HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: wmcguire@world.std.com (Wayne McGuire)
Subject: Pollard & Neo-Nazis
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 14:28:10 GMT

To: Ron Evans

>If Israel applies various devices to drive
>non-Jews out of Israel, how could it possibly complain if other
>nations in the world applied various devices to drive Jews from
>their midst?

  RE> If a person posts thinly-veiled antisemitic innuendo, how
  RE> could that person possibly complain about racism of
  RE> others?

Ah yes, the old anti-Semitism smear. Doesn't it embarrass you to
use it?

The issue of substance here, which has nothing to do with
innuendo and which you don't seem to be able to address, is one
of flagrant double standards, which was nicely described by I.F.
Stone:

     For Israel is creating a kind of moral schizophrenia in
     world Jewry.  In the outside world the welfare of Jewry
     depends on the maintenance of secular, non-racial,
     pluralistic societies.  In Israel, Jewry finds itself
     defending a society in which mixed marriages cannot be
     legalized, in which non-Jews have a lesser status than Jews,
     and in which the ideal is racial and exclusionist. Jews must
     fight elsewhere for their very security and
     existence--against principles and practices they find
     themselves defending in Israel. Those from the outside
     world, even in their moments of greatest enthusiasm amid
     Israel's accomplishments, feel twinges of claustrophobia,
     not just geographical but spiritual. Those caught up in
     Prophetic fervor soon begin to feel that the light they
     hoped to see out of Zion is only that of another narrow
     nationalism.

I don't think anti-Semitism smears are going to be very effective
in diverting world attention from the fact that Israel and
Israel's supporters increasingly have an embarrassing problem
with double standards in judging Israel and judging other
nations. The problem becomes even more severe when you have a
significant number of Israelis claiming that they are the chosen
people, a nation of priests called upon to define moral standards
for the rest of the benighted world. Increasingly this prophetic
stance arouses as much skepticism and mirth as Jimmy Swaggart
preaching chastity.

If Israel pressures Arabs to leave Israel, it can hardly object
to France pressuring Arabs to leave France--or Jews for that
matter. Nor if Israel increasingly becomes a Jewish theocratic
state does it have much ground to stand on in objecting to the
U.S. becoming a Christian theocratic state.

Israel and Israeli supporters seem so mixed up these
days--they've got to try to get their story straight. I can
understand their Swaggart-like need to seize upon any diversions
they can find.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
From: zmbenhal@netcom.com (Zeyd M. Ben-Halim)
Subject: Re: Homosexuality in Islam
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 00:30:37 GMT

In article <18113@autodesk.COM> mickw@autodesk.com (Mick Washbrook) writes:
>In article <nabeel.723931042@oracle.sce.carleton.ca>, nabeel@sce.carleton.ca (Rosignolo) writes:
>
>> 
>>    I essentially mean that the punishment is for _committing sodomy_
>> not for homosexual orientation. Homosexuals must restrain their
>> desires for God's sake. The society must help them quit or get
>> themselves under control. Finally, instincts do not judge religional
>> laws to be right or wrong (the brain must do that if it can.)
>
>We might as well ask straights to stop breeding. For all this talk of
>Islam and homosexuality, you still can't walk down the street in an Arab
>country without getting propositioned constantly. Jeez--I wish I had
>as much luck in the Castro. Time for a trip to Egypt, methinks.

you'll be disappointed unless you're willing to be the passive partner only!
Most of the men are interested in getting their rocks off rather than "Love"
"Relation".

>
>
>
>--
>Death to all fanatics!!
>
>Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law.
>


Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
From: gmeltzne@jarthur.claremont.edu (Goof)
Subject: Re: Malcom X
Organization: Harvey Mudd College, Claremont, CA 91711
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 21:08:39 GMT

In article <4650@copper.Denver.Colorado.EDU> aaldoubo@copper.denver.colorado.edu (Shaqeeqa) writes:
>In article <1992Dec8.082746.18003@muddcs.claremont.edu> gmeltzne@jarthur.claremont.edu (Goof) writes:
>>
>>	While I'm posting, I would like to know your (and other Moslems')
>>	reaction to the complete destruction of a Mosque in India by
>>	extremest Hindus.  I would also like to know the reaction to 
>>	the Brit in Saudi Arabia who was sentenced to be flogged 50 times
>>	because he swore at his staff (I think he was a doctor).
>
>How do you think we feel about a masjid being destroyed by Islam-hating,
>radical Hindus?

	Probably pretty upset, but I was curious because the was no mention
	of this anywhere on this group.  

>
>Didn't hear about the other one though ... where did you hear this?

	I read it in the LA Times the day I posted I think it was Dec. 7.


	Geoff
>
>Anisa
>	"The best kind - angry, rebellious, critical - a renegade ..."
>


-- 
Email: gmeltzne@jarthur.claremont.edu            

A .sig?  A .sig? We don't need no stinkin' .sigs!
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
From: kbibb@maui.qualcomm.com (Ken Bibb)
Subject: Re: Malcom X
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1992 23:16:57 GMT

In <1992Dec13.161648.7275@das.harvard.edu> adam@endor.uucp (Adam Shostack) writes:

>In article <1992Dec11.210839.20081@muddcs.claremont.edu> gmeltzne@jarthur.claremont.edu (Goof) writes:

>Adam Shostack 					adam@das.harvard.edu

>What a terrible thing to have lost one's .sig.  Or not to have a .sig
>at all because of elections.  How true that is.

Why is it horrible?  You could always complain about the winners in your
.sig....

-- 
Ken Bibb                "he heard the snow falling faintly through the
kbibb@qualcomm.com	 universe and faintly falling, like the descent of
jester@crash.cts.com     their last end, upon all the living and the dead."
				--"The Dead", James Joyce
Date: Thursday, 17 December 1992 21:43:57 MST
X-Mailer: TMail version 1.15R
From: "D. C. Sessions" <dcs@witsend.tnet.com>
Organization: Nobody but me -- really
Subject: Re: The Hadith about Muslims killing the Jews / Hamas vs. Sunnah
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
Distribution: world

In <BzCwo2.2vn@newsflash.concordia.ca>, ilyess@ECE.Concordia.CA (Ilyess Bdira)  wrote:
# 2) It is very misleading, I know many Hamas people (or actually people
# that sympathize with them) and none of them wants to kill all Jews, so quoting
# that Hadith hurts your image and make you look more ugly than you really are.
# Obviously Hamas is not interested in a reachable solution, nor in preaching
# about Islam. I will tell you what they should have done:
# -declare a war of liberation in the west bank and Gaza against Israeli
# occupation of that specific region, and limit itself to that goal. This will
# be more convincing and more reacheable than proclaiming the destruction of
# all of Israel. Have you wondered why there are too many collaborators?
# It is because the Palestinians themselves do not believe that they are
# going anywhere soon. So the weaklings opt for the safer side.

  Is it so hard to believe that there are people with a stake in the
  continuation of unrest?  During the Vietnam war, it was an article
  of faith that the US military preferred killing and dying to giving
  up the influence it had due to the war.  All the more so in the
  case of movements like HAMAS, various guerilla movements, and
  terrorist organizations.  In these cases, the leadership has
  nothing to gain from winning and a great deal of power to lose.
  In that position all but the most principled of people will
  rationalize doing what it takes to stay in power.  And just in
  case you had any doubts, you don't get to the top of a tough
  organization unless your entire attention is on that and nothing
  else.

--- D. C. Sessions                            Speaking for myself ---
--- Note new network address:                dcs@witsend.tnet.com ---
--- Author (and everything else!) of TMail  (DOS mail/news shell) ---
From: bdm@cs.anu.edu.au (Brendan McKay)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
Subject: Re: Treason vs. Espionage
Date: 15 Dec 1992 09:29:49 GMT
Organization: Australian National University
Distribution: world
Reply-To: bdm@cs.anu.edu.au
NNTP-Posting-Host: 150.203.23.70

In article <BzA326.L7K@ddsw1.mcs.com> Jack Schmidling writes:
>>#    7.   Terrorist bombing of US Information Agency libraries in Cairo
>>#and Alexandria.

>Most knowledgeable Miedeast followers know that was a Mossad job.

Except for those who know it was IDF intelligence.  

Brendan.

Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
From: shteingd@oak.math.ucla.edu (Semion D. Shteingold)
Subject: Re: Three troubling questions about Islam
Reply-To: shteingd@oak.math.ucla.edu (Semion D. Shteingold)
Organization: UCLA Mathematics Department
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 92 19:40:45 GMT

In article <1992Dec13.065109.2435339@locus.com>, jle@locus.com (John
Elghani/10000000) writes:
|> 
|> The native of the land returns to it from refugee camps in Lebanon,
       ^^^^^^
|> Syria, Jordan, ...etc, then the terrorist in charge will be 
|> eliminated, then Jews, Christians, Muslims, ...etc can live
|> in THEIR land normally.
|> 
|> jle
|> 

Could you be so kind to explain the highlited word?
I mean:
 Why do You consider Arabs `more` native than Jews?

Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
From: wmcguire@world.std.com (Wayne McGuire)
Subject: Deporting "Agitators"
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 05:07:54 GMT

To: Adam Shostack

McGuire's Law: Fanaticism impairs cognitive abilities. It's worse
than glue-sniffing.

It'd be a damn shame to see Kaufman's astonishingly poor reading
comprehension rub off on some of the more cognitively gifted
users here who are trying to make the best case for Israel.
(Their best case has not been very convincing so far, but then
again they are dealing with an exceptionally hard sell.)

  AS> Benjamin Natenyahu called for mass deportation of
  AS> Palestinian AGITATORS.  He did not call for the deportation
  AS> of all of the Palestinians.  His call was for deporting
  AS> people who violated the law.

I didn't say that Netanyahu called for the deportation of ALL
Palestinians or THE Palestinians. I said "Palestinians"--SOME
Palestinians--how many, we can't know for sure, although the clip
I posted from the Jewish Advocate revealed that the number he had
in mind was in the many hundreds or even thousands.

It's like UN Resolution 242: Israel is called upon under
specified conditions to withdraw from "territories," not "the
territories." Please read my sentences carefully.

In fact it's reasonable to suspect on the basis of Likud's
tolerance of and connections to extremist groups that advocate
wholesale transfer that what Netanyahu really has in mind is
eventually deporting hundreds of thousands of Palestinians,
probably under the cover of a war.

Deporting so-called "agitators" is bad enough. Netanyahu's
proposal is entirely racist: he doesn't propose deporting Jews
who agitate and violate the law. The American media have failed
to call Netanyahu on his ugly racism, probably because
interviewers like Larry King and Ted Koppel have an instinct to
try to protect Israel from its own brain-damaged behavior which
overrides their journalistic professionalism. They show no such
restraints in interrogating racists of any other ethnic group.

And let's keep in mind that the "law" under which Palestinians
are living in the occupied territories has been described by
Israelis themselves as "Nazilike." (These are the same laws that
the British used to oppress Jews before the founding of Israel.)
No person in his right mind and with self-respect would live
under such laws without violently resisting them. Certainly no
American or Jew would that I know and respect. These laws are the
instrument of an ugly regime (the military occupation, that is,
not Israel per se) that is begging to be smashed. They violate
all decent norms of human rights.
From: flax@frej.teknikum.uu.se (Jonas Flygare)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
Subject: Re: News from the Israeli press
Date: 14 Dec 1992 11:49:10 GMT
Organization: Dept. of Control and Systems, Teknikum, Uppsala
Distribution: world
Reply-To: flax@mizar.docs.uu.se
NNTP-Posting-Host: frej.teknikum.uu.se

In article <1992Dec13.220252.20607@colorado.edu>, perlman@qso.Colorado.EDU (Eric S. Perlman) writes:

|> No, but Catholics do tell their children not to marry non-Catholics.  I
-----------^^^^^^^^^
|> guess the only difference is that there are many nations where Catholics
|> are a majority, but only 1 where Jews are a majority.

If there is a need to generalize, I'd add _most_, just to be sure..
I make the same mistake myself at times..

--------------------------------------------------------
Jonas Flygare, 		+ Wherever you go, there you are
V{ktargatan 32 F:621	+
754 22 Uppsala, Sweden	+
From: revans@euclid.ucsd.edu (Ron Evans)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
Subject: Resisting occupation
Date: 20 Dec 92 22:30:30 GMT

<1992Dec20.183533.14758@ncsu.edu> hernlem@chess.ncsu.EDU (Brad Hernlem) writes:

3. It is my belief that it is a fundamental right of people to resist
the forced occupation of their land by a foreign army. 
Brad Hernlem (hernlem@chess.ncsu.EDU)

	Should the Kurds randomly kill Iranian soldiers until
	Iranians stop occupying Kurdistan?  Yes or no?
	(Or is the situation different when Muslims are the
	occupiers?)



-- 
Ron Evans (revans@math.ucsd.edu)
From: revans@euclid.ucsd.edu (Ron Evans)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
Subject: Practicing what is preached
Date: 14 Dec 92 08:33:28 GMT

<Bz8Gx7.I51@world.std.com> wmcguire@world.std.com (Wayne McGuire) writes:

Let me explain something to you: I do not engage in conversations
with folks on computer networks who engage in habitual personal
abuse. I learned a long time ago that such conversations, and
such persons, are a waste of time. On most computer networks with
which I am familiar, you would have been permanently booted off a
long time ago. Personal abusiveness is considered one of the
gravest sins among those who are interested in making this medium
work and thrive.


	Later in the same post, we find: 


This is typical of all your communications: you misread messages,
jump to wild conclusions, project views on your "enemies" that
they do not hold, and then wildly flail at your own
hallucinations. Sorting through all this mess is more a job for a
therapist than anyone else, and I don't propose to do it.


	Still later, we find more of the same:


Do you even begin to understand how grave are your problems in
reading comprehension and general cognition?
This is one of those questions which contains its own evident
answer. Of course you don't. There is a nice correlation between
your exclamation points, uppercased shouts, and verbal filth and
your inability to read English.

It'd be a damn shame to see Kaufman's astonishingly poor reading
comprehension rub off on some of the more cognitively gifted
users here who are trying to make the best case for Israel.

-- 
Ron Evans (revans@math.ucsd.edu)
From: arens@ISI.EDU (Yigal Arens)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
Subject: Re: Israeli soldiers kill Palestinian boy
Date: 15 Dec 92 21:29:30 GMT
	<1992Dec15.182856.23705@colorado.edu>
Organization: USC/Information Sciences Institute
In-reply-to: perlman@qso.Colorado.EDU's message of 15 Dec 92 18:28:56 GMT

In article <1992Dec15.182856.23705@colorado.edu> perlman@qso.Colorado.EDU (Eric S. Perlman) writes:
>
> ...  I do know that numerous
> PLO-affiliated activists who've stated even slightly non-standard
> opinions have been forced to seek protection from Israeli authorities
> not for being collaborators - which they're not - but just for speaking
> something that some party or other doesn't approve of.

This often repeated claim is absolute nonsense, completely untrue.  But
here's Mr. Perlman's chance to redeem himself: Please post the names and
circumstances under which PLO-affiliated activists who've stated
"slightly non-standard opinions" have "sought protection from Israeli
authorities".  Come on.  Let's see you do it.  You say "you know" of
"numerous" such cases.  Describing ten (10) cases would be enough.  OK,
five (5).  Alright -- just two (2).  Can you provide us ONE (1) example
of a PLO-affiliated activist who did no more than state a slightly
non-standard opinion, and as a consequence was forced to seek protection
from Israeli authorities?
--
Yigal Arens
USC/ISI                                                TV made me do it!
arens@isi.edu
From: bdm@cs.anu.edu.au (Brendan McKay)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
Subject: Re: Israeli soldiers kill Palestinian boy
Date: 14 Dec 1992 08:07:23 GMT
Organization: Australian National University
Distribution: world
Reply-To: bdm@cs.anu.edu.au
NNTP-Posting-Host: 150.203.23.70

In article<1992Dec13.170823.14064@colorado.edu> Eric Perlman writes:
>In article <1genihINNhqk@manuel.anu.edu.au> bdm@cs.anu.edu.au writes:
>>In article 22288@colorado.edu, perlman@qso.Colorado.EDU (Eric S. Perlman) writes:
>>>In article <1602@tdat.teradata.COM> jcg@tdat.teradata.com (Jonathan Gingerich) >writes:
>>>>In article <4570@bimacs.BITNET> ehrlich@bimacs.BITNET (Gideon Ehrlich) writes:

>>>>>  A mericans. please inform us what an American soldier is expected to
>>>>>do if he is stoned at Somally ?

>>>>Leave.

>>>While I don't often side with Gideon Ehrlich, in this case I am forced
>>>to.  Jonathan, the UN mandate given to the multinational forces
>>>currently operating in Somalia does allow shooting back if resistance is
>>>met.  Anyone who doesn't think that stoning doesn't fall under the
>>>category of possibly deadly force needs to re-think their position.
>>>Under the UN mandate, the US (or any of the other nations') forces would
>>>be justified in countering resistance.  [..rest deleted..]

>>I can't believe my eyes.  If American soldiers start killing Somali 
>>children (I include younger teenagers) who throw stones at them
>>there will an international outcry like you have never seen.

>If that were all that were going on in Somalia, perhaps. ut that never
>was all that is going on in the intifada.  

I can't seem to interpret this in any other way than that Palestinian
violence against Palestinians somehow justifies Israeli violence
against Palestinians.  Despite seeing this presented as an argument
quite a lot of times, I am still at a loss about its logic.
Perhaps you can explain it?

>                                           The intifada is not a popular
>uprising - not anymore, whether or not it was at the beginning.  Right
>now it has deteriorated into a battle between members of different PLO
>factions, which hold a large portion of the Palestinian population in
>terror.  Over the last two years, many more Palestinians have died at the
>hands of such militia than have been killed by the IDF.  And the vast
>majority of those killed by PLO-affiliated death squads are completely
>innocent.  The militias charge that they're collaborators, but the
>reality is far from that.

Some are certain to be collaborators, but I'm sure many are not.
I would be 99% certain that this corruption of the focus of the
intifada had more than a little Israeli help.  No, I'm not talking
about death squads necessarily; there are many subtler ways to go
about it.  On the other hand, as I've said before, the killing of
collaborators is an unfortunate invariant of "resistance movements",
especially at similar stages.

Brendan.
From: mmdh@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (Mazen Mokhtar)
Subject: Re: The Hadith about Muslims killing the Jews / Hamas vs. Sunnah
Organization: AT&T
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 22:35:19 GMT

In article <1992Dec17.170639.1238@cs.brown.edu> hm@cs.brown.edu (Harry Mamaysky) writes:

> Let's look at the facts. Hamas kidnapped a Jewish
>policeman, bound him and executed him - for NO reason.


  And you call that the facts? The reason for the kidnapping is twofold,
it is part of the struggle against Israeli oppression and it was a way to
seek the release of Ahmad Yassin.

  Would you care to repeat remind me of the reason why Israel destroys the
houses of Palestinians who are not even suspected of joining the intifadah?

> And you dare justify such attrocities in the name of freedom fighting.

  I justify no attrocities. I condemn every evil act. I also praise every
heroic attempt at battling oppression.

>So you call brutally executing a person with his hands bound a proper
>and succesful resistance tactic.

  If the person is a soldier on duty, whose job is to oppress and to contribute
to the killing of innocent Palestinians on command, I don't see what the
problem is. Should the French have refrained from killing Nazis?


Mazen Mokhtar
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
From: ifaz706@utxvms.cc.utexas.edu (Noam Tractinsky)
Subject: Re: Treason vs. Espionage  was:Re: ARF on
Organization: University of Texas @ Austin
Date: 11 Dec 92 12:31:26 CST

In article <1g6ipgINNt4r@manuel.anu.edu.au>, bdm@cs.anu.edu.au (Brendan McKay) writes:
+ In article 24883@cs.brown.edu, dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren) writes:
++eggertj@atc.ll.mit.edu writes:
++#arf@ddsw1.mcs.com (Jack Schmidling) writes:
+ [...]
++#But you forgot
++#    7.   Terrorist bombing of US Information Agency libraries in Cairo
++#and Alexandria.
+ 
++That should be condemned, but:
+ 
++1) It happened 40 years ago.
+ 
+ True.
+ 
++2) As it seems, the decision to do this was taken by a low-level official,
++   not a high ranking officer or the government.
+ 
+ False.  At the minimum the director of Aman (IDF military intelligence)
+ Benyamen Gibli was involved.  The only real controversy is whether the
+ order came from above Gibli and if so from whom.  Gibli said it came
+ from Defense Minister Lavon, but Gibli's secretary later claimed Gibli
+ had ordered her to forge a crucial document that implicated Lavon.

	In Haaretz, December 4, 1992, HArkabi speaks on Gibli,
	Dayan, Ben Gurion, Carmael, the British ambassador to 
	Cairo, Harkabi, managing spies, making decisions, tatics
	vs. strategies, etc.  Sorry, don't have time to translate.

	Also there, about a new book on Zionists attitudes towards
	Jerusalem '37-'49. 

Noam



+ 
++3) The bombs used were not meant to cause real damage, but only psychological
++   effect. One of them exploded in the pocket of the guy carrying it,
++   and all he suffered were superficial wounds to his leg. Of course
++   this doesn't justify the sabotage, but its not like blowing up
++   a truck with 400 pounds of TNT near a US embassy.
+ 
+ Ok, you get 2/3 :-)
+ 
++-Danny Keren.
+ 
+ Brendan.
+ 
+
From: revans@euclid.ucsd.edu (Ron Evans)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
Subject: Re: Anti-Semitism
Date: 14 Dec 92 05:58:05 GMT

In article <1ggq5gINN2g1@manuel.anu.edu.au> bdm@cs.anu.edu.au writes:

>Another pathetic childish attempt at slander-by-association.
>I thought you'd grow out of it by now.  What a pity.

>>	Now, as for the case at hand, a suggestion that Israel has
>>        a policy to drive out citizens based on their non-Jewishness
>>	alone strikes me as antisemitic innuendo.  I am not at all
>>	embarrassed to say so.

>Well, you should be.

>This posting does not constitute an opinion of Wayne, just an
>expression of my displeasure at the prospect of seeing worthwhile
>threads dragged into the mud.

	I request a clarification.  Which of these are true?

	1) The above suggestion about Israel is valid.
	2) The above suggestion about Israel is a lie but not
           anti-Semitic.
	3) Even if lies about Israel strike one as anti-Semitic,
           one should be ashamed to say so.
	4) The statement "Jews control the media" is anti-Semitic.
	5) The statement "Israel controls the media" is
	   anti-Semitic.
	
-- 
Ron Evans (revans@math.ucsd.edu)