HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: greenbrg@huji.ac.il (David Greenberg)
Newsgroups: misc.headlines,talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.mideast,soc.misc
Subject: Re: RESPONSE: "Eyewitness Testimony" and Tatoos: Proof of "Holocaust?"
Date: 10 Apr 92 09:57:36 GMT
Reply-To: shum!greenbrg@uunet.uucp
Followup-To: misc.headlines
Organization: The Hebrew University of Jerusalem

April 10, 1992

To clear up some apparent confusion:

Who is a Jew is defined by Induction:

The atoms are the original Jews, the Hebrews, who lived during time of
Abraham up until the Exodus from Egypt.

The Rules of Generation are:

(1) Anyone whose Mother was Jewish,

(2) Anyone who converts to Judaism.

Rule number two makes it impossible to call Jews a race.  Rule numebr one
also presents a problem, since normally the fathers of a certain race count
in its propagation.

Chag Pesach Sameach,

David Greenberg
Xref: sparky misc.headlines:3201 talk.politics.misc:17109 talk.politics.mideast:10350 soc.misc:420
From: stank@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (Stan Krieger)
Newsgroups: misc.headlines,talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.mideast,soc.misc,alt.revisionism
Subject: Don't Sleep too Comfortably (was: IHR Scores Stunning Victory ...)
Date: 7 Apr 92 16:32:14 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Summit NJ

alexander.kostomaroff writes:
>Ralph Winston of "Banished CPU" ends his verbose diatribe
>	"IHR Scores Stunning Victory in $11 Million Mermelstein Trial!"
>with a quote from Nietzsche:
>	"What does not destroy me, makes me stronger".
>
>How appropriate, Ralph! Good old Adolf H. used to repeat the same line quite
>often.
>
>Tell me with whom you share your one-liners and I tell you where are you
>from.
>
>Bye-bye, Parteigenosse Winston! Sieg Heil!

For all of you anti-Semities and/or Israel bashers reading this who
are gloating "Boy, those damn Jews are sure getting theirs now" (as if
we are, but that's another story), just remember, the neo-Nazis do
not discriminate.  Today their target are the Jews; tomorrow, it's
your non-white/non-Protestant ethnic/religious group.
-- 
Stan Krieger                     All opinions, advice, or suggestions, even
AT&T UNIX System Laboratories    if related to my employment, are my own.
Summit, NJ
smk@usl.com
Xref: sparky misc.headlines:3404 soc.misc:542 talk.politics.mideast:10792 talk.politics.misc:18238
From: jime@bullwinkle.atc.ll.mit.edu (Jim Eggert x6127 g41)
Newsgroups: misc.headlines,soc.misc,talk.politics.mideast,talk.politics.misc,alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Want facts?  "WHO RUNS THE MEDIA?  The Alarming Facts"
Date: 14 Apr 92 20:59:43 GMT
	<1992Apr14.055734.25544@ennews.eas.asu.edu>
	<JIME.92Apr14121818@bullwinkle.atc.ll.mit.edu>
	<1992Apr14.192835.23490@muddcs.claremont.edu>
Organization: MIT Lincoln Lab - Group 41

In article <1992Apr14.192835.23490@muddcs.claremont.edu> gmeltzne@jarthur.claremont.edu (manu) writes:
>   In article <JIME.92Apr14121818@bullwinkle.atc.ll.mit.edu> jime@bullwinkle.atc.ll.mit.edu (Jim Eggert x6127 g41) writes:
>
>   >Because there is a real and present injustice in the Israeli
>   >occupation of the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and Golan Heights.  A
>   >possible future war must be guarded against, but it does not justify
>   >the present injustice of the occupation.
>
>	   Do you mean injustice because Israel controls those areas, or do you
>   mean injustice becasue what is going on in those areas.  Or both?

Both, actually.  The mere occupation goes against UN resolutions.  And
there are considerable injustices going on as a result of the occupation.

>	   I've been reading this thread for awhile, and from what I gather, Jim,
>   you don't feel that the security forces should shoot at rock thowers, even
>   when in self-defence.  Other than leaving immediately, which is impracticle
>   right now, what do you think the security forces should do?  (personally
>   I think paint balls would be effective...)

If paint balls would be effective, then that would be considerably
better than lead bullets.  There is considerable technology available
to modern forces in putting down unarmed rioters: water cannons, tear
gas, shields, etc.  These devices are relatively humane in comparison
with rifles.  I know that Israel has/is experimented/ing with rubber
bullets, which is a step in the right direction.
--
=Jim  jime%atc.ll.mit.edu (Jim Eggert)
Newsgroups: misc.headlines,soc.misc,talk.politics.mideast,talk.politics.misc,alt.revisionism
From: jon@maui.cs.ucla.edu (Jonathan Gingerich)
Subject: Re: Deportations of Palestinians from the occupied territories
Reply-To: jon@culv.unisys.com
Organization: UCLA Computer Science Department
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 92 18:01:31 GMT

In article <JIME.92Apr15121133@bullwinkle.atc.ll.mit.edu> jime@bullwinkle.atc.ll.mit.edu (Jim Eggert x6127 g41) writes:
>In article <1992Apr15.021458.361@midway.uchicago.edu> gross@befvax.uchicago.edu writes:
>>...
>>The question of deporting INDIVIDUAL Palestinians, as a punishment for violent
>>   actions against Israel, is another question entirely.
>
>But even the deportation of individual Palestinians is against the Geneva
>Convention.  The world community does not in general support this
>action by Israel, and considers it contrary to international law.

True enough, but let's remember that Israel is not in the habit of deporting
individuals as "punishment" for "violent actions".  The 12 Palestinians 
recently facing (or suffering?) deportation were all already imprisoned,
11 of them as political prisoners.  Deportation is an administrative, not
legal proceeding.  Deportation is simply a weapon in the fight to supress
Palestine.

Jonathan

Xref: sparky misc.headlines:3337 soc.misc:485 talk.politics.mideast:10653 talk.politics.misc:17904
From: jime@bullwinkle.atc.ll.mit.edu (Jim Eggert x6127 g41)
Newsgroups: misc.headlines,soc.misc,talk.politics.mideast,talk.politics.misc,alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Want facts?  "WHO RUNS THE MEDIA?  The Alarming Facts"
Date: 12 Apr 92 05:24:28 GMT
	<1992Apr10.170451.3075@ennews.eas.asu.edu>
	<JIME.92Apr10223708@bullwinkle.atc.ll.mit.edu>
	<1992Apr12.014433.29249@ennews.eas.asu.edu>
Organization: MIT Lincoln Lab - Group 41

In article <1992Apr12.014433.29249@ennews.eas.asu.edu> makowsky@enuxha.eas.asu.edu (David Makowsky) writes:
>   In article <JIME.92Apr10223708@bullwinkle.atc.ll.mit.edu> jime@bullwinkle.atc.ll.mit.edu (Jim Eggert x6127 g41) writes:
>   # >   # The other 95% [of the Israeli partition 
>   # >   # not purchased by the pre-1948 Zionists]
>   # >   # was ceded to the nascent Israel by the UN and the UK, ...
>   # >   # partly because the Zionist terrorists were killing and murdering
>   # >   # Arabs, Brits, and a UN mediator.
>
>   # >	   Not only was this not a reason, but for the most part it falls
>   # >   flat on its face as a lie/untruth.
>
>   # How so?  Do you mean to imply that the Zionist terrorism was
>   # _completely_ ineffectual against the British?  Nonsense.
>
>	   Zionist resistance played a part.  Zionist terrorism, for the most
>   part (there were minor exceptions) was (as it still is now) a figment
>   of some propagandists' imaginations.

Make up your mind.  First it was not a reason at all, now it did play
a part.

And your characterization of Zionist terrorism merely shows your
ignorance.  You should read your history books about King David Hotel,
the assassinations of Lord Moyne, Count Bernadotte, and many
significant Zionist terrorist actions in the 1929-1948 period.  Hardly
minor exceptions.

>   # >   Do you know what percentage of Israel was contained in the Sinai?
>
>   # 0%.  The Sinai was never considered to be part of Israel by the world
>   # community.  That was a trick question, funny huh.
>
>	   What the world community considered it was irelevent.  How would
>   you like it if the world community refused to recognize your property
>   rights to your own home?  

And here we see the image of arrogance.  World opinion be damned,
Israel took the Sinai from Egypt, and that's it.  Luckily Begin was
more flexible than you appear to be.  Answer me this:  How many Jews
lived in the Sinai in 1966?  Then tell me that it was the home of Israel.

>   # >  ... the overwhelming majority
>   # >   of the terrorism was (as it still is) commited by the Arabs against
>   # >   the Jews.
>
>   # Substantiate, please.
>
>	   World events.

Great quote.  I'll have to remember that catch-all reference when I
write my next term paper.  See footnote 3.
-----
3.  World events.

--
=Jim  jime%atc.ll.mit.edu (Jim Eggert)
Xref: sparky misc.headlines:3371 soc.misc:515 talk.politics.mideast:10743 talk.politics.misc:18136
From: makowsky@enuxha.eas.asu.edu (David Makowsky)
Newsgroups: misc.headlines,soc.misc,talk.politics.mideast,talk.politics.misc,alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Want facts?  "WHO RUNS THE MEDIA?  The Alarming Facts"
Date: 15 Apr 92 14:52:19 GMT
Reply-To: makowsky@enuxha.eas.asu.edu (David Makowsky)
Organization: Arizona State University, Tempe AZ

In article <JIME.92Apr14230116@bullwinkle.atc.ll.mit.edu> jime@bullwinkle.atc.ll.mit.edu (Jim Eggert x6127 g41) writes:

# In article <1992Apr14.232215.21465@colorado.edu> perlman@qso.Colorado.EDU (perlman eric) writes:

# >   In article <JIME.92Apr14165943@bullwinkle.atc.ll.mit.edu> jime@bullwinkle.atc.ll.mit.edu (Jim Eggert x6127 g41) writes:

# >   >Both, actually.  The mere occupation goes against UN resolutions.  And
# >   >there are considerable injustices going on as a result of the occupation.

# >   Jim, this has been discussed before in tpm.  The occupation does not go
# >   against international law.  There have been a number of GA resolutions
# >   railroaded through which demanded a unilateral end to the occupation,
# >   but UNGA resolutions don't have the force of international law, and also
# >   those resolutions contradict the wording of UNSC 242 and 338, which talk
# >   about territorial compromise as a part of a peace plan, not unilateral
# >   withdrawal.

# >   Certainly I don't approve of everything going on in the territories, but
# >   let's get our facts straight.
 
# The occupation, as I clearly wrote above, goes against UN resolutions.
# Your posting agrees with me on this count.  Why do you admonish me to
# get my facts straight, if we agree?
 
	It is not that your facts are wrong, but because the UN resolutions
are meaningless, your facts are irelevent.

# 242 and 338, if I remember correctly, do ask for territorial
# compromise, which is a code phrase for trading land for peace.
# As Israel occupies the land, it is clear that Israel would have to
# withdraw from at least part of the occupied territories under these
# resolutions.
 
	The author of 242 has repeatedly stated that Israel is not now in
violation of it, and that by giving up the Sinai Israel may have
fufilled all of its obligations under it.

# As for whether the UNSC or UNGA resolutions hold the force of
# international law, well, international law doesn't have much force
# anyway, so I don't know what this argument buys you.
 
	Since UN resolutions for the most part are political and
ethnocentric (just look at all the block voting), using them does not
buy you any kind of a morality high ground either.

# The way the occupation is being run (deportation of elements of the
# local populace, construction of permanent settlements, ...) also goes
# against the Geneva Convention.

	No they do not.
--

David Makowsky
makowsky@enuxha.eas.asu.edu
Xref: sparky misc.headlines:3372 soc.misc:516 talk.politics.mideast:10744 talk.politics.misc:18137
From: makowsky@enuxha.eas.asu.edu (David Makowsky)
Newsgroups: misc.headlines,soc.misc,talk.politics.mideast,talk.politics.misc,alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Want facts?  "WHO RUNS THE MEDIA?  The Alarming Facts"
Date: 14 Apr 92 05:26:31 GMT
Reply-To: makowsky@enuxha.eas.asu.edu (David Makowsky)
Organization: Arizona State University, Tempe AZ

In article <JIME.92Apr13011246@bullwinkle.atc.ll.mit.edu> jime@bullwinkle.atc.ll.mit.edu (Jim Eggert x6127 g41) writes:

# In article <1992Apr12.071510.2846@ennews.eas.asu.edu> makowsky@enuxha.eas.asu.edu (David Makowsky) writes:

# >   In article <JIME.92Apr12012428@bullwinkle.atc.ll.mit.edu> jime@bullwinkle.atc.ll.mit.edu (Jim Eggert x6127 g41) writes:

# >   # In article <1992Apr12.014433.29249@ennews.eas.asu.edu> makowsky@enuxha.eas.asu.edu (David Makowsky) writes:

# >   # >   In article <JIME.92Apr10223708@bullwinkle.atc.ll.mit.edu> jime@bullwinkle.atc.ll.mit.edu (Jim Eggert x6127 g41) writes:

# >   # >   # >   # The other 95% [of the Israeli partition 
# >   # >   # >   # not purchased by the pre-1948 Zionists]
# >   # >   # >   # was ceded to the nascent Israel by the UN and the UK, ...
# >   # >   # >   # partly because the Zionist terrorists were killing and murdering
# >   # >   # >   # Arabs, Brits, and a UN mediator.

# >   # >   # >	   Not only was this not a reason, but for the most part it falls
# >   # >   # >   flat on its face as a lie/untruth.

# >   # >   # How so?  Do you mean to imply that the Zionist terrorism was
# >   # >   # _completely_ ineffectual against the British?  Nonsense.

# >   # >	   Zionist resistance played a part.  Zionist terrorism, for the most
# >   # >   part (there were minor exceptions) was (as it still is now) a figment
# >   # >   of some propagandists' imaginations.

# >   # Make up your mind.  First it was not a reason at all, now it did play
# >   # a part.

# >	   Instead of telling others to make up their mind, why do not you
# >   read.  The small amount of actual Jewish terrorism did not play any
# >   role in the British leaving.  Legitimate Jewish resistance did.
 
# And now you have flopped back again.  First the Zionist terrorism did
# not play a part, then it did, and now it didn't again.  I did read
# your postings, and they are quoted above (yours appear after >'s).
 
	Since you cannot read, I will write in in caps "JEWISH TERRORISM,
AS MINISCULE AS IT WAS, COULD NOT POSSIBLY HAVE PLAYED A ROLE.  JEWISH
RESISTANCE DID.  This is what I have always stated.

# Please make up your mind, and then post again.  Did the Zionist
# terrorism perpetrated by the Irgun, the LEHI, and others in the years
# 1929-1948 contribute to the British backing out of the Palestinian
# Mandate?  Cite your opinion, and any substantiation you may have.

	I did, above.
--

David Makowsky
makowsky@enuxha.eas.asu.edu
Newsgroups: misc.headlines,soc.misc,talk.politics.mideast,talk.politics.misc,alt.revisionism
From: jime@bullwinkle.atc.ll.mit.edu (Jim Eggert x6127 g41)
Subject: Re: Want facts?  "WHO RUNS THE MEDIA?  The Alarming Facts"
Organization: MIT Lincoln Lab - Group 41
	<1992Apr12.014433.29249@ennews.eas.asu.edu>
	<JIME.92Apr12012428@bullwinkle.atc.ll.mit.edu>
	<1992Apr12.071510.2846@ennews.eas.asu.edu>
Date: 13 Apr 92 01:12:46

In article <1992Apr12.071510.2846@ennews.eas.asu.edu> makowsky@enuxha.eas.asu.edu (David Makowsky) writes:
>   In article <JIME.92Apr12012428@bullwinkle.atc.ll.mit.edu> jime@bullwinkle.atc.ll.mit.edu (Jim Eggert x6127 g41) writes:
>   # In article <1992Apr12.014433.29249@ennews.eas.asu.edu> makowsky@enuxha.eas.asu.edu (David Makowsky) writes:
>   # >   In article <JIME.92Apr10223708@bullwinkle.atc.ll.mit.edu> jime@bullwinkle.atc.ll.mit.edu (Jim Eggert x6127 g41) writes:
>
>   # >   # >   # The other 95% [of the Israeli partition 
>   # >   # >   # not purchased by the pre-1948 Zionists]
>   # >   # >   # was ceded to the nascent Israel by the UN and the UK, ...
>   # >   # >   # partly because the Zionist terrorists were killing and murdering
>   # >   # >   # Arabs, Brits, and a UN mediator.
>
>   # >   # >	   Not only was this not a reason, but for the most part it falls
>   # >   # >   flat on its face as a lie/untruth.
>
>   # >   # How so?  Do you mean to imply that the Zionist terrorism was
>   # >   # _completely_ ineffectual against the British?  Nonsense.
>
>   # >	   Zionist resistance played a part.  Zionist terrorism, for the most
>   # >   part (there were minor exceptions) was (as it still is now) a figment
>   # >   of some propagandists' imaginations.
>
>   # Make up your mind.  First it was not a reason at all, now it did play
>   # a part.
>
>	   Instead of telling others to make up their mind, why do not you
>   read.  The small amount of actual Jewish terrorism did not play any
>   role in the British leaving.  Legitimate Jewish resistance did.

And now you have flopped back again.  First the Zionist terrorism did
not play a part, then it did, and now it didn't again.  I did read
your postings, and they are quoted above (yours appear after >'s).

Please make up your mind, and then post again.  Did the Zionist
terrorism perpetrated by the Irgun, the LEHI, and others in the years
1929-1948 contribute to the British backing out of the Palestinian
Mandate?  Cite your opinion, and any substantiation you may have.
--
=Jim  jime%atc.ll.mit.edu (Jim Eggert)
Xref: sparky misc.headlines:3291 soc.misc:453 talk.politics.mideast:10569 talk.politics.misc:17703
From: jime@bullwinkle.atc.ll.mit.edu (Jim Eggert x6127 g41)
Subject: Re: Want facts?  "WHO RUNS THE MEDIA?  The Alarming Facts"
Organization: MIT Lincoln Lab - Group 41
	<1992Apr12.070834.2636@ennews.eas.asu.edu>
	<JIME.92Apr13001541@bullwinkle.atc.ll.mit.edu>
	<1992Apr13.054206.5584@ennews.eas.asu.edu>
Date: 13 Apr 92 11:23:38

In article <1992Apr13.054206.5584@ennews.eas.asu.edu> makowsky@enuxha.eas.asu.edu (David Makowsky) writes:
>   In article <JIME.92Apr13001541@bullwinkle.atc.ll.mit.edu> jime@bullwinkle.atc.ll.mit.edu (Jim Eggert x6127 g41) writes:
>   # An interesting opinion.  In 1989 Israeli IDF Chief of Staff Shomron
>   # said "People ask why we don't end the intifada.  Anyone who wants to
>   # end the intifada must remember that there are only three ways to
>   # achieve this:  transfer of the Arab population of the areas,
>   # starvation, or physical elimination - that is genocide."
>
>	   So you agree with everything Shomron says?

I doubt it.

>   # Which of
>   # these or any other less wimpy policies would you support?
>
>	   The policy I support is transfer.  Without it there will be a
>   massive civil war that will make the intifada look like a sunday
>   school picnic (I know that transfer will lead to some violence, but
>   this violence will also look like a sunday school picnic when compared
>   with what will happen without transfer).  However, this is a long term
>   solution.  In the short term I support whatever policy will end the
>   intifada with the least amount of violence.  This may or may not
>   include one of Shomron's solutions.

Transfer to where?  You support the uprooting of a people from their
homes, and deportation to a land foreign to them?  When that happens
to the Jews, it is usually decried.  When it happens to the Arabs, you
support it.  Why?  It is against the Geneva Convention, anyway.




--
=Jim  jime%atc.ll.mit.edu (Jim Eggert)
Xref: sparky misc.headlines:3297 talk.politics.misc:17724 talk.politics.mideast:10572 soc.misc:456
From: maynard@b-cpu.UUCP (Maynard "the Main Nerd")
Newsgroups: misc.headlines,talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.mideast,soc.misc
Subject: Call Banished CPU for *REAL* Freedom of Speech!
Date: 10 Apr 92 02:49:07 GMT
Article-I.D.: b-cpu.gate.komZiB1w164w
Organization: Banished CPU, +1(503) 232-6566


 *YES*, you should certainly call Banished CPU!

 -=>  We support FREEDOM OF SPEECH!!  All points of view are welcome!
 -=>  Text and MS-DOS files available for download!
 -=>  FIRST-CALL ACCESS of 75 minutes/day and 1 meg/day download limit!
 -=>  No usage fees at this time!
 _______________________________________________________________________

      _Computer Bits_ magazine (of Portland, Oregon) PURPOSEFULLY
 CENSORED Banished CPU from their BBS list (as they finally admitted on
 04/09/92) and refuses to include us in any future BBS listings!  Why?
 I was told:  textfiles that challenge certain parts of the official
 "Holocaust story" (the worst thoughtcrime!) and a textfile on
 explosives, with information that can be found in public libraries!
 Also, they said they'd had "complaints" about Banished CPU.  Imagine
 that...

      Fight censorship and fascism!  Call Banished CPU, and tell other
 Freedom-loving people that *Banished CPU supports Freedom of Speech*,
 and give them our phone numbers!
 _______________________________________________________________________

 o  BBS software: RA v1.10 (both lines) and Waffle v1.64 (line 1 only)
 o  Relevant hardware:
   o  Intel 9600EX modem (v.32/42bis) and an Avatex 2400 modem
   o  675-meg 16ms Maxtor hard drive
   o  80386/33 with 8 megs 80ns RAM

      Support Freedom of Speech!  Read and speak FREELY about
 CONTROVERSIAL things that are CENSORED elsewhere!  Download and
 save COMPLETELY LEGAL (in the U.S.), EXTREMELY REVEALING texts --
 easily among the MOST FREQUENTLY CENSORED IN THE WORLD!  Exercise
 your right to Intellectual Freedom!

                          Keep freedom ALIVE!

                             Call today!!!

              Line 1:  (503) 232-6566 [2400-9600bps, v.32/42bis]
              Line 2:  (503) 232-5783 [300-2400bps]

                             Thank you.

                       Maynard "the Main Nerd"

-.-
Banished CPU supports FREEDOM OF SPEECH.  Currently no fees.
CALL:  +1(503) 232-6566 (8N1, v.32/42/bis) or +1(503) 232-5783 (8N1)
UUCP:  Path (..twiki!b-cpu) "ELIMINATED" BY ZIONIST THOUGHT POLICE!!!
Users of Banished CPU are solely responsible for their actions.
Newsgroups: misc.headlines,talk.politics.mideast
From: dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren)
Subject: Re: Arafat's Plane Missing in Libyan Desert
Organization: Brown University Department of Computer Science
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 13:32:28 GMT


Most recent - sources in Libya say Arafat survived the crash, although
some of the plane's crew were killed.

-Danny Keren.

Newsgroups: misc.headlines,soc.misc,talk.politics.mideast,talk.politics.misc,alt.revisionism
From: jime@bullwinkle.atc.ll.mit.edu (Jim Eggert x6127 g41)
Subject: Re: Want facts?  "WHO RUNS THE MEDIA?  The Alarming Facts"
Organization: MIT Lincoln Lab - Group 41
	<1992Apr12.014433.29249@ennews.eas.asu.edu>
	<JIME.92Apr12012706@bullwinkle.atc.ll.mit.edu>
	<1992Apr12.071917.2928@ennews.eas.asu.edu>
Date: 13 Apr 92 01:26:16

In article <1992Apr12.071917.2928@ennews.eas.asu.edu> makowsky@enuxha.eas.asu.edu (David Makowsky) writes:
>   In article <JIME.92Apr12012706@bullwinkle.atc.ll.mit.edu> jime@bullwinkle.atc.ll.mit.edu (Jim Eggert x6127 g41) writes:
>   # >	   However, Israel
>   # >   is the first local non imperial "power" to allow freedom of religious
>   # >   expression.
>
>   # Now as for the rest of your claim, it is so restrictive as to be
>   # meaningless.  Jerusalem has been under the control of various
>   # non-local governments for centuries.  Just which government are you
>   # comparing the present Israeli government with?  Not the British
>   # government.  Not the Ottoman Empire.  Not the Crusaders.  Not the
>   # Byzantine Empire.  Not the Roman Empire.  Not the Babylonians.  Not
>   # the Assyrians.  Perhaps the ancient Israelites, who were local after a
>   # fashion, and were hardly religiously tolerant.

>	   How petty can you get?  Fine.  I will amend my statement to be for
>   modern history.  Capish?

You still haven't answered the question.  Let me summaraze what I
think you are saying: "Israel is the first local non-imperial power in
modern history to allow freedom of religious expression."

My question is: What other local (to Jerusalem, I guess) non-imperial
power in modern history are you comparing Israel to?

--
=Jim  jime%atc.ll.mit.edu (Jim Eggert)
Newsgroups: misc.headlines