But The Duke Chronicle, which also ran thefirst ad, said Editor-in Chief Ann M. Heinberger.

And The Vanderbilt Hustler which ran the firstad, has not yet received the second according toEditor-in-chief Laura F. Creekmore. "But the wegot [the first ad] three months after Duke gotit," she noted.

The Tartan News at Carnegie-Mellon Universityjust received the first ad, according to ArtEditor Daniel R. Frey. "It was cause for a lot ofdebate [but]...we're not running it," he said."We're running an article about in instead."

The Daily Pennsylvanian received the first ad,but did not run it. However executive editorMatthew B. Kline the said that the paper has notreceived the second.

The Tuffs Daily did not receive the first ad,but the did receive the second one recently saidthe Editor-in-Chief David A. Saltzman.

He said that the staff debated extensively buteventually decided not to run the ad because ofits "potential for causing offense. There's goingto be a news story written on it..[with] eitherexcerpts or a shrunken-down version of the ad,"Saltzman said.

The Stanford Daily and The Dartmouth receivedthe neither ad, but their editors have discussedthe issue. "If we receive the ad] we'll print iton the editorial page right next to a houseeditorial concerning the ad," said TigTillinghast, president of The Dartmouth.

"I think it's disgusting, but it would be worsenot to print it" Tillinghast said. "If we dosuppress opinions from coming out they can't beaddressed."

Harvard Professor of Law Alan M. Dershowitzsaid yesterday that he find both advertisementsdeeply offensive even though the second onlydiscusses one aspect of the Holocaust.

"The fact that they killed the Jews matters notwhat happened to their bodies," said Dershowitz."It part and parcel of a whole argument ofHolocaust denial."

Dershowitz who was cited by a Committee flyer aas a supporter of the newspaper's running theoriginal ad, said that his remarks had been quotedin a misleading fashion