I would like to thank everybody for their help with "Degul-Silvaniei".
It is clearly Cehul Silvaniei, now that I know that's what I should be
looking for in the rather tortured handwriting I can see this.

Andras Kornai

> Felado :  [United States]
>         The Russians did not think so. In fact, to reimpose their
>         colonial rule in Hungary, they threw in more than 16 army
>         and 2 air force divisions.
I can well believe this. Nevertheless, a large army does not a large
armed conflict make. To the contrary, the overwhelming superiority
might have been the cause of there being so little actual fighting.

> In the fighting they suffered close to 700 dead,
> 1500 wounded and scores missing.
Official Soviet figures, or are the Soviet military archives now open?

> On the side of the freedom fighters (szabadsagharcos), at least 2700
> were killed and an estimated 30,000 wounded.
I think these figures are completely bogus. I would love to see some
documentation for this. With the demise of communism it should be
possible to list the 2,700 individually, just as it was possible to
list individually everybody ever interned at Recsk.

> When resistance was no longer feasible in light of the superiority
> of Russian arms, according to the UN High Commissioner for Refugees an
> estimated 200,000 left the country because of the fear of retribution.
An estimated 200.000 left, but how many of these were involved in combat?

> The above illustrates the old adage that the middle and older
> generation of East and Central Europeans, even if exposed to the
> civilizing discourse of the Anglo-Saxon world, can't hide their
> cultural backgrounds when debating. The culture of tolerance and
> the consideration of the possibility that the other person may have
> a point of view as valid as one's own is totally lacking.
> When they run out of ideas, their emotions take over. They
> unburden themselves with a torrent of arguments ad hominem.
I singled you out as you are one of the more articulate promoters of
the "szabadsa1gharc" view, and I didn't use any ad hominem arguments
against you. I assumed that as a military man you will understand
what makes this wholesale awarding of combat stripes so dishonorable,
and perhaps in your heart of hearts you do. Like I said, Hungarian
society has strong collective memory, and most people know what those
in their family/workplace/neighborhood did during 56. Let's see the
list of 2,700 and we can take it from there.

> In their extremism, there is much that make Pellionisz and
> Kornai kindred spirits.
I'm not sure what makes my views extremist, but of course Pellionisz
and I are kindred spirits. For starters, neither of us distinguished
himself in the revolution (or freedom fight).

Andra1s Kornai

Dear A.Kornai,

I would like to ask two question only.

a, What do you want to say about the fights in '56' excatly?
   'Pontosan mit is akarsz mondani az '56'-os harcokkal kapcsolatban?'

b, If you speak about 'little' or 'token' fights, what do you mean by
   'little' or 'token' and why? How do you define the 'taugh' resistance?
   'Ha olyan fogalmakat hasznalsz, mint gyenge vagy latszat ellenallas,
    akkor definiald mit ertesz ezalatt es miert! Hogy definialod a
    'kemeny' ellenallast?'

I am afraid these are very relative things. Without clear explanation of
the quetions above, I do not see any sense to talk about those fights in
56 and judge them.

J.Zsargo

At 02:34 PM 5/29/96 -0600, Cecilia L. Fa'bos-Becke wrote:

in reply to my remark:

>>On the other hand it was strange to see the thousands of motorcyclists. Some
>>of them looked like real war veterans but many of them looked like Hell's
>>Angels.

>They are--both bikers and veterans, although most are probably not wearing
>the jackets or vests indicating they are really "Hell's Angels."  I'm saving
>this posting for one of my best friends, however, who was a Green Beret in
>'Nam, and also has been a biker--and member of motorcyle groups, since he
>was 16.    Most of the bikers hold real jobs, at decent salaries, though,
>they're not "outlaws."  A lot of the ones whose looks probably surprised you
>the most probably come from places like Idaho, Montana, northern
>California--areas of the west and other mountain/wildnerness areas where
>looks and individualism are not a major concern.  Thanks for the posting.

I was referring to those who were much too young to be veterans of any wars,
those who had the visible part of their skin full of various tatoos, those
who had more than six rings in their noses, ears, lips, etc. and those who
were so filthy that others tried to avoid them (and in most cases  a
combination of these).

Gabor D. Farkas

"We trained hard,... but it seemed that every time we were beginning to
form up into teams we would be reorganized ... I was to learn later in
life that we tend to meet any new situation by reorganizing, and a
wonderful method it can be for creating the illusion of progress while
producing confusion, inefficiency and demoralization."

                                  Petronius Arbiter, 210 BC on Reorganization

Is Petronius right or wrong?  Certainly, a lot of people in Western
workplaces would agree with Petronius, but are his comments relevant to the
recent changes in Hungary?

Joe Szalai

P.S. Can anyone tell me where this quote is from.  I've checked just about
every book on or by Petronius that's in our library but had no luck finding
the above quote.

This post is for the benefit of those who do not receive MOZAIK,

                                                                Amos

> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Issue____________: *** MOZAIK 758 ***
Date_____________: Thu May 30 00:42:03 EDT 1996
Publisher________: Hollosi Information eXchange /HIX/
Disclaimer_______: Authors bear full responsibility for their articles.
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Send-Articles-To_: >
Subscribe________: >   or >
Unsubscribe______: > or >
Help_____________: >
Supervisor_______: >
Copyright________: http://www.clari.net/brad/copymyths.html
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
HIXWEB___________: http://www.hix.com/  or  http://www.hu.hix.com/
ARENA____________: http://www.hix.com/arena/  or  telnet arena.hix.com
HUDIR____________: http://www.hungary.com/hudir/
KIKI_____________: http://www.hungary.com/kiki/

> =======================================================
> Felado :  [United States]
> Temakor: OMRI Daily Digest - 28 May 1996 ( 50 sor )
> Idopont: Wed May 29 08:00:18 EDT 1996 MOZAIK #758
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

OMRI DAILY DIGEST
No. 103, 28 May 1996

ETHNIC HUNGARIAN LEADER CRITICIZES SLOVAK PRIME MINISTER. Hungarian
Civic Party chairman Laszlo Nagy said Vladimir Meciar's call for
creating "clean Hungarian constituencies" was a "propagandistic move,"
Narodna obroda reported on 28 May. Meciar made the statement during the
recent visit of OSCE High Commissioner on National Minorities Max van
der Stoel. However, critics have argued that "ethnically clean"
territory does not exist in Slovakia. Nagy said ethnic Hungarian
Coexistence chairman Miklos Duray did not consult his coalition partners
before declaring on 25 May that cooperation between opposition and
Hungarian coalition parties should be strengthened to form a union. Nagy
added that discussion of the matter should be delayed until the new
electoral law is approved. Meanwhile, Coexistence deputy chairman Arpad
Duka-Zolyomi told Sme on 28 May that his party is proposing a union of
Hungarian parties, not of the opposition as a whole. -- Sharon Fisher

-----------
ROMANIAN PRESIDENTIAL SPOKESMAN ON TREATY WITH HUNGARY. Traian Chebeleu
on 27 May said extremists in Hungary, the Hungarian diaspora, and the
Hungarian Democratic Federation of Romania put pressure on Budapest to
include the controversial Council of Europe Recommendation 1201 in the
Romanian-Hungarian basic treaty, Romanian media reported. He rejected
the claim that Romania had accepted the recommendation providing for
collective rights for ethnic minorities at the time of its admission
into the council. Chebeleu claims Bucharest only committed itself to
take into consideration that document's stipulations while drafting the
recently passed education law. The recommendation's inclusion in the
Hungarian-Slovak treaty does not solve existing problems but rather
creates new tensions in bilateral relations, Chebeleu added. He further
proposed the recently signed Romanian-Yugoslav treaty as a model for
Bucharest and Budapest. -- Matyas Szabo

[As of 12:00 CET]

Compiled by Deborah Michaels

> =*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
> *=
> =* TIPP GURU MOKA VITA SPORT DOSZ ||                                         
> *=
> =* HIR MOZAIK SZALON RANDI OTTHON ||    Hollosi Information eXchange /HIX/   
> *=
> =* NARANCS HUNGARY KORNYESZ FORUM ||                                         
> *=
> =*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
> *=
> =* Helpfile:    >          ||   WWW:     http://hix.mit.edu/    
> *=
> =* Human touch: >    ||   Finger:         
> *=
> =* ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> *=
> =* Hollosi Jozsi. /HIX/  (personal mail only: >)             
> *=
> =*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
> *=



--- End of forwarded mail from "HIX MOZAIK" >

In article >,
 says, in reply to:

>>I spent Memorial Day with friends in the Washington DC area. On Sunday we
>>visited the Vietnam War Memorial and the Korean War Memorial. Regardless
>>of one's feelings about those or any other wars, it is heartbreaking to
>>see the thousands of names of young people who died for their country.
>>You can see a few Hungarian names on the wall.
>>On the other hand it was strange to see the thousands of motorcyclists.
>>Some of them looked like real war veterans but many of them looked like
>>Hell's Angels.
>>Gabor D. Farkas
>>
>They are--both bikers and veterans, although most are probably not wearing
>the jackets or vests indicating they are really "Hell's Angels."  I'm
>saving this posting for one of my best friends, however, who was a Green
>Beret in 'Nam, and also has been a biker--and member of motorcyle groups,
>since he was 16.    Most of the bikers hold real jobs, at decent salaries,
>though, they're not "outlaws."  A lot of the ones whose looks probably
>surprised you the most probably come from places like Idaho, Montana,
>northern California--areas of the west and other mountain/wildnerness
>areas where looks and individualism are not a major concern.  Thanks for
>the posting.

Yes, just being a biker doesn't make one an *outlaw*. Back in the 70s and
early 80s I was a biker of sorts, too, (Yamaha 750cc triple cylinder shaft
drive mostly, with a few episodes on other things [and after trying a
friend's BMW RS100 in rough weather, despaired at not being able to afford
one at the time: it was as steady as a rock]; BTW Harleys were, and still
are, relatively expensive machines) and met a lot of ridiculous paranoia and
discrimination from so-called respectable people. Most weekend bikers in
the States, as in Britain, are just as Cecilia says: professionals (lawyers,
businessmen, academics, etc) who like to get away from the usual stuffiness
of their work/home environment to dress down and stretch their legs. The
outlaw types exist, but just as in any walk of life, are the tiny minority.
I met bearded US bikers when some were touring on their Harleys in Britain
and they certainly weren't outlaws/Hell's Angels even if they didn't really
mind whether some people thought they were: it was all part of the fun (born
to be free and wild, etc) ;-)

Regards,

George

In article >,
 says...
>
>>After all I don't know how you,
>>personally were raised, and never claimed otherwise.  And after all, some
>>people think in these more complex times, it is better to live a more
>>narrowly focused life.
>
>        Your insults are undescribable! Yes, you don't know how I was
>raised and your suggestion for a more narrowly focused life is beyond
>description.

Chill out, Bossy Boots. The only indescribable thing is your idiotic
hysteria. Screaming accusations of *insults* all the time while you
constantly insult others (much more grossly) is the pits.

>>I'm simply looking for a group that might share my own background better
>to discuss items in which this group may not be interested.
>
>        Please, hurry up and find a more congenial group which would be
>more interested in your ideas on manure and related subjects.

The real manure is coming from you, I'm afraid.

>        Eva Balogh (aka Bossy Boots)

Regards,

Your ardent admirer

Mr Hyde ;-)

In the meantime this message became obsolete, but here you go:

  I don't have any map around, but I would say that you should look around the
town of Simleul Silvaniei (Szilva'ssomlyo' as far as I know), which certainly
exists.
 About the name, Bontea sounds like a real Romanian family name, all the
other variants seem unreasonable.
 If some Hungarian name got Romanized (or perhaps Romanianized? :^) as
Vasile, there is big chance that initially it was La'szlo'. Btw. Laszlo has
also another romanian counterpart, Ladislau. Although Vasile is a genuine
Romanian first name, Ladislau is used only for Hungarians.

I hope it helps!

Zoli (from Zoltan, which could not be translated ...)

P.s: As a personal note: My mother has on her birth certificate dated back in
1946 as first name "Teresia" (standing for Tere'z). My birth certificate from
1967 calls me Zoltan, for the reasons above. My sister already appears
officially as
"Terez" on her birth certificate from 1977. Some evolution, I would
guess...At least around Arad.

>>At 02:18 PM 5/29/96 -0600, you wrote:
>>>
        >Which/what retraction?  There was something uniquely offensive to
all?  I
        >thought everything I've ever posted had someone or other wishing
I'd make
        >_a_ retraction.  Did I miss something in particular?
The retraction I asked for is a statement of yours, I highly objected to.
The one, which felt to be demeaning the Hungarian culture at
large....remember that one?  That one!  And a blanket "I am sorry period"
just does not cut it...sorry!

Geez Cecilia, I gotta find you a writing project that can both serve to
challenge and occupy your imagination, fingers and skills!  Give me a day or
two - I am sure I can come up with something!

Regards,
Aniko

Dear Eva;

At 04:13 PM 5/29/96 -0700, you wrote:
>At 02:18 PM 5/29/96 -0600, Cecilia wrote:
>>Dear Eva;
>
>>Many years ago, I found two volumes of Karyoli's memoirs/autobiographies in
>>a public library.  The first was written, but publication date uncertain,
>>before his political efforts failed.  The second was written and published
>>after his visit to Vienna when he was trying to resurrect his political
>efforts.
>
>        I'm afraid this whole thing is jibberish. What "visit to Vienna,"
>and what does it mean that "he was trying to resurrect his political
>efforts." He didn't visit Vienna and he didn't really try to resurrect his
>political career. He left Hungary in 1919 and moved to Prague and from
>Prague to France. After 1945 he returned to Hungary and became ambassador to
>France. He resigned after the communists got into power. He wrote two
>autobiographies. The first, the more important one, was published in 1922 in
>Hungarian, English, and German, and another one in the early 1950s.

Thank you for indicating the publication dates.  It had been awhile, so
please note I stated I was uncertain of the publication dates.  Second,
however, he did get stones thrown at him in Vienna.  It was a very brief
visit. As you have correctly observed he did live in Prague for awhile, it
is certainly not inconceivable that he visited other cities during his stay
in Prague.  It is a comparatively minor incident in the general history
books--when one finds it mentioned at all, but as I recall, he did
acknowledge it and said something to the effect that the incident did shake
him up a bit.  I don't have time to drive up to Stanford and find that bit
again, perhaps someone else can.  I'm not really interested in pursuing
Michael Karolyi's antics further, if all it is going to do is generate
further ire.
>
>>After all I don't know how you,
>>personally were raised, and never claimed otherwise.  And after all, some
>>people think in these more complex times, it is better to live a more
>>narrowly focused life.
>
>        Your insults are undescribable! Yes, you don't know how I was raised
>and your suggestion for a more narrowly focused life is beyond description.
>
If every attempt at amelioration or anything I say you choose to assume the
worst of, that is entirely up to you.  It is apparent to me that you will
believe or assume the worst no matter what I say.  It seems that if I wish
to avoid further conflict, it would be well for me to never respond to
another posting of yours, or refer to any of your postings.

>>I'm simply looking for a group that might share my own background better to
>>discuss items in which this group may not be interested.
>
>        Please, hurry up and find a more congenial group which would be more
>interested in your ideas on manure and related subjects.
>
Thank you, I trust if you encounter any, you will let me know about them.

Sincerely,

Cecilia L. Fa'bos-Becker
San Jo'se, CA, USA

(sorry, I keep forgetting that the city council just a couple of years ago
voted to restore the use of the accent now that wordprocessors made it
easier to use.)

N0BBS, Cecilia L. Fabos-Becker -  - San Jose, CA

Dear George;

At 09:39 AM 5/30/96 +1000, you wrote:
>Eva Balogh wrote, addressed to Cecilia Fabos_Becker:
>
>>         Please, hurry up and find a more congenial group which would be more
>> interested in your ideas on manure and related subjects.
>
>I do not think that this is necessary.  While I find many of Ms Fabos-Becker's
>topics just as relevant to HUNGARY as the recurring debates in this group on
>aspects of US politics/society etc. without any Hungarian reference, I do not
>think forcing her out is called for.
>
>Besides, manure and related subjects may well be of more interest, and
>certainly well within the charter of this discussion group, if it were
>HUNGARIAN manure.
>
>As for avoiding debates of a personal nature, one way is not to pick up the
>gauntlet.
>
Thanks George, and I hope my latest posts to Eva (one more is coming, but
it's not solely to Eva) agree with your admirable sentiment on the gauntlet.

By the way, do you think Hungarian manure would work any better at
converting that oversized adobe-brick in the garden to something resembling
real soil?  I'm not sure I can trust my friend on the control of the
dynamite--or is it nitro he's so good at making.  I forget which one he came
up with that accidentally blew the hole in the old high school football
field...  ;-)

Cecilia





AE0M, Tony Becker -  - Silicon Valley, U.S.A.

Dear Gabor;

At 02:32 AM 5/30/96 -0700, you wrote:


>I was referring to those who were much too young to be veterans of any wars,
>those who had the visible part of their skin full of various tatoos, those
>who had more than six rings in their noses, ears, lips, etc. and those who
>were so filthy that others tried to avoid them (and in most cases  a
>combination of these).
>
Oh, ok, thanks for the clarification.  I can only make a guess on this one
based on the "hangers on" noticed around my friends' group, and my brother's
group.  The young ones maybe are "wannebe associated with those that they
regard as heroic rebels?"  Again, it's just a guess, but it seems sometimes
that younger generations want to emulate and associate with elements of
older generations in which they think they perceive similar feelings of
shock or rebellion.  Look at the popularity of some of the old early
hard/"acid" rock music, like Led Zepelin, Steppenwolf, etc. that seems to be
resurgent in youth radio stations--not that they ever disappeared, but it
seems one hears it more now than say, 10 years ago.  This is just one guess,
however, I'm sure you'll get other opinions, some probably better.  Again,
thanks for the postings.

Sincerely,

Cecilia

N0BBS, Cecilia L. Fabos-Becker -  - San Jose, CA

Dear Aniko;
At 01:35 PM 5/30/96 -0300, you wrote:

>        >Which/what retraction?  There was something uniquely offensive to
>all?  I
>        >thought everything I've ever posted had someone or other wishing
>I'd make
>        >_a_ retraction.  Did I miss something in particular?
>The retraction I asked for is a statement of yours, I highly objected to.
>The one, which felt to be demeaning the Hungarian culture at
>large....remember that one?  That one!  And a blanket "I am sorry period"
>just does not cut it...sorry!
>
I've just spent nearly 3 hours trying to find the particular item in my
computer.  I seem to be missing about 2 weeks worth of e-mail, since
yesterday.  Weird, since it's the most recent two weeks.  Maybe the computer
has more sense than I do. :-)

However, I'm doing my best to remember what of all the reactions I got to
various items this one was.  I'll try again. I do remember one in which I
suggested something like that _if_ what I perceived of a sort of negative
behavior/attitude among some members of the HUNGARY group was typical of
Hungarian culture, then maybe I should share my father's regard (better
described as lack of regard).  Although I thought use of the word "if,"
indicated I wasn't really suggesting this was Hungarian culture, I apologize
for any _impression_ that I might have created that I really thought that
this was Hungarian culture.  I thought I had used the word "if," but I would
certainly agree that such a little word can get lost in the rest of an
entire sentence. It is also more than possible I thought I'd had even that
little word in their and did a typo and did not really have it in the
sentence.
There was no intention to say that all of Hungarian culture is of a negative
sort, nor that even _any_ individual or group in this list was
_purely/wholly_ representative of Hungarian culture or a negative Hungarian
culture, or a negative culture.

Have I got it right, yet?

Cecilia



N0BBS, Cecilia L. Fabos-Becker -  - San Jose, CA

At 06:19 PM 5/28/96 -0400, Sam Stowe, in an attempt to help Martha Bihari
set guidelines of what we're supposed to discuss and how we're supposed to
discuss it, wrote:

>P.S.S. -- Okay, so gardening, recipes and any nutty
>sociolinguistic/historical theories proposed by Cecelia Fabos-Becker are
>out of bounds. What else?

Well, obviously, anything by anyone who is sexist, racist, or bigoted should
be out of bounds.  But, and perhaps not so obviously, postings by anyone who
is a gingivist, agnuphilist, or crepitist should also be banned from this
list.  For those who aren't up to snuff on what's politically correct these
days, I'll explain what the above do.

A gingivist is one who dislikes those who show too much gum when smiling.
>From Latin, gingiva - "gum".

An agnuphilist is one who dislikes men who copulate with lambs and sheep.
>From Latin, agnus -"lamb" and Greek, philio - "loving".

A crepitist is one who dislikes those who loudly pass intestinal gas.
>From Latin, crepitus - "loud fart"; from crepitare - "to crackle"

I'm sure there are other types of posts to ban from this list but I'd like
others besides Sam and Martha to help in this frenzy.

Joe Szalai

Dear Group;

Anticipating Eva Balogh's last posting on this subject (the suggestion of
consulting the Jewish community was a good one): It was already done, and I
was just waiting for the response.  You're going to be surprised--so was I.
If we were to circulate crow feathers, all but one or two of us (and those
aren't either Eva or me) would have stomach aches, and the bird would
probably be on the "endangered list" by tomorrow.  Here is what I received.

I had sent a fax to a friend of mine Morey Schapira, the former national
president of the Council on Soviet Jews (recently renamed to something
else).  I told him of the debate, and told him of mine and other
interpretations of the use of the term, etc.--and also told him to freely
disagree with me, and if he did, I'd publish that he did.  I also said that
I'd prefer he wrote a statement and posted it himself.

He called me back and unfortunately he said he trusted me to write his
response, he knew I'd be fair.  I tried to tell him I didn't think some
people would agree with that, but he told me I was worrying too much
(obviously he doesn't read this group...).  Oh well, he also referred me to
a few other people at among other places, the Wiesenthal Center in L.A., and
the Holocaust Memorial (I had a couple of numbers for that one, but a
different department than needed for this).  Here it all is summarized.

Schapira, Breitart (Wiesenthal Ctr.), and Ionid (Holocaust Museum): The
legal definitions were created by the Jewish community and strictly
interpreted do include non-physical destruction.  However, the Jewish
community later has felt the language was not precise enough in some places,
is even weak, and does allow the potential for more than really ought to be
called "genocide" to merit the strict technical label.  The common
acceptance has been, "mass destruction of a people."  It can include violent
forced deportations as well as murder.  Severe mass persecution that
includes physical harm and makes people want to leave is a gray area, and
can go either way.

The emphasis of the Jewish organizations is the Jewish minorities in the
East Central European countries, they are not very knowledgeable, do not
gather such information, themselves, etc. on other groups as much, although
they do have some heightened awareness of severe persecution of "Romani"
(Gypsies) in Romania, and to a lesser extent Hungary, and other countries.
It was Mr. Ionid's opinion (the only one to venture one on this subject)
that, although he admitted to not knowing much about the possible
mistreatment of minorities in Romania other than Jews and Gypsies, that the
situation in Romania did not yet merit, in the present, the term "genocide"
other than with a qualifier, such as "cultural genocide."

There was one other statement from all of them.  They were not aware that
the  Hungarian Lobby people, or others, were as yet overusing the term in
communications with Congress and the media.  Apparently, the folks in DC and
elsewhere, are doing as I have--pretty much always adding qualifiers in
official, non-Hungarian communications.  There may have been one or two
slip-ups, but it's not regular or constant and no one seems to be
complaining that this particular item is a problem behavior.

There is the difficulty that Congress like anyone on the other side of a
petition or negotiating table, can usually be expected to diminish
something--even good legislative ideas--which can include their level of
concern.  There is some validity if one doesn't use the strongest
negotiating language, it wouldn't be taken seriously enough.  However, just
as valid has been the concern that too strong a language would put
Congresspersons off.  Whatever terminology is being used is apparently being
selected on an individual Congressperson basis, trying to cater to that
particular audience alone.  It seems to be working, as again, the Jewish
community isn't hearing of any real complaints.  In fact judging by the MFN
issue, the language to one and all must be pretty mild.

Regarding unconditional, permanent MFN for Romania; the Jewish community is
generally not in favor of it, but the bill in Congress and Lantos'
sponsorship of it is still an ongoing issue of discussion in the
organizations.  (I'd guess there are some splits on how this situation
should be handled and how Lantos should be addressed.)  The main Jewish
concern is the fact that Romania is "rehabitating Antonescu and other war
criminals."  They are also exploring what relationship this has to other
present situations in Romania, but again, haven't done much research
concerning ethnic Hungarians.

Hungarian-to-Hungarian communications is different, and does seems to have
problems in the use of the term.  Some people in this group and others
prefer the term, even among Hungarians, be restricted in use.  Under the
circumstances, I agree, and I will certainly do so, in the future.  My
apologies for using it so literally when it is no longer common acceptance
by the group who wrote the definition, to do so.

However, I hope those who insisted so strongly that it only applied to
physical destruction can understand why some people considered the literal
definition, not realizing the people who wrote it had back-tracked.
Unfortunately, the literal definition is still there for anyone to read,
including an international court judge, even if like some of the old "blue
laws," it's not really used or accepted.  The answer of the Jewish community
involved both views, and treated both with respect.  Disagreement with parts
of both was very polite.  Can we try to do the same, for once?


Finally, I hope this ends a debate into which I heartily wish I'd never
jumped. For certain, this is the last posting to the HUNGARY group I'm going
to make on this subject!  Eva, you're going to have to find someone else to
fight with, if you wish to continue this one! :-((

Sincerely,


Cecilia








N0BBS, Cecilia L. Fabos-Becker -  - San Jose, CA

At 03:23 PM 5/30/96 -0600, you wrote:
>Dear Aniko;
>At 01:35 PM 5/30/96 -0300, you wrote:
>
>>>Which/what retraction?  There was something uniquely offensive to
>>all?  I thought everything I've ever posted had someone or other wishing
>>I'd make a retraction.  Did I miss something in particular?

        >>The retraction I asked for is a statement of yours, I highly
objected to.
        >>The one, which felt to be demeaning the Hungarian culture at
        >>large....remember that one?  That one!  And a blanket "I am sorry
period"
        >>just does not cut it...sorry!
>>
>I've just spent nearly 3 hours trying to find the particular item in my
>computer.  I seem to be missing about 2 weeks worth of e-mail, since
>yesterday.  Weird, since it's the most recent two weeks.  Maybe the computer
>has more sense than I do. :-)

Hmmm... I'm glad you said that... not me;)
>
>However, I'm doing my best to remember what of all the reactions I got to
>various items this one was.

Yes, I can certainly appreciate that deciphering could well be a chore at
this point?  However, I only posed one, uno, ein, egy objection...is this
the right time to dig it up and quote it for you? Or, would you rather prove
your computer's sense to be less than your own?
>
>I'll try again. I do remember one in which I
>suggested something like that _if_ what I perceived of a sort of negative
>behavior/attitude among some members of the HUNGARY group was typical of
>Hungarian culture, then maybe I should share my father's regard (better
>described as lack of regard).  Although I thought use of the word "if,"
>indicated I wasn't really suggesting this was Hungarian culture, I apologize
>for any _impression_ that I might have created that I really thought that
>this was Hungarian culture.  I thought I had used the word "if," but I would
>certainly agree that such a little word can get lost in the rest of an
>entire sentence. It is also more than possible I thought I'd had even that
>little word in their and did a typo and did not really have it in the
>sentence.

Ok, Cecilia....given your apparent efforts, you can take this argument for
now... but give me time to really check deeper regarding the "ifs" and
"buts" of the matter... but you do realize (and consider it fair warning)
that should them ifs and buts be missing, we're considered to be back to
square one...  I no talk, until that retraction.  Btw... I asked you to give
give me a couple of days...to find something to occupy your brain and finger
power with... (geez, does a  simple request for such an opportunity have to
spelled out... word by word...for your highness)?

>Have I got it right, yet?

Can't commit to that above question for now.  Too busy checking "iffs" and
"buts" - which darned well better be there.
Regards,
Aniko
>

> Andras Kornai > on 21 May 1996 at 13:17:59, RE:
> szabadsagharc ['56] wrote:
> <"...revolution..wasn't anti-communist"

Csaba Zoltani wrote:
>         Au contraire, on 30 October 1956, the party presidium
>         dissolved the MDP (Hungarian Workers' Party, the Stalinist
>         state party founded in 1948). Simultaneously, Imre Nagy
>         announced the end of the single party system. A multi-party
>         parliamentary democracy was established. The revolution swept
>         away the power-monopoly of the ancien regime which retreated
>         head over heels. Imre Nagy chose a path away from communism.
>
>         The support received by the reform politicians was not for the
>         communist system, but for its replacement.

You are using the term 'anti-communist' too loosely.  The fact of establishing
a multi-party democracy is only sufficient to demonstrate that the revolution
was not philo-Communist.  Anti-Communism would have meant further action
against all Communist organizations and people who had Communist views.
For comparison, Senator McCarthy WAS anti-Communist.

The dissolution of the Hungarian Workers' Party wasn't a government act,
but of the party leadership.   The Nagy government took no action against
Communists collectively.  It was a liberal, pluralistic regime that allowed
all political views and organizations, including the Communists', to manifest
themselves.  Ergo, it was not anti- Communist.

Even the least savoury aspects of the revolution, the summary execution of
young soldiers in Interior Ministry uniforms (quite possibly ordinary
conscripts), were aimed at the symbols of totalitarianism rather than at
all Communists indiscriminately.

> Kornai goes on:
>
> <"... token resistance offered by Hungary..">
> <"... few actually fought..">

A rather bad choice of words.  It is obvious that some people will
justifiably feel offended by the expression 'token resistance': it
was anything but 'token' on the part of those who did resist.  On the other
hand, at the national level, armed resistance was neither typical, nor
widespread, nor significant.  In hindsight, we should be grateful
for this: given the Soviet determination to subdue Hungary, the
only result of more resistance would have been more casualties.

>         The Russians did not think so. In fact, to reimpose their
>         colonial rule in Hungary, they threw in more than 16 army
>         and 2 air force divisions.

Non sequitur.  The Soviets (for it is unfair to blame everything Soviet
on the Russians who suffered more than most) had the habit of overkill.

>  In the fighting they suffered
>         close to 700 dead, 1500 wounded and scores missing.

700 unnecessary and lamentable deaths.  But compare this figure to that
in Chechnya if you prefer bodycounts for arguments.

>  On the
>         side of the freedom fighters (szabadsagharcos), at least 2700
>         were killed and an estimated 30,000 wounded.

I note the expression "on the side of the freedom fighters'.
In guerilla warfare the civilian casualties are typically multiples of
the actual combatants'.

>  When resistance
>         was no longer feasible in light of the superiority of Russian
>         arms, according to the UN High Commissioner for Refugees
>         an estimated 200,000 left the country because of the fear of
>         retribution.

This is clearly tendentious myth-making on your part.  Most of the 200,000
left because they had a gutful of the Communist regime and did not want to
be part of its reimposition.  Most could have stayed on without retribution,
as the average emigre was no more or no less involved in the revolution
than the average stayer-on.

> Kornai goes on to say:
>
> <"...Csaba Zoltani's version...is preposterous nonsense promoted
> <by the vast majority of '56 emigres who were brave enough to emigrate
> <but not brave enough to stand up and fight..."

This is over the top.  You have no evidence for this "vast majority".  Just
because a noisy portion of 56ers in the US may well fit that description,
there is no reason to generalize their behaviour to all.  My sample may
not be any more representative than yours, but the 56ers I encountered
were just relieved to be out of the Communist experiment and took part
in none of this propaganda effort.

> <"...these people are collectively awarding themselves combat stripes they
> <don't deserve..."
>
> <"It's time Csaba Zoltani and other promoters of the "szabadsagharc"
> <myth fess up."
>
> <"I don't expect them to restore their honor by committing suicide,
> <but I expect them to cut the crap."
>
> <"...how dare these other mythmakers continue with their apalling
> <nonsense."
>
>         The above illustrates the old adage that the middle and older
>         generation of East and Central Europeans, even if exposed to the
>         civilizing discourse of the Anglo-Saxon world, can't hide their
>         cultural backgrounds when debating. The culture of tolerance and
>         the consideration of the possibility that the other person may have
>         a point of view as valid as one's own is totally lacking.
>         When they run out of ideas, their emotions take over. They
>         unburden themselves with a torrent of arguments ad hominem.
>
>         In their extremism, there is much that make Pellionisz and
>         Kornai kindred spirits.

Now, instead of addressing the points that Andras Kornai makes,
including the clearly sloppy ones, you are retreating behind a smoke-
screen of hurt pride and cliches.  I suggest that another central point
of civilized Anglo-Saxon discourse is the emphasis on facts, rather
than bombast.

George Antony

This is what came my way on another list.  Some of you, who have the=20
time, will no doubt benefit from it.  They may want to report to those of=
=20
us who have no time or connection, if there are many Hungarian recipes out=
=20
there.

Bon appe'tit!
Martha

---------- Forwarded message ----------

Here's a website after my own heart... a nice break from the serious=20
matters we ponder on this list  :-) =20

http://www.ibmpcug.co.uk/~owls/edibilia.html

It starts thus:
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
A dreary old clich=E9 has it that "one should eat to live and not live to
eat". It is typical that this imbecile concept, a deliberately fruitless
concept born of the puritan mind, should deny sensuous reaction at either
pole, and it is fortunate that neither pole really exists, for man is
incapable of being either altogether dumbly bestial or altogether dumbly
"mental".=20
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Read, eat, and enjoy!

Lonnie

Farkas D. Gabor
on May 29 06:09:27 EDT wrote :

>Probably it is Cehul Silvaniei, Szilagysomlyo.

Not quite correct. In fact :
Cehu Silvaniei = Szilagycseh,
Simleul Silvaniei = Szilagysomlyo (medieval nest of the Bathory clan),
both in the northern Transylvanian region called Szilagysag
("hepe-hupas" stb. - for those who heard of Ady; poet, native of those
parts).
To the Group : sorry for butting in for the 2-nd time without
introducing myself. So here it comes : Biro' Jeno",
originally from Zilah (Zalau), Transylvania ( Partium if you wish)
now living in Massachusetts since '87. I enjoy reading the
list, there's a lot of content on it, please don't ever stop.
Thanks.

In article >,
 says...
>
>                                              ..........Hmm! Until now I
>really thought that we had been actually quite rational in our discussions.
>Admittedly, here and there one finds people who find it hard to marshal
>rational thoughts and simply make personal attacks on other people, but
>they are relatively few in number.

Particularly someone called Eva Balogh.