HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: nmiller@starbase.trincoll.edu (norman miller)
Subject: American Jews and Lubavitch
Organization: Trinity College, Hartford, CT.
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 17:17:12 GMT

In 1931 and 1932, as the battle over Germany became acute, I
recall that the communists were surprisingly unconcerned
about the prospects of a Hitler victory.  "Let them come",
they said "then the working class will unite and drive them
out".  After them, us.

Now Habadniks are not communists, but their logic regarding
Jewish-Gentile relations is the same.  Let the nation's
governors indeed declare that this is a Christian nation,
let the public schools once again require that Jewish
children participate in Christmas and Easter celebrations,
let the Pat Robertsons and Pat Buchanans (and their friends
on the Supreme Court) beat back whatever gains have been
made over the years toward separation of church and state;
then America's Jews will realize that their well-being
consists in withdrawing from the general society into..a
European-style ghetto with its own schools, etc.  Intermar-
riage would vanish and most Jews would become baalei teshu-
va. One sure winner in such a scenario would of course be
Habad since it has already acquired considerable experience
in handling new arrivals (the fact that I admire and respect
this aspect of Habad's work is irrelevant).

That, as I see it, is the logic behind the whole thing.  I
know that many Lubavitchers _appear_ to be uncouth loutish
stumble-bums who just can't help getting us all into a mess
from their ill-advised antics.  Not so: there are some very
cool heads among them and they know what they're about.

There's a lot to be said for Habad's position--as there is
for O in general.  I have never believed that a secular
Jewish culture (chutz la'aretz) has any chance of surviving
and I agree with those who think that our future in this
country is bleak.

But.

History is full of examples (one might almost say that
history is nothing but a list of such examples) of unantic-
ipated consequences.  Habad may think it knows the outcome
of the strategy to weaken the First Amendment, but the
German communists were certain too.

That's the first objection.  My second is simply this:

I refuse to have my future determined for me by an elite
activist group that claims to know what's best for me and
doesn't even pretend to ask for my consent.

I think most American Jews agree with me.  I also think it's
time to do something about it.

Norman Miller
From: rubinoff@linc.cis.upenn.edu (Robert Rubinoff)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Name of Palestinian Deportees (part i)
Date: 1 Jan 93 17:07:50 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania

In article <4816@copper.Denver.Colorado.EDU> aaldoubo@copper.denver.colorado.edu (Shaqeeqa) writes:
>[...]  The Salman Rushdie affair is
>dead and buried.  
[A rather ironic choice of phrase, I think]

Not at all.  The call for Rushdie's death has been reconfirmed, and he is still
forced to live in hiding.  He has appeared in public more often recently; I
would imagine he is tired of hiding all the time.  But his life is still very
much in danger.

   Robert

Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: markr@mot.com (Mark)
Subject: Re: Entertaining suggestions for responses
Reply-To: markr@mcil.comm.mot.com
Organization: MCIL
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 04:25:12 GMT

In article <1gt2r8INN2on@terminator.rs.itd.umich.edu> jlove@ivrit.ra.itd.umich.edu (Jack Love) writes:
>Some ages ago on this thread I noted that I hadn't heard what
>I considered a good Hebrew greeting for Hannukah. A couple of

What is wrong with "Chanukah Sameach" ?

Mark
From: faigin@aero.org (Daniel P. Faigin)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Entertaining suggestions for responses to "Merry Christmas"
Date: 21 Dec 92 12:00:18
Organization: The Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo, CA
	<1992Dec21.195313.21867@epas.toronto.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: soldan.aero.org
In-reply-to: nusbache@epas.utoronto.ca's message of Mon, 21 Dec 1992 19:53:13 GMT

On Mon, 21 Dec 1992 19:53:13 GMT, nusbache@epas.utoronto.ca (Aryk Nusbacher) said:

> "Nice to hear that your god had a boy" usually works for me.

Of course, you now run the risk of introducing a new tradition for those who
observe that holiday: handing out cigars labeled "It's a boy!" :-) :-) :-)

Daniel (who wonders about the effect all this oil is going to have on his
waistline... oh what the ... it's Chanukah!)

--
[W]:The Aerospace Corp. M1/055 * POB 92957 * LA, CA 90009-2957 * 310/336-8228
[Email]:faigin@aerospace.aero.org              [Vmail]:310/336-5454 Box#13149
		    "And as they say, the rest is compost"
Xref: sparky soc.culture.jewish:24161 soc.culture.arabic:6011 talk.politics.mideast:24313
From: shaig@Think.COM (Shai Guday)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish,soc.culture.arabic,talk.politics.mideast
Subject: Re: Name of Palestinian Deportees (part i)
Date: 29 Dec 1992 14:31:19 GMT
Organization: Thinking Machines Corporation, Cambridge MA, USA
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: galaxy.think.com

In article <4601@bimacs.BITNET>, ehrlich@bimacs.BITNET (Gideon Ehrlich) writes:
|> 
|> In article <Bzxnpq.Crq@newsflash.concordia.ca>,
|> ilyess@ECE.Concordia.CA (Ilyess Bdira) writes:
|> 
|> > ... list also includes RABBIS (one of them killed an innocent  Arab
|> > merchant and only spent few months in jail before getting out on the
|> > shoulders of cheering Israelis).
|> 
|> Ilyess Bdira tells us half a story . the rabbi he talked about is
|> Rabbi Moshe Levinger. he and his family were under attact of several
|> dozens arabs. He shoot them in order to save himself.he was accused
|> first of murdering but he proved the atornyknowingly lies at court.
|> Instead of giving up the atorny change the charge from murdering to
|> "unprofesional using of arms " - he said that Rabbi Moshe bullet
|> missed the Arabian murderers , hit the wall and then hit a person
|> described as "inoccent" ! even the Anti religious Harez daily wrote
|> that puting Rabi Levinger at jail was an anti moral action.

Funny how my take of the story is neither here nor there.
I recall the incident mentioned as one in which Levinger
was accused of having shot off his firearm indiscriminently.
This resulted in the death of a storekeeper who had not been
involved in the stoning.  The storekeeper was indeed innocent,
all quotation marks to the contrary.

The debate was with regard as to whether Levinger had fired
and continued to fire his weapon after the danger had passed,
or whether his response could be considered justifiable.

The paper "Ha'aretz" is not vehemently anti religious as much
as objective and based on a non-religious viewpoint.  Of course
this can often lead to conflicts with religious principles
and policies.

As to my personal opinion of the incident, I think that the price
Levinger paid for his mistake was not consistent in that had
anyone but a palestinian been killed, the period would have been
greater.  Yes, this is mere conjecture on my part but in general
manslaughter does carry a longer sentence.


-- 
Shai Guday		| 
OS Software Engineer	| 
Thinking Machines Corp. |
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: eggertj@moses.atc.ll.mit.edu (Jim Eggert x6127 g41)
Subject: Re: Name of Palestinian Deportees (part i)
Reply-To: eggertj@atc.ll.mit.edu
Organization: MIT Lincoln Lab - Group 41
	<EGGERTJ.92Dec30110435@moses.atc.ll.mit.edu>
	<1992Dec30.193727.136@vms.huji.ac.il>
	<EGGERTJ.92Dec30223711@moses.atc.ll.mit.edu> <isaac.725782050@etrog>
Date: 31 Dec 92 10:33:53

In article <isaac.725782050@etrog> isaac@etrog.se.citri.edu.au (Isaac Balbin) writes:
>   What distinguishes Hamas from other Palestinian movements is that whilst
>   the PLO may COVERTLY admit members who may differ on the degree of violence
>   required to further the aims of the PLO, Hamas OVERTLY will not admit anyone
>   who is not committed to the furtherance of its clear aim ---the use of VIOLENCE.
>   Indeed, Hamas takes things one step further---one does not need to be a 
>   pro-Israel resident of Israel to be in their gun sights. Any Jew will do.

If this were indeed true, then it would hold up in a court of law.
Why did Israel not put these people on trial, if they are such heinous
criminals?  Why flaunt international law and deport these people?  Why
not try and jail them?

>   Let there be  no misunderstanding: this is a terrorist organisation of the most
>   brutal type committed to an armed struggle AND ONLY AN ARMED STRUGGLE 
>   until death.

If you can demonstrate that these people are terrorists, please do so.
List for me the terrorist actions that each one has done.  Otherwise
the accusations against them are unsubstantiated, ill-founded
guilt-by-association arguments.
--
=Jim  eggertj@atc.ll.mit.edu (Jim Eggert)
From: arens@ISI.EDU (Yigal Arens)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Israel's deportation of over 400 Palestinians
Date: 22 Dec 92 04:43:02 GMT
Organization: USC/Information Sciences Institute
In-reply-to: ehrlich@bimacs.BITNET's message of 21 Dec 92 17:59:13 GMT

In article <4586@bimacs.BITNET> ehrlich@bimacs.BITNET (Gideon Ehrlich) writes:
>
> In article <1gt2k7INNjkm@mizar.usc.edu> srose@mizar.usc.edu (Steve
> Rose) writes:
>
> >Israel's deportation of over 400 Palestinians is wrong, for at least three
> >reasons.
> > 1. It is illegal (according to Israeli, as well as international
> >    law).
>
> Kicking out those 400 criminals is a legal action, both according to
> Israeli law and according to the Israeli military law at Judea samaria
> and gaza strip.
> The international law is irrelevant since the status of those area are
> not as oof areas occupied from any state.
> ( remamber Jordenian occupation over judea and samaria was an illegal
> one , no country but England and Pakistan and jordan itself ,
> recognised that occupation , egypt never declared the Gaza strip to be
> a part of Egypt).

If this is your standard, then you probably oppose Israeli control over
Jerusalem (ALL of it!).  How many countries recognize that occupation?

As for the deportees, calling them "criminals" makes me suspect we're
not discussing the same people.  None of those being deported now were
charged with any crime, let along convicted for one.  They were all
picked up only a couple of days ago.

> > 2. It is only the most recent example of a sick policy of collective
> >    punishment.
>
> Each of the criminals was kicked out because of his own deeds, each of
> them joined the murdering collective, That issued a colective death
> punishment to all jews in Israel.

Total fabrication.  The Israelis have not proven ANYTHING concerning any
supposed "deeds" of these people.

Why are you forced to lie, Mr. Ehrlich?  Don't you believe you can get
by with the truth?
--
Yigal Arens
USC/ISI                                                TV made me do it!
arens@isi.edu
From: madhaus@netcom.com (Maddi Hausmann)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Why I became an Athiest (was: frustrations with christianity)
Date: 22 Dec 92 20:40:25 GMT
Organization: Society for Putting Things on Top of Other Things

tjm@hrt213.brooks.af.mil (Tim Miller) writes: >
aap@wam.umd.edu (Alberto Adolfo Pinkas) said: >>
>
>A> Atheist do not believe that there is a god. But, there is no way to "face
>A> incontrivertable proof" that there is a god. So, there is no way you can say
>A> what an atheist would do in an impossible situation.
>
>	I did not offer proof; I pointed out that an atheist believes
>that there is *no* G-d, regardless of argument to the contrary.  An
>*agnostic* has no opinion.

This is incorrect.  Another atheist has already posted the strong
versus weak atheism descriptions.  An agnostic has not made a 
decision whether there is a God or not.  A weak atheist acts as
if there is no God, because there is no evidence for one.  A
strong atheist believes there is no god.

Did it ever occur to you that the dictionary definition was
not written by atheists?  It is proper to let a group define
itself, rather than letting outsiders define it.  We atheists
have given you our definitions; please abide by them rather
than telling us what we are.

You would not like being called a Seventh-Day Adventist by a
Gentile, would you?  The Gentile might point out that you
worship on Saturday, and so does a SDA.  But the Gentile is
wrong.  So are you.

>	Theists believe in a non-proveable positive; an existance.
>*A*theists believe in a non-provable negative; a non-existance.  (prefix
>a-, meaning not; anti; against) Both these positions are faiths; they
>are beliefs without proof.

The prefix a- does not mean "opposite of", but "without" or "lacking."
Therefore the word atheism means a belief system that is without 
theism (belief in a God).  The prefix is a variant of the an- prefix 
(e.g. anaerobic, achromatic)

>	Agnostics hold that, as the issue is *irresolvable*, there is
>no knowledge upon which to base an opinion, thus no opinion is held.
>
>	If you're agnostic, call yourself one.

But I do hold an opinion.  I have no evidence for a God, and live
as if there is none.  However, I am willing to reexamine the
question in the face of new evidence.  That is weak atheism.

-- 
Maddi Hausmann                madhaus@netcom.com
Humorist, Satirist, Tech Writer.  Take your pick.

Centigram Communications Corp, San Jose California  408/428-3553
From: yaffe@pendragon.ICD.Teradyne.COM (Arthur G. Yaffe)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: God's Hyphen
Date: 3 Jan 1993 17:35:01 -0600
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
Reply-To: yaffe@diamond.ICD.Teradyne.COM
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu


. . . and as you can tell, Dima, from the subject line, I don't believe 
one must hyphenate the word "god".  In fact, it's just a word.  When
it refers to the one god, it should be capitalized.  That's as far as
I'll go.  As for "adonoi", that's not the name of God either.  It's the
word we use to avoid pronouncing the name of God.  I haven't ever tried
to pronounce aloud the various Hebrew spellings of God's name, but none
of them would come out "adonoi" (my lord).  

I personally would feel silly substituting a euphemism for a euphemism
for a euphemism, but that's exactly what those people who say "hasham"
as a substitute for "hashem" which is a substitute for "adonoi" (which
is innocuous in the first place) are doing.

You may, of course, have a different set of rules.  You may even post
your rules on the net, but you cannot demand that everyone follow the
rules that you develop.  Please keep in mind that S.C.J. is read
by C and R as well as O, and a few X as well.  We can't expect everyone
to understand that when you write "HaShem" they should pronounce 
"adonoi".  That's too much to ask.

A Happy (Secular) New Year to all!

Art

*************************************************************************
Arthur G. Yaffe                  | This space intentionally left blank.
Internet: yaffe@icd.teradyne.com |
*************************************************************************
Xref: sparky soc.culture.jewish:24172 soc.culture.arabic:6019 talk.politics.mideast:24321
From: ilyess@ECE.Concordia.CA (Ilyess Bdira)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish,soc.culture.arabic,talk.politics.mideast
Subject: Re: Name of Palestinian Deportees (part i)
Date: 29 Dec 92 16:23:30 GMT
Organization: ECE - Concordia University

In article <1hpnfnINNeai@early-bird.think.com> shaig@Think.COM (Shai Guday) writes:
>In article <4601@bimacs.BITNET>, ehrlich@bimacs.BITNET (Gideon Ehrlich) writes:
>|> 
>|> In article <Bzxnpq.Crq@newsflash.concordia.ca>,
>|> ilyess@ECE.Concordia.CA (Ilyess Bdira) writes:
>|> 
>|> > ... list also includes RABBIS (one of them killed an innocent  Arab
>|> > merchant and only spent few months in jail before getting out on the
>|> > shoulders of cheering Israelis).
>|> 
>|> Ilyess Bdira tells us half a story . the rabbi he talked about is
>|> Rabbi Moshe Levinger. he and his family were under attact of several
>|> dozens arabs. He shoot them in order to save himself.he was accused
....
>
>Funny how my take of the story is neither here nor there.
Your version does not contradict mine, I said killed not murdered..
whether or not intentionally it is till a killing.

>I recall the incident mentioned as one in which Levinger
>was accused of having shot off his firearm indiscriminently.
>This resulted in the death of a storekeeper who had not been
>involved in the stoning.  The storekeeper was indeed innocent,
>all quotation marks to the contrary.

Under any nonracist system of justice, Levinger would have been
convicted of at least manslaughter and reckless use of a lethal 
weapon resulting in death.
The punishment for that in the U.S is 10 to 20 years in jail, in Islamic 
law he would pay a huge sum of money to the family of the dead person,
and if not able to do it he would pay all of his salary (minus rent and 
food) untill he pays his debt.
I kind of prefer the second option.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: nusbache@epas.utoronto.ca (Aryk Nusbacher)
Subject: Re: Entertaining suggestions for responses
Organization: University of Toronto - Office of the Provost
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 19:57:10 GMT

People who know that I'm not the Christmas type often say, "Best
compliments of the season", and I find that when I say that to people,
it sounds awkward enough to make it clear that I'm making a point of
not saying "Merry Christmas".  Also, said with the proper ironic tone,
"best compliments of the season" can be directed at Jews for hours of mirth.

Aryk
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: merlyn@digibd.digibd.com (Merlyn LeRoy)
Subject: Re: ACLU/AJC Menorah Police?
Organization: DigiBoard, Incorporated, Eden Prairie,MN
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 04:31:56 GMT

strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight) writes:
>Marc Colten says Chabad got permission to put up a Menorah, and
>now the KKK wants to put up a cross.

>My guess is that they'll lose.
...
Don't trade stocks, your guesses are none too good.  They got the permit
days ago.

>A closer parallel to putting up a cross in a public place would be
>putting up a star of David. That hasn't been approved, and neither
>should the cross.

It isn't illegal to display religious symbols in public places;
what IS against the law is state establishment of religion.

The state can't prefer one over another, so the city can't permit
one group to put up a display and refuse another group; this is why
both groups have to be treated the same.

The court case that I read about hinged on whether the square was
considered a public forum or not; public forums can't restrict
speech based on political views.  On the other hand, areas considered
part of the government (like city hall) run into establishment problems
if religious displays are set up, because it looks like government
endorsement of a particular religion.

---
Merlyn LeRoy
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: nadel@attatash.aero.org (Miriam Nadel)
Subject: Re: jewish charities
Organization: /usr/lib/news/organization
Distribution: soc
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 16:14:42 GMT


There's another issue regarding large salaries for heads of the federations.
Which is that most of the staff is grossly underpaid relative to what they
would get working in the private sector or even for other nonprofits.  

My personal approach is to donate money directly to organizations I feel
are doing something useful, generally something I can see.  Most of these
are local.  Of the larger organizations I support, one I would strongly
encourage donating to is Jews for Judaism.  Given the number of messianic
posts here, the need for counter actions should be obvious and these 
are the people doing the best job of it.

Miriam Nadel
From: rlk@underprize.think.com (Robert Krawitz)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Conversations with a Rabbi
Date: 29 Dec 92 17:23:23
Organization: Thinking Machines Corporation, Cambridge Mass., USA
	<6628@pdxgate.UUCP>
NNTP-Posting-Host: underprize.think.com
In-reply-to: a0cb@rigel.cs.pdx.edu's message of 29 Dec 92 20:46:58 GMT

In article <6628@pdxgate.UUCP> a0cb@rigel.cs.pdx.edu (Chris Bertholf) writes:

   saal@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (samuel.saal) writes:

   >Some of us have ignored Dmitry's advice and have read the J4J propoganda.
   >We do know what it says and we can counter it.  The question is, how many
   >times must we read it befre we recognize it from the first paragraph and
   >can tell it is the same trash?  At what point is plowing through an
   >avalanche of garbage considered a waste of time?  Why can't those who ahve
   >read and refuted their trash summarize for others?  Why can't that
   >summary be passed by those who haven't read it to others who haven't so as
   >to save more poeple the trouble?

   Who are you saving trouble?  What makes you think your evaluation of the
   material is at all correct or open-minded enough (or close-minded
   enough) for all of the other intellects that read and post here
   regularly?

   You don't have to read the 'propaganda' multiple times, once will do.
   However, don't make the statement that it is the same propaganda
   every time, unless you know that to be fact (which you wouldn't
   unless you investigated the material).  Is this getting clearer
   now?

Very simple:  none of us have time to read everything that might happen
to come our way, and so we apply filters to it.  If it appears likely
that something will rehash the same tired old arguments with slightly
different wording, there's no point in reading it.  Furthermore, if it's
a subject that I know I have no interest in, why even bother reading it
in the first place?
--
ames >>>>>>>>>  |	Robert Krawitz <rlk@think.com>	245 First St.
bloom-beacon >  |think!rlk				Cambridge, MA  02142
harvard >>>>>>  .	Thinking Machines Corp.		(617)234-2116

Member of the League for Programming Freedom -- write lpf@uunet.uu.net
From: israel@unixg.ubc.ca (Robert B. Israel)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: kashrut howls
Date: 29 Dec 92 09:15:56 GMT
Organization: The University of British Columbia
NNTP-Posting-Host: unixg.ubc.ca

In <9212281823.AA19197@cyclone.sbi.com> gertler@cyclone.sbi.com (Don Gertler) writes:

>warren@nysernet.ORG (Warren Burstein) writes:
>> aliki@nova1.stanford.edu (Alexandra Schmidt) writes:

>> >... CMLOR ...
>> 
>> Now we conjugate acronyms?  I CMLOR, we COLOR, you CYLOR, he/she
>> CHLOR, they CTLOR ...

>I believe this is declension, not conjugation.

>-Don Gertler

Reminds me of the old joke:
He asked her to conjugate, but she declined.  :)

-- 
Robert Israel                            israel@math.ubc.ca
Department of Mathematics             or israel@unixg.ubc.ca
University of British Columbia
Vancouver, BC, Canada V6T 1Y4
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: jweber@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (jodi.weber)
Subject: Re: SCJ Gathering Balto-Wash; Final Update
Organization: AT&T
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 14:05:34 GMT

In article <92355.213701CARIAN@auvm.american.edu> CARIAN@auvm.american.edu writes:
>For those of you who have been following the continuing saga of the SCJ
>Gathering for the Baltington-Washimore area: it was successfully held...
>
>I understand there will be some overlap with next week's gathering in
>Highland Park, NJ.
>

What gathering in Highland Park?  Details, anyone?



Jodi Weber
jodiweber@attmail.com   or   jweber@cbnewsg.cb.att.com

Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: mwb@jpradley.jpr.com (Michael Brown)
Subject: Re: A self-confessed silly thread: Jewish Rock/Pop Stars
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 00:03:35 GMT
Organization: Unix in NYC

Two others that have occurred to me -

Mike Bloomfield (Butterfield Blues Band)
Peter Green (original Fleetwood Mac - composer of Black Magic Woman).
(NB - Peter Green is geshmatt)

Re : the Cat Stevens (feh!) = Steven Katz urban legend, there IS a Steven
Katz in rock, from the original Blood Sweat and Tears. Not sure if he's 
landsleit, though.

MB

-- 
Michael Brown          mwb@jpradley.jpr.com or uunet!murphy!jpradley!vtssys!mike
VTS Systems            718-968-1971
871 East 55th Street   Brooklyn, NY 11234
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------