HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: msirbu@next5.cs.umr.edu (Mihai Sirbu)
Subject: Moldova/Romania News from RFE/RL, 11/11/92
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 20:17:44 GMT
Organization: University of Missouri-Rolla, Missouri's Technological University

To subscribe to the RFE/RL daily bulletin send e-mail to     
		LISTSERV@UBVM.CC.BUFFALO.EDU
with a line
		SUB RFERL-L firstname lastname
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
RFE/RL Daily Report              No. 218, 11 November 1992

STOLOJAN EXPRESSES CONFIDENCE IN HIS SUCCESSOR.  Romania's outgoing
prime minister, Theodor Stolojan, said his appointed successor,
Nicolae Vacaroiu, is the best man to advance reform in the country.
In an interview on Radio Bucharest on 10 November, Stolojan came to
the defense of Vacaroiu, after doubts had been raised concerning his
suitability. He said those underestimating Vacaroiu were "very
wrong" and added that his successor had made an important
contribution to the country's economic reform.  If Vacaroiu was
incompatible with anything, Stolojan said, this was only
"incompatibility with corruption." Stolojan added that although the
new government will be headed by a non-partisan specialist and might
include some other experts, it will clearly be a government of the
Democratic National Salvation Front. (Michael Shafir, RFE/RL, Inc.)

ROMANIAN TRUCK DRIVERS STAGE WARNING STRIKE.  The Romanian Truck
Drivers' Union staged a warning strike in Bucharest on 10 November,
Radio Bucharest and Rompres reported.  Some 130,000 drivers gathered
in one of the capital's main squares, blocking traffic.  They were
protesting against the rise in fuel prices implemented since 22
October. The union's vice president said that negotiations with the
government will continue on 11 November and added that if fuel
prices are not brought back to the previous levels the union will
stage a general strike on 16 November. Protest meetings were also
held on 10 November in several other cities.  (Michael Shafir,
RFE/RL, Inc.)

--
The RFE/RL Daily Report is produced by the RFE/RL Research
Institute (a division of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, Inc.)
with the assistance of the RFE/RL News and Current Affairs
Division (NCA). The report is available by electronic mail
via LISTSERV (RFERL-L@UBVM.CC.BUFFALO.EDU), on the
Sovset' computer bulletin board, by fax, and by postal mail.

Copyright 1992, RFE/RL, Inc. All rights reserved.
From: mihai@sep.Stanford.EDU (Alexander Mihai Popovici)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.romanian
Subject: Cioaba, the gypsy king
Date: 12 Nov 1992 21:38:31 GMT
Organization: Stanford Exploration Project
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: oas.stanford.edu


	BUCHAREST, Romania (UPI) -- Ion Cioaba, king of the Romanian gypsies,
urged Romania and Germany Wednesday to delay the repatriation of 43,000
Gypsies from Germany until spring.
	``Where can 40.000 people go?,'' Cioaba told reporters in a press
conference. ``They have no homes, there are old people, handicapped
children and they have no food. No one has thought of these problems.''
	A German-Romanian agreement that came into effect on Nov. 1, provides
that Romanians living illegally in Germany will be forcibly repatriated
to their country within two years.
	A large number of Romanians who recently emigrated to Germany, are
Gypsies who fled from discrimination and attacks by Romanian nationalist
bands.
	The German government will bear the costs of the repatriation,
estimated at $6.3 million for 1992 and another $12.6 million until 1994.
	Cioaba denied that there was racial discrimination against the two
million gypsy population in Romania. ``We have lived here for more than
600 years. We have nothing against Romanians and they have nothing
against us,'' he said.


Newsgroups: soc.culture.romanian
From: emil@lamisun2.epfl.ch (Emil Laurentiu)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.romanian
Subject: Phone numbers?
Date: 13 Nov 92 18:29:05 GMT
Organization: Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne


	Hi you there! Please repost the list with the changes
of phone numbers in Romania (starting mid November).

-- 
---------------------------------------------------------
				                      Emil
Newsgroups: soc.culture.romanian
From: zoltan@psychnet.psychol.utas.edu.au (Zoltan Schreter)
Subject: Re: Hungarian Autonomy
Organization: Psychology Department, University of Tasmania
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 05:56:50 GMT

Bravo for these mostly rational and balanced arguments on this issue!
I enjoy some of my opinions on Romanians being falsified (I am a Hungarian).
What a comparison with many postings on soc.culture.yugoslav!

Zoltan Schreter
University of Tasmania, Hobart
Australia
From: slyxg@cc.usu.edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.romanian
Subject: Re: Gabe, bad address received.
Date: 5 Nov 92 12:41:06 MDT
Organization: Utah State University

Gabe, 
	I tried to send you and e-mail, but my mailer can't find your e-mail
box, to send it to.  Could you send me another address that I could try?
P.S.  I am a CS major also.

				Douglas Cannell
				slyxg@cc.usu.edu
From: mihai@sep.Stanford.EDU (Alexander Mihai Popovici)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.romanian
Subject: Iliescu and Hungary
Date: 10 Nov 1992 20:43:48 GMT
Organization: Stanford Exploration Project
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: oas.stanford.edu

I repost a somewhat stale (10 days) article from clari...


	BUCHAREST, Romania (UPI) -- Newly re-elected President Ion Iliescu
lashed out at ethnic Hungarians during his inaugural address Friday,
saying their appeals for greater local autonomy based on ethnic and
cultural identity were ``unacceptable.''
	``The demands for territorial authority on an ethnic basis are
unacceptable and without any foundation in the political...and legal
order,'' Iliescu said during his 45-minute inaugural address, which also
included appeals for closer ties with Hungary and a pledge to implement
free-market reforms.
	Iliescu's comments came in response to demands by the Hungarian
Democratic Union, which called for local autonomy and self
administration after a party congress earlier this week. Ethnic
Hungarians, who make up 8 percent of the population, have been the
target of linguistic and cultural discrimination.
	The Hungarian union denied they were making any territorial demands,
but their appeal touched off a furor among Romanian nationalists
suspicious that ethnic Hungarians want autonomy for Transylvania with
the ultimate goal of annexing the former Austro-Hungarian territory to
neighboring Hungary.
	Transylvania, a former principality that merged with the Austro-
Hungarian empire, is home to most of Romania's 1.7 million ethnic
Hungarians. It was ceded to Romania in 1918 following the breakup of the
empire at the close of World War I.
	The appeal by the HDU arose out of a climate of ethnic tensions in
Transylvania. Romanian nationalist rhetoric during the election
heightened the problem and soured ties with neighboring Hungary.
Hungarians recently charged that one Transylvania city mayor was trying
to close Hungarian businesses and remove signs in the Hungarian
language.
	During his inaugural address, Iliescu appealed for better relations
with Hungary, saying, ``We must reach a stage of normality.'' Iliescu
issued an invitation for Hungarian President Arpad Goencz to visit
Hungary and meet with him.
	The Romanian president, a former communist and one-time associate of
dictator Nicolae Ceausescu, also underscored his commitment to free-
market economic reforms. Because of his affiliation with with the
communists, Iliescu's commitment to democracy and a free-market economy
has been doubted at home and abroad since he came to power after the
fall of communism in 1989.
	Iliescu was re-elected to office during elections last month. Leading
leftist and anti-communist parties have rejected his appeal for a
national unity government to lead the country through its difficult
transition to an open political and economic system.


Newsgroups: soc.culture.romanian
From: mihai@sep.Stanford.EDU (Alexander Mihai Popovici)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.romanian
Subject: Re: Hungarian Autonomy?
Date: 5 Nov 1992 21:48:07 GMT
Organization: Stanford Exploration Project
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: oas.stanford.edu

In article <1dabcrINN4k3@agate.berkeley.edu>, 160955r@garnet.berkeley.edu () writes:
|> 
|> The imperatives of the moment have changed; Transylvania is irrevocably ours;
|> the urgent issue is not to LEGITIMIZE our hold on it, but to maximize 
|> people's welfare. To do that, we need to hit a deal with the Hungarians.
|> Clinging to obvious historic exaggerations is nothing but a hindrance in
|> this process..
|> I'm not saying to give away the farm; my original posting mentioned
|> safeguards, justice, etc. 
|> 
|> Radu T. Tomescu at UCBerkeley
|> Department of Economics

I totally agree that once we put aside all hystorical arguments we get
to the core of the problem.  Why all this Hungarian discontent?

I think the problem is mostly economy related.  It started in the late 70's
and was exacerbated by Abuziv Impuscatu's anti-hungarian policies.
People in Transylvania were watching Hungarian TV and comparing
the standard of living of their relatives in Hungary with their
own (much lower) in Romania.  Later the barrel of nationalistic
hate was spilled all over Eastern Europe.

I also think the solution is also in the economics.  If people
have the same standard of living as in Hungary and the same rights
(this is the tricky part) there shouldn't be any discontent.
If the standard of living in Romania was higher than in Hungary,
would anybody want to leave it?

So how to ensure the same rights?  A step is the Constitution.
The next is education.  Amazing the difference between people's
reaction to an accent between California and Texas.  However
this is a second order correction.
In a real democracy the Hungarian issue should not be an issue.

Cheers
Mihai
From: arf@ddsw1.mcs.com (Jack Schmidling)
Subject: ARF says is aint so
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 05:53:16 GMT
Organization: ddsw1.MCS.COM Contributor, Chicago, IL

In article <1992Nov6.215401.20508@midway.uchicago.edu> thf2@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>In article <BxAv09.FKo@world.std.com> srm@world.std.com (Stevens R Miller) writes:
>>>Stevens,  you're the one who brought up the mixed jury idea.
>>
>>So?  Jack suggests that facts can't be found by a mixed jury, unless the
>>mix includes Jews when the victim is a Jew.  I say the facts were determinable
>>by the mix that existed in the Nelson trial:  Six blacks, three hispanics
>>and three whites.  Is anyone claiming that adding a Jew to that mix would have
>>improved its ability to find facts?
>
>As I recall, the Rodney King-beating case jury was a "mixed" jury.  That
>didn't stop complaints that there were no blacks on the jury.

That has nothing to do with the the red herring about the mixed jury and
somehow I am a bigot again for trying to make some sense out of this
silly discussion.

there were two groups with prejudiced views involved in the case, Jews and
Blacks.  In fact, you could say Chasidic Jews and Black to be more correct.
It would seem to me that the most unbiased jury would contain neither of
the above but if you insist on "mixing" the jury to somehow get justice,
I insist on an equal number of Chasidic Jews and Blacks.  Nothing else
makes any sense.

js
From: rubinoff@linc.cis.upenn.edu (Robert Rubinoff)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Pyramids
Date: 11 Nov 92 19:41:33 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania

In article <1992Nov11.192728.3120@cbfsb.cb.att.com> klur@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (david.s.klur) writes:
>Now, I had thought that slaves (mostly Jews, but maybe others also?)
>built the pyramids under the pharaohs' rule.  After all, Jews
>celebrate Passover, the freedom of the Jews from slavery in Egypt.


The pyramids were all finished before Abraham was born; we had nothing to do
with them (except presumably to stare at them in amazement).  The Torah records
that our ancestors built "storage cities"; presumably they contributed to
various other types of construction, but no pyramids.

   Robert
Organization: Queen's University at Kingston
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 01:20:05 EDT
From: andy <2893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA>
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Autopsy - Kahane and Rosenbaum
 <Bx64A5.753@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> <1992Nov6.003849.23188@bony1.bony.com>
 <1992Nov09.103259.23950@ncrcae.ColumbiaSC.NCR.COM>

In article <1992Nov09.103259.23950@ncrcae.ColumbiaSC.NCR.COM>,
nabil@ncrcol.ColumbiaSC.NCR.COM (Nabil Idriss) says:
>
>I have a feeling that the Kahane was assassinated by the Mossad and not
>by an Arab. That is probably why there were no conviction in his case.
>Does anybody agree?

Unlikely
Organization: Queen's University at Kingston
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 20:08:09 EDT
From: andy <2893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA>
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: ad hominem

On our in-house discussion system we have a rule against personal, ad hominem
attacks, lets adopt that here. I shall refrain from making personal attacks and
 I hope others do to.
From: nmiller@starbase.trincoll.edu (norman miller)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: If I could read only one book..
Date: 12 Nov 92 22:44:26 GMT
Organization: Trinity College, Hartford, CT.

Of the many fine candidates, I'd settle for
Adin Steinsaltz's beautiful "The Thirteen-
Petalled Rose".

And of course there's Genesis.

Norman Miller
From: mmg@doc.ic.ac.uk (M M Ghanem)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Who built the pyramids
Date: 11 Nov 1992 21:25:56 GMT
Organization: Department of Computing, Imperial College, University of London, UK.
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: peaberry.doc.ic.ac.uk

Unfortunately I have to disappoint you, according to my best of knowledge
and to the common knowledge what you are saying is utterly rubbish.

The pyramids were built by EGYPTIANS not jews. You can check with your
nearest library to clarify your facts. If any jews contributed to building
the pyramid (although I doubt the fact) I think they were EGYPTIANS.

If what you were saying is true, why did they not transfer their knowr-how
with them ? 

P.S. Am I sensing something in the line of : The pyramids are jewish, 
therefore .... 

I hope I am wrong.

Sincerely,

Moustafa M. Ghanem
Dept. of Computing
Imperial College
London.
From: arens@ISI.EDU (Yigal Arens)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Living in Israel - Voting in USA
Date: 12 Nov 92 22:43:51 GMT
	<lfio2vINN223@appserv.Eng.Sun.COM>
Distribution: world
Organization: USC/Information Sciences Institute
In-reply-to: janiceg@marvin.Eng.Sun.COM's message of 5 Nov 92 17:56:47 GMT

In article <lfio2vINN223@appserv.Eng.Sun.COM> janiceg@marvin.Eng.Sun.COM (Janice Gelb) writes:
>
> In article 14996@midway.uchicago.edu, clmn@ellis.uchicago.edu (Bill Coleman) writes:
> >
> >Why should these people vote for both the US President and the Israeli 
> >Knesset?  And, to top it off, many of them argue that American Jews have
> >no business living in America.  I don't get it.
>
> Also, although most of these people were firmly committed to Israel, 
> they wanted their future children to have dual citizenship and they 
> wanted to maintain their own.  As the old saying goes, "It couldn't 
> hurt."  There is no harm in maintaining American citizenship, and 
> there are scenarios where it could be very helpful indeed.

So I guess that's what Zionism has come to...

1900: The only place a Jew can lead a normal life is a Jewish state.
1950: A Jewish state should be maintained so that Jews abroad have a
      place to go to if they feel like it.
1990: A Jew in the Jewish state should maintain contact with a safe haven
      abroad, you never know when you or your descendents will wish to
      move there.
--
Yigal Arens
USC/ISI
arens@isi.edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: solovay@netcom.com (Andrew Solovay)
Subject: Re: Conversion Question
Summary: Yo. Chill out.
Organization: International Irony League -- Death before smileys!
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 00:35:24 GMT

In article <1992Nov5.220045.25273@udel.edu> carroll@ori.cis.udel.edu (Mark C. Carroll) writes:
>In article <memo.731281@cix.compulink.co.uk> stephenp@cix.compulink.co.uk writes:
>]In-Reply-To: <1992Nov4.162107.16259@cbnews.cb.att.com> ask@cbnews.cb.att.com (Arthur S. Kamlet)
>]
>]] +From         : ask@cbnews.cb.att.com (Arthur S. Kamlet)
>]] +Subject      : Re: Conversion Question
>]] 
>]] In article <memo.729068@cix.compulink.co.uk> stephenp@cix.compulink.co.uk writes:
>]] ]You say that the person is NO LONGER keeping MANY of the mitzvot,
>]] ]from which one might infer that he or she at one time kept all the
>]] ]mitzvot and still keeps some of them. If that is the case, then in
>]] ]all probability the conversion would remain valid. The only way it
>]] ]could be found to be invalid is if one of the conditions for
>]] ]conversion was lacking at the time of the conversion, viz. the Beis
>]] ]Din was not Kosher (eg. Conservative), ...
>]] 
>]] I try hard not to let my anger get the best of me,  but why does the
>]] author have to go out of his was to provoke so many people?
>]] 
>]] Wasn't it sufficient to say "the Beis Din was not kosher" without
>]] being insulting and political and wrong?
>]
>]I'm not trying to insult anybody, merely stating a fact.
>]
>
>Nonsense. 
>
>You _deliberately_ went out of your way to add something to your post
>in order to make it pointedly insulting to a large number of your
>fellow Jews on the net. There was _no_ reason to go out of your way
>and point out your (unjustified) belief that Conservative conversion
>are invalid _unless_ you wanted to make an effort to insult and/or
>denigrate the Conservative readers on the net.

As I recall, the question was, under what circumstances might
Orthodox Jews view a conversion as invalid. One such circumstance
would be an invalid bet din. There's pretty much only one
siutuation in which a bet din is convened which an Orthodox Jew
would consider invalid, and that's when the members of the bet
din belong to a non-Orthodox movement. Given that, it was
entirely appropriate to give a Conservative bet din as an example.

Why does it bother you so much? By now it's well established that
Orthodox Jews don't accept Conservative conversions. If you're so
outraged by that viewpoint, perhaps you shouldn't follow a forum
on which OJs post...
-- 
Andrew M. Solovay	    "Until there was rock, you only had God."
					--Ziggy Stardust

#include <disclaimer.h>
From: rmt51@cas.org (Rick Turkel)
Subject: Re: Kosher Question: Eggs and chesse
Reply-To: rmt51@cas.org
Organization: S.W.I.G.
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 17:12:07 GMT

In article <13NOV199210332754@utkvx2.utk.edu>, egw@utkvx2.utk.edu (Wolpert,
Edward Greenwal) writes:
|> 	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
|> 
The only eggs that may not be eaten with cheese are those found inside a
chicken after it is slaughtered.  All other eggs are pareve, i.e., permitted
with either dairy or meat foods.
-- 
Rick Turkel           (___  ____ _  _  _  _  _     _  ___   _  _ _  ___
(rmt51@cas.org)           )    |  |  \  )  |/ \     |    |   |  \_)    |
(rmt51@cas.bitnet)       /     | _| __)/   | __)    | ___|_  | _( \    |
			Ein navi be`iro.            |

Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: levene@aplpy.jhuapl.edu (Robert A. Levene)
Subject: Re: Modest dress in Judaism (was Re: sexism in Judaism)
Organization: Johns Hopkins University
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 92 02:42:52 GMT

[I'm not sure if these posts are getting through; sorry if this is a repeat]

In article <1d9qr4INNjum@morrow.stanford.edu> aliki@nova1.stanford.edu
(Alexandra Schmidt) writes:

> Covered knees, elbows, nothing tight, and no cleavage does not in any
> way preclude a dress being elegant and glamorous.  I don't know where
> the equation of 'modest' and 'drab' is coming from here, but it's not
> from any religious source I know of.

They're not the same at all and I'm sorry I left that impression.  I
don't even recall if "drab" was the exact term the lecturer used; she
was trying to emphasize that when she worked in the "outside" world,
she wanted to blend in with the furniture and wallpaper, as distinct
from Sabbath, Holidays and community affairs where she dresses well.

The specifics will vary place to place.  Wearing a dress with short
sleeves isn't the same as wearing a miniskirt and halter top.  You can
be sure that given a particular outfit, there are some communities
(even within the same neighborhood) where said outfit would be
scandalous, some where it would be OK, and some where it would be
overkill.

Among the non-Orthodox world, I'm not aware of any particular 
dress code, perhaps others could start a thread on that.


> ... want, just obey a few small dress codes and then if the guys start
> ogling you as you sashay around the dance floor (with your husband, of
> course) you can feel secure in the knowledge that it's not your fault,
> it's theirs.

Not so fast... men aren't supposed to be watch women dance, which is
one reason why at Orthodox weddings, the men's and women's
circle-dancing is separated.  Furthermore, dancing with one's husband
in public is frowned upon for various reasons.

Rob

--
Robert A. Levene     Internet: levene@aplpy.jhuapl.edu
  "/  //  / /"         Bitnet:   RXL1@APLVM
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: goldberg@techunix.technion.ac.il (Jacques Goldberg)
Subject: Re: Who built the pyramids
Organization: Technion, Israel Institute of Technology
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 16:35:46 GMT

mmg@doc.ic.ac.uk (M M Ghanem) writes:

>Unfortunately I have to disappoint you, according to my best of knowledge
>and to the common knowledge what you are saying is utterly rubbish.

>The pyramids were built by EGYPTIANS not jews. You can check with your
>nearest library to clarify your facts. If any jews contributed to building
>the pyramid (although I doubt the fact) I think they were EGYPTIANS.
     Were the Jews living in Egypt under Pharaon considered Egyptians? It
     does not seem, at least if you accept the text of the Bible as you would
     accept any antique document: for the Bible says that persecutions started
     against these FOREIGNERS.
>If what you were saying is true, why did they not transfer their knowr-how
>with them ?
     Good question. Slaves forced by the Nazis to build the Auschwitz and other
     death camps have fortunately not (yet?) transferred the know-how.
     Or, less aggressively, Jews don't keep their dead people in pyramids, they
     bury them deep in the ground such as Abraham, Sarah, Isaac, Leah etc in 
     the Hebron cave.

>P.S. Am I sensing something in the line of : The pyramids are jewish,
>therefore ....
     Definitely NO WAY. No such claim. The pyramids are splendid Egyptian
     monuments and many people think that Jews were among the cheap labor used
     to build them. There were paid for the work and their descendants have
     absolutely no claim, even if their ancestors were not allowed to go on
     strike for a better paycheck.
>I hope I am wrong.
     You are even not wrong, just not very well informed.

>Sincerely,
     Friendly,
>Moustafa M. Ghanem
>Dept. of Computing
>Imperial College
>London.
     Yaaqov Goldberg, Dept of Physics, Technion, Haifa