HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: v206gb6c@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (IS AN ILLEGAL PERSONAL NAME)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Kahane's widow sues for big-shekels
Date: 5 Nov 92 05:14:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

I just read an AP wire story that said Libby Kahane (the former Rabbi's widow)
is suing the Marriott hotel where he was shot.  She filed a multi-million dollar
wrongful death suit.  She charges that the hotel was ``careless'' and 
``negligent'' because it ``failed to provide reasonable or adequate security 
or protection.''  The lawyer said that the hotel, knowing that Kahane's life had
been threatened many times, should have provided metal detectors and more
security.

Just thought people might want to know.

PauL M SchwartZ  (-Z-)  |  Follow men's eyes as they look to the skies
v206gb6c@ubvms.BitNet   |         the shifting shafts of shining 
pms@geog.buffalo.edu    |        weave the fabric of their dreams
pms@acsu.buffalo.edu    |                    - RUSH -
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: eross@uwovax.uwo.ca
Subject: Re: Bobby Fischer's anti-semitism
Organization: University of Western Ont, London
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 03:21:02 GMT

In article <BxKr7w.JDz@acsu.buffalo.edu>, v206gb6c@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (IS AN ILLEGAL PERSONAL NAME) writes:
> 
>     I just read that former chess champion Bobby Fischer blames his quitting
> world chess play on the Jews.  The article also said he has made other
> anti-semitic remarks in the past.  Can anyone comment on this?

Fischer is a rabid anti-semite who converted to christianity a while ago.  He
seems to be a member of the David Irving fan club with a "Jewish/Socialist
conspiracy" idea.  He may be able to play chess, but I wish he'd stay out of
the news.

-- 
Evan Ross
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Western Foot Patrol, University of Western Ontario, Lambton Hall,
1421 Western Rd., London, Ontario, N6G 4W4
(519) 661-3650	 Fax (519) 661-3687
From: mannj@acf9.nyu.edu (Jordan Mann)
Subject: Re: Kosher Honey - Still no answer
Organization: New York University
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 18:46:03 GMT

hayim@locus.com (Hayim Hendeles) writes:

>In article <mannj.721421798@acf9> mannj@acf9.nyu.edu (Jordan Mann) writes:
>>chips@eskimo.celestial.com (:crp:) writes:
>>
>>>An acceptable answer to why honey is kosher is still waiting to be found.
>>> ...
>>
>>I have never seen the relevant Talmudic passage myself, but I understand
>>that the Talmud's answer to this question is that bees don't manufacture
>>honey; they only gather it.  This is now known to be false.  The question

>You have made a basic error here. First of all, the Talmud DOES NOT
>ask the question about bee honey. One of the commentaries (Tosfot)
>on the relevant passage in the Talmud asks this question. 

The Talmud asks the question in Bechorot 7b.  I got the Talmud's answer 
slightly wrong, though, at least according to Rashi, who says that the 
Talmud doesn't mean that the bees gather the honey, but rather that the
honey isn't secreted by the bees; it just comes into being in their
stomachs (or whatever you call the inside of a bee) when the stuff they
eat from the flowers mixes together.  I don't know if this is consistent
with our knowledge of bees today.

The tosafot you are thinking of is in Avodah Zarah 69a, but he asks a 
different question.  He asks how it could be permissible to eat bee honey
in his time, since the bees' legs always got mixed in to the honey.

>[...]
>Third of all, even if the "scientific fact" given were false, it
>would still not make a difference. The fact is that Jews have been
>eating honey for the past 3000 years, and had there been a prohibition
>involved, we certainly would have heard about it long ago. Tosfot
>is merely trying to give a reason why one certain prohibition
>does not apply. So, if you don't like his reason, you are certainly
>welcome to introduce your own theory - as long as you don't argue
>in Halacha.

This is basically the fourth approach I mentioned in my previous article.

>Hayim Hendeles
--

Jordan Mann at NYU      (mannj@cims.nyu.edu)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: warren@nysernet.org (Warren Burstein)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Einstein and Judaism
Date: 8 Nov 92 12:26:23 GMT
Reply-To: warren@nysernet.org
Organization: Mail to News Gateway at Wang Labs

In <emc.721089476@noonian> emc@doe.carleton.ca (Eli Chiprout) writes:

>I often wonder what the reaction to Einstein would have been 
>if he had posted his comments concerning Judaism and
>science on this newsgroup instead of presenting them
>in lectures etc.

Probably no different than the debate that goes on here now.  While
I would like to see the debate carried on in a less inflammatory
manner (without regard to whether I agree or disagree with a given
flame), even if we had someone on this net with the statue of
Einstein, that person would still be open to criticism by those who
disagreed.

If this hypothetical poster had posted things that were more relevant
to talk.religion.misc or talk.politics.mideast than to soc.culture.jewish,
I'm sure that some people would have asked (some of them using typical
Usenet politeness, no doubt) that the discussion be taken to those groups.

[This is not to be construed as relating to the relevance of any actual
posting to SCJ.]

> Would he have been met with demands to "tone down" his remarks if he
> had posted as an anonymous poster?

The identity of a poster is irrelevant to all but ad-hominem
arguments.  The flames against anonymous posting (or postings that do
not bear the full name of the poster) are entirely out of place,
irregardless of whether the poster is a genius or an undergraduate (or
both.  or neither).  Arguments with the content of such postings (as
with the content of any other posting) are another thing.
-- 
/|/-\/-\          Adif tzav pinui metzav shmoneh.
 |__/__/_/    
 |warren@     
/ nysernet.org 			    Jerusalem
From: hillel@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (hillel.e.markowitz)
Subject: Re: Embarrassment
Organization: AT&T Federal Systems
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 19:36:33 GMT

In article <199211111450.AA27727@das.wang.com> MASH@WEIZMANN.WEIZMANN.AC.IL (Michael Shimshoni) writes:
>In: <4438@bimacs.BITNET>
>rothberg@bimacs.BITNET (Danny Rothenberg) tells us a story:
>
>>What is it in the Jewish pshyche that the more assimilationist we are,
>>the more embarrased we become when seeing other Jews trying to keep to
>>the ways of the predecessors in keeping the faith, eg Shabbat
>>observance, clothing?  Yet when it comes to the religious sensibilities
>>of others, we [Jews] are the first to rise to their defence?
>>
>>This all reminds me of the apocryphal story of the assimilated Jew (AJ)
>>and the 'orthodox' Jew (OJ) on a bus:
>>
>>AJ: Why don't you change your ways and join the real world?
>>
>>OJ: Actually, I'm Amish.
>>
>>AJ: Oh! I'm so sorry, I thought you were Jewish.  I do admire the
>>    courage it takes to keep your customs in the modern world, and you
>>    have my full support.
>

The story is given by Rabbi (Dr.) Twerski in his autobiography (I
forgot the exact title <blushing>) as having happened to him so it
is not "apocryphal".  A similar story involving a nonJewish
(Italian-American) woman and her immigrant mother contrasted to an
assimilated Jewish-American woman and her immigrant mother
(regarding their behavior and attitudes) appears in one of Hanoch
Teller's books.  Many of us have had more trouble with Jews than
nonJews in similar matters (such as trying to leave work in time
for Shabbos or take off Yom Tov).

>Stories are  nice, and  I am  sure that Danny  has also  heard stories
>showing his pet OJ in a less  than pleasant form.  So what? My Concise
>Oxford Dictionary  which I consulted  defines "apocryphal" as  "... of
>doubtful  authenticity;  sham,  false".   It  is  somewhat  less  then
>dignified to make up a story about your opponents and then use them as
>a "proof" for your  position.  BTW it may come as  a surprise to Danny
>that I  personably am more concerned  with the behaviour of  my fellow
>Jews than of the Amish, but I  have never tried to convince any Jew to
>change his  mode of dress and  belief, as long  as he does not  try to
>force them on me.

Then you have not fallen into the trap that so many assimilated
Jews in the U.S. have.

>
>>Need I say more?
>
>What have you actually said?
>

That there is a problem in the galus that must be addressed.

>>Danny Rothenberg            |    ^   Life's a dream-so sleep through it!
>
> Michael Shimshoni                    Wake up Danny, do not miss life! :-)


_______________________________________________________________
| Hillel Markowitz        |    Im ain ani li mi li             |
| H_Markowitz@att.com     |    Veahavta Leraiecha Kamocha      |
|_________________________|____________________________________|
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren)
Subject: Re: Bobby Fischer's anti-semitism
Organization: Brown University Department of Computer Science
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 04:43:30 GMT

v206gb6c@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (IS AN ILLEGAL PERSONAL NAME) writes:
#
# I just read that former chess champion Bobby Fischer blames his quitting
#world chess play on the Jews.  The article also said he has made other
#anti-semitic remarks in the past.  Can anyone comment on this?

This was recently rasied on alt.conspiracy and I posted the following,
so here it is again:


The only explanation is that Fischer, like so many other great 
chess players, is a nut. I used to play chess, and he was a big
hero of mine; I followed his career quite closely. Fischer was
indeed "fixed" (as he used to say) by the Soviets, who managed
tournaments in a way that made it very difficult for him to win.
It was his pressure that resulted in changing the candidate
matches to a knockout style, making it more difficult for the
Soviets, who completely dominated world chess, to wear him out
while agreeing to fast draws between themselves. At that time,
he made no anti-Jewish remarks, and even played in a small
tournament in Israel (which he easily won).

After brilliantly winning the world championship in 1972 from
Boris Spassky, Fishcer forfeited the 1975 title match because
of his insistence on a technicality - he wanted the match to
be over only when one player wins 10 games, and not as it used
to be (limited to 24 games). To me, that was the first sign
of the man going crazy - to drop the title without playing
because of such a thing!? At the age of 31, he vanished from
the world of chess and refused to play, despite numerous
attempts, and promises of very large prizes, to make him
return. Nobody conspired anything against him and I don't
see any reason that the Jewish community would have anything
against him (he is actually a Jew...).

He has always been an extremely immature person, very poorly
educated and very emotional. It was embarrassing to see him
spit on a letter sent to him by the US government (in front
of the CNN cameras).

Fischer belongs to some obscure religious sect, but I don't
know if that has anything to do with his hatered for Jews. His
recent statement "Judaism is Bolshevism is Communism" reflects
sadly on his education and mental state. Maybe he is paranoid
(a very useful thing if you are playing chess), and somehow
identifies Jews with his bitter adversaries - the Russians
and the Communists. Maybe it is because Jews have been, and
are, represented in Chess in a percentage far above their
percentage in the population.

Guess this is enough. BTW, Fischer leads 9-5 and most probably
will win. Not surprisingly, he demands to be recognized
as the world champion if he does... the current world champion
is Armenian Gary Kasparov, as nearly big a megalomaniac as
Fischer. If they ever play, that will be something to see. My
bet: Kasparov 10, Fischer 4, 20 draws.


-Danny Keren.
Organization: Queen's University at Kingston
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 18:00:58 EDT
From: andy <2893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA>
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Small town Judaism

Outside of Toronto, Montreal and Winnipeg, Canada's Jewish population is
relatively small and there has been some concern about the survival of
Jewish life in smaller communities like London, Kingston or even Ottawa.

I'm wondering if there are any other small-town Jews (or at least people in
communities with small Jewish populations) out there and what suggestions
they may have.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: solovay@netcom.com (Andrew M. Solovay)
Subject: Re: Pierced Ears
Organization: International Irony League -- Death before smileys!
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 22:16:09 GMT

In article <1992Nov10.200354.19103@njitgw.njit.edu> dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap) writes:
>I think the reason today has to do with bodilly mutillation.  For the
>same reason that elective surgery is not allowed.  But that still
>doesn't account for piercing a slave's ear.

But I know many frum women with pierced ears. The prohibition on
self-mutilation isn't time-connected; it applies to both men and
women equally. (Doesn't it?)

I think the main problem is that in more traditional circles,
only women wear ear-rings, so if a man has pierced ears, it's
ipso facto "beged ishah" (a women's garment). Now that pierced
ears are becoming very common among young men, this may change;
beged ishah is a notoriously subjective (and transient) thing.

It may also depend on what kind of earrings you wear. Two
matching earrings (one per ear) looks much more feminine then a
stud in one ear...


-- 
Andrew M. Solovay	    "Until there was rock, you only had God."
					--Ziggy Stardust

#include <disclaimer.h>
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: klur@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (david.s.klur)
Subject: Pyramids
Organization: AT&T
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 19:27:28 GMT


I just saw a PBS special about Pyramids -I thought the show
as excellent, except at the end when some pyramid specialist
marvelled at the dedication of the ancient Egyptians at being
able to work so hard for so long to complete the pyramids.

Now, I had thought that slaves (mostly Jews, but maybe others also?)
built the pyramids under the pharaohs' rule.  After all, Jews
celebrate Passover, the freedom of the Jews from slavery in Egypt.

So, who actually built the pyramids?  


--
David Klur 	           | "3 is prime, 5 is prime, 7 is prime,
AT&T			   |  9 is experimental error, 11 is prime,
dklur@attmail.com	   |  13 is prime..."
Me? Speak for AT&T?!?	   |    



Xref: sparky soc.culture.jewish:19368 misc.headlines:6937 talk.politics.misc:58623 misc.legal:19631
From: f_gautjw@ccsvax.sfasu.edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish,misc.headlines,talk.politics.misc,misc.legal
Subject: Re: Say it ain't so
Date: 6 Nov 92 20:37:19 GMT
Article-I.D.: ccsvax.1992Nov6.143719.1747
Organization: Stephen F. Austin State University

In article <1992Nov5.224551.26208@newsgate.sps.mot.com>, titmas@chdasic.sps.mot.com (Eric Titmas) writes:
> In article <Bx74tn.E9r@world.std.com>, srm@world.std.com (Stevens R Miller) writes:
> |> jake@bony1.bony.com (Jake Livni) writes:
> |> 
> |> >Doubt?  After arresting the murderer within a few minutes of the
> |> >attack? 
> |> 
> |> The murderer?  You're presuming the outcome; he was a suspect, presumed
> |> innocent. 
> 
> The jury has a duty to regard the defendant innocent until proven guilty.
> But everybody else certainly presumes guilt.  If the police think he's
> innocent they shouldn't arrest him;  if the D.A. thginks he's innocent
> they shouldn't bring charges;  if the judge thinks he's innocent he should
> dismiss the case.

But police frequently make arrests on the 'possibility of guilt' as they
are under political pressure to clear crimes.  So are DA's.  The judge
certainly has no need to presume guilt and should indeed dismiss the
case if the charges appear frivilous.  But many cases are complex and
not lightly dismissed.  The jury system goes a long way towards removing
the political pressures in almost any case.

-Joe Gaut
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: hillel@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (hillel.e.markowitz)
Subject: Re: ORTHODOX
Organization: AT&T Federal Systems
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 17:37:47 GMT

In article <1992Nov12.162212.27668@umbc3.umbc.edu> shimoff@umbc4.umbc.edu (Eliot Shimoff) writes:
>What is even more amusing -- and revealing -- is the ordering of the
>movements.  Almost invariably, it's OCR.  But why?  It clearly isn't
>alphabetical.  Nor is it chronological; Reform emerged before Conservative.
>Nor is it by number of adherents.  Given the fact that _all_ three
>claim to be observing Jewish law, C and R should object to possible
>ordering in terms of "degree of observance" or "%mitvot_kept."
>
>So why OCR?  (My guess: it is in the order of the number of letters
>in the names of the primary ordaining institutions in the US: YU,
>JTS, HUC-JIR.  This seems fine, although someone might object to
>YU as opposed to several other yeshivot [or yeshivas])
>
>Eliot Shimoff                  |    n   n   n
>   shimoff@umbc3.umbc.edu      |   X + Y = Z .  Easy to prove no solutions

I would guess that it is a sign to show that even then (when full flames
started with the creation of C) we were highly advanced in
technology.  Obviously all 3 movements are descended from the
original recipients of the Torah at Sinai who carefully checked the
Sifrei Torah for accuracy using the computerized equipment brought
by the space aliens and hinted at in the building of the ark.  We
still remember the original Optical Character Recognition software
of the lead programmer Moshe Rabbeinu.

Note: the reference to the ark was that it was a giant capacitor
with a massive charge.  Remember how the person who touched it in
the time of David got fried?  Any EEs around to actually calculate
the relevant values (gold conductor & cedar wood insulator)?

BTW isn't Purim a little early this year?

_______________________________________________________________
| Hillel Markowitz        |    Im ain ani li mi li             |
| H_Markowitz@att.com     |    Veahavta Leraiecha Kamocha      |
|_________________________|____________________________________|
From: aplebaum@irs01.cs.huji.ac.il (Hillel Applebaum)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Clinton / Gore election result
Keywords: USA Presidential election
Date: 8 Nov 92 15:12:10 GMT
Organization: The Hebrew U. of Jerusalem, Computer Science Dep.
NNTP-Posting-Host: irs01.cs.huji.ac.il

for hebrew speekers: it's now 
the Bill and the jewish qustion.
(HBILL V'HASHELA HAYEHODIT)
-- 

-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*--*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
/ Hillel P. Applebaum  |> ISRAEL - where all
/ Jerusalem,   Israel  |  jews should live !
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*--*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
Xref: sparky soc.culture.jewish:19318 soc.history:9232
From: chrism@cirrus.com (Chris Metcalfe)
Subject: Re: Pierced Ears
Organization: Cirrus Logic Inc.  Fremont, California
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 19:26:06 GMT

In article <1992Nov6.015337.5246@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu> friedenb@topaz.egr.msu.edu (Gedaliah Friedenberg) writes:
>
>
>I was always taught that our bodies are "on loan" from Hashem,
>and thus tatoos and earrings are out of the question.
>
>Does this (earrings rule) apply to women?  It certainly must not!  
>I know plenty of frum families that have daughters with pierced
>ears.
>
>Men should not dress as women, and thus earrings are forbidden for men 
>is understood.  
>
>Please restrict answers to (appropriate) halachic discussion regarding 
>desecrating one's body.  (Please no discussion on "Women *can* wear 
>earrings and Men *cannot*, therefore Judaism is sexist against Men," etc.).
>
>
>Gedaliah Friedenberg

I just listened to a professor of Talmud explain that in some Sephardi communities
the hachamim wear earrings as a sign of accomplishment in Torah study.  This would
be in North African or Arabian peninsula communities, where the custom among Arab
men is to wear earrings.

-- Chris Metcalfe


Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: clmn@ellis.uchicago.edu (Bill Coleman)
Subject: Re: Living in Israel - Voting in USA
Reply-To: clmn@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: Live & Direct from Downtown Petah Tikva ISRAEL
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 20:23:14 GMT

In article <DAVIS.92Nov10105447@passy.ilog.fr> davis@passy.ilog.fr (Harley Davis) writes:
>
>No harm, aside from the fact that it's illegal according to American
>law to become the citizen of another country without giving up your
>American citizenship.  In practice, of course, it's perfectly
>feasible.
>

Not in the case of Israel; there is a loophole and tens of thousands of
people jump through it.

As an aside, I have an Australian friend who lives here.  The loophole does
not exist for him so he had to choose.  He has retained his Australian
citizenship and has been a permanent resident here for six years.  He says
the extra paperwork is minimal, he gets most of the olim bennies, he had to
register for the army, he simply can't vote here.

I'll bet this is what 99 per cent of the Americans would do if forced to
-- 
Bill Coleman
clmn@midway.uchicago.edu
From: tichauer@valpso.hanse.de (Manfredo Tichauer)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Pierced Ears
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 92 17:03:47 +0100
Organization: "The Private site of Manfredo Tichauer"

dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap) writes:

> 
> I think the reason today has to do with bodilly mutillation.  For the
> same reason that elective surgery is not allowed.


  If so: Is plastic surgery for aesthetics reasons forbidden for a Jew ? 

 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Manfredo Tichauer M.                       EMAIL : tichauer@valpso.hanse.de
  Opitzstrasse 14                            VOICE :     (++ 49 40)  27.42.27
  2000 Hamburg 60 - GERMANY                  FAX   :     (++ 49 40) 270.53.09
 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: warren@nysernet.org (Warren Burstein)
Subject: Re: NYC Parking rules on Wednesdays - Why?
Reply-To: warren@nysernet.org
Organization: Mail to News Gateway at Wang Labs
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 08:30:41 GMT

In <1dna02INNd1m@agate.berkeley.edu> lmk2@garnet.berkeley.edu writes:

>going to one villager's house for a dairy meal followed by a
>visit to another house for a meat meal.

In many cases (I won't start to list them since I'll doubtless forget
something) it would be permitted to do so in this order.  I'm assuming
that we're talking about Jewish villagers, or the story would talk
about two nonkosher meals rather than one dairy meal and one meat meal.
-- 
/|/-\/-\          Adif tzav pinui metzav shmoneh.
 |__/__/_/    
 |warren@     
/ nysernet.org 			    Jerusalem
From: arens@ISI.EDU (Yigal Arens)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: anti-semitism
Date: 6 Nov 92 03:32:11 GMT
Article-I.D.: venera.22843
	<92309.0357052893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA>
	<92309.0440542893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA>
	<1992Nov4.132843.26985@cbnewsl.cb.att.com>
Organization: USC/Information Sciences Institute
In-reply-to: saal@cbnewsl.cb.att.com's message of 4 Nov 92 13:28:43 GMT

In article <1992Nov4.132843.26985@cbnewsl.cb.att.com> saal@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (samuel.saal) writes:
>
> I thought the appelation "Mystery Andy" would suffice.  This post leads me
> to believe "Paranoid Andy" is more accurate.  That may be why he doesn't
> care to post his name.

Talk about paranoia all you like, but the fact remains that:

1. YOU -- due to either stupidity or malice -- wrote to Andy's
postmaster, creating the impression that something improper was done by
him (Cf. the postmaster's request for "the details on the articles in
question"[?!] so that he can "take action if warranted").

2. YOU -- due to either stupidity or malice -- worded the questions to
the postmaster so that they didn't even accurately inquire into the
statements made by Andy.

3. YOU -- due to either stupidity or malice -- further misinterpreted
the postmaster's replies as contradicting Andy's statements.

And we're not even discussing your accusations of anti-Semitism -- BOTH
stupid AND malicious -- yet.
--
Yigal Arens
USC/ISI
arens@isi.edu