HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: British Royal Family question.
From: segs@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (susan.e.slusky)
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 16:24:01 GMT
Organization: AT&T


_Moment_ magazine did a whole issue on circumcision about a year ago.
One of the articles was about the British Royal family. I've forgotten
the details, but apparently Queen Victoria wanted mohels to do circumcisions
because of her belief that her family was connected to King David
although of course she would not have said that her family was
Jewish. This does not make much sense to me. Anyway she started 
a tradition of having the sons of the British royal family circumcised by
a mohel. Apparently the Wales' decided to break that tradition after
consulting with their physicians.

Susan Slusky
segs@mhuxo.att.com
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: ben@vmsa.technion.ac.il
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Pierced Ears
Date: 11 Nov 92 09:17:44 GMT
Organization: Computer Center, Technion IIT

In article <96772@netnews.upenn.edu> weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P
Wiener) writes:


>In article <1992Nov9.142818.27130@discus.technion.ac.il>, ben@vmsa writes:

>>Could not a pierced ear be forbidden based on what is the sign that
>>slave must do to indenture himself?
>

>Considering that kippahs were taken from slave fashion, I don't think so.

>--
this is intewresting. from where do you find that a kippa is "slave fashion"??
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: haber@shark.mel.dit.CSIRO.AU (Yaacov Haber)
Subject: Re: BABAJI
Organization: CSIRO, Division of Information Technology, Melbourne
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 11:35:49 GMT

In article <1992Nov08.201509.14486@crash> classics@crash.cts.com (Baruch Schwartz) writes:
>The following excerpt is from Babaji-The Divine Himalayan Yogi.
>
>                         THE WORLD AND THE MIND
>
Why do we have to read this on soc.culture.jewish?

Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: emc@doe.carleton.ca (Eli Chiprout)
Subject: Re: Why I think Kach's policies are racist (AND DANGEROUS)
Organization: Dept. of Electronics, Carleton University
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 20:59:58 GMT

In <1992Nov13.194419.10930@ennews.eas.asu.edu> makowsky@enuxva.eas.asu.edu (David Makowsky) writes:
>	That is not the point, although G-d has made certain promises
>that if X happens he will do Y.  Unless you are willing to call G-d a
>liar, we can force Y by seeing to it that X occurs.

God said Y will happen if X occurs, therefore we can force Him to prcduce Y
by making sure X happens.  This is what Yonah said about Ninivah.

God said:
X: Ninevah sins
Y: Punishment for sin (obliteration?)
X implies Y

Yonah said:
I will make sure that Y happens, and the way to do
that is not to inform Ninevah of her sins, therefor
ensuring that X happens.

Brilliant deduction, except that God didn't like it.

Place YOUR X and Y's on the table please Mr. Makowsky.




--
Eli Chiprout                 
Dept. of Electronics, 
Carleton University, Canada
emc@doe.carleton.ca
From: etzhadat@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Hydro Man)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Jewish Movies on Video?
Date: 10 Nov 92 21:44:29 GMT
Organization: Institute Chaotique for Galactic Sewage Treatment

In article <1992Nov7.005832.28685@gsm001.mendelson.com> gsm@gsm001.mendelson.com (Geoffrey S. Mendelson) writes:
>In article <83150@ut-emx.uucp> etzhadat@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Hydro Man) writes:
 (That was I)

>>Cocoon I&II (Bernie and his wife, S. Guenberg?) rare scifi with Jews!

>What about the Mel Brooks film "Jews In Space"?

>. . included a trailer for "History of World Part II".  [in (the real) part I]

>It included scenes from the segment "Jews In Space". "Jews In Space" 
>portrayed Hassidic men dancing inside a "Star of David" shaped space ship.

>History Of The World, Part II" was never made. :-(

Somebody just wrote a book review of "He, She, It", which coincidentally
just picked up from the library.

And of course there's "Space Balls," in which one could say all the characters
are Jewish, but I'm never sure where pure parody and shtick goes in the
scheme of things. . . Here they even say they're Jewish--sort of--with
lines like at the end of the movie "I've married a Druidish Princess!"
unlike a lot of movies where you only know from the stereotype.

In any case I don't know of any pre-1960 sci-fi with Jews in it. There
was a bit of schlock that came out in the 60's with Jewish stereotypes,
(maybe Barbarella even had some?)
can't remember off the top of my head, and of course there was Sleeper in
the 1970s. 


>-- 
>Geoffrey S. Mendelson 
>(215) 242-8712
>gsm@mendelson.com     or uunet!gsm001!gsm

P. Yaaqov Kornreich etzhadat@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu

Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: solovay@netcom.com (Andrew M. Solovay)
Subject: Re: Conversion Question
Organization: International Irony League -- Death before smileys!
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 22:18:08 GMT

In article <BxIq9I.HEv@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> hrubin@pop.stat.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) writes:
>There can be no reconciliation until the O and C accept that the R follow
>their version of halakhah.  Serious Reform Jews take Shabbat very seriously,
>but their interpretation of what is work differs.

Which is to say, "There can be no reconciliation." To an Orthodox
(or, for that matter, a Conservative) Jew, what marks Halachah is
that it is mandatory. Reform differs on that.
-- 
Andrew M. Solovay	    "Until there was rock, you only had God."
					--Ziggy Stardust

#include <disclaimer.h>
Organization: Queen's University at Kingston
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 13:00:09 EDT
From: andy <2893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA>
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Interfaith marriages
 <1688E6F8D.VSANNIC1@weizmann.weizmann.ac.il>
 <1992Oct30.000621.663007@locus.com>
 <5832@tivoli.UUCP>,<92312.0303512893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA>
 <1992Nov9.085309.21943@sarah.albany.edu>


In article <1992Nov9.085309.21943@sarah.albany.edu>, sarah@albnyvms.bitnet says:
>
>HUH???
>
>You recommend that people email her to tell her the evils of WHAT?
>Betrayal of Judaism? Emotional problems? Maybe she's not Jewish? She
>never said she was.  Maybe she's a marriage counsellor? Maybe she's
>dating a Jew, knows someone who is, or is just curious.  Don't you think
>you're being a little unfair? Who is she hurting my asking for information?
>
>Sarah, who is VERY confused and surprised at the venom in your email.

I may have misstated myself. I am asking people NOT  to do that!

Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: egw@utkvx2.utk.edu (Wolpert, Edward Greenwal)
Subject: Kosher Question: Eggs and chesse
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: University of Tennessee Computing Center
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 14:33:00 GMT

	Just a quick question: I was over at a friends house who made a
chesse ohmlet(sp).  I was taught (read: my mother says) that since an
egg comes from a chicken that you can't have it with chesse.  Is this true?

	ObQuestion:	If this is true, then does this mean that
			that the egg came after the chicken?

	Edward Wolpert
	wolpert@lead.chem.utk.edu

Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: jbaltz@hebrew.cc.columbia.edu (Jerry B Altzman)
Subject: Re: Himalayan Yogi Biography
Organization: mailer daemons association
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 16:35:59 GMT

In article <1992Nov08.201637.14750@crash> classics@crash.cts.com (Baruch Schwartz) writes:
>*** HIMALYAN YOGI ON-LINE ***

Great, but is it good for the Jews?

//jbaltz
--


jerry b. altzman       Relax, it's all just 1's and 0's       +1 212 854 2057 
jbaltz@columbia.edu                                      jauus@cuvmb (bitnet)
NEVIS::jbaltz (HEPNET)                    ...!rutgers!columbia!jbaltz (bang!)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: Bradley Somer <somer@aecom.yu.edu>
Subject: Re: Autopsy - Kahane and Rosenbaum
Originator: scj@israel.nysernet.org
Reply-To: <Bradley Somer <somer@aecom.yu.edu>>
Organization: Nysernet
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 15:15:00 GMT



On Mon, 2 Nov 1992, andy wrote:

> In article <1992Nov2.020359.3021@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU>,
> baker@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Andrew Baker) says:
> >
> >In article <92306.1839142893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> andy
> ><2893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> writes:
> >>
> >>Frankly, I always thought the guy who got Kahane deserved a medal.
> >
> 
> If someone could go back through time and assassinate Mussolini or Franco or
> Salazar or any other fascist dictator or tyrant, would they not be deserving
> of a medal? I have read Kahane's writings and his vision is one of extreme
> ethnocentric nationalism, a belief that all races and ethnic groups should be
> seperate, a belief that, if he were not Jewish, you would have no problem
> calling fascit. He was a hateful, violent man, evil, whether in driving
> his Christian girlfriend to suicide in the sixties or preaching hatred against
> arabs. His death is no loss to humanity. He is one of the few people (along
> with Ferdinand Marcos and Nicolae Ceausescu) who I was happy to see perish.
> 
That was quite a eulogy.  I feel sorry for people like you who are exited
to see a Jew die.  I never agreed with Kahane's methods either, but he did
have some ideas worth thinking about. He never actually put any of his
ideas into action.  I find you pretty "hateful, violent, and evil" to
suggest that you were very "happy to see him perrish." Therefore, should
the fact that I find you hateful and evil make me happy if you should
perrish, Andy?  G-D FORBID. We are all part of the same human race.
Kahane believed that his ideas were in the Israel's and the Jewish
people's best interest.  Perhaps they are, perhaps they are not. His major
contributions to Israel and humanity  included balancing the ideas of
ignoramous', as yourself.  It sickens me to see someone happy to see any
Jewish leader brutally murdered in cold blood, and the murderer walking
around free soon after. I would like to reiterate that I was no fan of
Kahane's political ideas, however, I attended his funeral to pay respects
to a man who did what he thought was in our (including your) best
interest.
From: warren@nysernet.org (Warren Burstein)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Autopsy - Kahane and Rosenbaum
Date: 9 Nov 92 09:26:53 GMT
Reply-To: warren@nysernet.org
Organization: Mail to News Gateway at Wang Labs

In <92313.1945472893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> 2893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA (andy) writes:

[Two eyewitness accounts of acts of violence committed by members of
the funeral procession (one of them mine) deleted to save space - go
back and read them if you've forgotten.]

>If Kahane had lived, what would he have thought?

I don't know what he would have thought (although I can make some
uncomplimentary guesses).  But I imagine he would have said that while
his followers had nothing to do with it, he does not condemn the act.
This is what he used to say after other violent acts were committed
against non-Jews.

Unlike him, I do condemn these acts.

Unlike you, I do condemn his murder.

People on both sides, please fire away - I'm going to duck.
-- 
/|/-\/-\          Adif tzav pinui metzav shmoneh.
 |__/__/_/    
 |warren@     
/ nysernet.org 			    Jerusalem
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: gertler@cyclone.sbi.com (Don Gertler)
Subject: Re: *jesus of Nazareth*
Originator: scj@israel.nysernet.org
Reply-To: <gertler@cyclone.sbi.com (Don Gertler)>
Organization: Nysernet
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 21:59:59 GMT

tichauer@valpso.hanse.de (Manfredo Tichauer) writes:

>    SOME  Christians wear a cross on their neck because :
>    ^^^^
> 1. They feel that it is something like a talisman;

So where are the tzitziz, man?

-Don Gertler
From: bfoo_ltd@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (Brian E. Foont)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: British Royal Family question.
Date: 11 Nov 92 04:20:36 GMT
Organization: University of Rochester (Rochester, NY)

In article <1992Nov11.011110.3278@gsm001.mendelson.com> gsm@gsm001.mendelson.com (Geoffrey S. Mendelson) writes:
>>Why does (did) the royal family use a mohel instead of a surgeon or some
>>other M.D.?
>
>Legend says that they are direct descendants of King David.
>

This ridiculous idea is based on a common theme among royalty, which 
makes them want to have fantastic family trees.  Therefore, virtually
all of them trace their lineage back to Charles the Great (Charlemange).
From here where would you go.  Well... you want divine right to rule, 
so a relation to (remember these guys are virtually all Christian) god
would just be great.  Unfortunately (or otherwise) Jesus had no children,
therefore, there are several different version by which this "line"
traces itself into various points in Mary's (Jesus's mother) or Joseph's
(Jesus's adopted father) family trees.  Like the two completely different
versions of Joseph's family tree tracing his family back to King David
(Mattew and Luke - even have a different number of generation), these
are after going back a few generations from Charles the Great, almost
certainly fabrications.

Brian E. Foont
bfoo_ltd@uhura.cc.rochester.edu

My views are my own, but you may share them.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish,misc.headlines,talk.politics.misc,misc.legal
From: titmas@chdasic.sps.mot.com (Eric Titmas)
Subject: Re: Say it ain't so
Organization: SPS
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 22:45:51 GMT

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.
-- 
Eric Titmas      Motorola ASIC       titmas@chdasic.sps.mot.com               

It is impossible to take in more money than Congress can spend.  - Thomas Sowell
From: rothberg@bimacs.BITNET (Danny Rothenberg)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Is Hilary Clinton a MOTT
Date: 8 Nov 92 13:27:48 GMT
Organization: Math department, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, ISRAEL

What is 'MOTT'?


--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Danny Rothenberg            |    ^     Life's a dream-so sleep through it!
Bitnet:                     | \-/-\-/         Be'ahavat Chinam
rothberg@bimacs             |  X   X Am Yisra'el       The People of Israel
Internet:                   | /-\-/-\Be'Eretz Yisra'el In The Land of Israel
rothberg@imacs.cs.biu.ac.il |    V   Im Torat Yisra'el With The Torah of Israel
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Organization: The American University - University Computing Center
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 22:40:53 EST
From: <CARIAN@auvm.american.edu>
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Conversion Question
 <09Nov92.194522.19265@granite.ciw.edu> <92314.212922CARIAN@auvm.american.edu>
 <1992Nov10.160234.1074@speedy.aero.org>

In article <1992Nov10.160234.1074@speedy.aero.org>, nadel@attatash.aero.org
(Miriam Nadel) says:
>
>In article <92314.212922CARIAN@auvm.american.edu> <CARIAN@auvm.american.edu>
>writes:
>>A better example would be the Conservative attitude toward Reform
>conversions.
. . .

>But there does tend to be the assumption among Conservative rabbis that a
>Reform conversion was not done halachically.  In the absence of specific
>information to the contrary, it would seem perfectly consistent to reject
>the conversion on the grounds that a Reform conversion is unlikely to meet
>Conservative halachic criteria.
>

With all due respect, I don't believe that there is an automatic assumption
by Conservative rabbis that all Reform conversions are done non-halachically.
Certainly *I* don't make such an assumption.

I have seen this and similar statements made before (about assumptions of the
status of particular conversions) and never really understood the point.
It's not as if any particular rabbi is faced day in and day out with so many
conversions that there is not the time or ability to ask the appropriate
questions. And most Reform rabbis who perform halachic conversions take
great pains to give their converts documentation attesting to that fact, so
one can generally know that a conversion was halachic by simply looking
at the "teudat giyur."

I'm not sure what percentage of Reform conversions today are halachic but it
is not insignificant. Reform rabbis often use the same mikveh that the
Rabbinical Assembly here in Washington uses for conversions and I have met
numerous Reform colleagues at the mikveh for that purpose.

I was a Reform rabbi for six years and never officiated at other than a
halakhic conversion.

Rabbi Charles Arian
CARIAN@american.edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: saal@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (samuel.saal)
Subject: Re: Himalayan Yogi online
Organization: AT&T
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 13:16:47 GMT

In article <1992Nov08.201356.14376@crash> classics@crash.cts.com
(Baruch Schwartz) writes:

>                           About the Sanskrit Classics

>3. Bibles:. For the first time in the history of the world, the first
>five books of the Old Testament and the entire New Testament are
>explained and interpreted; all the mysteries of the Revelations chapter
>are deciphered in the "light of inner Realization." The real apocalypse
>is unveiled. The Bhagavad Gita and the Quran are also included in this
>edition.

Although I cannot figure out why this was considered relevant enough
for posting to SCJ, with a name like Baruch Schwartz doing the posting,
should we be as concerned about Jews 4 Babji?
-- 
Sam Saal      kingfish!saal OR saal@kingfish.att.com
	Vayiftach HaShem et Peah Ha`Aton
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: chr04ha@vmsa.technion.ac.il (Amitai Halevi)
Subject: Re: Jewish Fundamentalism
Organization: Technion, Israel Institute of Technology
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 22:34:05 GMT

In article <2794@israel.nysernet.org>, warren@nysernet.org (Warren Burstein) 
 writes:
> I did once come across two people who claimed (and seemed serious
> about it) that every word of every midrash was true.  I tried to find
> out if perhaps they meant something different by this statement than
> what it seemed to mean on face value (e.g. "Was Moshe's height really
> ten amot?"  "Yes.") and either we were speaking entirely different
> languages, or they really accepted every word of midrash as factual
> (as opposed to containing truth in a metaphorical way).
> 
> Now assuming that I understood them, and they weren't just pulling my
> leg, perhaps this is Torah Shebaal Peh Fundamentalism?
> --
> /|/-\/-\          Adif tzav pinui metzav shmoneh.
>  |__/__/_/

>  |warren@

Perhaps indeed. But then, need one stop with the Midrash?

Amitai


 *---------------------------------------------------------------*
 | E.A. Halevi, Department of Chemistry, Technion - I.I.T.       |     
 | "Mipnei seiva takum, vehadarta pnei zaken" - Leviticus 19, 32 |
 *---------------------------------------------------------------*
From: saal@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (samuel.saal)
Subject: Re: McDonalds in Israel
Organization: AT&T
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 13:41:53 GMT

In article <1992Nov8.072533.696@vms.huji.ac.il> backon@vms.huji.ac.il writes:
>I just read in the Israeli papers that McDonalds is *finally* coming to Israel.
>I wonder if a Big Mac will be renamed BIG MOISHE :-)  :-)

Wasn't there a McDovids near Yeshiva University in New Yourk City?
-- 
Sam Saal      kingfish!saal OR saal@kingfish.att.com
	Vayiftach HaShem et Peah Ha`Aton
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: shimoff@umbc5.umbc.edu (Eliot Shimoff)
Subject: Re: Kosher & Jewish Holidays (2 different subjects)
Organization: Univ. of MD, Baltimore County
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 13:37:05 GMT

In article <MANDEL.92Nov6181009@litp4.ibp.fr> mandel@litp.ibp.fr (Arnaldo MANDEL) writes:
>In article <1992Nov5.152621.2481@porthos.cc.bellcore.com> lise@kepler.uucp (80734-romanov) writes:
>
>>    In article <92309.182218CARIAN@auvm.american.edu> <CARIAN@auvm.american.edu> writes:
>>    >
>>    >I'm not sure about congregational rabbis (BTW, it is not proper to capitalize
>>    >"rabbi" as a generic noun) but Hillel directors who are rabbis get paid for
>>    >moving furniture and setting up chairs. Everything else we do for free.
>>    >
>>    >Rabbi Charles Arian
>>    >CARIAN@american.edu
>> 
>>    My understanding is that congregational rabbis are not paid per se for
>>    holiday and Shabbat services.  They are compensated because the preparation
>>    (ongoing) required for services combined with constant service to the
>>    community restricts them from making a living otherwise.   
>

>Typical make believe hypocrisy of the kind that makes more and more people
>lose all respect for institutional religion.  Orthodox Judaism is certainly
>full of this (starting, perhaps, with the "shabbes goy" of old).

Oh.  In other words, before learning about the shabbes goy and Hillel
directors, you had respect for institutional religion?

Also, try checking both the definition of hypocrisy and the halakhic 
system before making such broad accusations.  Your ignorance is
appalling.




-- 
Eliot Shimoff                  |    n   n   n
   shimoff@umbc3.umbc.edu      |   X + Y = Z .  Easy to prove no solutions
Ashamnu, bagadnu, gazalnu ...  |   for n greater than 2.  Darn.  Can't fit
Better luck next year!         |   it into this little .sig file.  Oh well.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: MASH@WEIZMANN.WEIZMANN.AC.IL (Michael Shimshoni)
Subject: Halakha in Israel (was ..Jewish Equivalent of Islamic Law
Organization: Mail to News Gateway at Wang Labs
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 13:05:45 GMT

In: <1dmcjsINNgpl@pita.cs.huji.ac.il>
yair@huha.cs.huji.ac.il (Yair Friedman) stated:

>In article <1dis3mINNm2i@pita.cs.huji.ac.il>, aplebaum@irs01.cs.huji.ac.il (Hi
>|>
>|> I don't know about muslims, but we (National-Rligious Jews) want
>|> to change the currently british-otoman-etc-law in Israel to the
>
>Hillel,
>
>As far as I know Halakha is the base of law in Israel. The british common law
>and ottoman las has no status in Israel for several years, with exceptions
>of laws that was re-legislated such as the land ownership law (tabu).
>If there is no low in some subject the judge has to decide according to the
>halakha.

Yair is over-pessimistic.  The situation, while far from ideal, is not
as black as he paints it.  On independence in 1948 the Knesset decided
at the  outset: abolishing the  laws of the "White  Paper" (regulating
Jewish immigration to Palestine, and  making it impossible for Jews to
buy land in  certain parts of Palestine etc.) AND  that all other laws
would remain in power  as they were at the end  of the British Mandate
unless changed by Knesset legislation.   Thus e.g. the IMO unfortunate
legal situation  which does not  enable civil marriages in  Israel, is
still in  power, as it  was during the  British rule.  Since  then the
Knesset has enacted  changed many laws, the most famous  being the Law
of Return,  but still if  no legislation  was passed the  British (and
sometimes the Othman  or "Ottoman" law) is still the  law of the State
of Israel.  What may have misled  Yair is some general statement, that
if there is no specific law on  the books decisions should be based of
the  "Hebrew  Law".  In  practice,  this  is  a general  guideline  of
principle, not something acted upon  in daily court practice.  Just to
to  give an  extreme example,  there  is "no  law" on  the subject  of
smoking in public or private on Shabbat.  The Halakha has "some" views
on it,  still I  have yet to  hear that a  charge was  brought against
someone smoking on  Shabbat (perhaps with the exception if  he does so
in his car in a gas station...).

We have plenty of legal religious coercion in Israel, there is no need
to paint the picture blacker than it is!

>					Yair Friedman.

      Michael Shimshoni