id int32 0 7.53k | text stringlengths 0 61.3k | label int64 0 6 |
|---|---|---|
1,585 |
Can anyone figure out what kind of deranged parent was stupid enough to
bring their infant on a rock throwing crusade (or jihad, sorry)? 18-month
old infants certainly don't walk around the streets on their own. That would
lead me to believe that some nimrod of a "parent" brought them along for a
little terrorism.
thats what happened.
Uhm, last I heard, the territories were disputed. Israel's occupation is not
illegal. They are legally allowed to remain there until a settlement is reached
with the arabs which, from the behavior of the Palestinian negotitating team,
will probably be never.
huh? they were buying vegetables.
| 5 |
2,617 | # #I used to think that homosexuals were OK -- but havng now gotten a
# #chance through USENET to know quite a few, I've realized that I was
# #misled in my youth. Homosexuals are vicious, screwed-up, often
# #really evil people.
#
# That's a load of shit. If you really have the naivete to believe that the
# bozos over on soc.motss characterize our entire populace, you need to LIVE a
# little. Try soc.bi, for example...you'll find almost exclusively a bunch of
Yet, the characteristics of soc.motss fit quite well with the other
evidence that is available. High promiscuity, child sexual abuse
history, support for child molestation advocacy groups like NAMBLA,
S&M, etc.
# well-adjusted, friendly, humanistic people. And, in any case, I think
# you'll find that most people are quite different from the persona they
# present on USENET. For all I know, you're a wonderful, enlightened human
# being taking the role of hatemonger for satirical effect.
#
# Somehow I doubt it, though....
Hatemonger: someone who reminds people of why homosexuals are dying
in such large quantities of AIDS -- because their sexual compulsions
prevented them from keeping their number of sexual partners below
four digits.
# ## I've got a few clues for you. (a) I'm not working to pass any laws. (b)
#
# #It's being done in your name.
#
# And that makes it my responsibility, I see. Suppose I kill someone in the
# name of Clayton Cramer. How does that make you a murderer?
If I know about it, and don't express my disapproval, it certainly
would make you suspicious about me, wouldn't it?
# #My morals aren't yours. I wouldn't march in a parade with a group
# #that advocates child molestation. It doesn't stop homosexuals.
#
# I wouldn't march in a parade with a group like that either. And if you're
# talking about NAMBLA, I think you'll find that they DO NOT advocate child
# molestation. I also think you'll find that the VAST MAJORITY of homosexuals
They advocate sex between adults and children, with NO lower limit on
age. But that's right, homosexuals don't believe that an adult sodomizing
a five year old is child molestation.
# will have no truck with that group anyway.
Fooled me. They march in a number of gay parades around the country.
# ## #Clayton E. Cramer {uunet,pyramid}!optilink!cramer My opinions, all mine!
# ## #Relations between people to be by mutual consent, or not at all.
# ##
# ## But not between members of the same sex, right? How can you live with such
# ## hypocrisy?
# ##
# ## ----bi Andrew D. Simchik SCHNOPIA!
#
# #Sure. Whatever consenting adults want to do in private is none of
# #the government's business. YOU are the ones that want more laws
# #telling me what to do in private.
#
# Quit lumping me in with groups. The fact is that homophobia is an evil,
# unjustified prejudice, just like racism or sexism. You can't reject all but
# one of those.
#
# Drewcifer
It is NOTHING like racism or sexism. You CHOOSE to be a homosexual.
My distaste for homosexuality is because of what homosexuals DO. | 5 |
5,460 |
The borders of the Jewish state as drawn by the U.N. included the areas which
contained mostly Jews, that's what the surveys and the numerous commitees
where after when they visited here.
I never touched an Arab during my army service and never voted for anyone more
right than the Green party. Will I be spared by these "humanist standards"?
(or will anyone stop to consider this before sloughtering me?)
I doubt it. And not only because of the past record of murdering helpless
women and children since the turn of the century up to these days.
| 5 |
2,639 | From Israeline 4/27/93
Rabin: We Must Concentrate on Qualitative Changes in Israeli
Society
Today's AL HAMISHMAR quotes Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin's
Independence Day interview yesterday on Israel Television. Rabin
said that enforcing Jewish sovereignty over the entire Land of
Israel would lead to the establishment of a bi-national state. "I
would view it as if the historical destiny of my generation, Dor
Tashach, the generation that had the great privilege of determining
the fate of the people and founding the Jewish state, had been
lost." Rabin added, "We must stop dreaming of settlements [i.e. in
the Territories] and focus on qualitative and substantive changes
in Israeli society to make it a productive society dependent on its
own labor." The Prime Minister concluded saying that he would like
to achieve a significant breakthrough in the peace process during
his government's term.
| 5 |
1,317 |
Indeed. Larry King had the two attorneys (whose clients are now
dead) of Koresh and another Davidian on his show last night. Their
discussions with the survivors differ from the FBI account. The
attorneys say that they were told that the tanks knocked over lanterns
in the compound which started the fires.
Government spokespeople have lied and contradicted each other
throughout this whole affair. I'll wait for some better evidence before
I form an opinion.
--
paul hager hagerp@moose.cs.indiana.edu | 5 |
4,543 |
Excuse me? Quality? As in grade A CO2 and grade B CO2? I may not have
this quite right but I was under the impression that CO2 was CO2.
Furthermore,
A) There is no reason to believe this system is inherently stable-
The Ice ages occured without any help from humans.
B) The point was that the human contribution of CO2 and other
greenhouse gasses is insignificant and it won't really make a difference if
we make more or less.
C) What overwhelming data? I see lots of 'projections' of the future,
which is fascinating, considering they can't predict the weather two weeks
in advance. | 5 |
2,239 | I made a few phone calls today, and found that if you call the Bill Room at
the Sacramento State Capitol, you may order free of charge any bills that
are currently being pushed. I was told that they will only fill an order of
five bills per phone call, but when I asked kindly and told the nice lady that
it was very important, she filled my order for ten.
California State Bill Room
916-445-2323
Subject: Re: Need Senate Bill numbers and House Resolution numbers
Sorry I forgot to include this in my previous letter but we also
have to worry about State bills. These are the ones that I am
currently aware of:
SB 292
SB 247
SB 67
SB 89
SB 180
AB 117
AB 155
AB 166
AB 482
AB 501
My thanks to Bob Hale for providing the bill numbers!
/------------------------------------------------------------------------\
\------------------------------------------------------------------------/ | 5 |
5,071 | NOTE - local tx groups trimmed out of Newsgroups: line
<
<In article <1r208f$bp2@transfer.stratus.com>, cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D.
<>No, you were right the first time. Law enforcement agencies should keep
<>HIS opinions in mind before breaking into or assaulting ANYBODY'S house.
<
<OK, let me correct my unfortunate choice of words: I just hope that the
<law enforcement agencies keep your attitude in mind the next time your
<wife is gang-raped by a bunch of juvenile, drug-dealing thugs while she
<was jogging in the park. No, strike that... (etc.)
<
<>The BATF came out with horse trailers, 100 men, ninja uniforms, machine
<>guns, and stun grenades, and used them before Koresh could even look
<>at the warrant. Koresh fought back, and people died.
<
<The key part of this sentense is "Koresh fought back." This was his big
<mistake. When the police decide to exert their authority over you, you
<don't fight back unless you want people to get hurt. You cease all
<resistance and signal your submission to their authority. The cops
They are the BOSS. You are the SUBJECT. The concept of defense against
illegal action under color of law is kaput. No longer is it government
of the people by the people, its government of the people by the biggest
guns. The idea of 'sorting it out in court later' is fine, but one
has to GET TO COURT IN ONE PIECE to do that. Korash had good reason
to think that he was not going to get that chance. (see below).
<aren't in it to beat up and kill people, in spite of the actions of a
<few bad apples. If you quit resisting, they quit hitting. Perhaps the
<BATF did over react to the threat posed by Koresh. Perhaps they did use
<too much force. OK, fine. I'm willing to concede to that point if
<sufficient proof is produced (and I admit that there is some evidence to
<indicate this). However, resisting the BATF is the worst thing Koresh
<could have done. If they hadn't resisted, there is a good chance that
<no one would have been hurt. Remeber, they were using stun grenades,
<not anti-personnel grenades. If the BDs were not in violation of any
Rember, Korash didn't get to sort this all out, serenely typing at his
keyboard. He heard SOME KIND OF EXPLOSIVES go off, he saw he was being
ATTACKED with no overt action from him (yet). He could no more say 'oh,
its ok, its only stun grenades' anymore than I could. He slammed the door at
that point and proceeded to repel the attackers. He felt in genuine fear
of his life - I know I would be in fear of MY life at that point. Have
you ever been shot at? How clear and logically could you think, under
that pressure, when you MIGHT have ALL OF 1 or 2 SECONDS to evaluate
what is going on? And, it would not be the first time that 'law
enforcements' intended to bring in their suspect horizontally. For
all we know, he was informed by someone saying something like "Hey,
guy, the BATF is coming like gangbusters, and they mean to WASTE you..."
According to the latest news, the released warrant (so we are told) said
the reason for this WW III raid was that Korash's group had spent around
$200,000.00 on firearms and related stuff (over an undetermined period).
Now, even assuming that the figure isn't calculated like the Feds do a
drug siezure, for 90 people, that isn't really all that much (you priced
decent guns lately?). Hell, I can think of a person right now that probably
has that much for ONE INDIVIDUAL, mostly machineguns!!! Sure, he is
an avid collector, but unless a new law has been passed, it is NOT illegal,
nor an indication of anything illegal, to have a lot of guns. Also note
that the warrant had NOTHING TO SAY ABOUT MACHINE GUNS. So, what
is the justification of this cowboy raid, other than a romp gone bad
for some anti-gun media hype, to support Clinton's push for disarming
the unconnected citizen of any and all effective defensive weapons?
This administration has only one thing in mind. CONTROL. PEOPLE CONTROL.
Whether it is gun control, Clinton Cripple Chip, National smart ID cards,
it all boils down to PEOPLE CONTROL. Can you say 1984, only 10 years late?
I knew you could... :-)
<laws, they would have been released as they had been before. If this
<had happened and it turned out that the BATF had used too much force,
<then the BDs would have grounds for a law suit and for federal charges
<of civil rights violations (Sounds a lot like LA, huh? Don't take that
<wrong, I'm not commenting one way or the other about the Rodney King
<case). But that's not what they wanted. They got tipped off that the
<BATF was on the way in, and rather than adopting a non-violent,
<non-threatening posture to greet the BATF, they decided to fight.
And BATF knew the BDs were expecting them (via 60 minutes report). But
they decided they were so big, so bad, they would have a cakewalk at
the BDs expense, for a nice media show anyway. But it all turned to
shit, and the FBI taking over to manage things, we see it all turned to
shit, too. Clinton says 'I am taking full responsibility'... BAH.
Responsibility means to take the repercussions if it goes wrong. Bet
you NOBODY pays any serious repercussions. 'Responsibility' only has
meaning as media PR, or as a means to corner the average Joe Schmoe.
Figure it out... Clinton, Reno, the FBI and BATF, will all be IMMUNE.
Can you say WHITEWASH?
<I've said enough of this issue. I'm probably not going to convince any
<of you folks and you're certainly not going to convince me. I've got
<work to do.
<
< ++Don
Be VERY afraid of our government. In the land of the free...
And if you decide all this is acceptable, get even MORE afraid... especially
when it is YOU they decide, for some reason, they dislike...
When they no longer feel the need to confine their cowboy tactics to
'kooks', or 'wierdos'...
| 5 |
4,940 | garrod@dynamo.ecn.purdue.edu (David Garrod) writes...
It was on CBS yesterday. The explanation is reasonable enough.
Then again, if the fire was accidental, why didn't more
people get out?
That's true. I think there were several Australians in the
group as well.
_____ _____
\\\\\\/ ___/___________________
Mitchell S Todd \\\\/ / _____/__________________________
________________ \\/ / mst4298@zeus._____/.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'_'_'_/
\_____ \__ / / tamu.edu _____/.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'_'_/
\__________\__ / / _____/_'_'_'_'_'_'_'_'_'_'_'_'_'_'_/
\_ / /__________/
\/____/\\\\\\
\\\\\\ | 5 |
7,524 |
Put up or shut up. Where is your evidence?
Show a study indicating a link between liking >>GROWN UPS<< of the same
sex and liking children. Saying that 30% of molested children are male
shows nothing since it tells you nothing of the molesters preference
in adults (if they have any at all).
The politicians will have plenty to be scared of in one week be it 1% or
90%.
I'm sure there will be a few non queers, but the vast majority are
queer.
| 5 |
5,105 |
No we don't. They might be zealous, and maybe the bureau shouldn't
exist by some people, but they ARE NOT NAZIS.
Why do people toss around the Nazi label so easily?
| 5 |
3,101 |
I asked some simple questions at different occations. I don't understand why
some people insulted me for those SIMPLE questions!
Anyway, I didn't reply to them with the same language and I won't, because
1. There is no need
2. There is no benefit
3. I don't have time to reply to those garbages
By the way, do you want to know who am I? I am not a NATIONALIST Arab of 1967.
I am not a COMONIST Arab of 70's. Are you sure that you want to hear
my name? I am a MUSLIM FIGHTER. I am the same child who
fight with your armed soldier with stone! I am the same guy who wants to
bring JUSTICE to Palestine, I am the same fighter who wants to kicked Israel
out of south Lebonon in the same way of the 1982. I am the son of KHOMEINI.
I am honored to be a HEZBULLAH.... Don't you know me!!!? Just ask Rabin
he knows me!
Hamid
| 5 |
2,305 |
[BH] Tsiel,
[BH] I would contend that there was shelling from both sides of the border,
[BH] starting from the early 70's. Certainly the PLO did shell Northern
[BH] Israel from the Arqoub region, but Israel did much more shelling
[BH] destroying several South Lebanese villages. At the very least
[BH] we can say that both sides exchanged shelling, with occasional
[BH] aerial raids by Israel on Lebanese villages.
[BH] In any case Steve's characterization that the 1982 invasion was only in
[BH] response to years of shelling from Lebanon is false. Israel had
[BH] many reasons for invading but mainly it did so to install a government
[BH] in Lebanon favorable to Israel, and it nearly achieved this aim
[BH] with the election of Basheer El Gemayel, and his brother, Amin
[BH] El Gemayel, but the internal situation in Lebanon was too hard
[BH] to control and predict so Israel had to withdraw, and Amin El Gemayel
[BH] had to abrogate the 17 th of May Agreement.
Basil,
I was only correcting Steve's statement that Geurillas were shelling Israel
from the Golan, which was absurd.
The fact that "Israel did much more shelling" was in response to Palestinian
shelling from Lebanon. Israel has no intention of keeping an inch of Lebanese
territory. Israel will continue to fight Hizbullah, PLO, FPLP etc. as long as
its northern border is not quiet. If the Lebanese army can control these
elements then I think we can see genuine peace on the Israel-Lebanese border.
I remind you that a couple thousand Lebanese cross each day into Israel to
work.
As for the election of Bashir Gemayel, it is true that he was favorable to
Israel, is that why the Syrians killed him? His brother Amin was a Syrian
puppet, if he had not been, he would have been dead by now.
Tsiel | 5 |
4,145 |
Alberto, you've repeatedly misunderstood my postings. You are now making the exact point
that I've made several times but with a different definition of religion. You don't not
have to believe in the "religious" aspects of Judaism to be a Jew (this would confine
Judaism to be just a religion in the sense of a Christianity.). So, by converting out of
Judaism, I don't mean just not believing in the god of Judaism. I mean voluntarily
removing yourself from the Jewish nation. I am an agnostic but still consider myself
Jewish because of my cultural heritage. (I admit that many religious jews would argue
that I am not completely jewish because of my lack of faith, but Judaism is a religion of
dissent and debate isn't it?). The fact that one can opt to become Jewish simply by
converting to Judaism makes the nation of the jewish people the *least* racist and most
open nation. We have no quotas!
So I will once again make my point. Defining a member of the Jewish nation by religion
(not, as you say, religious belief) is NOT racism. You come to your incorrect conclusion
because you use a different definition for religion when you define the law of return and
when you define judaism. | 5 |
2,551 |
But the "values and systems that make the rich rich" all basically
amount to freedom of choice.
In New England in 1800 the entire economy was based on the small family
farm. Farm economy households were economically diversified, producing
not only agricultural goods but also "manufactured" goods, especially
cloth. Many farm women carded, spun, and/or wove, producing not only
cloth for their own family but also to sell, generating extra income.
But about this time the Industrial Revolution was underway in England
and by the 1820's it had moved to the US, in both cases in the form
of textile mills. These mills could produce cloth far more efficiently
and cheaply than people at home.
The result was that an important source of home income was wiped out
and many of these women were compelled by economic circumstance to
go to work in these same mills in Lowell, Mass, or Nashua, NH, where
they worked 73 hour weeks in deafening, dangerous conditions, living
regimented lives and being exposed to cotton-dust and infectious dis-
eases due to the work.
Now people didn't *HAVE* to buy the cheaper factory-made cloth.
They were free to keep buying the home-made variety and support
their local economy . . .
. . . but (sorry for the cliche), "it takes two to tango". The big
rich corporations achieved that wealth because we buy their stuff.
It used to be the case that the business center of a town was also
its social center. You KNEW the merchants you did business with
or even local kids working behind the counter. You would see
people on the street whom you knew and you could stop for a chat.
Nowadays local merchants are going out of business and people shop
at huge anonymous malls serving regional populations of hundreds of
thousands or millions. You have no particular relationship with the
companies you do business with, and feel no particular commitment
to them, nor they to you. Major components of what defines a "com-
munity" have been destroyed. On the other hand the products we buy
at these malls are a lot cheaper due to economies of scale and foreign
manufacture, and they are probably of better, or at least more consistent,
quality.
Don't blame the conservatives for this. Everyone makes their own
individual choice and the liberals and the fence-sitters are just
as guilty of pretending there are no social and cultural consequences
to economic choices.
| 5 |
2,246 | REFLECTIONS ON BOSNIA
LORD OWEN AND THE SERBS
In early February '93, Lord Owen made appearances in New York City
on the Donahue and Charlie Rose shows. On a couple of occasions on
those shows Lord Owen gave away his pro-Serbian position when he
made the point that much or most of the Bosnian territory then in
dispute or already overrun by Serbian forces had been controlled
and occupied by Serbs before WWII. It was as if he were saying
that since the Serbs had previously occupied those territories and
lost them during the Hitler years, they should be allowed to
reconquer them today.
I was familiar with this view because my father, a Yugoslav Jew
who escaped to this country during the war, was aided and found
sympathy among the Serbs during those harrowing years. In recent
months when the subject of Serbian aggression was mentioned, my
father would make the point that 850,000 Serbs were killed by Nazi
and pro-Nazi Croatian forces known as the Ustasha. My father is
so pro-Serbian that he dismissed reports of Serbian atrocities. My
father also excoriated New York Times columnist Anthony Lewis,
because, my father said, Anthony Lewis "is always talking about
the Muslims."
Update--April 28, 1993 After an uneasy truce in and around
Sbernica, shelling has resumed in nearby areas by all sides and
the killing and the misery continues apace while the Clinton
administration dithers its response. In the days leading to the
collapse of resistance at Sbernica, Lord Owen changed his tune.
Previously he had opposed military intervention on the grounds
that it would endanger U.N. relief workers. When Serbian forces
began to march on Sbernica, the threat to U.N. relief soldiers
went unmentioned while Lord Owen called for outside intervention
to stop Serbian aggression, including the use of air strikes. The
current disastrous situation can be seen as a failure of the West
and a failure of the Vance-Owen initiative which did nothing to
halt the Serbs. Now that it's too late to save Muslim areas that
Lord Owen felt should be in a Muslim state, Lord Owen belatedly
calls for strong action.
CLINTON AND BOSNIA
In the summer of 1992, George Kenney, a senior State Department
official, the undersecretary in charge of the Yugoslav desk, made
news when he resigned from the State Department because of the
Bush administration's refusal to take any action to halt Serbian
aggression. As Kenney saw it, Bush's inaction was largely due to
the president's unwillingness to risk any political capital by
getting involved there.
Apparently the same is true of the Clinton administration.
Clinton gives the impression that he cares more than Bush did
about the terrible ongoing tragedy, but the practical effect has
so far been the same.
According to the New York Times, (4/16/93) the Clinton
administration did everything it could to suppress a mid-March
report by its own experts which called for military action if
necessary to protect "safe havens" for the Muslims. At one point,
Senate majority leader, George Mitchell was so incensed that the
report was kept from Congress, that he called for an
investigation.
Instead of helping the desperate Bosnians, Clinton has signalled
again and again that Milosevic and the Serbs are free to do what
they want in Bosnia--indeed, Clinton and the West have been
signalling that the Serbs should get on with the job and finish
off the Bosnians as quickly as possible while we turn the other
way. A key signal was when Clinton made it clear that he would
NOT send in American military forces on the ground. On this
issue, Clinton has made me wistful for Bush. Bush and Baker could
not have done worse, and might have been pressured to do better
well before this time. Lives in Bosnia might have been saved and
the destruction might have been curtailed..
The Nation, the left and "the Bosnian QUANDARY"
Typical of the left's inability to come to grips with the core
issue involved in Bosnia, i.e., a clear aggressor destroying
hundreds of thousands of lives, is the editorial on the "Bosnian
quandary" in The Nation (4/26/93). In the end the editorial votes
to do nothing, even while noticing "the ghastly atrocities of the
Bosnian Serbs" and that the "greater and lesser powers...dither
and fuss [and] hang back." ("Before anything else happens, the
Clinton Administration ought to pay the $530 million the United
States owes the" U.N. the editorial concludes.)
In its most striking passage, the editorial writer warns that
"those who are pushing President Clinton to intervene on the side
of the Bosnians had better review U.S. foreign policy since World
War II." The editorial argues for inaction on the basis that the
Bosnian Serbs are no worse than any number of U.S. clients
including the Chileans, the South Africans, the Greek fascists and
others. (In a subsequent column for The Nation, Christopher
Hitchens correctly called this editorial, "contemptible.")
***
William Pfaff, a European based journalist who writes for the The
New Yorker and the Los Angeles Times, is among a group of liberal
columnists like Anthony Lewis, and Leslie Gelb who have clearly
and consistently called for strong Western and American
intervention to stop the Serbs. Pfaff's most recent column
(Liberal Opinion Week 4/19/93) is entitled "International
Cowardice Worsened Bosnian Tragedy."
He clarifies the international failure which has led to present
situation in one sentence. "Having refused to intervene to
sanction the threat to minority rights in newly independent
Croatia in June 1991, or to block or penalize the military
aggression by Serbia that immediately followed, and the atrocious
"ethnic cleansing" which followed that, the United Nations now
contemplates deploying in Bosnia military force on a scale which
two years ago could have deterred the horrors Yugoslavia has since
experienced." He goes on to explain that U.N. plans now envisaged
call for a "more daunting and open-ended military assignment than
a direct military intervention to halt the aggression would have
been a year ago."
Aryeh Neier on the Serbs In his "Watching Rights" column in the
The Nation (5/3/93) Aryeh Neier gets to the heart of the
motivation of the "aggressors"--the preferred term for the Serbian
forces who have been besieging and shelling Sarajevo for more than
a year. He explains that "there is no military purpose that is
served by the destruction of its fabric and its people...Above
all, few of those aligned with the forces attacking Sarajevo would
want to live there even if the city could be rebuilt. They are
not city people.
"It is this, I believe--aside from a desire to break the morale of
Bosnians and make them press their government to accept peace at
any price--that explains the conduct of the siege of
Sarajevo...[I]t is a loathing for all that is urban, pluralist and
cosmopolitan that has made Sarajevo the object for devastation.
"Historically, most of the Serbian population in Bosnia and
Herzegovina has been rural, while Muslims, who were the civil
servants and intelligentsia during the centuries of Ottoman rule,
made up a disproportionate share of the urban population....The
destruction of Sarajevo is not only an expression of hostility
against this city; it is also an attack on the urban idea....The
demagogues who whipped up the passions let loose by this war
exploited not only ethnic and religious bigotry but also hatred
for all that is cosmopolitan."
The light that Neier sheds on the issue helps to clarify what is
at stake. The Serbs represent the know-nothing, anti-secularist,
fundamentalist, fascist forces who are attacking the urban,
cosmopolitan, secular, multi-cultural idea. They are attacking
the rest of us, just as Hitler did. One irony is that at the
beginning of the crisis over Bosnia, it was for awhile maintained
by the Serbs and their supporters that they were responding to a
threat by the Bosnian Muslims to create a fundamentalist state.
Neier has shown that it is the Serbs who are the great threat to
secularism, multi-culturalism, diversity and democracy. It's the
Serbs who are attacking the democratic notion, the democratic
idea.
Anthony Lewis comes close to the point when he asks why does
respect for Clinton's presidency "depend...on his acting
effectively against Serbian aggression?...First of all because to
do nothing about genocide would be such a betrayal of the values
we and our allies profess." (Times, 4/26/93) But it's not merely
a betrayal of our values. It's because the Serbs are attacking us
by proxy, just as Hitler was.
One argument for decisive action by the West that is heard in a
different form, is that war in the Balkans is destablizing for
Europe. We hear it as, the Bosnians are Europe's Palestinians;
that is to say, just as the Palestinian refugee problem has been
the key to instability in the Middle East, just so will the
hundreds of thousands of Yugoslav refugees of all ethnicities
result in turmoil in Europe for decades to come.
One of the lessons of the twentieth century is that even though
the Atlantic Ocean divides us, the Americas are ultimately tied to
the destiny of Europe. If Europe is destabilized, the U.S. will
inevitably be affected and drawn into its problems. As in a
whirlpool, sooner or later we will be drawn into the maelstrom.
And as past history and Pfaff have shown, it's much better if we
do so decisively, quickly and on our terms. | 5 |
639 |
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!! | 5 |
12 |
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"?
What are the "rules" that have been bent by Arab actions? It would seem
that the Israeli deportations were seen by the other side as an example
of "changing the rules".
| 5 |
3,165 |
There were a great many Germans, Poles and others who did not
sympathize with the victims of the Holocaust but instead participated
with enthusiasm in the killing.
The Holocaust wasn't a massacre, it wasn't even killing for sport; it
was an entire Industry of Death. German engineers, architects
technicians and bureaucrats proudly put their best efforts into as
efficient and methodical a Killing Machine as they could devise and
operate. And it certainly was something extraordinary.
Please don't bleat to us about how the Nazis suffered from the
Holocaust.
All Jews suffered during WWII [...]
was "correct" him with:
All humans suffered [...]
So what WERE you implying?
Are we supposed to thank you for your generosity?
Or should we be pleased with your minimal common sense?
Why is it that when someone writes something simple like "All Jews
sufffered during WWII" that YOU feel the burning need to add
commentary? Regardless of what people write, you keep trying to twist
things into what YOU want to hear. People with similar tendencies in
more extreme form are sometimes called Historical Revisionists. Is
this something that you aspire to?
| 5 |
625 |
Yes, it is. I have taken photos of it's minaret.
Dunno.
This doesn't sound like "eye for an eye" anymore. Changed your tune?
| 5 |
2,074 |
Dear Elias,
I counted at least 4 such answers in public (plus whatever private
email replies you may have received), yet you refuse to accept
anything. Perhaps you are better off in the private world of the
"Center for Policy Research" in Iceland where you can define
"sensible" in whatever way makes you feel most comfortable.
| 5 |
2,600 | I have NEVER spoken for a ban against guns in America !
What I've said is that there seems to be to MANY of them, and especially
to many in wrong hands....
Now IF you would like to reduce the number, how would you do it without affecting
good/responcible gun owners ??
I DO believe in a persons freedom.
What I don't believe is that you can have it all and don't pay for it.
MOST europeans believe in a society of individuals, and that you HAVE
to give 'a little' to make that society work.
Cars and guns should really not be mixed, I just tried to make a point.
Like America, Norway has some spaces you have to cross to get from a to b,
so a car is essential in most parts....
Guns on the other hand are not essential in Norway, so we don't
argue that IF we 'banned' guns we HAVE to ban cars.....
EVERYONE who believe that Hitler and WW2 could be avoided if there were
more guns in Germany in the 30's: PLEASE read some HISTORY!
Is this discussion about
1. Banning weapons for ALL Americans
or
2. Making it harder for criminals to get one ??
Change of name.......
Wrote that one after reading the first postings about the Waco 'incident'.
I still think there are 'some' posters should move their post to alt.conspiracy
or make a new newsgroup.
(If you read the first postings after the Waco fire you should see who I mean......)
Did the BATF get the warrant for a gun search only or was there other reasons.
(Child abuse for instance)
Doesn't the people reading this newsgroup have access to the clari.news.* hierarcy ??
(Some seems rather mis/unInformed)
(Or is the clari.news.* hierarcy ruled and censored by the corrupt facist goverment??)
| 5 |
306 | From article <1r0mhtINNa59@cronkite.Central.Sun.COM>, by dbernard@clesun.Central.Sun.COM (Dave Bernard):
I noticed that too. Special agent (asshole actually) Ricks stated that
David Koresh had "explosives that could blow up an armored vehicle 40
feet into the air." It looked like to me that the BDs had plenty of
opportunity to use these explosives---provided that they had them in the
first place. For example, when one of the tanks was injecting CS gas
into the ranch house (yes ranch house; the BDs weren't living in a
fortress) they could have easily destroyed or disabled that tank because
it was idling there for a considerable length of time. So, why didn't
they do this? Could it be that they didn't have any explosives or
similar munitions? I just don't buy what the ATF and FBI have been
saying. Hopefully, the truth will come out.
Here's something noteworthy: after the fire had been burning for some
time an explosion occurred---just *one* explosion. The media said that
this was some of the explosives that the BDs posessed going off. I
don't think this was the case. My brother and I noticed that this
so-called "explosion" resembled a plume of propane gas being ignited.
We figure that this is what it was because of how the "explosion"
looked and sounded. Obviously, it wasn't due to something like TNT,
dynamite, or C4. I have seen a propane explosion before...the explosion
in the ranch house greatly resembled this. Also, I noticed something
that looked like a propane tank in the charred ruble the next day.
Isn't it curious that the ATF wasn't very forthcoming about how the four
officers got killed? Many weeks had gone by before they stated that
some of the officers had been killed and/or wounded by grenades thrown
by the BDs. Earlier, when someone asked one of the spokespersons about
whether or not an autopsy had been performed on the slain agents, they
said that an autopsy had been done but THEY WEREN'T READY TO RELEASE
THE FINDINGS. Now why is this? Does the ATF have something to hide?
Perhaps those four agents were killed by friendly fire. What is the
cause of death exactly? NO ONE HAS EVER SAID WHAT IT IS.
What is certain is this: ATF agents *did* throw grenades into the
compound. As a matter of fact, Mr. Koresh handed his lawyer a grenade
body during one of the lawyer's visits to the compound. Later on
the lawyer gave the grenade body (I don't know if it was a dud or a
spent one btw) to the ATF. How much do you want to bet that this
grenade will mysteriously disappear? At this point in time the only
people we know who had grenades was the ATF agents. Wouldn't it be
a shocker if the no one ever found any evidence of grenades, rockets,
or explosives in the rubble? The ATF would sure have egg on their
face then. Note that the ATF is doing the *initial* sweep of the
rubble. The FBI and the Texas Rangers won't investigate until the
ATF is done. This looks like a perfect opportunity for the ATF to
make sure that others "find" what they want for them to "find" if
you know what I mean. I'm probably being a little paranoid here
but if I am I have could reason to be. Recall that several weeks
had gone by before anyone said that the BDs had used grenades.
Also recall that early on the ATF had *denied* that their agents
used grenades on the BDs. Someone is lying here.
Scott Kennedy, Brewer and Patriot | 5 |
5,032 |
Now which is it? Are you going to comdemn national media, then turn around
and use it to support some position you present? Seems somewhat contradictory
doesn't it.
I believe this true when we speak of physical data, in the
sense of pure science. But when we speak of data that revolve
around social sciences then we have to be careful.
I quite agree. But these are cases or 'news events' that contain
politics, social science information, sociology, etc. and at
best are reflections of the group that reports them.
As you have pointed out, it is difficult to report that the
temperature was 98 degrees when it was 60 degrees and have
people believe you.
Yes and no. The survey presented, according to Mr. Cramer,
a value called the median- which one used this makes us
believe that 1/2 of the males had 7.3 plus sex partners and
1/2 of the males had 7.3 or less sex partners. Homosexuals
are purported to make up only 1%. In this case, the majority
of people with 7.3 plus sex partners are heterosexual.
It is my feeling that median was not the intended word usage.
But if it is then we have little evidence to support Mr. Cramer
claims about gay promiscuity > hetero promiscuity.
Very good- this is a point that I have tried to bring out,
and as any network news program will show you, it is true.
The News Media is a business and as such becomes skewed because
of where its loyalties lie. | 5 |
6,537 |
I'd bet cash 90% of the people couldn't find the window after six
minutes! Ask anybody who's taken basic training in the military. It is
not at all uncommon for a few soldiers who have not properly attached
and cleared their masks to require assistance exiting the chamber. Since
that chamber has a door, not just a window, it's likely a hell of a lot
easier to exit than a multi-room, damaged house. | 5 |
4,072 |
Rabin is the PM. Did he ever indicate such a wish? Try to implement it?
I opt for the third.
Ish | 5 |
698 |
Just from experience, seeing a couple of houses burn down, one doesn't
need any accelerant to get a lot of black soot. There's plenty of
stuff in a house that will burn 'dirty'. Even the asphalt shingles
would make a really sooty smoke. | 5 |
5,662 | Arab citizens have the all the same rights as Jews. Arabs are
exempt from military service, but that is about it. Arabs have a
full voice in Israeli politics, to the degree that they choose to
get involved. They may vote. There are Arabs in the Cabinet. | 5 |
7,235 |
I just exchange ideas over the USENET with other people. I never
attacked you as to put you in the need to defend yourself against me.
I am not a violent person, and I do not see how can anyone be threatened
by the opinions and ideas of others as expressed on USENET.
I asked you to continue on email because I am not interested on a
flamefest, where you change my words or just make up some of your own
and present them as mine.
So, do not worry. You do not need to defend yourself because I am not
attacking you.
This is a good advice for yourself.
| 5 |
6,473 | From article <C5n90x.EsJ@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>, by gsh7w@fermi.clas.Virginia.EDU (Greg Hennessy):
Really? I thought that insurance companies hired all of
their actuarial staffs to determine the risks correlated
with all groups of people, and that gays are more likely
to have AIDS than are those of other sexual orientations.
If I am wrong about this correlation, please correct me.
My auto insurance company charges me up the wazoo because
I am a young male with a very high performance car. I
always thought that this was based on NHTSA and other
statistical data, rather than bigotry and hatred for young
men with fast cars. Of course, with the proper government
intervention, we could force the insurance companies to
pretend that young men with fast cars are just the same
as everyone else... | 5 |
4,241 |
The whole "saddam is going to invade Saudi Arabia" was nothing but US State
Department propeganda. Saddam (and Iraq in general) never recognised the
British created Kuwait. They were trying to recover land they believed
was theirs, much like the Argentines in the Faulklands. The Kuwaitis pushed
just a little too far by taking Iraqi oil and Saddam thought he'd settle
the dispute the old fashioned way...
Everybody would have been much better off had they left the reunited Iraq
together and concentrated on taking out Saddam. A strong, united Iraq with
an elected government would have gone a long way to ridding the world of
the feudal dictatorships in the Gulf.
But of course a weak divided Arab people better suits US foriegn policy... | 5 |
4,731 |
A typical Nazi/racist Armenian of 'ASALA/SDPA/ARF'. Can it be that
criminal/Nazi Armenians of ASALA/SDPA/ARF hate Muslims for ideological
reasons regardless of what they do? Between 1914 and 1920, your criminal
Armenian grandparents committed unheard-of crimes, resorted to all
conceivable methods of despotism, organized massacres, poured petrol
over babies and burned them, raped women and girls in front of their
parents who were bound hand and foot, took girls from their mothers
and fathers and appropriated personal property and real estate. And
today, they put Azeris in the most unbearable conditions any other
nation had ever known in history.
Source: The Times, 2 March 1992
CORPSES LITTER HILLS IN KARABAKH
ANATOL LIEVEN COMES UNDER FIRE WHILE FLYING WITH AZERBAIJANI FORCES
TO INVESTIGATE THE MASS KILLINGS OF REFUGEES BY ARMENIAN TROOPS...
As we swooped low over the snow-covered hills of Nagorno-Karabagh we saw
the scattered corpses. Apparently, the refugees had been shot down as
they ran. An Azerbaijani film of the places we flew over, shown to
journalists afterwards, showed DOZENS OF CORPSES lying in various parts
of the hills.
The Azerbaijanis claim that AS MANY AS 1000 have died in a MASS KILLING
of AZERBAIJANIS fleeing from the town of Khodjaly, seized by Armenians
last week. A further 4,000 are believed to be wounded, frozen to death
or missing...
Seven of us squatted in the cabin of an Azerbaijani M24 attack helicopter
as we flew to investigate the claims of the mass killings. Suddenly there
was a thump against the underside of the aircraft, a red flash of tracer
ripped past the starboard wing, and the helicopter rocked sharply. We
swung round, and there was a deafening burst of fire from the cannon
under our wing as the helicopter crew returned fire.
We had been fired on from an Armenian anti-aircraft post. We swung round
again, tipped to starboard and appeared to dive straight down into a
valley. The brown earth swooped around our heads, the helicopter swung
round again and followed the contours of the ground. Our cannon fired
repeated blasts.
Later it emerged that a civilian helicopter that we had been escorting
had landed successfully at Nakhichevanik in the east of the disputed
enclave of Nagorno-Karabakh, to pick up some of the dead. We had, in
fact, been attacked both by ground fire and by an Armenian helicopter.
I had seen the Armenian helicopter intermittently through the window,
its cannons firing, but had thought - mistakenly - that it was on
"our side". Our group of Western journalists had embarked on a
search-and-rescue flight that had become a combat mission.
Our flight consisted of the civilian passenger helicopter and two
M24 Soviet attack helicopters in the Azerbaijani service, nicknamed
flying crocodiles for their armour. Our party was in the second
crocodile. The civilian helicopter's job was to land in the mountains
and pick up bodies at sites of the mass killings. The attack helicopters
were there to give covering fire if necessary.
The operation showed a striking sign of the disintegration of the Soviet
armed forces because our pilot was a Russian officer. An Azerbaijani
official told us that there were now five former Soviet military
helicopters -and their pilots- fighting for Azerbaijan. "They have
signed contracts to fly for us," he said. The helicopter we engaged
in combat was most probably flown by a brother-officer of our Russian
pilot, but fighting for the Armenians.
We had taken off just before 5pm on Saturday from Agdam airfield, an
heated for the Armenian-controlled mountains of Karabakh, a sheer
white wall in the distance. The civilian helicopter picked up four
corpses, and it was during this and a previous mission that an
Azerbaijani cameraman filmed the several the several dozen bodies
on the hillsides. We then took off again in a hurry and speed back
towards Azerbaijani lines. Azerbaijani gunners on the last hill before
the plain - and safety - gazed up at us as we passed.
Back at the airfield in Agdam, we took a look the bodies the
civilian helicopter had picked up. Two old men a small girl were
covered with blood, their limbs contorted by the cold and rigor
mortis. They had been shot.
What did our Russian pilot think of the tragedy, our close shave,
and the war in Nagorno-Karabakh? He gave us CHEERFUL GRIN, POLITELY
DECLINED TO ANSWER QUES TIONS, AND MARCHED OFF TO HIS DINNER.
Serdar Argic | 5 |
6,199 | There are basically three alternatives for Gaza:
1. To throw the Jews to the sea. that is basically to make them leave
the Middle-East and go back to where they came from (russia, Europe, USA, etc)
2. To throw the Gazans into the sea, in accordance with Yitzhak Rabin's
wish and that of many Zionists.
3. For Israelis and Palestinians to come to an honorable and fair (I
don't attempt to say just) settlement, which would allow each person
to live in dignity in his country in freedom and equality.
I personnaly opt for the third alternative. How about you folks ? | 5 |
5,684 | In <1993Apr21.175443.5338@dct.ac.uk> mcsdc1jpb@dct.ac.uk (John Bell) dribbles
in his nappies and manages to splutter:
You know, John, if you had kept the follow-up to line here on talk
politics guns, we might have taken you a bit more seriously. It would have
at least implied that you had some backbone, perhaps a modicum of willingness
to present your views and support them. I guess we all know better now.
Really? That's interesting, as I was always of the opinion that
people dumb enough to keep a monarchy around and support them with tax
funds when said monarchy is merely a figurehead deserve all that
they get. Dunkirk, for example. What? That has nothing to do with it?
Then enjoy your helping of foot.
And they killed a few people of their own, including one child
at last report. So what? Being a federal agent is not license to kill.
Then there's CNN indicating that the ATF/FBI actually *DID* start the
fires which would mean feds killed just under 100 people. If you're
so hot to assign blame, make sure you don't overlook the obvious.
Montgomery isn't much of a hero here, either. Amazing how
different things look on the other side of the pond, isn't it? Not
that what you think makes much of a difference in the USA, though, and
for good reason. When you can vote I'll take your rhetoric a bit more
seriously. Right now, you're merely a waste of trans-atlantic bandwidth.
Proof positive that ignorance really is bliss. | 5 |
6,548 |
I am replying to this because I haven't seen anyone else do so yet. It
seems rather odd really as there are so few really wierd posters left
who aren't fascists or Arab extremists.
Yes it was and it was clearly admitted so by the troops who carried it
out and then stupidly deposited testimony in their own archives to that
effect.
Source? Noone is claiming this anymore except you. Would you like
to name one credible historian who asserts this? I believe that
even Begin has the decency not to claim this.
Yes they did and thye said so - they said they went their with the
intention of killing all the men and all the women who got in their
way. Their *own* archives remember, this is not hostile testimony.
Sound van bogged down in a ditch. No warning given.
Yes it was and no it was not. It was a massacre - the murder of hundreds
of unarmed civilians who had no part in the fighting. The surviving men
were taken to the local quarry and shot in the back of the head. Not
intentional? Yeah right.
No it did not - you have a source for this slander of course?
The men involved said clearly that the intention was to kill all the
men. It was a premeditated mass murder nothing else.
On that we agree at least.
Yes they did want to kill the inhabitants and many of them were killed.
This is of course simple to resolve, the Haganah sent a soldier to report
on the massacre. He brought a photographer with him. He sent in a report.
The Israeli government suppressed it. Now the government was a Labour
Government. Since then the Revisionists have gotten into power but for
some reason Likud didn't release the report and its pictures either.
Perhaps you might want to tell me why? If it happened as you claim then
there will be no pictures of men shot in the head with their hands tied
behind their backs, no women and children shot as they slept. Yet for
some reason they did not take the chance to clear their own name. You
have a reason for this don't you? I somehow doubt it. The facts are
exactly as the people responsible claim - a premeditated mass murder
nothing else. No Iraqi soldiers, no other fighting. Just ethnic cleansing
at work.
Joseph Askew
| 5 |
1,652 |
Remember me, Tom? I hope you'll respond, and I seem to
be a Voice of Reason or some such (I've been recieving fan mail,
so naturally my ego is somehwat inflated of late), and hope to
make a few points here.
And our argument is that you cannot remove them from the people
who need restricting and not remove them from the people who don't. A
fairly simple problem, given our size and numbers. Do you agree? We
all believe criminals, particularly violent criminals, should not have
firearms. The problem is making a law that does this without trodding
upon the rights of the vast majority. Nobody here seems to be able to
do it, and I doubt anybody in Norway can either. Thus, we are left with
a philosophical difference: does the safety of a few justify restricting
the many? We say "no," while others say "yes."
Can you provide a method that cannot be abused? I doubt it.
Of course. This is not in contention. What is in contention
is how much one has to pay.
It is this "giving a little" that makes Americans wary...
We have seen this argument before. You might remember how a
Chamberlain "gave a little" to a particular fascist/short asshole,
and how such "appeasement" worked. While it might work in some
instances, it doesn't work in others, and since we cannot predict
the future we must be cautious in using actions that have a
history of failure.
Cars are not essential in Norway any more than they are in
the USA. I'm willing to bet that you have neighbors that would be
willing to drive you anywhere you wanted to go for a price. Thus,
cars are not essential for your transportation. However, the
arguments presented show that, since cars are used to kill far more
people than guns in the USA, it makes much more sense to restrict
cars than it does guns. How one defines "essential" often depends
upon what one is willing to go through for that service. When we
look at the raw data, such comparisons are not individually weighed.
This depends upon what the populace was willing to do. As
Desert Storm proved, even an armed populace won't just revolt even
when given a chance. Still, would Hitler have done all that he did
with an armed populace? We have to wonder, as some of his first
acts were to confiscate firearms. Other points in history show
that dictators were overthrown by arms in the hands of the populace.
Thus, we're left wondering if Hitler would have been overthrown
or if King George was just unlucky in keeping the USA as a colony.
One can argue both sides; one also has to live with each action.
It is about #2, but so far all proposals to curtail #2 have
wound up enforcing #1 as well. I only wish that "or" was so logical.
That was, on my part, purely in jest. I merely pointed out
how we were from similar backgrounds racially, but of wholly different
backgrounds politically. I thought this would underscore my point on
how our cultures were so different despite similar heritage.
BATF can *only* enforce gun/tobaccco/alcohol violations. Child
abuse is a matter for the individual states and local authorities.
That hierarchy is a paid-for feed at many sites. Most people do
not get it for this reason, and I suspect money, not censorship, is the
main reason. Do you get alt.sex* at your site? I can't read it here
because of censorship and legal fears, so again our differences show.
You have topless sunbathing, and in the USA we can watch a murder every
fifteen seconds and yet breasts are forbidden on television. | 5 |
4,454 |
Hmm... all reports from Texas authorities indicate that none of the children
which the group released showed any signs of child abuse.. given that the same
results were found the last time the group was investigated for such allegations,
I can pretty much state that I strongly suspect the government of disinformation
/deception on this issue. And about stockpiling weapons/food, many recognized
religous groups practice maintaining a one years supply of food, and some even
maintain a supply of weapons and ammunition, why are those two facts grounds
for an armed assault? And from the dollar value of the weapons purchased,
if they bought decent firearms it comes out to about one handgun, rifle, and
shotgun for each adult, with a few extras... Going by that rule, the BATF
best get ready for the fight of their life when they assault Alabama...
| 5 |
3,683 |
Who said it was dead. It seems to be alive and well here on the net. | 5 |
309 | From psc@sei.cmu.edu (Peter Capell) on rec.martial-arts...
>I'm sure such weapons have been developed. Our society does not,
>however, condone their possession or use.
Actually, Joe, I wrote the above. Peter was responding to my article.
I'm actually rather confused by your post. I suppose I didn't
make myself clear, cause you seem to have gotten exactly the
opposite impression from what I intended. I suppose "the authorities"
might have been a better term than "society". Carry and use a firearm
in many parts of the country (certainly the parts I live in), and expect,
at the very least, to have an awful lot of explaining to do.
And there is also appears to be a trend in society at large that
actively opposes what many see as their right to defend themselves.
In a few other parts of our society, handguns are banned or
so restricted as to be practically unavailable to the law-
abiding citizen for self-defense outside the home. Funny,
though, how the criminals in such places continue to have a
lush supply of guns and no compunctions about using them.
IMHO, you don't need to be either a political philosopher or
a crime victim to realize that there's a flaw in the gun-
grabbers' logic.
Agreed.
You're welcome to your HO, too, the First Amendment being as
important as the Second, but please don't let your obvious
good intentions be subverted by insupportable generalities
about something as big and diverse as US society.
My only intention was to comment that the existence of suitable
weapons of self defense doesn't mean you'll escape a whole shitload
of trouble should you be forced to use them.
Or by the
naive hope that making gun possession a crime will give pause
to someone who would be a criminal anyway.
I made no such statements, nor do I have such a naive hope or outlook.
Wishing you peace and the wherewithal to defend yourself
if others' thoughts are not that kindly,
That's all I want: the opportunity to leave in peace, or to
have the means to defend myself when that in not possible.
I *think* we agree on this issue. I guess my position didn't
survive the transition from cognition to ASCII.
| 5 |
2,214 |
Pardon me? History shows that within the last 170 years, Greeks played
that game twice: They used Istanbul Patriarch Grigorios in 1822 to
instigate the Morea rebellion that resulted in the massacres of
the Muslim people. Again, the Orthodox Patriarch Constantine V
invited the Russian Czar Nicholas II to invade the Ottoman Empire
'in the name of Jesus,' and save his flock from Ottoman rule.
Source: "The 'Past' in Medieval and Modern Greek Culture," in Speros
Vryonis, ed., 'Byzantina kai Metabyzantina,' Vol I (Malibu,
Calif., 1978).
p. 161.
In the words of Professor Skiotis, "With savage jubilance, [the Greeks]
sang the words 'Let no Turk remain in the Morea, nor in the whole world.'
The Greeks were determined to achieve to 'Romaiko' in the only way they
knew how: through a war of religious extermination."
<<The leader of the Ashkenazi community of Corlu complained to the
president of AIU [Alliance Israelite Universelle] in 1902 about
persistent Greek attacks against its Jewish quarter:
''The fanatic Greeks of our city, as of other places in Thrace,
have the habit of, contrary to the spirit of real Christianity,
making a replica of Judas Iscariote and of burning it on the night
of Holy Saturday. They construct a wooden figure, cover it with
clothing which they claim is that of the ancient Jews, and they
burn it publicly in the middle of a multitude of the ignorant and
the fanatic. It often happens that this multitude, already excited
by the tales of the suffering of Christ that has been made to them
at the Church, is exaulted at the appearance of the execution of he
who is supposed to have betrayed Christ, and works up a great anger
against the Jews...For a long time we have known that each year,
on such a day, they will cut off the heads and arms of the corpses
in our cemetery and will burn them with great solemnity. We make
no complaint about this in order not to create differences between
the two communities. But this audacious madness of these fanatics
has increased. We ourselves see the flames and hear the cries of
hatred and vengeance against the Jews.''[42]>>
[42] Ashkenazi Community, Corlu, to AIU no.8783, 2 May 1902, in AIU
Archives (Paris) II C 8, with report printed in El Tiempo of 1 May 1902.
Source: Professor Stanford J. Shaw, 'The Jews of the Ottoman Empire and the
Turkish Republic,' New York University Press, New York (1991).
pages 202-203:
<<In 1865, immediately after enactment of the new Organic Statute for the
Jewish community, and just as Jewish capital from Europe was beginning
to have an effect in Istanbul, local Armenians and Greeks started a pogrom
against Jews immediately across the sea of Marmara at Haydarpasa, terminus
of the Anatolia railroad, with three hundred Jews massacred and many more
beaten and raped before the disturbance was stopped after the Sultan sent
his personal guard across the bay to protect the Jews [39].
In later years, ritual murder attacks against Jews, carried out mostly
by native Greeks, Armenians, and, in Arab provinces, by Maronites and
other Arab Christians, often with the assistance of the local European
consuls, took place throughout the empire. There were literally thousands
of incidents continuously until World War I, in Southeastern Europe as far
west and north as Monastir and Kavalla, in Istanbul, at Gallipoli and
the Dardanelles, at Salonica, and in all the Arab provinces as far south
as Damascus and Beirut and in Egypt at Cairo and Alexandria. These
invariably resulted from accusations spread among Ottoman Christians
by word of mouth, or published in their newspapers, often by Christian
financiers and merchants anxious to get their Jewish competitors out of
the way or to divert onto the Jews Muslim anger at reports of Christian
massacres of Muslims in Southeastern Europe or Central Asia, resulting
in individual and mob attacks on Jews, and the burning of their shops
and homes.
Individual experiences were horrible. Jews constantly went in fear of
Armenian or Greek attacks in the streets of Ottoman cities. In Egypt
and Syria, it was usually the Greeks who led the way, in many cases
with the assistance of local Armenians and Syrian Christians, whose
Greek, Arabic and French-language newspapers often printed all the
rumors they could find regarding Jews, evidently with the desire of
instigating violence. The Syrian Arab Christians in particular spread
their long-standing anti-Semitic hatreds from Syria to Egypt, where
their monopoly of the local press and their espousal of popular causes
such as Egyptian nationalism and opposition to the British rule, enabled
them to spread their anti-Jewish message among the Muslim masses with
little question or opposition.
On 20 June 1890, thus, Sir Evelyn Baring (later Lord Cromer), British
High Commissioner in Egypt, received the following report from David
and Nissim Ades, in Cairo:
''Sir,
I beg sir to draw to your attention to the violent articles which
has (sic) appeared in an Arabic paper called El Mahroussa which
contained nothing but lies and false accusations against the Jews,
especially those (the issues) of the 14th, 17th and 19th instant.
Now, Sir, are we to have here an anti-Semitic party amidst fanaticism,
Greeks, Armenians, etc., or is he to be allowed to continue to poison
the people's minds with exaggeration and painted words? In an article,
he asserted that the Jews use Christian blood for Passover, of course
this has caused a deal of excitement.'' [40]
Whenever Greek and other Orthodox religious authorities or prominent
Greek business leaders or consuls were asked to help to stem the violence
or reduce tension, they invariably indicated their cooperation and then
failed to do anything to prevent attacks or punish those who stimulated
or led them. [41]
The leader of the Ashkenazi community of Corlu complained to the
president of AIU [Alliance Israelite Universelle] in 1902 about
persistent Greek attacks against its Jewish quarter:
''The fanatic Greeks of our city, as of other places in Thrace,
have the habit of, contrary to the spirit of real Christianity,
making a replica of Judas Iscariote and of burning it on the night
of Holy Saturday. They construct a wooden figure, cover it with
clothing which they claim is that of the ancient Jews, and they
burn it publicly in the middle of a multitude of the ignorant and
the fanatic. It often happens that this multitude, already excited
by the tales of the suffering of Christ that has been made to them
at the Church, is exaulted at the appearance of the execution of he
who is supposed to have betrayed Christ, and works up a great anger
against the Jews...For a long time we have known that each year,
on such a day, they will cut off the heads and arms of the corpses
in our cemetery and will burn them with great solemnity. We make
no complaint about this in order not to create differences between
the two communities. But this audacious madness of these fanatics
has increased. We ourselves see the flames and hear the cries of
hatred and vengeance against the Jews.''[42]>>
[39] El Tiempo, 28 April 1926; Galante, Istanbul I, 185; Galante, Documents V,
340-41.
[40] FO 78/430, enclosed in Baring no.207 to Lord Salisbury, Cairo,
25 June 1890, reprinted in Landau, 'Ritual Murder Accusations', p.450.
[41] Jacob Landau, 'Ritual Murder Accusations and Persecutions of Jews
in Nineteenth Century Egypt', Sefunot V (1961), 425-427; for example
see report in BAIU [Bulletin de l'Alliance Israelite Universelle:
Deuxieme Serie (Paris)], first semestre 1881, pp.66-67. Galante also
reported similar difficulties with the Greek religious leaders while
he was teaching in Rhodes.
[42] Ashkenazi Community, Corlu, to AIU no.8783, 2 May 1902, in AIU
Archives (Paris) II C 8, with report printed in El Tiempo of 1 May 1902.
Serdar Argic | 5 |
5,428 | Did anyone else notice how the question of what federal
laws were violated was brushed aside? I'd like to know
what laws were violated, and on what evidence the orignial
BATF warrants were based.
| 5 |
3 |
They were attacking the Iraqis to drive them out of Kuwait,
a country whose citizens have close blood and business ties
to Saudi citizens. And me thinks if the US had not helped out
the Iraqis would have swallowed Saudi Arabia, too (or at
least the eastern oilfields). And no Muslim country was doing
much of anything to help liberate Kuwait and protect Saudi
Arabia; indeed, in some masses of citizens were demonstrating
in favor of that butcher Saddam (who killed lotsa Muslims),
just because he was killing, raping, and looting relatively
rich Muslims and also thumbing his nose at the West.
So how would have *you* defended Saudi Arabia and rolled
back the Iraqi invasion, were you in charge of Saudi Arabia???
I think that it is a very good idea to not have governments have an
official religion (de facto or de jure), because with human nature
like it is, the ambitious and not the pious will always be the
ones who rise to power. There are just too many people in this
world (or any country) for the citizens to really know if a
leader is really devout or if he is just a slick operator.
You make it sound like these guys are angels, Ilyess. (In your
clarinet posting you edited out some stuff; was it the following???)
Friday's New York Times reported that this group definitely is
more conservative than even Sheikh Baz and his followers (who
think that the House of Saud does not rule the country conservatively
enough). The NYT reported that, besides complaining that the
government was not conservative enough, they have:
- asserted that the (approx. 500,000) Shiites in the Kingdom
are apostates, a charge that under Saudi (and Islamic) law
brings the death penalty.
Diplomatic guy (Sheikh bin Jibrin), isn't he Ilyess?
- called for severe punishment of the 40 or so women who
drove in public a while back to protest the ban on
women driving. The guy from the group who said this,
Abdelhamoud al-Toweijri, said that these women should
be fired from their jobs, jailed, and branded as
prostitutes.
Is this what you want to see happen, Ilyess? I've
heard many Muslims say that the ban on women driving
has no basis in the Qur'an, the ahadith, etc.
Yet these folks not only like the ban, they want
these women falsely called prostitutes?
If I were you, I'd choose my heroes wisely,
Ilyess, not just reflexively rally behind
anyone who hates anyone you hate.
- say that women should not be allowed to work.
- say that TV and radio are too immoral in the Kingdom.
Now, the House of Saud is neither my least nor my most favorite government
on earth; I think they restrict religious and political reedom a lot, among
other things. I just think that the most likely replacements
for them are going to be a lot worse for the citizens of the country.
But I think the House of Saud is feeling the heat lately. In the
last six months or so I've read there have been stepped up harassing
by the muttawain (religious police---*not* government) of Western women
not fully veiled (something stupid for women to do, IMO, because it
sends the wrong signals about your morality). And I've read that
they've cracked down on the few, home-based expartiate religious
gatherings, and even posted rewards in (government-owned) newspapers
offering money for anyone who turns in a group of expartiates who
dare worship in their homes or any other secret place. So the
government has grown even more intolerant to try to take some of
the wind out of the sails of the more-conservative opposition.
As unislamic as some of these things are, they're just a small
taste of what would happen if these guys overthrow the House of
Saud, like they're trying to in the long run.
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?
| 5 |
5,452 | From Israeline 4/27/93
Peace Talks Resume Today; Israel to Offer Palestinians New
Proposals
Israel Radio, KOL YISRAEL, reports on today's resumption in
Washington of the bilateral peace talks, following a recess which
lasted over four months. According to the report, Israel is
expected to offer the Palestinians new proposals regarding the
authority of the Palestinian Executive Council, general elections,
control over land and human rights issues in the Territories.
Israel will express its readiness to give the Palestinians control
of more land than previously offered. According to the radio
report, one estimate is that Israel will give the Palestinians
control over as much as two thirds of the administered lands, as
well as broad authority on water issues. Israel will seek to
promote its offer to hold elections in the Territories in hopes of
strengthening the position of the Palestinian delegation to the
peace negotiations. According to Israel Radio, the Israeli
delegation to the bilateral talks with the Palestinians will offer
greater responsibilities to the Palestinian Executive Council
allowing it certain legislative capabilities, without making it a
symbol for Palestinian sovereignty. U.S. Secretary of State Warren
Christopher invited all the heads of delegations to a gathering
tonight. It will be the first such event since the Madrid
conference. Head of the American team at the bilateral peace talks,
Edward Djerejian, said that tonight's gathering is meant to
demonstrate the U.S.' active role in the peace process.
| 5 |
3,203 |
Perhaps Iranians are not Arabs even not-so-strictly-speaking ?
| 5 |
2,851 | shut up andi!
| 5 |
2,014 |
Certainly many religious beliefs seem to be positive principles for
everyday living. Indeed, I believe it is the Islamic religion which
avoids alcohol (I apologize if I name the wrong religion) and that
is certainly a physical positive in many respects. However, this
proves nothing. Just because something is a "basic, pragmatic
principle of day-to-day living" TODAY doesn't mean it evolved from
the same. Especially those beliefs and (mostly) positions held based
on interpretations of the religion.
Religious beliefs come from many places but most will be backed up
(after many levels of arguments) to "Because that's how it is written."
or "God says..." Now I'm not faulting that but that is not a basic,
pragmatic principle as you mean it in this context. It is a belief
based on faith, which by definition is not necessarily backed up by
logic. Faith is a given. God is a absolute truth when arguing from
religion. Also, many religions would reject your thesis that their
beliefs simply come from these day-to-day principles.
In summation, if you wish to use religious arguments be prepared to
back them up with "It says in the [fill in religious document here],"
because most religions (things which at least I denote as religions)
are based on the writings of or teachings of [fill in religious
figure here].
NOTE: Religion is a charged topic and if I offended anyone regarding
my references to God, I apologize. Please insert your own
sensible references, the argument should apply to nearly all
religions. | 5 |
1,314 |
Mr. Cramer, when are you going to stop indulging in such blatant lies?
This is not only not true, you know damned well that it's not true. None
of your research supports this; no mental health expert has taken this
position. This is *your own* opinion which is not backed up by any
research or any knowledge.
According to one survey, done in San Francisco, the number of heterosexual
men who were molested as children was on the order of 5%. The number of
homosexual men who were molested as children was on the order of 8%.
Source: a book on sexual abuse of children by David Finkelhor (sorry,
the title escapes me).
Conclusions that can be drawn from this: none.
Oh, you definitely have a choice. You realize, of course, that you
are approaching the two-year anniversary of your crusade. How are
you planning on celebrating two years of lies?
Incidentally, we are still waiting your crusade against African-Americans,
women, and other minorities who also want to "impose their morality on
others". After all, they also want the government to "tell peaceful
people how to live." Therefore, you really "have no choice", but to
continue to point out that being a woman or an African-American is not
a lifestyle, but a sickness.
It's bullshit, Mr. Cramer. It was bullshit when you began this crusade
and it's still bullshit. I am continually amazed at the depths to which
you'll stoop to carry on this deliberate attack. | 5 |
6,032 | 5 | |
4,096 |
According to the NY Times, the 4 islands "belong[] to the United Arab
Emirates."
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?
| 5 |
4,910 | :
: >It's quite possible that a buyer and seller will both
: >trust some third party more than either trust the other, and
: >will desire the moderation of that third party. But if a random
: >third party assumes the right to interfere in a transaction contarary
: >to the wishes of the primary participants, odds are pretty good the
: >results will be detrimental.
:
: So we try to ensure that the process of deciding whether to introduce
: third parties isn't random. As Steve said above, there are examples
: where third parties *are* less ignorant or corrupt than the two
: primary parties; should this knowledge not be able to help?
:
A third party should be able to use persuasion to sway the transaction.
If, on the other hand, we condone the use of force or threat of violence
by the third party, then we are in trouble. A fourth party could say
that it knows better than parties 1, 2, and 3. And a fifth party... and
so on. Who wins? The one that can use the force or threat of force the
best. In other words "Might makes right." Let's abandon such
aggressive tactics and work from voluntary cooperation and respect from
others. That is what libertarians want. | 5 |
5,313 |
It is the Serbs who were divided when Croatia and Bosnia-Hercegovina
attempted to secede from Yugoslavia, ripping more than 2,000,000 Serbs
and their property out of Yugoslavia.
The Croatian and Muslim nations had the right to secede, not the Republics.
Additionally, the secessions were to be negotiated, which would probably
have required international mediation; instead the secessions were illegal,
unilateral, and acts of war against Yugoslavia and those who did not
want to be ripped out of Yugoslavia by the secessions. | 5 |
811 |
I seem to recall graphic news file of buddhist monks setting themselves on fire
in the streets of Saigon. Yes, its a horrible way to go, but apparently not
so horrible that someone with enough religious conviction might not be able to
carry it through. And, since they've discovered bullet wounds in a couple of
the bodies from the compound, there is the possiblity that those with the will power to self immolate also had the will power to take out the ones who had
less constitutional fortitude. Then again, maybe the FBI ran in while the fire
was raging, executed those two, and ran out again. | 5 |
2,949 |
Frankly, I'm sick of being lied to. It was bad before Clinton,
and now it's worse. Here, listen to Ricks' ( FBI ) words,
ONE-HALF hour before the fire:
" Come out with your hands up. This matter is NOW OVER. "
Now, I hear Ricks ( and REno ) claiming that this was just
"another incremental step in pressure". More bullshit.
Why did they pick 6 AM Monday morning? So nobody would
NOTICE. So everyone would be busy at work, starting a new
week. More bullshit.
Did the FBI hold back fire engines? Here, let me paraphrase
Sessions"
" no, we didn't hold back the engines. We had them on
stand-by, blah, balh, blah... And so, to protect the
the fireman, we didn't allow the engines to enter until
it was safe "
WHAT THE FUCK IS THIS? " YES, WE HAVE NO BANANAS? "
What the HELL kind of double-talk is this? No, we didn't, so
blah, balh, we did. Huh?
I WATCHED this.
Clinton takes responsibility, "EVEN THOUGH" it wasn't his
decision. MOre BULLSHIT. Does he, or does he NOT, take
responsibility?! No more "even though" bullshit. Yes.
Or no.
Christ.
| 5 |
1,234 |
Damned if you do and Damned if you don't!
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.
| 5 |
6,116 | : > From: elf@halcyon.com (Elf Sternberg)
: Bzzzzt. THANK you for playing, but obviously you are not reading the
: material as it is presented. According to the report I've got in my
: hands, the Newsweek article (which reported that "2 to 3 percent" of the
: population is gay) used the criteria of "No heterosexual contact in the
: past year." But at the same time, the University of Denver study points
: out, quite dramatically, that 60% of all self-identifying gay men have
: > had some form of heterosexual contact in the past year.
:
: I think the big mistake in that study must be that if one had had no sexual
: contact of any kind in the previous year, they are counted as heterosexual.
: Even if they didn't intend it that way, that's how the figures are being used.
Could someone please post some date such as what questonnares where used
and how they were distributed and returned.
-- | 5 |
7,515 | A repost from talk.religion.misc,talk.politics.guns,soc.culture.jewish:
From: cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares)
Subject: Re: Who's next? Mormons and Jews?
Date: 20 Apr 1993 19:15:13 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.
All government claims. If they were really stocking such weapons for
Armageddon, how come they never used them?
"The time is coming. Those of you who have no sword, sell your shirt and
buy one... And they told him, Master, we have two swords. And he said, It
is enough." (LUKE ...)
"Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace,
but the sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father,
and the daugher against her mother..." (MATT 10 34-35)
Just maybe you won't be home. Then you can come home to something
like this:
"Well, it's been a rough month," begins Johnnie Lawmaster. "I
just get laid off, and my divorce became final. But I just wasn't
ready for what happened this particular Monday."
That particular Monday was was December 16, the first day of the
Bill of Rights' third century, the day when federal agents and local
law enforcement officer broke into the house in Tulsa that always flew
the U.S. flag. When Lawmaster drove into the driveway that bleak
afternoon, one of his neighbors had some news.
"'Ohmigod, John, you are in big trouble!' my neighbor tells me.
'Sixty police, federal agents and the bomb squad busted in you house,
kicked down the door, cut locks off your gun safe.' I couldn't
believe it. Then I walked inside. What a nightmare."
It was no nightmare; it was horribly real life. Apparently acting
on information the Lawmaster possessed an illegal firearm, some thirty
agents of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (BATF) teamed up
with state and Tulsa police authorities, search warrant in hand, to
search for a "Colt, AR-15, .223 caliber machine gun, unknown serial
number." The warrant, issued by U.S. Magistrate John Leo Wagner, also
authorized agents to seize "any tools used in the alteration or
modification of firearms, such as files or drills; documents, papers,
books, records, and other tangible properties which identify occupants
or owners of the property to be searched...."
Reports vary, but according to neighbors, the joint task force
operation aimed at the unemployed warehouseman from a nearby hospital
involved some 60 agents and local law enforcement personnel against
Lawmaster. They cordoned off the street; took station with weapons
drawn in the back yard; used a battering ram to break through the
front door; kicked in the back door; broke into his gun safe; threw
personal papers around the house; spilled boxes of ammunition on the
floor; broke into a small, locked box that contained precious coins;
stood on a table to peer through the ceiling tiles, breaking the table
in the process. Then, they left. The doors were closed but not
latched, much less locked. The ammo and guns were left unsecured.
"My front and back doors were pulled shut, but they were busted
through and couldn't latch. Anybody could have waltzed in there and
stolen everything I own. A child could have taken a gun. The guns,
the safe -- everything was open and laying around. I keep all my
magazines empty, but someone had loaded them. While I was looking
around in amazement, the gas, electric and water companies show up to
turn the power off. They said they were told to shut things down.
Then I found the note. "Nothing Found - ATF."
"They didn't make any attempt to notify me. I've lived in Tulsa
all my life and never got more than a traffic ticket. How come they
can't look that up, realize I've been law-abiding my whole life, then
come to the door when I'm home? They didn't leave someone here to
watch over my private property. They didn't even come by to explain
what happened. They just raided my home, ransaked it, left it wide
open and left."
Lawmaster placed a phone call to the local BATF agent. "I asked,
'Are you gonna' arrest me?' and he said, 'No.' I asken him, "Who is
going to repair and clean up my house?' And he said, "If you're going
to talk to me, come down to my office.'
"'I can't come down!' I said. 'My doors are broken!' If I had
been on vacation and I didn't have friendly neighbors, I would have
lost everything I own. Here I am a competent, responsible firearms
owner, and the government leaves them open, unlocked, with ammo strewn
around."
Lawmaster said the agent advised him, "If you want your door to
lock and your gun safe to lock, you're gonna' have to pay for it
yourself."
"'Oh, I'll come right down, alright,' I told him. 'I'll come
down, but I'll bring my attorney.' And he said, 'Well, you bring
your attorney, and we won't talk to you.'"
So if you don't want your tea party to be held in awkward silence, make
sure your lawyer isn't there, there's a good chap.
What a repulsive outlook on society. "Followers of unusual religions
may be killed by the government -- it simply can't be helped in a free
society."
You and I have two different concepts of "free."
-- | 5 |
6,090 |
This is getting sad. All you can do is make this ridiculous statements,
based upon some old information and a Press Democrat article that was
poorly written.
Please show the numbers for your use of "MUCH more". I have not seen
them. And I want them to be true and accurate, or at least show a
trend within the everyday gay population.
There are all kinds of 'damaged and screwed up' people, and most of
them are not gay. | 5 |
3,660 |
The BATF got sat on pretty early on. After the initial shooting
was over, it pretty much become the FBI's show. (Even that BATF guy
stopped showing up next to the speaker at the daily press conferences).
| 5 |
6,820 |
I'm getting tired of these wimpy Liberals whining about gun control,
too! Ya know, the Second Amendment says
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a
free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms,
shall not be infringed.
Now, notice, it says *arms*. Not guns. Arms.
The Comsymp ZOG wants you to think that it is the only legitimate
possessor of nuclear weapons. Unconstitutional! You and I have just
as much right to a kilogram or two of nice weapons grade plutonium as
any cruddy little pointy headed liberal Los Alamos pinkos.
Support your right to keep and bear short range nuclear weapons. It's
a legitimate and challenging sport.
And screw the limit.
spl | 5 |
7,325 | Few simple points: Leadership: You are responsible for all that your
subordinates do or fail to do.
Law: Any deaths that occur as a result or during the
commision of a crime are a felony against whoever dies
during the incident, and whoever committed the crime
establishing the incident is chargable for MURDER ONE.
This is how criminals are charged with murder for the
deaths of bystanders from police stray rounds and such.
Someone dying of a heart attack is also considered a
murder one, if it is in a situation caused by a crime.
| 5 |
7,517 |
I think it was - he went into town fairly often, and was known to go
jogging. This was even during the 9 month period when he was being
watched. One wonders why the BATF went ahead, when they had been warned
according to an interview with a BATF agent, that the BD were expecting
them, and why they had the media in tow. Almost looks like they wanted
to have a romp and a nice show for the media, and it all went to hell...
He was also never known to act violently. He has always surrendered
peacefully before (but of course, the warrants were served peacefully).
He has been tried on the allegations before and found NOT GUILTY.
The justification for this mess was he was alleged to have purchased
$200,000.00 worth of guns and stuff (over an undetermined time period).
Last I heard this is not a crime, or indication of one. I know of an
INDIVIDUAL with that much value in guns. SHould he get a fly-thru-the-door
shoot-first-talk-later raid? (grenades are shooting first, nobody I
know of can say 'oh, thats only a stun grenade, thats OK...'). Can you?
I sure cannot. Also, one cannot be sure that 200K figure is not calculated
like the Feds calculate the value of a drug siezure... Even so, it
is a 'so what' issue... He wasn't bothering anyone (besides the
BATF who doesn't like folks other than themselves or other govt
people having any effective guns)... and having an unapproved
religeous group. Are we required to not offend the BATF these
days? I sure hope it hasn't come to THAT...
MY point is, it DOES NOT ADD UP. We need an independent investigation,
and NOW. Assuming other than FBI/BATF are preserving the evidence.
They had the premisis bugged. I am inclined to think a further wait
would have saved lives. One wonders why they didn't have emergency
gear on hand when they moved, and why they didn't turn on the water
when a fire was observed, instead of saying "aw, gee, there is no water".
Why so long before the fire gear even SHOWED UP - like after the building
had pretty much finished burning? Fireman safety? Isn't that a decision
the firefighters should be allowed to make? No water? Why didn't
the Feds TURN IT BACK ON? They sure could cut it off quickly enough...
One does wonder about the possibility of 'settling scores'...
What does 'taking responsibility' mean? You think she is going to be
facing jail time if the acts were found to be criminal? You think
she is going to face ANY repercussions if the FBI/BATF are found to
have acted wrongly? I don't. It is a nice PR gimmick, though.
I am not assured there will even be a serious independent investigation
for possible wrongdoing or criminal acts on the part of the BATF or FBI.
I expect to hear "they are our best law enforcement. They wouldn't do
anything like that - NO WAY. OUT of the QUESTION. End of issue".
I want to see an INDEPENDENT investigation, with full prosecuting and
subpoena powers. With felony prosecution where felony acts are found.
Fat chance, I bet. I bet the Justice Dept will have an internal
investigation which will turn up at most 'poor judgement'.
I hope I am wrong, that this is gone over with a fine tooth comb.
| 5 |
7,321 |
Atomic Energy Commision - Hmm, they would say this.
The Earth may spew alot of substances into the atmosphere, but the quality
of your toxic output can easily make up for the lack of quantity. Furthermore,
the planet is a system of carbon, sulfur and other chemicals which have been
acting for billions of years, we are but newcomers to the system - we must adapt
and control in order to bring about stability. Also, two wrongs do not make a right,
so continuing our practices despite overwhelming data is just ignorance in (non)action.
Educated and open minded environmentalists do not. | 5 |
1,704 | Announcing
the Trincoll Journal
Trinity College's
Paperless Publication
The Trincoll Journal is an interactive magizine written in Hypercard.
This publication offers a wide variety of information concerning the
"Trinity Campus", and the Greater Hartford Area. In addition the Journal
also provides a unique forum for opinion and expression.
We would like to invite the Internet community to participate in the
creation of this publication by submitting Articles, Art Work, Events
(for the Greater Hartford Area only), and anything else that you think is
interesting, to the Journal each week.
Articles may be written about anything as long as they are written well!
We are also interested in mirroring Newsletters and other information not
easily accessible to non-intensive Macintosh Users.
The weekly deadline for submitting Materials is Wendsday 10:00pm (Eastern
Standard Time).
Please send all submissions to: Journal@mail.trincoll.edu
To receive the Journal each Week send a mail message with the words
"Subscribe Journal" as the subject line to: Journal@mail.trincoll.edu.
Please include Full name and instituion in the body of text. | 5 |
1,467 | >>You should face the facts. Love Canal was not, and is not, an
>>environmental disaster, nor even a problem.
>>
>>Nor is Times Beach and TMI and acid rain killing trees and
>>....
>>
>Not a problem? Would you move to Three Mile Island? I would
>imagine there is some cheap property available!
No, because I don't like the weather back East. However, it would bother me
not one bit to live in an equivalent area here. By the way, do you KNOW what
the extra exposure to radiation from TMI was?
>The naturally occurring catastrophic events [disasters] that
>destroy property (ie: hurricanes, tornados, earthquakes) do
>not usually leave toxic wastes that prevent people from
>re-building their lives there. The man-made disasters (oil
>spills, toxic dumping, radioactive waste dispersions) cause
>death and make an area unliveable far beyond the initial
>event.
O.K., in the U.S., tell me about some of these deaths and some of these
unliveable areas. Oh, and if you manage to find some of these unliveable
areas, tell me what percentage of the total US land area they are.
(Hint - the total waste produced by all nuclear reactors in the US can be
safely stored in the area of three footbal fields.)
--
There are actually people that STILL believe Love Canal was some kind of
environmental disaster. Weird, eh? | 5 |
905 |
Providing safety and security for one's own people is the most
fundamental responsibility of any political entity. For the Palestinian
leadership to refuse to accept this responsibility, i.e. take the
responsibility to protect their people from radical Palestinian elements
who are opposed to the peace process, is reprehensible. To argue that a
Palestinian police force would be established in order to control peaceful
political groups only reinforces the reality that the Palestinian
leadership, so far, can not exercise control over radical Palestinian
elements nor effectively deal with the killing of Palestinians by
Palestinians. This is a problem that can only be solved by the
Palestinian people.
| 5 |
2,758 |
Our doctors' monopoly is exactly the same as in the U.S., if not
more powerful now that they can dictate insurance payment rates,
but I don't know an answer to this one. Anecdotally, my friends
who are MD's (including my main buds from high school) talk about
how hard it is to turn "state's witness" against someone else ...
no direct experience there, though.
Well, what American private insurance plans cover travel expenses???
Since our public insurance plans are publicly accountable, one can
raise a stink in the media to try and extort benefits beyond which
one is entitled (hey, not Alberta's fault that he lives there) ...
If he lived in Cheyenne, WY his private insurance would've told him
to go to hell for the travel expenses and that's that. An HMO would
have just kept quiet and let him go blind.
I don't think that this has been shown with the DMC ...
It's regular practice in a hospital to figure out who needs to get
at what facilities. Don't Americans have to arrange in advance for
operations too? I think that there are two standards being applied
here, and that Canada can't give Beverly Hills-style treatment to
everybody. It's not a big brother list ... it's more like calling
around town for a table for dinner ...
Yes, and the Tories in Ottawa are trying to make them do that rather
than hope for a bigger grant from the feds and their province the
next time around. Whether it's using mop a couple of weeks longer
or even selling services to Americans (remember, our system is cash
based and since our health care infrastructure is overbuilt except
in specialties that require larger populations to generate business,
why not? The alternative is closing unused wards ... business.).
You answered the question yourself ... "private nonprofit foundations
have to make money somehow", and I think that it's about time that
they acted like the private hospitals that they are. Personally,
I'm fed up with Canadian socialists trying to tell everyone that
their health care is free when we are actually buying insurance
(that's one at you, Bob Rae!!).
Since we have always been evaluated in an OECD style, I don't see
how ... remember, OECD counts both private and public funds, and
in Canada like France and Germany, 30% of health care spending is
private funds (i.e., not the basic health insurance money).
Minor copayments can flush out abusers. Remember that our "system"
is only an insurance policy. But our costs aren't rising fast
enough to ensure adequate copayments/deductibles ... last year,
Quebec's user-fee proposal came out with the number of "$5" as
the necessary hike that could be done through a copayment rather
than give the QMA a raise. And it's not contract time yet, as
far as I can tell from UPI Clarinet ...
Even the new Reform Party, a breakoff of traditionalists from the
Conservatives with a mildly "libertarian" faction, holds our public
health insurance as an untouchable but that just a few people have to
be reminded that it's not free (the average Canadian/European is more
fiscally naive than their American counterparts on issues like these).
But no mention of copayments anywhere to be seen ... but cutting public
spending all over the place, and bringing back the death penalty, with
little haste if elected.
Sorry! (-; It's just that I even run into people from Buffalo
and from Michigan who don't know ...
Yeah, but there'd be a lot of lead-time and a health-care crisis that
would preclude it. If provincial governments (as bad as some of them
are; heck, we have the NDP cleaning up a spending mess made by the
Conservatives in Saskatchewan - embarassing!) can be so irresponsible,
there is still reallocation --- health insurance is so important that
it's about the only thing that can inspire open rebellion and violent
insurrection outside of the hockey rink. Right now, attempts to get
the system and its users to learn good habits are being treated like
cod-liver oil ...
Most Americans are fearful of a single-tier system ... (-;
Seriously, there are few areas that have sufficient population for a
two/more-tiered system like what the French have ... a health policy
prof, D.G. Shea, has cited studies in the NEJM that indicate having
a population of 500,000 is necessary for adequate competition ...
and in Canada, there are only four cities west of the Great Lakes
with that population or larger.
Anyways, the numbers show that costs have held steadier than those
in the U.S. and barring any future Chernobyl-like crisis, sudden
transients in spending are unlikely. In fact, the health allocation
is one of the most well-behaved sectors of spending up north so any
talk of bankruptcy is talk-radio fodder far away from the border.
This won't be overnight, and something like this would force Canada
to have a system more like the French one ... but that's not a bad
thing, and the change will be minimal (i.e., add copayments and
frustrate the socialists chanting "Hey, it's *free*!").
gld | 5 |
190 |
That study which was in the NEJM, I think, noted that the frequency
of heart surgery on patients over seventy increase with income in
California (I guess richer people have more heart disease in
California -) ) whereas the frequency of surgery on patients over
seventy in Canada was relatively uniform across income distribution.
Heart surgery was more frequent in California, but mortality and
outcomes were essentially the same.
The only potential problem I see with the private MRI facilty in Calgary is the
self-referral problem to the facility for the doctors who have a financial
interest in it, which is basically unethical...but in Canada because
of our small population, there is likely only to be a few private
facilities involving only a small number of doctors,
and thus I don't think the self-referral problem, which is an epidemic in the
US, could ever get out of hand here.
It is an experiment that will be certainly be watched carefully.
What likely happened is the sponsors of the private MRI which include
doctors anticipated that Alberta would need more MRI's, and instead
of waiting for the health planners to realize they needed another
one or two, saw a business opportunity...where they would have a
secure business from the public insurance side of things, and they
could supplement people and businesses who want to pay cash. | 5 |
542 | Whatever.
Anyway, Elias should take a look at my quotes to find real, effective
ways of getting your point across. Notice that all the quotes are
recent. Buy a clue, Nazi man from up north. | 5 |
7,101 | 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. | 5 |
548 |
there is NO evidence of effect of gun buyback programs but hopefully if
there is any effect it may prevent injuries or deaths in one of these types
of common incidents.
Firearms are the fifth-leading cause of unintentional deaths among children
ages 14 and under. I don't understand how the ratio to other accidental
deaths is important. So guns don't kill as many children as car accidents.
What is the difference in severity between 1,000 deaths and 10,000 deaths?
I am not trying to use accidental gun-related deaths among children as a
justification for gun control. Who needs to be convinced that accidental
gun deaths of children is a serious problem? I assumed that any humane
person would be concerned when any 10 year old got hold of their parents
gun from their bedroom drawer and accidently blew away one of their friends.
My point was, gun buyback programs which are almost always run by police
departments MIGHT (I stress might) do a LITTLE (I stress little) good by
giving people the impression that the police are attempting to respond
to interpersonal gun violence in a unique way. Overall, I thought that I
had made it clear that I did not think that gun buyback programs were
useful.
Well Joe, I suggest that you talk to the Center to Prevent Handgun Violence
or the Centers for Disease Control. If YOU look carefully you will see
that YOU greatly underestimate the presence of guns in the lives of youths.
The CPHV reports that 135,000 youth bring GUNS to school DAILY and that
400,000 bring GUNS to school at least once a year. The CDC estimates
that 1 out 0f 25 high school students carried a gun to school at least once
in 1990. The CDC also says that 1.2 million elementary-aged, latch-key
children (kids who come home from school to an empty house), have access
to guns in their home. California schools reported a 200% increase in
student gun confiscations between 1986 and 1990, and a 40% increase between
1988 and 1990. Florida reported a 61% percent increase in gun incidents in
schools between 1986/87 amd 1987/88. These are the "statistics".
Okay, maybe I worded it wrong...DAD. I meant that to put children in a
situation (fortified compound) where harm could come to them is not the
act of a Messiah in my opinion. I'm not saying that Koresh had control over
these children directly, but I would hope that whatever Messiah there is
would not let innocent children die.
If as he claimed he was the Messiah and people followed him as such, why
did he not tell their parents to free the children instead of letting them
burn alive? Thanks for the reality check Joe, its been real. | 5 |
6,101 |
In fact, this "productive human presence" in the desert has, in the
centuries it has been there, produced one of the greatest
civilizations in human history. They not only created the wheel, but
the printing press, the light bulb, Post-Modern skyscraper
architecture, Broadway theatre and nuclear power, as well.
Right, Elias. The Negev was a veritable Garden of Eden until the Evil
Jews turned off the rain and turned it into a horrible desert. Part
of the International Jewish Conspiracy. Say, who should I call to
turn off the rain here in NY, right now?
Yeah, deserts rarely look like the Garden of Eden.
This is why Nature Reserves people are heavily armed with anti-tank
weaponry. Just what we need in the Nature Reserves.
Nothing like "vast nuclear reactors" when it comes to hiding them from
air attack. AT least Saddam had the sense to hide his CBN plants in
"baby milk" factories.
Indeed, many older people recall fondly those lovely tomatoes and
oranges that the Bedouin exported form their Garden of Eden. In fact,
that region used to supply the entire world with bananas, until the
Jews pushed that business onto the "banana republics".
Elias, you're stupid postings are a source of considerable amusement
and hilarity. Please don't stop. I might even have to go back to
watching TV.
| 5 |
4,332 | Oh..
just a note, my usually poor typing is made even more dificult by the
small keyboard and mutiple connections I am piped through in order
to access news while here in DC.
I'm really not trying to irritate the spelling mavens :-)
LUX ./. owen
| 5 |
525 |
Heavens! Everybody but Phill is out of step!
Once again, Phill lets us all know that might makes right -- but ONLY for
the all-sacred government.
-- | 5 |
6,060 | Has anybody heard an explanation of why the FBI was using tear gas
in a 35 mph wind?
Doesn't seem like vry good tactics to me ...
Any other explanations?
Lew | 5 |
403 | Okay. I have my copies of all relevant gun-control bills. I'm mad as hell.
I want to get involved. I want to join the battle to protect our Second
Amendment Rights.
Who do I write?
Who should I concentrate on writing my comments to? The actual author of the
bill? The supporters of the bill? My Congressman? My Senator? Newspapers?
Magazines? All of the above?
I don't believe that I will change the world, but at least I am going to throw
a few punches. Can any of you offer any advice or suggestions to me as I now
begin to get involved here?
Thanks for replying directly to me via e-mail. | 5 |
2,276 | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I dont think you're correct here. There have been no reports of the Bosnians
Muslims supporting the Nazis in their genocide against the Serbians. The fact is
that the Croat govt. using their secret police (called the Ustache, I think)
were the prime agents of the Nazis in Yugoslavia against the Serbs.
| 5 |
1,811 | It is interesting, sometimes, to listen to U.S. news as seen through
the eyes of another country.......
B.B.C. world news service, on short-wave, originating out of London,
reports that a survivor of the Waco massacre states that a tank, when
making a hole in the wall of the building, knocked over a kerosene
lamp and that is how the fire started. Attempts were made by the
people inside to put out the fire, but it spread too quickly.
Has anyone in U.S. heard anything similar or are U.S. government
spin-doctors censoring such information? | 5 |
5,514 |
What crap, Phil. 50mm? Wrong. To give you a clue as to how big 50mm is, the
F-16 fighter aircraft have 20mm gattling guns used to shoot down other
aircraft. A 50mm gun would be somewhere in the `cannon' realm. They might
have had .50 calibre but definitely not 50mm.
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Paul R. Busta Busta@kozmic.enet.dec.com
Salem,N.H.
603-894-3962
| 5 |
6,043 |
Wrong.
Quite true. And evolution made "decided" that homosexuality had a place,
otherwise it would have disappeared quite quickly. There are very few
animals which do not exhibit homosexual behavior.
It has been here before humans existed, and will be here after the
human race has gone.
Quite true. 2000 years of religious idiocy have not changed the nature
of man. You tried to rid yourselves of us for 2000 years and failed.
| 5 |
6,791 |
And is there a reason or value for such a brainless shit for brains asshole
to be haer. You are a self hating bastard. Neither your name nor your
ideas, which I've come across before and thought were too stupid and
uncivlized to respond to, prove your first-worldist claim and civility.
Give me sources to read it or shut up. You think I will take such an
ignorant as yourself on his words??
There is nothing primitive about Islam except in your mind. I do read and
live daily with disagreable facts, and I only ask them to prove themselves.
The last time I checked, this was truly a 1st-worldist civilized approach to
facts and figures. I did not whine about the jews, I merely stated a fact
thet is strange to nobody. As far as me being jerk, FUCK YOU. (Sorry to
other people that read this).
I am at home fuck face. my name does not mean I am from somewhere else,
except in your litte manute stupid brain. And while we are at names,
yours does not particularly seem to be 1st-worldist. Ajami?? What's that
? Arabic?? As I said you must be ashamed of what you are. You must
really hate yourself don't you ass-hole??
Mohammed | 5 |
3,131 |
Um, I sortof hesitate to bring this up, but owning even a single share
entitles you to attend the annual shareholders meeting, and under most
corporate charters to introduce topics to be discussed. While I *don't*
suggest the tactic used by some in Japan (go to the shareholders meeting,
and disrupt the bejeezus out of everything), what about a well-worded
resolution complaining about "advocacy journalism"?
| 5 |
3,839 | #
#
# ># So Steve: Lets here, what IS zionism?
#
# > Assuming that you mean 'hear', you weren't 'listening': he just
# > told you, "Zionism is Racism." This is a tautological statement.
#
# I think you are confusing "tautological" with "false and misleading."
No, but you're right that I didn't express myself well.
The dialog went:
A: "Zionism is racism."
B: "What IS zionism?"
DC: "You weren't listening, were you?"
In other words, the first statement *defined* a Zionism of discourse.
Everything else was redundant. | 5 |
1,755 | Broadcasting amplified sounds of tortured rabbits?
Burning alive men, women, and children?
We have on our hands here some truly sick puppies.
| 5 |
6,675 | ... Wayne McGuire? Did someone prove he's anon15031@anon.penet.fi,
and he ran off to restock on PCP? | 5 |
3,073 |
This is really uncalled for.
You cannot expect a European, growing up in a culture of "rulers" and
"subjects," to immediately grasp the concepts of individual independence
and citizen sovereignity in the US.
He's less at fault than the countrymen we have here who also can't grasp it.
-- | 5 |
986 |
why does this remind me of bosnia and ethnic cleansing ??????
tippu
| 5 |
126 | Can people please stop the 'I think/know the BATF/FBI are completely
responsible but they'll cover it up so that the investigation will
show that Koresch is responsible' bs. In an investigation of this
size with the feds, state, and civilians involved in the
investigation it would be practially impossible to cover up.
And with Republicans like Arlen Spector calling for investigations,
this isn't going to be handled with kid gloves. | 5 |
5,640 |
Interesting development. Especially since the Feds (and the U.N.)
accused Saddam Hussein of using illegal chemicals on his own
citizens as well. Hmmm... Republican Guard/Iraqu Army = FBI/BATF?
You decide.
--
I hope very much that others who will be tempted to join cults
and to become involved with people like David Koresh will be
deterred by the horrible scenes they have seen over the last
seven weeks.
-President William Jefferson Clinton, April 20, 1993,
at a press conferance held the day after the Branch Davidians
"compound" went up in flames while under attack by the FBI/ATF
near Waco, Texas. Is your church U.S. Government approved?
CONNECT THE GOD-DAMNED DOTS!!! Ministry, TV Song | 5 |
5,534 |
While also allowing law enforcement agencies to intercept phone
conversations of criminals *and* non-criminals unlawfully. ("No, Rev.
King, we aren't spying on you.")
I wonder how long it will take for "the wrong people" to put their
hands on the equipment necessary to read this stuff. It'll probably
be as safe as weapons locked safely in evidence rooms.
And people to whom they sell them to. All it takes is corrupting
the right guy. No, that never happens.
| 5 |
3,617 |
Pardon me? Your ignorance cramps my conversation. Although the administrative
mechanism was a strictly centralized one, the Ottoman Empire 'was a classical
example of a pluralist social order.' The 'millet system' was the mechanism
which shaped the social order of the multi-national Ottoman Empire and stood
behind its continuity. As a matter of fact, because Islamic principles
were in force in the Ottoman Empire, it was natural to use religious
criteria to differentiate among the various communities which constituted
the Empire. The 'millet' system began to be based on ethnicity in the
19th century under the influence of nationalism. Sousa writes of the
existence of thirteen communities in the Ottoman Empire in addition to
the Muslim 'millet' in 1914. These were: (1) Greeks attached to the
Orthodox Patriarchate in Istanbul; (2) Catholics or Latins who were
remnants of Genoese and Venetian merchants; (3) Gregorian Armenians
attached to a Patriarchate in Istanbul; (4) Catholic Armenians; (5) Syrian
Catholics attached to a Patriarchate in Mardin; (6) Chaldean Catholics
attached to a Patriarchate in Mosul; (7) Syrian Jacobites attached to a
Patriarchate in Mardin; (8) Protestants; (9) Melchites attached to a
Patriarchate in Damascus; (10) Hebrews of two rites; (11) Bulgarian
Catholics attached to the Bulgarian Exarch; (12) Maronites; and (13)
Nestorians.[1] Scholars who studied the pluralistic social structure
outlined briefly above, concluded that the social order of the Ottoman
Empire fit the framework of the 'Mosaics Theory.'[2]
[1] N. Sousa, "The Capitulatory Regime of Turkey, its History, Origin and
Nature," (Baltimore, 1933).
[2] C. S. Coon, Caravan: "The Story of the Middle East," (New York, 1951),
p. 162 and H. A. R. Gibb/H. Bowen, "Islamic Society and the West: A
Study of the Impact of Western Civilization on Moslem Culture in the
Near East," (Oxford, 1951).
Serdar Argic | 5 |
1,681 |
So, you approve of the BATF launching a 100-person raid, complete
with flack jackets, men hidden in horse trailers, stun grenades,
semi-auto weapons on peaceful citizens? who would also accept
a search authoried by a court?
There is still no proof that the Branch Davidians had illegal weapons.
Nothing else was in the jurisdiction of the BATF, unless they were
thought to have a still, or be smoking untaxed cigarettes.
The automatic firearms violation is a TAX matter ! You don't serve
no-knock warrants on someone with .50 CAL MGs. It isn't necessary
(they can't flush a machine gun down a toilet, you know), and it isn't
smart (if you are right, you got a good chance of getting blown away.
if you are wrong, you shouldn't have done it.)
The stupidity was indeed related to this. But the stupidity may have been to
attempt to serve the warrant by ludicrously over-armed, over-protected
and over-confident gestapo. Escalation isn't automatically brilliant.
IT WAS A TAX MATTER ! YOU CAN"T FLUSH MGs DOWN THE TOILET !
YOU DON"T NEED NO-KNOCK WARRANTS FOR EVERYTHING.
Actually, IMHO nothing justifies them, but that is another argument .
There wasn't any murder of police officers. There was probable cause
to arrest them for murder perhaps. We US citizens are innocent until proven
guilty.
There also wasn't any killing until the BATF screwed up real bad.
Lew | 5 |
945 | 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! | 5 |
4,475 | #
# Which Article of the Constitution gives me the right of revolution if things
# seem to be going cockeyed??
#
# Hmmm...
# --
# Peter G. White, President, Synthesis 93 Inc.
# Milwaukee, Wisconsin, U.S.A.
# Peter.White@mixcom.com
| 5 |
7,450 |
[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 | 5 |
5,744 | The best reason to abolishing the ATF is that they don't have enough
to do. If the organization were disbanded and its duties assigned to
the FBI (firearms) and IRS (tobacco and alcohol). Both of these
organizations have enough to do. The FBI is probably not going to try
to get a criminal charge of illegal machine gun for having a broken
gun.
There have been postings stating that law enforcement should be
divided and and weak. But there is nothing more dangerous to
liberties than a law enforcement agency without enough criminals to
chase. The ATF is one and look at the trouble it started in
Waco.
| 5 |
4,508 | [...]
Some of the Davidians *are* black.
Next question?
| 5 |
3,124 | [...]
The President is not competent to plan or judge the planning of such a
raid, nor does he need to be. His job is to set basic policies and
manage the people under him. If Clinton instructed Reno to preserve
lives, and if she confirmed that the plan for the raid was a safe as
could be, then he did his job. The President should not involve
himself in the minor details of these kinds of operations. This sort
of micromanagement only leads to disaster, as was demonstrated so well
in Vietnam.
But the raid went bad: Over 80 civilians have been killed in a
controntation with U.S. authorities.
NOW Clinton enters the picture in a big way. Will Clinton start an
investigation? Or will he try to squash any attempt to investigate?
Is he a responsible leader? Or is he only interested in protecting
the image of his administration?
We'll all find out as this unfolds.
-- | 5 |
4,931 | Source: Channel 4 News at 19.00, Monday 2 March 1992.
2 French journalists have seen 32 corpses of men, women and children
in civilian clothes. Many of them shot dead from their heads as close
as less than 1 meter.
Source: BBC1 Morning news at 07.37, Tuesday 3 March 1992.
BBC reporter was live on line and he claimed that he saw more than 100
bodies of Azeri men, women and children as well as a baby who are shot
dead from their heads from a very short distance.
Source: BBC1 Morning news at 08:12, Tuesday 3 March 1992.
Very disturbing picture has shown that many civilian corpses who were
picked up from mountain. Reporter said he, cameraman and Western
Journalists have seen more than 100 corpses, who are men, women,
children, massacred by Armenians. They have been shot dead from their
heads as close as 1 meter. Picture also has shown nearly ten bodies
(mainly women and children) are shot dead from their heads. Azerbaijan
claimed that more than 1000 civilians massacred by Armenian forces.
Serdar Argic | 5 |
2,225 | THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
______________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release April 23, 1993
PRESS CONFERENCE BY THE PRESIDENT
The East Room
1:00 P.M. EDT
THE PRESIDENT: Terry, do you have a question?
Q Mr. President, there's a growing feeling that the
Western response to bloodshed in Bosnia has been woefully inadequate.
Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel asked you yesterday to do something,
anything to stop the fighting. Is the United States considering
taking unilateral action such as air strikes against Serb artillery
sites?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, first let me say, as you know, for
more than a week now we have been seriously reviewing our options for
further action. And I want to say, too, let's look at the last three
months. Since I became President I have worked with our allies and
we have tried to move forward, first on the no-fly zone, on
enforcement of it, on the humanitarian airdrops, on the war crimes
investigation, on getting the Bosnian Muslims involved in the peace
process. We have made some progress. And now we have a very much
tougher sanctions resolution. And Leon Fuerth, who is the National
Security Advisor to the Vice President, is in Europe now working on
implementing that. That is going to make a big difference to Serbia.
And we are reviewing other options. I think we should
act. We should lead -- the United States should lead. We have led
for the last three months. We have moved the coalition. And to be
fair, our allies in Europe have been willing to do their part. And
they have troops on the ground there.
But I do not think we should act alone, unilaterally,
nor do I think we will have to. And in the next several days I think
we will finalize the extensive review which has been going on and
which has taken a lot of my time, as well as the time of the
administration, as it should have, over the last 10 days or so. I
think we'll finish that in the near future and then we'll have a
policy and we'll announce it and everybody can evaluate it.
Q Can I follow up?
THE PRESIDENT: Sure.
Q Do you see any parallel between the ethnic
cleansing in Bosnia and the Holocaust?
THE PRESIDENT: I think the Holocaust is on a whole
different level. I think it is without precedent or peer in human
history. On the other hand, ethnic cleansing is the kind of
inhumanity that the Holocaust took to the nth degree. The idea of
moving people around and abusing them and often killing them solely
because of their ethnicity is an abhorrent thing. And it is
especially troublesome in that area where people of different ethnic
groups live side by side for so long together. And I think you have
to stand up against it. I think it's wrong.
We were talking today about all of the other troubles in
that region. I was happy to see the violence between the Croats and
the Muslims in Bosnia subside this morning, and I think we're making
progress on that front. But what's going on with the Serbians and
the ethnic cleansing is qualitatively different than the other
conflicts, both within the former Yugoslavia and in other parts of
the region.
Q Mr. President, by any count, you have not had a
good week in your presidency. The tragedy in Waco, the defeat of
your stimulus bill, the standoff in Bosnia. What did you do wrong
and what are you going to do differently? How do you look at things?
Are you reassessing? (Laughter.)
THE PRESIDENT: I don't really believe that the
situation in Bosnia -- it's not been a good week for the world, but I
don't know that the administration could have made it different.
On the stimulus package, I'd like to put it into the
larger context and remind you that in this 100 days we have already
fundamentally changed the direction of an American government. We
have abandoned trickle-down economics. We've abandoned the policies
that brought the debt of this country from $1 trillion to $4 trillion
in only a decade.
The budget plan, which passed the Congress, which will
reduce the deficit and increase investment, has led to a 20-year low
in mortgage rates, dramatically lower interest rates. There are
probably people in this room who have refinanced their home mortgages
in the last three months, or who have had access to cheaper credit.
That's going to put tens of billion dollars coursing throughout this
economy in ways that are very, very good for the country. And so we
are moving in the right direction economically.
I regret that the stimulus did not pass, and I have
begun to ask -- and will continue to ask not only people in the
administration, but people in the Congress whether there is something
I could have done differently to pass that. Part of the reason it
didn't pass was politics; part of it was a difference in ideas.
There are really people still who believe that it's not needed. I
just disagree with that.
I think the recovery -- the economists say it's been
underway for about two years, and we've still had 16 months of seven-
percent unemployment, and all the wealthy countries are having
trouble creating jobs. So I think there was an idea base -- an
argument there, that while we're waiting for the lower interest rates
and the deficit reduction and the investments of the next four years
to take effect, this sort of supplemental appropriation should go
forward.
Now, I have to tell you, I did misgauge that because a
majority of the Republican senators now sitting in the Senate voted
for a similar stimulus when Ronald Reagan was President in 1983, and
voted 28 times for regular supplemental appropriations like this. I
just misgauged it. And I hope that I can learn something. I've just
been here 90 days. And, you know, I was a Governor working with a
contentious legislature for 12 years, and it took me a decade to get
political reform there. So it takes time to change things. But I
basically feel very good about what's happened in the first 100 days
with regard to the Congress.
Q Waco --
THE PRESIDENT: Well, with regard to Waco I don't have
much to add to what I've already said. I think it is a -- I want the
situation looked into. I want us to bring in people who have any
insights to bear on that. I think it's very important that the whole
thing be thoroughly gone over. But I still maintain what I said from
the beginning, that the offender there was David Koresh. And I do
not think the United States government is responsible for the fact
that a bunch of fanatics decided to kill themselves. And I'm sorry
that they killed their children.
Q Mr. President, to follow up partly on Helen on your
stimulus package and on your political approach to Capitol Hill, Ross
Perot said today that you're playing games with the American people
in your tax policy. He was strongly critical of your stimulus
package. He said he's going to launch an advertising campaign
against the North American Free Trade Agreement. How are you going
to handle his political criticism? Will it complicate your efforts
on the Hill with your economic plan? And do you plan to repackage
some of the things that have been in your stimulus program and try to
resubmit them to the Hill?
THE PRESIDENT: Let me answer that question first.
We're going to revisit all of that over the next few days. I'm going
to be talking to members of Congress and to others to see what we can
do about that. With regard to the economic plan, I must say I found
that rather amazing. I don't want to get into an argument with Mr.
Perot. I'll be interested to hear what his specifics are, but I
would -- go back and read his book and his plan. There's a
remarkable convergence except that we have more specific budget cuts,
we raise taxes less on the middle class and more on the wealthy.
But, otherwise, the plans are remarkably similar.
So I think it would be -- I'll be interested to see if
maybe perhaps he's changed his position from his book last year and
he has some new ideas to bring to bear. I'll be glad to hear them.
Q To follow up, sir, how do you plan to handle his
political criticism? He's launched a campaign against you. Do you
think you can sit back and just --
THE PRESIDENT: Well, first of all, I will ask you to
apply the same level of scrutiny to him as you do to me. And if he's
changed his position from the positions he took in the campaign last
year, then we need to know why and what his ideas are. Maybe he's
got some constructive ideas.
I think the American people have shown that they're very
impatient with people who don't want to produce results. And the one
thing I think that everybody has figured out about me in the last --
even if they don't agree with what I do -- is that I want to get
something done. I just came here to try to change things. I want to
do things. And I want to do things that help people's lives. So my
judgment is that if he makes a suggestion that is good, that is
constructive, that takes us beyond some idea I've proposed that will
change people's lives for the better, fine. But I think that that
ought to be the test that we apply to everyone who weighs into this
debate and not just to the President.
Q Mr. President, to go back to Bosnia for a minute.
You continue to insist that this has to be multilateral action, a
criteria that seems to have hamstrung us when it comes to many
options thus far and makes it look as if this is a state of
paralysis. The United States is the last remaining superpower. Why
is it not appropriate in this situation for the United States to act
unilaterally?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, the United States -- surely you
would agree, that the United States, even as the last remaining
superpower, has to act consistent with international law under some
mandate of the United Nations.
Q But you have a mandate and --
THE PRESIDENT: They do, and that is one of the things
that we have under review. I haven't ruled out any option for
action. I would remind all of you, I have not ruled out any option,
except that we have not discussed and we are not considering the
introduction of American forces into continuing hostilities there.
We are not.
So we are reviewing other options. But I also would
remind you that, to be fair, our allies have had -- the French, the
British and the Canadians -- have had troops on the ground there.
They have been justifiably worried about those. But they have
supported the airdrops, the toughening of the sanctions. They
welcomed the American delegation now in Europe, working on how to
make these sanctions really work and really bite against Serbia. And
I can tell you that the other nations involved are also genuinely
reassessing their position, and I would not rule out the fact that we
can reach an agreement for a concerted action that goes beyond where
we have been. I don't have any criticism of the British, the French
and others about that.
Q Would that be military action?
Q Mr. President, several of the leading lights in
your administration, ranging from your FBI Director to your U.N.
Ambassador, to your Deputy Budget Director to your Health Services
Secretary, have issued statements in the last couple of weeks which
are absolutely contradictory to some of the positions you've taken in
your administration. Why is that? Are you losing your political
grip?
THE PRESIDENT: Give me an example.
Q Example? Judge Sessions said that there was no
child abuse in Waco. Madeleine Albright has said in this morning's
newspapers, at least, that she favors air strikes in Bosnia. All of
these are things you said that you didn't support.
THE PRESIDENT: First of all, I don't know what -- we
know that David Koresh had sex with children. I think that is
undisputed, is it not? Is it not? Does anybody dispute that? Where
I come from that qualifies as child abuse. And we know that he had
people teaching these kids how to kill themselves. I think that
qualifies as abuse. And I'm not criticizing Judge Sessions because I
don't know exactly what he said.
In terms of Madeleine Albright, Madeleine Albright has
made no public statement at all about air strikes. There is a press
report that she wrote me a confidential letter in which she expressed
her -- or memo -- in which she expressed her views about the new
direction we should take in response to my request to all the senior
members of my administration to let me know what they thought we
ought to do next. And I have heard from her and from others about
what they think we ought to do next. And I'm not going to discuss
the recommendations they made to me, but in the next few days when I
make a decision about what to do, then I will announce what I'm going
to do. So I wouldn't say that either one of those examples qualifies
speaking out of school.
Q How about the Value Added Tax, Mr. President?
THE PRESIDENT: What was that?
Q The Value Added Tax -- Mrs. Rivlin and Miss Shalala
both said that they thought that that was a good idea.
THE PRESIDENT: I don't mind them saying they think it's
a good idea. There are all kinds of arguments for it on policy
grounds. That does not mean that we have decided to incorporate it
in the health care debate. No decision has been made on that. And I
have no objection to their expressing their views on that. We've had
a lot of people from business and labor come to us saying that they
thought that tax would help make their particular industries more
competitive in the global economy. I took no -- that wasn't taking a
line against an administration policy.
Q Mr. President, a week ago a group of gay and
lesbian representatives came out of a meeting with you and expressed
in the most ringing terms, their confidence in your understanding of
them and their political aspirations, and their belief that you would
fulfill those aspirations. Do you feel now that you will be able to
meet their now enhanced expectations?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I don't know about that. And I
don't know what their -- it depends on what the expectations are.
But I'll tell you this: I believe that this country's policies
should be heavily biased in favor of nondiscrimination. I believe
when you tell people they can't do certain things in this country
that other people can do, there ought to be an overwhelming and
compelling reason for it. I believe we need the services of all of
our people, and I have said that consistently. And not as a
political proposition. The first time this issue came up was in 1991
when I was in Boston. I was just asked the question about it.
And I might add -- it's interesting that I have been
attacked -- obviously, those who disagree with me here are primarily
coming from the political right in America. When I was Governor, I
was attacked from the other direction for sticking up for the rights
of religious fundamentalists to run their child care centers and to
practice home schooling under appropriate safeguards. I just have
always had an almost libertarian view that we should try to protect
the rights of American individual citizens to live up to the fullest
of their capacities, and I'm going to stick right with that.
Q Are you concerned, sir, that you may have generated
expectations on their end and criticism among others that has
hamstrung your administration in the sense of far too great emphasis
on this issue?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, but I have not placed a great deal
of emphasis on it. It's gotten a lot of emphasis in other quarters
and in the press. I've just simply taken my position and tried to
see it through. And that's what I do. It doesn't take a lot of my
time as President to say what I believe in and what I intend to do,
and that's what I'll continue to do.
Q Mr. President, getting back to the situation in
Bosnia -- and we understand you haven't made any final decisions on
new options previously considered unacceptable. But the two most
commonly heard options would be lifting the arms embargo to enable
the Bosnian Muslims to defend themselves and to initiate some limited
air strikes, perhaps, to cut off supply lines. Without telling us
your decision -- presumably, you haven't made any final decisions on
those two options -- what are the pros and cons that are going
through your mind right now and will weigh heavily on your final
decision?
THE PRESIDENT: I'm reluctant to get into this. There
are -- those are two of the options. There are some other options
that have been considered. All have pluses and minuses; all have
supporters and opponents within the administration and in the
Congress, where, I would remind you, heavy consultations will be
required to embark on any new policy.
I do believe that on the air strike issue, the
pronouncements that General Powell has made generally about military
action, apply there. If you take action, if the United States takes
action, we must have a clearly-defined objective that can be met. We
must be able to understand it and its limitations must be clear. The
United States is not, should not, become involved as a partisan in a
war.
With regard to the lifting of the arms embargo, the
question obviously there is if you widen the capacity of people to
fight will that help to get a settlement and bring about peace? Will
it lead to more bloodshed? What kind of reaction can others have
that would undermine the effectiveness of the policy?
But I think both of them deserve some serious
consideration, along with some other options we have.
Q Do you think that these people who are trying to
get us into war in Bosnia are really remembering that we haven't
taken care of hundreds of thousands of veterans from the last war and
we couldn't take care of our prisoners and get them all home from
Vietnam? And now many of them are coming up with bills for
treatment of Agent Orange. How can we afford to go to any more of
these wars?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I think that's a good argument
against the United States itself becoming involved as a belligerent
in a war there. But we are, after all, the world's only super power.
We do have to lead the world and there is a very serious problem of
systematic ethnic cleansing in the former Yugoslavia, which could
have not only enormous further humanitarian consequences -- and
goodness knows there have been many -- but also could have other
practical consequences in other nearby regions where the same sorts
of ethnic tensions exist.
Q Did you make any kind of agreement with Boris
Yeltsin to hold off either on air strikes or any kind of aggressive
action against the Serbs until after Sunday? And in general, how has
his political situation affected your deliberation on Bosnia?
THE PRESIDENT: No, I have not made any agreement, and
he did not ask for that. We never even discussed that, interestingly
enough. The Russians, I would remind you, in the middle of President
Yeltsin's campaign, abstained from our attempt to get tougher
sanctions through the United Nations in what I thought was the proper
decision for them and one that the United States and, I'm sure, the
rest of the free world very much appreciated.
Q Do you wish, Mr. President, that you'd become more
involved in the planning of the Waco operation? And how would you
handle that situation differently now?
THE PRESIDENT: I don't think as a practical matter that
the President should become involved in the planning of those kinds
of things at that detail. One of the things that I'm sure will come
out when we look into this is -- the questions will be asked and
answered, did all of us who up the line of command ask the questions
we should have asked and get the answers we should have gotten? And
I look forward to that. But at the time, I have to say, as I did
before, the first thing I did after the ATF agents were killed, once
we knew that the FBI was going to go in, was to ask that the military
be consulted because of the quasi, as least, military nature of the
conflict given the resources that Koresh had in his compound and
their obvious willingness to use them. And then on the day before
the action, I asked the questions of the Attorney General which I
have reported to you previously, and which at the time I thought were
sufficient. I have -- as I said, I'm sure -- I leave it to others to
make the suggestions about whether there are other questions I should
have asked.
Q Mr. President, what is your assessment of Director
Sessions' role in the Waco affair? And have you made a decision on
his future? And if you haven't, will you give him a personal hearing
before you do decide?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, first of all, I have no assessment
of his role since I had no direct contact with him. And I mean no
negative or positive inference. I have no assessment there. I stand
by what I said before about my general high regard for the FBI. And
I'm waiting for a recommendation from the Attorney General about what
to do with the direction of the FBI.
Q Mr. President, since you said that one side in
Bosnia conflict represents inhumanity that the Holocaust carried to
the nth degree, why do you then tell us that the United States cannot
take a partisan view in this war?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I said that the principle of
ethnic cleansing is something we ought to stand up against. That
does not mean that the United States or the United Nations can enter
a war, in effect, to redraw the lines, geographical lines of
republics within what was Yugoslavia, or that that would ultimately
be successful.
I think what the United States has to do is to try to
figure out whether there is some way consistent with forcing the
people to resolve their own difficulties we can stand up to and stop
ethnic cleansing. And that is obviously the difficulty we are
wrestling with. This is clearly the most difficult foreign policy
problem we face, and that all of our allies face. And if it were
easy, I suppose it would have been solved before. We have tried to
do more in the last 90 days than was previously done. It has clearly
not been enough to stop the Serbian aggression, and we are now
looking at what else we can do.
Q Yesterday you specifically criticized the Roosevelt
administration for not having bombed the railroads to the
concentration camps and things that were near military targets.
Aren't there steps like that that would not involve conflict --direct
conflict or partisan belligerence that you might consider?
THE PRESIDENT: There may be. I would remind you that
the circumstances were somewhat different. We were then at war with
Germany at the time and that's what made that whole incident so --
series of incidents -- so perplexing. But we have -- as I say, we've
got all of our options under review.
Q The diplomatic initiative on Haiti is on the verge
of collapse. What can you do to salvage it short of a full-scale
military operation?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, you may know something I don't.
That's not what our people tell me. I think Mr. Caputo and
Ambassador Pezzullo have done together a good job. The thing keeps
going back and forth because of the people who are involved with the
de facto government there. It's obvious what their concerns are.
They were the same concerns that led to the ouster of Aristide in the
first place, and President Aristide, we feel, should be restored to
power. We're working toward that. I get a report on that -- we
discuss it at least three times a week, and I'm convinced that we're
going to prevail there and be successful.
I do believe that there's every reason to think that
there will have to be some sort of multilateral presence to try to
guarantee the security and the freedom from violence of people on
both sides of the ledger while we try to establish the conditions of
ongoing civilized society. But I believe we're going to prevail
there.
Q Mr. President, would you care to make your
assessment of the first 100 days before we make one for you?
(Laughter.)
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I'll say if -- I believe, first of
all, we passed the budget resolution in record time. That was the
biggest issue. That confirmed the direction of the administration
and confirmed the commitments of the campaign that we could both
bring the deficit down and increase investment, and that we could do
it by specific spending cuts and by raising taxes, almost all of
which come from the highest income people in this society --reversing
a 12-year trend in which most of the tax burdens were borne by the
middle class, whose incomes were going down when their taxes were
going up, while the deficit went from $1 trillion to $4 trillion, the
total national debt, and the deficit continued to go up.
We have a 20-year low in interest rates from mortgages.
We have lower interest rates across the board. We have tens of
billions of dollars flooding back into this economy as people
refinance their debt.
We have established a new environmental policy, which is
dramatically different. The Secretary of Education has worked with
me and with others and with the governors to establish a new approach
in education that focuses on tough standards, as well as increasing
opportunity. We have done an enormous amount of work on political
reform, on campaign finance and lobbying reform. And I have imposed
tough ethics requirements on my own administration's officials.
These things are consistent with not only what I said I'd do in the
campaign, but with turning the country around. The Vice President is
heading a task force which will literally change the way the federal
government operates and make it much more responsive to the citizens
of this country.
We are working on a whole range of other things. The
welfare reform initiative, to move people from welfare to work. And,
of course, a massive amount of work has been done on the health care
issue, which is a huge economic and personal security problem for
millions of Americans.
So I think it is amazing how much has been done. More
will be done. We also passed the Family Leave bill. A version of
the motor voter bill -- that has not come out of conference back to
me yet. And everything has been passed except the stimulus program.
So I think we're doing fine and we're moving in the right direction.
I feel good about it.
Q Sir, a follow-up. Wouldn't you say, though, that
one of your biggest initiatives, aid to Soviet Russia, is now
practically finished -- if we can't pass a stimulus bill in our own
country, how can we do it for them?
THE PRESIDENT: Let me recast the question a little bit.
It's a good question -- (laughter) -- it's a good question, but to be
fair we've got to recast it. We have already -- the first round of
aid to the Soviet -- to non-Soviet Russia, to a democratic Russia, is
plainly going to go through, the first $1.6 billion. The aid that we
agreed with our partners in the G-7 to provide through the
international financial institutions, which is a big dollar item, is
plainly going to go through. The question is, can we get any more
aid for Russia that requires a new appropriation by the United States
Congress? And that is a question I think, Mary, that will be
resolved in the weeks ahead, in part by what happens to the American
workers and their jobs and their future. I think the two things will
be tied by many members of Congress.
Q The tailhook report came out this morning,
documenting horrendous and nearly-criminal conduct on the part of the
Navy. How much did you discuss the incident and what might be done
about it with your nominee to be the Secretary of the Navy?
THE PRESIDENT: First, let me comment a little on that.
The Inspector General's report details conduct which is wrong and
which has no place in the armed services. And I expect the report to
be acted on in the appropriate way. I also want to say to the
American people and to all of you that the report should be taken for
what it is, a very disturbing list of allegations which will have to
be thoroughly examined. It should not be taken as a general
indictment of the United States Navy or of all the fine people who
serve there. It is very specific in its allegations, and it will be
pursued.
The only thing I said to the Secretary-Designate of the
Navy and the only thing I should have said to him, I think, is that I
expected him to take the report and to do his duty. And I believe he
will do that.
Q Mr. President, to back to Russia for just a minute.
The latest poll show that Mr. Yeltsin will probably win his vote of
confidence. But there seems to be a real toss-up on whether or not
voters are going to endorse his economic reforms.
THE PRESIDENT: I understand that.
Q Can you live with a split -- (laughter) -- can you
live with a split decision, though, or do you need both passed in
order to then build support for Russian aid?
THE PRESIDENT: I believe -- the answer to your question
is, for the United States, the key question should be that which is
posed to any democracy, which is who wins the election. If he wins
the election, if he is ratified by the Russian people to continue as
their President, then I think we should do our best to work with him
toward reform.
You know, we had a lot of other countries here for the
Holocaust Museum dedication -- their leaders were here. Leaders from
Eastern Europe, leaders from at least one republic of the former
Soviet Union; all of them having terrible economic challenges as they
convert from a communist command and control economy to a market
economy in a world where there's economic slowdown everywhere. And
in a world in which there's economic slowdown and difficulty, all
leaders will have trouble having their policies be popular in a poll
because they haven't produced the results that the people so
earnestly yearn for. You can understand that.
But if they have confidence in the leadership, I think
that's all we can ask. And the United States will -- if the Russian
people ratify him as their President and stick with him then the
United States will continue to work with him. I think he is a
genuine democrat -- small d -- and genuinely committed to reform. I
think that we should support that.
Q Mr. President, Mr. Perot has come out strongly in
what is perceived behind the line against a free trade agreement --
NAFTA. How hard are you going to fight for this free trade agreement
and when do you expect to see it accomplished?
THE PRESIDENT: I think we'll have the agreement ready
in the fairly near future. You know, our people are still working
with the Mexican government and with the Canadians on the side
agreements. We're trying to work out what the environmental
agreement will say, what the labor agreement will say, and then what
the fairest way to deal with enforcement is.
The Mexicans say, and there is some merit to their
position, that they're worried about transferring their sovereignty
in enforcement to a multilateral commission. Even in the United
States, to be fair, we have some folks who are worried about that --
about giving that up. On the other hand, if we're going to have an
environmental agreement and a labor standards agreement that means
something, then there has to be ultimately some consequences for
violating them. So what we're trying to do is to agree on an
approach which would say that if there is a pattern of violations --
if you keep on violating it past a certain point -- maybe not an
isolated incident, but a pattern of violation -- there is going to be
some enforcement. There must be consequences. And we're working out
the details of that.
But I still feel quite good about it. And this is just
an area where I disagree with Mr. Perot and with others. I think
that we will win big if we have a fair agreement that integrates more
closely the Mexican economy and the American economy and leads us
from there to Chile to other market economies in Latin America, and
gives us a bigger world in which to trade. I think that's the only
way a rich country can grow richer. If you look at what Japan and
other countries in the Pacific are doing to reach out in their own
region, it's a pretty good lesson to us that we had better worry
about how to build those bridges in our own area.
So this is an idea battle. You know, you've got a lot
of questions and I want to answer them all, but let me say not every
one of these things can be distilled simply into politics -- you
know, who's for this and who's for that, and if this person is for
this, somebody else has got to be for that. A lot of these things
honestly involved real debates over ideas, over who's right and wrong
about the world toward which we're moving. And the answers are not
self-evident. And one of the reasons that I wanted to run for
President is I wanted to sort of open the floodgates for debating
these ideas so that we could try to change in the appropriate way.
So I just have a difference of opinion. I believe that the concept
of NAFTA is sound, even though, as you know, I thought that the
details needed to be improved.
Q Mr. President, there was a tremendous flurry of
interest earlier this month in the Russian document that purported to
show that the Vietnamese had held back American prisoners. General
Vessey has now said publicly that while the document itself was
authentic, he believes that it was incorrect. Do you have a personal
view at this point about that issue? And more broadly, do you
believe that, in fact, the Vietnamese did return all the American
prisoners at the time of the Paris Peace Accord?
THE PRESIDENT: First let me say, I saw General Vessey
before he went to Vietnam and after he returned. And I have a high
regard for him and I appreciate his willingness to serve his country
in this way. As to whether the document had any basis in fact, let
me say that the government of Vietnam was more forthcoming than it
had been in the past and gave us some documents that would tend to
undermine the validity of the Russian documents claim.
I do not know whether that is right or wrong. We are
having it basically evaluated at this time, and when we complete the
evaluation, we'll tell you. And, of course, we want to tell the
families of those who were missing in action or who were POWs. I
think that we'll be able to make some progress in eliminating some of
the questions about the outstanding cases as a result of this last
interchange, but I cannot say that I'm fully satisfied that we know
all that we need to know. There are still some cases that we don't
know the answer to. But I do believe we're making some progress. I
was encouraged by the last trip.
Q I'd like to follow up on that. Before the U.S.
normalizes relations, allows trade to go forward, do you have to be
personally sure that every case has been resolved or would you be
willing to go forward on the basis that while it may take years to
resolve these cases, the Vietnamese have made sufficient offerings to
us to confirm good faith?
THE PRESIDENT: A lot of experts say you can never
resolve every case, every one, that we couldn't resolve all the cases
for them and that there are still some cases that have not been
factually resolved, going back to the Second World War. But what I
would have to be convinced of is that we had gone a long way toward
resolving every case that could be resolved at this moment in time,
and that there was a complete, open and unrestricted commitment to
continue to do everything that could be done always to keep resolving
those cases. And we're not there yet.
Again, I have to be guided a little bit by people who
know a lot about this. And I confess to being much more heavily
influenced by the families of the people whose lives were lost there,
or whose lives remain in question than by the commercial interest and
the other things which seem so compelling in this moment. I just am
very influenced by how the families feel.
Q your economic stimulus package, are you doing
some kind of reality check now and scaling back some of your plans,
your legislative plans for the coming year, including the crime bill,
the health care initiative and other things? Are there any plans to
do that? And also, did you underestimate the power of Senator Bob
Dole?
THE PRESIDENT: No, what I underestimated was the extent
to which what I thought was a fairly self-evident case, particularly
after we stayed below the spending caps approved by this Congress,
including the Republicans who were in this Congress last year -- when
we had already passed a budget resolution which called for over $500
billion in deficit reduction. When they had voted repeatedly for
supplemental appropriations to help foreign governments, I thought at
least four of them would vote to break cloture, and I underestimated
that. I did not have an adequate strategy of dealing with that.
I also thought that if I made a good-faith effort to
negotiate and to compromise, that it would not be rebuffed. Instead,
every time I offered something they reduced the offer that they had
previously been talking to the Majority Leader about. So it was a
strange set of events. But I think what happened was what was a
significant part of our plan, but not the major part of it, acquired
a political connotation that got out of proportion to the merits, so
that a lot of Republicans were saying to me privately, "Mr.
President, I'd like to be for this, but I can't now. And we're all
strung out and we're divided."
And I think we need to do a reality check. As I said,
what I want to know -- let me go back to what I said -- what I want
to know from our folks and from our friends in the Senate on -- and
Republicans or Democrats -- is what could I have done differently to
make it come out differently. Because the real losers here were not
the President and the administration. The real losers were the
hundreds of thousands of people who won't have jobs now. We could
have put another 700,000 kids to work this summer. I mean, we could
have done a lot of good things with that money. And I think that is
very, very sad. And it became more political than it should have.
But the underlying rationale I don't think holds a lot of water --
that it was deficit spending. That just won't wash.
Q and redo --
THE PRESIDENT: No. I mean, you know, for example --you
mentioned the crime bill. I think it would be a real mistake not to
pass the crime bill. I mean, the crime bill was almost on the point
of passage last year. And they were all fighting over the Brady
Bill. Surely, surely after what we have been through in this country
just in the last three months, with the kind of mindless violence we
have seen, we can pass a bill requiring people to go through a
waiting period before they buy a handgun. And surely we can see that
we need more police officers on the street.
That's another thing that -- I really believe that once
we move some of that money -- not all, but some of it up into this
jobs package to make some of the jobs rehiring police officers on the
street who'd been laid off, that would be a compelling case. I mean
people are scared in this country and I think we need to go forward.
I feel very strongly that we need to go forward on the crime bill.
Q Mr. President, back to the tailhook report for a
second. That report contained very strong criticism of the Navy's
senior leadership in general, but did not name any of the senior
officers. Do you believe that the senior officers who are implicated
in this, including Admiral Kelso who was there one night in Las
Vegas, should they be disciplined and do you believe the public has a
right to know the names of the senior officers?
THE PRESIDENT: You should know that under the rules of
law which apply to this, I am in the chain of command. There is now
an Inspector General's report and the law must take its course. If I
were to answer that question I might prejudice any decisions which
might be later made in this case. I don't really think -- I think
all I can tell you is what I have already said. I was very disturbed
by the specific allegations in the Inspector General's report, and I
want appropriate action to be taken.
Until the proper procedures have a chance to kick in and
appropriate action is taken, I have been advised that because I am
the Commander-in-Chief I have to be very careful about what I say so
as not to prejudice the rights of anybody against whom any action
might proceed or to prejudice the case in any other way either pro or
con. So I can't say any more except to say that I want this thing
handled in an appropriate and thorough way.
Q Mr. President, could I ask you for a clarification
on Bosnia? You said that you were not considering introduction of
American forces. Does that include any air forces as well as ground
forces, sir?
THE PRESIDENT: I said ground forces.
Q You said ground forces. Could I ask you, sir, if
you fear that using U.S. air strikes might draw the United States
into a ground war there?
THE PRESIDENT: I just don't want to discuss our
evaluation of the options anymore. I've told you that there's never
been a serious discussion in this country about the introduction of
ground forces into an ongoing conflict there.
Q With hundreds of thousands of gays in Washington
this weekend for the march, did you ever reconsider your decision to
leave town for this weekend? Did you ever consider in any way
participating in some of the activities?
THE PRESIDENT: No.
Q Why not?
THE PRESIDENT: Because I -- and, basically, I wouldn't
participate in other marches. I think once you become President, on
balance, except under unusual circumstances, that is not what should
be done. But more importantly, I'm going to the American Society of
Newspaper Editors, a trip that presumably most of you would want me
to make, to try to focus anew on what I think are the fundamental
issues at stake for our country right now. And I expect that I will
say something about the fact that a lot of Americans have come here,
asking for a climate that is free of discrimination; asking,
basically, to be able to work hard and live by the rules and be
treated like other American citizens if they do that, and just that.
And that's always been my position -- not only for the gays who will
be here, but for others as well.
Thank you very much. | 5 |
1,483 |
In Massachusetts, you will likely be arrested for murder, but
if you convince the cops/DA that you used lethal force because
of threat of death or serious bodily harm, then the charges
would probably be dropped. If you run away and are later caught,
then you will have a much harder time convincing cops/judge/jury
of your innocence. Going "on the lam" is seen as an indication
of guilt by a lot of people.
| 5 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.