HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: makowsky@enuxhb.eas.asu.edu (David Makowsky)
Subject: Re: Why I think Kach's policies WASTE BANDWIDTH
Reply-To: makowsky@enuxhb.eas.asu.edu (David Makowsky)
Organization: Arizona State University, Tempe AZ
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 13:41:00 GMT

	[ Note - I have deleted much here - dlm ]

In article <92323.0131202893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> andy <2893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> writes:

# In article <1992Nov18.004605.6160@ennews.eas.asu.edu>,
# makowsky@enuxhb.eas.asu.edu (David Makowsky) says:

# >In article <92322.1419442893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> andy
# ><2893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> writes:

# ># In article <1992Nov17.022910.24924@ennews.eas.asu.edu>,
# ># makowsky@enuxhb.eas.asu.edu (David Makowsky) says:

# ># >In article <emc.721961733@ro> emc@doe.carleton.ca (Eli Chiprout) writes:

# ># ># A racist will never admit to being one.  He/she will admit to
# ># ># the existence of racists, but his/her policies will never
# ># ># be racist, by definition.  Save your breath and our bandwith
# ># ># ladies and gentlemen.

# >        I would like to thank Andy for posting this since it gives me an
# >opourtunity to say something else about Eli's post.  It would seem,
# >according to what he wrote above, that anyone who denies they are a
# >racist is one.  Well, I will not do it, but I wonder what would be if
# >I called Eli a racist?
 
# False logic. Saying that a racist will never admit to being a racist is not the
# same as saying that all people who deny being a racist are racist.
 
	I agree it is false logic.  However, Eli seems to imply that a
racist will never admit to it.  He does this after making accusations
that Kach was a racist.  He than dismisses refutations of that claim
by stating that a racist will never admit to being one, implying that
Kach is racist despite refutations of that claim.  Therefore my point
was and still is valid (The false implication breeded the false
logic.).

# If all male Jews are circumcised does that mean that all circumcised males are
# Jews?

	Well, Eli might imply they are if the denied being Jewish.  But
that is Eli's implication, not my logic.
--
	There are three types of people in the world.  Those that are good
at math and those that are not.

makowsky@enuxhb.eas.asu.edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: warren@nysernet.org (Warren Burstein)
Subject: Re: Alia only with Brith-Mila?
Reply-To: warren@nysernet.org
Organization: Mail to News Gateway at Wang Labs
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 10:26:34 GMT

Are we required to ask a Jew if he is circumcized?  Maybe we're
supposed to assume that he is unless we have evidence to the contrary?
-- 
/|/-\/-\          Adif tzav pinui metzav shmoneh.
 |__/__/_/    
 |warren@         "Warren's slogan is an Anti-semite slogan."
/ nysernet.org 			    Gideon Ehrlich
Organization: The American University - University Computing Center
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 23:53:31 EST
From: <CARIAN@auvm.american.edu>
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject:    SCJ Gathering, Balto.-Wash.

The SCJ gathering for the Baltimore - Washington area *will* take place,
G-d willing, on the afternoon of December 20 at a kosher restaurant in
the Washington area.

If you are interested in coming, and you are not one of the people
who have already responded, please e-mail me for more details.

So far we have 8 or 9 people coming.

Rabbi Charles Arian
CARIAN@american.edu
From: rothberg@bimacs.BITNET (Danny Rothenberg)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: British Royal Family question.
Date: 19 Nov 92 18:11:32 GMT
Organization: Math department, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, ISRAEL

In article <1992Nov17.170141.1494@speedy.aero.org> nadel@attatash.aero.org (Miriam Nadel) writes:
>In article <92318.1343472893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> andy <2893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> writes:
>>It makes sense if you remember that "British-Israelism" the belief that the
>>British are descended from one of the Lost Tribes was very much in vogue in the
>>19th century. The theory seems to be more an attempt to justify British
>>Imperialism and British pretensions to superiority than a serious
>>anthropological attempt to trace the origins of the British. Also, many
>>British-Israelites were, like today's Black Hebrews fervently anti-Jewish
>>believing the Jews to be imposters and the British to be the Chosen People.
>>In the 20s, 30s and 40s the infamous "Protocols of the Elders of Zion"
>>were distributed by British Israelite chapters (there was an organisation)
>>worldwide.
>
>There are a couple of chapters on this in _Peculiar Notions and Eccentric
>Lives_ by John Michell.  The most famous was Lord Shaftsbury who decided the
>British were one of the lost tribes and had the mission of converting
>the Jews to Christianity and leading them back to Jerusalem.  He was not
>particularly successful at this, but some good came out of it, in that
>the theory was part of what led to the Balfour Declaration.
>
>Of course, there was also the guy who decided that Britain was the true
>Holy Land and that all of the biblical names referred to places in Britain.
>If I recall correctly, he identified Jerusalem with Glasgow, Egypt with
                                      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^  ^^^^^^^^^^
>Ireland, etc...
 ^^^^^^^
>
>Miriam Nadel

Does this mean that the person concerned was a Scottish Presbyterian?
:-)


--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Danny Rothenberg             |     ^
Bitnet:                      |  \-/-\-/  "He's not the messaiah.  He's a
rothberg@bimacs              |   X   X    very naughty boy."
Internet:                    |  /-\-/-\                        - Brian's Mum
rothberg@bimacs.cs.biu.ac.il |     V
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: kolassa@genesee.bst.rochester.edu (John Kolassa)
Subject: Re: Vatican Recognition of Israel - Who Needs
Reply-To: kolassa@genesee.bst.rochester.edu (John Kolassa)
Organization: University of Rochester Biostatistics.
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 92 02:49:22 GMT

In article <1992Nov23.005200.6861@nysernet.org>, astein@nysernet.org (Alan Stein) writes:
> Was it Stalin who asked how many troops the pope had?
> 
> The Vatican's refusal up until now to establish diplomatic relations
> with Israel is a sign of its own hypocracy and moral bankruptcy, as
> well as the theological difficulty in coming to grips with the
> reestablishment of the Jewish state.
> 
> Israel should make no concessions in order to gain Vatican
> recognition;  on the contrary, it is the Vatican which should be
> offering apologies and concessions to Israel.
> -- 
> Alan H. Stein   -----  AJIN   -----  astein@israel.nysernet.org

Funny how you don't object to the Vatican's refusal to recognize
Isreal's enemies.  For instance, Jordan.
-- 
Thanks, John Kolassa, kolassa@bio1.bst.rochester.edu
From: rena@tequila.LANL.GOV (Rena Whiteson)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: goy
Date: 20 Nov 92 02:28:09 GMT
Reply-To: <rena@tequila.LANL.GOV (Rena Whiteson)>
Organization: Nysernet
Originator: scj@israel.nysernet.org

>FYI: In case you're wondering, the word "goy" (pl. "goyim") is
>not at all derogatory; it is just the Talmudic word for non-Jew.
 
>Andrew Michael Solovay

Actually goy means nation.  Goyim means nations. Because of the context
of much of its usage it has come to mean 'all the other nations'. 

Rena Whiteson
Los Alamos National Laboratory
rw@beta.lanl.gov   
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: solovay@netcom.com (Andrew M. Solovay)
Subject: Re: Square Kippot (was: Re: Tzitzit on ordinary garments)
Organization: Smiley Abolition Front
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 19:15:15 GMT

In article <1992Nov16.034811.2749@cbnews.cb.att.com> ask@cbnews.cb.att.com (Arthur S. Kamlet) writes:
>In article <1992Nov16.021109.15846@cas.org> rmt51@cas.org writes:
>>In article <1992Nov15.201508.28866@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu>,
>>friedenb@silver.egr.msu.edu (Gedaliah Friedenberg) writes:
>>|> 
>>|> If one were to wear a square kippah, would it require tzitzit?
>>|> (is a kippah considered a garment?)
>>|> 
>>No.  There is a certain minimum size for a 4-cornered garment to require
>>tzitzit, and a kippah is too small by far.
>
>The talit is a rectangular garment, at keast one side is 1 amot
>(4 fists -- about 18 inches)

Of course, if you wear a kaffiah, that may well qualify; kaffiot
are rectangular, and generally are large enough. Strange that one
doesn't often see kaffiot with tzitzit...

Some turbans may well require tzitzit. They are usually made from
rectangular strips, but I don't know the dimensions; they may be
scarf-like, with one dimension shorter than an amot (amah?), in
which case they wouldn't need tzitzit.
-- 
Andrew Michael Solovay    

"We know that Solovay is a misogynist and an idiot..."
                --Melinda Shore
Organization: The American University - University Computing Center
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 22:21:25 EST
From: <CARIAN@auvm.american.edu>
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: SCJ Gathering in Baltimore/Washington Area
 <92317.090539CARIAN@auvm.american.edu>
 <1992Nov15.030345.13315@linus.mitre.org>

In article <1992Nov15.030345.13315@linus.mitre.org>, edelheit@smiley.mitre.org
(Jeff Edelheit) says:
>
>In article <92317.090539CARIAN@auvm.american.edu> <CARIAN@auvm.american.edu>
>writes:
>>Addendum:
>>You don't have to actually be from Baltington/Washimore to attend.
>>If you want to come from elsewhere, great, but I'm not picking anyone
>>up at the airport (unless Warren comes from Jerusalem).
>>
>Since I live near Dulles Airport, I'd be willing to pick someone up.
>However, would the good Rabbi consider giving someone a ride if they
>showed up at AU having taken Metro from Washington National?

Fair enough.
I'd rather they take the Metro to Cleveland Park than to AU, though,
since I'll most likely be coming from home rather than the office
and I live nearer to the Cleveland Park than the AU Metro stop.
Both are on the Red Line, AU is just two stops further towards
Shady Grove.

Rabbi Charles Arian
CARIAN@american.edu
From: krovetz@sydney.cs.umass.edu (Bob Krovetz)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: The Importance of Judaism (was re: Conversion Question)
Date: 24 Nov 92 01:10:03 GMT
Reply-To: krovetz@cs.umass.edu (Bob Krovetz)
Followup-To: soc.culture.jewish
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst

In article <FAIGIN.92Nov19074137@soldan.aero.org> faigin@aero.org (Daniel P. Faigin) writes:
>On Thu, 19 Nov 1992 06:15:48 GMT, khaikin@boa.cis.ohio-state.edu (dmitry
>khaikin) said: 
>
>> What is scary about all this is that
>> sooner or later you or your children will step even lower and then, G-d
>> forbid, will just get out of it. I know a lot of Reform people that are
>> xians now and have no idea about Judaism (nor about xnity). 
>
>This is certainly not a given conclusion. Just we we know people who are less
>religious than their parents, we know folks that are more religious. Just as
>you have adherents of Reform that drift into Christianity, you also have
>dedicated members of Reform who stay Reform, and members of Reform who become
>Baal Teshuvah, and go into Orthodoxy.
>
>I don't think the drift is a matter of movement; it's a matter of upbringing
>and education. You don't see it in Orthodoxy because the Jewish education is
>so integral to the movement. You see it to some extent in Conservative, and
>more in Reform, because of parental attitudes that don't teach the kids the
>importance of Judaism.
>

Why do we have different parental attitudes about the importance of Judaism?
How does this relate to the theological differences between the movements?
Many of the Jews I encounter don't have strong feelings about Judaism, and
if *they* don't have strong feelings, their children will probably be even
less likely to have them.  Although we see cases of children rebelling, and
becoming more observant, I think these are relatively rare.


Bob

krovetz@cs.umass.edu

Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: Just try a little harder <dkeller@ndlvax.enet.dec.com>
Subject: Subscribe DOM KELLER
Originator: scj@israel.nysernet.org
Reply-To: <Just try a little harder <dkeller@ndlvax.enet.dec.com>>
Organization: Nysernet
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 09:22:36 GMT

SUBSCRIBE Dom Keller
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: khaikin@boa.cis.ohio-state.edu (dmitry khaikin)
Subject: Re: mezuzah question
Organization: The Ohio State University Dept. of Computer and Info. Science
Distribution: soc
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1992 07:18:28 GMT

In article <1ej3rhINN9tg@morrow.stanford.edu> aliki@nova1.stanford.edu (Alexandra Schmidt) writes:
>
>I read yesterday (in what I would call a not-great source which happened to
>be selling mezuzot) that their mezuzot were suitable for your home or office.
>Hello?  I'd never heard of putting up a mezuzah on an office doorframe (I
>don't sleep in my office--at least it hasn't come to that yet).  Is this
>commonly done?  
>
>			. . .Alexandra

Yes, if it is your office. The mezuzah is only put up for the room that
you are sleeping in. And I will quote from Shma Israel:
"...And write them on your doorposts on your house and upon your
gates..."

So, if it is your property you should put a mezuzah on the doorposts.

Thanks,
Dima
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  "A word is worth one coin; silence is worth two."_____ The Talmud.
  "Silence is good everywhere, except in connection with Torah."____ The Zohar.
   khaikin@cis.ohio-state.edu (Dmitry Khaikin, Columbus Ohio, USA)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: jgoldber@todah.chem.utoronto.ca (Joel Goldberg)
Subject: Re: Yogi Berra online
Organization: University of Toronto Chemistry Department
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 03:21:45 GMT

In article <1992Nov17.210703.8003@porthos.cc.bellcore.com> er@iscp.Bellcore.COM (Elie Rosenfeld) writes:
>Yes, the wit and wisdom of this great man is now available in archive form.
>(Why is this is s.c.j?  Who cares!)
   Well, there's the halachic issue of presumption of observance. ie.
       "Hu loh over ad sheh hu over."
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: ask@cbnews.cb.att.com (Arthur S. Kamlet)
Subject: Re: Kosher pork in the diabetic?
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories,  Columbus, Ohio
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1992 19:45:39 GMT

In article <gqJLuB1w165w@valpso.hanse.de> tichauer@valpso.hanse.de (Manfredo Tichauer) writes:
>esafern@shearson.com (Eric Safern) writes:
>
>> Please CYLOR first, however.
>
>  What means CYLOR?

In the context of this newsgroup,   CYL-R means:

  Consult Your Local --------  Rabbi


-- 
Art Kamlet  a_s_kamlet@att.com  AT&T Bell Laboratories, Columbus
From: milst1@cislabs.pitt.edu (Martin I Lewison)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: American Antisemitism
Keywords: antisemitism
Date: 18 Nov 92 21:35:00 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh


Yeah, I pulled that article off clarinet.  One heartening thing:
American antisemites tend to be white men over 60 who have no more than a
high school education, according to the study.  So, our worst enemies will
be dead soon.

One disheartening thing:  In general, African-Americans are far more likely
to be antisemitic than whites.

-Martin 
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: lise@kepler.uucp (80734-romanov)
Subject: Re: Jewish Movies on Video?
Reply-To: er@oscar.bellcore.com (80734-romanov,elisabeth)
Organization: Bellcore, Piscataway, NJ
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 92 18:08:27 GMT

In article <1992Nov6.200715.11503@cbnewsm.cb.att.com> segs@cbnewsm.cb.att.com 
(susan.e.slusky) writes:
>
>something I can't remember the name of, based on a novel of B. Malamud, 
>starring Rod Steiger.

"The Pawnborker", actually based on the novel of the same name by Edward
Wallant.
From: aaldoubo@copper.denver.colorado.edu (Shaqeeqa)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: American Antisemitism
Date: 21 Nov 92 00:16:19 GMT
Organization: University of Colorado at Denver

In article <mannj.722279634@acf9> mannj@acf9.nyu.edu (Jordan Mann) writes:
>milst1@cislabs.pitt.edu (Martin I Lewison) writes:
>
>And from what I've heard, the likelihood that a black person is anti-Semitic
>*increases* with their level of education.  Witness the popularity of anti-
>Semitic tirades by Nation of Islam representatives on prestigious college
>campuses.  There was one a week or two ago at Columbia.

I hope there is not an insinuation that the Nation represents Islam
or Islamic philosophy.  Anyone who is familiar with The Nation's
ideology might learn that they are extremely racist against caucasions
as a whole - whether they are Jewish or not.  I happen to have had a
few encounters with the 'brothers' from The Nation on our campus - who
told me that I would not (nor any other caucasion Muslim) be welcome
in their masjid (I would be 'thrown out'); and, when asking if I, as a
'fellow' Muslim, is still considered to be a 'devil', was told, 'I don't
know - are you?'

I never heard of any anti-semitic remarks, but I do know that they
strongly resent Arabs and are not discrete in voicing their opinions
on this.

Anisa
From: dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Oral sex
Date: 16 Nov 92 17:49:34 GMT
Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, N.J.

In article <H6X82KE@math.fu-berlin.de> ring@inf.fu-berlin.de (Rod J. Ring) writes:
>In article <9211142004.AA09989@host0.COLBY.EDU>, jjsulliv@COLBY.EDU (Nice Young Lady(tm))
>writes:
>> 
>> According to a strict view of Jewish morality, she shouldn't even be sleeping
>> with you, anyway. :-P

Nevertheless, there is a bad way and a worse way to go about this...

>According to not even too strict a view of Jewish morality *any*
>Jewish person should not engage in any sexual contact with anybody
>but their Jewish *spouse*.

But even the Talmud recognizes that humans are sometimes weak and fall
victim to passions.  It describes how one should behave in such a
situation so as to cause the "least damage".  For instance, if two
non-married Jewish people wish to sleep together, they should wear
clothes that they would not normally wear and travel to another town,
so that they shouldn't be recognized, since recognition would bring
shame on them, their families, and their town.

>Excuse me, but *anything* else, including Jewish men "practising"
>on shickse women and including sex between two Jewish partners not
>married to each other, violates Jewish morality.

But violations can be made even worse, so the original question
remains valid.
-- 
  |)  David Charlap          | .signature confiscated by FBI due to
 /|_  dic5340@hertz.njit.edu | an ongoing investigation into the
((|,)                        | source of these .signature virusses
 ~|~
From: ben@vmsa.technion.ac.il
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Jews in Banks
Date: 18 Nov 92 13:08:58 GMT
Organization: Computer Center, Technion IIT

In article <1992Nov16.160701.16000@midway.uchicago.edu> thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu
(Ted Frank) writes:
>>Now, perhaps you would like to tell us why you wish us to believe that
>>major international banks exclude Jews.  Are you perhaps trying to stir
>>up a little antisemitism yourself?  Are Jews not allowed in the doors?
>>Is our money not accepted for deposit?  Are there no Jew on the boards?
>>
>Eight of the ten largest international banks in the world are Japanese.
>There are no Jews on any of their boards.


But i thought there were already a good number of Jews in the West Bank? :-)
Xref: sparky soc.culture.jewish:20678 soc.culture.turkish:11891 talk.politics.mideast:22383 talk.politics.soviet:9073 soc.culture.greek:10799 soc.culture.europe:9733 soc.culture.soviet:10148 soc.rights.human:4272 soc.culture.yugoslavia:9652
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: "Merchandising" (Re: Conversion Question)
From: Yaakov Kayman <YZKCU@CUNYVM.BITNET>
Date: Monday, 23 Nov 1992 14:07:54 EST
 e.edu><1992Nov22.093616.18914@u.washington.edu><1992Nov23.161129.8646@cbfsb.cb.att.com>
Organization: City University of New York/ University Computer Center

In article <1992Nov23.161129.8646@cbfsb.cb.att.com>, hem@maverick.col400.att.com
(Hillel E. Markowitz) says:
>
>In article <1992Nov22.093616.18914@u.washington.edu>
>nobby@hardy.u.washington.edu (Vitaly Shmatikov) writes:
>>
>>...
>>before you post next time that churches give 2 points to everybody who
>>converts a Jew while regular prozelytes are worth only 1.
>>
>>
>>nobby@u.washington.edu
>>
>
>While the mainstream churches don't do this, there are a number
>of cults which do behave this way.  They have targeted the
>immigrant population very heavily and use significant
>mistranslations, misquotations, and outright lies to attempt to
>convert Jews.  There are also organizations of xian missionaries
>who pretend to be Jewish such as Jews for jesus, "Hebrew
>christians", and "Messianic Jews" [sic]. ....

Perhaps the mainstream churches might find it more in their interest
to discourage, rather than to fund, as I'm sure at least some do,
the above groups. After all, what does it say about the quality of the
merchandise one is trying to sell if one must employ fraud, etc., to
sell it?

> Hillel Markowitz

Yaakov K.
--------
Yaakov Kayman      (212) 903-3666       City University of New York

BITNET:   YZKCU@CUNYVM        "Lucky is the shepherd, and lucky his flock
Internet: YZKCU@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU     about whom the wolves complain"
From: gertler@cyclone.sbi.com (Don Gertler)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Conversion Question
Date: 19 Nov 92 01:03:56 GMT
Reply-To: <gertler@cyclone.sbi.com (Don Gertler)>
Organization: Nysernet
Originator: scj@israel.nysernet.org

hrubin@pop.stat.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) writes:

> If the Orthodox insist that those not accepting their view are not
> properly Jewish,

I don't know any Orthodox Jews who make this claim.  I know some,
however, who claim that they are properly Jewish, but they are
acting improperly.

> and that people they convert to their version of
> Judaism are not to be considered Jewish, they ARE fragmenting the
> the Jewish people.

Like so many other posts on this thread, this begs the question.  If
these people are not, in fact, Jews, then the Jewish people are not
being fragmented by such statements.  If I insist that German Shepherds
are not Golden Retrievers, then I am not fragmenting the Golden Retriever
breed by such a statement, even if the German Shepherds THINK they're
Golden Retrivers. 

If these people are Jews, then I would agree with you.  But this is
exactly the issue under debate.  You may not like the fact that the
issue is debatable, but each group -- if not individual -- has its
own set of requirements.  That makes the issue debatable.  Unless
you want to say that it goes by the least stringent definition.  That
is, if ANYONE thinks of a particular individual as being Jewish, then
that person is, by definition, a Jew.

-Don Gertler
From: chaim@linc.cis.upenn.edu (Chaim R. Dworkin)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Who built the pyramids
Date: 17 Nov 92 18:23:04 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania

In article <1992Nov16.165211.20122@digi.lonestar.org> gpalo@digi.lonestar.org (Gerry Palo) writes:
>In article <emc.721745528@ro> emc@doe.carleton.ca (Eli Chiprout) writes:
>>>Immanuel Velikovsky resolved this problem in his book "Ages in Chaos".
>>>He places the Exodus not in the New Kingdom but at the end of the
>>>Middle Kingdom.  Following that was a 400 year period of Hyksos 
>>>domination (which he equates to the Amalekites).  This flies in the
>>>face of accepted chronology, but his case is so thoroughly argued and
>>>the results of the revised chronology are so astounding that it is
>>>really worth a look.  


This has gotten me somewhat curious.  If it's not asking too much, could
you post a brief summary of currently accepted chronology and
Velikovsky's chronology?  I'm quite curious to see a side-by-side
comparison.

Thanks.

Chaim R. Dworkin
chaim@linc.cis.upenn.edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish,bit.listserv.catholic