just an opinion.
>AAP

It may be a painful thread, but I believe the argument MUST be made.

Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: MASH@WEIZMANN.WEIZMANN.AC.IL (Michael Shimshoni)
Subject: Re: ORTHODOX
Organization: Mail to News Gateway at Wang Labs
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 15:18:11 GMT

In: <1992Nov11.190212.708@vms.huji.ac.il>
backon@vms.huji.ac.il expresses amusement:
 Subject: ORTHODOX

>Look in a dictionary for the derivation of the word ORTHODOX. It comes from th
>Greek ORTH: straight, correct, true, right   and  DOXA: opinion.
>It thus amuses me to no end when I  see representatives of the Reform and
>Conservative movements denigrating the "orthodox".

Let have  some more fun  and amuse  ourselves.  The dictionary  can be
such a wonderful source of such fun:

Christ from Greek khristos anointed one (khrio anoint), translation of
Hebrew; see  Messiah.  From  that Christian, one  who believes  in the
Messiah.

I am  sure Josh kills himself  laughing thinking of all  these silly O
and other Jews who in spite the demand of the Rambam to believe in the
Mashiah, refuse to admit that they really are Christians.

The Oxford Dictionary, the book of a thousand jokes.

>Josh

 Michael Shimshoni
From: simon1@bass.bu.edu (Simon Streltsov)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: "Feminazism" and "Holocaust"
Date: 23 Nov 92 03:02:51 GMT
Reply-To: simon1@bass.bu.edu (Simon Streltsov)
Followup-To: soc.culture.jewish
Distribution: na
Organization: Boston University

I am watching for some time like "we" (Jews) are
beating "bunch of Catholics" for using the word
"Holocaust".

I am no master of English, but I want to ask:
who said, that Holocaust is an appropriate word
for the murder of millions of Jews during WW2?

ho.lo.caust \'ha:l-*-.ko.st, 'ho--l*-\ n [ME, fr. OF holocauste, fr. LL 
   holocaustum, fr. Gk holokauston, fr. neut. of holokaustos burnt whole, fr. 
   hol- + kaustosburnt, fr. kaiein to burn - more at CAUSTIC] 1: a sacrifice 
   consumed by fire 2: a thorough destruction esp. by fire

Let's see : 1/ it's Greek 
2/ it's "sacrifice, consumed by fire"

Fire of course wakes up all allusin to Auschwitz, and, as I realise,
that "YouAll" studied it 100 times at school,

BUT,
what has (Greek,i.e. paqgan) "sacrifice" to do with it?!

I would appreciate any help on this question:
a/ who and when first used the word "holocaust" for 
the WW2 atrocities?
b/ is it appropriate ?
c/ if not, why it was used?

My first - uneducated - guess - will be to say
a/some Jewish writer (reporter) 1-3 years after the WW2
b/ no
c/ to make things sounds very abstract and "religious"
(in the goishe sense - as in church). 
then d/ why?

p.s. I began thinking about this after listening (I got there
by mistake (-:[) to a Reform speaker, who was saying proudly,
that Jews were in the origin of all Human Rights, Immigration for
all Races etc groups in USA, and the reason - he said - "because
of the Holocaust". I didnt dare to ask, where were these people
during WW2.

Simon Streltsov,
Boston University

"If you go on the road and come to a fork - Take it!"
From: goldberg@techunix.technion.ac.il (Jacques Goldberg)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: NO WAY! (Re: A message from Kach to the Arabs?)
Date: 19 Nov 92 09:09:36 GMT
Organization: Technion, Israel Institute of Technology

Yaakov Kayman <YZKCU@CUNYVM.BITNET> writes:

>A grenade attack in East Jerusalem?!! I personally would not believe for
>a moment that Kakh people would do such a thing, except possibly with
>IMMEDIATE EXTREME provocation, and what constitutes THAT can certainly be
>debated IF or when a major outrage occurs RIGHT BEFORE such an attack.

>I don't believe for one INSTANT that this attack was the work of Kakh!
>Rather, it was almost certainly that of some group seeking to further
>muddy Kakh's name. Kakh is not so stupid, nor is it so amoral, let alone
>immoral. THis, after all, is MURDER, hardly anything ***RABBI*** Kahane
>might ever have given his approval to!

>Yaakov K., supporter of Rav Meir Kahane, Hashem Yiqqom Dammo
>           (may G-d avenge his blood!)

    Agreed. I can see 3 logical explanations:
    1-accident at work (TE'UNATH AVODAH): someone who played with the grenade,
      or wanted to get rid of it and did not know how.
    2-part of an intoxication campaign aimed at splitting the Jewish Israeli
      opinions even deeper. Some people are indeed able to blindly kill
      innocents for such political benefits. Any logically reasoning Jewish
      group,KACH included, would pursue the opposite goal.
    3-an illogical murder perpetrated by a mad person, as this unfortunately
      occurs from time to time, at random places on our planet.

  Yaaqov Goldberg, not a supporter of Rav Meir Kahane, HaShem Yiqqom Dammo,
  taking this opportunity to express sorrow for the death and wounding of
  innocents, everywhere, everybody.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: makowsky@enuxhb.eas.asu.edu (David Makowsky)
Subject: Re: Why I think Kach's policies are racist (AND DANGEROUS)
Reply-To: makowsky@enuxhb.eas.asu.edu (David Makowsky)
Organization: Arizona State University, Tempe AZ
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 03:22:33 GMT

In article <dfs.721968471@crusher> dfs@doe.carleton.ca (David F. Skoll) writes:

# In <1992Nov17.005622.18960@ennews.eas.asu.edu>
# makowsky@enuxhb.eas.asu.edu (David Makowsky) writes:
 
# [Skoll]
# ># Kach's "solution" is a recipe for disaster.  It is something that you
# ># may come up with in a brain-storming session, but quickly discard
# ># because of its catastrophic implications for Israel.
 
# >	You did it again.  Fine.  Lets say (for the sake of argument) that
# >it is a recipe for disaster.  SInce it is one of the few options given
# >for certain problems, and the ONLY one given for others, instead of
# >smearing it why don't you try to come up with alternatives?
 
# I think Mr. Makowsky cannot read.  Here, in plain language, is the
# David Skoll Alternative to Kach (tm):

	Maybe I cannot read.  But you have proved you cannot read.  I
never claimed for EVERYTHING Kach's was the only alternative.

# 1 - Maintain a very strong Israeli military.
 
# 2 - Put pressure on the West to contain Iran, Iraq and Syria.  Put
#     pressure on West to have the Arab sanctions against Israel dropped.
 
# 3 - Negotiate some sort of interim arangement for self-rule in WB and
#     possibly Gaza
 
# 4 - Continue the peace process with Syria, Lebanon and Jordan.
 
# The next phase, if the peace talks go well:
 
# 5 - Sign peace treaties with Syria, Lebanon and Jordan.
 
# 6 - Give more control to Palestinians in WB and Gaza, possibly leading
#     to independence after years of smooth sailing.

# That's my solution.  It's not perfect.  But it's a hell of a lot better
# than Kach's.

	Even if you are correct (and I believe you are not) there are many
problems that you did not even bother to address.
--
	There are three types of people in the world.  Those that are good
at math and those that are not.

makowsky@enuxhb.eas.asu.edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: jgoldber@todah.chem.utoronto.ca (Joel Goldberg)
Subject: Re: What is "GLATT" in reference to Kosher airline food?
Organization: University of Toronto Chemistry Department
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 20:43:57 GMT

In article <41483@sdcc12.ucsd.edu> ph105fcd@sdcc14.ucsd.edu (Matthew Harrington) writes:
>I've been informed by the FAQ for rec.travel.air that Kosher meals
>on airlines are "glatt" and "double sealed."  What do these terms
>mean?
  It means that there are no wrinkles in the plastic wrap sealing the
  meals.
From: weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Halacha when the decisive facts were wrong (was Re:
Date: 20 Nov 92 16:51:49 GMT
Reply-To: weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener)
Organization: The Wistar Institute of Anatomy and Biology
In-reply-to: cohen@quartz.ciw.edu (Ronald Cohen)

In article <19Nov92.205459.15910@granite.ciw.edu>, cohen@quartz (Ronald Cohen) writes:
>Another example is "electricity is fire" which is false.

The prohibition of electricity on Shabbos is actually rather subtle,
and the `e is fire' line is a very watered down version of what's
going on.  To start off, the relevant notion of fire is halakhic,
not physical.
-- 
-Matthew P Wiener (weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: goldberg@techunix.technion.ac.il (Jacques Goldberg)
Subject: Re: Kippah
Organization: Technion, Israel Institute of Technology
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 06:38:23 GMT

jlove@ivrit.ra.itd.umich.edu (Jack Love) writes:

>In article <goldberg.721642220@techunix.technion.ac.il> goldberg@techunix.technion.ac.il (Jacques Goldberg) writes:
>>jlove@ivrit.ra.itd.umich.edu (Jack Love) writes:
>>
>>>(....) Since current custom is derived from
>>>the Babylonian tradition,(......)
>>>so I would appreciate learning the source of your data.
>>
>>    Could you please quote the source of yours?
>>    For example, does it apply to the raising of the Torah (HAGBA'AH) before
>>    or after the reading?
>>    Thanks in advance - Yaaqov Goldberg



>I'll be happy to share any of my sources. In this case I'm not sure
>what you are asking. Is your question, do I have any sources which
>specify whether the head should be covered during hagba'ah? I'm not
>being coy--I really don't understand your question.
   
     Thank you for this opportunity to again apologize for my very poor
English or obscure thinking which too often make it difficult to understand
my writings.
     I was asking for a source saying that current custom (in general?) is
derived from the Babylonian tradition; indeed I had the possibly wrong feeling
from your post that you would take it as a granted starting point that current
custom for Jewish tradition is the Babylonian tradition. I was further asking
if Babylonian tradition is at the origin of raising the Torah scroll before or
after the reading. The point was, since some communities raise before reading,
others after reading, what was the Babylonian tradition, if any? Furthermore,
if there is a rule that current tradition is the Babylonian tradition, are
there more such apparent exceptions to such a rule? If there are many, can such
a rule still be used the way you suggest?
      My question had nothing to do, directly, with the kippah issue. Just as
you asked for a source, on the ground that custom come from Babylonian
tradition, I asked for a source that custom indeed come from there. 

>Jack Love
      Yaaqov Goldberg
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 14:02:20 EST
From: Callec Dradja <GRV101@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: sex and Dawud Melekhanu(Yemenite pronunciation)

In article <H6X82KE@math.fu-berlin.de>, ring@inf.fu-berlin.de (Rod J. Ring)
says:
>
>According to not even too strict a view of Jewish morality *any*
>Jewish person should not engage in any sexual contact with anybody
>but their Jewish *spouse*.
>
>Excuse me, but *anything* else, including Jewish men "practising"
>on shickse women and including sex between two Jewish partners not
>married to each other, violates Jewish morality.
>
The rabi here at Penn State (Rabi Michael) once told me that he
believed that sex between two unmarried people was fine in that
the commandment against adultury was not being broken; in this
case, no one is having sex with a married person. I am a little
fuzzy here, but if I remember correctly, he also said that sex between
a married and unmarried person is also ok and gave as an example
King David's many concubines.

At the time, I was very surprised to hear this especially since he
is an orthodox rabi. What do other people think? Is Rabi Michael
correct or should he take a refresher course on basic Jewish law?

                                                Gregson Vaux


********************************************************************
* If all we do is live and die,           *  Gregson Vaux          *
* then tell me about the birds that fly.  *  Penn State University *
* If all we did was die and live,         *  Semitics & English    *
* would springtime be there to forgive?   *  GRV101@psuvm.psu.edu  *
********************************************************************
From: tichauer@valpso.hanse.de (Manfredo Tichauer)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Religious freedom in Spain
Date: 22 Nov 92 00:35:21 GMT
Organization: "The Private Site of Manfredo Tichauer"

solovay@netcom.com (Andrew M. Solovay) writes:

> In article <34eiuB2w165w@valpso.hanse.de> tichauer@valpso.hanse.de (Manfredo 
> >  But there is something much more interesting than this. A Jewish friend
> >  from Bolivia told me that in Bolivia there was a  JEWISH PRESIDENT
> >  who governed from 1947-1949, and whose name was Enrique Hertzog.If this
> >  would be true, than I think he would have been the only Jewish president
> >  of a country (and a Catholic one!) that is not Israel.
> 
> I don't know about presidents, but Benjamin Disraeli served as
> Queen Victoria's Prime Minister. As I recall, he refuse to swear
> by the trinity when taking the oath of office.

  But: Disraeli was baptized at the age of 13 (together with all his
       brothers) and received a Christian upbringing.



 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Manfredo Tichauer M.                       EMAIL : tichauer@valpso.hanse.de
  Opitzstrasse 14                            VOICE :     (++ 49 40)  27.42.27
  2000 Hamburg 60 - GERMANY                  FAX   :     (++ 49 40) 270.53.09
 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: simon1@bass.bu.edu (Simon Streltsov)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Vatican Recognition of Israel - Who Needs
Date: 23 Nov 92 02:47:55 GMT
Reply-To: simon1@bass.bu.edu (Simon Streltsov)
Followup-To: soc.culture.jewish
Organization: Boston University

In article <1992Nov23.005200.6861@nysernet.org> astein@nysernet.org (Alan Stein) writes:
>Was it Stalin who asked how many troops the pope had?
Yes, excellent point!
But, at the same time Stalin used religious terminology (once?)
and made concessions to church, when Germany entered USSR.

Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: er@iscp.Bellcore.COM (Elie Rosenfeld)
Subject: Re: Cornered turtles?
Reply-To: er@iscp.Bellcore.COM (Elie Rosenfeld)
Organization: Bell Communications Research (Bellcore)
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 92 18:20:52 GMT

In article <1992Nov20.180726.16368@umbc3.umbc.edu>, shimoff@umbc4.umbc.edu (Eliot Shimoff) writes:
|> Warren's new "acharei ha-chagim" sig tells us "adif tzav pinui
|> mi'tzav shmoneh."  Some have suggested a subtle (or perhaps not
|> so subtle) political message, but those of us who fondly recall
|> the "strange carrot" assume that there is an even more subtle
|> message.
|> 
|> My own guess:
|> 
|> "A cornered turtle is better than "Thou Shalt Not Steal""
|> ...etc....

I hate to sound clueless, but for us modern-Hebrew impaired types, before this
thread gets even wackier, could someone *please* tell us the real translation
of the phrase?  No political comments, just the facts, ok?  Thanks.
-- 
Elie Rosenfeld      | "I am what I am, Leila -- and if there are self-made
Bellcore            |  purgatories, then we all must live in them.
Piscataway, N.J.    |  Mine is no worse than someone else's."
(908) 699-8800      |                     - Spock, "This Side of Paradise"
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish,misc.headlines,talk.politics.misc,misc.legal
From: srm@world.std.com (Stevens R Miller)
Subject: Re: Say it ain't so
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 02:36:47 GMT

dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap) writes:

>In article <Bxv6vr.Dyu@world.std.com> srm@world.std.com (Stevens R Miller) writes:
>>>With a lawyer who
>>>knows that there are legal loopholes large enough to drive a truck
>>>through, the teenager may well be instructed to deny everything. 
>>
>>The Fifth Amendment is now a legal loophole?

>The fifth ammendment does not give you the right to purjure yourself.
>It only gives you the right to refuse to answer questions.  It does
>not give you the right to deny the truth.

You're right, David, but Nelson was not giving testimony.  There is no
obligation to answer police questions or even (generally) to tell the police
the truth.  Nevertheless, you are reading "deny" more precisely than I
did, and I see your point.  My position is simply that the presence of a
lawyer would probably have prevented a confession from being coaxed out
of Nelson, and that such prevention is not a loophole; it is a fundamental
Constitutional right.

Also, Nelson denies having ever made a confession.  Consider this:  If a
lawyer had been present, and unable to stop a penitent Nelson from actually
confessing, that lawyer would have been estopped from arguing that Nelson
had never confessed.  Because of shoddy police work, Nelson's position may
have been enhanced beyond what the truth might have permitted.
-- 
Stevens R. Miller J.D.
From: nobby@byron.u.washington.edu (Vitaly Shmatikov)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Conversion
Date: 23 Nov 92 06:00:38 GMT
Article-I.D.: u.1992Nov23.060038.3089
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle

In article <1992Nov23.053009.16069@cis.ohio-state.edu> khaikin@boa.cis.ohio-state.edu (dmitry khaikin) writes:
>Hi everybody! This is Dima. I will respond to your post but a little bit
    ^^^^^^^^^                                  ^^^^
>later. The reason that my modem just decided to play jokes on me, so, I
>hope at least this message gets through!
>

Isn't there something Carrollian in the message above :-) ? 
Anyway, has anybody seen this elusive Everybody lately?

>Thanks,
>Dima
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>  "A word is worth one coin; silence is worth two."_____ The Talmud.
>  "Silence is good everywhere, except in connection with Torah."____ The Zohar.
>   khaikin@cis.ohio-state.edu (Dmitry Khaikin, Columbus Ohio, USA)

nobby@u.washington.edu (just kidding)
Organization: Queen's University at Kingston
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 19:22:00 EST
From: andy <2893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA>
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: goy
 <1992Nov23.071119.3812@cbnews.cb.att.com>
 <92328.1349192893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA>
 <1992Nov23.193922.24323@cbnewsl.cb.att.com>

In article <1992Nov23.193922.24323@cbnewsl.cb.att.com>, saal@cbnewsl.cb.att.com
(samuel.saal) says:
>
>In article <92328.1349192893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> andy
><2893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> writes:
>
>>I am well aware that the word "Jew" can be used in a derogatory way. Unlike
>>kike or hymie the word "Jew" is not intrinsically derogatory. The word "goy"
>>however is. After your presumptious rant, I don't expect you'll acknowledge
>>the difference but it is there nevertheless.
>
>I find PAndy's assertive proof methodology amusing, to say the least.
>The word "Goy" comes from the Hebrew word "goy" (duh) which means
>"nation" (or "people").  There is nothing intrinsically negative about
>this.  In fact, when modified (something that can also be done), it can
>mean a variety of things (Goy Kadosh - a holy people - springs to mind;
>hardly negative).
>
>I hardly expect PAndy to acknowledge this after his presumptuous rant, of
>course.  Maybe he should ask Noam Chomsky.

Look it up in a dictionary. In english, Goy is seen as a derogatory. Why not
use gentile (please try to respond without personal insults)



>--
>Sam Saal      kingfish!saal OR saal@kingfish.att.com
>        Vayiftach HaShem et Peah Ha`Aton
From: janiceg@marvin.Eng.Sun.COM (Janice Gelb)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Down Under Story
Date: 18 Nov 1992 17:50:10 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Distribution: world
Reply-To: janiceg@marvin.Eng.Sun.COM
NNTP-Posting-Host: marvin

In article 29343@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca, jgoldber@todah.chem.utoronto.ca (Joel Goldberg) writes:

>
>   Next week, at Brovender's:
>      G'mara, I just met a girl at G'mara.
>      And suddenly a daf,
>      Will never be enough,
>      For me!!


And to the same tune (and a better rhyme to the original!):

N'giah
I just touched a girl
That's n'giah


********************************************************************************
Janice Gelb                  | (415) 336-7075     
janiceg@marvin.eng.sun.com   | "A silly message but mine own" (not Sun's!) 
********************************************************************************
From: jlove@ivrit.ra.itd.umich.edu (Jack Love)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: goy
Date: 23 Nov 1992 16:03:43 GMT
Organization: /usr/local/trn/lib/organization
NNTP-Posting-Host: ivrit.ra.itd.umich.edu

In article <1992Nov23.040258.28472@cs.albany.edu> mark@cs.albany.edu (Mark Steinberger) writes:
>Given the prevalence of discrimination, and even outright pogroms, in
>the treatment of Jews by their neighbors over the past few centuries,
>is it any surprise that the Yiddish word for non-Jew would have some
>negative connotations?
>
>Is that any reason to stop using it?
>

Yes. Put it this way. Other groups feel that they have legitimate
reasons for calling Jews names. Should they continue to do so or
would you prefer that they make an effort to use more respectful
terms?

>Viewed another way, should we stop calling ourselves Jews because the
>word has had negative connotations for a number of non-Jews?
>
>--Mark

There is a fairly general notion that people can call *themselves*
as they please. You may have some complex idea behind your comment,
that I don't grasp at this time, but I don't think your comment
bears on the issue of using the term "goy" in a derogatory fashion.

Jack F. Love
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish