HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: hm@cs.brown.edu (Harry Mamaysky)
Subject: dual allegiance
Organization: Somewhere East or Somewhere West
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1992 16:58:37 GMT

In article <1en5q1INNlrd@manuel.anu.edu.au>, bdm@cs.anu.edu.au (Brendan McKay) writes:
|> In article 1elri7INN896@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu, bc744@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Mark Ira Kaufman) writes:
|> 
|> >   Jonathan Pollard is a criminal.  He engaged in espionage, and
|> >was convicted of this crime.  And though, as a Jew, I am glad he
|> >did it, 
|> 
|> I will save this for the next time you flame someone for suggesting
|> that American Jews have dual allegiance.
|>
|> Brendan.
|> 

Brendan, old pal, I would find it very disheartening if American Jews
did not have dual allegiance. That American Jews support Israel is a
very proud fact. That some American Jews don't is shameful. So,
contrary to the implication I get from your post, the dual allegiance
of American Jews is a very good and natural thing.

Harry.
From: dan@jonas.berkeley.edu (dan graves)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
Subject: Re: Jonathan Pollard...
Date: 23 Nov 1992 00:36:08 GMT
Organization: University of California Berkeley
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: jonas.berkeley.edu

In article <1ek55qINN6du@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu>, bc744@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Mark Ira Kaufman) writes:
|> 
|>    Jonathan Pollard is a man who is condemned to prison, for the
|> rest of his life. 

Rightly so; he is a traitor.  
He sold top secret information about the security
of this nation.  What was to be done with the information is 
irrelevant.  Who he sold it to is irrelevant. He compromised the
security of his country, therefore he is a traitor
As far as i am concerned, he is lucky he was
not executed.

dtg
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
From: adam@endor.uucp (Adam Shostack)
Subject: Re: MEQ #17: Ben-Gurion on Israeli expansi
Organization: Aiken Computation Lab, Harvard University
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 17:14:37 GMT

In article <1992Nov19.211814.15938@trl.oz.au> a.Faris@trl.oz.au  writes:
>In article <113@jcpltyo.JCPL.CO.JP>, ohayon@jcpltyo.JCPL.CO.JP (Tsiel Ohayon) writes:

>|> Do you have proof that Israel wanted that war badly? If Israel went to war in
>|> 67 it did not need to wait for the Arabs to make a mistake. It would therefore
>|> be at war every day!

>Yes, the first shot was fired by Israel. Israel had ordered a pre-emptive
>strike against Syria and Egypt strictly on the basis that their was troop
>movement on those countries borders. Therefore, Israel fired the first shot
>and invaded the Golan Heights and Sinai.

Israel fired the first shot after Egypt provided cuasus belli, in the
form of blockading the Straits of Tiran.  Quotes posted regularly by
Danny Keren show that Nasser knew the blockade would start a shooting
war, and was prepared to deal with it.

The strike was not pre-emptive, and it was certainly not unexpected.
It was merely more effective than the Arabs expected, which can be
traced to a failure of their intellegence services.

Adam
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.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
From: adam@endor.uucp (Adam Shostack)
Subject: Re: MEQ #17: Ben-Gurion on Israeli expansi
Organization: Aiken Computation Lab, Harvard University
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 16:32:25 GMT

In article <22914@venera.isi.edu> arens@ISI.EDU (Yigal Arens) writes:
>In article <BxvzMy.FJ6@news.cso.uiuc.edu> eshneken@ux4.cso.uiuc.edu (Edward A Shnekendorf) writes:
>> Jerusalem was annexed but the rest of the West Bank wasn't.  

>This is not quite accurate.  In 1968 Israel annexed East Jerusalem
>together with a significant portion of the surrounding West Bank,
>reaching almost to Bethlehem in the south and to Ramallah in the north.

Would you define significant?  I seem to remember it being 12km around
the city, so that the city itself would not be a border, and so that
future fighting would not take place in the city, but around it.

>The Israelis insist on referring to this whole area now as "Jerusalem"
>so that they can continue to make their argument about "not dividing the
>city".  The great majority of the annexed area was never part of any
>Jerusalem municipality, either in Israel itself, or during Jordanian
>rule, or at any other time.

Do you suggest that a Jerusalem itself should be a border?  There are
neighborhoods counted as part of Jerusalem which, if not for the 12 km
area of annexation, would be a border, and have the potential to be a
divided city in the future.


>Yigal Arens                                         TV made me do it!

Which should come as no suprise. :)





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.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
From: naftaly@supergas.dazixco.ingr.com (Naftaly Stramer)
Subject: Re: MEQ #17: Ben-Gurion on Israeli expansi
Reply-To: naftaly@dazixco.ingr.com
Organization: Dazix
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 18:07:49 GMT


In article <1992Nov22.232127.16939@trl.oz.au>, faris@sarcasm.trl.OZ.AU (Aziz Faris) writes:
>In article <1992Nov18.171803.14775@dazixco.ingr.com>, naftaly@supergas.dazixco.ingr.com (Naftaly Stramer) writes:
>|> 
>|> So now you became a furtune teller. Can you please tell me when I am going to win
>|> the lottery?
>
>After I win it.

Please tell me when you are.

>
>|> 
>|> The only reason Israel invaded PLO lend (now Lebanon) in 82 was the PLO forces 
>|> there and the terrorists attacks they launched against Israel. As for the Arabs
>|> being smarter to avoid conflicts, I hope this will continue so we will finally
>|> have peace in the area.
>
>Keep on wishing. Peace is only possible once Israel honors all outstanding UN
>resolutions and stops its Zionist and expansionist policy.

Can you please tell me what are the outstanding UN resolutions you refer too?

>
>A.Faris


Naftaly

----
Naftaly Stramer (303)581-2370, FAX (303)581-9972    Intergraph Corporation
Internet: naftaly@dazixco.ingr.com                  Electronics Division    
UUCP: ..uunet!ingr!dazixco!naftaly  	            5101 Spine Road
Please excuse my English			    Boulder, CO 80301
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
From: naftaly@supergas.dazixco.ingr.com (Naftaly Stramer)
Subject: Peace with Syria
Reply-To: naftaly@dazixco.ingr.com
Organization: Dazix
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 16:56:29 GMT


From Israeline 11/17/92

Syrian Deputy President Rejects Idea of Meetings Between Prominent
Israeli and Syrian Figures
 
Today's HA'ARETZ reports that 24 hours after Foreign Minister
Shimon Peres who was on a visit to Cairo reproposed the idea of a
meeting between Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and Syrian President
Hafez Assad, it has been rejected by Assad's deputy, Abd el-Halim
Hadam. "Everyone knows that for us, this issue (meetings between
senior Israeli and Syrian figures) is not up for discussion," said
Hadam in a Radio Monte Carlo interview marking 22 years of Assad
rule.
Today's DAVAR quotes Hadam, who said yesterday that Syria strives
for a just and comprehensive peace arrangement on the basis of U.N
resolutions 242 and 338. He claimed that even if such an
arrangement is achieved with Syria, it won't include relations with
Israel beyond what is required by resolution 242. Meaning, there
will be no normalization of relations between the two countries.


My comments:

So all they want is the Golan back. After that every direction is open for them.
This is the reason why Israel is willing to give back only parts of the Golan
hieght at first. With this attitude from the Syrians I am very pessimitic
regarding the peace talks between Israel and Syria.

---


Naftaly Stramer (303)581-2370, FAX (303)581-9972    Intergraph Corporation
Internet: naftaly@dazixco.ingr.com                  Electronics Division    
UUCP: ..uunet!ingr!dazixco!naftaly  	            5101 Spine Road
Please excuse my English			    Boulder, CO 80301
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
From: adam@endor.uucp (Adam Shostack)
Subject: Re: MEQ #17: Ben-Gurion on Israeli expansi
Organization: Aiken Computation Lab, Harvard University
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 21:49:08 GMT

In article <1992Nov17.205756.27098@trl.oz.au> a.Faris@trl.oz.au  writes:
>In article <1992Nov13.235034.28376@dazixco.ingr.com>, naftaly@supergas.dazixco.ingr.com (Naftaly Stramer) writes:

>|> Fist, Israel didn't annex the West Bank. Second, the Golan and the
>>> West Bank were lost by the Arabs in a war they started in 1967. 

>Thanks for the response I was wondering what had really taking place 25 years
>ago. If Israel had not annexed the West Bank, why did Jerusalem become its
>Capital?. You also forgot to state that it was a war Israel was praying to
>happen.

Israel annexed parts of Jerusalem and surrounding land, it did not
annex the rest of Judea and Samaria in the hopes that that land could
be trade for peace.  Jerusalem has always been the capital of Israel,
and it "became" the capital of Israel in recognition of the central
position it has always held as the spiritual home of the Jews.

Could you show how Israel was "praying" for a war in 1967?  Does it
have to do with forcing Nasser to close the Straits of Hormuz, knowing
that that would lead to war?

Adam



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.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
From: jake@bony1.bony.com (Jake Livni)
Subject: Re: MEQ #17: Ben-Gurion on Israeli expansi
Organization: The Department of Redundancy Department
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 92 16:08:21 GMT

In article <1992Nov17.211026.27509@trl.oz.au> a.Faris@trl.oz.au  writes:

>So Israel is the strongest country in the M.E. and every one is at its mercy.
>It took the Golan heights in six days because it wanted it so bad. Where does
>one go from here?.
>
>A.Faris

If Syria's Assad would act rationally, he might've sought peace with
such a power.  But noooooo, he continued the Holy Fight.  On one day
that didn't work well for him, he lost 80 Syrian aircraft in dogfights
with Israeli pilots - and still hasn't learned.

Israelis aren't going to let their land become another Syrian Hama,
and won't be intimidated by Arab agression.  Why not accept Israel in
peace as a neighbor?  (And, no, not a neighbor in psuedo-peace like
Iran/Iraq, Syria/Iraq, Syria/Jordan, Iraq/Kuwait, Syria/Lebanon, etc.)




-- 
Jake Livni  jake@bony1.bony.com              10 years from now, George Bush will
American-Occupied New York                   have replaced Jimmy Carter as the
My opinions only - employer has no opinions. standard of a failed President.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
From: adam@endor.uucp (Adam Shostack)
Subject: Re: Malik Shabazz, Islam and Anti-Semitism...
Organization: Aiken Computation Lab, Harvard University
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 20:16:11 GMT

In article <22921@venera.isi.edu> arens@ISI.EDU (Yigal Arens) writes:
>In article <1992Nov16.142553.15082@cs.brown.edu> dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren) writes:
>> The declaration of independance does include something like a bill of
>> rights, but I agree it is not a good enough substitute.

>The Israeli declaration of independece does not really include much in
>the way of a statement of civil rights.  It states that all citizens of
>the state will treated equally without regard to sex, religion, race,
>and a few other characteristics which I don't recall right now.  The
>declaration does not have the force of law, but in recent years the
>Israeli Supreme Court (noting the absence of any law guaranteeing
>freedoms and rights) has used it to infer some of the rights typically
>associated with a democratic state, e.g., the freedom to demonstrate,
>and more.  One glaring ommission from the declaration, and certainly not
>an unintended oversight, is any reference to equality irrespective of
>*nationality* (le'om).  That would appear to be the matter under
>discussion here.

In fact, no country, to the best of my knowledge, guarantees equal
rights to any person of any nationality.  If a person residing in the
United States tries to get a job, they can, quite rightly, be denied
that job if they are not an American citizen (and don't have a green
card.)  If they are refused the job of grounds of race or religion,
they are being illegally descriminated against.

If someone living in Israel, by choice or by fate, not an Israeli
citizen, their basic rights should still be maintained, but they
should not expect to be treated as an Israeli citizen.

(On a side note, does anyone know what happened to the proposal from
Justice several years back that would have allowed closed trials of
suspected drug dealers who were not US citizens?)

Adam


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.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
From: adam@endor.uucp (Adam Shostack)
Subject: Husseini statement censored by Zionist media
Organization: Aiken Computation Lab, Harvard University
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 22:02:18 GMT

"We must force the Israeli society to establish mutual relations with a
society bigger than it [the Arabs].  That is, our Arab society, following
which it will be possible to gradually dissolve the Zionist entity."

        Faisal Husseini, speaking to the Arab Youth Club in Amman, Jordan,
        quoted in "Ha'aretz", 11/15/92



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.
From: rothberg@bimacs.BITNET (Danny Rothenberg)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
Subject: Re: MEQ #17: Ben-Gurion on Israeli expansi
Date: 19 Nov 92 18:51:02 GMT
Organization: Math department, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, ISRAEL

In article <1992Nov17.211026.27509@trl.oz.au> a.Faris@trl.oz.au writes:
>In article <4457@bimacs.BITNET>, rothberg@bimacs.BITNET (Danny Rothenberg) writes:
>|>
>|> Just a small point, but Israel did not take the Golan until towards
>|> the end of the Six-Day War in 1967.  (BTW why do non-Jews insist on
>|> calling it just the '1967 War'?  Is it because they are afraid to
>|> admit to the fact that Israel won so convincingly in such a short
>|> time?)  Israel would not have scaled the Heights had it not been for
>|> the fact that Syria joined in the war and Israel had no choice but to
>|> open a third front (after (a) Egypt & (b) Jordan) which happenned to
>|> mean that Israel took control of the Golan.  Nobody in Israel was too
>|> upset at Israel's taking control as the Heights command the Gallilee
>|> (go up and take a look) and the Syrians had been shelling the
>|> residents of the Gallilee continuously from 1948 until 1967 when
>|> Israel at last wrested control from Syria.
>> rothberg@bimacs.cs.biu.ac.il |     V
>|> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>So Israel is the strongest country in the M.E. and every one is at its mercy.
>It took the Golan heights in six days because it wanted it so bad. Where does
                              ^^^^^^^^
>one go from here?.
>
>A.Faris

Six days?  It took just two days, if that, to conquer the Golan :-)
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Danny Rothenberg             |     ^
Bitnet:                      |  \-/-\-/  "He's not the messaiah.  He's a
rothberg@bimacs              |   X   X    very naughty boy."
Internet:                    |  /-\-/-\                        - Brian's Mum
rothberg@bimacs.cs.biu.ac.il |     V
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
From: naftaly@supergas.dazixco.ingr.com (Naftaly Stramer)
Subject: Re: MEQ #17: Ben-Gurion on Israeli expansi
Reply-To: naftaly@dazixco.ingr.com
Organization: Dazix
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 17:18:03 GMT


In article <1992Nov17.210335.27283@trl.oz.au>, faris@sarcasm.trl.OZ.AU (Aziz Faris) writes:
>In article <1992Nov16.172820.16188@dazixco.ingr.com>, naftaly@supergas.dazixco.ingr.com (Naftaly Stramer) writes:
>|> 
>|> Israel occupied the Golan Hieghts only after Syria joined Egypt in a war against
>|> Israel in 1967. 
>|> 
>|> 
> Israel wanted that war so badly that it would have invaded Syria regardless.

So now you became a furtune teller. Can you please tell me when I am going to win
the lottery?

> Fortunately for Israel, you had people like Golda Meyer and Moshe Dyan who
> were patient and allow the Arabs to make a mistake.
> 
> Israel invaded Lebanon in 82 because it wanted south Lebanon and could not
> wait for another war since the Arabs became smarter and avoided conflicts
> at all cost.

The only reason Israel invaded PLO lend (now Lebanon) in 82 was the PLO forces 
there and the terrorists attacks they launched against Israel. As for the Arabs
being smarter to avoid conflicts, I hope this will continue so we will finally
have peace in the area.
 
> 
> A.Faris


----
Naftaly Stramer (303)581-2370, FAX (303)581-9972    Intergraph Corporation
Internet: naftaly@dazixco.ingr.com                  Electronics Division    
UUCP: ..uunet!ingr!dazixco!naftaly  	            5101 Spine Road
Please excuse my English			    Boulder, CO 80301
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
From: eshneken@ux4.cso.uiuc.edu (Edward A Shnekendorf)
Subject: Re: Jonathan Pollard...
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 19:25:28 GMT

jeremy@castle.ed.ac.uk (Jeremy Henderson) writes:

>In article <1992Nov22.192135.558@das.harvard.edu> adam@endor.uucp (Adam Shostack) writes:
>~
>~His fate was worse than that of several genuine traiotrs, like the
>~Walker family, who sold secrets to the Soviets for years.

>But not, of course, as bad as that meted out to Mordechai Vanunu (sp?), who
>also acted according to his own conscience, and was illegally kidnapped and
>imprisoned in inhumane conditions.

Vanunu's situation was different, BUT even if you accept that they are the same,
Pollard suffered more.  Vannu gets out of prison in 12 years - Pollard NEVER
gets out.  Vanunu hurt the security of Israel (and was Palestinian sypathizer
- whether it was a decision of conscience or not is not certain), Pollard didn't
hurt U.S. security and NEVER sympathized with America's enemies. In fact, his
information regarded foiling the plans of one of America's enemies, namely Iraq.


Ed.





>-- 
>===Jeremy Henderson===jeremy@castle.ed.ac.uk=          

>Seen on rec.arts.books "Characters and plot are the exemplar components
>of mundane fiction. I do not care to see them at all"
From: arens@ISI.EDU (Yigal Arens)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
Subject: Re: Malik Shabazz, Islam and Anti-Semitism...
Date: 19 Nov 92 05:51:03 GMT
Organization: USC/Information Sciences Institute
In-reply-to: dzk@cs.brown.edu's message of 18 Nov 92 15:27:23 GMT

In article <1992Nov18.152723.12638@cs.brown.edu> dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren) writes:
>
> lkk@panix.com (Larry Kolodney) writes:
> #dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren) writes:
>
> #BTW, Yeshiva students, who are exmempt from service, somehow still get
> #these benefits.
>
> That is a fact that nearly all Israelis find infuriating and vigorously
> protest. Unfortunately that's how the political system in Israel
> works, with the religious parties exorting the state for benefits.

The interesting point, though, is that even Yeshiva students (and other
Jews) who do not serve end up being classified as though they had,
through a clever wording of the pertinent law.  This can be taken as
further evidence that the intent is to generally exclude Arabs -- and
not simply *anyone* who does not serve in the military -- from receiving
the benefits in question.
--
Yigal Arens
USC/ISI                                                TV made me do it!
arens@isi.edu
From: aaldoubo@copper.denver.colorado.edu (Shahzaadee)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
Subject: Re: Islam versus Religion
Date: 23 Nov 92 02:44:19 GMT
Organization: University of Colorado at Denver

I wrote:

>I agree with you very much, David, but I feel a little uncomfortable with
>the word beduin because you seem to suggest that it was confined to these
>people only.  The message of Islam reached so many different people - from
>the cities (remember that Mecca was a major city of interest and trade) as
			   ^^^^^

Clarification ... I meant Medina.  Excuse me ... ;-?

Anisa
From: bdm@cs.anu.edu.au (Brendan McKay)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
Subject: Re: Kahan Commission
Date: 16 Nov 1992 03:34:24 GMT
Organization: Australian National University
Distribution: world
Reply-To: bdm@cs.anu.edu.au
NNTP-Posting-Host: 150.203.23.70

In article 1e6141INN9b4@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu, bc744@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Mark Ira Kaufman) writes:

>   I would like to ask Brendan McKay how this massacre in the two
>refugee camps could have been predicted.  Are you saying that the
>Israelis ordered them into the camps, believing that these people
>would start slaughtering men, women, and children?  That seems to
>be what you are implying.  Are you saying that Sharon anticipated
>these massacres?  On what do you base such an assumption?

Sigh.  I made no such assumption.  You are so eager to paint me with
one of your silly brushes that you are reading what you want to read
into my postings.  Why don't you read what I actually write for a
change?  I have a full copy of the Kahan report (except the secret
appendix) beside me.  I read it all and so far I have not made any
claim which was not a finding of that commission.  (I might have
phrased it in less diplomatic language than they did.)  Have you
read it at all?

>   And with regard to the Time magazine lawsuit, they claimed Mr.
>Sharon ordered the attacks, and knew that they were taking place.
>It was proven in court that Time magazine lied.  By this, I mean
>they printed false claims about Mr. Sharon, and it was proven in
>court that Time KNEW their claims were false.

Sharon only had to establish that Time could not prove what they 
claimed about him.  As to what was actually proven in court, the 
important evidence was heard in secret so how do you know what it was?

>   And as far as my knowledge of what goes on in the mideast, it
>will stack up against your puny pile of selected data.  Your are
>either ignorant of the whole picture, or you know more than what
>you choose to post, but you are so biased, that your selectivity
>as made you a liar.  
>   I repeat that there is more than enough on Sharon to show him
>as the creep that he is.  So why do truth a disservice, by doing
>what you do?  You, Mr. McKay, are a bigot.  You are incapable of
>being objective about Israel, or Jews.

I love you too, Mark.  By the way, it's Dr. McKay but you can
call me Brendan.

Brendan.
From: shaig@Think.COM (Shai Guday)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
Subject: Re: MEQ #17: Ben-Gurion on Israeli expansi
Date: 23 Nov 1992 14:45:21 GMT
Organization: Thinking Machines Corporation, Cambridge MA, USA
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: merlin.think.com

In article <1992Nov23.010744.22017@trl.oz.au>, faris@sarcasm.trl.OZ.AU (Aziz Faris) writes:
|> In article <1992Nov19.160231.12468@bony1.bony.com>, jake@bony1.bony.com (Jake Livni) writes:
|> |> 
|> |> How can Israel divert even one drop from the East Bank?  The East Bank
|> |> (of the Jordan River) is on the other side of the river from the West
|> |> Bank  --  by definition!
|> |> 
|> |> What a dope!
|> 
|> The water is diverted from away from the east bank ASS HOLE.
|> 
|> A.Faris

Interesting post, considering that Israel and Jordan have unofficially
cooperated on these issues and have some form of working relationship.

Any hard evidence to substantiate this flight of fancy?
Official Jordanian protests lodged over water diversion for example?
Or could this be a flight of fancy generated by our new resident
proctologist?
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast