text:
Dassault Mirage IV

The Dassault Mirage IV was a French supersonic strategic bomber and deep-reconnaissance aircraft. Developed by Dassault Aviation, the aircraft entered service with the French Air Force in October 1964. For many years it was a vital part of the nuclear triad of the Force de Frappe, France's nuclear deterrent striking force. The Mirage IV was retired from the nuclear strike role in 1996, and the type was entirely retired from operational service in 2005.

During the 1960s, there were plans to export the Mirage IV. In one proposal, Dassault would have entered a partnership with the British Aircraft Corporation to jointly produce a Mirage IV variant for the Royal Air Force and potentially for other export customers, but this project did not come to fruition. The Mirage IV was ultimately not adopted by any other operators.

Origins
During the 1950s, France embarked on an extensive military program to produce nuclear weapons; however, it was acknowledged that existing French aircraft were unsuitable for the task of delivering the weapons. Thus, the development of a supersonic bomber designed to carry out the delivery mission started in 1956 as a part of the wider development of France's independent nuclear deterrent. In May 1956, the Guy Mollet government drew up a specification for an aerially-refuelable supersonic bomber capable of carrying a 3 tonne, 5.2-metre-long nuclear bomb 2,000 km (without aerial refuelling). According to aviation authors Bill Gunston and Peter Gilchrist, the specification's inclusion of supersonic speed was "surprising" to many at the time.

The final specifications, jointly defined by government authorities and Dassault staff, were approved on 20 March 1957. Sud Aviation and Nord Aviation both submitted competing proposals, both based on existing aircraft; Sud Aviation proposed the Super Vautour, a stretched Sud Aviation Vautour with 10500 lbf thrust SNECMA Atar engines and a combat radius of 1700 mi at Mach 0.9. Dassault's proposal for what became the Mirage IV was chosen on the basis of lower cost and anticipated simpler development, being based upon a proposed early 1956 twin-engined night-fighter derived from the Dassault Mirage III fighter and the unbuilt Mirage II interceptor. In April 1957, Dassault were informed that they had won the design competition.

Dassault's resulting prototype, dubbed Mirage IV 01, looked a lot like the Mirage IIIA, even though it had double the wing surface, two engines instead of one, and twice the unladen weight. The Mirage IV also carried three times more internal fuel than the Mirage III. The aircraft's aerodynamic features were very similar to the III's but required an entirely new structure and layout. This prototype was 67 ft long, had an 37 ft wingspan, 670 sqft of wing area, and weighed approximately 55000 lbs. It was considerably more advanced than the Mirage III, incorporating new features such as machined and chem-milled planks, tapered sheets, a small amount of titanium, and integral fuel tanks in many locations including the leading portion of the tailfin.

The 01 was an experimental prototype built to explore and solve the problems stemming from prolonged supersonic flight. At the time, no aircraft had been designed to cruise at over Mach 1.8 for long periods of time and there were sizable technological and operational uncertainties. Weapon-related issues were another issue. Building the 01 in Dassault's Saint-Cloud plant near Paris took 18 months. In late 1958, the aircraft was transferred to the Melun-Villaroche flight testing area for finishing touches and ground tests. On 17 June 1959, French General Roland Glavany, on a five-year leave from the French Air Force since 1954, took the 01 for its maiden flight.

On 19 September 1960, René Bigand (replacing Glavany as test pilot) increased the world record for speed on a 1000-kilometre closed circuit to 1,822 km/h (1,132 mph) around Paris and the Melun base. Flight 138, on 23 September, corroborated the initial performance and pushed the record on a 500 km closed circuit to an average of 1,972 km/h (1,225 mph), flying between Mach 2.08 and Mach 2.14. The Mirage IV 01 prototype underwent minor modifications during testing in the autumn of 1959, most noticeably, the tail was enlarged (slight reduction in height, large increase in chord).

Production
In order to increase range, studies were made of a significantly larger Mirage IVB design, powered by two Snecma license-built Pratt & Whitney J75 engines and having a wing area of 120 m² (1,290 sq ft) compared to 70 m² (750 sq ft) of the prototype IV, as well as a speed of Mach 2.4 and a gross weight of 140000 lbs. The Mirage IVB proposal had been instigated as a response to interest by de Gaulle in ensuring that two-way (including the aircraft's return to France) strike missions could be flown. However, development of the aircraft was ultimately cancelled in July 1959 due to the greater cost involved, a decision having been taken to rely upon aerial refueling instead also being a factor.

With the Mirage IVB considered to be too expensive, the medium-sized Mirage IVA, slightly larger than the first prototype, was chosen for three more prototypes to be produced. This aircraft had a wing area of 839 sqft and weighed about 70000 lbs On 4 April 1960, a formal order for 50 production Mirage IVA aircraft was issued. The three prototype aircraft were built between 1961 and 1963, with first flights on 12 October 1961, 1 June 1962, and 23 January 1963. By 1962, the second prototype had conducted simulated nuclear bombing runs in the trials range at Colomb-Bechar in southern Algeria. The third prototype was equipped with the navigation/bombing systems and flight refuelling probe. The fourth prototype Mirage IVA-04 was essentially representative of the production aircraft that would follow.

For production, various portions of the aircraft were subcontracted to Sud Aviation (wings and rear fuselage) and Breguet Aviation (tailfin), which was still a separate company from Dassault until 1967; Dassault manufactured the front fuselage and flight-control system internally. Manufacture of both the prototypes and subsequent production aircraft was often hindered by an explicit requirement that there would be no reliance upon foreign suppliers to maintain France's nuclear capabilities; due to this, the Mirage IV initially lacked an inertial navigation system as French industry could not yet produce this device.

On 7 December 1963, the first production Mirage IVA performed its maiden flight. A series of 62 aircraft was built, and they entered service between 1964 and 1968. Although Dassault had designed the Mirage IV for the low-level flight role right from the start, the final batch of 12 aircraft ordered in November 1964 differed from the earlier aircraft in several areas, including the flight controls, avionics, and structural details, for the purpose of providing improved low-level performance. It had been planned for this batch to be powered by the newer Pratt & Whitney/SNECMA TF106 turbofan engine. The improvements featured upon the last 12 Mirage IVs were later retroactively applied to the whole fleet.

In December 1963 Dassault proposed a Mirage IV-106 variant with 2 Snecma TF106 (license-built Pratt and Whitney) engines, an enlarged 105,000 gross-weight fuselage, terrain-avoidance radar, and armed with a proposed French version of the American Douglas GAM-87 Skybolt air-launched ballistic missile. This version would have been very costly, and ultimately was not ordered.

Proposed export variants
In 1963, the Australian government sought a replacement for the Royal Australian Air Force fleet of English Electric Canberra bombers, largely in response to the Indonesian Air Force's purchase of missile-armed Tupolev Tu-16 bombers. Dassault proposed a version of the Mirage IVA with Rolls-Royce Avon engines. Australian Air Marshall Frederick Scherger seriously considered purchase of the IVA in 1961 because it was considered to be proven hardware already in service (in contrast to the BAC TSR-2 which was still in development), before settling on the General Dynamics F-111C. The IVA was one of five aircraft types that were short listed for the role, but the F-111C was eventually selected.

In April 1965, the British Government cancelled the TSR-2 reconnaissance-strike aircraft. However the operational requirement still existed, so in response, Hawker Siddeley offered the Buccaneer S.2, the Americans the General Dynamics F-111K, while, in July 1965, Dassault and British Aircraft Corporation (BAC) jointly proposed a modified Mirage IV. The Dassault/BAC aircraft, known as the Mirage IV* or Mirage IVS (S for Spey) would be re-engined with more powerful Rolls-Royce Spey turbofan engines with a total of 41700 lbf, larger (fuselage depth increased by 3 in, had an approximately 2 ft forward fuselage extension, and was to weigh 80000 lbs), and use avionics planned for the TSR-2, although BAC preferred the French Antilope radar. Although designed by Dassault, the production was to be carried out jointly between Dassault and its subcontractors (wing, mid-fuselage, and tail) and BAC (front and rear fuselage). The final assembly location was not determined before this proposal was rejected. The Mirage IV* was to carry a bombload of up to 20000 lbs.

The Mirage IV* was claimed to meet nearly every RAF requirement except for field length, and some claim it exceeded the F-111 slightly in speed and had at least equal range. The estimated cost was £2.321 million per airframe (for 50) or £2.067 million (for 110), less than the price of the F-111K. However Air Ministry and RAF studies of the proposal identified further modifications to meet the RAF low-level performance requirements. These included airframe strengthening and revised cockpit glazing to improve visibility for both the pilot and crew member. There was also a significant shortfall in range, despite the lengthened fuselage. BAC claimed that the British government evaluation into the Mirage IV* was "relatively superficial". RAF pilots who test-flew the Mirage IV were "favourably impressed" with its low-altitude handling. However, some British government officials, including Parliament members Julian Risdale and Roy Jenkins, questioned the Mirage IV*'s capacity to operate from unprepared airstrips or to operate at low level, or claimed that the F-111 was a superior aircraft "in a class of its own". Air historian Bill Gunston notes that low-level Mirage IV missions had been planned since 1963 and Mirage IVs operated regularly at low level since 1965, and argues that the ability of a strategic bomber to operate from unprepared airstrips is historically unimportant.

Ultimately, as much for strategic political reasons as for technical ones, the F-111K was preferred (only to be cancelled later in its turn) and the Spey-engined Mirage abandoned.

BAC and Dassault had also hoped to sell the Mirage IV* to France and to export the Mirage IV* to various nations, such as India, possibly Israel, and others; the lack of a British sale put an end to such possibilities. Some aviation journalists claim that the rejection of the Mirage IV* may have dampened French interest in joint Anglo-French cooperation.

Design

The Mirage IV shares design features and a visual resemblance to the Mirage III fighter, featuring a tailless delta wing and a single square-topped vertical fin. However, the wing is significantly thinner to allow better high-speed performance and has a thickness/chord ratio of only 3.8% at the root and 3.2% at the tip; this wing was the thinnest built in Europe at that time and one of the thinnest in the world. While being significantly smaller than an expensive medium bomber proposal for the role, the Mirage IV was roughly three times the weight of the preceding Mirage III.

The Mirage IV is powered by two Snecma Atar turbojets, fed by two air intakes on either side of the fuselage that had intake half-cone shock diffusers, known as souris ("mice"), which were moved forward as speed increased to trim the inlet for the shock wave angle. It can reach high supersonic speeds: the aircraft is redlined at Mach 2.2 at altitude because of airframe temperature restrictions, although it is capable of higher speeds. While broadly similar to the model used on the Mirage III, the Atar engine had a greater airflow and an elevated overspeed limit from 8,400 rpm to 8,700 rpm for greater thrust during high altitude supersonic flight. While the first Mirage IV prototype was fitted with double-eyelid engine nozzles, production aircraft featured a complicated variable geometry nozzle that automatically varied in response to the descent rate and airspeed.

The aircraft has 14,000 litres (3,700 gal (US)) of internal fuel, and its engines are quite thirsty, especially when the afterburner is active. Fuel was contained within integral tanks within the wings, as well as a double-skinned section of the fuselage between and outboard of the inlet ducts, underneath the ducts and engines, and forward of the main spar of the tail fin; this provided a total internal capacity of 14000 lbs. A refueling probe is built into the nose; aerial refuelling was often necessary in operations as the Mirage IV only had the fuel capacity, even with external drop tanks, to reach the Soviet Union's borders, thus refuelling was required to allow for a 'round trip'. In the event of nuclear war between the major powers, it was thought that there would be little point in having the fuel to return as the host air bases would have been destroyed; instead, surviving Mirage IVs would have diverted to land at bases in nearby neutral countries following the delivery of their ordnance.

The two-man crew, pilot and navigator, were seated in tandem cockpits, each housed under separate clamshell canopies. A bombing/navigation radar is housed within an oblique-facing radome underneath the fuselage between the intakes and aft of the cockpit; much of the Mirage IV's onboard avionics systems, such as the radar communications, navigational instrumentation, and bombing equipment, were produced by Thomson-CSF. Other avionics elements were provided by Dassault itself and SFENA; one of the only major subsystems not of French origin onboard was the Marconi-built AD.2300 doppler radar. Free-falling munitions could also be aimed using a ventral blister-mounted periscope from the navigator's position.

The Mirage IV has two pylons under each wing, with the inboard pylons being normally used for large drop tanks of 2,500-litre (660 gal (US)) capacity. The outer pylons typically carried ECM and chaff/flare dispenser pods to supplement the internal jamming and countermeasures systems. On later aircraft, this equipment typically included a Barax NG jammer pod under the port wing and a BOZ expendables dispenser under the starboard wing. No cannon armament was ever fitted aboard the type. The early Mirage IVA had a fuselage recess under the engines which could hold a single AN-11 or AN-22 nuclear weapon of 60 kt yield. The Mirage IV can carry 12 solid-fuel rockets diagonally down below the wing flaps, for rocket-assisted take off (RATO).

From 1972 onward, 12 aircraft were also equipped to carry the CT52 reconnaissance pod in the bomb recess. These aircraft were designated Mirage IVR for reconnaissance. The CT52 was available in either BA (Basse Altitude, low-level) or HA (Haute Altitude, high-altitude) versions with three or four long-range cameras; a third configuration used an infrared line scanner. The CT52 had no digital systems, relying on older wet-film cameras. The first operational use of the system took place during missions in Chad in September 1974.

During the 1980s, a total of 18 Mirage IVs were retrofitted with a centreline pylon and associated equipment to carry and launch the nuclear ASMP stand-off missile. The Mirage IVA could theoretically carry up to six large conventional bombs at the cost of drop tanks and ECM pods; such armament was rarely fitted in practice.

Introduction and early operations
In February 1964 deliveries of the Mirage IV to the French Air Force started, with the first French Mirage IV squadron being declared operational on 1 October that year. The Mirage IV bomber force soon consisted of nine squadrons of four aircraft (2 pairs – one aircraft carrying the nuclear bomb, one a buddy-refuelling tanker) each. When fully built up, the force consisted of three wings. These wings were each divided into three bomber squadrons, each equipped with a total of four Mirage IVs, with each deployed at a different base to minimise the potential for an enemy strike to knock out the entire bomber force. These squadrons were:
 * 1/91 'Gascogne' based at Mont de Marsan
 * 2/91 'Bretagne' based at Cazaux
 * 3/91 'Beauvaisis' based at Creil
 * 1/93 'Guyenne' based at Istres
 * 2/93 'Cevennes' based at Orange
 * 3/93 'Sambre' based at Cambrai
 * 1/94 'Bourbonnais' based at Avord
 * 2/94 'Marne' based at St-Dizier
 * 3/94 'Arbois' based at Luxeuil

After establishment of its own deterrent force, the Force de Dissuassion, more commonly known as the Force de frappe, France withdrew from the military command structure of NATO in 1966. De Gaulle viewed the operational establishment of the Mirage IV fleet, a critical component of the independent Force de frappe, as highly influential to his decision to withdraw France from NATO, and that an independent French nuclear deterrent was necessary to ensure independence as a nation. From 1964 to 1971, the Mirage IV was France's sole means of delivering nuclear ordnance. At this point they were each armed with a single 60 kiloton nuclear bomb.

Alert status consisted of an active inventory of 36 Mirage IVs. At any one time 12 aircraft would be in the air, with a further 12 on the ground kept at four minutes' readiness and the final 12 at 45 minutes' readiness, each equipped with an onboard functional nuclear weapon. These 36 active aircraft would be rotated with 26 reserve aircraft; the latter were kept in an airworthy condition or were otherwise subject to maintenance activities. Within the first decade of the type entering service, in excess of 200,000 hours were flown and 40,000 aerial refuelling operations were performed by the Mirage IV fleet alone; at one point, Mirage IV operations were consuming up to 44 per cent of the French Air Force's total spare parts budget.

The primary objectives of the Mirage IVA force were major Soviet cities and bases. With aerial refueling, the plane was able to attack Moscow, Murmansk or various Ukrainian cities when sortieing from French bases. A justification of the Mirage IV given by Armée de l'air Brigadier General Pierre Marie Gallois, an architect of the French nuclear deterrent, was that: "France is not a prize worthy of ten Russian cities".

In order to refuel the Mirage IVA fleet, France purchased 14 (12 plus 2 spares) U.S. Boeing C-135F tankers. Mirage IVAs also often operated in pairs, with one aircraft carrying a weapon and the other carrying fuel tanks and a buddy refueling pack, allowing it to refuel its partner en route to the target. Even so, some sources state that some of the mission profiles envisioned were actually one-way, with the crew having no chance of returning after bombing a Soviet city. The inability for the Mirage IV to return after missions had been a point of controversy during the aircraft's early development.

Both flight and ground crews received training principally by Strategic Air Forces Command 328, stationed at Bordeaux. Several Nord Noratlas were specially modified, having received the Mirage IV's radar, control consoles, and additional electrical generators, for the purpose of training navigators; these were later replaced by a pair of customised Dassault Falcon 20 outfitted with much of the Mirage IVP's avionics.

Transition and upgrades
Initially, the basic attack flight profile was "high-high-high" at a speed of Mach 1.85, engaging targets up to a maximum radius of 3,500 km (2,175 mi). In the late 1960s, when the threat of surface-to-air missile defences made high-altitude flight too hazardous, the Mirage IVA was modified for low-altitude penetration. Flying low, the maximum attack speed was reduced to 1,100 km/h (680 mph) and the combat radius was also decreased. By 1963, the majority of missions involving the Mirage IV were being planned as low-level flights. By 1964, Mirage IVAs were conducting training penetration runs at an altitude of 200 ft, without the assistance of terrain-following radar, which subjected pilots to considerable workload and those on board to high levels of turbulence.

To improve survivability, the French Air Force began dispersing Mirage IVs to pre-prepared rough strips during the 1960s; while the use of hardened bunkers had been assessed, it was found to be financially impractical. By the 1970s, it had become clear that vulnerability of the Mirage IV to air defences, even while flying at low altitudes, had made the delivery of gravity bombs such as the AN-11 or AN-22 impractical. Thus, it was decided to pass a greater share of the deterrent role onto land-based missiles and submarine-launched ballistic missile alternatives; as a result, a single wing of Mirage IVs was stood down in 1976, partially due to fleet-wide attrition losses.

In 1973, it was reported that a force of 40 Mirage IVs would continue to perform as a part of France's nuclear deterrent until the 1980s, and that steady improvements were to be undertaken. In 1975, all Mirage IVs were progressively painted in a new green/grey camouflage scheme. In 1979, in response to the decreasing effectiveness of free-fall bombs used by both its strategic and tactical nuclear forces, development of the ASMP stand-off missile was initiated; the ASMP would possess a range of up to 400 km (250 mi) and was alternative armed with either a single 150 or 300 kiloton nuclear warhead. Various test launches of dummy and later live ASMPs were performed using the Mirage IV as the launch platform between 1981 and 1983.

In July 1984, a contract was formally issued for the upgrade of a total of 18 Mirage IVAs to carry the ASMP missile in the place of traditional bombs; these aircraft were redesignated Mirage IVP (Penetration). The conversion of Mirage IVAs to IVPs involved a large number of modifications and re-workings of the aircraft. A deep centerline pylon was added, which could accommodate either a single ASMP missile or a CT52 reconnaissance pod. The main radar and electronics suite were removed and replaced by newer counterparts; other modified systems included the navigation system, flight control system, and various elements of the cockpit. On 12 October 1982, the first modernised Mirage IVP performed its first flight; it re-entered active service on 1 May 1986.

In August 1985, a French proposal that would have seen Mirage IVPs stationed at air bases inside neighbouring West Germany was made public; this deployment would have marked a significant philosophical departure from traditional French nuclear defence policy. Aviation authors Bill Gunston and Peter Gilchrist allege that French officials had historically discounted the option of recovering Mirage IVs in friendly territory as unduly optimistic, as those nations might become unfriendly or hostile in the aftermath of a French nuclear attack.

Phase-Out
On 31 July 1996, the Mirage IVP was formally retired in its bomber capacity, the nuclear mission having been transferred from the Mirage IV to the newer Dassault Mirage 2000N. EB 2/91 was disbanded and EB 1/91 was redesignated ERS 1/91 (Escadron de Reconnaissance Stratégique, Strategic Reconnaissance Squadron), using five remaining Mirage IVPs based at Mont-de-Marsan; the remaining aircraft were stored at Chateaudun. In the reconnaissance role, the Mirage IVP has seen service over Bosnia, Iraq, Kosovo and Afghanistan.

ES 1/91 Gascogne's surviving Mirage IVPs were retired in 2005 and are conserved and stored at the Centre d'Instruction Forces Aériennes Stratégiques (CIFAS) at Bordeaux Mérignac. The retirement of all reconnaissance-configured Mirage IVPs in 2005 meant that the French Air Force's Mirage F1CRs were for some time the only aircraft capable of carrying out aerial reconnaissance missions. The long term replacement for the Mirage IVP was Mirage 2000N aircraft outfitted with a modern PRNG Pod de Reconnaissance Nouvelle Génération (New Generation Reconnaissance Pod), equipped with digital camera equipment.

The Mirage IV had been popular with its crews, who found it enjoyable to fly. In addition, it required surprisingly little maintenance considering its age and complexity.

Operators

 * French Air Force
 * French Air Force

Aircraft on display

 * 02 is on display at the Musée de l'Air et de l'Espace at Paris-Le Bourget
 * 1 "AP" is on display at Châteaudun Air Base (CANOPEE Museum).
 * 4 "AC" is on display at Rochefort airbase.
 * 6 is on display at Savigny-les-Beaune.
 * 9 "AH" is on display at the Musée de l'Air et de l'Espace at Paris-Le Bourget. This actual aircraft used to drop live nuclear bombs during Tamouré test.
 * 11 "AJ" is on display at Bordeaux airbase.
 * 16 "AO" is on display at St Dizier airbase.
 * 18 "AQ" is on display at Savigny-les-Beaune Museum.
 * 23 "AV" is on display at Cazaux airbase.
 * 29 "BB" is on display at Avord airbase.
 * 32 "BE" is on display at Orange airbase.
 * 36 "BI" is on display at Istres airbase.
 * 43 "BP" is on display at Mont-de-Marsan Air Base.
 * 45 "BR" was formerly displayed in the Paris Science Museum, but was donated to the Yorkshire Air Museum in 2016; the aircraft arrived in March 2017.
 * 59 "CF" is on display at Creil airbase.
 * 61 "CH" is on display at St Dizier Aero retro Museum.
 * 62 "CI" is on display at the Musée de l'Air et de l'Espace at Paris-Le Bourget.

title: Dassault Mirage IV


text:
Margaret of Burgundy, Queen of France

Margaret of Burgundy (Marguerite; 1290 – 30 April 1315) was Queen of France and Navarre as the first wife of King Louis X; however, she was locked in prison during her whole French queenship.

Life
Margaret was born in 1290. She was the second daughter of Robert II, Duke of Burgundy (1248–1306) and Agnes of France (1260–1327), the youngest daughter of Louis IX of France and Margaret of Provence. As such, she was a member of House of Burgundy, a branch of the Capetian dynasty.

In 1305, Margaret married her first cousin once removed, Louis, who had inherited the crown of Navarre from his deceased mother, Queen Joan I. They had one daughter, Joan (born 1312, died 1349).

Early in 1314, Margaret was caught in an alleged act of adultery in the Tour de Nesle affair. Her sister-in-law Isabella of France was a witness against her, and Margaret was imprisoned at Château Gaillard along with her sister-in-law Blanche of Burgundy.

In November of the same year, Louis I of Navarre ascended the French throne as Louis X of France, thus Margaret became Queen of France. However, she remained confined, as Louis would not revoke her punishment for adultery, nor have her crowned as a queen consort. Without an incumbent pope, Louis had no means of annulling his marriage. After poor treatment in prison, Queen Margaret caught a cold and died in 1315, although another source states that she was strangled to death.

Legacy
Margaret's daughter, Joan, later became queen regnant of Navarre as Joan II (1311–1349). Her paternity was under doubt because of her mother's alleged adultery. On his deathbed, Louis formally recognized Joan as his daughter.

In 1361, Margaret's succession rights became important in the premature death of Philip I, Duke of Burgundy (her grandnephew), since the closest Burgundian heirs were descendants of Margaret and of her sister, Joan the Lame. Margaret's grandson and heir Charles II of Navarre claimed the duchy on the basis of primogeniture, but Joan the Lame's son John II of France on the basis of proximity, being one generation closer to the Burgundian dukes. As king, John ruled in his own favor and became Duke of Burgundy, later bestowing the Duchy upon his son, Philip the Bold.

In fiction
Margaret is portrayed in Le Roi de Fer and La Reine Étranglée, two 1955 novels in Maurice Druon's Les Rois Maudits (The Accursed Kings) series of historical novels. She was played by in the 1972 French miniseries adaptation of the series, and by Hélène Fillières in the 2005 adaptation.

Margaret appears as a pivotal character in the second season of the historical drama series Knightfall where she is portrayed by Clementine Nicholson.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Margaret of Burgundy, Queen of France


text:
Dust (His Dark Materials)

In Philip Pullman's His Dark Materials and The Book of Dust trilogies, Dust or Rusakov particles are  particles associated with consciousness that are integral to the plot. In the multiverse in which these trilogies are set, Dust is attracted to consciousness, especially after puberty; the Church within the series associates Dust with original sin and seeks its end. Pullman described Dust in an interview as "an analogy of consciousness, and consciousness is this extraordinary property we have as human beings".

Paradise Lost
Anne-Marie Bird links Pullman's concept of "Dust" to "a conventional metaphor for human physicality inspired by God's judgment on humanity." Writing in Children's Literature in Education, she suggests that the first trilogy develops John Milton's metaphor of "dark materials" from Paradise Lost "into a ‘substance’ in which good and evil, and spirit and matter – conceptual opposites that form the basis of religious dualism – coexist."

Meanwhile, William A. Oram argues that Pullman follows Milton in presenting "matter" as inherently good. For Pullman, he says, the ethical opposite is the "void", which is "evil". According to Oram, the Dust is the full embodiment of matter, "because in matter Dust becomes conscious." Oram compares the following passage from The Amber Spyglass, in which the angel Balthamos explains the origin of Dust, to Satan's account of his coming to consciousness in Book V of Paradise Lost: "''Dust is only a name for what happens when matter begins to understand itself. Matter loves matter. It seeks to know more about itself, and Dust is formed. The first angels condensed out of Dust and the Authority was the first of all.'"

Other analogs
In Fantasy, Myth and the Measure of Truth, folklore and fantasy scholar William Gray has noted similarities between Pullman's descriptions of Dust to Perelandra by C. S. Lewis, particularly the "Great Dance" passages where "Dust" is described as "at the centre" and "whereof allworlds, and the bodies that are not worlds, are made". However, in their Mythlore article exploring Pullman's self-positioning versus C. S. Lewis, Marek Oziewicz and Daniel Hade point out that Pullman subverts Lewis's redemption story in which death is overcome. Whereas Lewis's characters will supposedly live forever in their physical bodies when they enter "the real Narnia", in The Amber Spyglass, "Pullman's ghosts laugh in surprise as they find themselves 'turning into the night, the starlight, the air' in a materialist subversion of 'dust thou art, and unto dust shall thou return'."

Naming
In Northern Lights, Lord Asriel reveals the origins of the term "Dust" to be from a passage from the slightly alternative version of the Bible in Lyra's world:
 * "In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return." —

Dust was previously known (in Lyra Belacqua's universe) as "Rusakov particles" named after their discoverer, Boris Mikhailovitch Rusakov. Rusakov discovered a field permeating the universe that enabled consciousness, before the discovery of Dust; its existence was predicted, as:
 * "the existence of a Rusakov field implies the existence of a related particle".

In our universe, Mary Malone researches dark matter, referring to it as "Shadows" or "Shadow particles". The name "Shadows" was given to the particle by her colleague, Oliver Payne, in references to Plato's Allegory of the Cave, involving "shadows on the wall". When she communicates with Shadows by interfacing with her detector, it confirms that they are the same as Dust and dark matter. The Mulefa, who are able to see Dust directly, use the word "sraf" accompanied by a leftward flick of the trunk (or arm for humans) to describe it.

Nature and characteristics

In the multiverse of His Dark Materials, the characters perceive Dust visually; scholar Amanda M. Greenwell observes that "at no point does any character touch, taste, hear, or smell Dust." While the human eye is unable to see Dust unaided, multiple characters still manage to "see" it. "Attempts to see and interpret Dust, or see and appreciate evidence of it in other visual manifestations, drive the action of the entire trilogy—which suggests that Pullman's work, insofar as it employs this investigation into visual literacy, is largely about the way the human subject chooses to perceive the world around him."At the start of Northern Lights Lord Asriel is one of the few to have seen Dust, but only with the aid of "photograms" taken with "a new specially prepared emulsion". He shows the scholars at Jordan College a slide show, revealing Dust as "a fountain of glowing particles". Pullman himself has stated that the "projecting lantern" that Asriel uses was based on childhood memories of his own grandfather's magic lantern.

When Dust is first mentioned in Northern Lights, it seems to be something negative; only later do Lyra and her daemon, Pantalaimon, discover that it is good and necessary for survival. Lord Asriel observes that Dust only gathers on adults and not children, leading Lyra to uncover the true meaning of Dust. In her world, the Church has identified Dust as what it calls "original sin"; Dust originated when Adam and Eve ate the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. In Pullman's universe, Dust is "consciousness and knowledge and wisdom" – something children do not yet possess, and a positive force for everyone except those in the Magisterium.

Functions
Dust is attracted to objects that have been formed by consciousness, and can be viewed by special photographic emulsions. It is particularly attracted to consciousnesses that have matured; in the case of humans in Lyra's world, this happens when their Dæmon is fixed in shape. For the mulefa, this happens when adolescents start using wheels. Dust is also what connects humans to their dæmons. If the bond between a child and their dæmon is severed (as through Intercision), both the child and the dæmon will eventually die. If the separation occurs after Dust has settled on the person (that is, after adolescence), the person becomes a lifeless shell.

In The Amber Spyglass, Will and Lyra learn that, "Without Dust, people will not be able to survive."

Communication
Dust is able to communicate with humans via several methods shown throughout His Dark Materials and The Book of Dust, including by use of alethiometers. Mary Malone is able to construct a computer program that, when paired with a detector, can communicate with Dust by typed questions. Later, Mary uses I Ching divination, which Lyra confirms to be a method of communicating with Dust.

Alethiometers
An alethiometer is a truth telling device which can answer any question. The word is derived from the Greek words aletheia (truth) and metron (measure). In Lyra's world, six alethiometers were constructed. Also known as symbol readers, alethiometers have a ring of 36 standard symbols, but are all different; some, for example have more elaborate decoration. Over the course of the books, several alethiometers are shown being read, including by Lyra Belacqua, Hannah Relf, and Fra Pavel.

Each symbol on the rim of an alethiometer has several levels of meaning; for example, the anchor can mean steadfastness, hope, the sea, or other interpretations. To phrase a question, three adjustable levers are pointed at symbols, and the reader has to hold the level of meaning for each symbol in their head. A fourth lever, made of an alloy sensitive to Dust, swings around, stopping on different symbols to give an answer, with the number of times it stops at a given symbol indicating the level of meaning intended.

In La Belle Sauvage, it is said that no more alethiometers can be built, as their construction depends on a rare metal being subjected to special treatment, knowledge of which has been lost. Oxford has an alethiometer in its library, which is read by Hannah Relf, various other universities have one, and one is missing. After the Magisterium attempts to steal one, a secret society opposed to their actions is able to obtain it, and give it to Relf to use on their behalf. The missing alethiometer is found by Malcolm Polstead in the pack of Gerard Bonneville, and given to the Master of Jordan College, for safekeeping. In Northern Lights, it is this alethiometer which is given by the Master to Lyra, who is able to read it intuitively. At that point in the story, only two other alethiometers are known to survive.

History within the books
Within the books, Dust came into existence when consciousness did; it was created by consciousness, as well as being conscious. Occasionally, Dust condensed into Angels; the first of these was called The Authority, who told all the angels that subsequently condensed that he was the creator of the multiverse. In the trilogy, Angels are formed from condensing Dust. These angels only appear as winged humans because that is what is expected of them; in reality, they have more complex shapes, similar to "architecture".

About 33,000 years prior to the time of the books, Dust had induced changes in sapient species, including humans and mulefa, to allow them to interact better, conferring more consciousness. For the mulefa, this was the start of their oral history and memory as a species. When asked directly, Dust states that this was done by rebel angels for vengeance over the war in heaven.

300 years before the start of His Dark Materials, scientists in Cittagazze had created the Subtle Knife, which allowed them to travel between worlds. However, explorers were not meticulous about closing the cuts in the fabric between worlds, and Dust was lost into the void between universes through the cracks of these windows. At that time, the mulefa noticed that their trees – which depend on Dust for fertilisation – had started producing fewer seeds.

title: Dust (His Dark Materials)


text:
Zatarain's

Zatarain's is an American food and spice company based in New Orleans, Louisiana, in the United States that makes a large family of products with seasonings and spices that are part of the cultural cuisine and heritage of Louisiana and New Orleans' Cajun and Creole traditions that includes root beer extract, seasonings, boxed and frozen foods.

The company was started in New Orleans in 1886 and moved to the suburb of Gretna when the family sold the company, in 1963.

It was founded as a grocery by Emile A. Zatarain Sr., in 1886. He created a formulation for root beer that became popular regionally after its introduction at 2:30 p.m. on May 7, 1889, at the Louisiana (Purchase) Exposition under the brand Papoose Root Beer, for which he took out a trademark. He started a new business, Papoose Pure Food Products, built a factory, and began to market it in 1889.

He expanded his product range to include mustard, pickled vegetables, and extracts. Then he moved into the spice business and became known for New Orleans and Cajun-style products.

In 1963 the family sold the business, which has been owned in several different forms in its more than 130-year history. The brand is currently owned by McCormick, the world's largest spice company.

Products

The company produces Cajun and Creole cuisine related food items, in five categories: The company still manufactures root beer extract for home preparation and brewing.
 * Crab and shrimp boils: these are used to prepare boiled seafood and in hosting the social event known as a seafood boil. The boil is a mesh bag (formerly cheesecloth) containing spices, including mustard seed, coriander seeds, allspice, bay leaf, and black pepper. The company also offers a liquid concentrate crab boil that can be used in lieu of the mesh packets to enhance soups.
 * Creole mustard, a common item in New Orleans food, is a stone-ground brown mustard, often referred to as "hot mustard" to differentiate it from standard American yellow mustard.
 * Fish-Fri, seasoned cornmeal.
 * Ready-to-serve dinners, including gumbo, jambalaya, red beans and rice, and black beans and rice contain precooked beans, rice, and seasonings, to which consumers may optionally add meat. The dinners are available in two forms: frozen, for heating in a microwave oven, or in a package to which water is added before cooking on a stovetop or in a microwave oven.
 * Seasonings include cayenne pepper, root-beer extract and mixes and blends similar to the kinds of pre-blended seasonings made popular by Paul Prudhomme and Emeril Lagasse.

History
Zatarain's was founded by Emile A. Zatarain, Sr. a merchant and entrepreneur of Basque descent. He had 5 sons, all of whom followed him into his business when they finished school.

In 1886, Zatarain opened a grocery store with the first National Cash Register in Louisiana. A few months later, he bought a horse and buggy to do deliveries. The company's big success, at first, was root beer. According to great-great granddaughter Allison Zatarain, "Emile introduced Papoose Root Beer at 2:30 p.m. on May 7, 1889, at the Louisiana (Purchase) Exposition. The root beer was so successful, that his business grew, and grew, and grew!"

Several years later, Zatarain found that it was more cost effective to sell the root beer blend as an extract. Zatarain formed a company called Papoose Pure Food Products to manufacture the root beer and diversify into other foods and he built a factory at 925 Valmont Street, New Orleans. He began to import and pack olives, pickles and spices.

When the root beer and spice business became more profitable than the grocery store, Zatarain focused on the manufacturing business at Papoose Pure Food Products. His root beer extract sold in barrels to restaurants and markets where it was added to carbonated water.

Seasonings with a Creole or Cajun flair were among the first of Papoose Pure's products expansions. Next they moved into Creole Mustard and pickled products.

On May 29, 1922, as his sons assumed more of the day-to-day operation, Zatarain reincorporated the business as E.A. Zatarain & Sons, Inc. and also did business as Zatarain's Pure Food Products. Emile A. Zatarain, Jr. and his wife Ida May Bennett Zatarain eventually took over the business. Ida May created recipes for their products, like Remoulade Sauce and Olive Salad.

In 1963 the family sold the business to James Grinstead Viavant, founder of the Avondale Shipyards in New Orleans, who had sold his ship building business in 1959. Viavant took over the company, which was using outdated packaging technology, and modernized it.

In 1963, Viavant merged Zatarain's Papoose Products Co., Inc. and another recently-acquired business, Pelican State Lab, owner of a brand of coated fish frying seasoning mix called Fish-Fri, which was brought under the Zatarain's label, and became a best-seller. He dropped bleach, dyes, and pickles and focused on the profit centers at a new plant with modern equipment on a five-acre campus in Gretna, Louisiana, where he turned Zatarain's into a regionally well-known brand by the early 1970s. Fish-Fri became "the entreè" of litigation in 1983. Zatarain's sued Oak Grove Smokehouse for trademark infringement; Oak Grove sold a competitor "Fish Fry." Although the court determined Fish-Fri qualified for protection, Oak Grove's Fish Fry qualified as a fair use. The case opinion is also notable for its use of puns.

With sales now at $10M a year, as Viavant neared retirement, he sold the business to Centra Soya Co. for $24 million in May 1984. Centra increased sales revenues to $14M when it sold Zatarain's to a San Francisco holding company, Wyndham Foods, Inc., 18 months later. Wyndham kept the retail business and expanded the brand into the institutional food business. They rolled out the boxed food products that Zatarains still manufactures, using the term "Cajun" on the boxes to capitalize on the trend in cooking popularized by New Orleans chef Paul Prudhomme in the 1980s. When the fad faded, the company shifted to branding Zatarain's products as "Louisiana-style" or "New Orleans-style".

The company was acquired again in 1987 by a Brentwood, Tennessee company, Martha White Foods, itself a subsidiary of E-II Food Specialties Co., for $35 million. Zatarain's had several more owners over a period of months in the late 1980s, including American Brands of Old Greenwich, Connecticut.

By the 1990s, Zatarain's marketed more than 200 products locally and regionally. It pushed for a national footing with the first national television advertising in 1999.

The company was taken private in a leveraged buyout by Citigroup Venture Capital in 1993 as Zatarain's Partnership LP, a partner group of Citigroup Venture Capital and several Zatarain's employees. The product line was expanded to include frozen foods. It was sold to McCormick on May 9, 1993 for $180M after the company's sales rose 15% annually for the prior five years.

In 2017, the New Orleans Pelicans announced Zatarain's as their jersey patch sponsor.

title: Zatarain's


text:
Vinay Katiyar

Vinay Katiyar (born 11 November 1954) is a politician and the founder-president of Bajrang Dal, the youth wing of the Hindu nationalist organisation Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) in India. He has served as an All India General Secretary of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), and as a Member of Parliament in both the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha.

Life and career
Katiyar was born in a Kurmi family to Devi Charan Katiyar and Shyam Kali in Kanpur. He holds a bachelor's degree in Commerce from Kanpur University.

Katiyar started his political journey with Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP), the student wing of the Sangh Parivar. He was the organizing secretary of ABVP's Uttar Pradesh state unit from 1970 to 1974, and the convener of the Jayaprakash Narayan's Bihar Movement in 1974. He became a pracharak (full-time worker) of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) in 1980. He founded the Hindu Jagran Manch in 1982. In 1984, he was chosen to start the new youth organisation Bajrang Dal to support the Ram Janmabhoomi movement.

Later, Katiyar served as the President of Uttar Pradesh State Unit of the Bharatiya Janata Party from 2002 to 18 July 2004 and the national General Secretary of the BJP from 2006.

Katiyar was elected to the Lok Sabha from the Ayodhya (Lok Sabha constituency) to the 10th, 11th and 13th Lok Sabha in 1991, 1996 and 1999, and to the Rajya Sabha as a representative of Uttar Pradesh in 2012.

Controversies
In a 2018 interview with ANI, Katiyar said that there was no need for Muslims to remain in India in the wake of its Partition, and that Muslims in India should, instead, move to Pakistan or Bangladesh. These views were shared after his comments about the Taj Mahal, claiming that the monument was a Hindu temple in the period of Aurangzeb's rule and implied that it would soon be returned to its 'original state' through its destruction.

title: Vinay Katiyar


text:
Harry Dent

Harry Shuler Dent Jr. (born May 12, 1953) is an American financial newsletter writer.

Biography
Dent, born in Columbia, South Carolina, is the son of Republican political strategist Harry S. Dent Sr.

Dent is the founder of HS Dent Investment Management, an investment firm based in Tampa, Florida that advises, and markets, the Dent Strategic Portfolio Fund mutual fund. Dent is also the president and founder of the Dent Research and director of H.S. Dent Publishing.

Dent writes and markets an economic newsletter that reviews the economy in the US and around the world by focusing on generational consumer spending patterns, as well as financial markets. He has written eleven books, two recent ones being bestsellers. His most recent book, The Sale of a Lifetime, was released in September 2016.

The basis of Dent's investment thesis, spending wave theory, is that consumer spending related to the generational formation of families has a profound effect on the market value of investments such as financial securities, real estate, and gold. Dent's spending wave theory posits that young adults spend little within the greater economy, and spending increases while they rear children. It peaks as children leave home and then slows during the last 15 years of working life (48–63). According to Dent, the decreased spending patterns of the current generation of US baby boomers entering retirement will cause a pronounced downturn in the greater macroeconomy and an associated decline in the value of financial markets.

Dent resides in San Juan, Puerto Rico.When asked why Puerto Rico, Dent replies that there are more women willing to “work for cheap”.

title: Harry Dent


text: Talk:Properties of the Holy See

title: Talk:Properties of the Holy See


text:
Galbi

Galbi, kalbi, galbi-gui , or grilled ribs is a type of gui (grilled dish) in Korean cuisine. "Galbi" is the Korean word for "rib", and the dish is usually made with beef short ribs. When pork spare ribs or another meat is used instead, the dish is named accordingly. Galbi is served raw, then cooked on tabletop grills usually by the diners themselves. The dish may be marinated in a sweet and savory sauce usually containing soy sauce, garlic, and sugar. Both non-marinated and marinated galbi are often featured in Korean barbecue. In Japan, this and many other dishes in Korean barbecue influenced yakiniku, a fusion cuisine that often makes use of galbi (glossed as karubi).

Cuts and marination

Traditionally, galbi is cut to expose one smooth bone along the short edge with the meat uniformly filleted in flat layers.

An alternative cut, "LA galbi", also known as a flanken cut, features cut bones peeking out along the long edge. The method was developed by Korean immigrants in Los Angeles to accommodate the thinner rib-eye cut preferred by American butchers. The variation, which enables the marinade to penetrate the meat faster, has since made its way back to South Korea. Non-marinated galbi is called saeng-galbi ("fresh ribs"); marinated galbi is referred to as yangnyeom-galbi ("seasoned ribs"). Pork galbi is usually served marinated, but non-marinated dwaeji-saeng-galbi ("fresh pork ribs"), made of Jeju Black pig, is popular in Jeju Island. As pork ribs are smaller, marinated dwaeji-galbi often consists of pork ribs mixed with shoulder meats.

Beef
Softer cuts of beef, such as from a cow or heifer, are preferred when grilling galbi. Properly grilled, the dish is a glossy, dark-reddish brown with a smoky, sweet taste. The meat should easily fall from the bones.

The marinade for so-galbi-gui (소갈비구이; "grilled beef ribs") typically includes soy sauce, sugar, minced garlic and scallions, ginger juice, ground black pepper, toasted and ground sesame, and sesame oil. The beef is usually scored on the surface prior to marinating, and the juice from Korean pears is brushed on before grilling.

Pork
For dwaeji-galbi-gui (돼지갈비구이; "grilled pork ribs"), the marinade can be either ganjang (soy sauce)-based or gochujang (chili paste)-based: the former being similar to beef galbi marinade and the latter being spicy. Cheongju (rice wine) is usually used in both types of marinade to remove any undesired porky smell.

If used, pork shoulder meat is carved into thicker slices of around 2.5 cm in width. Deeper cuts are made when scoring the surface to allow the marinade to penetrate the meat.

Grilling and serving
Galbi is grilled, typically by the diners themselves, on grills set in the tables. The meat cooks for a short time on medium high heat on a lightly greased gridiron over glowing charcoal. The remaining marinade is brushed on during grilling to produce a glazed finish.

Once cooked, the meat is typically cut into pieces over the grill with kitchen scissors, then wrapped inside lettuce leaves, kkaennip (perilla leaves), or other leafy vegetables. These made-on-the-spot leaf wraps, called ssam, usually include a piece of grilled meat, ssamjang, raw or grilled garlic, and a sauce made of soybean paste and chili paste. Like other Korean main dishes, galbi is often accompanied by bap (cooked rice) and side dishes known as banchan.

title: Galbi


text:
Natural Bridge

Natural bridge or Natural Bridge may refer to:

 * Natural arch, a land formation sometimes referred to as a natural bridge

Australia

 * Natural Bridge, Queensland, in the Gold Coast hinterland

United States

 * Natural Bridge, Alabama
 * Natural Bridge, New York
 * Natural Bridge, Virginia
 * Natural Bridge (Virginia), a National Historic Landmark
 * Natural Bridge Caverns, in Texas
 * Natural Bridge State Park (Massachusetts)
 * Natural Bridge State Park (Virginia)
 * Natural Bridge State Park (Wisconsin)
 * Natural Bridge State Resort Park, in Kentucky
 * Natural Bridges National Monument, in Utah
 * Natural Bridges State Beach, in Santa Cruz, California
 * Ayres Natural Bridge State Park, in Wyoming
 * Battle of Natural Bridge, an American Civil War battle in Florida
 * Natural Bridge Battlefield State Historic Site at the site of the battle
 * Tonto Natural Bridge, in Arizona
 * Tonto Natural Bridge State Park
 * Natural Bridge Avenue, a major thoroughfare that borders Fairground Park in St. Louis, Missouri
 * Natural Stone Bridge and Caves, in Pottersville, New York

Other uses

 * Natural Bridge (album), by Béla Fleck, 1982
 * The Natural Bridge, an album by Silver Jews, 1996
 * Natural Bridge (magazine), a literary magazine based at the University of Missouri-St. Louis

title: Natural Bridge


text:
Talk:Jews/Archive 5

Israeli definition
I want to question the claim (not only in this article) that Israeli law uses a different definition for "Jew" than Halakha does. In practice that may appear to be the case, but on looking closely at the immigration laws and regulations (I'm not so sure about other instances) we find they say that certain people will be treated as Jews, or given the same privileges as Jews, and so on, not that they are Jews. That is because Israeli law usually tries to avoid direct confrontation with Halakha. I don't have the time to research this properly but if someone has access to the actual texts that would be nice. --Zero 17:38, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)

 * The issue here is the confusion between the Law of Return, which facilitates immigration to Israel, and the definition of a Jew for the purposes of marriage etc., which is that of halakha. Those eligible under the Law of Return include the grandchildren of Jews (male or female), non-Jewish spouses of Jews, and people converted by an accepted list of Rabbis (Orthodox, Conservative, and Reform).  The Law of Return excludes Jews who have converted to another faith.  This is radically different from the halakhic definition of a Jew, which includes those people whose mother is a Jew, and those people who have converted according to halakha.  Halakha considers a person who converts to another faith to still be a Jew. Jayjg 17:49, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)

 * Everything you write is correct (but I'm not sure if you think you are agreeing with me or not). My point is that the Law of Return does not say that someone converting to another religion is not a Jew, it only says that they are not going to be treated as Jews for immigration purposes.  So we can't say that the Law of Return uses a different definition of "Jew". It's a pedantic point. --Zero 19:20, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)

 * I've significantly revised the section in question, let me know what you think. Here is a link to the actual Law of Return and its amendments: http://www.mfa.gov.il/mfa/mfaarchive/1950_1959/Law%20of%20Return%205710-1950 Jayjg 20:35, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)

non-national?
I realize there are many conflicting definitions, My guess is that non-national is somehow related to Jewish diaspora. However, Jewish nation existed well before the Babylonian captivity. Doesn't this non-national negate Jewish nation, Jewish people, etc? I suggest we remove non-national from the very first sentence, it is too confusing, to say the least. Objections? ←Humus sapiens←Talk 03:41, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Indeed. Heaven forbid that there should be a single word in Wikipedia that even obliquely undermines the Zionist project. Hardly a suggestion, looks like fait accompli to me. -- Viajero 18:34, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * I thought it was just an innocent mistake, but looks like it carried more negativity than I expected. Highly disturbing comment to a change that had nothing to do with Zionism. Since Judea was conquered and reconquered again, did this caused the Jews to stop being a nation they once were? Their only "fault" is they survived and persevered. If you got a problem with that, you're in a crappy company. Denying Jews (alone!) the right to nationhood is not anti-Zionist, it is antisemitic.  ←Humus sapiens←Talk 20:36, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Viajero: I'm not a Zionist -- in fact, I'm about as emphatic a diasporist as there is -- and I think of the Jewish people as non-national, but this was an awfully controversial statement to make without qualification in the lead of this article. I haven't had a chance just now to look at how well the article deals with this controversial matter, but I can't think of where better to take up differing opinions on the question of whether the Jews constitute a nation. I would think it certainly should present all significant sides, using appropriate citations -- Jmabel 19:24, Jul 1, 2004 (UTC)

 * I don't even know what a "non-national" cultural tradition is, it confused me. As for Viajero's comments, yes, of course, anything Jews do is part of the International Zionist Conspiracy. Jayjg 21:09, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Hebrew language messianic link removed
I thought that the messianic portion would make the site interesting to those with an interest in the subject. "There is no reason that out of four links, two should be Lubavitch; even one link is more than their population warrants. Also, this is the *English* Wikipedia page" - I have to disagree that a population tally is necessary for inclusion. And The Toka Pona links to a site that isn't in English either. For a "Jew" article, it is reasonable to believe that those that follow that link may be able to read it. - Tεx  τ  urε  21:14, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Why? Your statement sort of implies that the only people who would be interested in reading anything that relates to the jewish people, judaism etc are those who are jewish. I haven't explored a lot of the links on this page, but thst's basically because i've only recently discovered it. I've no position one way or the other about non-english links, though i would suggest that they be marked as such. And before you ask, I'm not jewish. I'm also not a follower of ANY religion (if I had to be classed as anything i suppose secular humanist is the closest label). That doesn't however mean that i've no interest in cultures other than my own or in different religions. Markalex 22:24, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * First of all, I will point out the fact that the Federation of Jewish Communities of the CIS (Russia) (http://www.fjc.ru/default.asp) site is also a Lubavitch website, so that two of the links in this article are already devoted to Lubavitch. I guess the question is "why wouldn't three Lubavitch links be even better?"  In answer, the links at the bottom are meant to be representative of the topics discussed, not exhaustive.  They are also intended to link to sites which can give considerable amounts of information on the topic that could not be included in the article.  There are literally thousands of Jewish websites out there, perhaps tens of thousands.  Three links were allocated to each of the major Jewish religious movements; of the three Orthodox links, one was allocated to Lubavitch, even though it represents at most 10% of Orthodox Jews.  The link given was to the main English language Lubavitch website, their "flagship" site, so to speak, a site chock-full of information about and by the Lubavitch movement and it's fairly recently deceased Rebbe.  Additional links are not warranted, particularly links to Hebrew Language sites from an English article.  As for Jews being able to read the Hebrew site, Wikipedia is not an encyclopedia for Jews alone, not even the articles on Jewish topics; rather, it is an encyclopedia for all people fluent in English, of whom Jews comprise at most one percent.  And even for Jews, 40% of Jews at best are fluent enough in Hebrew to read the site, and an even lower percentage of those Jews who surf English encyclopedia pages.  Perhaps the link would be appropriate in a Hebrew language Wikipedia version of this article, or, if there were no other webpages about Lubavitch, the link might even be appropriate here.  But given that there is already (as mentioned) an excellent Lubavitch site available, one that, in fact, represents the movement, this link is superfluous.

 * Regarding the idea that the site might be "interesting" to people who read it, I am well aware of the aching desire Lubavitch Messianists have to spread the word that their deceased leader Rabbi Schneerson a"h is the Messiah, and their belief that Rabbi Schneerson a"h should be intensely interesting to everyone. As a result of this desire the Jew and Judaism articles on Wikipedia suffer a daily assault of anonymous editors adding links to their favorite Messianic websites because the Lubavitch sites currently linked to are only implicitly Messianistic.  Nevertheless, the intensity of their desire does not make the links themselves more relevant to the article, which is about Jews as an ethnic group, and not about the individual many Lubavitchers believe is the Messiah. And rest assured, if there were three or four or ten Lubavitch links here, but they were not explicitly Messianist ones, then the Jew and Judaism articles would still be subject to daily link assaults from Messianists. Jayjg 03:50, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Another questionable edit
I find the edit 05:46, Jul 3, 2004 by User:202.56.245.166 to be mostly a liability, but probably worth looking at selectively rather than reverting entire. Does someone want to take a look at it? -- Jmabel 19:19, Jul 3, 2004 (UTC)
 * This referred exactly to the passage addressed in the next section below. -- Jmabel 22:05, Jul 4, 2004 (UTC)

And another
Long edits into the article intro are generally suspicious, from whatever POV they are. I reverted this, but the removed segment is here for whoever thinks something can be salvaged (most of it is recounted somewhere in the article body):
 * In the purest sense, anybody, whosoever born of a Jewish mother is a Jewish person, regardless of his or her religion. In this, a woman is considered a Jewish mother, if she is of Hebrew descent. A person is considered as half-Jewish if s/he is born of a Jewish father and a non Jewish mother.
 * In an ethnic sense, the Jews are members of the people, or "nation", that traces its ancestry from the Biblical patriarch Abraham through his son Isaac and in particular Jacob, Isaac's son, as well as to those who subsequently joined them over the course of history as converts. Ethnic Jews include both "Observant Jews", meaning those who practice the Biblical and Rabbinic laws, known as the halakha'', and those who, while not practicing Judaism as a religion, still identify themselves as Jews in a cultural or ethnic sense. These are sometimes called "Secular Jews".
 * The ancient Hebrews were once a race, with common blood and nationality. The ancient Hebrews called themselves as "Israelites" by nationality. The term 'Israelite', has racial and religious overtones. However the modern day term 'Israel', is free of these denotations. It regards a person to be 'Israeli' as long as one is a citizen of the state of Israel, whether he is a Jew or Arab or Christian. The present day Jews are neither a single race, nor a single nationality. Today the term "Jewish" refers to a people bounded not by statehood but by descent and origin. :In that, the term 'Jewish' is more relevant today, than the term 'Jew'. Increasingly, more and more people of Jewish origin prefer to call themselves as 'Jewish', rather than 'Jew'. Because of the long and varied history of the Jewish Diaspora, no Jew or Jewish person today alive is Hebrew by race. Instead the Jews today are of Hebrew descent. The Samaritans are the only ancient Jewish people who are closest to the Old Testament Hebrews.''

JFW | T@lk  22:46, 3 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * I think Jews sometimes refer to themselves (and often non-Jews refer to them) as "Jewish" or "a Jewish person" rather than "a Jew" is because of the pejorative way in which the term "Jew" has often been used. As The American Heritage Dictionary points out:
 * It is widely recognized that the attributive use of the noun Jew, in phrases such as Jew lawyer or Jew ethics, is both vulgar and highly offensive. In such contexts Jewish is the only acceptable possibility. Some people, however, have become so wary of this construction that they have extended the stigma to any use of Jew as a noun, a practice that carries risks of its own. In a sentence such as There are now several Jews on the council, which is unobjectionable, the substitution of a circumlocution like Jewish people or persons of Jewish background may in itself cause offense for seeming to imply that Jew has a negative connotation when used as a noun. Jayjg 22:00, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Origins of Karaite Judaism
Some editors here are adamant that Karaites do not descend in any way from the movement created by Anan ben David, but that does not reflect the generally held by scholars, nor by all Karaites. Of the five Karaite websites I have been able to find on the web, two recognized Anan's contribution to Karaism, two said nothing about Anan, and one said that Anan did not found Karaism, his movement was different from Karaism, and he used Rabbinic methods (the view, I believe, of the most persistent Karaite editor). Examples:
 * The orginisation of the Karaites was rather loose and informal until the sevnth century c.e., but after that, due to Rabbanite coersion, it became necessary to organise and by the next century the first universally recognized leader of Karaism was ‘Anan Ben-Dawid. A member of an aristocratic Rabbinite family, he discovered the follies of Rabbanism, and wrote the first systematic non-Rabbinic theological document. While Karaism existed before him, this is why he is often noted as the father of Karaism. http://www.orahsaddiqim.org/History/Events/Movement_of_Karaism_-_The_Begininng.shtml (Karaite website)

 * Then in the 8th century a last glimmer of hope appeared in the form of a shrewd leader named Anan ben David. Anan organized various anti- Talmudic elements and lobbied the Caliphate to establish a second Exilarchate for those who rejected the Talmud. The Muslims granted Anan and his followers the religious freedom to practice Judaism in their own way. Anan gathered a large following around him and his followers became known as the Ananites. Some time after Anan's death his followers merged with other anti-Talmudic groups and took on the name "Followers of the Bible" or in Hebrew "Bnei Mikra". Later "Bnei Mikra" was abbreviated into "Karaim" or in English "Karaites". http://www.karaite-korner.org/history.shtml (Karaite website) Jayjg 01:15, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Earlier debate/s about Karaites here: Recently, on the Talk:Jew/Archive 3 page there were extensive heated debates about the following issues IZAK 06:17, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC) : There never was "one" Karaite group in history...:
 * Anan ben David and Karaites as Jews
 * Who are today's "true" Karaites?
 * Who is User:Yoshiah_ap representing as he needs to have a NPOV about Karaites
 * How many "real" Karaites are alive today: Numbers please!
 * Wikipedia says:Anan ben David's true role: He praised Islam and Christianity
 * Rebuttal concerning Anan ben David
 * Rabbinical opposition to Anan, the Karaites, and Karaism
 * Summarizing the "dispute" over Karaism
 * Is Karaism Judaism and does it belong with the article on Jew?
 * In spite of common assumptions, is there really more than one Jewish religion?
 * And finally:

"See: http://www.sacred-texts.com/jud/t10/ht110.htm

''THE HISTORY OF THE TALMUD: CHAPTER VII: THE EIGHTH CENTURY. THE DOMINION OF THE GAONIM. THE OPPOSITION OF THE KARAITES. THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A SECT OF THAT NAME.''

"...As their doctrines, however, were not fixed, and as almost every age the Karaites were split into diverse sects, therefore they could not resist or make headway against the Talmud, whose strength is, to those who rightly understand it, that it has never purposed to make fixed rules, to last for all ages; deliberation and reasoning concerning the Halakhas according to the circumstances, is the principle of the Talmud; and the saying of the Talmud, "even when they say to you of right that it is left, and of left that it is right, thou shalt not swerve from the commandment," shows the opinion of the Talmud, that the practice of the ceremonies and precepts is dependent on the time, place and other circumstances. With this power the Talmud combatted all its enemies, and was victorious." IZAK 06:14, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

"The controversies between the Jews and the Karaites are recorded in many books, Karaite and Talmudistic, from the age of R. Saadia the Gaon, and his opponent Sahal ben Matzliah to the present time. In them can also be found the history of their alternate triumphs. But this is not our task here: we will remark only that from the days of R. Saadiah the Gaon, when the Rabbis had begun to have polemics with them, can be seen the deep mark the Karaite literature left on the Rabbinical one. Philosophy was from that time used in conjunction with the Torah; many Gaonim followed R. Saadiah's method of harmonizing the Torah and the philosophy of that time, that they should seem as mutual enemies. So the Karaites charged such men with infidelity, but others were themselves compelled to imitate them, and called in the aid of philosophy, of the divinity, to interpret the texts of the Holy Scriptures." IZAK 06:14, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

"The effect of the Karaites on the Talmudist Rabbis is made evident also in this: that since their time the rabbis also began to write down fixed Halakhas taken from the Talmud, that the readers should not otherwise by error adopt the Karaite rules, made by the Karaite leaders, which they might mistake for the rules of the Talmud itself, since they could not know the whole Talmud by heart. They composed, therefore, the "Halakhoth G'doloth" (Great Halakhas), "Sh'iltoth'derab A'bai" (Queries of R. Ahai), for the sake of the students, who could not themselves wade through the whole Talmud. But thereby they opposed the spirit and object of the Talmud itself, that the Halakhas should be matter for discussion, and modified in accordance with the requirements of the time and place. As soon as the Gaonim had permitted to propound decisions of the Halakhas, and to fix them, those Gaonim, who succeeded them, were compelled to teach that these decisions of the former Gaonim, even though given without proofs, are holy for the people, as if giver, from Mount Sinai. This circumstance added fuel to the quarrel of the Karaites, and gave them new points of attack. The hope of some great men of the nation to reconcile the Jews with the Karaites became naught, for although the Karaites quarrelled among themselves, and split into rival sects, yet they all equally hated the Talmud, reviled it, and insulted it, styling the two colleges, at Sura and Pumbeditha, "the two harlots" spoken of in Ezekiel, who (claimed they) referred to these colleges in his prophecy." IZAK 06:14, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

"'According to Makrizi there were among the Karaites ten sects, differing from each other in their opinions, practice and festivals; they had no permanence, some rose, some fell, and in the tenth century only five large sects were found, named:'

 * 1. Jod'anim or Jodganim.

 * 2. Makrites or Magrites.

 * 3. Akhbarites.

 * 4. Abn Amronites or Tiflisites.

 * 5. Balbekites.

"In this we see the power of the Talmud, that even those who were inimical to it or hostile to a large portion of it, Halakhas never had different opinions concerning the festivals and other such things, important to one particular nation; for they could not deny its general tradition..." IZAK 06:14, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * The reader will find in the books of Jost, Grätz, Fürst, Geiger, and in Hebrew, in "Bequoreth L'toldoth Hakaraim" an account of the particulars about which the various sects of the Karaites differed, and also the names of their leaders. IZAK 06:14, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * "We do not think it necessary to give these details in this place. We will mention for illustration the latest sect, which wished to fix the day of Atonement only on a Saturday every year, because it is said "Sabbath Sabbathan," which means a Sabbath of rest (Lev. xxiii. 32), and they translate "a Sabbath of Sabbaths," and the first day of Passover on Thursday.
 * Thus each Karaite sect celebrated the Biblical festivals on different days, for each sect construed the texts in the Pentateuch by preference without being able to come to an agreement.
 * Thus also in respect of the observation of Sabbath: for some Karaites, their houses were during the Sabbath their prisons, where they did sit in darkness, and which they could not leave when their neighbors happened not to be Karaites like themselves.

 * Some points to consider... 1) Did these groups call themselves Karaites, or were they *considered* Karaites because they didn't accept Rabbinical Authority? 2) There are various groups within Rabbinical/Orthodox Judaism. and 3) IZAK, there's no need to quote pages upon pages of what you've already said. --Josiah 07:06, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Yoshiah: I did NOT quote "pages upon pages of what [I've] already said", I just provided the LINKS to past discussions that people may have forgotten or not be aware of. However, because it is so vital to this present discussion I ONLY quoted the LAST point as it shows the scope and internal conflictedness of the various Karaite movements over the centuries. IZAK 09:03, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Izak, on my 1024x768 resolution, your quoting of previously posted materials is around 2 pages long. I'm not counting the links as part of those "pages upon pages".--Josiah 02:27, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)

The symbol image: Magen David and/or Menorah?
"The Magen David... is the symbol most commonly associated with Judaism today, but it is actually a relatively new Jewish symbol... In fact, the symbol is so rare in early Jewish literature and artwork that art dealers suspect forgery if they find the symbol in early works." (Source: ) I suggest we include both Magen David and menorah, "One of the oldest symbols of the Jewish faith is the menorah..." (the same source). IMHO, MD should consist out of two intertwined triangles. Also, the current image gets shifted (above/aside the table) with the change in the page width. ←Humus sapiens←Talk 03:03, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * I agree. Jayjg 05:13, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * I think that would work, but I think a Torah scroll would work just as well :)--Josiah 02:46, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Opening Paragraph
rephrased to capture three groups, the ethnic, the converted and the secular. How did Wikipedia lose the ethnic which is part (together with converted) of the operational definition for both Orthodox and Convservative?

Recast this yet again. The problem with the earlier definition is that someone without a preconception of Jews would think (especially with the mutually exclusive word "either" inserted) that there were two or more groups of people who were Jews without any real understanding of how the two groups overlap. A Jew, religious or not, is always either a descendent of Jews or a religious convert. No one can ever become a Jew simply by reading Maimonides, watching Milton Berle and eating bagels. -- Cecropia | Talk 04:22, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Sorry, but this def: A Jew is an active member of the Jewish faith (Judaism) by birth or conversion, a blood descendent of Jews who identifies with Jewish cultural tradition, or both. is also problematic: 1. What about inactive? 2. What about those who does not identify? (Marx, Trotsky, etc) 3. I strongly object to using the word "blood" here.  ←Humus sapiens←Talk 04:48, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * How about A Jew is a member of the Jewish faith (Judaism) by birth or conversion, a natural descendent of Jews who identifies with Jewish cultural tradition, or both.

 * Marx or Trotsky? How about Madeline Albright? How about Robert Moses, who sued the Jewish Encyclopedia to be delisted. That's difficult, because then we're dealing with outside definitions of a Jew. -- Cecropia | Talk 04:58, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * I'm not trying in any way to be offensive. I'm trying to come up with a short, simple, readable definition that someone who doesn't understand what a Jew is can comprehend. -- Cecropia | Talk 05:01, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)

None taken. How's this: A Jew is a follower of the Jewish faith (Judaism) or a descendent of Jews, or both.  ←Humus sapiens←Talk 05:03, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * That's fine by me. Short, accurate, understandable. But do you think it will lead to quibbles about Jewish descendents who have joined other religions and deny Jewishness? -- Cecropia | Talk 05:07, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * They are still considered Jews, at least by some. E.g. Marranos, or those who were baptised in the 1st centuries who were forced to spend both Christian and Jewish holidays in the presence of a priest to prevent the "backsliding". Or the assimilated German Jews who considered themselves 100% German in the early 20th cent. A census may be a dangerous thing if applied "properly".  ←Humus sapiens←Talk 05:18, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * How about a Jew who formally converts to another religion? He is still "a descendent of Jews." What about Robert Moses, who attended the Episcopal Church? But I have no objection to your wording, change it if you like; it seems incomplete but I can't some up with a simple qualifier at this point. -- Cecropia | Talk 05:22, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * A Jew who formally converts to another faith is still considered a Jew by many (perhaps most) Jews, and by Jewish law as well. Jayjg 17:46, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * I remember my family joking when Barry Goldwater ran for president of the U.S., "Finally, one to the major parties nominates a Jew for president... and he's an Episcopalian." -- Jmabel 02:10, Jul 8, 2004 (UTC)

JudaISM
Judaism is not a combination of religious and secular. It is an "ism"--a belief system. It is the (English language) name of the Jewish religion. Jews practice Judaism when they do Jewish religious practice. A member of a secular Jewish organization like the Workman's Circle or a Zionist might be religiously devout Jews, but they are not practicing Judaism when they attend a meeting or engage in Zionist politics. -- Cecropia | Talk 04:54, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)

not practicing Judaism when they attend a meeting or engage in Zionist politics.  ???. Zionism is bringing Jews back to their homeland. This is a central tenet of Judaism. There are arguments among Jews over when and how this should happen. By human action, by an act of God, at this time, during the time of the Messiah, are some of the areas of discussion. But the core of Zionism...return of Jews to Israel, and Jerusalem in particular...is a core tenet of Judaism.

 * It is certainly a Jewish movement, and may seek to fulfill a goal of Jewish religion, but it is a political movement; it is not a religious practice. You may say it is a religiously inspired practice, though many Zionists are/were secularists. -- Cecropia | Talk 15:28, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)

The political movement is one group's method of fulfilling the religious tenet. see Jewish_eschatology where it is listed. Many Zionists were and many are secularists, Shinui for example. But despite their best intentions, Shinui in being Zionist is acting to fulfill a religious tenet of Judaism.

 * But Shinui does not view it as such; rather, they see it as a form of national liberation, as did almost all of the early Zionists, who were secular. The Zionist Congresses were not prayer services or religious retreats.  Jayjg 18:09, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * I concur strongly with Jayjg here. Many of my older relatives considered themselves Zionists. None of them were Orthodox, and few of them were more than nominally religious. Conversely, I know non-Zionist and even anti-Zionist Orthodox Jews. At all times since the advent of the Zionist movement some Zionists have doubtlessly been religiously motivated, but certainly some have not. -- Jmabel 02:15, Jul 8, 2004 (UTC)

 * With the exception of the Satmar, no Religous Jew - whether Orthodox, Conservative, Reconstruction, Reform, Karaite, or otherwise - would say that Zionism is not an integral part of the Jewish Faith. Heck, even the Secular Jews would say that Zionism is an integral part of the Jewish Faith.--Josiah 02:49, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Zionism is a political movement intent on creating a Jewish homeland (usually in Israel), and is being confused with the religious belief that Jews as individuals should move to or live in Israel. By the way, before WWII the Reform movement was anti-Zionist (both Zionism as a political movement, and against the idea that Jews should move to Israel), and that attitude still exists to some extent in Classical Reform. Jayjg 17:55, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * That's absurd. Are you telling me that organizations like Brit Tzedek v'Shalom (Hmm, we don't have an article, see ) don't contain a goodly number of religious but non-Zionist Jews? Many BTvS members would consider themselves Zionists, but many would not, and as far as I've been able to tell, it has little correlation to which ones are religious. And while I hesitate to link to what I consider a hate site, and wouldn't do so in the article itself... well, let me break up the URL with a blank and let you reassemble it so I don't help their Google score: http:// masada2000.org/shit-list.html ... I think the site is despicable, but it is true that many of the people they are attacking are indeed non-Zionist Jews, and plenty are religious (several are rabbis). -- Jmabel 03:05, Jul 8, 2004 (UTC)

 * Thanks for the link. That organization still believes in the existence of Israel, so I would label it a liberal Zionistic Organization, in contrast to a fundamentalist Zionistic organization that believes that all Palestinians should be kicked out. To quote their site: "As a pro-Israel organization Brit Tzedek unequivocally supports the existence of the State of Israel as a Jewish state, a position affirmed in our seven principles. The organization frames its work to open up dialogue within the Jewish community and to ensure inclusivity as we work for a negotiated settlement to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict."--Josiah 03:18, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Many Jews in the 20s, 30s, and 40s belonged to organizations which were profoundly secular and yet still Zionist; the Farband (a secular Socialist-Zionist) movement would be a prime example. Zionism is a political movement, not a religious movement. Jayjg 17:55, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * The belief in aliyah--return to Israel--is part of the Jewish faith--but "Zionism" is a political movement. It stemmed from the belief among many Jews that they would never be allowed to live in peace anywhere in the world (and especially in Europe) as Jews, so wanted a homeland, where Jews would be a majority, and run their own affairs. Palestine was desirable for obvious reasons even among the non-religious, but it was not exclusive. -- Cecropia | Talk 03:24, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Cecropia, you say "Palestine was desirable for obvious reasons even among the non-religious"....could you say what the "obvious reasons are"? Uganda was another site under the control of the British and formally considered by the World Zionist Congress as an alternative to the Land of Israel.

 * Umm... I thought it would be obvious? :) As the location of the ancient land of Israel, it would be a natural choice, and have cultural meaning even for secularists. But I was making the point that many other areas were considered with the goal of creating an independent home for Jews apart from the goal of religious destiny. -- Cecropia | Talk 15:18, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Just to be clear, Uganda was offered by the British, and a motion was adopted to create a committee to investigate it as a temporary refuge for Russian Jews suffering from pogroms. Even then, a large portion of the delegates walked out in protest. Jayjg 18:22, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)

To Cecropia: Well, sometimes what's obvious to one is not so obvious to another. Earlier in this thread: not practicing Judaism when they attend a meeting or engage in Zionist politics.  ???. In Judaism the performance of a commmandment is NOT strictly dependent upon intending to perform the commandment. The level of dependency is discussed in detail in works of Jewish Law. Living in the Land of Israel is a commandment. Those individuals that live there fulfill the commandment whether they intend to or not. So we end up with members of HaShomer HaTzair (anti-religious) fulfilling an important commandment regardless of their intention, or even in spite of their heartfelt, express intention not to do so. This is why I said that Zionists are practicing Judaism when they attend a meeting or engage in Zionist politics.    They are engaged in the preparatory steps to perform the commandment of living in the Land of Israel.

To Jayjg: Regarding Uganda, the reaction of the delegates indicates the depth of commitment to Israel and Israel only. The movement was not to get out of Russia to a Jewish land but to get out of Russia to THE Jewish land....no other land would do.

 * Yes, that was the feeling on the part of some delegates. However, the majority of the delegates (including Herzl) thought the situation in Russia was so critical that it was worth investigating other locations as places of temporary refuge. Jayjg 18:47, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

7 million non-Jews killed?
I thought the generally accepted number was 5 million. Jayjg 15:31, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * And, are we now headed towards counting and mentioning "all" casualties of World War II, all "victims" of Hitler's madness and Germany's aggression, which are estimated to have been about fifty million, and thus use a favorite "tactic" for anulling the immense importance of the GENOCIDE against only one people on an unprecedented scale? Let's stick to JEWS please, let other articles enumerate the staggering cost of the war on other population groups. IZAK 16:33, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Only one people? What about gypsies and retards and homosexuals? Sam [Spade] 16:35, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * I believe the term "retards" is offensive. Jayjg 17:08, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Also, it wasn't unprecedented. See Holocaust (disambiguation) for others. --Wclark 19:50, 2004 Jul 14 (UTC)

 * The scale wasn't unprecedented, but other things were. Jayjg 20:50, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * (That's not to say I think the mention of other groups is really appropriate on this page, though.) --Wclark 20:04, 2004 Jul 14 (UTC)

Those issues are discussed in the Holocaust article. THIS article is about Jews and what the Holocaust did to them. IZAK 16:37, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * I thought that the number was 10 million. Oh well. But... I couldn't find where this is being covered? However, it might do good to clarify that the holocaust was not only a war against the Jews. Hitler equally hated Blacks & Gypsies.--Josiah 16:50, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Although Hitler did indeed think that Gypsies and Blacks (and Slavs and various other groups) were inferior races, and killed or attempted to kill them as well, his "war" was not against them, but rather against the Jews, who he saw as the only rivals to "Aryans" for world domination. Jayjg 17:11, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

There were no "Blacks" in Europe, and the full force and scope of the Nazis was on the Jews as seen from the notorious Wannsee conference where Wikipedia researchers tell us that: "The Wannsee conference was the discussion by a group of Nazi officials about the "final solution of the Jewish question" (Endlösung der Judenfrage). It took place on January 20, 1942 in the Wannsee Villa overlooking the Wannsee lake in southwestern Berlin and would lead to the Holocaust."........ Note: it was the Jewish question they were concerened with primarily, not the "gypsy question", that was small potatos to the Nazis. IZAK 16:58, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Anyway, regardless of the figure, this is an article about Jews (and one which is already almost double the recommended article length). It is not intended to correct alleged "common misperceptions" among some unknown groups of people about non-Jewish deaths in the Holocaust, but rather to talk about Jews, including the effect of the Holocaust on Jews. An article on the Roma, similarly, might deal with the effects of the Holocaust on the Roma, and should not talk about the numbers of Jews, or Slavs, or homosexuals killed in the Holocaust as well. The Holocaust article, which this article links to, covers quite well both Jewish and non-Jewish aspects of the Holocaust in detail. That is what an article the Holocaust is for. It is not what an article on Jews is for. Jayjg 17:59, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * I do think the figure of those killed for other reasons is worth mentioning in passing. There is a common misconception that the only people killed in the death camps were Jews, when that simply isn't the case. The comparison to, e.g. the Roma is not symmetrical - David Gerard 18:30, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * 1) Why do you say this is a "common misconception"?
 * 2) Why does an article about Jews need to "clear up" this "misconception"? This is an article about Jews, not about the Holocaust.
 * 3) In what way is comparison to the Roma "not symmetrical"?
 * Jayjg 18:39, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * 1. Because it is a common misconception. Ask people how many people Hitler killed and many will respond 'six million'. 3. The comparison is not symmetrical because one group's losses is common knowledge, the other is quite obscure. 2. Well, you do have a point there ...

 * Of course, mentioning a number for others at all will require a reasonably hard and defined number - David Gerard 19:06, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * 1) I am dubious about how "common" the misconception is. 2) This is the main point anyway; the purpose of an article about Jews is not to clear up misconceptions (common or otherwise) about non-Jewish deaths in the Holocaust. Jayjg 19:20, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I would argue that since the Jews were the largest group of victims of the Holocaust, but not the only group: (1) the article about the Jews should mention in passing that there were other victims and (2) all other articles that refer to groups being systematically slaughtered by the Nazis, and especially any that give numbers of victims, should mention the Jews as well; in both cases this is to give appropriate perspective. -- Jmabel 18:51, Jul 14, 2004 (UTC)

 * I think the opposite; the article on the Holocaust should (and does) explain who and how many victims there were, while articles on each sub-group should stick to the facts of the Holocaust vis a vis that particular group alone. Jayjg 18:59, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

As for 5 million vs. 7 million non-Jewish victims, I was restoring the previous text from this article. Whatever number is given should ideally be sourced. This wasn't, but it is what was already there. -- Jmabel 18:51, Jul 14, 2004 (UTC)

 * "What was already there" is a bit misleading; as far as I can tell, that sentence was part of a huge number of individual edits made by one individual yesterday. For months before that, it was not "what was there". Jayjg 18:59, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

title: Talk:Jews/Archive 5


text:
Robert Wilcox (actor)

Robert Wilcox (May 19, 1910 – June 11, 1955) was an American film and theater actor of the 1930s, 1940s, and 1950s.

Personal life
Wilcox was born in Rochester, New York, the son of Dr. Roscoe Squires Wilcox of Rochester, who died when Wilcox was 16. He attended Nazareth Hall Academy and John Marshall High School in Rochester.

He was married twice. His first wife, whom he married in 1937 and divorced two years later. was Florence Rice, daughter of sportswriter Grantland Rice. He married Diana Barrymore in 1950. The five-year marriage, which ended with his death, was stormy, with repeated separations, reconciliations and police calls for domestic disturbances. Barrymore chronicled their bouts with alcoholism in her 1957 autobiography, Too Much, Too Soon, which she dedicated to him.

Acting career
He started his career with a Buffalo, New York, Community Theater Group. His career began in earnest in 1936 after being signed by a Universal Pictures talent scout while playing Duke Mantee in a summer-stock production of The Petrified Forest. Wilcox worked in 18 Hollywood films before World War II, starting with the role of the Intern in Let Them Live. (Another source states that he played the romantic lead in 26 films, before going into the service for World War II. ) He was a contract player with Universal Studios, unhappy with his typecasting in "cops and robbers" roles. He is perhaps best known for playing Bob Wayne and his alter ego, "The Copperhead", in the 1940 film serial Mysterious Doctor Satan.

He was inducted into the United States Army February 27, 1942. He served 38 months in the United States Army during World War II, rising from private to the rank of captain, and seeing action in Belgium, France and Germany. Following the war, he returned to Rochester, and appeared in an amateur production of Soldier's Wife, a quiet comedy by Rose Franken about a veteran returning from the Pacific, presented in January 1946 by the Rochester Community Players. Wilcox, according to a contemporary news report, was considering whether to go back to Hollywood or to work in professional theater. his post-war work was mostly on the stage.

His last stage performance was in the road show Pajama Top, costarring his wife, Diana Barrymore. The production, an English translation of the French comic success, Moumou, was directed by Leonard Altobell (also a native of Rochester) and opened its national tour at the Auditorium Theater in Rochester November 8, 1954.

Death
Wilcox died of a heart attack on June 11, 1955, while riding a train from New York City to Rochester to visit his mother. A porter discovered his body in a Pullman berth when he tried to wake the actor at the Rochester train station stop. He was 45 years old. He is buried at Riverside Cemetery.

title: Robert Wilcox (actor)


text:
Julian Hodge

Sir Julian Stephen Alfred Hodge (15 October 1904 – 17 July 2004) was a London-born entrepreneur and banker who lived in Wales for most of his life, from the age of five.

Background and beginnings
Julian Hodge was born on 15 October 1904 in Camberwell, south London, the son of an electrician. His mother was Irish. At the age of four he moved with his family to Pontllanfraith in the South Wales Valleys.

He left school from the Lewis School Pengam at age 13 but his mother encouraged him to read classic novels and recite poetry to further his education. His first job was as an assistant in a chemist's shop. He joined the Great Western Railway as a junior clerk in 1920 and studied accountancy in his spare time, qualifying as a corporate accountant in 1930. He went into business for himself as an accountant in 1934. He married Moira Thomas in 1951 and had three children.

Hodge formed the idea of creating a national bank for Wales. His business was initially based on insurance and money lending and he floated his company as the Hodge Group in 1961. In 1972 he formed the Bank of Wales (originally known as the Commercial Bank of Wales), and later the Julian Hodge Bank, in Cardiff. Hodge bought Ty Gwyn, a prominent house in the village of Lisvane, in the suburbs of Cardiff, in 1961.

He also founded the Jane Hodge foundation, named after his mother, to give money to charitable causes, often offering a 'double your money' challenge where he would match the amounts raised by the public.

In later life from his home as a tax exile in Jersey, Hodge helped fund the campaign for a "No" vote in the 1997 Welsh devolution referendum and his son, Robert Hodge, was chairman of the "Just Say No" campaign.

In 2004 the Sunday Times Rich List estimated his fortune at £48 Million, making him the 18th richest person in Wales, and the oldest of Britain's 1,000 richest people.

He died at his home on Jersey, three months short of his 100th birthday. A donation in his will funded the construction of the Sir Julian Hodge Memorial Organ at St Peter's Church, Roath, Cardiff.

title: Julian Hodge