Hollosi Information eXchange /HIX/
Copyright (C) HIX
Új cikk beküldése (a cikk tartalma az író felelőssége)
Megrendelés Lemondás
1 Researchers wanted in Ukraine, et al. (mind)  12 sor     (cikkei)
2 Re: Gossip, Hearsay, and Innuendo (mind)  13 sor     (cikkei)
3 Re: About Slovak fascism, general remarks (mind)  10 sor     (cikkei)
4 Re: About Slovak fascism, general remarks (mind)  46 sor     (cikkei)
5 Re: Mr. Frajkor, listowner of Slovak-L (mind)  31 sor     (cikkei)
6 Re: Mr. Frajkor, listowner of Slovak-L (mind)  17 sor     (cikkei)
7 Re: About mr albu, general remarks (mind)  11 sor     (cikkei)
8 Re: Newworld editorial/Soros (mind)  33 sor     (cikkei)
9 Re: Funar (mind)  37 sor     (cikkei)
10 Re: A few numbers concerning HungarHotels' sale (mind)  27 sor     (cikkei)
11 Re: HungarHotels + freedom of speach (mind)  65 sor     (cikkei)
12 Quotes & language (mind)  78 sor     (cikkei)
13 Mea Culpa (mind)  19 sor     (cikkei)
14 Re: To agent "Lup". (mind)  20 sor     (cikkei)
15 Re: Mea Culpa (mind)  7 sor     (cikkei)
16 Re: About Slovak fascism, general remarks (mind)  29 sor     (cikkei)
17 Misc. (mind)  15 sor     (cikkei)
18 Re: Funar (mind)  18 sor     (cikkei)
19 Re: About Slovak fascism, general remarks (mind)  10 sor     (cikkei)
20 Re: Sophistry (mind)  69 sor     (cikkei)
21 Re: Hungarhotels (mind)  54 sor     (cikkei)
22 Re: Funar (mind)  39 sor     (cikkei)
23 Re: Cultural Superiority Complex (mind)  76 sor     (cikkei)
24 Re: Mr. Frajkor, listowner of Slovak-L (mind)  99 sor     (cikkei)
25 Re: Mr. Frajkor, listowner of Slovak-L (mind)  19 sor     (cikkei)
26 Re: Mr. Frajkor, listowner of Slovak-L (mind)  22 sor     (cikkei)
27 Re: Gutter language (mind)  36 sor     (cikkei)
28 A few numbers concerning HungarHotels' sale (mind)  23 sor     (cikkei)
29 The Pope In Hungary - mea culpa (mind)  22 sor     (cikkei)
30 Re: I'm back! (mind)  12 sor     (cikkei)
31 Re: Mr. Frajkor, listowner of Slovak-L (mind)  45 sor     (cikkei)

+ - Researchers wanted in Ukraine, et al. (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

"East Europe Connection" from suburban Washington, DC (Tour Operator,
Genealogists, Private Investigators) is seeking persons who can conduct
research in archives and local registry offices in the following Ukrainian
cities: Kharkiv, Poltava and Odesa.
Additionally in Minsk, Budapest, and Arad (Romania).

Email replies to me ), will be farwarded to Lawrence
Krupniak of
East Europe Connection
1711 Corwin Drive
Silver Spring MD 20910
301-585-0117 (home/FAX)
+ - Re: Gossip, Hearsay, and Innuendo (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

At 05:08 PM 9/1/96 PDT, Gabor Fencsik wrote:
>Today's NY Times has a fascinating article about ex-agent Ben Fischer's
>lawsuit against the CIA.  It has everything: "rumor, gossip, hearsay,
>innuendo, shoddy journalism, selective leaks, and lethal backbiting".
>It also has a number of Hungarian angles: a certain Mr Weber, "a legend
>in the agency, a Hungarian official who defected to the Unites States
>in the 1950, spied for the CIA throughout Eastern Europe during the cold
>war and rose to the third highest slot in the agency's Soviet Europe

        Thank you. I read it. Most interesting.

        Eva Balogh
+ - Re: About Slovak fascism, general remarks (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

At 05:32 PM 9/1/96 -0700, Peter Kmet' wrote about Albert Albu:

>as I wrote to you following your scandalous call for ETHNIC CLEAN-UP of
>Slovakia it would be better for you as Romanian to stay out of this.

        You arouse my curiosity. Albert Albu actually suggested ethnic
cleansing in Slovakia? I would like to see the actual text of it.

        Eva Balogh
+ - Re: About Slovak fascism, general remarks (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

At 04:32 PM 8/30/96 +0200, Roman Kanal wrote an excellent description of
Slovak "fascism." I put the word "fascism" in quotation marks because most
of the extreme nationalists of Eastern Europe, be they Romanians, Slovaks,
Hungarians, will fiercely object to the term. They don't like the term
"nationalism socialism" either. One Hungarian "fascist" corrected my usage
of "nationalism socialism" in connection with Szalasi and corrected it to
"Hungarism." Of course, that is a ridiculous criticism because the use of
the word appeared in an English-language publication in the United States
and in passing. The English-speaking readers wouldn't have had any idea what
I was talking about when I described Ferenc Szalasi as a Hungarist! But all
this is not terribly important. We know what we are talking about when we
are talking about, be that in the Romanian, Slovak, or Hungarian context.

>What are the principal characteristics of the contemporary Slovak fascism?

        Asks Roman Kanala and lists several characteristics. Some of these
characteristics could be simply lifted from Slovakia and moved to Hungary or
Romania and we would all know what we are talking about. Here are a couple:

>Reaction against the values of liberalism and Western democracy.
>Irrational, emotional adoration of the Nation. "Uncomfortable" facts
>are ignored and the picture of parallel reality interpolated from the
>"positive" facts. There also are "our facts" and "their facts", to be
>ignored and fought against. "Our facts" don't even have to be facts,
>hearsay is accepted.

        Just think of one of Arpi Rambo's latest letters. When I corrected
the percentage of Hungarian-speaking inhabitants of Greater Hungary (minus
Croatia-Slavonia) from 66 percent to the actual 54.5 percent, I was severely
reprimanded. My contention must be either a lie, or if that is not a lie, it
should not be uttered in case Funar or Mecar are reading this list!!! Well,
the 54.5 percent figure comes the Magyar Kiralyi Statisztikai
Hivatal--census of 1910, whether they like or not or whether Funar or Mecar
are reading it or not. As I told Zoli Szekely a few days ago, we can't have
a rational argument with two sets of facts: one espoused--and often
invented--by their side and another set which is accepted by the
international community and scholarly circles.

        The Slovak nationalists might hate the Hungarians but they are very
similar to the Hungarian nationalists they so despise. Carbon copies of each
other and not just because of the identical ideologies but because the
almost identical historical experiences and temperants.

        Eva Balogh
+ - Re: Mr. Frajkor, listowner of Slovak-L (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

At 01:39 PM 8/30/96 GMT, Kristina Szurek wrote:

]>I have a degree from York, but that's beside the point.
>As a therapist, I deal with a lot of people that have various handicaps,
>and ATTENTION SEEKERS (like Mr. Kanala here) are among them.
>Just look at his postings: advertising his usenet threads, crossposting,
>purposely picking controversial issues, and when discussion is heated
>abandoning them (I have (unfortunately) came across many threads where
>he never responeded to the replies.).  We call such people
>shit disturbers (=naseru peknu kopku, potom s palickou pichnu do toho
>hovna, a potom ujdu prec).

        A person who is using his/her so-called professional standing to
call another person psychologically disturbed is one of the most despicable
human beings. When a so-called psychologist is no longer can hold his own in
an argument he can cheerfully say: "my opponent is a psychologically
disturbed person. And you people out there can be sure that I am right
because I am a `professional.' I know what I am talking about. He is CRAZY!"
And what can one say to such a character assassination? No, I am not crazy?
Kristina Szurek can be ashamed of herself for using such low tactics. But I
can assure her this will not float around here because we know that Roman
Kanala is not crazy. But our opinion of you is getting to be less and less

        As for Kristian Szurek's B.A. in psychology. You must be kidding.
What is a B.A. in anything? A huge nothing. One can always go and be an
"administrative assistant" with a B.A. In the good old days, we used to call
an administrative assistant "secretary."

        Eva Balogh
+ - Re: Mr. Frajkor, listowner of Slovak-L (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

At 02:44 PM 8/31/96 GMT, Igor Gazdik wrote:
>#In article >,  says...
>#>recourse. Mr. Frajkor knows that I am a Slovak
>                                   -------------
>#>Roman Kanala
>        the underscored text is a public insult to all slovaks
>        and slovakia.

        Oh, that's interesting. My impression of Roman Kanala two and a half
years ago was just the opposite. I thought that he was a wonderful man
Slovakia can be proud of.

        Eva Balogh
+ - Re: About mr albu, general remarks (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

At 08:54 AM 9/1/96 GMT, Igor Gazdik wrote:
>        2.      it would also open the trustees' eyes vis a vis your
>        neurotic hunnic barking, mental lability, lack of respect of
>        other people's opinion and a generally known vulgarity.

        Just an innocent little question: what is Mr. Albu's "hunnic
barking"? I hope you don't mean that Mr. Albu is one of those hmmm hmmm--Huns?

        Eva Balogh
+ - Re: Newworld editorial/Soros (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

On Mon, 2 Sep 1996, Zoli Fekete, keeper of hungarian-faq wrote:

> On Mon, 2 Sep 1996, DARREN E PURCELL wrote:
> > the editors are a bunch of failures in American business
> > who went over to Eastern Europe to play, have fun, and pontificate about
> > the problems of Hungary by always ponting to the likes of Reagan and
> > Bush.
>  Are you implying that there exist other sorts of Americans gone over ;-)?!

Yes, I wuld like to think that those going to Hungary on Fulbrights and
those interested in the region as a whole are not failures. Since I fall
into both categories, I am biased, but I went over there with purpose. I
hope that many of the exchange students do as well.

However, I have to agree with you in part. The travel experience has
always lured those that seem to not have enough to do in their lives.

> > this paper, Budapest centered and of little relavance to anyone outside
> > of the city.
>  Unfortunately, one only has to be a Pestian (as opposed to American) to
> behave like this - must be something in the water (the capital is
> appropriately known as 'the vizfej' in the rest of the country,
> incidentally) ;-<...

VIzfej? a magyarazott kerek szepen (I don't think I spelled expalantion
correctly). does this mean city-centered in thought?

Darren Purcell
+ - Re: Funar (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

At 11:06 AM 9/2/96 -0700, Gabor Farkas wrote:

>According to Radio Kossuth Romanian President Iliescu pushed out Funar's
>party from the governing coalition. Apparently he could not take Funar's
>attacks, lately Funar called him a traitor, as a result of the proposed
>treaty with Hungary.

        It will be very interesting to watch the political scenes in both
countries in the next two weeks or so. An extraordinary meeting of the
Hungarian parliament was called into session for tomorrow, where it is
certain that the opposition parties will "dish it out" to the government on
the contents of the treaty.

        The Hungarian-language lists are full of articles from people living
in Hungary about the treaty. Practically all the reactions are negative. One
correspondent dwelt on the role of the media: the journalists try to
influence public opinion about the treaty but . . . .

        Although Ferenc Novak is convinced that I am certain about my own
infallibility; i.e., I believe that I know everything, actually this is not
the case. I don't know a heck of a lot of things from exact to natural
sciences, or from philosophy to law. Another thing I am not very familiar
with is the questions of the Hungarian minority in the neighboring
countries. That's the reason why I rarely express an opinion on such
matters. In this case as well as in the Slovak-Hungarian case, I really
don't know whether Hungary did cave in to the Slovaks and the Romanians as
some people claim or whether these treaties are the best the country can
sign. In the Romanian case it is obvious to me that the Hungarians are not
the only ones who are unhappy. It seems that certain Romanians, like Funar,
are also furious.

        Eva Balogh

P.S. I want to thank Gabor for his reference of the Romanian-Hungarian
treaty's text in Nepszabadsag. I printed it out but I had no time to read it
+ - Re: A few numbers concerning HungarHotels' sale (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

At 02:35 PM 9/2/96 +1000, George Antony wrote in connection with the
HungarHotels sale:

>The crunch will come when the Forum Hotel will be sold.

        Yes, this seems to be the case. As far as I know the Forum Hotel was
the only one which didn't have a fairly large debt. According to HVG (August
17, p. 89) the Forum Hotel may bring in as much as $50 million. HVG
calculated that  would mean $70 million more income on paper. In real life,
however, because of the different exchange rates (111 Ft/dollar then; today
153 Ft/dollar), interest on the debt, size of share, the real figure is
about $20 million. Then the paper added: "Mar az is ketseges persze, hogy
akar 70 millio dollarert is erdemes volt-e a magyar hatosagok
szavahihetoseget, itelokepesseget es dontesi kompetenciajat meghurcolni a
nemzetkozi nyilvanossag elott." [It is doubtful that even for $70 million it
was worth to drag the reliability, judgment, and competence of the Hungarian
authorities through the mud in front of the whole world.] I can only agree
with this. And let us add that a somewhat similar situation occurred only a
few days ago with the decision to postpone the adjustment of energy prices.

        In brief, even if the Forum Hotel sold for the highest possible
price of $50 million the actual difference between the price of the hotel
chain then and now is only $20 million, which, according to the HVG, is the
result not so much of the "cleverness of the Hungarian negotiators" but
changed international appreciation of Eastern Europe as an area for investment.

        Eva Balogh
+ - Re: HungarHotels + freedom of speach (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

At 05:48 PM 9/2/96 EDT, Jeno Biro wrote in connection with the HungarHotels
That makes at least
>half of Mr. Kiss' statement sound true (the 15.6 figure). Whether or not we ca
>from this,  that the other half is also true I do not know.

        Well, it isn't if you calculate the exchange rate, interest rate,
and size of share. Mr. Kiss forgot to calculate all this into it and the
average newspaper reader is not going to pick this up. I think Vilaggazdasag
is right: they lost on the deal. As George Antony said, we will see what
happens to the Forum.

>However if we do,
>Horn is right : the 3.8 billion was a very low bid.

        It was a shameful move, I'm afraid, low bid or not. I was ashamed of
my country when it happened. In decent business circles one doesn't do
things like that and only Mr. Provinciality (that is Gyula Horn) would not
think of the international consequences of such a move. Hungary's reputation
was dragged into the mud--HVG wasn't exeggerating.

>P.S. I enjoy your history debates very much. However I do not share your
>pessimism when it comes to hungarians not being mature enough to
>appreciate freedom of speach as a cornerstone or major ingredient
>of democracy.

        After rereading my own posting I also thought that I left with an
impression that I was terribly pessimistic about the future. I would like to
correct this. The older generation--forty and over, let's say--is lost. They
are not going to be able to fit in. They cannot start a new career, and they
will have difficulty to change over to an entirely different economic and
political system. It doesn't matter how much one tries to explain that our
economic and political system is better, they will not change their minds.
The younger people are something else. But even this way, we will need at
least 20-25 years before the "mode of thinking" will change.

        And that reminds me of a news item from yesterday's BLA: According
to a public opinion poll conducted by the Institute of Minorities of the
Minoritas Foundation eighteen-year olds who just finished high school
"reject traditional politics but they are open toward new `movements'
[political movements, whatever that means]. Centuries-old negative reactions
still influence Hungarian youth. Fifty-three percent of apprentices think
that politics is good only for the politicians." Youngsters who finished
gymnasium are less skeptical: only 26 percent thinks that politics is a
useless undertaking. However, 69 percent of the apprentices and 54 percent
of those who finished gymnasium think that politics make no difference
whatsoever, doesn't matter which party is in power. This doesn't bode well
for the future.

>I think they do but there is a heavy load of cinicism involved
>when answering polls. (I think you mentioned a 6% figure from a poll).
>Could it be caused simply by dire straits or possibly some other
>psycho-social or historical factors ?

        A combination of the two, I think. But one thing I am certain. The
situation is not as bad as some newspapers and politicians like to portray
it. The country is in "dire straits" only if you thought that in ten years
we will live as well as the Austrians. Then, the situation is indeed very
bad. Too high expectations, unfulfilled, make things worst at least

        Eva Balogh
+ - Quotes & language (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Sorry, Subscribers, for the drag-on, but I must adress the issue again of B.
Ferenc using my quotes and having a fixation with an uncomplimentary word I
used in a posting.

Dear Ferenc,

Obviously you are misunderstanding some things:

1) Yes, I am being truthful.  You are using a curse word to sidetrack the topic
Because sound arguments are not being made against my counter-arguments and my
questions are not often seriously answered, some people seem to want to attack
a word I used instead of adressing the issues.  (Somethimes maybe attacking the
speaker is easier than attackng the issue.)

I NEVER said you used the word f-fej in your messages, but you ARE using it
to avoid the real topic by having a fixation with this word.  Understand?

Therefore, you ARE using this word to derail me.  In English, 'to use a word'
does not only mean 'to speak a word' but simply to USE it as an excuse or tool.
 You did not say f-fej, but you ARE harping on this point and USING it to put
 smoke over the original issues.

Whether you label me (falsely) a newcomer or call me a lurker... I am still a
subscriber.  It is the sort of tactic as mentioned above that made me hesitant
about enterring earlier debates!  You seem to have earlier made comments to
others that seem overly critical and snide; therefore you're present encounter
with me is of no surprise.  (BTW: I contributed to the List earlier by making
a comment about language schools in Hungary and about enjoying the history
discussion the Dr. Phidas wanted to possibly take on to private lines!)

Put me on probation??!!  Ha!  Am I supposed to receive a grade from you at the
end of the semester, too? I am not doing this just for attention. What a waste
that would probably be, because you seem to have misunderstood different things

Please, try to refrain from continually half quoting: "God sure must hate him!"
That was used in a sarcastic statement showing the absurdity of others inter-
preting their god's message from events simply to fit their own purposes.  If
a Christian can interpret the unfortunate events of others as God's anger with
them, then they should look at themselves with the SAME standards.  If the
death of a homosexual is considered by someone to show god's punishment of the
person, then how should they also interpret the death of their own people and
leaders???  When Pope J-Paul I died (some rumor he was murdered), why didn't
anyone in the Church who is so quick to pronounce god's judgements say anything
about the pope's death and god's anger with him ???? !!!!! ?????  That is when
I said, "if you're going to judge that...when J-P I died ... that then shows
 that god sure must hate him!"  You should also be careful when quoting, pls.

Still, Ferenc, I say that any god who spreads a horrid, vile, wretched disease
to indiscriminantly kill scores of people when 'he' is only SUPPOSED to be
punishing gays is a doo-doo pooh-pooh head (f-efj). If this is the case he is
a doo-doo pooh-pooh head (f-fej).  What other term would you use??? He couldn't
even kill lesbians.... but babies and mothers he sure did not then seem to for-
get.  ??????????????  Do you call that being then a loving, just and holy
father???  I'm not going to ask you this question again.  I'll let it rest.

I do not think you have said anything homophobic.  Our present discussion is
dealing with language... and not any other topic.  However, I can see Joe
Szalai's point regarding trying to "ghettoize" the gay topic.  It sounded as
if you wanted the gay topic off the list, and this action (not any words) can
seem as if the topic of treating gays equally should not even be a matter for
discussion. Therefore, I can see who this misunderstanding occurred.

Yes, my postings are very often very civil and respectful. Some people, however
may feel threatened by my asking questions which should not be asked or cannot
be answered. However, the politeness of many of my other postings does not seem
to matter, because you seem to be fixated that in an "if... then clause" I
 called Yahwey a dickhead. You yourself have been known to use snide remarks an
 make personal cracks at others.  I do not think I have done that.  I have kept
 mainly to the debate, although I am not perfect.

Wishing you the best and wishing you would take more time to read postings
+ - Mea Culpa (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

To the original sender of 'Mea Culpa':

(It may have been Janos, but whoever it was- ...    )

I deleted your posting by accident, but want to thank you for pointing out wher
the origin of f-fej on the list is from.  You do not have to apologize to me.

I would simply like to say I appreciate your polite, sincere manner.  You ad-
mitted a possible 'mistake,' and now we move on.  You were not snide or rude to
me. Thank you.

I am not blaming anyone on the list for teaching me anything. (Self-rightous
 Ferenc can be as snide as he wants.)  I learned a word... and also used it onc
 where "I" thought it fit.  I am sorry if I offended you or others.

Sorry for the trouble... mindenesetre... I like learning any Hungarian I can,
+ - Re: To agent "Lup". (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

At 05:52 AM 9/2/96 -0700, you wrote:

>        Aniko, Lup = Woolf = Farkas. This idiot thinks that Marina is Gabor
>Farkas. I don't know whether you took Latin or not but in Latin lupus =
>farkas (woolf). Hence the Romanian and don't forget that Gabor comes from
>        Eva Balogh

Thanks to both yourself and to Gabor for getting me out of the bushes!
Wonder how Mpflerr feels about the association?  Not to mention Gabor?  Must
say, such things are _almost_ (big almost, but getting smaller) making the
good ol Doc himself look to be a tad (_little tad_) more sane?

Regards, Aniko
PS - thanks for the writings on the Hotels....interesting!  Also thanks for
re-iterating my feelings regarding "Dr". Kristina?  (You are far more
eloquent than I).  And at last, are you not just a tad surprised that there
are not three dr. titles preceeding her name?  (Just thought I'd ask.  After
all, with "all" that knowledge, there should at least be three)?  Ciao.
+ - Re: Mea Culpa (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

At 01:19 PM 9/3/96 EDT, Mark Humphreys wrote:

>Sorry for the trouble... mindenesetre... I like learning any Hungarian I can,

Mindenesetre--good word. You are doing fine!

        Eva Balogh
+ - Re: About Slovak fascism, general remarks (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

In >, (Michael Hajovsky)
>In >  (Karl Pollak) writes:
> > perhaps you failed to notice that Carleton U is in Ottawa,
> > Ontario, not in Boston or Philadelphia. Consequently the First
> > Amendment to the US Constitution is of no relevance to anyone
> > concerned.
>Sorry to disappoint you, I have not failed to notice where Mr. Frajkor
>ISP is, or that our Internet-would-be-censor, Mr. Albu is posting from
>USA. But anyone from Ottawa, Bratislava, Havana or Tripoli should be
>able to post his opinions on the Internet without the fear of being
>harmed by nuts.
> > [As an aside, it would be a good idea to actually read that
> > amendment because it guarantees _nothing_.  All it does is to
> > prohibit the federal Congress from passing a certain law.  It does
> > no pass any such injunction on any State authority and has no
> > validity as against a private person]
>You are 100 percent wrong. It simply means that there shall be law
>abridging free speech by anyone, anywhere in the USA.

Oh, really?

Frank Bures, Dept. of Chemistry, University of Toronto, ON, M5S 3H6

+ - Misc. (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

To all:

I will be visiting Bavaria, Czechia and Hungary in the next two weeks.
Unfortunately almost all is work related (except for some book shopping),
so I will not participate in the debates. Although, I have to admit that
there are many days when I am considering unsubscribing because of the
"who says" case rather than the "what is said". It is so prevalent lately,
that even the otherwise saner participants are getting accostumed to it.

Maybe I am just plain old fashioned, but a periodic dose of civility would
help many on this newsgroup.

I wish you all a pleasant two weeks.

+ - Re: Funar (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Eva Balogh writes:

>. In this case as well as in the Slovak-Hungarian case, I really
> don't know whether Hungary did cave in to the Slovaks and the Romanians
> some people claim or whether these treaties are the best the country can
> sign. In the Romanian case it is obvious to me that the Hungarians are
> the only ones who are unhappy. It seems that certain Romanians, like
> are also furious.

Just a note of caution. You are using countries and people
interchangably, while actually discussing an issue that involves respective
governments. I think it is fair to say that some of those government's
activities do not necessarily represent the ideas of their populations.

+ - Re: About Slovak fascism, general remarks (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

In >
@  (Frank Bures) writes:

  >> It simply means that there shall be law
  >> abridging free speech by anyone, anywhere in the USA.

 >Oh, really?

A case of fat fingers typing <g>. If certain contributors to this
list had their way it really could be so.
+ - Re: Sophistry (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

In article >, Zoltan Szekely
> once again walks the tightrope by writing:

>> This is debatable. By the end of the war, most of the biggest death
>> in Poland and the east had been overrun by the Russians or shut down
>> the remaining inmates force marched back to the Reich, most of them
>> or being murdered en route. And your theory overlooks the realities of
>> bombing.
>It is not my theory. I read about it somewere. And it seems
>to be a very sad fact of the war.

Nice of you to tell us where you read about this. And it is a theory -- a
bad one at that. You seem to be drawn to them like a moth to a flame.

>I was really, really surprised by your comment on my note to
>Eva Balogh.
>> >
>> >Anyway, I respect the 3000th year celebration of Jerusalem.
>> >It must have some significance for his people, if they
>> >celebrate it.
>> >                                                  Sz. Zoli
>> "His" meaning whom? Your antecedant isn't clear at all. If you mean me,
>> I'm delighted and tickled to death that you assume I'm Jewish.
>??? What? I just can't believe this. First, after your stupid
>statement about Heidegger, you identified YOURSELF with the
>American culture, and now, expect the unexpectable, you identify
>yourself with a city? "His people" is the people of Jerusalem
>(maybe it would be theologically more correct to say "her people"),
>and you are not even mentioned here.

We ain't talkin' theology, bubba. We're talking grammar here. When
referring to inanimate objects such as cities, mountains or your
intellect, it's customary to use "it" as a pronoun. Since Hungarian uses
pretty much one pronoun to cover "he, she and it", I was surprised to see
you make this mistake. Are you sure you're not Romanian?
It's nice to see the words "stupid" and "Heidegger" come out of your
keyboard in such close proximity to one another. I admire you for being
willing to make a fool of yourself over and over again on the subject of
Heidegger. You're like the Energizer bunny of idiocy. P.S. -- You don't
have to be a resident of Jerusalem to be Jewish. Lots of Americans are of
the Jewish faith. Keep that startling revelation to yourself for the
moment, though. You wouldn't want to panic any other members of the group.

>I'm deeply sorry that I had to leave you out from my sentence,
>but this story is just not about you. Very sad, but there are
>some things on the face of this earth, which are not about you.
>I hope, you still can survive...
>(And my antecedant is none of your business, anyway.)
>                                                      Sz. Zoli

Your antecedants swung from the trees and ate bananas. Hell, your knuckles
still scrape the ground when you walk upright, son!
Sam Stowe

"First thing we do, we kill all the mathematicians!"
-- Shakespeare

"I only use my gun
Whenever kindness fails..."
-- Robert Earl Keen
+ - Re: Hungarhotels (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

> At 05:48 PM 9/2/96 EDT, Jeno Biro wrote:
> >However if we do,
> >than
> >Horn is right : the 3.8 billion was a very low bid.

Eva Balogh wrote:
>         It was a shameful move, I'm afraid, low bid or not. I was ashamed of
> my country when it happened. In decent business circles one doesn't do
> things like that and only Mr. Provinciality (that is Gyula Horn) would not
> think of the international consequences of such a move. Hungary's reputation
> was dragged into the mud--HVG wasn't exeggerating.

I do not share your furore over this.  Legally there was nothing wrong with
the Horn decision: he pulled back at the stage of a letter of intent, not
at the stage of a valid contract.

As for the message sent to foreign investors, it is twofold.  One is
certainly to raise questions about the predictability of the Hungarian
government and this is not desirable.  On the other hand, it is to let
foreign investors know that the government intends to charge realistic
commercial values for assets and investors cannot expect to buy up the
asset base of the country on the cheap.  This is definitely positive as
a message, *provided* it stands on firm feet. For there are plenty of
entrepreneurs out there who want to make just a quick buck out of Eastern
European privatization and can be expected to merely do a bit of asset
stripping (e.g., sell the silverware, china, building etc. separately
for more than what they paid for a going business, thus making a profit
and killing the business) and get out.  If the sale now brings more to
the Hungarian state treasury than it would have over a year ago, Horn's
decision will be vindicated and the second aspect of the message will be

As for the calculations, I consider the old deal of retaining a 49% share
unfavourable in itself, regardless of price, as it would have left the
Hungarian government with substantial ongoing financial commitments in
scrubbing up the tattered old hotels AND a minority voting position on
the board.  I did not see the Vilaggazdasag calculation: has this issue
been factored into their calculation ?

Finally, if he can pull off a better deal, Horn will be able to claim
for domestic consumption to have stood up to marauding foreign capitalist,
thus denting the arguments of his left- and right-wing opponents about
his selling the country out and letting her to be walked over by all and
sundry.  Considering that economic nationalism is one of the main hobby
horses of the collective paranoid anticapitalist opposition, this would
be a minor political coup for him.

One does not have to like Horn to admit that this is the calculated risk-
taking behaviour of a professional politician, of which Hungary needs
many more on all sides of the political dividing lines.  For starters,
if there had been professional politicians in the Antall government, Horn
would not be in power now.  Just think about it.

George Antony
+ - Re: Funar (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

At 02:29 PM 9/3/96 PDT, Jeliko wrote:
>Eva Balogh writes:
>>. In this case as well as in the Slovak-Hungarian case, I really
>> don't know whether Hungary did cave in to the Slovaks and the Romanians
>> some people claim or whether these treaties are the best the country can
>> sign. In the Romanian case it is obvious to me that the Hungarians are
>> the only ones who are unhappy. It seems that certain Romanians, like
>> are also furious.
>Just a note of caution. You are using countries and people
>interchangably, while actually discussing an issue that involves respective
>governments. I think it is fair to say that some of those government's
>activities do not necessarily represent the ideas of their populations.

        This is certainly true but two governments agreed to sign an
agreement. Surely, both parties made some compromises. For example, if I
recall, Romania originally refused to include the controversial reference to
any kind of autonomy. Be that cultural or otherwise. Yet, eventually this
paragraph was included. I am also sure that the Hungarian government, most
likely as a result of pressure from the Hungarian minority organizations in
Romania, wanted to have a wider interpretation of the autonomy clause. At
the end, they had to agree to a narrower interpretation. Surely, the
Hungarian and Romanian cabinets agreed that the text as it stands acceptable
to them.

        Now comes the reaction of the certain segments of the population in
each country. The Hungarian opposition parties and certain Romanian parties
dislike the provisions of the treaty. For example, Funar's party. Or, in
Hungary, Torgyan's party. Then comes the populations themself. I am certain
that there are people in both countries who find the treaty provisions
unacceptable. The question is how large percentages of the populations are
against the treaty. I am sure, at least in Hungary, we will find out soon
enough. Hungarians adore taking opinion polls.

        Eva Balogh
+ - Re: Cultural Superiority Complex (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

In article >, Zoltan Szekely
> shooting himself in the foot over and over again
with abandon, says:

>you look really desparate about the French culture.
>You can not understand, that in a HUNGARY list it
>is not fair to attack somebody on the sole basis
>of his/her French origin. You would create the
>false impression in the reader, that Hungarians
>feed anti-French sentiments. I hope you understand
>that it is not nice.

Coming from a guy who attacks people based on their Jewish heritage and/or
American origins, this is rich indeed. Do you have a sign taped to your
back that says "hypocrite"?
>And judging a nation and a culture 'an bloc' on
>the basis that it is coming from a specific
>geografical location (say, France) is just nonsense.

So, it's okay when you do it, but the rest of us are forbidden? I'd say
France is a tad more than a geographical location. They have this thing
called a culture and a language -- good cuisine, Gerard Depardieu movies,
institutionalized rudeness and a sense of superiority unhampered by any
objective grounding in reality. Zut alors! They're just like you! Wait,
folks...wait....it's coming to me: a) Zoltan reflexively sticks up for the
French, b) Who are more slavishly francophile than the Romanians?...Nah,
even they would never claim him as one of their own. By the way, dimwit,
my dislike of the French -- Parisians if you really want to get technical
about it. My own interactions with French people outside that place have
been great -- is based on what they do and what they say, not where
they're located geographically. It's the same grounds for dislike that I
apply to you. I don't play favorites. You project your own dislike of the
U.S.A., based apparently on the unforgivable fact that it's on the wrong
side of the Atlantic as far as you're concerned, onto me. Keep your
unconscious to yourself, buster. By the way, you're still taking up space
at an American university, even though you think we're not nearly as
advanced as you Europeans culturally. Have I called you a hypocrite
lately? Not in several paragraphs, at least.

>Have you ever heard about Blaise Pascal, Saint-
>Exupery or Simone Weil? They are not exactly the
>same soup as Descartes, Rousseau or Voltaire.
>                                         Sz. Zoli

This is your same stupid name-dropping crap, where you mouth off about
stuff of which you know little or nothing. Let me share one of my favorite
morsels from Pascal's "Pensees" with you (Joe Szalai -- Heads up, buddy!
You'll appreciate this one.):

"If he exalts himself,
I humble him.
If he humbles himself,
I exalt him.
And I go on and on
contradicting him
until he realizes
he is a monster who surpasses
all understanding."

In your case, Zoltan, I make an exception. I will continue to humble you
until you realize you are a dumb-ass who couldn't reason his way out of a
wet paper sack. Sorry, pal, but you're just not ready for prime-time
monster status yet. Keep working on those totalitarian ideas of yours and
we'll have you up in the big leagues in no time flat.
Sam Stowe

P.S. -- Simone Weil would have back-handed you.

"I only use my gun
Whenever kindness fails..."
-- Robert Earl Keen
+ - Re: Mr. Frajkor, listowner of Slovak-L (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

In >, (Paul Zapletal)
>On Aug 30, 1996 17:42:27 in article <Re: Mr. Frajkor, listowner of
>Slovak-L>,  (Kristina Szurek)' wrote:
>>:Mr. Kanala
>>Kristina Szurek
>>: First of all, Miss Kristina Szurek is neither a professional nor a :
>>Very nice intro :-) your ignorance is aparent from the very first line of
>>posting.  An achievement of a Bachelor degree consists of 4 years of
>>studies which in my book is a scholar. I have worked for various agencies
>>throughout Toronto before (full time) and during my studies (part-time,
>>summers), and am currently self-employed.  You may have doubts about me
>being a
>>professional, but my clients don't.
>Dear Ms Szurek
>Congratulations,  obtaining a BA degree is without doubt an achievment at
>York University.  And
>I have no doubt that it was a hard work.  When you get out into a real
>world you will most likely
>find out that the word professional,  in the field of psychology, means
>somebody who has a Master
>degree or a Doctorate.   These people, once they prove that they are
>competent, are issued
>licences that allow them to practice and arrive to conclusions or
>diagnosis.  To protect the
>general public, these licences can be revoked.  In the real world you will
>also find out that the
>word scholar is reserved for professionals who distinguished themselves
>more than others by
>studying a lot, publishing scientific papers, books and who have proven
>themselves.  This
>distinction is given to them by their peers in the field.
>For all  these reasons I think that Mr. Kanala was right in his
>observations on your use of
>words professional and scholar.   In fact, had you been a licenced
>professional and made
>a "professional advice' in a public forum, as you did in your previous
>post, your carrier
>would probably be over.  By no means I am suggesting that you should not
>take pride in
>your important work.  I only sincerely hope that you are taking a totally
>different approach,
>when working with these unfortunate kids, than the one that you exhibit
>>: This girl just obtained (June 1996) a Bachelor degree in Child
>>: psychology from York University
>>I do not know where you get your information from, but the information is
>Incorrect?   Are you denying the very Bachelor degree that you were so
>of a minute ago?    Is it not a fact that on June 25, 1996 you have
>advertised yourself on usenet in misc. kids and crossposted the message
>in numerous related newsgroup fora with the following: " I have just
>from York University with the Bachelor degree (BA) in Psychology...".
>And you made it known already that you specialize in child behavior.
>You seem to be confused now about your credentials.
>Maybe you should go back to York University and consult preferably with
>some Associate Professor with a BA degree as to what kind of diploma is
>really hanging on your wall.   If you decide to go back to school, it will
>have some real advantage.  Yes, then you will be able to keep your E-mail
>address past the six month period.
>>Sorry, I didn't finish the rest of your posting, it got too boring. Big
>>no content....it's called BULL SHIT in our university dictionary.
>Ouch!!!   What a finish    You don't mean York University!  But then, you
>not have any other university (using your words) in your book.
>Sorry, but you  blew it completely.


York University has such a reputation in Canada that the only two
schools that are any good do not even have "York University" in
their names. They call themselves Osgood Hall (law school) and
Schulich School of Business. York University is very close in
quality to another Toronto's aberration Ryerson Quasitechnical
University, where quite large group of lecturers obtained their PhD's
in Hungary in 6 months and for $10,000 fee.

Frank Bures, Dept. of Chemistry, University of Toronto, ON, M5S 3H6

+ - Re: Mr. Frajkor, listowner of Slovak-L (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

In >,  (Kristina Szurek)
>If you have a child or adult, perhaps yourself, suffering from
>head injuries, autism, developmental delays,... please contact me.

I would be tempted to call it child abuse if I brought my child to

>I can also send you a brochure outlining our services, we are located
>in Toronto, Ontario.  Speak fluently English, Slovak and Hungarian.
>Big words, no content....it's called BULL SHIT in our university

You forgot to mention you speak vulgarese (4-letter-words) fluently.
But on the other hand it is obvious, isn't it?

Frank Bures, Dept. of Chemistry, University of Toronto, ON, M5S 3H6

+ - Re: Mr. Frajkor, listowner of Slovak-L (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Frank Bures, At 03:49 PM 9/3/96 GMT, you wrote:
>In Response to Dr, Dr. Dr....who?
>,  (Kristina Szurek)

<snippola majore of the doc's whatever>

>You forgot to mention you speak vulgarese (4-letter-words) fluently.
>But on the other hand it is obvious, isn't it?
Goodness Frank.... are you sure that you did not err?  I am sure that you
meant to reinetare some others wisdom right.... "scholarly words being
obvious that as they are"    yes?

PMS majore.... aka .... an alternative to "Lup"????

>Frank Bures, Dept. of Chemistry, University of Toronto, ON, M5S 3H6

+ - Re: Gutter language (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

At 03:59 PM 9/2/96 -0500, Michael Csiki > referring
to Ferenc Novak >, wrote:

>        Joe - I may have entered into this thread late but in the letter
>you respond to there is not one iota of homophobia - the contributor is
>responding to use of language not a sexual orientation, as I said, IN
>THAT letter.  :)  Again, I may have entered the thread late and maybe
>this contributor is homophobic but not in THAT LETTER THEY AIN'T!  :)

Oh yeah?  In his first paragraph, which I should have quoted, he said of
Mark Humphreys: "The worst of a bad lot is a relative newcomer who, in
addition of inundating the list with hundreds of lines of militant
homosexual and anti-religious tirades, produces prose that would make a
sailor blush."

When I read Mark's posts I didn't think that they were "hundreds of lines of
militant homosexual and anti-religious tirades".  I thought that they were
well written and thought provoking.  They were not tirades.  And they
weren't militant!  In my books, if someone suggests that demands for
equality are somehow "militant", then there's a better than average chance
that they're "...phobes" or "...ists" of some kind.

Then, at 04:45 PM 8/30/96 -0400, Ferenc Novak > confirmed my
suspicions when he wrote:

>You misunderstand, Joe.  It's not fear.  Just plain disgust.

He doesn't mince his words, does he?  Is he homophobic?

Joe Szalai

"Before they're plumbers or writers or taxi drivers or unemployed or
journalists, before everything else, men are men. Whether heterosexual or
homosexual. The only difference is that some of them remind you of it as
soon as you meet them, and others wait for a little while."
           Marguerite Duras
+ - A few numbers concerning HungarHotels' sale (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

George Antony wrote :

>I recall that the unsuccessful US bidders said something to the effect that
>only the Forum was worth anything, the rest was useless and they only offered
t>o buy them because they were part of the package.  Given this, perhaps
>somewhat self-serving, opinion it may well be better that those hotels have
>been sold off completely, not only 51% of them as in the original deal, and
>even if at a lower price considering currency movements.

Are you sure the original bid was for 51% only ? Because that would explain the
discrepancy from  the 3.8 billion Ft bid (Dec '94) to the 15.6 billion (Aug
As I shoved in my post yesterday the present value of 3.8 billion Dec '94
should be about 5.7 billion in todays Forints. Now if that 5.7 represented 51%
of the shares than the total (100% of the shares) would be approx. 11.5 billion
This is a realistic figure as compared to 15.6 billion (the price for the whole
package including Forum) and it shows that it was worth waiting for the right
bid which will bring in about 40% more money.

Biro" Jeno".
+ - The Pope In Hungary - mea culpa (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

On Mon Sep  2 18:43:40  Peter Hidas wrote :

>At 3:54 PM 9/2/96, Biro Jeno wrote:
>> During the war, the Abbot obtained a promise from both the
>>Hungarian and later from the occupying German authorities, that no
>>military units would be allowed to enter the monastery. This allowed him
>>to save the lives of some 1000 Jewish Hungarians.

>Unfortunately, that is a bit of an exaggeration . For a while the Red Cross
>operated at Pannonhalma but were expelled from there in 1944. Towards the
>end of the war the good brothers provided temporary shelters for hundreds
>of refugees but few of them were Jewish. Thirty six Jews were saved by the
>Abbot. He describe these actions to his superiors in a letter dated in

Thank you for correcting me on that number. As I stated in my post I did not
write the article, my intent was not to start another Jewish thread, I simply
was charmed by the story as a whole. (Sounded kind of romantic).
Unfortunately romantics love hyperbole. I thought the author was a historian
and as such more objective.

Biro' Jeno".
+ - Re: I'm back! (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

In article >,

>..and fully operational. Well, nearly.
>I was away for 5 weeks! 4 weeks in Hungary,
>Love/best wishes     Eva

Welcome back!

George Szaszvari, DCPS Chess Club, 42 Alleyn Park, London SE21 7AA, UK
Planet Earth, Milky Way Galaxy * ARM Club * C=64..ICPUG * NW London CC
+ - Re: Mr. Frajkor, listowner of Slovak-L (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Mr. Bures is being quoted:

At 03:57 PM 9/3/96 GMT, you wrote:

>York University has such a reputation in Canada that the only two
>schools that are any good do not even have "York University" in
>their names.

Hold your horses young man!  You are making claims here that will become far
harder to back up than you might realize .... and I don't mean on "frosh"
events either!

They call themselves Osgood Hall (law school) and
>Schulich School of Business. York University is very close in
>quality to another Toronto's aberration Ryerson Quasitechnical
>University, where quite large group of lecturers obtained their PhD's
>in Hungary in 6 months and for $10,000 fee.
I will have you know that - several people whom I know personally have began
their professions (and could more than honestly claim success in today's
standards)  by being rather well educated at what you reffer to as an
"aberration" (btw ... cheq spell... does not look correct)?  Ryerson to my
knowledge does not claim to be a University .... unless things have
drastically changed within the last few month?   .... please feel free to
correct.  As for the ten thousand dollar fee;  let's start a bet on how much
"dr." Kristina might have paid for hers????

Judging by the fact that one BA,  such as her proudly acclaimed
accomplishment can be had for 100US in some remote parts of the world ...
what would one pay for a BA degree whose teachings and morals advocate
and/or result in such postings as Dr. Kristina?????  (Ohhh.... please
forgive me listmembers for this overindulgence of "Flaming" !  This is
simply getting the best of my PMS and boy a boy .... sure beats beating on
them poor little students, who get slapped silly should their Latin not be
up to par for morning prayers...)


>Frank Bures, Dept. of Chemistry, University of Toronto, ON, M5S 3H6