HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: benali@alcor.concordia.ca ( ILYESS B. BDIRA )
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
Subject: Re: CLINTON SPEECH TEXT: RABIN MEETING
Date: 3 Sep 92 17:38:40 GMT

anwar+@cs.cmu.edu (Anwar Mohammed) writes:

>Point of history: wasn't the government of Algeria made up of
>the same "freedom fighters" who won a bloody war of independence 
>from the west (specifically France).  In light of this, it seems
>that your implicit accusation against the west (who "are too fearful 
>of a strong Islamic government and nation") ignores the fact that
>most of the Arab people's problems are self-inflicted and have very
>little to do with the West.

while your last statement is true, it does not contradict with
the fact that western intelligence usually infiltrate the ranks
of "freedom fighters" to send the people they want to power (or
to undermine the people they hate most). A recent example is Afghanistan.
In Algeria, I am not sure what happened in the sixties, but in the
nineties, what is happening is obviously more or less directed by
some western intelligence agencies.


>Nonsense.  My government was allowed to exist because it has more
>political and historical legitimacy than most can claim, including 

Wrong! They were allowed to stay because they serve better U.S
interests than an unpredictable democratic government. Even
U.S diplomats say that, so don't deny it.

>the minority governments in Iraq and Syrian and that transplanted
>monarch in Jordan.

This is right if your "more" means "Greater than or equal to"
because their legitimacy is equal to 0, and so is your government's.


>I've got news for you Anisa, a country's citizens determine the 
>legitimacy of a government.  Thus, Kuwaitis are the sole determinors
>of whether their government is legitimate.   Therefore, you have
>absolutely no say in this.

I do not think you have any say in it either!
(Not that you shoudn't of course).

My opinion is:
Kuwait is for Kuwaitis and they should decide what kind of country they
want to be, the same should be said about all Arab countries. 
Although I beleive in Pan-Islamic Unity and within it Pan-Arab unity, 
I believe that it should be left to all those tribes to decide whether or not
they want to be part of it, and at what level (Federation, Economic community,
Military Alliance, complete fusion in some cases, etc.).

In all cases, every region/state/republic must be ruled by the locals within
an agreed upon level of autonomy.

I am really sorry, by the way, about the level at which the discussion sank
between you three, I hope we avoid emotional tirades and stick to rational
factual analysis.

thank you.
From: nabil@ncrcol.ColumbiaSC.NCR.COM (Nabil Idriss)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
Subject: Re: BILL CLINTON ON ISRAEL AND THE MIDDLE
Date: 28 Aug 92 18:13:26 GMT
Organization: NCR E&M Columbia SC.

In article <1992Aug27.101737.5090@rs.com> horen@rs.com writes:
>In article 25239@castle.ed.ac.uk, egpv29@castle.ed.ac.uk (JHenderson) writes:
>>In article <1992Aug26.140030.25262@rs.com> horen@rs.com writes:
>>=>>In article 8356@dscomsf.desy.de, hallam@zeus02.desy.de (Phill Hallam-Baker) writes:
>>=>>
>>=>>At no time have I ever claimed that Shamir is in any way representative of the
>>=>>Israeli people. Since most of the Israelis I meet consider Shamir to be at best
>>=>>mentaly deficient, this would be a ludicrous statement.
>>=>>
>>=>>However Shamir is reperesentative of the Likud party, or at the very least
>>=>>demonstrates the sort of person they are prepared to tolerate as leader.
>>=>
>>=>You're quite the presumptuous little twerp, aren't you Phill? Did you ever
>>=>stop to consider that perhaps most of the Israelis whom you meet are, themselves,
>>=>not too representative of the Israeli people? or is it, since Shamir *was* elected 
>>=>in 1988 with a sizeable mandate by the Israeli voting public, that you consider
>>=>both him *and* most Israelis to be "mental[l]y deficient"?
>>=>
>>=>And why use the word "tolerate"? Isn't it obvious to you that Shamir, by virtue
>>=>of the fact that he was elected in 1988, and renominated in 1992, is "the [sort
>>=>of] person they *want* as their leader"?
>>
>>I would guess that Phill was giving the Israelis the benefit of the doubt.
>>As you point out, the evidence is that they don't merit it.
>
>Fuck you, asshole.


That is a good one Jonathan. This is probably Nora why I did not want to resume
our latest conversation.
-- 
Nabil Idriss                           |       FOR EVERY ACTION AN OPPOSITE  
NCR - Midrange Products Division       |       AND EQUAL REACTION.
      Columbia, South Carolina         |      
email: nabil@ncrcol.ColumbiaSC.NCR.COM |
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
From: perlman@qso.Colorado.EDU (Eric S. Perlman)
Subject: Re: CLINTON SPEECH TEXT: RABIN MEETING
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 21:04:29 GMT

In article <1992Aug28.223417.2436830@locus.com> jle@locus.com (John Elghani/10000000) writes:
>In article <1992Aug28.142332.20788@midway.uchicago.edu> rivk@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>
><<Abunch of senseless attacks deleted>>
>
>>Cheers to Kuwait. 
>
>Now that Kuwait has the Israelis on their side, they've got no one
>to fear.  Hopefully they can remember to fear their creator.
>Well, both Kuwait and the Israelis have the following in common:
>
>1- Slaughter the Palestinians.
>2- Unfair trials to the Palestinians.
>3- Iraq as #1 enemy.
>4- Support to John Gurung against the fair government of Sudan.
>5- Palestinian expulsion.
>
>I look forward for the day that Israel will occupy Mecca.  Are we 
>going to see Kuwaiti women welcoming them like they welcomed the
>british in Kuwait?
>
>I said it over and over.  The Iraqi war was initiated secretely by
>the Israelis for the following reasons:
>
>1-  To destroy any power the arabs have, or potentially the moslems.
>    They succeeded so far.
>
>2-  To split the arabs in 1/2.  They succeeded so far. Look at the 
>    fights between Anwar and Anisa for example.
>
>3-  To drain out the money out of the Gulf to eliminate potential
>    strength the arabs may gain via money.
>    They're succeeding so far;  Saudia is borrowing money.
>
>Israel fabricates, the US obeys/applies, and the arabs and the americans die,
>the israelis are saved.  Congratulations 
>to Al Khalifa Mr. Anwar Mohxxxed la radiya allaho anho.


A new Jewish Conspiracy theory!  Oh how fun.  How despicable.  This is
proof positive that *someone* actually reads tripe from folks like
Winston - it positively smacks of his and others' "Zionist Occupation
Government" themes.


-- 
"How sad to see/A model of decorum and tranquillity/become like any other sport
A battleground for rival ideologies to slug it out with glee." -Tim Rice,"Chess"
     Eric S. Perlman 				 <perlman@qso.colorado.edu> 
  Center for Astrophysics and Space Astronomy, University of Colorado, Boulder
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
From: bdm@cs.anu.edu.au (Brendan McKay)
Subject: Re: Arabs/leftists? (was Re: Computer Scie
Reply-To: bdm@cs.anu.edu.au
Organization: Australian National University
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 05:41:04 GMT



Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
From: nabil@ncrcol.ColumbiaSC.NCR.COM (Nabil Idriss)
Subject: Re: politics
Organization: NCR E&M Columbia SC.
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 20:07:51 GMT

>Israel signed a peace treaty and opened diplomatic relations with Egypt,
>too. That should have been quid pro quo. Instead, Israel *also* had to 
>fork over a lot of land.
>
>>I did not benefit whatsoever from this concession.
>
>Clue time, Nabil -- YOU WEREN'T MEANT TO. The treaty was between *Egypt*
>and Israel, not between the Palestinians and Israel. Egypt, quite prop-
>erly, asked for and got things that benefited *Egypt*, not that benefited
>the Palestinians. They threw a bone to the Palestinians in the form of an
>autonomy principle, and Rabin's working on that one now. But why the hell
>you think Egypt, or Israel, or anyone else, has to arrange its national
>affairs for your benefit, is beyond me.
> 

Clue time, Nora. It is your responsibility and not Egypt or anyone else, to 
have the decenecy and give me back my stolen land.

>Pressure Syria and Jordan into physical concessions. You could make
>Jordan do a lot; its population is over half Palestinian anyway. And
>you could stop killing off Jews in a random fashion, that'd help.
>

If you give the Palestinians their right and let them go back to
their homes, and stop attacking them then they will stop the " Random
Killing".

>Nope. That's ours, plain and simple.

Nope, that's ours, plain and simple. We lived there for 2000 years, and the
current occupants came from Europe.
>
>
>Clue time, Nabil -- we've *got* the WB and Gaza. The only question is
>whether we are going to give them to you, and in exchange for what, if
>we decide to do so.
>

Nora, giving me these short confident answers are not going to do you any
good. When you take some one home by force, you should have the decency
to at least admit it and not telling him that it belongs to a European 
immigrant.

This is the last paragraph I am going to respond to Nora. I am not ready to
flame with a female. Why don't you leave the flaming between me and Jonathan
Horen. I guess we got accustomed to each other. 


-- 
Nabil Idriss                           |       FOR EVERY ACTION AN OPPOSITE  
NCR - Midrange Products Division       |       AND EQUAL REACTION.
      Columbia, South Carolina         |      
email: nabil@ncrcol.ColumbiaSC.NCR.COM |
Xref: sparky talk.politics.mideast:19175 alt.war:1851
From: snggab01@uctvax.uct.ac.za
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast,alt.war
Subject: Re: Soviet Nuclear Weapons Stolen? / The Count
Date: 26 Aug 92 08:44:53 +0200
Summary: Long live Iran
Organization: University of Cape Town

In article <1992Aug23.160415.20938@ncsu.edu>, hernlem@chess.ncsu.EDU (Brad Hernlem) writes:
> 
> As to the issue that some may have been transferred to Iran, I doubt whether
> any of the new Islamic Republics would be willing to hand over nukes to
> a potential adversary like Iran.  These governments are fairly Western in
> outlook, having already opened diplomatic relations with Israel. They 
>                                                                  ^^^^
> probably see Iran correctly as a powerful radical government, bent on
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> expanding its influence by destabilizing its neighbors.  Similarly,
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> though they have cooperated in the past, could you see Syria giving nukes
> to Iran?  The potential for a serious falling out in the future precludes
> such options -- the Arabs understand each other better than the European
> arms moguls understand them.


> 
Chris is showing blatant ignorance of the political situation in the middle
east.It is not Iran but America that has been destabilising the middle east.
Who was it that provided Saddam with arms for nearly ten years to bomb and maim
Iranian and Kurdish civilians ? Who subsequently bombed Iraq and killed or
injured nearly 40000 civilians. ? Who has now been providing arms to Syria
as a warm newly found friend ? James Baker was on television shaking the hand
of Hafez Assad,a hand that was slippery with blood.

Iran is a  democratic republic in which unlike America ,a woman can walk
the streets without the fear of being raped and drug dealers and rapists are 
mercilessly executed.Long live Iran! Long live the Islamic revolution !.
From: jle@locus.com (John Elghani/10000000)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
Subject: Why is Fahd of Saudia carring for Saddam today?
Date: 2 Sep 92 09:13:26 GMT
Organization: LC

As you may have read in the previous mail, King Fahd of Saudia is in
friendly touch with Saddam Husain, and he called him in the morning
to wake him up for Fajr Islamic Prayer.  The following reasons
are my best guess:

0- Fahd and Saddam predicting the Shiiat's rising in south iraq as
   a threat, while the US and Britain don't.   It is the most
   thing the Saudia hates: Shiiat, especially, the stuburn ones
   the live in the easten side of Saudia.  The no-fly zone
   sort of boosts their strenght in iraq.

1- As CBS News mentioned,  the Gulf countries are not participating
   in the no fly zone because they are afraid that BUSH may be gone
   due to Clinton's popularity, and Saddam may remain to guard them
   instead.  So, they're saying:  Feed the dog so it wont bite you
   later.

1.1 The US is becomming a close friend, slowly, with Yemen; an all time
    enemy of Saudia.  Recently,  Yemen discovered finest oil 
    in its terrirories.  Saudi is disallowing Yemen to dig since
    the oil is near Saudi oil fields.  The US went ahead and
    made deals with Yemen to begin digging, Saudia got upset.

2- King Fahd returned to his conciousness and felt sorry for the hundreds 
   of thousands iraqis he participated in slaughtering.

3- He realized that Israel is not his best secret ally in the region. :D

4- As Husni Mubarak of Egypt, he's distancing himself away from the
   crimes commited aginst 1/2 million innocnts because the war
   wasn't so much loved in the islamic and arabic world, he
   found himself sort of alone with Anwar Mohammad and his few
   alikes.

5- Myths of armed Islamic Fundamentalism  and arrests of thousands
   of Saudi oposition could be true .

6- He's in love with Saddam's wife and has been away from her
   for 2 years too long.

7- He can no longer live without Iraqi dates (fruit).

8- His Ulser (sp?, stomach problem) needs water from Babilon.
From: aaldoubo@copper.denver.colorado.edu (Anisa Alnoor Aldoubosh)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
Subject: Re: Here it is Anisa, for the third time in three days
Date: 2 Sep 92 18:31:31 GMT
Organization: University of Colorado at Denver

In article <3676@copper.Denver.Colorado.EDU> aaldoubo@copper.denver.colorado.edu (Anisa Alnoor Aldoubosh) writes:
>In article <Btv92v.BnK.2@cs.cmu.edu> anwar+@cs.cmu.edu (Anwar Mohammed) writes:
>
>>          Official Foreign Assistance by Kuwait
>>                 to Third World Countries
>>
>>                      1984     1985     1986     1987     1988
>>                      ----     ----     ----     ----     ----
>>Official Foreign
>>Assistance            862      868      983      337      534
>>(Million KD)
>
>>GDP                   6424.6   6151.0   6675.9   6406.1   6633.1
>>(Million KD)
>
>>Aid as % of GDP       13.4%    14.1%    14.7%    5.3%     8.1%
>>----------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>Aid as % of GDP (average for 5 years): 11.12%

It just occurred to me, given both statistical charts, that
when the GNP in 1983 was $25,000 to 1987, this was the highest
aid period; of course until it dropped to $9,000 in 1988 started
to decrease in amount.

I still would like to know the breakdown to the of the various
countries are, what the aid was to pre and post War, and my
other questions.

I don't mind waiting until you have the time to research and compile
it.  (Yalla - yalla!  :-).

Do I anticipate a response also on my previous question concerning
suffrage for women and if you feel this is democratic not to
include women from voting rights?
 
Anisa

	"Since when did the affairs of the state take
	precedence over the affairs of God?"

Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
From: horen@rs.com (Jonathan B. Horen)
Subject: Re: politics
Organization: Renaissance Software, Inc.
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 16:20:29 PDT

In article <1992Aug23.200751.14229@ncrcae.ColumbiaSC.NCR.COM> nabil@ncrcol.ColumbiaSC.NCR.COM (Nabil Idriss) writes:
>
[...]
>
>This is the last paragraph I am going to respond to Nora. I am not ready to
>flame with a female. Why don't you leave the flaming between me and Jonathan
>Horen. I guess we got accustomed to each other. 
        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

And decided to leave the flaming to Brendan McKay and others...
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
From: bdm@cs.anu.edu.au (Brendan McKay)
Subject: Re: Arabs/leftists? (was Re: Computer Scie
Organization: Australian National University
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 00:10:57 GMT

horen@rs.com (Jonathan B. Horen) writes:
>In article <1992Aug31.054833.1647@cs.anu.edu.au> bdm@cs.anu.edu.au writes:
>>
>>>                                     but let me also state that t.p.m.
>>>readers ought to look at from where in the world these three are posting)
>>
>>More jingoism from Mr. "fuck you, asshole".  By the way, I bet
>>I have travelled more widely in the US than you have.

>You lose -- I spent two years hitchhiking throughout the US following
>Woodstock, and made it to every state except Hawaii. As for Alaska, I
>was stationed there for two years in the US Army.

Drat!  I have been to 39 states (including Hawaii) which is many more
than most Americans, but you win this time.  I'll get back to you
when I manage 50.  What was the point of your comment, anyway?

>But tell us, Brendan: wither have you travelled in the Middle East? 

Not at all, as I have stated publically before.  I'm waiting for a 
good excuse (relevant conference) to visit Israel.  

>j.horen@rs.com

Brendan.
From: arens@ISI.EDU (Yigal Arens)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
Subject: Re: Lehi and nazies
Date: 29 Aug 92 02:39:29 GMT
	<4925@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP> <22242@venera.isi.edu>
	<1992Aug26.171849.12592@discus.technion.ac.il>
Organization: USC/Information Sciences Institute
In-reply-to: davidba@carmel.technion.ac.il's message of 26 Aug 92 17:18:49 GMT

In article <1992Aug26.171849.12592@discus.technion.ac.il> davidba@carmel.technion.ac.il (David Ben_Ami) writes:
>
> In article <22242@venera.isi.edu> arens@ISI.EDU (Yigal Arens) writes:
> >In article <4925@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP> rdtst+@pitt.edu (Richard D Thorne) writes:
> >>
> >>   When someone says "Israel sanctions torture" they know full well
> >>   that the average Israeli, like the average US or Brit citizen is a
> >>   humane person who opposes torture.
> >
> >Is this, like, a self-evident truth?  Now that you bring it up, my guess
> >would be that the average Israeli actually *supports* the torture
> >engaged in by Shabak.
> >
> >Sure, the average Israeli, like the average person anywhere, opposes the
> >application of torture to people like him/her.  But Palestinians are
> >viewed as "different".
> >
> >The question of the use of torture must have come up in polls in Israel.
> >Does anyone have any information on this?
>
> Yigal's characterization of the Israeli as inhumaely obtuse person is 
> hypocritical as ever. He forgets that the average Israeli happens to be
> in a state of war for over 40 years (almost 50) with enemy who only now
> consider to abandon their vow to annihilate him. He applies analogies
> to nations who are in a state of peace. [The Americans never felt the
> horrors of war in their own home in the last 200 years].

I find your response rather confusing.  What is your actual claim?  Are
you saying that Israelis *oppose* the torture of Arabs?  What is the
relevance of the state of war to this?  Or, are you claiming that
Israelis *support* the torture of Arabs, but that that is understandable
under the circumstances?

It appears that you are making the second claim -- admitting that
Israelis support the torture of Arabs, but asserting that this is
to be expected due to the Mideast situation.

So why argue with me?  You should instead argue with Mr. Thorne.  *He*
was the one who compared Israelis to Americans and Brits.  *He* was the
one who made claims that you now assert to be false.
--
Yigal Arens        "You'd think [Bush] was running for First Lady instead
USC/ISI            of for President."     Bill Clinton, commenting on GOP
arens@isi.edu      attacks on his wife.   LA Times, 8/20.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
From: goykhman_a@apollo.hp.com (Alex Goykhman)
Subject: Re: CLINTON SPEECH TEXT: RABIN MEETING
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 15:12:17 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Company, Chelmsford, MA

In article <1992Aug29.023849.2438387@locus.com> jle@locus.com (John Elghani/10000000) writes:
>In article <BtMH14.FMo.2@cs.cmu.edu> anwar+@cs.cmu.edu (Anwar Mohammed) writes:
...
>Also, don't be fooled with those pro-israeli Kuwait sympathizers
>on this net.  They are so glad you and I are attacking each other.
>This is what israel wished, planned for and achieved. ...

    One can't help but conclude that you both were planted by Mossad:)



-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer: all opinions are mine.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: egpv29@castle.ed.ac.uk (JHenderson)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
Subject: Re: Fair Swap
Date: 3 Sep 92 14:57:39 GMT
Organization: Edinburgh University

In article <1992Sep3.133246.10319@cs.brown.edu> dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren) writes:
=>In article <25475@castle.ed.ac.uk> egpv29@castle.ed.ac.uk (JHenderson) writes:
=>#
=>#As long as you subscribe to the view that the best form of defence is attack.
=>#It's been thrashed out dozens of times how Israel instigated the '67 war, to
=>#mention just one example, but you just don't seem to get it, do you. 
=>
=>Neither do I, because it is clear that the sole responsibility to the
=>`67 war lies with the Soviet Union, Egypt, Syria and Jordan.

That's odd - I don't remember seeing these countries invading Egypt.

=> There is
=>no legitimate question about this. Even prominent Arab figures, like
=>the late Egyptian president Anwar Sadat and King Hussein, admit this. 
=>The relevant quotes have been posted on the net many times.

Not to mention the various sources confirming that it was Israel that
launched an unnecessary invasion, but, as you say, this has been 
mentioned many times here, with little apparent impact.



-- 

-Jeremy Henderson            |  Une souris verte
 egpv29@castle.ed.ac.uk	     |  Qui courrait dans l'herbe
--More--(2%)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
From: rivk@ellis.uchicago.edu (nora gayle rivkis)
Subject: Re: politics
Reply-To: rivk@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 20:35:36 GMT

In article <1992Sep01.035418.2447987@locus.com> jle@locus.com (John Elghani/10000000) writes:

>>Just like Elghani!  As has been mentioned umpteen times on this net, the
>>name "Palestine" for the land was a Roman invention.  Once again, we see
>>what should be very obvious:  Elghani refuses to take seriously anything
>>which attacks his hopelessly narrow view of the world.  Ho hum.

>Do you deny the equality beteen the names Palestine and Philistine?  If you
>do, just let me know so I can laugh a little more, I happened to
>like jokes.

For the eighth time, Mr. Elghani, what we deny is that the similarity has
any accuracy. The people who made up the name Palestine didn't have a clue
what they were talking about and cared less; hence they took the name from
some people who were, in fact, wholly unrelated to the people they were
naming. We've been through this before. Blame the Romans for screwing up
the name if you like, but your attempts to give *credibility* to the Roman
lie is ridiculous.

>jle

	-Nora
-- 
"Light one candle for those who are suffering pain we learned so long ago..."

Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast