waashk/20ng huggingface dataset:
In article <1ri5pk$2f0@cat.cis.Brown.EDU> dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren) writes: >Can someone elaborate a little on what this "Libertarian" movement is? I >am not going to draw conclusions from a small sample, but so far I >recall two self-described "Libertarians" posting here. Both seems to be:  >1) Incredibly ignorant. >2) Incredibly arrogant. >3) All they want is to get people angry. >4) Posses a lousy sense of humor. >5) write incoherently and jump from topic to topic without any logical >   connection between topics. >6) Describe themselves as intelligent and knowledgeable, although everything >   in their posters points to the opposite. >7) Very childish.  	The Libertarians believe in getting the government off the backs of the people, so that the free market can solve problems.  	Libertarians believe in an end to the welfare state, an end to government subsidies of all sorts.  The basic idea is that the government is way too big and way too expensive, and should be shrunk down to a reasonable size.  	They also believe in a complete end to foreign aid, including the stationing of American troops overseas.  We can not and should not be policing the world.   	I agree that the people who come into this group and describe themselves as Libertarians seem to posses the charictaristics you describe, but heck, we're not all like this.  I'm a libertarian, and I've got a great sense of humor! :)  Adam   Adam Shostack 				       adam@das.harvard.edu
In article <ARENS.93Apr13161407@grl.ISI.EDU> arens@ISI.EDU (Yigal Arens) writes:  >Los Angeles Times, Tuesday, April 13, 1993.  P. A1. > ........  The problem if  transffering US government files about Yigal Arens and some other similar persons does or does not violate a federal or a local American law seemed to belong to some local american law forum  not to this forum. The readers of this forum seemed to be more interested in the contents of those files. So It will be nice if Yigal will tell us: 1. Why do American authorities consider Yigal Arens to be dangerous? 2. Why does the ADL have an interest in that person ? 3. If one does trust either the US government or the ADL what an    additional information should he send them ?
Mr. Salah, why are you such a homicidal racist?  Do you feel this same hatred towards Christans, or is it only Jews?  Are you from a family of racists?  Did you learn this racism in your home?  Or are you a self-made bigot?  How does one become such a racist?  I wonder what you think your racism will accomplish.  Are you under the impression that your racism will help bring peace in the mid- east?  I would like to know your thoughts on this.
In article <1993May7.175730.12246@ncsu.edu> hernlem@chess.ncsu.edu (Brad Hernlem) writes: >In article <39298@optima.cs.arizona.edu>, bakken@cs.arizona.edu (Dave Bakken) writes: >|> In article <C6MM8A.5KB@bony1.bony.com> jake@bony1.bony.com (Jake Livni) writes:  >|> >In the NY Times, on Sunday, May 2, in an article on Somalia, a >|> >reporter writes: >|> > >|> >  " [...] But last year, Iran quietly took over four islands belonging >|> >  to the United Arab Emirates and deported their people, with hardly a >|> >  protest from the United States. [...]" >|> > >|> >Does anyone know what this is referring to?  I seem to have missed it. >|> >(Spiked, no doubt. :-)  >|> There was something in the NYT and other sources about this for a few >|> days.  It is an ongoing border disupute, and when the Iranians kicked >|> out the UAE people it was briefly reported (this was many moons ago). >|> I don't recall reading of any public US comment; if it were a strong >|> protest I probably would have seen it.  >Those islands would be Abu Musa, and the Greater and Lesser Tunbs, I presume. >I don't know about a fourth. The latter two islands belong to Iran and so  According to the NY Times, the 4 islands "belong[] to the United Arab Emirates."   >could not be "taken over". The major row is over Abu Musa which has been  >jointly administered by Iran and UAE. The dispute goes back to the early >1970's when Britain evacuated the island and Iran under the Shah reclaimed >the island which had historical ties to Iran. No British objection was >raised at that time. > >It is my understanding that UAE residents of Abu Musa are currently free to >travel to and from the island and that Iran is desiring diplomatic resolution  >of the dispute.   Why is it, then, that when the British, Iranians and UAE refer to Occupied Territory, they mean territory in dispute in Israel but not in their own affairs?
amehdi@src.honeywell.com (Hossien Amehdi) writes:  >In article <C5IFH7.3q4@news.cso.uiuc.edu> eshneken@ux4.cso.uiuc.edu (Edward A Shnekendorf) writes: >> >>What the hell do you know about Israeli policy?  What gives you the fiat >>to look into the minds of Israeli generals?  Has this 'policy of intimidation' >>been published somewhere?  For your information, the actions taken by Arabs, >>specifically the PLO, were not uncommon in the Lebanon Campaign of 1982.  My >>brain is full of shit?  At least I don't look into the minds of others and  >>make Israeli policy for them! >> >... deleted  >I am not in the business of reading minds, however in this case it would not >be necessary.  Israelis top leaders in the past and present, always come across >as arrogant with their tough talks trying to intimidate the Arabs.    How would you deal with Arabs who ALWAYS threaten to drive you into the sea or burn half your conuntry?  Would you talk nicely?  Would you say please?  You wouldn't.  The language of the middle east is power and force.  Sorry - that is the way it is now.  If you aren't strong, you go down.  Israel has to talk  and act tough.  Notice, Israel talks and acts tough in battle, but is willing to talk peace.  >The way I see it, Israelis and Arabs have not been able to achieve peace >after almost 50 years of fighting because of the following two major reasons:  > 1) Arab governments are not really representative of their people, currently >    most of their leaders are stupid, and/or not independent, and/or >    dictators.  True - and they have brainwashed their people into thinking Jews are some sort of monsters.  Arab non-recognition of Israel and support of war and terror is also an important factor, wouldn't you say?  > 2) Israeli government is arrogant and none comprising.  What do you want Israel to do?  They are negotating? I'm sick of people calling for Israel to withdraw from the territories now.  That's not realistic, don't you realize that?  A solution must be negotiated.  It is on the table.  Have patience.
cl056@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Hamaza H. Salah) writes:  >>Would you tell me which Arab country is prohipiting the Jews from >>migrating to Palestine?  >the last arab country was syria. but not all of them >migrated due to the jewish state economical and  >securital dilemma!  As usual, when Salah is not totally racist, she manages to get virtually all the facts wrong.  Assad pledged to allow Jews to leave Syria, but not to go to Israel.  Unfortunately, not all of them have escaped yet, but not because they don't want to leave;  rather, Assad went back on his word and stopped issuing travel permits.  He claimed bureaucratic snags, but everyone knows it was a tactic to pressure Israel.
In article <C5J2qz.MnE@world.std.com> mkaye@world.std.com (Martin Kaye) writes:     Great interview with Benjamin Netanyahu on CNN - Larry King Live (4/15/93)    This guy is knows what he is talking about. He is truely charismatic,    articulate, intelligent, and demonstrates real leadership qualities.   I agree, but I wish I liked his politics.
In a previous article, adam@endor.uucp (Adam Shostack) says:  >In article <2BDAD779.24910@news.service.uci.edu> tclock@orion.oac.uci.edu (Tim Clock) writes: >>In article <AMOSS.93Apr25163327@shuldig.cs.huji.ac.il> amoss@shuldig.cs.huji.ac.il (Amos Shapira) writes: >>>cy779@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Anas Omran) writes: > >>>Eh????  Could you please give me details about an event where a "Neutral >>>Observer" was killed by purpose by an Israeli soldier? >  There are many cases, but I do not remeber names.  The Isralis shot and killed a UN observer in Gaza in the first half of Intifada.
In article <1rd7eo$1a4@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu>, cy779@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Anas Omran) writes: > > In a previous article, tclock@orion.oac.uci.edu (Tim Clock) says: > >>In article <1993Apr24.203620.6531@Virginia.EDU> ab4z@Virginia.EDU ("Andi Beyer") writes: >>>I think the Israeli press might be a tad bit biased in >>>reporting the events. I doubt the Propaganda machine of Goering >>>reported accurately on what was happening in Germany. It is >>>interesting that you are basing the truth on Israeli propaganda. >> >>Since one is also unlikely to get "the truth" from either Arab or >>Palestinian news outlets, where do we go to "understand", to learn? >>Is one form of propoganda more reliable than another? > > There are many neutral human rights organizations which always report > on the situation in the O.T.  But, as most people used to see on TV, the > Israelis do not allow them to go deep there in the O.T.  The Israelis > used to arrest and sometimes to kill some of these neutral reporters.   Anas, of course ! The YAHUD needed blood for the matza. After all, Passover *was* last month :-)  Why don't you give us your National Geographic travelogue of your recent trip to "Palestine" ? Or are you too disappointed by what you saw ? :-)  Josh backon@VMS.HUJI.AC.IL
waldo@cybernet.cse.fau.edu  writes: > ab4z@Virginia.EDU ("Andi Beyer") writes: >  > > First of all I never said the Holocaust. I said before the > > Holocaust. I'm not ignorant of the Holocaust and know more > > about Nazi Germany than most people (maybe including you).  >  > Uh Oh!  The first sign of an argument without merit--the stating of one's  > "qualifications" in an area.  If you know something about Nazi Germany,  > show it.  If you don't, shut up.  Simple as that. >  > > 	I don't think the suffering of some Jews during WWII > > justifies the crimes commited by the Israeli government. Any > > attempt to call Civil liberterians like myself anti-semetic is > > not appreciated. >  > ALL Jews suffered during WWII, not just our beloved who perished or were  > tortured.  We ALL suffered.  Second, the name-calling was directed against > YOU, not civil-libertarians in general.  Your name-dropping of a fancy > sounding political term is yet another attempt to "cite qualifications"  > in order to obfuscate your glaring unpreparedness for this argument.  Go  > back to the minors, junior. 	All humans suffered emotionally, some Jews and many others suffered physically. It is sad that people like you are so blinded by emotions that they can't see the facts. Thanks for calling me names, it only assures me of what kind of ignorant people I am dealing with. I included your letter since I thought it demonstrated my point more than anything I could write.
In article <1483500353@igc.apc.org> Center for Policy Research <cpr@igc.apc.org> writes: > >From: Center for Policy Research <cpr> >Subject: rejoinder. Questions to Israelis > > >Dear Josh > >I appreciate the fact that you sought to answer my questions. > >Having said that, I am not totally happy with your answers. > >1.   You did not fully answer my question whether Israeli ID cards >identify the holders as Jews or Arabs. You imply that U.S. >citizens must identify themselves by RACE. Is that true ? Or are >just trying to mislead the reader ?   I think he is trying to mislead people.  In cases where race information is sought, it is completely voluntary (the census possibly excepted).
In article <48090@sdcc12.ucsd.edu> hminassi@sdcc13.ucsd.edu (HM) writes:  >     Azeri President Abulfaz Elchibey said Azerbaijan had recovered >the bodies of some 500 "terrorists including blacks, Mongols and >fighters recently brought to (the Armenian capital) Yerevan from Lebanon."  You can dream whatever you wish. We have demands from the Armenians. With the Government of x-Soviet Armenia, we would sit down, go over all our outstanding issues, whether it's land or reparations or recognition, whatever it is. We'd like to sit down and ask for it. By all means, lands and properties were taken away from us and they should be returned to the rightful owners, the Turkish and Kurdish  people, who were there 3,000 years, long before the Armenians ever showed up in that area. Entire population of the region was subjected  to genocide beyond belief; genocide which was planned to exterminate  the whole Turkish people of the region to the last man, woman and child.  Armenians tortured and massacred millions of defenseless civilians. To  assemble innocent civilians in the mosques and burn them in the buildings  was one of their methods. Even today the traveler in that region is seldom  free from the evidence of these Armenian crimes.  If you have the stomach, I would strongly recommend the following references on the Armenian genocide of the Muslims. Many more of them are also available in the 'Erzurum and Van Turkish Genocide Museums.'  1. Neside Kerem Demir, "Bir Sehid Anasina Tarihin Soyledikleri:     Turkiye'nin Ermeni Meselesi," Hulbe Basim ve Yayin T.A.S.,     Ankara, 1982.   2. Veysel Eroglu, "Ermeni Mezalimi," Sebil Yayinevi, Istanbul, 1978.  3. A. Alper Gazigiray, "Osmanlilardan Gunumuze Kadar Vesikalarla Ermeni    Teroru'nun Kaynaklari," Gozen Kitabevi, Istanbul, 1982.  4. Dr. Kirzioglu M. Fahrettin, "Kars Ili ve Cevresinde Ermeni Mezalimi,"    Kardes Matbaasi, Ankara, 1970.   But more than that.   A Final Goodbye in Azerbaijan:  [Photo by Associated Press]: "At a cemetery in Agdam, Azerbaijan, family  members and friends grieved during the burial of victims killed in the  fighting in Nagorno-Karabagh. Chingiz Iskandarov, right, hugged the  coffin containing the remains of his brother, one of the victims. A copy  of Koran lay atop the coffin." The New York Times, 3/6/92  Final Embrace :  [Photo by Associated Press]: "Chingiz Iskenderov, right, weeps over  coffin holding the remains of his brother as other relatives grieve  at an Azarbaijani cemetery yesterday amid burial of victims killed  in fighting in Nagorno-Karabagh." The Washington Post, 3/6/92  Nagorno-Karabagh Victims Buried in Azerbaijani Town :  "Refugees Claim Hundreds died in Armenian Attack...Of seven bodies seen   here today, two were children and three were women, one shot through   the chest at what appeared to be close range.  Another 120 refugees   being treated at Agdam's hospital include many with multiple stab   wounds."  Thomas Goltz  The Washington Post, 2/28/92  Serdar Argic
In article <C6vI24.M7o@bony1.bony.com> jake@bony1.bony.com (Jake Livni) writes: >   You appear to be referring to Moshe Dayan.  How do you know that the >   "evicted Jordanians" were not provided with something else?  In fact, >   this thread indicates that they were squatters on land that they did >   not own but received compensation for their loss, anyways!  Woe to >   Jews when they feel that recovering land that has been taken from them >   by force (with "ethnic cleansing" of any remaining Jews) is >   "disgusting and shameful".    Does anyone have a reference to the claim that the Arabs in the Moghrabi district were "squatters"?  I haven't seen this in the books I have read.  I haven't seen the opposite, either...
In article <benali.735836579@alcor> benali@alcor.concordia.ca ( ILYESS B. BDIRA ) writes: >bc744@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Mark Ira Kaufman) writes: > > >... >>for your information on Israel.  Since I read both American media >>and Israeli media, I can say with absolute certainty that anybody >>who reliesx exclusively on the American press for knowledge about >>Israel does not have a true picture of what is going on. > >Of course you never read Arab media, > >I read Arab, ISRAELI (Jer. Post, and this network is more than enough)  The Jerusalem Post is only a small part of the Israeli media ( One that caters to outsiders for the most part, anyways).  If you never read Ha'aretz, Maariv, or other Hebrew langauge papers , or at least seen some of their articles translated, you are not really getting the Israeli media.      >and Western (American, French, and British) reports and I can say >that if we give Israel -10 and Arabs +10 on the bias scale (of course >you can switch the polarities) Israeli newspapers will get either >a -9 or -10, American leading  newspapers and TV news range from -6  Inlcuding some of the left-leaning ones?   >to -10 (yes there are some that are more Israelis than Israelis)  A -6 to a -10? Is that why stations such as PBS have run shows which do not depict the Israeli standpoint at all?  IS that why the Intifada got more coverage in 1987 and 1988 than did Saddamn gassing Kurds by the thousands?     >The Montreal suburban (a local free newspaper) probably is closer >to Kahane's views than some Israeli right wing newspapers, British  I am from Montreal. I read the Suburban. Did they ever advocate the Kahane stupidity of expelling the Arabs? Are they racist?  The Suburban has some columnists that explain the Israeli standpoint.  They are nothing like Kahane. IN any case, the Suburban is a paper with a minor local distribution and no influence.    >range from 0 (neutral) to -10, French (that Iknow of, of course) range >from +2 (Afro-french magazines) to -10, Arab official media range from >0 to -5 (Egyptian)  to +9 in SA. Why no +10? Because they do not want to >overdo it and stir people against Israel and therefore against them since  >they are doing nothing. > >  >>   As to the claim that Israeli papers are biased, of course they >>are.  Some may lean to the right or the left, just like the media >>here in America.  But they still report events about which people >>here know nothing.  I choose to form my opinions about Israel and >>the mideast based on more knowledge than does an average American >>who relies exclusively on an American media which does not report >>on events in the mideast with any consistency or accuracy. > >the average bias of what you read would be probably around -9, >while that of the average American would be the same if they do >not read or read the new-york times and similar News-makers, and >-8 if they read some other RELATIVELY less biased newspapers. > >so you are not better off. >  So what source is the closest thing to a zero?
In article <389@jcpltyo.JCPL.CO.JP>, ohayon@jcpltyo.JCPL.CO.JP (Tsiel Ohayon) writes: |> In article <1993Apr26.211905.28317@freenet.carleton.ca> aa229@Freenet.carleton.ca (Steve Birnbaum) writes: | And in 1982 the attack was a response |> [SB] to years of constant shelling by terrorist organizations from the Golan |> 							     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |> [SB] Heights. Children were being murdered all the time by terrorists and Israel |> ^^^^^^^^^^^^ |> [SB] finally retaliated.  Nowhere do I see a war that Israel started so that  |> [SB] the borders could be expanded. |>  |> I agree with all you write except that Terrorist orgs. were not shelling |> Israel from the Golan Heights in 1982, but rather from Lebanon.    Tsiel,  I would contend that there was shelling from both sides of the border, starting from the early 70's.  Certainly the PLO did shell Northern Israel from the Arqoub region, but Israel did much more shelling destroying several South Lebanese villages.  At the very least we can say that both sides exchanged shelling, with occasional aerial raids by Israel on Lebanese villages. In any case Steve's characterization that the 1982 invasion was only in  response to years of shelling from Lebanon is false.  Israel had many reasons for invading but mainly it did so to install a government in Lebanon favorable to Israel, and it nearly achieved this aim with the election of Basheer El Gemayel, and his brother, Amin El Gemayel, but the internal situation in Lebanon was too hard to control and predict so Israel had to withdraw, and Amin El Gemayel had to abrogate the 17 th of May Agreement.  |>  |> Tsiel |> --  |> ----8<--------------------------------------------------------------->8------ |> Tsiel:ohayon@jcpl.co.jp	   | If you do not receive this E-mail, please let me |> Employer may not have same | know as soon as possible, if possible. |> opinions, if any !         | Two percent of zero is almost nothing.
I understand how israel captured the teritory and feels that it is its right to annex it. I can't fully understand why it has to deal with palestinians much the same way jews were treated before the holocaust (the Final Solution) by Hitler. What I totally don't get is why the U.S. has to subsidize the existance of such a thorough abuser of human rights. 				Just wondering
In article <1483500354@igc.apc.org> Center for Policy Research <cpr@igc.apc.org> writes: > >From: Center for Policy Research <cpr> >Subject: Final Solution for Gaza ? > >While Israeli Jews fete the uprising of the Warsaw ghetto,  "fete"??? Since this word both formally and commonly refers to positive/joyous events, your misuse of it here is rather unsettling.   >they repress by violent means the uprising of the Gaza ghetto  >and attempt to starve the Gazans.  I certainly abhor those Israeli policies and attitudes that are abusive towards the Palestinians/Gazans. Given that, however, there  *is no comparison* between the reality of the Warsaw Ghetto and in  Gaza.   > >The right of the Gazan population to resist occupation is >recognized in international law and by any person with a sense of >justice.   Just as international law recognizes the right of the occupying  entity to maintain order, especially in the face of elements that are consciously attempting to disrupt the civil structure.  Ironically, international law recognizes each of these focusses (that of the occupied and the occupier) even though they are  inherently in conflict. > >As Israel denies Gazans the only two options which are compatible >with basic human rights and international law, that of becoming >Israeli citizens with full rights or respecting their right for >self-determination, it must be concluded that the Israeli Jewish >society does not consider Gazans full human beings.  Israel certainly cannot, and should not, continue its present policies towards Gazan residents. There is, however, a third  alternative- the creation and implementation of a jewish "dhimmi" system with Gazans/Palestinians as benignly "protected" citizens. Would you find THAT as acceptable in that form as you do with regard to Islam's policies towards its minorities?   >Whether they have some Final Solution up their sleeve ?  It is a race, then? Between Israel's anti-Palestinian/Gazan "Final Solution" and the Arab World's anti-Israel/jewish "Final Solution". Do you favor one? neither?  > >I urge all those who have slight human compassion to do whatever >they can to help the Gazans regain their full human, civil and >political rights, to which they are entitled as human beings.  Since there is justifiable worry by various parties that Israel and Arab/Palestinian "final solution" intentions exist, isn't it important that BOTH Israeli *and* Palestinian/Gazan "rights" be secured? > >Elias Davidsson Iceland >