waashk/20ng huggingface dataset:
>Look nobody asked those countries about their UN forces >to be on the ground.  They can take their forces which are >incomponent and ineffective at the first place.  And let whoever are >willing to do the job what it takes.  How anyone can defend this >stinking UN force on the ground who let the Bosnnian PM >yanked out from the UN vehicle and being shot by the Serbian >military?  How anyone can defend this UN force who are just watching >the shelling on cities and towns everyday?  How anyone can >defend and say those stinking UN forces being effective >when Bosnian had almost 14,000 children casualties between 5-14 age  >groups?  I think talking about the current UN forces to Bosnian >muslims is just an insult to their casualties.    > >I think Senator Biden said it all what has to be said on this issue. >Europe is a sad place to criticize human rights in anywhere in this  >world.  Like Biden said, they are the bigots when it comes to  >cultural difference and minorty closer to their home. >Because they get rid of their minorities long long time >ago starting in 15th centuries.  And they let Adolph >to take care of the rest in 20th Century.  But he was much more  >naughty than they expected because he dared to step many  >toes.  So, why spoil the good thing now when Serbs doing today what  >they were thinking the same yesterday. > >C. Akgun   Infact on tuesday, the Bosnian foreign minister asked formally the UN to leave Bosnia, just to show how much hypocracy is there in Europe. These so called UN is actually helping Serbs carry out their etnic-clensing/murders/rapes. In Zepa the UN effectively helped the Serbs carry out their heinous crimes by spreading conflicting reports that nothing was going on there. The cowards, or so called UN peacemakers, only "attempted" to  go out there for a fact finding mission -as if with all the ham-radio operators were lying and all the US war planes out there have no means of flying over there. This is the biggest farce in the history of the world and the same act has been repeated over and over again in different beseiged Bosnian towns....  Yes! I heard today that the president of Bosnia- under pressure from the "civilized nations" has appealed to the UN to stay there in Bosnia. He should know better..  These hypocrates (Sadly! it includes Clinton administration too) all came out and said that the call for a referendum from bosnian serbian perliment (or a bunch of rapists/criminals) is a farce and yet they have to wait for the result of this referendum to act....   For those of you who are against US to commit ground troops, fine just lift the arms-embargo on BOTH sides (since we know that serbs always got the heavy weapons form federal army).   Wake up West!! and admit that you are the most uncivilized, the most hypocratic and the most violent bunch on this earth...    -Khalid
In article <C5IF8u.3Ky@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, ptg2351@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Panos Tamamidis ) writes: >  Yeah, too much Mutlu/Argic isn't helping.  I could, one day, proceed and  You shouldn't think many Turks read Mutlu/Argic stuff. They are in my kill file, likewise any other fanatic.   > >(I have nothing against Greeks but my problem is with fanatics. I have met > >so many Greeks who wouldn't even talk to me because I am Turkish. From my > >experience, all my friends always were open to Greeks) >  >  Well, the history, wars, current situations, all of them do not help.  Well, Panos, Mr. Tamamidis?, the way you put it it is only the Turks who bear the responsibility of the things happening today. That is hard to believe for somebody trying to be objective. When it comes to conflicts like our countries having you cannot blame one side only, there always are bad guys on both sides. What were you doing on Anatolia after the WW1 anyway? Do you think it was your right to be there? I am not saying that conflicts started with that. It is only not one side being the aggressive and the ither always suffering. It is sad that we (both) still are not trying to compromise. I remember the action of the Turkish government by removing the visa requirement for greeks to come to Turkey. I thought it was a positive attempt to make the relations better.  The Greeks I mentioned who wouldn't talk to me are educated people. They have never met me but they know! I am bad person because I am from Turkey. Politics is not my business, and it is not the business of most of the Turks. When it comes to individuals  why the hatred? So that makes me think that there is some kind of brainwashing going on in Greece. After all why would an educated person  treat every person from a nation the same way? can you tell me about your  history books and things you learn about Greek-Turkish encounters during your schooling.  take it easy!   -- Tankut Atan tankut@iastate.edu
In article <1993Apr16.174056.13368@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu> gfeygin@unicorn.eecg.toronto.edu (Gennady Feygin) writes: >Does anyone have a schedule of Kol Israel broadcasts in different >languages that could be posted or e-mailed to me. Your >assistance would be greatly appreciated > >GF
>them. (By the way, I do not applaud the killing of _any_ human being, >including prisoners sentenced to death by our illustrious justice department) > >Peace. >-marc >
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.   So, this is another kind of terrorism committed by the Jews in Palestine. They do not allow fair and neutral coverage of the situation in Palestine.  >to determine that is to try and get beyond the writer's "political >agenda", whether it is "on" or "against" our *side*. > >Tim
I recently read that during Bill Clinton's campaign, he stated that if elected he would immediately recognize Jerusalem as Israel's capital.  According to the article, Mr. Clinton reaffirmed this after winning the presidency.  However, during recent talks with President Mubarak, Secretary of State Christopher stated that "the status of Jerusalem will be a final matter of discussion between the parties".  Now I don't want to start a big discussion over the status of Jerusalem.  All I want to know is if anyone can  authenticate Mr. Clinton's statements with dates, places, etc.  Thank you.
jake@bony1.bony.com  writes: > In article <1993Apr25.222120.3411@Virginia.EDU> ab4z@Virginia.EDU ("Andi Beyer") writes: > >waldo@cybernet.cse.fau.edu  writes: >  > >> ALL Jews suffered during WWII, not just our beloved who perished or were  > >> tortured.  We ALL suffered.   >  > >	All humans suffered emotionally, some Jews and many > >others suffered physically.  >  > I'm just waiting for Andi to tell us that African Americans should > start paying compensation to White Americans who "suffered" from being  > slave owners. >  	Do you have a problem with the language? I said everyone suffered emotionally because they sympathyzed with the victims of Holocaust. I wasn't implying that anyone suffered more than the actual victims. Neither was I implying any wrongdoing on the part of the Jews as the cause for the Holocaust. What is wrong with you guys? Regardless of what one  says you keep hearing what you want to hear.
In <EGGERTJ.93May9230207@moses.ll.mit.edu> eggertj@moses.ll.mit.edu (Jim Eggert x6127 g41) writes:  >It is important to note that there remains at least one mosque in the >Jewish quarter of the Old City, at least according to my map.  You >might be able to find it just north of the Hurva synagogue.  Is this >mosque really still there?  Was this mosque built by "squatters" too?  When I was in Jerusalem a couple of years ago, our guide told us the story of that mosque - not sure if it was true.  Apparently, it was built by a Jewish convert to Islam.  He had had a dispute with his neighbours, and built the mosque "davka" to annoy them.  It's a cute story, but not sure if it's true...
In <2BDC2B73.17775@news.service.uci.edu> tclock@orion.oac.uci.edu (Tim Clock) writes:  >In article <Apr26.175327.86241@yuma.ACNS.ColoState.EDU> bh437292@lance.colostate.edu writes: >>In article <1993Apr24.202201.1@utxvms.cc.utexas.edu>, ifaz706@utxvms.cc.utexas.edu (Noam Tractinsky) writes: >>|>      Paraphrasing a bit, with every rocket that  >>|> 	the Hizbollah fires on the Galilee, they justify Israel's  >>|> 	holding to the security zone.  >>|>  >>|> Noam >> >> >> >>I only want to say that I agree with Noam on this point >>and I hope that all sides stop targeting civilians. >> >>Basil  >> >Absolutely. I'm sure that civilians on both sides would be pleased >if the fighters (military, guerilla, whatever) would just take their >argument elsewhere, find an unpopulated area somewhere, and slug it out.   >At that point, we will all breath a sigh of relief *and* cheer for >our side in the struggle.  Ah, but when you fire at armed folks they have this nasty habit of firing back. A simple terrorist could get hurt that way.
mafifi@eis.calstate.edu (Marc A Afifi) writes:  >Let's not forget that the soldiers were killed not murdered. The >distinction is not trivial. Murder happens to innocent people, not people >whose line of work is to kill or be killed. It just so happened that these >soldiers, in the line of duty, were killed by the opposition.   That still doesn't mean we should cheer their deaths.  Policemen are also in  the line of fire and their job includes the possibility of getting killed.   Should we be happy when they die?  As I said before, the question is not whether or not you agree with the policies of Israel.  You may wish for the Israelis to cease occupation, but don't rejoice in death.  >-marc
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. > >Is this some campaign to smear this Libertarian party or what?   Wow, hang on a second.  The libertarian party stands for personal freedom, lassez-faire economics and minimal government.  Whoever is describing the self as a Libertarian (maybe you were refering to the posters who call  themselves civil libertarians) are not talking at all about Libertarian philosophy.
In article <OAF.93May11231227@klosters.ai.mit.edu> oaf@zurich.ai.mit.edu writes: > In message: <C6MnAD.MxD@ucdavis.edu> Some nameless geek <szljubi@chip.ucdavis.edu> writes: > > To Oded Feingold: > >  > > Call off the dogs, babe. It's me, in the flesh. And no, I'm not > > Wayne either, so you might just want to tuck your quivering erection > > back into your M.I.T. slacks and catch up on your Woody Allen. > > > This is an outrage!  I don't even own a dog. > Of course you do.  You married it a while ago, remember?
tankut@IASTATE.EDU (Sabri T Atan) writes:  >In article <C5IF8u.3Ky@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, ptg2351@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Panos >Tamamidis ) writes: >  >> >(I have nothing against Greeks but my problem is with fanatics. I have met >> >so many Greeks who wouldn't even talk to me because I am Turkish. From my >> >experience, all my friends always were open to Greeks) >>  >>  Well, the history, wars, current situations, all of them do not help.  >Well, Panos, Mr. Tamamidis?, the way you put it it is only the Turks >who bear the responsibility of the things happening today. That is hard to >believe for somebody trying to be objective.   Well, if you put things into historical perspective, the Turks  moved into an area, which was inhabited by Greeks.  This is how the history  between the two nations started some centuries ago.  Since then, it has been  a continuous battle between the two nations.  From my perspective I can't see  why I should say that Greeks have been responsible for what has happened   between the two nations.  Of course, it would not be reasonable to argue that  the hostility should drag till we kick the Turks out of this area.  This isn't  going to happen, so the best would be to improve the relations between the two  countries.  A golden oportunity exists with Cyprus.  If things can't work  there, there isn't any possible way that could work between our nations.  >When it comes to conflicts like our countries having you cannot >blame one side only, there always are bad guys on both sides. >What were you doing on Anatolia after the WW1 anyway? >Do you think it was your right to be there?   I always avoid to discuss such things.  I consider it a waist of my time.  Besides, as I said, I do not want to open a new flame.  >I am not saying that conflicts started with that. It is only >not one side being the aggressive and the ither always suffering. >It is sad that we (both) still are not trying to compromise. >I remember the action of the Turkish government by removing the >visa requirement for greeks to come to Turkey. I thought it >was a positive attempt to make the relations better.   I thought it was a smart move to receive more money from Greek tourists.  I bet that this week there should be about 200,000 tourists from Greece  in Turkey.  Each one will leave at least $1,000 so go and figure what this  means to your economy.  If you had kept the visa requirement, how many  Greeks would bother to visit Turkey?  >The Greeks I mentioned who wouldn't talk to me are educated >people. They have never met me but they know! I am bad person >because I am from Turkey. Politics is not my business, and it is >not the business of most of the Turks. When it comes to individuals  >why the hatred?   Come on. Do not extrapolate from your limited personal experience.  You err  if you think you'd get a reasonable conclusion.  >Tankut Atan >tankut@iastate.edu
In article <1smllm$m06@cville-srv.wam.umd.edu> aap@wam.umd.edu (Alberto Adolfo Pinkas) writes: >In article <1993May10.211316.28455@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> adams@bellini.berkeley.edu (Adam L. Schwartz) writes: >>In article <1smbma$8mr@cville-srv.wam.umd.edu> aap@wam.umd.edu (Alberto Adolfo Pinkas) writes:  >>I'm not sure about this but I hope the answer is that you can't apply under >>the law of return.  By conversion, you've elected not to be a part of the >>Jewish nation.  >Which was my point. By converting to another religion I do not loose >my cultural identity, I just loose my religious identification.  	I disagree.  By converting to another religion, you certainly do change your cultural identity, and lose that part of you which was Jewish.   >>At the moment you converted, you officially anounced to the world >>that *you* do not consider yourself to be part of the Jewish Nation. >>So, why should the Jewish Nation consider you to be a member?  >To be a part or not of the Jeish Nation is defined by my culture and not >by my religion. Actually, if I am an atheist, which is in fact like  >converting into a non-Jewish in terms of religion, I am still considered as >part of the Jewish Nation.  	No, there is a serious cultural and religios difference between renouncing the jewish god and accepting a new one.  "Thou shall have no other gods before me."  Conversion is a violation of this, atheism you might be able to wiggle around with.  Adam    Adam Shostack 				       adam@das.harvard.edu
In article <SMITH.93Apr21183049@minerva.harvard.edu> smith@minerva.harvard.edu (Steven Smith) writes: >dgannon@techbook.techbook.com (Dan Gannon) writes: >>     THE U.S. HOLOCAUST MEMORIAL MUSEUM: A COSTLY AND DANGEROUS MISTAKE >> >>                         by Theodore J. O'Keefe >> [Holocaust revisionism] >>  >> Theodore J. O'Keefe is an editor with the Institute for Historical >> Review.  Educated at Harvard University . . . > >According to the 1990 Harvard Alumni Directory, Mr. O'Keefe failed to >graduate.  You may decide for yourselves if he was indeed educated >anywhere. > >Steven Smith  Is any education a prerequisite for employment at IHR ? Is it true that IHR really stands for Institution of Hysterical Reviews? Curious minds would like to know...  Hap
In article <13MAY93.02285380@edison.usask.ca> f54oguocha@edison.usask.ca writes: >In a previous article, josip@eng.umd.edu (Josip Loncaric) wrote: >>  >>Actually, just after the FIRST world war, many Muslims were killed by Serbs. >>Under Serbian-led regime between the two world wars, many Croats were >>also killed (especially during the dictatorship introduced on Jan. 6, 1929). >> >Josip, > >please, don't be offended at this question: Who are the "Muslims" in the >Bosnian context? i know that a moslem/muslim is a believer in Islam. Islam  >is a religion and it is practised in many parts of the world. But it is not >, yes definitely not, an ethinic group. ok! so, these Bosnian Muslims, who >are they? to which ethnic group do they belong? what language(s) do they >speak? do they have a different language from that of the Serbs or Croats?  >the way the western press use the word 'muslim' in this Bosnian debacle has  >kept me wondering when the meaning of muslim/moslem i knew from childhood was  >changed in the dictionary. this is just a question. no flames intended! > >oguocha >  Mr. Oguocha,   "Muslims" in the Bosnian context are in fact "Turks"... In fact, correct   me if I am wrong, Serbs are attacking Bosnians with their battle cries   "Death to the Turks!".     Is this so shocking? Years of communism apparently suppressed their    hatred and anger towards the Turks. But such hatred is obviously one that   dies hard.       Serbs must understand, Turks are no longer the good old barbarians world   has come to know by propaganda after propaganda.       Serbs must further understand that barbarism does not work.       Serbs must even further understand that barbarism would one day have   to face counter-barbarism. So, I urge those people [Serbs] to stop   killing Bosnian women and children. And they must never forget that   Turks in the motherland are watching...patiently.     Cordially,
Jake Livni writes:    >Well over 100,000 in Lebanon alone. >1,000,000 - 2,000,000 in the Iran/Iraq conflict, even if Iranians >aren't Arabs, strictly speaking.  (They seem to hate the Zionists at >least as much as anyone else in the neighborhood.  Is there some >correlation perhaps between hating Israel and killing off your own >people?)   Perhaps Iranians are not Arabs even not-so-strictly-speaking ?
From Israel Line, Thursday, April 22, 1993:   Today's HA'ARETZ reports that three women were injured when a Katyusha rocket fell in the center of their community. The rocket was one of several dozen fired at the communities of the Galilee in northern Israel yesterday by the terrorist Hizbullah organization [...]    In article <1993Apr14.125813.21737@ncsu.edu> hernlem@chess.ncsu.edu  (Brad Hernlem) wrote:  Congratulations to the brave men of the Lebanese resistance! With every Israeli son that you place in the grave you are underlining the moral bankruptcy of Israel's occupation and drawing attention to the Israeli government's policy of reckless disregard for civilian life.   	Apparently, the Hizbollah were encouraged by Brad's cheers 	(good job, Brad). Someone forgot to tell them, though, that  	Brad asks them to place only Israeli _sons_ in the grave,  	not daughters. Paraphrasing a bit, with every rocket that  	the Hizbollah fires on the Galilee, they justify Israel's  	holding to the security zone.
In article <93111.225707PP3903A@auvm.american.edu> Paul H. Pimentel <PP3903A@auvm.american.edu> writes: >What gives Isreal the right to keep Jeruseleum?  It is the home of the muslim a >s well as jewish religion, among others.  Heck, nobody ever mentions what Yitza >k Shamir did forty or fifty years ago which is terrorize westerners much in the > way Abdul Nidal does today.  Seems Isrealis are nowhere above Arabs, so theref >ore they have a right to Jerusaleum as much as Isreal does.
In article <benali.735954392@alcor> benali@alcor.concordia.ca ( ILYESS B. BDIRA ) writes: > >>	ISLAMABAD (UPI) -- Representatives from 51 Islamic nations were > >>considering Tuesday a request from Bosnia-Herzegovina for $260 million > >>and weapons to fight the Bosnian Serbs. > >.... > >>	The only commitment so far is $20 million from Saudi Arabia, which > > > >Thanks Saudia for the pocket change. > >Compare that to the "Liberation of Q8" and to what they gave to some > >weird causes.. O.K at least they are paying.  Damned if you do and Damned if you don't!  > > > >>has already donated $100 million to Bosnia-Herzegovina. > >>	Sources on the political committee said delegates were in agreement > >>on the need to help the Bosnian Muslims, but the request for weapons had > >>delayed a decision. > >>	``It may interpreted as violating the United Nations' embargo on > >>supplying arms to Bosnia,'' warned Egyptian Foreign Minister Amer > >>Moussa. > > > >Mr. Amr Moussa was not worried about International law when he tortured > >to death  many of his citizens and when he shot people praying in a Mosque, > >or when he is causing trouble to his neighbor just becasue the CIA says so. > >Why doesn't he just shut up, he won't be involved in any Bosnian effort > >anyway, or does the west have to be represented even in an Islamic conference?  Just for the record, Egyptian troops were one of the first to be stationed there. I can't remember the exact date but it was late last year. In fact, they lost at least one man there as far as I know.
In article <2BF36F14.21492@news.service.uci.edu> tclock@orion.oac.uci.edu (Tim Clock) writes: >In article <1993May13.201441.23139@nysernet.org> astein@nysernet.org (Alan Stein) writes: >>It seems that, to keep the peace talks going, Israel has to keep >>making goodwill gesture after goodwill gesture, while Palestinian >>Arabs continue to go around hunting Jews. > >You *know* that putting something like this out on the newsgroup is *only* >going to generate flames, not discussion. Try adding some substance to >the issue of "gestures" you mentioned. >What is it you feel that Israel *has* offered as a "gesture"? What would >you (*realistically*) expect to see presented by the Arabs/Palestinians >in the way of "gesture"?  Timbo, Israel has not been recognized as a state by the Arabs, except for Egypt, of course.  Isn't that  a gesture?  What has Israel offered? Well, it has been calling for peace talks for 45 years, asked for economic relations, and asked for diplomatic ties.  What else is there? Would you have Israel sacrifice its security?  Nay, I think not.