HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: "wayne mcguire" <wayne.mcguire@channel1.com>
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
Subject: israel vs. world
Date: 19 Dec 92 11:32:14 EST
Reply-To: "wayne mcguire" <wayne.mcguire@channel1.com>
Distribution: talk
Organization: Channel 1 Communications

To: Mark Ira Kaufman

 MIK> The concept of human rights is one that should apply to
 MIK> people universally.  Furthermore, if one considers
 MIK> deporting a person to be worse than murdering a person, one
 MIK> has a distorted view of the severity of these to actions.

The entire world has condemned the Israeli deportations,
including the U.S., and including both George Bush on the
Republican side and Bill Clinton on the Democratic side.

The Security Council vote in the UN condemning the deportations
was unanimous.

But here you are serving as an apologist for the deportations,
which comes as no surprise on the heels of your defense of
Jabotinsky's flaming Jewish racism.

The current situation is a classic example of what I was talking
about a few days ago, before this crisis erupted: diaspora Jews
are increasingly put in the untenable position of trying to
defend Israeli policies which the entire world condemns. It is an
impossible exercise to conduct without looking ridiculous.
Witness, for instance, the strained and bizarre interpretation by
another user here of the Geneva Convention policy concerning
deportation from occupied territories. The entire community of
international legal experts--with the exception of some
pro-Israel militants among them--would laugh in his face.

Your expressed concern about universal human rights is also
laughable. If there were any substance to this, and it weren't
merely posturing on your part, you would advocate the deportation
of Jewish terrorists from Israel. But you don't, and neither does
Benjamin Netanyahu. In fact many and perhaps all of the Jewish
terrorists who engaged in such acts as planting bombs at the
homes of West Bank Palestinian mayors (an act which your hero
Jonathan Pollard obscenely praised) served relatively brief
prison terms and are now walking the streets.

What could explain the fact that the entire world is lined up
against Israel? Why anti-Semitism, of course! Nearly the entire
world, including the American president and president-elect,
consists of depraved anti-Semites. Why are they anti-Semites?
Innate God-implanted depravity, I presume.
---
  OLX 3.0 31-2557  The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws.
--
Channel 1 (R)   Cambridge, MA

Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
From: jaa12@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (John A Absood)
Subject: A Question
Reply-To: jaa12@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (John A Absood)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 06:10:34 GMT

Hello Netters:

I am wondering whether anyone here has heard any comments about
the situation in Somalia by Noam Chomsky or Christopher Hitchens.

Thanx a million,

John Absood
From: perlman@qso.Colorado.EDU (Eric S. Perlman)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
Subject: Re: Can anyone answer a real quick, simple question?
Date: 20 Dec 92 16:03:55 GMT
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder

In article <1992Dec20.053857.20960@netcom.com> zmbenhal@netcom.com (Zeyd M. Ben-Halim) writes:
>In article <cubsfan.724814873@camelot> cubsfan@camelot.bradley.edu (Michael Silverman) writes:
>>The United Nations condemned Israeli expulsion of Palestinians from
>>the Occupied Territories.
>>
>>My question...why did the UN not condemn the acts of terrorism
>>which *led* to the expulsions?
>
>Because the deportation is an act of STATE and is illegal under INTERNATIONAL
>law. The murder of the border guard is illegal under Israeli law and it is
>up to that state to deal with it according to it's laws.
>If the UN condemned every murder in the world it would take forever.
>The fact that state in this case engaged in deportation/collective punishment/
>No due process of the law is against the Geneva convention whichever way you
>interpret it. If you think that the UN is picking on Israel it is because it is

Notwithstanding the incorrect position stated in the last sentence -
Israel is by no means the only occupying force in the world today; to a
large degree the US qualifies as an occupying force vis-a-vis Native
Americans' land, and this doesn't even address the fact that Jews are
native to Israel - Mr. Ben-Halim makes an interesting point which I feel
must be addressed seriously.

Can the murder of Sergeant-Major Nissim Toledano be called "any murder"?  

I think not.  I think that it can be compared to the acts carried
out in Germany, for example, by the Red Army faction, or in Russia
by members of Pamyat'.  Those are organizations which are very
similar to Hamas in their xenophobic, absolutist, and hateful
worldview.  But no nation has to fight such extremism on such a huge
scale as Israel does.  The world has lately cried out, and resolutions
passed in the security council, against the neo-Nazi violence in German
cities such as Rostock.  Therefore, Mr. Ben-Halim's point, while
well-intentioned, fails:  if the UN wishes to be even-handed, it should
be condemning both Hamas and Israeli acts, if any at all.

-- 
"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> 
  Center for Astrophysics and Space Astronomy, University of Colorado, Boulder
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
From: makowsky@enuxhb.eas.asu.edu (David Makowsky)
Subject: Re: Israeli soldiers kill Palestinian boy
Reply-To: makowsky@enuxhb.eas.asu.edu (David Makowsky)
Organization: Arizona State University, Tempe AZ
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 01:29:28 GMT

In article <1602@tdat.teradata.COM> jcg@tdat.teradata.com (Jonathan Gingerich) writes:

# In article <4570@bimacs.BITNET> ehrlich@bimacs.BITNET (Gideon Ehrlich) writes:

# >In article <1992Dec10.001819.2413754@locus.com> jle@locus.com (John
# >Elghani/10000000) writes:

# >>>..
# >> Israel is an intelligent and peacefull government, and
# >>the PLO is just a bunch of scum arabs;

# >In order that our discution will be more intelectual
# >I'll ask the readers to inform the net about their OWN countries.

# >Please wrote what soldiers of your own army are expected to do
# >when they are stoned?

# >  A mericans. please inform us what an American soldier is expected to
# >do if he is stoned at Somally ?
 
# Leave.

	Actually, this was not the correct question.  The correct question
is "what is an American soldier to do if he is stoned in an area where
it is necessary for him to maintain a presence, in part due to the
misbehavior of the locals and in part due to the weak and whimpy way
in which that soldiers government deals with those showing this rotten
behavior?
--
"For all I care, you can send your money to the Hitler memorial fund, too, if
that pleases you."

From  arens@vaxa.isi.edu (Yigal Arens) in article <9323@venera.isi.edu>
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
From: bc744@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Mark Ira Kaufman)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
Subject: Re: Militant Foreign Nationalisms
Date: 14 Dec 1992 13:50:31 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: thor.ins.cwru.edu


Wayne McGuire writes...


#To: Mark Ira Kaufman
#
# MIK> Why don't you consider American Jews to be American?
#
#Do you even begin to understand how grave are your problems in
#reading comprehension and general cognition?
#
#This is one of those questions which contains its own evident
#answer. Of course you don't. There is a nice correlation between
#your exclamation points, uppercased shouts, and verbal filth and
#your inability to read English.
#
#My point was that any militant nationalist whose is not living in
#the nation of his obsession, and whose passions are leading him
#into relentless ugly conflict with his fellow citizens, and who
#doesn't have the guts to act on his convictions by fighting for
#his beliefs in the homeland of his heart, cuts an entirely
#ridiculous figure.
#
#This is especially true for militant Zionists, since a cardinal
#principle of Zionism is that all Jews in the world should move to
#Israel. Militant Zionists living comfortably in America,
#browbeating fellow Americans with verbal violence and endless
#demands for handouts instead of putting their bodies on the line
#in Israel, do not inspire respect among most Americans. Israelis
#especially find these loudmouths to be contemptible.
#
#I can foresee Americans eventually leaning more to the Arab than
#the Israeli cause simply because Arab nationalists in America
#have made less of a nuisance of themselves than Jewish
#nationalists. Americans hate being pressured and browbeaten by
#anyone. All the powerful political instruments that the Israeli
#lobby has built up to push American policy this way and that
#could well in the long run backfire and blow up in the faces of
#the lobbyists.

     
     Thank you for answering the question.  

Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
From: nabeel@sce.carleton.ca (Rosignolo)
Subject: Re: : Homosexuality in Islam
Organization: Carleton University
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 23:15:33 GMT

In <1992Dec13.163424.7558@das.harvard.edu> adam@endor.uucp (Adam Shostack) writes:

" In article <nabeel.724198000@oracle.sce.carleton.ca> nabeel@sce.carleton.ca (Rosignolo) writes:
" >In <42467@sdcc12.ucsd.edu> revans@euclid.ucsd.edu (Ron Evans) writes:

" >" 	Irrelevant: stealing and killing are not victimless crimes.
" >" 	Yes, a lesbian could fight her sexual urges, but why
" >" 	should she have to?  Similarly, a white woman could fight  
" >" 	her urge to marry a black man, but why should she have to?   
" >"         Just because racists find miscegenation indecent?

" >   The society is enough a victim. As long as you are a member of the society
" >you have to be positive. If you want to live on your own, you can go in the
" >desert or mountains and live however the hell you wish.

" I'm confused.  Do you think that society is damaged by a lesbians
" screwing other lesbians, or by white women marrying black men (or vice
" versa)?

" If so, how?  If not, could you please restate what you meant?

  I do not know why he included the case of interracial marriages into
the discussion, but Lesbianism is threatening to the family, the society
cell that the society is interested in. It is not proper to raise
children with a single parent or no parents at all or other than the
parents. Lesbians must be bound to be constructive to the society they
live in. Sexual love should _all_ pour in one pot, the family (spouse)
not for every pedestrian or such.

  This is the sort of society religions approved. If you do not believe
in religions, live as you wish, but away from the bases of religion.
That is (may be one reason) why the punishment of homosexuality in
Islam (often death) seems too severe to atheists, but I think it is 
very lenient (but I condole myself that God will take care of them once
they die.)

  It is not that I am homophobic or something, on the contrary, I have
homosexual tendencies like everyone else, but I do not consider every
damn emotion I have, sexual or has to be carried out. Some emotions are
to be suppressed, e.g. fear (sometimes.)

             _
 |\_________(@)= |CENSORED|    The above is fiction. I hope you enjoyed it!
   \_\  --/ _/
     \=====/       "wa lI qalamon  fI 'onmolI  'in hazaztohO
        ||            famA  .duRunI   'aLA  'ahoZa   lmohaNadA
        ~~          'i_thA .sUla fawqa .Tirsi waq^o .sarIrihI
                     fa'iNa  .sulIla  lmashrafiYi  lahO  .sudA"
                                           -- ibn Sana' Al-Mulk

Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
From: H.M.
Subject: craziness and brotherly love
Organization: Somewhere East or Somewhere West
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 15:56:07 GMT

[as always, posted without permission]
[Israel Line 12-15-92 wries....]

[IL] Syrian Deputy President Says Yasser Arafat Lost his Sanity

[IL] Today's YEDIOT AHRONOT quotes the Italian newspaper "Il-Jiornale"
[IL] which published an interview yesterday with Syrian Deputy President
[IL] Abdel Halim Hadam, the man considered "number two" in Syria. Hadam
[IL] said in the interview that he is convinced that PLO Chief Yasser
[IL] Arafat has lost his sanity. "I have the impression, that following
[IL] the plane accident, Arafat lost his sanity..." Hadam said that
[IL] Arafat's claim that parts of the Golan Heights belong to the
[IL] Palestinians constitutes the final proof of his madness.

OK, so we all knew Arafat was crazy a long time ago. But in yet
another example of the deep love all Arabs feel for their fellow
brethren we see that the final, unarguable, unrefutable proof of this
fact was when Arafat declared that a part of land which Syria thinks
belongs to Syria in fact belongs to the Palestinians. Hmmm.....

Mr.Hadam does not consider the PLO's claim that ALL of Israel belongs
to the Palestinians as an indication of madness. But, the claim that a
miniscule part of land which Syria does not even control belongs to
the Palestinians surely is a sign of the unfortuneate deterioration of
Yasser's mental state.

Makes you wonder, doesn't it? Does Syria really give two shits worth
about Israel or the Palestinians? Or does Syria really only care about
Syria? Hmmmm....

Harry.
From: revans@euclid.ucsd.edu (Ron Evans)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
Subject: Re: Three troubling questions about Islam
Date: 12 Dec 92 08:02:02 GMT


	How could one accomplish the destruction of Israel
        without destroying Israelis?
	
<4648@copper.Denver.Colorado.EDU> aaldoubo@copper.denver.colorado.edu (Shaqeeqa) writes:

>The same could be asked to you.  How could one accomplish the complete
>establishment of Israel without destroying Palestinians?


	I am not surprised that people are evading the top question:
	I believe there is no answer. 
	As for the other question, how about a two-state solution?

-- 
Ron Evans (revans@math.ucsd.edu)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
From: jle@locus.com (John Elghani/10000000)
Subject: Re: Three troubling questions about Islam
Organization: LC
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 06:51:09 GMT

In article <42473@sdcc12.ucsd.edu> revans@euclid.ucsd.edu (Ron Evans) writes:
>
>	How could one accomplish the destruction of Israel
>        without destroying Israelis?


The Soviet UNION was destroyed structure wise, but the soviet civilians
didn't have to be nuked, nor bombed by bullistics.

The native of the land returns to it from refugee camps in Lebanon,
Syria, Jordan, ...etc, then the terrorist in charge will be 
eliminated, then Jews, Christians, Muslims, ...etc can live
in THEIR land normally.

jle

Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
From: nabeel@sce.carleton.ca (Bulbul)
Subject: Re: Targetting civilians
Organization: Carleton University
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 23:40:52 GMT

In <42520@sdcc12.ucsd.edu> revans@euclid.ucsd.edu (Ron Evans) writes:
"  
" <4658@copper.Denver.Colorado.EDU> aaldoubo@copper.denver.colorado.edu (Shaqeeqa) writes:

" Saddam did not have the authority under
" Islamic law to declare jihad, and furthermore, Islam does not have
" anything to do with the Gulf War, Scuds, or Palestinians.  

" <1992Dec13.064519.2435255@locus.com> jle@locus.com (John Elghani/10000000):

" >Your state ,israel, claims to bomb Lebanon's cities because
" >they include terrorists.  AND IRAQ bombed Tel AVIV because it includes
" >terrorists as well.  The terrorist in TEL AVIV, is a common terrorist
" >of islam and arabism in the land of Hamas and Fatah.  Saddam and 
" >Fatah are arabists, and Hamas is islamic.

" 	Two devotees of Islamic fundamentalism who often
" 	act in concert are presenting us here with
" 	divergent views.  Which is correct? Were the Scud attacks 
" 	consistent with Islamic principles or not?  I think

   Ron, there is no contradiction, Miss Shaqeeqa essentially said that Saddam's
"rock'n'talk" had nothing to do with Islam. Mr. John did not say it had! He
said that Israel was a common enemy of Arabs and Muslims (nothing about
Saddam's relation with Islam, unless you consider Arabist anti-Islamic which
makes the two statements consistent.)

   You may mislead most illiterate readers by your wrongly drawn
conclusions. But if you want answers to your questions, Miss Shaqeeqa has
to prove her statement that Saddam has no authority to declare Jihad (it is
not a piece of cake, especially if she wants to tell us who does,) you
know better whether Israel is an enemy to Arabs, I know it is to Islam.
And I think that the scudd attacks can be considered consistent with Islamic
principles although it depends on what Islamic school of thought's opinion
you want. If it is the Dollaric School, then it depends on the amount of
money paid, otherwise, most probably those scudds do not violate the Islamic
principles. You may want to ask Miss Shaqeeqa for the reasons. (If she fails,
send me e-mail!)

             _
 |\_________(@)= |CENSORED|    The above is fiction. I hope you enjoyed it!
   \_\  --/ _/                      
     \=====/       "wa lI qalamon  fI 'onmolI  'in hazaztohO            
        ||            famA  .duRunI   'aLA  'ahoZa   lmohaNadA
        ~~          'i_thA .sUla fawqa .Tirsi waq^o .sarIrihI
                     fa'iNa  .sulIla  lmashrafiYi  lahO  .sudA" 
                                           -- ibn Sana' Al-Mulk
From: ilyess@ECE.Concordia.CA (Ilyess Bdira)
Subject: Re: Babri aftermath (Re: Malcom X)
Organization: ECE - Concordia University
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 23:35:46 GMT

In article <1992Dec14.184354.27953@das.harvard.edu> adam@endor.uucp (Adam Shostack) writes:
>I'd say that intolerance, irrational emotions, and hateful tribalism
>are all symptoms of fanaticism.

I kind of expected you to say that. A fanatic has been used lately 
interchangeably with fundamentalist. However, fundamentalism in my opinion 
does not  necesarily result in those symptoms. Tunisian fundamentalism, 
for example, was a very tolerant, rational and relatively realistic brand,
but it was fought mercilessly by one of America's freindly dictators.


=============================================================
Modified Murphy's first law of realistic probability:
If it can happen, it will happen...
Unless of course "it" is a good thing.
::::::::::::::********************************:::::::::::::::
Ilyess Ben Ali Bdira    Montreal Quebec  Canada
E-mail ilyess@ECE.concordia.CA, benali@alcor.concordia.CA
Phone Number and Address variable...
::::::::::::::********************************:::::::::::::::
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast,soc.culture.arabic
From: clamen+@CS.CMU.EDU (Stewart Clamen)
Subject: Re: Opposites and yet so alike
Originator: clamen@BYRON.SP.CS.CMU.EDU
Reply-To: clamen+@CS.CMU.EDU
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University
	<EGGERTJ.92Dec15225404@moses.atc.ll.mit.edu>
	<1992Dec16.194303.1893@cs.brown.edu> <29724@castle.ed.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 20:51:36 GMT

In article <29724@castle.ed.ac.uk> jeremy@castle.ed.ac.uk (Jeremy Henderson) writes:

   In article <1992Dec16.194303.1893@cs.brown.edu> hm@cs.brown.edu (Harry Mamaysky) writes:
   ~
   ~Here we have an enraged mob (why pray tell would they be so mad). Let
   ~us not interpret the anticks of a few enraged people to be
   ~representative of the views of Jews in general.

   Let's not interpret the antics of the Israeli Supreme Court, in
   allowing the mass deportation of Palestinians, without any trial,
   or right of appeal, in contravention of international law, and any
   basic standards of humanity, as representative of the views of Jews
   in general.

I view the Israeli Supreme Court decision to be on par with the US
Supreme Court decision that it was OK for the DEA to hire bounty
hunters to kidnap foreign citizens living in sovereign countries and
to illegally transport them into the US to stand trial.

--
Stewart M. Clamen			Internet:    clamen@cs.cmu.edu
School of Computer Science		UUCP: 	     uunet!"clamen@cs.cmu.edu"
Carnegie Mellon University		Phone: 	     +1 412 268 2145
5000 Forbes Avenue			Fax:	     +1 412 681 5739
Pittsburgh, PA 15213-3891, USA
From: jaeger@buphy.bu.edu (Gregg Jaeger)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
Subject: Re: Homosexuality and Islam
Date: 15 Dec 92 23:43:51 GMT
Organization: Boston University Physics Department

In article <42375@sdcc12.ucsd.edu> revans@euclid.ucsd.edu (Ron Evans) writes:
><1992Dec9.144059.15070@cbfsb.cb.att.com> mmdh@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (Mazen Mokhtar) writes:

>>  As far as punishment, I am not sure what it is. I think that the punishment
>>for proven homosexual sodomy between men is the similar to the punishment for
>>fornication.

>	From The LA Times, Dec. 1, 1992, p.H/6:
>	"Islamic law is strictly enforced in Iran, where homosexual
>         sex is punishable by death."

>Ron Evans (revans@math.ucsd.edu)


Let's construct a similar statement in another context: personal freedom
is strictly protected in the United States, where libraries are
regularly censored.


Gee, if the LA Times said _that_ then the true punishment _must_ be death.
I mean, what greater fountainhead of truth about Islamic matters can one find? 


Gregg
From: spinoza@next06wor.wam.umd.edu (Yon Bonnie Laird of Cairn Robbing)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
Subject: Re: Israeli soldiers kill Palestinian boy
Date: 13 Dec 92 10:51:25 GMT

In article <4652@copper.Denver.Colorado.EDU>  
aaldoubo@copper.denver.colorado.edu (Shaqeeqa) writes:
> >In article <4570@bimacs.BITNET> ehrlich@bimacs.BITNET (Gideon Ehrlich)  
writes:
> >>
> >>  A mericans. please inform us what an American soldier is expected to
> >>do if he is stoned at Somally ?
> 
> The first thing the soldiers did upon landing on the shores of Somalia  
(to
> make way for the others) was to have people lie face down with their
> hands behind their back.  They even went to wake up sleeping people (by
> kicking them in the sides) to surrender to the 'invading' troops at gun-
> point.  [When Dick Cheney comments, he says 'I was angry - it took me a
> few minutes to get over it'.]
> 
> Just as in the same scenario in the OCCUPIED Territories, there are
> defenseless people forcibly adhering to 'Democracy' and  
'humanitarianism'
> under the guize of 'protection' and 'security'.
> 
Well, Anisa, you got that half right. Somalia is, alas, very much like the  
West Bank and the Gaza district. There are a large number of people who  
are not doing very well (Palestinians and Somalis), the "warlords" in  
charge are doing quite nicely for themselves (Warlords in Somalia,  
"Palestinian activists", as the Washington Post termed the young man who  
carried out an improptu execution for Agence France Presse cameras not too  
long ago), and there seems to be lots of internecine warfare (carried out  
by what you decribe as "defenseless people". Admittedly, in the West Bank  
and Gaza, they haven't reached the atrocity level of Somalia, but in this  
case, Id say its the thought that counts).
Oh, and one other thing that I suppose is similar: the majority of Arab  
states haven't offered either the Palestinians or the Somalis diddly in  
the way of assistance. Ok, I'm with you this far, but what does this have  
to do with the Americans and/or the Israelis, other than the fact that the  
standard of living improves dramatically when Israel/US takes over and  
prevents people from killing each other for no apparent reason?


Here's wishing that Operation Restore Hope will result in a peaceful, fed  
country, and that the US would finally get 'round to catching those  
warlords and throwing them in the deepest, dankest dungeon they can find  
(well, actually, I think they should be dealt with a bit more harshly,  
but)...............................