waashk/20ng huggingface dataset:
In article <martinb.735590895@brise.ERE.UMontreal.CA> aurag@ERE.UMontreal.CA (Aurag Hassan) writes:     Are you trying to say that there were no massacres in Deir Yassin    or in Sabra and Shatila? If so then let me tell you some good jokes:     There is not and was not any such thing like jewish killing in WWII     Palestinians just did what Davidians did for fourty years and more.     In fact no one was killed in any war at any time or any place.     People die that is all. No one gets killed.     Maybe also vietamiese didn't die in Vietnam war killed by american    napalm they were just pyromaniacs and that's all.     Maybe jews just liked gas chambers and no one forced them to get in there.they     may be thought it was like snifing cocaine. No?     What do you think of this ? Isn't it stupid to say so?    Well it is as stupid as what you said .Next time you want to lie do it    intelligently.     Sincerely yours.     Hassan  Arab civilians did die at Dir yassin. But there was no massacre. First of all, the village housed many *armed* troops. Secondly, the Irgun and Stern fighters had absolutely no intentions of killing civilians. The village was attacked only for its military significance. In fact, a warning was given to the occupants of the village to leave before the attack was to begin.  By all rational standards, Dir Yassin was not a massacre. The killing was unintentional. The village housed Arab snipers and Arab troops. Thus it was attacked for its military significance. It was not attacked with intentions of killing any civilians.  To even compare Dir Yassin, in which some 120 or so Arabs died, to the Holocaust is absurd. The Irgun did not want to kill any civilians. The village had almost 1000 inhabitants, most of whom survived.
In article <C5sDCK.38n@news.cso.uiuc.edu> eshneken@ux4.cso.uiuc.edu (Edward A Shnekendorf) writes: >anwar+@cs.cmu.edu (Anwar Mohammed) writes: > >>In article <4815@bimacs.BITNET> ehrlich@bimacs.BITNET (Gideon Ehrlich) writes: >>>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? > >>ADL authorities seem to view a lot of people as dangerous, including >>the millions of Americans of Arab ancestry.  Perhaps you can answer >>the question as to why the ADL maintained files and spied on ADC members >>in California (and elsewhere??)?  Friendly rivalry perhaps? > >Come on!  Most if not all Arabs are sympathetic to the Palestinian war  >against Israel.  That is why the ADL monitors Arab organizations.  That is >the same reason the US monitored communist organizations and Soviet nationals >only a few years ago.   >  The ADC is an organization of Arab-*AMERICANS*.  Let me see...you're saying that "most if not all" Arab-AMERICANS should be spied on?  You're also saying that "most if not all" Arab-AMERICANS should be views as a national security threat to Israel (and the US,  as you gratuitously imply in your reference to the WTC bombing, in  which no Arab-AMERICANS were involved)?  By inference, can we assume  that you think that anyone of Arab lineage anywhere in the world poses  a threat to Israel and, therefore, should be spied on?  Perhaps, then, on the basis of Pollard spy case (not to mention the Rosenbergs, etc.) you think that all Jewish Americans should be spied  on by the ADC.  Oh, never mind; this whole spying case has obviously so  convoluted your sense of right or wrong in these matters that I have  no wish confuse you further.  >>Perhaps Yigal is a Greenpeace member? Or the NAACP? Or a reporter?  >>Or a member of any of the dozens of other political organizations/ethnic  >>minorities/occupations that the ADL spied on. > >All of these groups have, in the past, associated with or been a part of anti- >Israel activity or propoganda.  The ADL is simply monitoring them so that if >anything comes up, they won't be caught by surprise.  So the LA times reporter who had information about him sold to the South African government was involved in "anti-Israel activity or propaganda"? Are we to infer that the simple act of reporting an event in a newspaper constitutes "anti-Israel activity or propaganda"?  Or was it South Africa?  The LA  times reporter was based in South Africa, after all.   > > >>>Gideon Ehrlich >>-anwar >Ed. >
In <1slm8r$dnk@terminator.rs.itd.umich.edu>, jlove@ivrit.ra.itd.umich.edu (Jack Love)  wrote: #  # In article <2BEC0A64.21705@news.service.uci.edu> tclock@orion.oac.uci.edu (Tim Clock) writes: # >This issue has been going on for a while and your presentation here of # >just one reference probably won't resolve this issue to those that # >oppose your insistence that mosques *were* destroyed. Even in your # >location of this one reference, you spend most of your quote dealing # >with an incidence that, while abhorrant, has nothing to do with the  # >issue at hand here. Then, at the end of the quote, there is an almost # >off-hand comment that "two mosques" were destroyed. # > # >To support a claim of this nature, what other authors support this # >incident? If identifiable mosques were destroyed they are certainly # >identifiable, they have names and addresses (steet location). The # >comment by one reporter *does* make us wonder if "this happened" but # >by no means "proves it. #  # There is no doubt that Israeli authorities ordered the destruction of # mosques in the vicinity of the Wailing Wall. That does not mean, # however, that once can generalize from this to any other points.  The # entire plaza, mosques and all, was cleared to make it possible for Jews # to have a place to worship in the place that was holiest to many of # them, and which had been denied to them for millenia. #  # On the other hand, throughout the rest of Jerusalem and Israel, to the # best of my knowledge, Israeli authorities have scrupulously avoided # damage to any Islamic religious sites. This contrasts with the policies # of previous regimes which destroyed Jewish synagogues out of hate and # bigotry.    Or, for that matter, with the USA.  Around here, nobody reroutes   freeways to avoid churches, synagogues, and so forth.  They just   get condemned, paid off, and the road goes through.  The same is   standard policy for any number of other public projects: schools   and sports arenas being only two examples.    Anticipating the objection that the cases aren't comparable: how   not?  The Wall has to count as the #1 tourist attraction in that   part of the world; making room for the traffic would be a twenty   second decision for any city council I ever heard of.
In article <2BC0D53B.20378@news.service.uci.edu> tclock@orion.oac.uci.edu (Tim Clock) writes:  >Is it possible to track down "zuma" and determine who/what/where "seradr"  >is?   Done. But did it change the fact that during the period of 1914 to 1920,  the Armenian Government ordered, incited, assisted and participated  in the genocide of 2.5 million Muslim people because of race, religion and national origin? By the way, you still haven't corrected yourself. During World War II Armenians were carried away with the German might and cringing and fawning over the Nazis. In that zeal, the Armenian publication in Germany, Hairenik, carried statements as follows:[1]  "Sometimes it is difficult to eradicate these poisonous elements (the Jews)  when they have struck deep root like a chronic disease, and when it   becomes necessary for a people (the Nazis) to eradicate them in an uncommon  method, these attempts are regarded as revolutionary. During the surgical  operation, the flow of blood is a natural thing."   Now for a brief view of the Armenian genocide of the Muslims and Jews - extracts from a letter dated December 11, 1983, published in the San Francisco Chronicle, as an answer to a letter that had been published in the same journal under the signature of one B. Amarian.   "...We have first hand information and evidence of Armenian atrocities   against our people (Jews)...Members of our family witnessed the    murder of 148 members of our family near Erzurum, Turkey, by Armenian    neighbors, bent on destroying anything and anybody remotely Jewish    and/or Muslim. Armenians should look to their own history and see    the havoc they and their ancestors perpetrated upon their neighbors...   Armenians were in league with Hitler in the last war, on his premise    to grant them self government if, in return, the Armenians would    help exterminate Jews...Armenians were also hearty proponents of   the anti-Semitic acts in league with the Russian Communists. Mr. Amarian!   I don't need your bias."      Signed Elihu Ben Levi, Vacaville, California.  [1] James G. Mandalian, 'Dro, Drastamat Kanayan,' in the 'Armenian     Review,' a Quarterly by the Hairenik Association, Inc., Summer:     June 1957, Vol. X, No. 2-38.  Serdar Argic
In article <1993Apr20.190606.13801@kpc.com> henrik@quayle.kpc.com  writes: >In article <1993Apr20.173009.10580@sol.ctr.columbia.edu>, deniz@mandolin.ctr.columbia.edu (Deniz Akkus) writes: > >    Well, this is your opinion !  >  Of course it is!    >    Turkish/ Azeris can BARK all they WANT since the ABOVE is UNTRUE. However,  >    I am sure YOU GUYS would have NEVER brought up ARMENIA's involvement if  >    KARABAKHI-Armenians had had HEAVY losses. >  And this is your opinion.  It is not any more valid due to repeated capital letters and words such as 'untrue' 'never' etc.    >	Read what ? The New York Times , that is publishing anti-armenian >	articles. Nop, I have my resources. Look, everyone knows how aggressive >        Turks/Azeris have been in the past. Armenians ARE NOT gona sit >	around and watch FIRE WORKS by AZERIS taught by TURKS.   So Armenians are justified in aggression since supposedly Turks have been aggressive in the past?  I don't follow your logic.    >DA] I don't wish to get into the Cyprus discussion.  Turkey had the right to > >	Not a chance ! You CAN NOT convince me (based on your REASONS)that  >	your GOVERNMENT did the RIGHT thing to invade CYPRUS.   I have said that I don't wish to get into Cyprus discussion and did not give any reasons for Turkey's involvement.  I also am not trying to convince you of anything, seeing no reason to waste any time....   >DA] Lastly, why is there not a soc.culture.armenia?  I vote yes for it. >DA] After all, it is now free.   > >	Well, I am NOT in the position to agree or disadree with you. > >	  I am serious.  Let's get soc.culture.armenia started and have some peace of mind?
In article <C7185t.9xJ@unix.amherst.edu> eerginel@unix.amherst.edu (ERDEM ERGINEL) asked:  [EE] No, no flaming here. Just a simple question.  ...with a simple answer!  [EE] As far as I know most of the Armenians belong to the Gregorian Orthodox [EE] faith and such was the case in nineteenth century Ottoman Empire. It is [EE] also known that some Armenian communities were converted into Catholicism [EE] and Protestantism by the Western European missionaries in this period.   The vast majority of Armenians in eastern Anatolia were Gregorian or Armenian Apostolic. There was, however, a higher percentage of non-Gregorian Armenians  in Cilicia, closer to the Mediterranean, in Adana, Marash, Aintab, etc.    [EE] Another known fact is that almost half of the Armenians living in Anatolia [EE] did not speak any Armenian, but used Turkish in their everyday lives.  This is not true. While it was forbidden for Armenians to speak Armenian in certain areas of Cilician Armenia, most all Armenians spoke Armenian. In fact, Turks who interacted with Armenians also spoke Armenian! For sure, most all Armenians, especially men, also knew Turkish in order to function in larger  society.  [EE] My question is, given so many separations in the Armenian community, what [EE] was the common denominator of the Armenian people that allowed Armenian [EE] nationalism to emerge in the nineteenth century? As I stated, religion [EE] was not uniform (unlike the Greeks) and many Armenians couldn't even speak [EE] Armenian. I would like to know what factors brought the Armenians in the [EE] Ottoman Empire together and led to the formation of an Armenian  [EE] consciousness.  The Armenians in Turkey were persecuted because they were Armenian, regardless of the specific branch of Christianity they professed. The resultant Armenian nationalism was in direct reaction to this persecution. Even at the later  stages of WWI, and after the genocide, many Armenians who were converted to  Islam were also exterminated because they continued as Armenian Moslems. This  practice continued well into the 1920s by Ataturk in parallel with the policy  of clearing out pockets of steadfast Islamic fundamentalism. Many of these converted Armenians, ironically, in order to stay alive, were staunch Moslems.   [EE] Any information will be appreciated.  You answered your own question! The common thread throughout your inquiry was the word Armenian!  [EE] Regards,
I flipped on my local Cable Access Channel (a channel where any community member can broadcast whatever they want for about $50 per half hour) and saw a "documentary" (I use this term loosely) on the conflict in the West Bank.  It was apparently made with a hand held camcorder (the quality was terrible, and the camera was really jumpy).  The documentary (sic) told the tales of all of the children who died in the "war" against the Jews as martyrs.    It was a regular sob story.  One "victimized youth" was recounting on how all he "really" wants to do is to get an education and that the big bad Jews won't let him go to high school.  He admittedly  spent 4 years in prison (age 13 to 17) for murdering a Jewish woman but claims that it was "for the cause."  I have seen this kind of garbage before.  I have a lot of sympathy for the Palestinian cause (as do many Jews), but I think that even many Arabs would be ashamed to call this a documentary!  The most suprising part is that the only credits shown at the end was an address for the makers of the film named JEWISH COMM. ON THE MIDDLE EAST.  Anybody heard of them?  They make Peace Now look like right-wingers.
In article <C6x81M.EJF@news.cis.umn.edu> prabhak@giga.cs.umn.edu (Satya Prabhakar) writes: >(mohamed.s.sadek) writes: >> >>I like what Mr. Joseph Biden had to say yesterday 5/11/93 in the senate. >> >>Condemening the european lack of action and lack of support to us plans  >>and calling that "moral rape". >> >>He went on to say that the reason for that is "out right religious BIGOTRY" > >Actually, this strife in Yugoslavia goes back a long way. Bosinan Muslims, >in collaboration with the Nazis, did to Serbians after the first world >war what Serbs are doing to Muslims now. This is not a fresh case of >ethnic cleansing but just another chapter in the continuing saga >of intense mutual hatred, destruction,... Not taking sides in this >perpetual war does not amount to religious bigotry. It could just >be helplessness with regards to bringing peace to a region that does >not even know the meaning of the word. > >Satya Prabhakar >--  Muslims helping the Nazis???  Where on earth do you come up with such accuusation??  Do you have proofs??  If not, you should publically apologize for such a statement.  Last time I heard, the nazis prided themselves in needing no body to carry their politics and ideologies.  And if your statment were true, don't you think Israel would of used it to point to what a Muslim neighbor (PALESTINE) could do to them if they allowed it to be?  The jewish lobby and power is very strong, and if what you said is true, we would of heard it from them before you could come up with it. And you dare say that you are taking no sides!!
In article <1993Apr20.164517.20876@kpc.com> henrik@quayle.kpc.com writes: > >Esin Terzioglu]  Your ignorance is obvious from your posting.  >Esin Terzioglu]  1) Cyprus was an INDEPENDENT country with Turkish/Greek  >		    inhabitants (NOT a Greek island like your ignorant  >			posting claims) >Esin Terzioglu]  2) The name should be Cyprus (in English) >Esin Terzioglu]  next time read and learn before you post.  > > > >Aside from spelling , why is that you TURKS DO NOT want to admit your >past MISTAKES ? You know TURKISH INVASION of CYPRUS was a mistake and too >bad that U.N. DID NOT do anything about it. You may ask : mistake ? >Yes, I would say. Why is that the GREEKS DID NOT INVADE CYPRUS ? >  The Greeks did try to invade Cyprus just before the Turkish intervention: They failed. Just for your info.
In article <16BB28ABD.DSHAL@vmd.cso.uiuc.edu>, DSHAL@vmd.cso.uiuc.edu writes: > It seems that President Clinton can recognize Jerusalem as Israels capitol > while still keeping his diplomatic rear door open by stating that the Parties > concerned should decide the city's final status. Even as I endorse Clintons vie > w (of course), it is definitely a matter to be decided upon by Israel (and > other participating neighboring contries). > I see no real conflict in stating both views, nor expect any better from > politicians. > ----- > David Shalhevet / dshal@vmd.cso.uiuc.edu / University of Illinois > Dept Anim Sci / 220 PABL / 1201 W. Gregory Dr. / Urbana, IL 61801  I was trying to avoid a discussion of the whether Clintons views should be endorsed or not.  All I was trying to find out was  whether the newspaper article was correct in making these statements about the President by obtaining some information about when and where he made these statements.  Thank you.
It looks like Ben Baz's mind and heart are also blind, not only his eyes. I used to respect him, today I lost the minimal amount of respect that I struggled to keep for him. To All Muslim netters: This is the same guy who gave a "Fatwah" that Saudi Arabia can be used by the United Ststes to attack Iraq . That Fatwah is as legitimate as this one. With that kind of "Clergy", it might be an Islamic duty to separate religion and politics, if religion means "official Clergy".
In article <1483500352@igc.apc.org>, Center for Policy Research <cpr@igc.apc.org> writes: > >From: Center for Policy Research <cpr> >Subject: rejoinder. Questions to Israelis > > >To:  shaig@Think.COM > >Subject: Ten questions to Israelis > >Dear Shai, > >Your answers to my questions are unsatisfactory.    So why don't ypu sue him.  ----
In article <C65v0L.59n@bony1.bony.com> jake@bony1.bony.com (Jake Livni) writes: >In article <2BDCCB7D.2715@news.service.uci.edu> tclock@orion.oac.uci.edu (Tim Clock) writes: > >>Tell *them* to stay home? :-) Sorry, terrible attempt at homour there. >> >>Alternative? Hell, I don't know. But...its perfectly possible to have >>objections to a particular policy while feeling that there is no  >>"alternative choice". > >Sealing off the Gaza Strip has the interesting side-effect of >demonstrating the non-viability of Gaza as an independent state. >Where are all of these people going to go to find work if they are >separated from Israel?  If they complain about having to show id cards >on the way to work, how will they feel about showing passports on the >way to work? > Throughout the years of the Israel/Arab-Palestinian conflict, the internal Palestinian popultation has found itself essentially relegated to the lower tiers of the economy. Given the major kinds of positions required by the Israeli and the "Palestinian" economy, there are essentially two different ones existing side by side aren't holding down many of the " skilled" positions. So, when Gaza has to operate on its own, there are  few residents trained to fill the need for middle and upper management.
In article <9304202017@zuma.UUCP> sera@zuma.UUCP (Serdar Argic) writes:               (a.k.a. Serdar Argic, The Merciful and Compassionate)  [Serdar Argic's bountiful, divine, all-knowing, and footnoted  wisdom is regrettably omitted for this solemn tribute.]   WHERE CAN I JOIN THE SERDAR ARGIC FAN CLUB?  DO I GET A T-SHIRT?  --The Friendly Neighborhood Alien--
bsadeghi@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Behzad Sadeghi) writes: >do not, and i repeat, do not, cross post the following subjects to     >soc.culture.iranian:  >Re: Jews Supports Serbs >Re: Arab Leaders and Bosnia >Re: HizbAllah in Bosnia >Re: The Stage is Being Set  >that's all we need here; more bigotry and hate! believe me, >we have already reached our quota for the year. try again >next year.  >behzad
In article <39898@optima.cs.arizona.edu> bakken@cs.arizona.edu (Dave Bakken) writes: [deleted] > >Is this really what you (and Rached and others in the general >west-is-evil-zionists-rule-hate-west-or-you-are-a-puppet crowd) >want, Ilyess?  It's noteworthy that the posts about the west being evil etc are made not in some Islamic hellhole but from the west. If the west is so bad, why do they come here? Notice how they comfortably exercise their rights to free expression, something completely absent in their own countries.  Vasudev
Are you people sure his posts are being forwarded to his system operator??? Who is forwarding them???  Is there a similar file being kept on Mr. Omran???  Salam,  John Absood
In article <1993Apr27.023914.9453@Virginia.EDU> ab4z@Virginia.EDU ("Andi Beyer") writes: >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 humans suffered emotionally, some Jews and many >> >others suffered physically.    >	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.  	Quite a few people couldn't have cared less about what happened to the Jews of Europe.  If they had cared, they would have done something.  >What is wrong with you guys? Regardless of what one  >says you keep hearing what you want to hear.   	Maybe its because many of us, who have been on usenet for several years remember tripe like this being posted:  -------------  |>For all those interested, I would like to inform all that Binyamin Netanyahu |>(leader of the Israeli Likud party) will be interviewed on CNN tonight on |>Larry King Live.   | |didn't this guy go crying on the "zionist" tv confessing |that he committed adultary, and was cheating on his wife.. | |a typical jew leader, huh?  	This was posted fairly recently.  There has been much more racist stuff in the past.  Why are we expected to listen to it and remain "calm?"  I don't think that listening to racist or anti-semetic slurs is an incitement to calm debate.  	Perhaps you don't mean to be coming off as highly offensive. However, the way you have posted seems to be typical of those who have an irrational dislike for Israel and Jews.  Perhaps if you took a close look at what you've posted thought a bit about the combatative tone you've used, you would see why people are reacting the way they are.   Adam Shostack 				       adam@das.harvard.edu