User talk:IZAK/Archive 3

Occupation pages
IZAK, please please please withdraw these pages. Evil begets evil. They are only answers to the "Occupation of Palestine" debate which might actually be reaching an amicable solution. These belong in the respective history pages. This tit-for-tat approach will ruin (this area of) Wikipedia, which is not in great shape to start with. Gadykozma 17:33, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)

IZAK, please keep going with these pages. Good begets good (with apologies to Gadykozma). Many people in the English-speaking West have the impression that the only significant or ongoing "occupation" in the world is Israel "occupying" Gaza & West Bank. Please write about Syrian occupation of Lebanon next! --Uncle Ed 17:54, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * Hmmm IZAK 18:08, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)

IZAK, I will make another appeal and I promise it will be the last. In other areas of Wikipedia people see well-written papers and they imitate. In this area of Wikipedia people see a bad POV-full page that was voted against by 70% of the voters in a VfD vote, and they imitate it... Do you really think Occupation of Palestine is a model page that should be replicated? Gadykozma 01:06, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * I am having great trouble following your reasoning. The "Occupation of Palestine" (if used as a description for the modern State of Israel) ONLY exists in the minds of some deluded Arabs and Anti-Semites. The State of Israel is a 100% internationally acceptable and legitimate state, it is not "occupying" anything, as "Palestine" was previously a League of Nations British Mandate, and before that it belonged to the Ottoman Empire for over four hundred years. The Arabs were not given Israel and Israel does not "occupy" Arab land. It is Arab propaganda that manufactures these lies. But we must recognize that the term "Occupation" is nevertheless used by some in the world who cannot accept Israel's legitimacy as an independent Jewish state. So, that being the case, and if the "Occupation of Palestine" is what they want to call Jewish Israel, then by the same token and using the same argument, we can and should begin to look at any other types of "occupation" and see whether they are similar or different than the very term used by Israel's enemies. Thus, lo and behold, the ARABS themselves, and many other countries as well, are guilty of the very same thing they accuse Israel of doing, and the Occupation of the Gaza Strip by Egypt and Occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem by Jordan are important factual articles that shed light on how Arab states themselves accupied the Gaza Strip and the West Bank (areas designated by the United Nations for a Palestinian Arab state). And, most significantly of all, during the twenty or so years that Egypt and Jordan controlled and ruled over the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, NEVER did they call for or create a Palestinian state in those areas they occupied! On the contrary, they actually governed Gaza and the West Bank as vassal provinces on the verge of annexation. All we are doing is stating the facts in a NPOV fashion. IZAK 16:36, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * IZAK, Wikipedia is not about NPOV. Its about bringing users information which is interesting, clear, well written, meaningfully organized, and NPOV. These pages do not violate NPOV policy, but they violate all the rest. Gadykozma 02:15, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Jordan annexed East Jerusalem and the West Bank in 1950
See: http://www.palestinefacts.org/pf_1948to1967_jordan_annex.php
 * "What did the Arabs do about Jordan's annexation of the parts of Palestine they captured?: In April 1950, Jordan annexed eastern Jerusalem (dividing the city for the first time in its history) and the "West Bank" areas in historical Judea and Samaria that Trans-Jordan had occupied by military force in 1948 (Jordan changed its name to Trans-Jordan in April 1949). On April 24, 1950, the Jordan House of Deputies and House of Notables, in a joint session, adopted a Resolution making the West Bank and Jerusalem part of Jordan. This act had no basis in international law; it was only the de facto act of Trans-Jordan as a conquerer. The other Arab countries denied formal recognition of the Jordanian move and only two governments - Great Britain and Pakistan - formally recognized the Jordanian takeover. The rest of the world, including the United States, never did...." IZAK 06:07, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)

List of Jewish Nobel Prize winners
You might be interested in Votes for deletion/List of Jewish Nobel Prize winners. -Udzu 09:57, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Thank you for bringing this to my attention. The whole vote is a stupid mistake, as I have indicated on that page. You can't "vote" Jews out of existence in any case... IZAK 18:11, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)

OOP
Please have a look at the Occupation of Palestine article when you get a chance. I have twice reverted HistoryBuffEr POV insertions and revisions to the last revision by Ed Poor. Also, see his comments on the talk page. His current revision to the article is far from neutral. --Viriditas 05:10, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Violence against Israel pages
IZAK, I just want to point out to you, all races on this planet have been persecuted at one point or another, not just the Jews. Please do not use Wikipedia as your political mouthpiece, it's meant to be an encyclopedia. --SpaceMonkey 09:26, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * Noone is denying all races on the planet their voice. Why you feel the need to make this comment is most bewildering. Jews are often the targets of Anti-Semitism or are you denying that as well? IZAK 08:36, 3 Oct 2004 (UTC)

IZAK, I suggest that (with SpaceMonkey's consent) you remove the personal attack from the VFD page. You will also notice that the page is unlikely to survive in its present form... JFW | T@lk  10:13, 3 Oct 2004 (UTC)


 * IZAK, I'm going to very, very strongly suggest that, in the future, you make no accusations that any Wikipedia editors are anti-Semitic. In the past you have thrown that accusation around extremely freely, and it only hurts your cause.  If you find your fingers typing such an accusation in the future, please reconsider posting, as many times as it takes until you finally delete the accusation and deal with the articles themselves, and not ad hominems about the editors.  Jayjg 19:14, 4 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I go by the theory that "if it sounds like a duck, talks like a duck, and makes comments like a duck, it's a......duck". Are you suggesting that Anti-Semitism is "acceptable" on Wikipedia, or that one should turn the proverbial "blind-eye" to it? What you are saying will only encourage harsher rhetoric against Jews on Wikipedia, so I urge YOU and others to speak out more forcefully against hate speech against Jews, in its modern guise of "anti-Israel" or "anti-Zionist" lies and distortions, that unfortunately do tend to make their appearance on Wikipedia, and which need to be called for what they are. IZAK 20:03, 4 Oct 2004 (UTC)


 * Unfortunately you have displayed a dismaying inability to distinguish ducks from chickens, turkeys, and other domesticated birds. There is no need to call people anti-Semites, regardless of whether or not it is true; these statements are ad hominem and only distract from the actual issues at hand.  Stick to editing the articles to NPOV, there's no need to pass judgement on the editors, and it does far more harm than good. I'm trying to help you here, IZAK, not criticise you. Jayjg 21:28, 4 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Yea, lots of chickens and turkeys are also around, that's true...IZAK 21:31, 4 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Genocide against Israelis in the form of Suicide Bombers
Looking for your support against User:Bsktcase on page Genocides in history regarding breach of genocide convention against Israelis. Please support the NPOV article posted and help keep it there. Evolver of Borg

Feast of Tabernacles entry and redirect
Hello IZAK,

I did not intend to tread on your toes by the addition of the link. I added an explanation as to why I had done this on the discussion page. The reason why I ended up on that page was in trying to link "Feast" or "Festival of Tabernacles" and I discovered that there was an existing redirect to that page. I have been building various radio broadcasting pages tied to "Pirate Radio" and offshore broadcasting and this is how Armstrong and the Worldwide Church of God ties in. While editing the page on Big Sandy Texas to include a paragraph about Ambassador College which used to be located there, I also added comments about the financial impact that the Worldwide Church of God had on the community every year by celebrating the Feast of Tabernacles. So that is the whole story. I would like to have some basic explanation as to what the foundation for their Feast of Tabernacles was, even if it was a varient from the Jewish festival itself. As I stated, I am not trying to cause problems here, I am merely trying to cross reference material. I would appreciate your views on this. Thanks. MPLX/MH 18:22, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)

HistoryBuffEr's RFC
IZAK, I would suggest you see my comment at User talk:HistoryBuffEr in regard to his RfC. It would be good if the two of you could resolve this. -- Cecropia | Talk 03:50, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I wouldn't give him such a long response, and I absolutely wouldn't engage him if I were you. He's clearly a bad-faith user, aka troll, and will thrive on being called names like "anti-semite" and "nazi." Rhobite 04:57, Oct 6, 2004 (UTC)

Isaac, much as I sympathize with you, Buff is right about the requirement for you to avoid personal remarks. In the heat of discussion, it's easy for even the best of us to forget the, er, debate rules. I suggest you take the "moral high road" and issue a unilateral apology.

Here at Wikipedia, self-justification doesn't win you any points. Just ensure that your future conduct is above reproach, and all else will be well. --Uncle Ed 14:33, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Voting
who is sam spade and why should i be voting for him to get admin? Xtra 08:31, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)


 * FYI: He has been hostile to points he deems "pro-Jewish" (as in the Jew article), and I have voted AGAINST him. IZAK 02:22, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Thanks IZAK. Unfortunately, often propaganda obscures some people's views. &larr;Humus sapiens&larr;Talk 09:30, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Refuting HistoryBuffer's Israel bashing (categorically)
Nice work, but I think your new section would be much clearer if you create a new section below the old comments (you still have some old comments left below your new text). I wonder if you could also paste HistoryBuffEr's comments in italics, and then add your text as an indented rebuttal. It will be longer, but at least it will be in context. --Viriditas 07:10, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)


 * Done to some extant. Thanks. IZAK 08:11, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Sam Spade
Hi Kate, I was aiming at the Talk pages, will place correctly, thanks. IZAK 10:09, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC) '''NOTE: Hi everyone, due to Sam's past pro-Nazi views I became very alarmed at his looming adminship. At this point I have nothing more to say or add. I was not "spamming" by contacting fellow Wikipedian editors and warning them about a SERIOUS ERROR on the horizon that would be a great embarrassment to all of us! Hope to hear good tidings in the future.'''IZAK 10:25, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC) "To err is human..." Thank you for your response Mark! IZAK 10:37, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * IZAK, you're overplaying your hand on Sam Spade. Given the present voting, his adminship bid is dead anyway. Stop making so much noise. JFW | T@lk  09:50, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Do you realise that you're adding this to user pages, not talk pages? See User:Marcus2, User:Netoholic, etc.  I'm reverting these - please put them on users' talk pages, if anywhere.    &mdash; Kate Turner | Talk 09:51, 2004 Oct 10 (UTC)
 * While I am opposed to Sam Spade's adminship, I don't think this is the right way to go about it. Sjc 10:02, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Please stop spamming. We don't advertise things this way. I respect your views and you have the right to express them but there's only one place to voice them and that's at the rfa page. I'm almost tempted to revert your edits en masse. --Jiang 10:10, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Izak, I have to agree with Sjc and Jiang. Mass spamming of people's talk pages is not going to enamour them of your views - it'll only annoy them.    &mdash; Kate Turner | Talk 10:20, 2004 Oct 10 (UTC)
 * Stop spamming users on the basis of how they voted. It is almost intolerable. - Mark 10:18, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Hello. Thankyou for warning me about the error I made in voting for Sam Spade. Unfortunately I suffer from a rare neurological disorder by which I am unable to change my mind after it is made up, so you'll have to forgive me for not changing my vote as a result of your thoughtful warning. - Mark  10:32, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * The information you have spread around the wikipedia has already been discussed on the talk page for Sam Spades' RfA. You might want to read that discussion through and respond there. Kim Bruning 12:40, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * IZAK, I have been checking some of the contributions of Sam Spade and I am still undecided. Can you show me exactly which of his contributions (Date & Time) are the ones you ar objecting about? --AAAAA 15:05, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * IZAK, please give up your campaign against Sam Spade; this is another example of what I have encouraged you to stop doing. Jayjg 15:52, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)

This sort of attack campaign is exactly what should NOT be happening here. I have added these attacks on Sam Spade to the RFC that already exists against IZAK. Please see Requests for comment/IZAK. -- Netoholic @ 17:09, 2004 Oct 10 (UTC)

Excuse me, why are you telling me, not even asking me, how to vote on someone else's admin-ship. I'm not voting either way on him. I don't imagine he will get it, but I rarely vote on admin-ships: I vote yes on people whose work I know and like. I only vote no on people I think are utterly incompetent or act in bad faith. I often dislike Sam Spade's views, but I don't see him as acting in bad faith. I see no reason that he could not separate his administrative role from his editing role, so I'm not voting against him. On the other hand, I see nothing particularly to be gained from having him as an admin, so I'm not voting for him. -- Jmabel 18:27, Oct 10, 2004 (UTC)

I want to thank you belatedly for your handling of the Sam Spade adminship nomination. You ought to be commended for standing up to this user. 172 18:10, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Kingdom of Israel and Kingdom of Judah
Hi IZAK,

I have been looking out for the Hebrew for Kingdom of Israel and Kingdom of Judah since the amendment made to the pages back in August because the Hebrew was not correct.

I have no doubt that you are infinitely more informed in Hebrew than I (my paternal Jewish heritage being immediately supplanted by my maternal Roman Catholic one).

The text that I used came from the text of the parallel Hebrew/English Bible According to the Masoretic Text at http://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt0.htm which I have thought to be pretty authoritative. --JohnArmagh 07:04, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)


 * Hi John, I will take a look at it. IZAK 21:20, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Alberuni
On October 11, Alberuni created an article for the NGO, Al Mezan Center for Human Rights. On October 13, he created an article for the NGO, Hasbara. Instead of working on both pages, which would reflect a desire to work towards NPOV, he worked on the former, while redirecting the latter to Propaganda, even though they are both NGO's. I have recently redirected the page to Zionism. Either way, Alberuni's actions illustrate extreme hypocrisy, as well as a blatant disregard for fairness and neutrality. --Viriditas 10:29, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)

User:Alberuni is presently on his own hobby-horse anti-Israel and anti-Zionism Jihad and will need to calm down his erratic behavior if he wishes to be taken seriously. IZAK 00:25, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Thank you for fixing this page. --Viriditas 02:11, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * User:Alberuni also needs to take a major chill pill. His relentless slander of users such as jayjg is unacceptable.--Josiah 22:29, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Thanks, but User:Alberuni still has to manipulate it as part of Category:Propaganda which is a shame. IZAK 02:20, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * I have removed that category. NGO's are not categorized as Propaganda, and if Alberuni was consistent, he would have categorized Al Mezan Center for Human Rights as Propaganda.  Alberuni is merely engaging in tit-for-tat POV edit wars.  I will not engage in such wars, but I will remove the offending bias.  --Viriditas 07:15, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)

What to do with HistoryBuffEr?
Hello Izak. I obviously don't like HistoryBuffEr's extreme POVing. What can I do about it? What do you suggest?--AAAAA 11:35, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)

All I can say is do your best as a Wikipedian and respond to his POV edits whenever you can. IZAK 00:21, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Category:Terrorists - VfD
Someone offered to delete this category, because it is "inherently POV". I harshly disagree and voted to Keep. So far, the vote is 6-5 in favour of keep. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion#.5B.5B:Category:Terrorists.5D.5D MathKnight 12:27, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)


 * Thanks for bringing this to my attention. I have voted: I agree with User:Siroxo: "Tough one, probably should be kept but closely monitored." IZAK 00:20, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Hasbara page
Great work on the Hasbara page, Izak!!! Jayjg 04:02, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)

moved from Votes for deletion/Occupied Palestinian Territories (look there for the context)
Don't worry about losing the Wikipedia ideological battle Yitzhak. Your hasbara campaign is going well. No one is the wiser.Alberuni 05:00, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Alberuni is soooooo kind, what's next... candies for (Palestinian)kiddies after suicide bombings..? IZAK 06:07, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * "Note that the term Palestinian as applied to those people entitled to the Palestinian territories is itself in dispute." Palestinian kids don't exist, remember? Just like the Israeli Occupied Territories don't exist. Wikipedia says so. You helped make it happen. Those suicide bombings are just your imagination. Alberuni 06:11, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Alberuni, what have you been smoking lately? IZAK 06:16, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Nothing lately. Why? Are you making an offer? Alberuni 06:24, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Nope, how about a "dose of reality"? IZAK 06:38, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)


 * Hi there User:BACbKA (what is "BACbKA" in English by the way?) are you sure you are in the right Wiki, maybe you stumbled over here from the Russian & Wiki, as you left no comments...? I am still trying to understand why you have inserted this here? I had to dig up your name's connection to this insertion from the "history" of this user page. You NEITHER explained why you were doing this NOR signed your name, both of which are very naughty and very un-Wikipedian. All I can see is that you enjoy my (English) writing style and wanted to let me know how much you loved it, and maybe want to learn some style...who knows if you don't explain yourself...?! IZAK 06:04, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Ohhhh, I just came across this, and now I see what you did: "Ensuing personal discussion with User:Alberuni moved over to User talk:IZAK BACbKA 21:42, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)" OK then, but I had to find this out alone? Your efforts are appreciated though. Thank you. IZAK 09:58, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Talk:Holocaust denial examined
I'm not going to revert, but I would appreciate it if you would read ForestFire and then consider replacing the lengthy copied section with a link to the relevant text. If not, well, that's unfortunate; nobody is served by having the debate on HistoryBuffEr's behavior spread out across dozens of user talk: and article talk: pages. Thanks. &#8212;No-One Jones (m) 02:49, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Dear User:Mirv, I am NOT spreading this to "dozens" of pages! I AM bringing it to the attention of about eight users deeply concerned and involved with this problem and about two discussion pages. Thank you for your concern with this matter. IZAK 02:57, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Hi IZAK
I think its mean when you call me names. Please don't do that. Have you seen Civility, Wikiquette, or Dispute resolution? Please do!! Feel free to talk to me about whatever, I welcome your thoughts. May God bring you peace, Sam [Spade] 23:42, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Response
Dear Sam: Thank you for contacting me. I appreciate your concerns. However, I have found that in spite of your efforts and outward civility, there have been times when your actions and writings on Wikipedia have hurt my feelings as a Jew and as a human being. In particular, I found your harsh behavior and unsympathetic manner during your edit wars at the Jew article extremely disturbing, to say the least. At that time I was contacted by User:Spleeman see User talk:IZAK/archive 2 where he consoles me: "Don't let Sam get you angry. Trust me, he's not worth your time. If you do have any trouble with him in the future, however, let me know. I've been compiling data on his activities: User:Spleeman/Sam_Spade. Happy edits! -- Spleeman 08:18, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)." In conclusion, I have no real "personal" grudge/s against you, as I have no idea who you really are. I do happen to admire your battles on behalf of "God", although I am not sure who your God is or if that God is my God...but that is not the issue now. I am sorry if you have misunderstood me and I certainly do not mean to hurt your feelngs. But you must understand, that the same things you ask of me to observe Civility, Wikiquette, or Dispute resolution must and do apply to you and your allies equally, and that your words and actions have frequently contravened the same things you want me and others to keep. So try to be reasonable, and treat others as you would like them to treat you and all will be well. Again, thank you for contacting me. Yours sincerely, IZAK 01:39, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry, it appears we understand things differently. I don't recall edit warring on Jew, but rather vigorously insisting upon neutrality. If you review the page history, you will see that our main conflict was over my dispute header, which you wanted to remove. IMO the person requesting more attention be paid is always right. The person attempting to remove such requests for community involvement, esp. when coupling that with slurs (Remove as it is only Sam Spade that is insisting on Holocaust "revisionism" . Is he an anti-Semite?  19:13, 17 Aug 2004 User:IZAK) is in the wrong. There was clearly not consensus at that time to remove that header. After hard work, and alot of edits, my goal was achieved, consensus occurred, and I moved along, as I had became aware that outside POV's were not welcome on Talk:Jew, and that civil communication was not to be expected there (see Talk:Jew/Archive_7 and the discussion immediately following). Since then I haven&#8217;t heard much from you, outside of the campaign of personal attacks and smear Spam which you waged against me, calling me an anti-semite, and defaming my character. Why would you do that? I found it rather discouraging, to be honest. To be frank, every false accusation of anti-semitism trivializes real anti-semitism, just as every false accusation of rape trivializes real rape. I am very concerned about your methods of interacting with others, and wonder if this is how you communicate IRL? Please review Requests for comment/IZAK at length, and decide if this is what you want to be known for. BTW, my God is All, everything that ever is, was, or ever shall be. He is the God of the Kabala, the God of the Vedas, the God of Islam, the one God of all people, everywhere. And if you think I'm an anti-semite, please read where I council a real anti-semite.


 * I would like to point out to you Paul that since Cosmotheism see's God in every one of us, that would include Black folks and Jews. Heck, even Commies exist, and are therefore an aspect of God. If, as a white person you feel closer to God, I would hope that we could judge that by your fruits. Rather than being angry and yelling at commies, I find it best to focus on doing what good and charity that we can, assisting those we love. And in the end, when God is All, we should have some basic good will and charity towards everyone. Sam Spade 02:51, 8 May 2004 (UTC)


 * May God be with you, Sam [Spade] 13:26, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Hi again Sam: Thank you for your detailed explanation/s. I generally do not venture outside of Jewish, Israeli and Zionist-related areas of discussion so I agree that we only "crossed paths" when you made your zealous entries at the Jew article. I was not the only one there that noted and objected to your modus operandi at that time, and when User:Spleeman alerted me to you record of controversy at User:Spleeman/Sam_Spade I was alarmed that you had far too many sharp axes to grind all over Wikipedia, simply put. For whatever reason you did move on from Jew and that was that, until I became aware of your running for admin and my gut feeling, re-inforced by what is known about your efforts on Wikipedia at User:Spleeman/Sam_Spade, was to actively oppose your candidacy by all the methods known to us in an a democracy, by also contacting others who may not have heard what User:Spleeman has had to report at User:Spleeman/Sam_Spade which has been mistakenly called "spamming" (at any rate, a communication meant for parties concerned with voting for a particular admin. candidate is not "spamming".) I did this to "even the playing the field", it was NOT meant to be anything personally harmful to you as I do not have anything against you personally as a fellow Wikipedian and as a human being. I am sorry for any discomfort and hurt you may have experienced and I hope that we can continue a positive dialogue in the future. Thanks again for your sincere words and patience. IZAK 00:52, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)


 * OK, I can accept that, but please do not to use slurs like "anti-semite" "bigot" or "nazi" on the wikipedia in the future. They are hurtful personal attacks. User:Spleeman is a sockpuppet / troll / vandal, which you can discover by spending maybe 5 minutes looking into him. I am a user with over 12,000 edits, many of which are to controversial subjects. User:Spleeman (a user with less than 500 edits) has an axe to grind w me due to interactions regarding anarchism, not Judaism. As a side topic on Judaism, I am a pantheist / panentheist, and therefore find the kabala quite agreeable, as well as certain Rabbi's, such as Israel ben Eliezer, the Baal Shem Tov. I have had numerous Jewish friends and acquaintances, and find the accusations of anti-semitism particularly repugnant. I strongly caution you to amend your behaviours here, as they do not reflect well upon yourself, nor the wikipedia as a whole. Sam [Spade] 13:28, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

They're at it again
More POV pushing, check the edit history. Jayjg 02:22, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)