waashk/20ng huggingface dataset:
In today's Israeline posting, at the end (an afterthought?), I read:  > More Money Allocated to Building Infrastructure in Territories to > Create Jobs for Palestinians >  > KOL YISRAEL reports that public works geared at building > infrastructure costing 140 million New Israeli Shekels (about 50 > million dollars) will begin Sunday in the Territories. This was > announced last night by Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and Finance > Minister Avraham Shohat in an effort to create more jobs for > Palestinian residents of the Territories. This infusion of money > will bring allocations given to developing infrastructure in the > Territories this year to 450 million NIS, up from last year's > figure of 120 million NIS.  While I applaud investing of money in Yehuda, Shomron, v'Chevel-Azza, in order to create jobs for their residents, I find it deplorable that this has never been an active policy of any Israeli administration since 1967, *with regard to their Jewish residents*. Past governments found funds to subsidize cheap (read: affordable) housing and the requisite infrastructure, but where was the investment for creating industry (which would have generated income *and* jobs)?   After 26 years, Yehuda and Shomron remain barren, bereft of even  middle-sized industries, and the Jewish settlements are sterile "bedroom communities", havens for (in the main) Israelis (both secular *and* religious) who work in Tel-Aviv or Jerusalem but cannot afford to live in either city or their surrounding suburbs.  There's an old saying: "bli giboosh, ayn kivoosh" -- just living there wasn't enough, we had to *really* settle it. But instead, we "settled" for Potemkin villages, and now we are paying the price (and doing for others what we should have done for ourselves).
In a previous article, hasan@McRCIM.McGill.EDU (M. Hasan AlHafez) says:  >So the wars of 1948, 1956, 1967, 1968 (Karama), 1978, and 1982 were >all started by Arabs.   The wars of 1948, 1956, 1967, 1978 were definitely started by the Arabs. The war in 1982 was instigated by the Arabs who continually murdered Israeli children with their rocket attacks.  Israel was only trying to stop this.   Last what the heck are you talking about with "1968 (Karama)"?  There was  no war in 1968!       Steve --
In article <1993Apr13.164305.701@bernina.ethz.ch>, nadeem@p.igp.ethz.ch (Nadeem Malik) writes:  > >Actually, if can remember correctly, was it not reported and even on camera >some time during the Israeli invasion of Lebanon, or when the itifada began, >that CNN caught regular uniformed Israeli soldiers breaking the arms of  >some Arab youngsters in a very professional and brutal manner, (someone  >please give full details if they can remember).   So was it on CNN or not?   >This is one of the few >occassions on which such a scene has been transmitted to the West and  >in the USA ... it caused uproar and was one of the factors that has significantly >changed the preception of the Israeli army's role in the mid-east. > >So there is proof for you!   What proof. You said above: "was it not reported..." and "someone please give  full details if they can remember". Hear say is not proof.    >It is obvious that is a systematic policy of the >Israelis which must be occurring on a massive scale behind the scenes.  Yes, like the 700 or more Palestinians brutally murdered by their brothers.   > >Nadeem >
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:  >>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.  	A neutral organization would report on the situation in Israel, where the elderly and children are the victims of stabbings by Hamas "activists."  A neutral organization might also report that Israeli arabs have full civil rights.  >The Israelis used to arrest and sometimes to kill some of these >neutral reporters.  	Care to name names, or is this yet another unsubstantiated slander?   >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.  	Terrorism, as you would know if you had a spine that allowed you to stand up, is random attacks on civilians.  Terorism includes such things as shooting a cripple and thowing him off the side of a boat because he happens to be Jewish.  Not allowing people to go where they are likely to be stabbed and killed, like a certain lawyer killed last week, is not terorism.  Adam        Adam Shostack 				       adam@das.harvard.edu
In article 93Apr24130647@angell.cs.brown.edu, hm@cs.brown.edu (Harry Mamaysky) writes: > > >From _Myths and Facts_, by Leonard J. Davis, Near East Research Inc., >1989: > >[pp. 108-109] > >    "Unlike the PLO's almost exclusive focus on civilian targets, the >100 troups from the Irgun and Stern group that struck at Deir Yassin >on April 10, 1948, targeted the village for its military importance. >Deir Yassin was on the road to Jerusalem, which the Arabs had >blockaded, and it housed Iraqi troups and Palestinian irregulars. >Snipers based in Deir Yassin were a constant threat to Jewish citizens >in Jerusalem. > >    "Arab civilians were killed at Deir Yassin, but that attack does >not conform to the propaganda picture that the Arabs have tried to >paint. The number of Arabs killed was generally reported to be about >250. In 1983, however, Eric Silver of _The Guardian_ (Britain) >interviewed a survivor, Mophammed Sammour, who testified that 116 out >of a population of 800-1000 were killed. 'About three days after the >massacre,' Sammour explained, 'representatives of each of the five >clans in Deir Yassin met at the Moslem offices in Jerusalem and made a >list of the people who had not been found (alive). We went through the >names.  Nothing has happend since 1948 to make me think this figure >was wrong.' > >    "Unlike the PLO's deliberate attacks on civilians, the killing of >civilians at Deir Yassin was not premeditated. The attackers left open >an escape corridor from the village and more than 200 residents left >unharmed.    why does this remind me of bosnia and ethnic cleansing ??????    tippu
In article <1483500360@igc.apc.org> Center for Policy Research <cpr@igc.apc.org> writes:  >I am born in Palestine (now Israel). I have family there. The lack of >peace and utter injustice in my home country has affected me all my life.  Bullshit.  You've been in Iceland for the past 30 years.  You told us so yourself.  It had something to do with not wanting to suffer the fate of your mother, who has lived with Jews for a long time or somesuch.  Sounded awful.  >I am concerned by Palestine (Israel) because I want peace to come to >it. Peace AND justice.   Are you as concerned about peace and justice in Palestine (Jordan)?  >Israeli trights and Palestinian rights are not symmetrical. The first >party has a state and the other has none. The first is an occupier and >the second the occupied.   Let's say that Israel grants the PLO _EVERYTHING THEY EVER ASKED FOR_. That Israel goes back to the 1967 borders.  What will the "Palestinean Arabs" in Tel-Aviv call themselves?  The Palestineans in West Jerusalem?  In Haifa?  Will they still claim to be "occupied"?  Or do you suggest that Israel expell or kill off any remaining Arabs, much as the Arabs did to their Jews?  Indeed, there is much which is not symmetrical about the conflict in the M.E.  And most of this lack of symmetry does NOT favor Israel.  >Elias Davidsson >Iceland
In article <HM.93Apr24130647@angell.cs.brown.edu> hm@cs.brown.edu (Harry Mamaysky) writes:  >From _Myths and Facts_, by Leonard J. Davis, Near East Research Inc., >1989:  >[pp. 108-109] > >    "Unlike the PLO's almost exclusive focus on civilian targets, the >100 troups from the Irgun and Stern group that struck at Deir Yassin >on April 10, 1948, targeted the village for its military importance. >Deir Yassin was on the road to Jerusalem, which the Arabs had  Since Facts and Myths doesn't even know where Deir Yassin was, why should we pay any attention to the rest of what it says?  >blockaded, and it housed Iraqi troups and Palestinian irregulars. >Snipers based in Deir Yassin were a constant threat to Jewish citizens >in Jerusalem. > >    "Arab civilians were killed at Deir Yassin, but that attack does >not conform to the propaganda picture that the Arabs have tried to >paint. The number of Arabs killed was generally reported to be about >250. In 1983, however, Eric Silver of _The Guardian_ (Britain) >interviewed a survivor, Mophammed Sammour, who testified that 116 out >of a population of 800-1000 were killed. 'About three days after the >massacre,' Sammour explained, 'representatives of each of the five >clans in Deir Yassin met at the Moslem offices in Jerusalem and made a >list of the people who had not been found (alive). We went through the >names.  Nothing has happend since 1948 to make me think this figure >was wrong.'  This account from Eric Silver is the only valid point that M&F makes. You can find it together with other evidence and analysis in  Silver's biography of Begin.  Also in Silver's book you will find documentary evidence that nearly everything else in M&F's account is pure bullshit.  >    "Unlike the PLO's deliberate attacks on civilians, the killing of >civilians at Deir Yassin was not premeditated. The attackers left open >an escape corridor from the village and more than 200 residents left >unharmed. After the remaining Arabs feigned surrender and then fired >on the Jewish troops, some of the attackers killed Arab soldiers and >civilians indiscriminately. Independent observers told _The Guardian_ >that among the bodies they found Arab men disguised as women."  This is pretty disgusting.  The Guardian was told of one or two feeble old men who dressed in women's clothing in a pathetic  attempt to escape death.  See Silver's book.
In article <1993Apr19.192207.413@ncsu.edu> hernlem@chess.ncsu.edu (Brad Hernlem) writes:  >I think that you should try to find more sources of news about what goes on >in Lebanon and try to see through the propaganda.   Thank you, Brad/Ali, for warning us about the dangers of propaganda. It's funny, though, coming from you.  >There are no a priori >black and white hats but one sure wonders how the IDF can bombard villages in  >retaliation to pin-point attacks on its soldiers in Lebanon and then call the >Lebanese terrorists.  Who is it that executes these "pin-point attacks" on Israelis?  The guys in the white hats or the ones in the black hats?  Neither?  You mean that they are just civilians, farmers, teachers, school children? Well, maybe they ARE terrorists, after all?  And maybe that "propaganda" was correct, too?  Hmm?
hasan@McRCIM.McGill.EDU writes:   >Ok. I donot know why there are israeli voices against negotiations. However, >i would guess that is because they refuse giving back a land for those who >have the right for it.  Sounds like wishful guessing.   >As for the Arabian and Palestinean voices that are against the >current negotiations and the so-called peace process, they >are not against peace per se, but rather for their well-founded predictions >that Israel would NOT give an inch of the West bank (and most probably the same >for Golan Heights) back to the Arabs. An 18 months of "negotiations" in Madrid, >and Washington proved these predictions. Now many will jump on me saying why >are you blaming israelis for no-result negotiations. >I would say why would the Arabs stall the negotiations, what do they have to >loose ?   'So-called' ? What do you mean ? How would you see the peace process?  So you say palestineans do not negociate because of 'well-founded' predictions ? How do you know that they are 'well founded' if you do not test them at the  table ? 18 months did not prove anything, but it's always the other side at  fault, right ?  Why ? I do not know why, but if, let's say, the Palestineans (some of them) want ALL ISRAEL, and these are known not to be accepted terms by israelis.  Or, maybe they (palestinenans) are not yet ready for statehood ?  Or, maybe there is too much politics within the palestinean leadership, too many fractions aso ?  I am not saying that one of these reasons is indeed the real one, but any of these could make arabs stall the negotiations.  >Arabs feel that the current "negotiations" is ONLY for legitimizing the current >status-quo and for opening the doors of the Arab markets for israeli trade and >"oranges". That is simply unacceptable and would be revoked.   I like California oranges. And the feelings may get sharper at the table.    Regards,
In article <1993Apr28.230749.18198@Virginia.EDU> ab4z@Virginia.EDU ("Andi Beyer") writes: >P.P.S. Just to clear up something, I don't think than the Jews >are necessarily any worse than other people  How generous Andi.  Thanks for your validation.
In article <1993Apr25.182253.1449@Virginia.EDU> ab4z@Virginia.EDU ("Andi Beyer") writes: >	I have just started reading the articles in this news >group. There seems to be an attempt by some members to quiet >other members with scare tactics. I believe one posting said >that all postings by one person are being forwarded to his >server who keeps a file on him in hope that "Appropriate action >might be taken".  >	I don't know where you guys are from but in America >such attempts to curtail someones first amendment rights are >not appreciated. Here, we let everyone speak their mind >regardless of how we feel about it. Take your fascistic >repressive ideals back to where you came from.  It would be nice if, as you rightly point out the inherent value of freedom of speech, discussion would also deal with the all-to- frequent ritualized abuses and distortions of that freedom that do  occur. There are situations where a few extremely vocal, and  usually radical, people **do** drive people away, effectively stifle all other ("opposing") views and generally "take over". *Clearly*, the purpose behind such actions is *to deprive* others of *their* freedom of speech through overt and covert coercion and domination of  the "media form" in question. While "freedom" of speech is to be valued,   this is not. How would you suggest that this sort of reoccuring problem be  alleviated? More particularly, how can this be controlled within the  structure of these newsgroups?
In a previous article, zbib@bnr.ca (Sam Zbib) says:  >IMHO, it does not really matter who started any individual battle within  >the Arabs/Isreal war context. The real question is who/what  started the  >War. Does anyone have any doubts it was the creation of Israel on Arab  >land ?   Where the hell do you get off calling it "Arab land"?  Jews have been living there for a long time.  Jews didn't just start arriving in 1900, they've been living there for thousands of years, except for periods when they were expelled but they always returned home.     Steve --
4/15/93 1242  Turkey sends light weapons as aid to Azerbaijan  By SEVA ULMAN     ANKARA, Turkey (UPI) -- Turkey is arming Azerbaijan with light weapons to help it fight Armenian forces in the struggle for the Nagorno- Karabakh enclave,  the newspaper Hurriyet said Thursday.  Deputy Prime Minister Erdal Inonu told reporters in Ankara that Turkey was responding positively to a request from Azerbaijan for assistance.  "We are giving a positive response to all requests" from Azerbaijan, "within the limits of our capabilities," he said.  Foreign Ministry spokesman Vural Valkan declined to elaborate on the nature of the aid being sent to Azerbaijan, but said they were within the framework  of the Council for Security and Cooperation in Europe.  Hurriyet, published in Istanbul, said Turkey was sending light weapons to Azerbaijan, including rockets, rocket launchers and ammunition.  Ankara began sending the hardware after a visit to Turkey last week by a high-ranking Azerbaijani official. Turkey has however ruled out, for the second time in one week, that it would intervene militarily in Azerbaijan.  Wednesday, Inonu told reporters Ankara would not allow Azerbaijan to suffer defeat at the hands of the Armenians. "We feel ourselves bound to help Azerbaijan, but I am not in a position right now to tell you what form (that) help may take in the future," he said.  He said Turkish aid to Azerbaijan was continuing, "and the whole world knows about it."  Prime Minister Suleyman Demirel reiterated that Turkey would not get militarily involved in the conflict. Foreign policy decisions could not be  based on street-level excitement, he said.  There was no immediate reaction in Ankara to regional reports, based on Armenian sources in Yerevan, saying Turkish pilots and other officers were captured when they were shot down flying Azerbaijani warplanes and  helicopters.  The newspaper Cumhuriyet said Turkish troops were digging in along the border with Armenia, but military sources denied reports based on claims by local people that gunfire was heard along the border. No military action has  occurred, the sources said.  The latest upsurge in fighting between the Armenians and Azerbaijanis flared early this month when Armenian forces seized the town of Kelbajar and later positioned themselves outside Fizuli, near the Iranian border.
In article <22APR199300513566@vxcrna.cern.ch> casper@vxcrna.cern.ch (CASPER,DAVI./PPE) writes: >>Are you aware that there is an arms embargo on all of what is/was >>Yugoslavia, including Bosnia, which guarantees massive military >>superiority of Serbian forces and does not allow the Bosnians to >>try to defend themselves?  >Should we sell weapons to all sides, or just the losing one, then?  Ending an embargo does not _we_ must sell anything at all.  >If the Europeans want to sell weapons to one or both sides, they are welcome >as far as I'm concerned.  You seem to oppose ending the embargo.  You know, it is difficult for Europeans to sell weapons when there is an embargo in place.  >I do not automatically accept the argument that Bosnia is any worse than >other recent civil wars, say Vietnam for instance.  The difference is it is >happening to white people inside Europe, with lots of TV coverage.  But if this was the reason, and if furthermore both sides are equal, wouldn't all us racist Americans be favoring the good Christians (Serbs) instead of the non-Christians we really seem to favor? -- "On the first day after Christmas my truelove served to me...  Leftover Turkey! On the second day after Christmas my truelove served to me...  Turkey Casserole     that she made from Leftover Turkey. [days 3-4 deleted] ...  Flaming Turkey Wings! ...    -- Pizza Hut commercial (and M*tlu/A*gic bait)
In article <C5qu5H.1IF@news.iastate.edu>, oyalcin@iastate.edu (Onur Yalcin) writes: |> In article <1993Apr19.155856.8260@kpc.com> henrik@quayle.kpc.com  writes: |> >In article <1993Apr17.185118.10792@ee.rochester.edu>, terziogl@ee.rochester.edu (Esin Terzioglu) writes: |> >|> |> >|>..[cancellum]...  |> >|> |> > |> > henrik] Let me clearify Mr. Turkish; henrik] ARMENIA is NOT getting "itchy". SHE is simply LETTING the WORLD KNOW  henrik] that SHE WILL NO  LONGER sit there QUIET and LET TURKS get away with  henrik] their FAMOUS tricks. Armenians DO REMEMBER of the TURKISH invasion  henrik] of the Greek island of CYPRESS WHILE the world simply WATCHED.   Onur Yalcin] It is more appropriate to address netters with their names as  Onur Yalcin] they appear in their signatures (I failed to do so since you did  Onur Yalcin] not bother to sign your posting). Not only because it is the  Onur Yalcin] polite thing to do, but also to avoid addressing ladies with  Onur Yalcin] "Mr.", as you have done.  	Fine. Please, accept my opology !  Onur Yalcin] Secondly, the island of which the name is more correctly spelled  Onur Yalcin] as Cyprus has never been Greek, but rather, it has been home to  Onur Yalcin] a bi-communal society formed of Greeks and Turks. It seems that                 ^^^^^^^^^^^ Onur Yalcin] you know as little about the history and the demography of the  Onur Yalcin] island, as you know about the essence of Turkey's  Onur Yalcin] military intervention to it under international agreements.  	bi-communal society ? Then why DID NOT Greece INVADE CYPRUS ?  	 Onur Yalcin] Be that as it may, an analogy between an act of occupation in  Onur Yalcin] history and what is going on today on Azerbaijani land, can only  Onur Yalcin] be drawn with the expansionist policy that Armenia is now pursuing.  	Buch of CRAP and you know it. Nagarno-Karabagh has ALWAYS been PART          of ARMENIA and it was STALIN who GAVE IT to the AZERIS. Go back and         review the HISTORY.    	The Armenians in Nagarno-Karabagh are simply DEFENDING their RIGHTS         to keep their homeland and it is the AZERIS that are INVADING their          teritory.  Onur Yalcin] But, I could agree that it is not for us to issue diagnoses to  Onur Yalcin] the political conduct of countries, and promulgate them in such  Onur Yalcin] terminology as "itchy-bitchy"...          I was not the one that STATED IT.
In article <2BDD9DFC.13587@news.service.uci.edu> Tim Clock writes:   [TC] Do you, as I do, agree that this (sort) of "peace process" is needed? [TC] What about the particular points mentioned in the article? Is what [TC] Israel is (supposedly) going to propose "good"? Does it go too far? [TC] Not far enough?  [TC] If you don't agree that a "peace process" is needed, what is?  I personally think that a peace process is needed, since only through negotiations will the future generations be able to live in stability. Unfortunately not all think like this, we have cases like: 	Anas Omran, Hamza Saleh, Jle, Mohammed Reza, Mehmed Abu-Abed,  Anwar Mohammed and others who think that JIHAD is the only solution.   I wish that people (including myself) would have more objective views like Tim, Basil and Shai for example and put the rhetoric aside and start discussing "substance".  My view is that Israel has made more gestures towards its Arab foes than the opposite. What have the Sysrians given to us or proposed? What have the Palestinians proposed? If the Palestinians would just revoke or rewrite their  charter, or just condemn acts of Palestinian violence that would be a good start. The Palestinians have all to gain from these negotiations. Its seems though that they are not strong enough to make decisions on their own and are plagued by internal strife, that is why we are not getting anywhere. Fundamentalism is slowly taking over in the territories, then it will be too late to discuss issues with the Palestinians since they will only vow for the destruction of Israel. Arabs  must take example on Egypt. Egypt came to the bargaining table, got what it wanted from Israel and there is now peace and cooperation between the two countries.  The tougher you play ball with Israel the tougher Israel gets.  Tsiel   Tsiel