HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: solovay@netcom.com (Andrew M. Solovay)
Subject: Flame Wars on s.c.j (was Re: Conversion Question)
Summary: It's--ah say--it's a joke, son! Jest, that is.
Organization: International Irony League -- Death before smileys!
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 17:47:55 GMT

I don't know about you guys, but I think we've done this topic to
death. I think it's time we start one of the other Perenial
FlameWars. I humbly offer the following as FlameBait(TM):

You Zionists wouldn't be so brutal to the Palestinians if you'd
just accept Y'shua.

(As a rare boon to the Humor Impaired, I am adding a smiley to
this posting, contrary to my usual scruples...)

                                                                  ..
                                                                  MM .M
                                  .MMMMMMMM,                      MM MM  ,.
         ., .M                .MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM,            'MM.  MM MM .M'
       . M: M;  M          .MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM,          'MM,:M M'!M'
      ;M MM M: .M        .MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM,         'MM'...'M
       M;MM;M :MM      .MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM.       .MMMMMMMM
       'M;M'M MM      MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM.    ,,M.M.'MMM'
        MM'MMMM      MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM.'M''MMMM;MM'
       MM., ,MM     MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM      '.MMM
       'MM;MMMMMMMM.MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM.      'MMM
        ''.'MMM'  .MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM       MMMM
         MMC      MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM.      'MMMM
        .MM      :MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM''MMM       MMMMM
        MMM      :M  'MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM'.MM  MM:M.    'MMMMM
       .MMM   ...:M: :M.'MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM'.M''   MM:MMMMMMMMMMMM'
      AMMM..MMMMM:M.    :M.'MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM'.MM'     MM''''''''''''
      MMMMMMMMMMM:MM     'M'.M'MMMMMMMMMMMMMM'.MC'M'     .MM
       '''''''''':MM.       'MM!M.'M-M-M-M'M.'MM'        MMM
                  MMM.            'MMMM!MMMM'            .MM
                   MMM.             '''   ''            .MM'
                    MMM.                               MMM'
                     MMMM            ,.J.JJJJ.       .MMM'
                      MMMM.       'JJJJJJJ'JJJM   CMMMMM
                        MMMMM.    'JJJJJJJJ'JJJ .MMMMM'
                          MMMMMMMM.'  'JJJJJ'JJMMMMM'
                            'MMMMMMMMM'JJJJJ JJJJJ'
                               ''MMMMMMJJJJJJJJJJ'
                                       'JJJJJJJJ'
                                         JJJJJJ
-- 
Andrew M. Solovay    "I've learned a secret about keeping house... after
                      four years, the dust doesn't get any thicker."
                                        --Quentin Crisp
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: cohen@quartz.ciw.edu (Ronald Cohen)
Subject: Re: Conversion Question
Date: 11 Nov 92 02:33:42 GMT
Organization: Geophysical Laboratory, CIW

In article <92315.121602YZKCU@CUNYVM.BITNET> Yaakov Kayman <YZKCU@CUNYVM.BITNET> writes:
> ... There would still remain the problema-
>tical situation of Conservative clergy who themselves do not accept all
>of Torah, Written and ORAL (emphasis added),
> as divinely-authored and therefore binding,

That would have been news to the sages.  Some oral halachot were
given to Moses on Sinai, but surely not the entire Gemara,
Rambam, Shulchan Aruch, etc!  That must not be what you mean.


I think Orthodox should accept Conservative conversions,
marriages, and divorces on the basis of darchay shalom.  The O
position on this is not tenable for the long term, because it is
impossible to demonstrate that some ancestor did not become Jewish
by a C conversion.  Just because one is brought up O does not mean
that all of ones ancestors back to some ancient time (when?
Jacob?  But Joseph's wife was Egyptian!)  were kosher.  By
emphasizing these issues they cause pain and are mean spirited,
but the basic fact remains:  there is no way to demonstrate "pure
blood" back to Abraham!  Correct me if I am wrong, but the O
halacha does not put a statute of limitations on this.  

O does not have to back down on halacha here to bring peace (and
Moshiach?).  They merely have to decide to not press the issue.
Just as they do not stone a sabbath breaker to death
(hopefully!) they should not destroy a persons sole by kicking
out an observant member of the Jewish community because of what
they regard as an unkosher conversion.

I think Rambam had the right point of view on this.  He states
that one should not investigate a family to see if they are
Jewish if they claim so.  Their claim should be accepted unless
they are mean-spirited, in which case the presumption is that
they are not Jewish!
-- 
Ronald Cohen
Geophysical Laboratory, Carnegie Institution of Washington
5251 Broad Branch Rd., N.W.,  Washington, D.C. 20015
From: weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Einstein and Judaism
Date: 9 Nov 92 14:02:32 GMT
Reply-To: weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener)
Organization: The Wistar Institute of Anatomy and Biology
In-reply-to: 2893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA (andy)

In article <92313.1842022893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA>, 2893684@QUCDN (andy) writes:
>As this is a "cultural" newsgroup rather than a religious one, [...]

Wrong.

As explained in the mythical FAQ, and known by all long time posters,
this is not just wrong, this is completely and ignorantly wrong.

In the old days, all netwide groups were named net.* (usual) or mod.*
(moderated) or even fa.* (forwarded ARPANET mailing lists).  There was
no official newsgroup voting, CFD, and all that muckity.  So at some
point net.religion spawned off net.religion.jewish, which mostly talked
about food anyway.  Then came the great renaming, and the formation of
talk.*, soc.* and all the rest. (alt.* and gnu.* were still in the
future.)  The expectation at the time was that talk.* groups were going
to die outside of universities.  Since the net.religion.* hierarchy was
headed to talk.*, the proposal was to move to soc.culture.jewish.  And
that's it.  The group is neither "religion" nor "culture", it's Jewish.

(At that time, Mideast politics was still part of the newsgroup.  Within
the year, talk.politics.mideast was created.)
-- 
-Matthew P Wiener (weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: warren@nysernet.org (Warren Burstein)
Subject: Re: Autopsy - Kahane and Rosenbaum
Reply-To: warren@nysernet.org
Organization: Mail to News Gateway at Wang Labs
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 06:33:04 GMT

dm = makowsky@enuxha.eas.asu.edu (David Makowsky)

me: I don't know about David Skoll, but I have read the deceased racist's
me: books and articles and heard him speak.

dm: We are discussing Rabbi Meir Kahane.  Not whoever it was you heard
dm: speak.

Yes, we are discussing the late racist rabbi.
-- 
/|/-\/-\          Adif tzav pinui metzav shmoneh.
 |__/__/_/    
 |warren@     
/ nysernet.org 			    Jerusalem
From: lmk2@garnet.berkeley.edu ()
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: If I could read only one book on Judaism, what would it be?
Date: 12 Nov 1992 17:20:05 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
NNTP-Posting-Host: garnet.berkeley.edu


The Torah


Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: tjm@hrt213.brooks.af.mil (Tim Miller)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Dvar Torah -- Parshas Vayera -- Rabbi Alter
Date: 10 Nov 92 00:56:44 GMT
	<1992Nov9.230851.24961@cbnews.cb.att.com>
Organization: AL/HRTI, Brooks AFB


On Mon, 9 Nov 1992 23:08:51 GMT, ask@cbnews.cb.att.com (Arthur S. Kamlet) said:

 A> Why did Abraham, who did not hesitate to argue with G-d when he told
 A> Abraham he planned to destroy Sodom, not argue when told to
 A> scarifice Isaac?

 A> He is silent.  Not one word?

 A> (There's a midrash that he does ask G-d which son he means, but
 A> that's not so much an argument as it is a delaying tactic or a
 A> clarification.)

	This is from memory, so don't take me at my word:

	In the Torah, HaShem said something along the lines of:

	"Take your son; your only son; the one you love; Isaac..."

	I recall my rabbi explaining this as half of the conversation,
i.e.: 

	"Take your son..."
	"Which son?"
	"Your only son."
	"I've two."
	"The one you love."
	"I love both of 'em."
	"Isaac."
	"Ohhhh, Isaac."

	Now, I don't know about you, but I know that *I* have, on more
than one occasion, acted stupid in an attempt to get out of a chore I
don't want to do.  The hope is that whoever it is will get too
tired/annoyed of nailing things down precisely and ask someone else...

-- Cerebus <tjm@hrt213.brooks.af.mil>
"It works too...Sometimes."
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: wc4209@writer.yorku.ca (Irene Berkovich)
Subject: Correction re Leonard Jeffries
Originator: wc4209@innis
Organization: Computer Assisted Writing Centre, York University, Toronto, Canada
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 19:15:10 GMT

In my post yesterday I quoted an article in the Canadian Jewish News
that Jeffries was fired from CCNY.  I have gotten a few emails
informing me that actually he still works at CCNY doing 'research' for
>90k per year, but has been removed from his position as Chairman of
the African American Studies.

It's a real "booshah and cherpah" that this university keeps him on.

Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: MASH@WEIZMANN.WEIZMANN.AC.IL (Michael Shimshoni)
Subject: Re: Sexism
Organization: Mail to News Gateway at Wang Labs
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 10:45:06 GMT

In: <96455@netnews.upenn.edu>
weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener) wonders:

>In article <GJSSBPF6@cc.swarthmore.edu>, mwertz1@cc (Melanie Wertz) writes:
>>No one has answered my questions yet.  Why is it that MEN are not barred
>>from appearing provocative to women?  WOMEN EXPERIENCE ATTRACTION TOO!
>
>So count yourself lucky, but meanwhile, what are you talking about?  Men
>should wear at least knee-long pants, two layers of underwear under their
>shirt which covers at least the middle of their biceps.  Orthodox men are
>do not appear on Chippendale calenders.

I do not  know which criteria are used for  these calendar models, but
Matthew's dress  rules for  Orthodox men,  while they  are not  some I
would personally  feel comfortable  in obeying, still  seem permissive
compared to what  is expected of Orthodox women.  Bare  from below the
knee, and  showing half the biceps,  is something which would  make it
much  more comfortable  for women  in  Bnei Beraq  and Me'a  She'arim.
There seems to be little consideration  for the climate of the Israeli
summer in  these rules.  Asking men  to wear "at least"  two layers of
underwear  on a  "hamsin day"  is IMO  also a  cruel punishment  which
should not be allowed.

>-Matthew P Wiener (weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu)

  Michael Shimshoni
Xref: sparky soc.culture.jewish:19753 misc.headlines:7002 talk.politics.misc:59580 misc.legal:19802
From: bd@fluent@dartmouth.EDU (Brice Dowaliby)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish,misc.headlines,talk.politics.misc,soc.culture.african-american,misc.legal
Subject: Re: Say it ain't so
Date: 11 Nov 92 15:22:04 GMT
Reply-To: bd%fluent@dartmouth.EDU
Distribution: usa
Organization: Fluent Inc., Lebanon NH

jake@bony1.bony.com (Jake Livni) writes:

>In article <BD.92Nov5105238@fluent.UUCP> bd%fluent@dartmouth.EDU writes:
>>arf@ddsw1.mcs.com (Jack Schmidling) writes:
>>
>>>srm@world.std.com (Stevens R Miller) writes:
>>>: arf@ddsw1.mcs.com (Jack Schmidling) writes:
>>>: 
>>>: >: Lemrick Nelson was acquited in the Crown Heights murder.
>>>: >:
>>>: >Welcome to the world of reverse racism.                  
>>>: 
>>>: Did you watch the case Jack?  Do you know the facts?  How do you know that
>>>: a mixed jury was racist in its verdict?
>>>: 
>>>: Welcome to the world of reasonable doubt.
>>>
>>>Pray tell, how many Chassidic Jews were on this "mixed jury"?
>>
>>Trial is supposed to be by a jury of the defendant's peers, not
>>a jury of the victim's peers.
>
>If this is the case, does this mean that an accused rapist should only
>be tried by other accused rapists?  Should women be excluded from such
>juries?  You are setting up for a system that victimizes the victims
>after the crime, as well.

Jake, it's not a question of "if this is the case", it *is* the
case.

There is, of course, a long drawn-out legal/educational debate about 
what exactly a "jury of your peers" means, but no-one that I know
of has suggested that it means a rapist must be tried by rapists, 
any more than it means that a defendant with a finger missing has to have
a jury of people with fingers missing.

The presumption of innocence is integral to this process.  When you say 
that I am "setting up for a system that victimizes the victims after 
the crime, as well" you are missing the point.  The jury system is
designed to maximize the possibility of a just solution, starting
with the assumption that the accused is innocent.  It is incumbent
on the accuser to prove, beyond a resonalbe doubt, that the accused
actually committed the crime.

Do you suggest that in order to be "fair" to the victim then a black man
accused of shooting a white police officer should be tried before a
jury of white police officers?  This doesn't seem "fair" to me.

-- 
   Brice Dowaliby, Fluent Inc., 10 Cavendish Court, Lebanon, NH  03766
                         bd%fluent@dartmouth.edu        
             I don't speak for them, they don't speak for me
                              DoD # 0698
From: faigin@aero.org (Daniel P. Faigin)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Conversion Question
Date: 11 Nov 92 07:33:11
Organization: The Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo, CA
	<09Nov92.194522.19265@granite.ciw.edu>
	<1992Nov10.222459.5565@elroy.jpl.nasa.gov>
	<LERNER.92Nov10181537@tune.cs.columbia.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: soldan.aero.org
In-reply-to: lerner@cs.columbia.edu's message of Tue, 10 Nov 1992 23:15:37 GMT

On Tue, 10 Nov 1992 23:15:37 GMT, lerner@cs.columbia.edu (Michah Lerner) said:

>>                       The Reform phylosophy is that one should LEARN what
>> the religion is about, then MAKE INFORMED DECISIONS about its practice.  

>   If a decision is truly informed it will stick to standards.  Are we such
>   geniuses that we can always decide what is "best" for us?    

It is in this question that history of Reform is important. Reform was, and to
some extent still is, a product of the German enlightenment in the 1800s. The
key view of the enlightenment is that of "reason", and that man is a
"reasoned" beaast. Thus, in the Reform view, man (in the humanity sense) has
the reason to decide. This is not the Orthodox view, which views man as a
servant (under the yoke) of God. Hence questions such as:

>   Does the Torah say you can pick which mitzvahs to observe?

are distinctly Orthodox questions. The enlightenment would hold that man has
the capacity to reason and to determine what is meaning for worship. Orthodox
views hold the Torah as the literal word of God; thus under Orthodoxy you
cannot "pick" what to observe. (of course, this forgets the fact that the
Orthodox have indeed done some amount of "picking", as not all mitzvah in the
Torah are observed today. After all, God didn't say you could throw them away
because times have changed either.)

This is not to say that one side is "right" and the other is "wrong"; there
are no "rights" and "wrongs" when were talking about religious belief systems.
But this is a difference that must be recognized.

Daniel
--
[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"
From: lmk2@garnet.berkeley.edu ()
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Einstein and Judaism
Date: 10 Nov 1992 18:39:27 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
NNTP-Posting-Host: garnet.berkeley.edu

In article <emc.721403064@kmpec> emc@doe.carleton.ca (Eli Chiprout) writes:
>>I find this highly consistent with the notion of G-d in Judaism.
>	^^^^
>Can you elaborate?  Are you referring to Einstein's comments
>or comments by various posters?
>
>>Leslie
>--
>Eli Chiprout                  " 'Al ta'am vereach, ein lehitvakeah!"

Einstein's

Leslie
From: ed@wente.llnl.gov (Ed Suranyi)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Minyan in Senate!
Date: 10 Nov 92 04:21:19 GMT
Organization: UC Davis Dept of Applied Science at LLNL

In January there will be a minyan in the U.S. Senate!  Or, at least,
there would be if you count women.  There will be exactly ten Jews
in the Senate.  There will be two states for which BOTH senators are
Jewish:  California and Wisconsin.

Ed
ed@wente.llnl.gov


Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: emc@doe.carleton.ca (Eli Chiprout)
Subject: Re: Belief and science (Einstein)
Organization: Dept. of Electronics, Carleton University
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 14:48:15 GMT

In <BxJ4y8.5Bs@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> hrubin@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) writes:
>Putting on my professional hat, when one examines the process of inference
>carefully, what is being done is using data to update beliefs.  That we do
>not carry this out explicitly, and in fact cannot, is due the the sheer
>size of the problem--massively larger than the size of the universe.

Agreed

>God knows His laws of the operation of the universe, but we are commanded
>to work at getting approximations to them.  It is only in this way that we
>can have mastery over haaretz.

But you have come to this conclusion using the process of inference that
is incomplete, as you have mentioned.  So how do you stand above that 
incompleteness to propose the above as a fact rather than as a theory?

I submit as well, that any being that knows the universe in its totality
would have to contain more information than the universe: MUCH, MUCH more.
But then we have just expanded the universe by that statement.

>Herman Rubin, Dept. of Statistics, Purdue Univ., West Lafayette IN47907-1399
>Phone: (317)494-6054
>hrubin@snap.stat.purdue.edu (Internet, bitnet)  
>{purdue,pur-ee}!snap.stat!hrubin(UUCP)
--
Eli Chiprout                 
Dept. of Electronics, 
Carleton University, Canada
emc@doe.carleton.ca
From: goldberg@techunix.technion.ac.il (Jacques Goldberg)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Prayer shawls
Date: 12 Nov 92 16:25:39 GMT
Organization: Technion, Israel Institute of Technology

aliki@nova1.stanford.edu (Alexandra Schmidt) writes:


>JJ--try to find a copy of the book 'House of David Tallitot', by Annette
>Z. Easton.  (It's not really a book, more like one of those stapled-together
>cross-stitch/crafts booklets.  If you don't have a local Jewish bookstore
>or *really* good crafts shop, you might try 1-800-JUDAISM and see if you
>can order it from them.)  The important things are not mixing linen and
>wool, and tying the tzitzit correctly (directions are included); aside from
>that there aren't a whole lot of restrictions.

>			. . .A.
    For sure, plus it does not end with linen and wool. If you make it of wool
be sure not to use cotton thread to make it, etc, etc, so better go and buy
one with a Kosher certificate, infinitely more important than the decoration,
color, stripes.
         
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: leonid@spss.com (Leonid Feygin)
Subject: Re: Bobby Fischer's anti-semitism
Organization: SPSS Inc.
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 20:24:21 GMT


In article <1992Nov12.044330.24893@cs.brown.edu> dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren) writes:

> ...<Info about Fischer skipped>

>as the world champion if he does... the current world champion
>is Armenian Gary Kasparov, as nearly big a megalomaniac as
    ~~~~~~~~
>Fischer. If they ever play, that will be something to see. My
>bet: Kasparov 10, Fischer 4, 20 draws.
>
>
>-Danny Keren.

Minor comment on Kasparov's ethnicity: Gary Kasparov is actually 
half-Armenian, half-Jewish.  (His late father was Jewish.)  He even 
started to play chess as a teenager under his father's last name 
(Weinstein, if I remember correctly); he was already a well known 
young chess player in then USSR when he took his mother's last name.
--
Leonid Feygin     SPSS, Inc.     leonid@spss.com     (312) 329-3639
From: hayim@locus.com (Hayim Hendeles)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Dvar Torah -- Parshas Vayera -- Rabbi Alter
Date: 10 Nov 92 21:01:52 GMT
Organization: Locus Computing Corporation, Los Angeles, California

In article <1992Nov9.230851.24961@cbnews.cb.att.com> ask@cbnews.cb.att.com (Arthur S. Kamlet) writes:
>...
>>This is demonstrated without question when we consider his response
>>to G-d's final test [which is at the end of this week's parsha].  Commanded by
>>G-d to sacrifice his beloved son, Avrohom did not hesitate for a moment.
>
>This has always puzzled me.
>
>Why did Abraham, who did not hesitate to argue with G-d when he told
>Abraham he planned to destroy Sodom,  not argue when told to
>scarifice Isaac?
>
>He is silent.  Not one word?  
>
>(There's a midrash that he does ask G-d which son he means, but
>that's not so much an argument as it is a delaying tactic or a
>clarification.)
>-- 
>Art Kamlet  a_s_kamlet@att.com  AT&T Bell Laboratories, Columbus

I had the same question, and this is my 2 cents:

G-d is not a used-car salesman that you can bargain with. If G-d gives
you a command, then there is nothing to talk about. Our job, is to
fulfill G-d's will unconditionally, whether or not we understand
it, or whether or not we perceive it as "good". Therefore, when
G-d says "sacrifice Isaac", there is nothing to talk about. G-d says
do, we must do. No IFs, ANDs, ORs, or BUTs.

However, when it came to Sodom, G-d informed Abraham of his plans.
This was none of Abraham's business, yet G-d saw fit to inform
Abraham of it. Now why should G-d inform Abraham, unless he wanted
to give Abraham a chance to do something about it? Hence, Abraham
siezed this opportunity, and began "bargaining". But this "bargaining"
in no way signified Abraham's reluctance to follow a Divine command -
which would have been wrong.

This is, IMHO, comparable to the words given by the Talmud in the
post-Golden-Calf episode, where G-d tells Moses, "Leave me alone,
and I will destroy them". Moses instantly realized that the
implication of G-d having told this to him, implied that G-d would
not destroy the Jews as long as Moses would "not leave G-d alone".
i.e. G-d implied He was giving Moses a chance to do something.
Hence, Moses increased his prayer for forgiveness, and was ultimately
successfull.

Hayim Hendeles
From: simon1@bass.bu.edu (Simon Streltsov)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Israel and the diaspora
Date: 11 Nov 92 15:39:31 GMT
Reply-To: simon1@bass.bu.edu (Simon Streltsov)
Followup-To: soc.culture.jewish
Organization: Boston University

In article <BxIutB.KqI@cs.columbia.edu> ratner@cs.columbia.edu (Michael Ratner) writes:

>and they would (or wouldn't) give you that permission.  In order to
>obtain the exit visa applicant would have to sign the document stating
>that he/she renounces his/her Soviet citizenship effective the moment
>he/she crosses the country border.

Small detail : citizenship was renounced not when you cross the border, but
when you renounce citizenship ( and PAY for it - the only time in my
life, when I payed for something with pleasure and good laugh (-:[ )
before getting permission to leave -
there are many stories, when a militia-men stops a person in the
street - and stares at his only paper - viza.

>Russian authorities no longer require emigrants to renounce the
>citizenship. 
I would say, unfortunately.

I am very upset seeing people with this red "pasportina" going around.
The funniest thing is, that now they invite us back - 
to take russian citizenship - and pay for it again - 
good gesheft,a ?
>						-- Mike Ratner
Simon Streltsov
From: sarah@albnyvms.bitnet
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: In Search Of...Kosher Pop-Tarts
Date: 5 Nov 92 07:26:54 GMT
Article-I.D.: sarah.1992Nov5.072654.22109
Reply-To: sarah@albnyvms.bitnet
Organization: University of NY at Albany

As I don't keep Kosher (yet?), I have eaten these, and can tell you
that they are good, but the non-wheat ones have a very strange crumbly
texture to the crust.
 
Sarah