HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: hallam@zeus02.desy.de (Phillip M. Hallam-Baker)
Subject: Re: Israel Cancels Building in the West Bank
Reply-To: hallam@zeus02.desy.de
Organization: DESY ZEUS Central Data Acquisition
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 20:43:13 GMT

In article <1992Jul27.201335.20721@midway.uchicago.edu>,
rivk@quads.uchicago.edu (nora gayle rivkis) writes:

|>In article <1992Jul26.145638.8927@dscomsf.desy.de>
|>hallam@zeus02.desy.de writes:
|>
|>>This is only the essential first step to show that Israel is serious
|>>about the peace negotiations. It is futile to expect more than than.
|>|>
|>And where is the essential first step to show that the Arabs are
|>serious
|>about the peace negotiations? I haven't seen one yet.

The rules of the diplomacy game is reciprocity. Expecting the ending of
sanctions is far too much for this step. I haven't heard that future
setlement building has been ruled out, this is the substantive step
which will of course have to wait until there is some sort of
settlement. Obviously there will have to be some reciprocal step,
however I'm not sure that the Arabs have anything that Israel is
particularly interested in in that "price range". The real point as far
as Israel is concerned is peace and security. Something will have to be
found, whether it is something that the Israelis actualy want is another
matter, point is that it must be something that the Arab side do not
want.

Phill Hallam-Baker
From: friedenb@egr.msu.edu ( Gedaliah Friedenberg )
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
Subject: Re: Zachary Baumel
Date: 23 Jul 92 05:37:17 GMT
Reply-To: friedenb@egr.msu.edu ( Gedaliah Friedenberg )
Organization: Michigan State University
Originator: friedenb@kira.egr.msu.edu


In article <22001@venera.isi.edu> arens@ISI.EDU (Yigal Arens) writes:

>Has it occurred to you that some people might consider Mr. Baumel a
>prisoner of war, and not a hostage?

I guess that it depends on your perspective.  I am sure that Yigal's
perspective is slightly different than mine, somewhat different than the
Baumel family's, and a lot different than Hizbullah's.

Let's assume, then, that he is a POW (for the sake of argument).  Does
this give the US the right to abandon him?  And, under International
law governing POWs, where are the UN and Red Cross inforcing Zack's
rights?

Gedaliah Friedenberg
-=-Department of Mechanical Engineering
-=-Department of Metallurgy, Mechanics and Materials Science
-=-Michigan State University
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
From: ejk@coral.JPL.NASA.gov (Elya Kapelyan)
Subject: Re: Avoiding Flames
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, NASA/Caltech
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 23:11:41 GMT

In article <1992Jul21.170738.2725@dazixco.ingr.com>, naftaly@supergas.dazixco.ingr.com (Naftaly Stramer) writes:
|> 
|> In article <1992Jul16.191727.11052@mcs.kent.edu>, rayes@Snake.mcs.kent.edu (Sandra Rayes) writes:
|> 
|> >Don't give me this old and worn out "implied meaning" excuse.  The
|> >world knows what it means.  The "spirit" of the resolution is
|> >clear: forceful acguisition by territory is condemned and give the
|> >damned land you took back to its rightful owners!!!  I don't even
|> >need my degree in Poli Sci to figure that out!!!!!
|> >
|> 
|> So what is Syria doing in Lebanon for the last years?
|> 
|> >Sandra.
|> 
|> 
|> --
|> Naftaly Stramer (303)530-0441, FAX (303)581-0106    DAZIX, An Intergraph Company
|> Internet: naftaly@dazixco.ingr.com                  6285 Lookout Road    
|> UUCP: ..uunet!ingr!dazixco!naftaly  	            Boulder, CO 80301
|> Please excuse my English

	Please, that at least should be obvious--the Syrians are fulfilling
their brotherly duties, and protecting the Lebanese one from the other.  (Of
course we all know that there is no such thing as Lebanon anyway, only Greater
Syria.)

	Elya
From: analyst@netcom.com (David Sternlight)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
Subject: Re: Anwar Mohammad and Fuad Ajami
Date: 23 Jul 92 19:02:43 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)


Jaber refers to the New Republic of "May June July 1991" as support for
his assertion that Fuad Ajami is both Persian and pro-Khomeini.

There is no such thing. The New Republic comes out bi-weekly, not
every three months.

I assume Jaber simply is referring to either his vague memory or
something someone else told him. Neither is reliable in a discussion
of such a high temperature.

Therefore, please provide the specific New Republic reference and
some quotes of Ajami in that reference in support of the claim.

-- 
David Sternlight        David Sternlight Inc.        email:analyst@netcom.COM
From: ejk@coral.JPL.NASA.gov (Elya Kapelyan)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
Subject: Re: Avoiding Flames
Date: 23 Jul 92 20:32:45 GMT
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, NASA/Caltech

In article <1992Jul23.040109.30252@cs.cmu.edu>, anwar+@cs.cmu.edu (Anwar Mohammed) writes:
|> In article <1992Jul22.234704.24874@midway.uchicago.edu> rivk@midway.uchicago.edu writes:

|> 
|> Well, for one, Nora, there are *nowhere near* as many Syrians on this newsgroup (or
|> in the world, for that matter) claiming that Syria is democratic and justified 
|> in all its actions as there are Israelis claiming the same for Israel.
|> 
|> 
|> >
|> >	-Nora
|> >
|> >
|> 
	There is a very good reason why "*nowhere near* as many Syrians on this
newsgroup (or in the world, for that matter) claiming that Syria is democratic
...".  That reason is that that person would be laughed off the net.  In a 
country where the president gets elected with a 99.9% vote (who made up that
0.1% anyway?) it is a bit rich to talk about "democracy".

	As to the second part of your claim, there are _very_ few people on 
this group claiming that Israel is justified in _all_ its actions.  So your 
argument is a bit weak.

	Elya
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
From: davidba@carmel.technion.ac.il (David Ben_Ami)
Subject: Re: Iraq/Kuwait border dispute?
Organization: Technion, Israel Inst. of Technology
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 09:21:07 GMT

In article <1992Jul29.015322.90002@cs.cmu.edu> anwar+@cs.cmu.edu (Anwar Mohammed) writes:
>In article <1992Jul28.195953.14935@cs.ubc.ca> yogi@cs.ubc.ca (Yossi Gil) writes:
>
>It isn't surprising that Iraq is resisting.  They've also taken to
>claiming Kuwait as a 19th province again.  Look where it got them
>last time.
>
>>
>>A friend of mine, (who is not an Iraqi himself, but probably closer to the
>>Iraqi side then to the Kuwaiti one) said that the Kuwaitis are in danger
>>that this demand would backfire on them.  Should this be realized "even
>>the opposition of Iraq would never forgive the Kuwaitis". He mentions that
>>the Iraqis are known for years in the Arab world as the most stubborn,
>>persistent and aggressive of all Arab nations.
>
>Who cares?  If this is true, they will never forgive the Kuwaitis for
>resisting their occupation and taking steps toward self-preservation.
>If Iraqis can't forgive Kuwaitis for the mistakes of their own government,
>then they'll never get themselves out from under this brute, Saddam
>Hussein.
>
>In general, though, I disagree with this assessment of the situation.
>Nationalistic stereotypes aside, the region would be much better off
>if Saddam Hussein was overthrown and the GCC states chipped in to
>help Iraq rebuild (a Marshall plan for Iraq).

Indeed, I think that Bush should have continued the war until Saddam
was overthrown and/or dead. He should have installed an enlightened
Occupation force that will take it as a mission to create a new
creature in the World: an Arab democrarcy. and with the help of the
GCC, Japnese, German rebuild Iraq like they did in Germany and Japan
after WWII.

Only, Bush got cold feet all of a sudden in 28 Feb. and announced a
uni-lateral cease fire. What a blunder! He only had to wipe out Sadam
remaining forces.

The Goal of the war was mistakenlt defined as "liberation of Kuwait"
it should have been the "Taming of unscrupulous states in the ME"
and "Unconditional surrender of the Baath regime in Iraq. I think 
Bush's analogy of saddam to Hitler was quite accurate only he didn't
live up to it.

david.
-- 
=============================================================================
  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
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
From: rwerman@vms.huji.ac.il (ROBERT WERMAN)
Subject: Sticks and Stones Will Break My Bones [Was: FACTS EVERY ISRAEL
Organization: The Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Date: 26 Jul 92 17:07:57 GMT

Date: 26 Jul 1992 20:11 IDT  
Distribution: world

Dr. Yigal Arens writes:

>You appear to be avoiding the question.  How many Jews have been killed
>BY A ROCK BEING HURLED AT THEM?

>And while you're at it, how often should such deaths happen before it
>would, in your opinion, be appropriate to refer to stones as "deadly
>weapons"?  

*******************

Cops in most western countries will shoot someone who attacks them
with knives.  Are we to conclude that they shouldn't, since knives
are less lethal than guns?

Cops in most western countries will even shoot someone who attacks
them with fists when they are not able to subdue the attackers.
Does Dr. Arens believe that the cops should even up the odds by
using knives?  Or just fists?

Attacking authority and its symbols has known consequences; no one
is surprised even though there are many who are unhappy with the
course of events.  

It is interesting, btw, that when Israeli soldiers beat up the 
rioting, masked stone throwers, the world was far more outraged
than when we began to shoot at them, with rubber or lead bullets.

No, Dr. Arens has his agenda and his questions and not surprisingly
they do not coincide with those of us who feel that Israel has a 
far better record than other countries tried with a similar situation
of dealing with a population in revolt.

"Not good enough if someone dies," we might say.  And that is true.
That is what makes the situation so tragic; we are not going to 
lay down our arms and run.  And apparently, the Palestinians, for
their reasons, will go on throwing stones at us and shooting and
axing one another.



__Bob Werman
rwerman@vms.huji.ac.il
Jerusalem

Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
From: ejk@coral.JPL.NASA.gov (Elya Kapelyan)
Subject: Gandhi (Re: ISRAEL JOINS THE CIVILIZED WORLD)
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, NASA/Caltech
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 17:42:54 GMT

In article <1992Jul22.173205.6722@cs.brown.edu>, dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren) writes:

|> While rejecting the comparison between Gandhi and Shamir, one can easily
|> conjecture how Gandhi's ideas and ways of doing things would work in the
|> middle-east. Not too good, I am afraid.
|> 
|> (please don't interpert this as a negative opinion on Gandhi, which was
|>  undoubtly a great man).
|> 
|> -Danny Keren.
|> 

	As a sidenote, I believe that Gandhi supported the population exchange
that brought Pakistan into being.  If such a stance were translated to the 
Middle East (and in particular Israel), this stand would put Gandhi to the 
right next to Moledet...

	Elya

Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
From: perlman@qso.Colorado.EDU (Eric S. Perlman)
Subject: Re: U.S. territories vs. Israel territories
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 15:38:31 GMT

In article <156d64INNn1p@agate.berkeley.edu> dan@jonas.berkeley.edu (dan graves) writes:
>In article <1992Jul29.143532.1796@oakhill.sps.mot.com>, diaz@oakhill.sps.mot.com (Rafael Diaz) writes:
>|> 
>|> I would like to raise an issue of comparing U.S. territories vs.
>|> Israel territories. To be more specific I will use the Island
>|> of Guam in the South-East Pacific ocean.
>|> 
>|> * The people of Guam are U.S. citizens, but they have NO voting power
>|>   in the presidential election.
>|> 
>|> * The people of the W.B. & Gaza are NOT Israeli citizens and have
>|>   no voting power in the Israeli elections.
>|> 
>|> 
>|>   Could somebody explain why is it O.K not to have presidential 
>|>   voting power in U.S. territories?
>|> 
>|> 
>|> -Rafy
>|> 
>|> -- 
>|> ________________________________________________________________________
>|> 		       __        _    
>|>   =_   __   ___    =  /  )      / )   ==========   diaz@sigi.sps.mot.com
>|>  =  ) /_ )     )  =  /--<  _  -/-     == oakhill!sigi!diaz@cs.utexas.edu
>
>Are you certain that this is true?  i remember some coverage of
>politics in Guam and Puerto Rico.   Email replies will be appreciated.
>
>respectfully,

The situation, as I recall it, is that while Guam, Puerto Rica, et al. have
presidential primaries, and some delegates to both the D&R conventions,
they have no electoral votes and thus don't have presidential voting
power.  They also don't have representatives in Congress.
 

-- 
"How sad to see/A model of decorum and tranquillity/become like any other sport
A battleground for rival ideologies to slug it out with glee." -Tim Rice,"Chess"
     Eric S. Perlman  <perlman@qso.colorado.edu> or <eric@lyra.Colorado.EDU> 
  Center for Astrophysics and Space Astronomy, University of Colorado, Boulder
From: bx573@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Alan H. Stein)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
Subject: Re: Israel, Lebanon, etc
Date: 31 Jul 92 02:31:55 GMT
Reply-To: bx573@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Alan H. Stein)
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)


In a previous article, bval@ilws61 (Valentine Bob) says:

>There are a few interesting points about the Israeli occupation
>of Lebanon raised lately.
>
>1) Have Palestinian Katyusha landed in Israel since the PLO was 
>   disarmed?
>
>   I believe the answer is "no", the Katyusha that landed in Israel,
>   (one of which killed a five year old girl, one landed on a 
>   thankfully empty bus station) were fired by "Hizbollah" after
>   the Israeli assassination of their leader (Awari?)

Does it really matter which Arab terrorists have been lobbing rockets at
Israeli civilians from Lebanon?  Is there a rule that Israel can only
defend itself from PLO terrorists, but not from any other Arab terrorists?
(Let's not ignore the fact that the number of rockets launched from Lebanon
recently is not in the single digits, but in the three digits.  Or that the
the Israeli actions against the Hizbollah terrorist leader was in reaction
to his murderous acts.)

>  
>4) In response to the usual comments that "Hizbollah kills
>   soldiers and Israel kills civilians", this is one of those
>   catch-22 situations. Because Israels soldiers are not where
>   the Israeli population is (i.e. in Lebanon), Israeli 
>   civilians are not being killed by attacks on Israeli soldiers
>   from Lebanon. If you believe that "Hizbollah" is a local
>   resistance movement, then you believe that there is no
>   catch-22 and that the attacks will stop if Israel pulls out.
>   Of course, if the soldiers pull back across the border,
>
>      attacking Israeli soldiers will result in civilian
>      casualtys
> 
>      attacks can be made on civilians without army intervention

Of course, the attacks are not just on Israelis soldiers;  the rocket
attacks are aimed at civilians, not soldiers.
>
>5) Whether these groups are "resitance" or not, their public
>   line is to call for the destruction of the state of Israel.
>
How true!

>   How do other countrys deal with armed groups calling for the
>   destruction of your country which are 
>
>	living on your border
>
>	being financed by the host country and/or allies who
>	you are officially at a state of war with
>
I doubt any are as gentle as Israel.
-- 
bx573@cleveland.freenet.edu----Alan H. Stein----stein@uconnvm.uconn.edu
From: egpv29@castle.ed.ac.uk (JHenderson)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
Subject: Re: Radio Host Fired After Jewish Protest
Date: 29 Jul 92 08:28:35 GMT
Organization: Edinburgh University

In article <22047@venera.isi.edu> arens@ISI.EDU (Yigal Arens) writes:
=>In article <1992Jul25.173853.1@uwovax.uwo.ca> singer@uwovax.uwo.ca writes:
=>>
=>> Arens Junior quotes a newspaper piece by somebody named Michaels which
=>> purports to quote a Jewish document presented to the Nazis in 1941 in
=>> which the expression "Israeli liberation movement" (sic) is used. Does
=>> anybody know whether the term "Israeli" was in use before 1948, and in
=>> fact as early as 1941? Could this be another Protocols of the Elders
=>> of Zion?--
=>
=>Oh boy, are you taking the easy way out!  So maybe this correspondence,
=>which was published in the mainstream, respectable Ha'aretz newspaper,
=>which has been discussed in Israel numerous times before and since,
=>which has never been denied or even disavowed by Shamir or anyone else
=>from Lehi --- maybe it's a forgery!  Yeah, that's the ticket!

I think it was probably cooked up as part of an international plot
devised by the Queen of England and Noam Chomsky.


-- 
-Jeremy Henderson        egpv29@castle.ed.ac.uk   

(or am I?)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
From: bx573@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Alan H. Stein)
Subject: Re: U.S. territories vs. Israel territories
Reply-To: bx573@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Alan H. Stein)
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 92 01:34:39 GMT


In a previous article, diaz@oakhill.sps.mot.com (Rafael Diaz) says:

>
>I would like to raise an issue of comparing U.S. territories vs.
>Israel territories. To be more specific I will use the Island
>of Guam in the South-East Pacific ocean.
>
>* The people of Guam are U.S. citizens, but they have NO voting power
>  in the presidential election.
>
>* The people of the W.B. & Gaza are NOT Israeli citizens and have
>  no voting power in the Israeli elections.
>
>
>  Could somebody explain why is it O.K not to have presidential 
>  voting power in U.S. territories?

We're not a Jewish state.
-- 
bx573@cleveland.freenet.edu----Alan H. Stein----stein@uconnvm.uconn.edu
From: phd21@seq1.keele.ac.uk (A. Jaber)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
Subject: Re: Help for Anwar Mohammad
Date: 28 Jul 92 17:44:54 GMT
Reply-To: phd21@seq1.kl.ac.uk (A. Jaber)
Organization: University of Keele, England

>From: anwar+@cs.cmu.edu (Anwar Mohammed)
>
>Now that I have his mail bouncing back to him, A. Jaber now has 
>his friends sending me e-mail.  Anyone have any advice on how to 
>deal with this lunatic?
>
>thanks,
>anwar
>-- 
>Anwar Mohammed                           Graduate Student

	In a previous occasion Anwar Mohammad communicated with me
	via private E-mail, I have sent him a private E-mail to answer
	the questions I have raised about his views of the Khomeinist 
	propaganda and the origin of Ajami concerned in this dispute.
	I have provided my references for my claim. 

	Anwar is choosing to respond to me in this manner. Anwar
	Mohammad thinks that every body raises the same questions that
	I have raised is my friend. So from now and then any body who
	is going to disagree with Anwar is going to be my friend.

	The person who contacted Anwar got his views from TPM about
	Ajami this person is not an Arab and he is as hostile to Saddam
	Hussein as Anwar Mohammad. The concern of this alleged friend
	of mine is the stand Ajami takes and the unfounded accusations
	he says about Sunni Muslims. Instead of answering his questions
	he is accusing him of being my friend.

A Jaber
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
From: jake@bony1.bony.com (Jake Livni)
Subject: Re: ISRAEL JOINS THE CIVILIZED WORLD
Organization: The Department of Redundancy Department
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 92 21:35:16 GMT

In article <24030@castle.ed.ac.uk> egpv29@castle.ed.ac.uk (JHenderson) writes:

>Now I've heard everything - Shamir and Gandhi in the same category.
>Funny how the little Indian chap is best known for non-violence whereas
>the little Jewish bloke is a well-known member of a murderous gang. Still,
>these little distinctions don't mean much, do they Jake?

"the little Jewish bloke _IS_ a well-know member of a murderous gang?"
And which gang would that be?  How many people have they murdered in 
the past, oh, say, 10 years?

Your unwillingness to recognize the difference between Shamir/Bush/Major
and between Arafat/Habash indicates severe stupidity or severe prejudice.
Probably both.

-- 
Jake Livni  jake@bony1.bony.com               Pat Paulsen for President
American-Occupied New York                    This year he has a real chance!
My opinions only - employer has no opinions.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
From: bx573@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Alan H. Stein)
Subject: Re: Israel Cancels Building in the West Bank
Reply-To: bx573@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Alan H. Stein)
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 92 17:47:53 GMT


In a previous article, hernlem@chess.ncsu.EDU (Brad Hernlem) says:
>
>What has Israel done? -- agreed not to build a number of settlement that
>weren't even started or weren't even contracted for yet and announced
>accelerated settlement in East Jerusalem!

Try getting the facts straight.  Israel has cancelled contracts.
 
>
>How long will it be before the State Department realizes that the
>history of Israel has been one of a blodthirsty nation bent on
>territorial conquest (can you say "Lebanon", boys and girls? or Gaza? or
>the Golan Heights? or the West Bank? or Jerusalem? or the land seized in
>the '48 war?)?

How soon some forget terrorist attacks from Lebanon (still going on), and
from Gaza, or bombardments by Syrian artillery of peaceful Israeli villages
below, or the invasion by Jordan from the West Bank, or the illegal
occupation of the Old City by Jordan from 1948 to 1967, during which they
not only prevented Jews from entering (in violation of the cease fire
agreement in 1948), but also destroyed synagogues and used Jewish
gravestones to pave the way to latrines.

>Syria has done, unilaterally I might add, what Israel has screamed
>should be done for so long -- disarmed the Palestinian fighters in
>Lebanon and brought "peace" to the bulk of Lebanon. Let's see a little
>give from the Israelis in response to this action; perhaps at least
>ceasing its bombardment of villages and attacks outside of its "security" zone.

I'm sure that the Israelis in the Galilee, still being subjected to rocket
attacks from those "disarmed Palestinian fighters in Lebanon," would be
delighted to learn that those attacks are merely figments of their
imaginations.
-- 
bx573@cleveland.freenet.edu----Alan H. Stein----stein@uconnvm.uconn.edu
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
From: bx573@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Alan H. Stein)
Subject: Re: territories vs the territories
Reply-To: bx573@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Alan H. Stein)
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 92 21:56:54 GMT


In a previous article, perlman@qso.Colorado.EDU (Eric S. Perlman) says:
>
>I would disagree, since the example used is a singular case requiring
>specificity.  In any case the question of wording in French is rather
>pointless, since the resolution was debated and drafted in English,
>therefore the English text is the official wording by the UN's own
>rules.  End of story.
>
Exactly.  There was quite a debate about the use of the definite or
indefinite article, and the indefinite article was carefully chosen.
Some may wish to check various analyses written by one of the Rostows.
-- 
bx573@cleveland.freenet.edu----Alan H. Stein----stein@uconnvm.uconn.edu
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast