HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.history
Date:         Thu, 17 Dec 1992 13:29:22 EST
From:         Tom Powers <TPOWERS@UNIVSCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: First Amendment (was Re: The Spanish/American War)
              16 Dec 1992 13:57:20 PST from <CLANCEY@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>

Unfortunately, it was not James Madison who said that the first amendment
raised a wall of separation between church and state. It was Thomas
Jefferson, in a letter to a committee of the Danbury (CT) Baptist
Association. The letter, dated January 1, 1802, contained the following
words:
      "Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely
between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his
faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach
actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence
that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature
should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting
the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between
Church and State."

However Jefferson's memory may be honored, he is NOT the man who wrote
the First Amendment. But then, he and Madison together led the disestab-
lishment movement in Virginia, so I suspect their sentiments were much
the same on this matter.
From: regeorge@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Robert E George)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.history
Subject: Somalia Was Re: The Spanish/American War
Date: 16 Dec 92 16:01:25 GMT
Organization: The Ohio State University

In article <9212161344.AA16775@slc12.INS.CWRU.Edu> "Cheryl P. Lewis" <cpl@po.CW
RU.Edu> writes:
>This is indeed an interesting question. An article in yesterday's
>New York Times (12/15/92) discussed similar feelings expressed by
>residents of the Bronx. They were proud of the fact that the United
>States had the generosity to assist the Somolians and expressed sym-
>pathy for their present circumstances. At the same time, they did
>not understand why a greater effort was not being made to feed hungry
>U.S. citizens 

    I'm not blind to poverty in America, but I think there is clearly
a difference of degree between Somalia and even the most impoverished
inner city in the U. S. There is certainly hunger in the U.S., but
I am unaware of any mass starvation comparable to the situation in
Somalia. Differences of degree *matter*

>and why the military could not be deployed to patrol
>and protect the streets of the inner cities. One gentleman could
>not understand why the Marines could relieve Somalians of their weapons,
>while the federal government seems unable to disarm uzi-toting 14 year-
>olds who are terrorizing his neighborhood. Local law enforcment agencies
>are powerless against such obstacles.

      In the U.S., we have the 2nd and 4th Amendments. "Sweeps" would
tend to weaken both, and we want to preserve both. In Somalia, they have
neither, so we may as well go ahead with arbitrary confiscation of
weapons.
     Incidentally, there seems to be some latitude for local commanders:
one officer on ABC NEWS 12/15 said weapons would only be confiscated from
"dangerous-looking" individuals.


>
>One may disagree with the use of the armed forces within the borders
>of this country; however, this question should give one cause to think
>about this
        I think the use of the armed force within the borders of this
country stirs strong visceral feelings among many different groups.
Conservatives-Libertarians recall the days of quartering Redcoats;
workers may remember the union-busting of the National Guard in the 19th
and early 20th centuries; Southern traditionalists may remember Sherman's March
and/or Little Rock/Ole' Miss/University of Alabama; African-Americans may
remember the use of military units to quell urban civil disorders; liberals
may remember the Kent State shootings.

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: bit.listserv.history
From: crdunlea@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Christopher R. Dunlea)
Subject: Re: First Amendment (was Re: The Spanish/American War)
Organization: Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 92 23:37:02 EST

In article <BzD6sK.G7L@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> creps@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Steve Creps) writes:
>In article <1992Dec15.110751.24169@newstand.syr.edu> crdunlea@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Christopher R. Dunlea) writes:
>>In article <01GS9MKYTB8Y9UMSTJ@VAX1.UMKC.EDU> "Bring me Joan, dipped in Spam" <TBEAUDOIN@UMKCVAX1.BITNET> writes:
[Constitutional debate deleted]

I think I did mention that this was not Scripture (harhar) but interpretation.
I guess you learn something new every day.	

Chris

Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.history
Date:         Sat, 19 Dec 1992 00:21:30 EST
From:         JFCOVALE@SUVM.BITNET
Subject:      Re: The Spanish/American War

Ron- Thanks.  I am inclined to the view that the quality of the discussion on
history-l is much higher than on EDPOLYAN.

John
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: HISTORY@PSUVM.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"HISTORY@PSUVM.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.history
Date:         Fri, 11 Dec 1992 20:06:00 CST
From:         RICHARD JENSEN <CAMPBELLD@APSU.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: The Spanish/American War

    Denis Paz asks
    how do the events of Bosnia and Somalia in 1992 "justify" US
    actions in 1898?
    As follows: Cynical historians have assumed that "humanitarian"
    justifications must have been preposterous, because nobody is
    that humanitarian.  The "real" reason therefore must have been
    something else (and because it was hidden, probably something
    nefarious.)
    The intervention in Somalia (in response to a media barrage not
    that much different from the US media stress on atrocities in
    Cuba in 1898) demonstrate that the cynical assumptions are not
    necessary at all. That the US can indeed intervene for
    humanitarian reasons. Furthermore, as 1992 perhaps shows (I
    write "perhaps" because the situation changes every day) the US
    has rather more willingness to get involved than European
    powers.
    Richard Jensen
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: history@PSUVM.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"history@psuvm"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.history
Date:         Thu, 17 Dec 1992 18:57:00 CST
From:         RICHARD JENSEN <CAMPBELLD@APSU.BITNET>
Subject:      free book on Internet

From: Barry Shein <bzs@WORLD.STD.COM>
Subject: Online BookStore Announcement: The Internet Companion
Reply-to: obs@world.std.com
                             Tracy LaQuey

                            Editorial Inc.

                         Software Tool & Die

                                 and

                      The Online BookStore (OBS)

                      Are Pleased To Announce...


The first simultaneous electronic and print publication of a major new
book: The Internet Companion: A Beginner's Guide to Global Networking
by Tracy LaQuey with Jeanne C. Ryer (Addison-Wesley, $10.95).

Online copies of Vice-President-elect Al Gore's Foreword and the first
two chapters of this best-selling book are available via anonymous FTP
from:

                            world.std.com

in the directory:

                     /OBS/The.Internet.Companion/

Further chapters will be released in the future. See the README and
COPYRIGHT files in that directory for more details. Direct comments
and questions about the book to:

                   internet-companion@world.std.com

This pioneering effort is a step in bringing together the on-line
electronic and print media, enabling authors to explore new avenues of
publishing their works. Comments, inquiries, etc. welcome: Send to
obs@world.std.com.
From: S30285@BC750.BITNET
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.history
Subject: Re: The Spanish/American War
Date: 14 Dec 92 04:41:07 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: HISTORY@PSUVM.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"HISTORY@PSUVM.BITNET"

Lenny,
Try the area of the Baton Rouge revolt.  What about Texas?--we gave up all
claims by the Adams-Onis Treaty.  Texans will get mad, but it is only through
an "unequal treaty" [a popular word in this part of the world] that Santa
Anna was forced to sign that Texas had legitimacy from 1836-1845.  That treaty
was not recognized by Mexico as being valid and they do not recognize Texas
as part of the U. S.  until the Treaty of Guadaloupe-Hidalgo in 1848.
Barton
From: regeorge@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Robert E George)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.history
Subject: Re: The Spanish/American War
Date: 16 Dec 92 15:45:19 GMT
Organization: The Ohio State University

In article <HISTORY%92121608414590@PSUVM.PSU.EDU> DGPAZ@CLEMSON.BITNET writes:
[deletions to save space]
>Thus, e.g., it is a good and appropriate thing to teach
>the history of the Protestant Reformation. It is a bad
>and inappropriate thing to teach that the Prot. Ref.
>happened because God was restoring true biblical religion
>after the long night of medieval Catholic superstition.
>(The assumption being that Protestantism is true and
>Catholicism is false.)
>
>Denis Paz
>Department of History
>Clemson University
>South Carolina, U.S.A.

 How should the *effects* of e.g. the Protestant Reformation, or
the rise of Islam, or the Evangelical movement in 19th century Britain
be presented?  Good and bad things could be said of each of the three.
I think here is where the issue really lies.

 In theory, both good and bad effects should be presented. But when the bad
is presented, some people will holler "bigotry!" I think that this is one
reason why the religious aspects of history are taught less in secondary
school than would otherwise be the case: if a high-school world history
teacher reads from Correlli Barnett's book on the collapse of British
power that Evangelism made the British into a law-abiding and kindly
people, but at the same time destroyed the ruthlessness that keeps a nation
from going to the dogs, he/she will get angry calls from parents. So it
becomes safer to skip over religion -- and indeed any other issue about
which people feel strongly (which unfortunately includes virtually all of
history)

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
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.history
Date:         Thu, 17 Dec 1992 07:55:52 EST
From:         Ken Koester <MAINT2@ERS.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: The Spanish/American War

On Wed, 16 Dec 1992 14:15:08 CST John Coryell. said:
>>
>>Isn't anyone going to mention Arizona and New Mexico?
>
>Sure.  Gadsden.  Complete control of the Colorado, for what it's been
>worth.  How about the Marshall Protectorate?  What is the criteria
>here exactly?
>
No, the Gadsden purchase bought a small sliver of Arizona.  The rest of it
had been "liberated" a bit earlier.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.history
From: hiscrp@nuscc.nus.sg (C R Pennell)
Subject: Re: janie johnson cure complete
Organization: National University of Singapore
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 23:55:06 GMT

arowden@AUSTIN.ONU.EDU (Andrew Rowden x2252) writes:
: Being new to the listing, please forgive my ignorance upon this subject.
: I have but only one question to ask...
: 
: Who is (or was) Janie Johnson and what is a "green goddess".

	Don't know about Janie Johnson, but a green goddess is a pretty
obsolete type of British military fire-engine, painted green, and kept in
reserve for the purpose of breaking strikes by firemen (cf 1978)

: 
: Thank you.

Not at all

Richard Pennell, History NUS
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-VMS-To: IN%"HISTORY%RUTVM1.BitNet@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.history
Date:         Fri, 18 Dec 1992 15:39:00 CST
From:         JCFITZHARRIS@STTHOMAS.EDU
Subject:      Re: Sunk ships
Comments: To: HISTORY%RUTVM1.BitNet@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU

"recompile humanity" suggests the MAC rebuild desktop as "rebuild
society?"
Humor much appreciated in the midst of end-of-term frenzy.
Best wishes George!

Joe Fitzharris
JCFitzharris@Stthomas.edu
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.history
From: vancleef@netcom.com (Henry van Cleef)
Subject: Re: Situationism
Organization: Netcom--posted from Andover, Mass.
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 03:50:08 GMT

In article <01GS6W2567IA000PDU@RHODES.BITNET> MARTIN FOX <FOXML@RHODES.BITNET> writes:
>  Can anyone recommend books on the history of and ideology behind the
>French Situationist uprisings in May 1968?
>
>-Martin

Janet Flanner (Genet) wrote several long analyses of the French unrest
when they were current events.  Published in the "New Yorker" in 1968-9.
Flanner was New Yorker's French correspondent from the beginnin (1925),
an astute observer whose writing is a good background material.
-- 
Hank van Cleef  vancleef@netcom.com vancleef@tmn.com  Andover, Mass.
Unix systems consultant---kernel, device drivers, networking, X11
SysV, BSD, Sun, Ultrix, AIX, SCO. Porting a specialty. 
	     The Union Institute  History of Science
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.history
From: crdunlea@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Christopher R. Dunlea)
Subject: Re: The Spanish/American War
Organization: Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 92 11:12:52 EST

In article <HISTORY%92121322512390@PSUVM.PSU.EDU> Lenny <LABBEY@GITVM1.BITNET> writes:
>Don, which territories which did not belong to us did the US annex prior
>to the Spanish-American War?
>
>I can't think of any.  We bought Florida, Louisiana, Alaska, the Gadsden
>land, California.
>
>Lenny

I think Texas and Hawaii qualify. I know we annexxed Texas at somer
point, and Hawaii was definitely annexed in the late 1890's. 

Chris

Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.history
Date:         Sun, 13 Dec 1992 17:02:09 ECT
From:         robert <BB05196@BINGVMB.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: The Spanish/American War
              12 Dec 1992 11:35:26 CST from <djm1@RA.MSSTATE.EDU>

Professor Mabry is quite right to predate my observation concerning Social
Darwinism with his note about "America's Sense of Mission."  Perhaps I may be
allowed to "one-up" him by taking us back another peg in time.  If E. Morgan is
to be believed, John Winthrop's sense of the "City on the Hill" might well have
set up this entire idea of the American Mission, albeit in a very different
way.
   Harris
   Department of History
   Binghamton U.
   BB05196@BINGVMB
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Subject: (no subject given)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.history
Date:         Tue, 15 Dec 1992 16:21:08 EST
From:         A322000 <A322@NMUMUS.BITNET>

Please add me to your lists.  Keith Malkowski A322@NMUMUS
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.history
From: crdunlea@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Christopher R. Dunlea)
Subject: Re: The Spanish/American War
Organization: Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 92 23:47:01 EST

In article <HISTORY%92121618535554@PSUVM.PSU.EDU> "John Coryell." <jcoryell@NWU.EDU> writes:
>
>Sure.  Gadsden.  Complete control of the Colorado, for what it's been
>worth.  How about the Marshall Protectorate?  What is the criteria
>here exactly?
>
>John Coryell.

The question was: the person could not identify any places that the US
outright grabbed and annexed in the Nineteenth Century. Wasn't the 
Marshall Protectorate given the US after World War I?

Chris

Newsgroups: bit.listserv.history
From: hiscrp@nuscc.nus.sg (C R Pennell)
Subject: Re: Truth in History
Organization: National University of Singapore
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 10:32:40 GMT

djm1@RA.MSSTATE.EDU (Don Mabry) writes:

	A very interesting piece about knowledge & truth in history, which
contained one small irony that people might like to toss around:
				[Some people believed that Roman]
: Catholic Cuba was not Christian and, for them, intervention meant
: saving Cuban souls. 

	Compare this with the justifications put forward by some of the
Spanish prelates in the sixttenth century for the original Spanish
conquest of the continent. If there is an afterlife and de las Casas de
Vitoria, Seulveda and co were watching th second time round they must have
felt quite at home!
	O.K. I know it's  fantasy. Back to serious matters

Richard PEnnell History NUS
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.history
Date:         Thu, 17 Dec 1992 15:43:44 EDT
From:         Carty Ellis <CELLIS@BROCKVMA.BITNET>
Subject:      Islamic (Arab) resources

I have recently had an enlightening experience concerning Britian - India -
Islam - national Adgendas - Historians adgendas - the upshot of these
discussions has me looking for substantiating resources.  An Islamic
History professor (whose Ph.D.  is in British History) maintains that
much of the secondary history we see is of a very colored viewpoint.

When I requested sources - his statement was There aren't any Arabic
histories of the crusades - left me twitching a bit.  I'll admit there
seems to be some grey areas here - but does anyone know of any Arabic
historical work that can be used as original source?  Admittedly there
will be a large language barrier - but existence is the first question.
Thanks.

***********************************************************************
Carlton Ellis                  *   BITNET CELLIS@BROCKVMA
Senior Programmer/Analyst      *
Administrative Computing       *
State University of New York   *
College at Brockport           *
***********************************************************************
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: HISTORY@PSUVM.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"HISTORY@PSUVM.BITNET"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.history
Date:         Thu, 17 Dec 1992 15:14:35 -0500
From:         Carolyn Schriber <SCHRIBER@RHODES.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Islamic (Arab) resources

Depends on what you count as `history` I suppose, but there are certainly
accounts of the Crusades from the Arab view.  On that comes quickly to mind is
the reation of Ousama Ibn Mounkidh to his first meetings with the Normans.
It`s included in many source volumes for western civ and medieval courses.
And theres a recent translation of a Muslim account currently in the book
stores- - cant remember the title, but it`s an obvious one.
Carolyn Schriber
Rhodes College
From: cpl@PO.CWRU.EDU (Cheryl P. Lewis)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.history
Subject: Re: The Spanish/American War
Date: 16 Dec 92 13:44:27 GMT
Reply-To: "Cheryl P. Lewis" <cpl@po.CWRU.Edu>
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Comments: To: HISTORY@UBVM.cc.buffalo.edu

This is indeed an interesting question. An article in yesterday's
New York Times (12/15/92) discussed similar feelings expressed by
residents of the Bronx. They were proud of the fact that the United
States had the generosity to assist the Somolians and expressed sym-
pathy for their present circumstances. At the same time, they did
not understand why a greater effort was not being made to feed hungry
U.S. citizens and why the military could not be deployed to patrol
and protect the streets of the inner cities. One gentleman could
not understand why the Marines could relieve Somalians of their weapons,
while the federal government seems unable to disarm uzi-toting 14 year-
olds who are terrorizing his neighborhood. Local law enforcment agencies
are powerless against such obstacles.

One may disagree with the use of the armed forces within the borders
of this country; however, this question should give one cause to think
about this.

--
Cheryl Lewis           (216) 368-2792
Circulation Assistant   cpl@po.cwru.edu
Law Library
Case Western Reserve University
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: HISTORY@PSUVM.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"HISTORY@PSUVM.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.history
Date:         Fri, 11 Dec 1992 12:00:00 CST
From:         RICHARD JENSEN <CAMPBELLD@APSU.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: The Spanish/American War

    Don Mabry asks, "Was the intervention in Cuba part of a
    pattern?" Yes.
    In retrospect there were many motivations for US involvement in
    1898. Some of them:
    1. Humanitarian interest. How strong was it in 1898? (how strong is
       it right now regarding Somalia & Bosnia)?  Fairly strong.  It
       also motivated the newspapers (esp Hearst and Pulitzer). They
       had a keen sense of tapping strong current of public opinion, in
       part to boost their circulation maybe, but much more important,
       esp to Hearst, was his plans to become President himself.
    2. Closely related to humanitarian interest: a sense that monarchy/
       aristocracy/ militaristic European states had no business in the
       brave New World environment. Germany, Spain were suspect (also
       Russia, Japan; Britain much less so).
       a) Germany had a deal with Spain to buy the Spanish possessions in
          the Pacific.  Hence the US decided to keep Philippines & Guam,
          but indeed Germany got most of the rest. (the islands went to
          Japan in 1914, and were scenes of nasty battles in ww2).
    3. Strategic interests concerned an important group, led by T
       Roosevelt & Captain Mahan. They were upset by growing British
       control of the seas (made possible by British control of world
       cable communications, by the new technology of coal which put a
       premium on having ports everywhere, as the Brits did). They were
       especially worried about the Panama Canal route, which could be
       controlled by the power the occupied Cuba.
    4. Instability and political upheaval in Central America/ Caribbean
       also bothered the US a great deal.  In recent years historians
       have read this as an excessive conservatism that sought to
       protect "capital" against desirable popular rebellions.  This
       reading has been set back by Somalia and Bosnia: "law and order"
       may not be such an evil matter.
       --the US fears were well grounded, as evidenced by the horrors
       of the Mexican civil war that broke out 13 years later.
       ==Richard Jensen
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.history
From: hiscrp@nuscc.nus.sg (C R Pennell)
Subject: Re: MILHIST-L
Organization: National University of Singapore
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 23:24:31 GMT

J_CAUSEY@CCNODE.COLORADO.EDU (Frederick the Great) writes:
:         Hi there, Tom.  Haven't heard from you in a while.  I had that
: problem, until I realised that the list's name is MILHST-L, not MILHIST-L.
: I think they did that to test our dedication ;).


	No, just whether you could count - MILHIST-L is 9 letters


Richard Pennell, History NUS

Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.history
Date:         Tue, 15 Dec 1992 08:13:59 -0500
Reply-To:     "Cheryl P. Lewis" <cpl@po.CWRU.Edu>
From:         "Cheryl P. Lewis" <cpl@PO.CWRU.EDU>
Subject:      Re: The Spanish/American War
Comments: To: HISTORY@UBVM.cc.buffalo.edu

Dear Mr. George:

You are definitely not out of place here! I agree with your
interpretation of what the First Amendment means. Thank you
very much!

By the way, don't let the fact that you do not consider yourself
a historian prevent you from participating in the discussions on
this list. Hope to read more from you soon!

--
Cheryl Lewis           (216) 368-2792
Circulation Assistant   cpl@po.cwru.edu
Law Library
Case Western Reserve University
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU