HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: davidba@carmel.technion.ac.il (David Ben_Ami)
Subject: Re: Anti-Arab racism on the net
Organization: Technion, Israel Inst. of Technology
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 13:19:57 GMT

In article <1992Sep22.234913.2413565@locus.com> jle@locus.com (John Elghani/10000000) writes:
>In article <1992Sep22.214400.24408@colorado.edu> perlman@qso.Colorado.EDU (Eric S. Perlman) writes:
>>In article <1992Sep22.155548.29602@Princeton.EDU> egnilges@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Ed Nilges) writes:
>>>In article <1992Sep21.165053.15392@das.harvard.edu> adam@sparkle.uucp (Adam Shostack) writes:
>>>>
>>>>Palestine was created, in theory, by the UN.  It was destroyed before
>>>>it had any form of government.
>>>
>>>How odd, you could fly to "Haifa, Palestine" in 1938 according to my old
>>>airline scheds.  The Palestine state was part of the Ottoman Empire
>>>until WWI, then it was a British mandate until 1948.
>>
>>Except that under the british mandate there was no government of local
>>people, if you will.  So Adam is correct on this one.
>
>Oh really?  Why did Lebanon the state remain Lebanon and Palestine
>became Israel.  If the European Thieves of Palestine chose Lebanon
>instead of Palestine, then you'll be hypocritically arguing against
>Lebanon's pre-existence of Israel.
>
>Palestine happened to be the unlucky nation to be selected by the
>European Mafia.  It could've been Egypt, where similar claims
>can be stated as those made against Palestine.

Can you say 'The Elders of Zion'? it seems Elgahni is walking in the
bootsteps of Hitler!
>
>It seems that you guys deny so many facts, and wish to beat around the
>bush.  I think the future will be:   Israel will expand, then will
>fully shrink by fundamentalists just because many of you guys think like
>Adam (facts deniers).

Facts????
Did Elgahni read the Bible? Can he really claim that it was fabricated
by the Zionist/European Mafia? The only country that the Jews had as a
Homeland is Palestine! neither Egypt, nor Lebanon or any other part od
the world played the role of Palestine in Jewish History from 3500 years.
I suggest Elgahni read the Bible again and also see the movie "Holocaust"
to understand what "Europeans" came to Palestine and in what circumstances.

David.

>
>jle
>


--
=============================================================================
  David Ben-Ami (irc: bigdav)      |   "I can resist anything but Temptation"
  s2780369@Techst02.Technion.Ac.Il |       Oscar Wilde
  davidba@Carmel.Technion.Ac.Il  davidba@Moav.Techniona.Ac.Il
Organization: Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct,talk.politics.mideast
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 08:06:03 -0400 
From: Radu Eugen Edelstein <re0x+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: Anti-Arab racism on the net
	<1992Sep22.155548.29602@Princeton.EDU>

Mr. Nilges, you write:
>How odd, you could fly to "Haifa, Palestine" in 1938 according to my old
>airline scheds.  The Palestine state was part of the Ottoman Empire
>until WWI, then it was a British mandate until 1948.  This is real
>existence, and by normal postcolonial logic it should have graduated to
>a free Palestine.  This process was diverted into the creation of the
>state of Israel and the concomitant destruction of Palestine.  No, I
>have no problems with the state of Israel, but why not Israel and
>Palestine side by side?

First of all, you contradict yourself (a "state" *can not* be a part
of an empire).  Second, the Romans are the ones who, almost 2,000
years ago, changed the name of the land from Israel (or Judea), to
Palestine.  Thus, the inhabitants of the land at the time (the Jews)
were the first ones to be called Palesinians.  The name of Palestinians
was still being applied to the Jewish inhabitants of the area, at the
begining of this century.
Your theory is simply an aberation.  Why don't you consult a history
book before making up such a story?  If you would, you could at least 
include some real facts and thus offer a chance for your being taken
seriously. 
And by the way, I like reading some anti-colonial stuff.  It reminds
me of the good all times in the Communist country I fled.  We had it
all they long on the radio and TV, and I miss it here...    :-)

Rad

Xref: sparky alt.politics.correct:5610 alt.politics.elections:15249
From: wolfone@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Patrick Chester)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct,alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: damning statistics
Date: 6 Oct 92 09:01:53 GMT
Followup-To: alt.politics.correct
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin TX

Just remember that old saying about the three kinds of lies:

Lies,
Damn Lies,
and....

STATISTICS!! :)


My apologies to Ed Nilges for not doing my homework and providing a 1000
word position paper on lies. Oops ;)
-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Patrick Chester            |"The earth is too fragile a basket in which to keep
wolfone@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu |  all your eggs." Robert A. Heinlein
Politically Incorrect      |"The meek shall inherit the earth. The rest of us
Future Lunar Colonist      |  are going to the stars." Anonymous
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct
From: dsteinbe@nmsu.edu (David Steinberg)
Subject: free speech
Organization: NMSU Computer Science
Distribution: alt.politics.correct
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 17:14:01 GMT

Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct
From: john@anasazi.com (John R. Moore)
Subject: Re: Clinton's Cabinet (humorous suggestions)
Reply-To: john@anasazi.com
Organization: Anasazi Inc, Phoenix AZ USA
Distribution: usa
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 16:59:32 GMT

Keywords: 

In article <1992Sep13.091614.9827@leland.Stanford.EDU> farthing@leland.Stanford.EDU (ljf) writes:
]The point is that for much of the time, military personnel live a life
]very similar to anyone with a 9-to-5 job.
]
]>Obviously you know NOTHING about military life. Try living in a condo
]>when you are at sea for 8 months! Try it when you are stations in
]>someplace where the only living quarters are barracks. Try it when
]>everyone lives in a tent (you DO remember Desert Storm, don't you)?
]>
]>Sheesh!
]
]So?  What does any of that have to do with lesbigay military
]personnel?  They are at sea for 8 months.  Some went to Desert Storm
]and then came back and were forced out of the military for being
]lesbigay.

Well, you were arguing that military life is like living in an apartment
or dormitory, when it is simply not true in general, and in those cases where it
is true, it is irrelevant.
]
]What is the big deal about having someone of the same sex finding you
]sexually attractive?  As long as it isn't sexual harassment, why does
]it bother you?  After all, out of the 40 rapes reported during
]Operation Desert Storm, all of them were men raping women.

It doesn't bother me, but when I was in the military, most of the people
I knew would respond VIOLENTLY if they suspected such a thing. There was
even a person here on the net who said he would respond to a homosexual
proposition with his fist. I don't condone such behavior, but unless
things have changed a lot, that attitude is common among you men
in the military. I don't think the military should be used as a place
for social experimentation - there are too many lives at stake. I don't
want the guys in charge of nuclear weapons in a bad state of mind because
there is homophobia in action.


-- 
John Moore NJ7E, 7525 Clearwater Pkwy, Scottsdale, AZ 85253  (602-951-9326)
john@anasazi.com ncar!noao!asuvax!anasaz!john anasaz!john@asuvax.eas.asu.edu
 - - Support ALL ...erk  glugh   mmpph.... Memory fault (core dumped)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct,alt.politics.marrou,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
From: sean@cae.wisc.edu (Sean Rutledge)
Subject: Re: Legislation of morality
Organization: U of Wisconsin-Madison College of Engineering
Distribution: usa
Date: 5 Oct 92 10:24:34 CDT

In article <BvII61.EBz@mail.boi.hp.com> kde@boi.hp.com (Keith Emmen) writes:
>sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth) writes:
>> What gets ridiculous about the whole AIDS issue is that people keep saying
>> "Anyone can get it".  But take a look at how it is spread, and take a look
>> at what the high-risk groups are.  How can I get it if I don't do any of
>> the things that would expose someone to it??  I figure, if you don't shoot
>> drugs, and practice abstinence (I'll get flamed as a prude on this one, what's
>> wrong if I have self-control?/), you chances of getting it drop to near zero.
>> Am I wrong here??
>
>The definition of high risk behavior is becoming broader all the time.  As 
>more people get the virus, it becomes more and more of a heterosexual 
>problem.  I spent some time in Africa last winter, and AIDs is *not* a 
>homosexual or drug-users disease.  It is rampant in the whole population.  

I read that this is due to the different sex practices in Africa.  Contraceptives
are relatively expensive for poor people.  To practice cost-effective birth
control, anal sex is used.  This is especially true in the cities for
prostitutes.

This practice is high risk.  These Africans are NOT practicing safe sex.


sean rutledge                              murphy was an optimist!!!
sean@cae.wisc.edu

Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct,alt.politics.elections
From: garrett@Ingres.COM (QUOTE OF THE YEAR)
Subject: Re: damning statistics
Summary: Old post  
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.4-b1  
Keywords: 
Organization: ASK Computer Systems, Ingres Product Division
Date: 29 Sep 92 02:36:54 GMT

In article <EekuXCq00WBMM7xeVS@andrew.cmu.edu>, Andrew E Johnson <aj1j+@andrew.cm writes...
>I am looking for a series of statistics
>that are most damning of the Bush administration. 
> 
These stats are from an old post (don't have the originator).

From the Sept./Oct. of Mother Jones

During the last four years: 

National Debt: + up 57% (1,477,000,000,000)
Budget Deficit: + up 157% (244,500,000,000)
Americans unemployed for 6 months or longer: +up 133% (1,127,000)
Mean Annual income of the poorest one-fifth: -$54 down .5%
Hourly earling for blue collar workers: -$1 down 10%
Number of millionaires: +28,100 up 81%
Americans without health insurance: +4,600,000 up 15%
Families recieving AFDC: +944,000 up 25%
Median monthly payment to those families: -$49.26 down 12%
Children liveing in poverty: +500,000 up 4%
Violent crimes: +95,278 up 21%
Americans in prison: +177,122 up 28%
Americans on death row: +464 up 22%

	Hope this helps. Some posts really strike home so I keep 
them around. This is one of them.

-Garrett
Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct
From: gdsimpso@unix.amherst.edu (GILBERTO DANIEL SIMPSON)
Subject: Latino E-Mailing List
Organization: Amherst College
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 02:31:07 GMT
From: "tom betz" <tom.betz@execnet.com>
Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct
Subject: willie horton: one last t
Date: 1 Oct 92 09:47:10 EST
Reply-To: "tom betz" <tom.betz@execnet.com>
Distribution: alt
Organization: Executive Networks Information

Quoth Mark Gansle regarding WILLIE HORTON: ONE LAST T on 09-27-92:

MG>:An independent committee to elect George Bush airs (and the official
MG>campaign staff never tries to get them to stop from airing) an ad whic
MG>*names* Willie Horton and explains that what he did while on parole.
MG>The ad never mentions Willie Horton's race.

It didn't have to.  

I saw that ad.

It showed his mug shot.





---
  WinQwk 2.0 a#299  My name is George Bush and I'm running from my record.
--
Executive Network Information System  (914) 667-4567
International ILink Host
From: choy@skorpio.usask.ca (I am a terminator.)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct
Subject: Hands off
Date: 6 Oct 92 01:30:33 GMT
Organization: University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada

Starfleet's prime directive is to avoid interference with other cultures
and worlds. The idea is to let nature run its course for fear that man
can damage or imperil due to ignorance, insensitivity, clashing alliances,
and other complex headaches. My criticism of this idea is that
interference and influence from complex societies may well be part of
the natural course in the universe. It's all coin tossing. Heads may
lead to a winner or a loser. Even if heads leads to many losers, the
history of societies is so full of variables that it may be just a
jinx. Politicians must be bold and have to keep their eyes open and
their wits about them.

Henry Choy
choy@cs.usask.ca
Xref: sparky alt.politics.correct:5517 talk.politics.mideast:20613
From: d9bertil@dtek.chalmers.se (Bertil Jonell)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct,talk.politics.mideast
Subject: Re: What is a terrorist
Date: 28 Sep 92 10:40:26 GMT
Organization: Chalmers University of Technology

In article <1992Sep26.043918.27496@das.harvard.edu> adam@endor.uucp (Adam Shostack) writes:
>In a recent posting, Ed Nigles (egnilges@phoenix.Princeton.EDU)
>claimed that Sweden was not a terrorist state, under a definition he
>posted.
>
>I pulled this off of sci.military, about recent Swedish behavior:

  ..which suggests rather strongly that Nigles definition is in error:)

  I'll take this opportunity to push my own definitions:

Military intentionally targets military: war
Military intentionally targets guerilla: counter-insurgency
Military intentionally targets civilians: warcrime
Guerilla intentionally targets military: guerilla-war
Guerilla intentionally targets guerilla: very dirty
Guerilla intentionally targets civilians: terrorism
Civilians intentionally targets military: becomes combattant (guerilla)
Civilians intentionally targets guerilla: becomes combattant
Civilians intentionally targets civilians: 'normal' crimes

  Depending on how you define unannounced hostile intrusions by unconventional
forces, the Swedish Navy is thus engaged in either war or counter-insurgency, 
not terrorism:)

>Adam Shostack 					adam@das.harvard.edu

-bertil-
--
"It can be shown that for any nutty theory, beyond-the-fringe political view or
 strange religion there exists a proponent on the Net. The proof is left as an
 exercise for your kill-file."
"This is the famous Hasan B Mutlu-trigger, insert it in your .sig file today!"
Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct
From: robart@agora.rain.com (Robert Barton)
Subject: Re: Free Speech ? ?
Organization: Organization
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 23:42:19 GMT

In article <1992Sep28.163644.13484@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> regeorge@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Robert E George) writes:
>[1] In early 1951, Harry S Truman (Democrat) was President of the United
>States. General of the Army Douglas MacArthur was commander of U.S.
>armed forces in the Far East. General MacArthur wrote a letter to a
>(Republican) politician; statements in that letter convinced President
>Truman that General MacArthur did not fully support the Far Eastern
>policy that he (President Truman) had developed. Consequently, President
>Truman used his constitutional power to relieve General MacArthur of
>his command. 
>        Was General MacArthur deprived of his rights of free speech?

  Of course not.  He exercised his right of free speech when he wrote the letter.

>[2] In the late 1960's, Edward Heath was Leader of the Opposition
>(Conservatives) in the U.K. Enoch Powell held an important post in
>the Shadow Cabinet (meaning that if and when the Conservatives stopped
>being the Opposition and became Her Majesty's Government, Mr. Powell
>was slated to receive an important post in HMG). Mr. Powell delivered
>a speech in which he seemed (to Mr. Heath, and others) to advocate
>making life in Britain very uncomfortable for immigrants of African
>descent, with the goal of inducing them to leave. Mr. Heath therefore
>dismissed Mr. Powell from the Shadow Cabinet.
>        Was Mr. Powell deprived of his rights of free speech?

  Of course not.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct
Subject: Re: Free Speech ? ?
From: mzener@eagle.wesleyan.edu
Date: 28 Sep 92 17:51:00 EDT
Organization: Wesleyan University

> [1] In early 1951, Harry S Truman (Democrat) was President of the United
> States. General of the Army Douglas MacArthur was commander of U.S.
> armed forces in the Far East. General MacArthur wrote a letter to a
> (Republican) politician; statements in that letter convinced President
> Truman that General MacArthur did not fully support the Far Eastern
> policy that he (President Truman) had developed. Consequently, President
> Truman used his constitutional power to relieve General MacArthur of
> his command. 
>         Was General MacArthur deprived of his rights of free speech?

   No.  His employer, the executive branch, decided that he would not be the
best man for the job.  General MacArthur was not jailed, fined, or any such
thing;  his military pension was not revoked, and Americans were not called on
to view him as an outcast.

> [2] In the late 1960's, Edward Heath was Leader of the Opposition
> (Conservatives) in the U.K. Enoch Powell held an important post in
> the Shadow Cabinet (meaning that if and when the Conservatives stopped
> being the Opposition and became Her Majesty's Government, Mr. Powell
> was slated to receive an important post in HMG). Mr. Powell delivered
> a speech in which he seemed (to Mr. Heath, and others) to advocate
> making life in Britain very uncomfortable for immigrants of African
> descent, with the goal of inducing them to leave. Mr. Heath therefore
> dismissed Mr. Powell from the Shadow Cabinet.
>         Was Mr. Powell deprived of his rights of free speech?

   No.  Again, his fellow party members decided that his political views were
not on line his theirs, so they reduced his authority in that party.  They did
not imprison him, bar him from holding those views, nor restrict his ability to
go off and form a party all on his own.
   Freedom of speech doesn't mean you'll be free from bearing all consequences
of letting your thoughts be known, just the more serious ones.

Max Zener
Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct
From: regeorge@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Robert E George)
Subject: Free Speech ? ?
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 16:36:44 GMT

I pose two questions about free speech (both drawn from the pre-PC
era, but I notice free speech is a topic much mentioned in this group):

[1] In early 1951, Harry S Truman (Democrat) was President of the United
States. General of the Army Douglas MacArthur was commander of U.S.
armed forces in the Far East. General MacArthur wrote a letter to a
(Republican) politician; statements in that letter convinced President
Truman that General MacArthur did not fully support the Far Eastern
policy that he (President Truman) had developed. Consequently, President
Truman used his constitutional power to relieve General MacArthur of
his command. 
        Was General MacArthur deprived of his rights of free speech?
[2] In the late 1960's, Edward Heath was Leader of the Opposition
(Conservatives) in the U.K. Enoch Powell held an important post in
the Shadow Cabinet (meaning that if and when the Conservatives stopped
being the Opposition and became Her Majesty's Government, Mr. Powell
was slated to receive an important post in HMG). Mr. Powell delivered
a speech in which he seemed (to Mr. Heath, and others) to advocate
making life in Britain very uncomfortable for immigrants of African
descent, with the goal of inducing them to leave. Mr. Heath therefore
dismissed Mr. Powell from the Shadow Cabinet.
        Was Mr. Powell deprived of his rights of free speech?

Robert George
(speaking only for myself)

"The very essence of individual freedom is equal justice under a rule of
law, a law to which every man shall be subject and which no executive
can modify."
    Senator Robert Taft , March 11, 1944
Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct
From: holly@mailhub.scf.lmsc.lockheed.com (Holly Wise)
Subject: Question Get
Summary: Request numbered list of questions
Organization: Lockheed Santa Cruz, CA.
Distribution: clinton-wins@mail.clinton-gore.org
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 92 19:40:38 GMT

-----
holly@mailhub.scf.lmsc.lockheed.com
Xref: sparky alt.politics.correct:5489 talk.politics.mideast:20577
From: adam@endor.uucp (Adam Shostack)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct,talk.politics.mideast
Subject: What is a terrorist
Date: 26 Sep 92 04:39:18 GMT
Organization: Aiken Computation Lab, Harvard University


In a recent posting, Ed Nigles (egnilges@phoenix.Princeton.EDU)
claimed that Sweden was not a terrorist state, under a definition he
posted.

I pulled this off of sci.military, about recent Swedish behavior:

[ASW is Anti-Submarine Warfare]


Newsgroups: sci.military
From: Urban F <urf@ki.icl.se>
Subject: ASW in Sweden last week
Organization: None. I speak only for myself.
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 1992 16:29:42 GMT



>From Urban F <urf@ki.icl.se>

Sunday 13:th Sept. the Swedish corvette _Go"teborg_ launched a
fully armed, target seeking anti-submarine torpedo. It missed,
the explanation beeing that "target seeker settings can be made
before launch, a setting was chosen which probably made it
confused by the presence of Swedish surface units, but the ship's
commander had a good reason to use that setting". This was the
first time a torpedo was used in Swedish ASW operations. As of
yesterday the torpedo hadn't been recovered.

The supreme commander says: "Our goal is to sink a sub." and "We
have no absolutely conclusive evidence as to the nationality of
the intruder."

Our prime ministers says: "There are indications the sub is
Russian." (But, please, lets keep the discussion about whether
the subs exist and if so from where they come from this group.)
Adam Shostack 					adam@das.harvard.edu

What a terrible thing to have lost one's .sig.  Or not to have a .sig
at all.  How true that is.      
Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct
From: john@anasazi.com (John R. Moore)
Subject: Re: Clinton's Cabinet (humorous suggestions)
Reply-To: john@anasazi.com
Organization: Anasazi Inc, Phoenix AZ USA
Distribution: usa
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 17:01:03 GMT

Keywords: 

In article <1992Sep13.091614.9827@leland.Stanford.EDU> farthing@leland.Stanford.EDU (ljf) writes:
]The point is that for much of the time, military personnel live a life
]very similar to anyone with a 9-to-5 job.
]
]>Obviously you know NOTHING about military life. Try living in a condo
]>when you are at sea for 8 months! Try it when you are stations in
]>someplace where the only living quarters are barracks. Try it when
]>everyone lives in a tent (you DO remember Desert Storm, don't you)?
]>
]>Sheesh!
]
]So?  What does any of that have to do with lesbigay military
]personnel?  They are at sea for 8 months.  Some went to Desert Storm
]and then came back and were forced out of the military for being
]lesbigay.

Well, you were arguing that military life is like living in an apartment
or dormitory, when it is simply not true in general, and in those cases where it
is true, it is irrelevant.
]
]What is the big deal about having someone of the same sex finding you
]sexually attractive?  As long as it isn't sexual harassment, why does
]it bother you?  After all, out of the 40 rapes reported during
]Operation Desert Storm, all of them were men raping women.

It wouldn't bother me, but when I was in the military, most of the people
I knew would respond VIOLENTLY if they suspected such a thing. There was
even a person here on the net who said he would respond to a homosexual
proposition with his fist. I don't condone such behavior, but unless
things have changed a lot, that attitude is common among young men
in the military. I don't think the military should be used as a place
for social experimentation - there are too many lives at stake. I don't
want the guys in charge of nuclear weapons in a bad state of mind because
there is homophobia in action.

-- 
John Moore NJ7E, 7525 Clearwater Pkwy, Scottsdale, AZ 85253  (602-951-9326)
john@anasazi.com ncar!noao!asuvax!anasaz!john anasaz!john@asuvax.eas.asu.edu
 - - Support ALL of the bill of rights, INCLUDING the 2nd amendment! - -
 - - It is not enough to be right. One must also be effective! - -