Hollosi Information eXchange /HIX/
HIX HUNGARY 774
Copyright (C) HIX
1996-08-30
Új cikk beküldése (a cikk tartalma az író felelőssége)
Megrendelés Lemondás
1 Re: Unaffordability of Hungary and an unrelated questio (mind)  28 sor     (cikkei)
2 Heidegger and Hungary (Was Re: Sophistry) (mind)  73 sor     (cikkei)
3 Heidegger and Hungary Part 3 (mind)  58 sor     (cikkei)
4 Heidegger and Hungary (Part 2) (mind)  115 sor     (cikkei)
5 Hungary and Heidegger Part 4 (mind)  116 sor     (cikkei)
6 Re: Mr. Frajkor, listowner of Slovak-L (mind)  55 sor     (cikkei)
7 Re: Komondorok, Kuvaszok, es Pulik (mind)  43 sor     (cikkei)
8 Re: Mr. Frajkor, listowner of Slovak-L (mind)  75 sor     (cikkei)
9 Re: Speaking in many tongues (was Re: American Imperial (mind)  48 sor     (cikkei)
10 Re: The Bloody Footprints of the Commissar (2) (mind)  21 sor     (cikkei)
11 Re: Mr. Frajkor, listowner of Slovak-L (mind)  35 sor     (cikkei)
12 Re: Komondorok, Kuvaszok, es Pulik (mind)  38 sor     (cikkei)
13 Re: Komondorok, Kuvaszok, es Pulik (mind)  38 sor     (cikkei)
14 Good Reading (mind)  23 sor     (cikkei)
15 Re: Church, morals, identities etc... (mind)  20 sor     (cikkei)
16 Re: Sophistry (mind)  59 sor     (cikkei)
17 Re: Church, morals, identities etc... (mind)  16 sor     (cikkei)
18 Re: Church, morals, identities etc... (mind)  16 sor     (cikkei)
19 ??? Clogged Arteries ??? (mind)  7 sor     (cikkei)
20 Re: Sophistry (mind)  42 sor     (cikkei)
21 Re: Cultural Superiority Complex (mind)  18 sor     (cikkei)
22 Re: Church (civil, calm response) (mind)  64 sor     (cikkei)
23 Re: Church, morals, identities etc... (mind)  20 sor     (cikkei)
24 Re: Church (mind)  45 sor     (cikkei)
25 Re: Church, morals, identities etc... (mind)  79 sor     (cikkei)
26 Re: Church, morals, identities etc... (mind)  31 sor     (cikkei)
27 Re: Church, morals, identities etc... (mind)  5 sor     (cikkei)
28 Re: Church, morals, identities etc... (mind)  9 sor     (cikkei)
29 Re: Sophistry (mind)  76 sor     (cikkei)
30 Re: Sophistry (mind)  27 sor     (cikkei)
31 Re: Church, morals, identities etc... (mind)  11 sor     (cikkei)
32 Re: Church (civil, calm response) (mind)  28 sor     (cikkei)
33 Re: Church, morals, identities etc... (mind)  23 sor     (cikkei)
34 Re: Church, morals, identities etc... (mind)  10 sor     (cikkei)
35 Re: Church, morals, identities etc... (mind)  17 sor     (cikkei)
36 Re: An opinion from Hungary (mind)  13 sor     (cikkei)
37 Re: Sophistry (mind)  24 sor     (cikkei)
38 Re: An opinion from Hungary (mind)  18 sor     (cikkei)
39 Re: Church, morals, identities etc... (mind)  17 sor     (cikkei)
40 Re: Reminder. (mind)  4 sor     (cikkei)

+ - Re: Unaffordability of Hungary and an unrelated questio (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

In article >, Zoltan Szekely
> writes:

>What do you mean by 'acting on his National Socialist
>sympathies'? These sympathies ended as early as in 1934.
>(When the sympathies of Chamberlain and Daladier toward
>Adolf Hitler just began.)

This is simply not true. Heidegger's sympathies for National Socialism did
not end in 1934. He decided that the chaps who were implementing it
weren't up to the task. He was also peeved because they did not look to
him specifically for intellectual guidance in implementing the new
Sonderweg (Special Way) between Russian communism and American capitalism.
Heidegger remained a card-carrying member of the Nazi Party until the end
of the war in 1945. Heidegger continued, after the war, to write
approvingly of National Socialism.

As for Chamberlain and Daladier, to suggest that either gentleman was in
the least bit sympathetic to the goals and methods of National Socialism
is a ludicrous distortion of reality. Chamberlain and Daladier thought
they were avoiding a catastrophe like War War I by knuckling under to
Hitler at Munich. They did not realize that they were facing a catastrophe
-- and evil -- on what to them must have been an unimaginable scale.
Sam Stowe

"I only use my gun
Whenever kindness fails..."
-- Robert Earl Keen
+ - Heidegger and Hungary (Was Re: Sophistry) (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Okay, Zoltan Szekely's obviously not going to stop with the
mischaracterizations of either Heidegger or Heideggerian thought. To spare
those of you who find this entire debate arcane in the extreme (and, God
knows, anytime you deal with Heidegger, you are shaking hands with the
arcane), I've re-titled the thread heading as a general warning. Enter
only at your own risk. I would also recommend that you not try to drive or
operate heavy machinery after reading this thread from here on out.

With that caveat, however, I would like to take a little aside, if I
might, to relate this entire subject back to Hungary. And I think this is
a debate with serious implications for Hungary's future. Zoltan, for all
his intolerance and smug ignorance, is a pretty fair example of what
passes for an intellectual on the Hungarian right at the moment. Most of
us, having lived in the U.S. and Canada and the rest of the West (Don't
want to leave out our stout-hearted friends in Britain and Australia),
discount Zoltan's claims as those of a right-wing nut. We err in doing so,
because a fringe character in one culture can be received as a downright
prophetic leader in another. Zoltan makes constant appeals to a kind of
comic-book nationalism that glosses over, where it doesn't totally ignore,
some of the more complex and problematic aspects of Hungary's recent
history. Were Hungary in the same social, economic and political state as
much of western Europe, that wouldn't count for much. But Hungary is a
nation in agony after two devastating wars, one bloody uprising and half a
century of communist rule -- all of it within a hundred-year span. The
country has been, and currently is, subject to misrule, corruption,
bureaucratic incompetence and widespread human suffering. When the pain of
its present circumstances becomes too much, any nation will seek refuge in
its past. And who should we find waiting back there in the past with open
arms but Zoltan Szekelys who can offer the comforting story of a nation
whose greatness and natural place in the sun has been betrayed by
"others." They sing of a nation that can reclaim its greatness through a
"special way" which rejects the excesses of communism and the capitalism
which has "weakened" and "mongrelized" America and the rest of the West.

Heidegger is a starting point for radical conservatives like Zoltan
because he offers, first, name recognition and the prestige which goes
with it and, second, a rather malleable philosophy which, while not in and
of itself fascistic in nature, rejects scientific-rationalism in favor of
much less clear-cut and self-evident epistemology for adjudicating truth
claims. One of the most telling criticisms of Heidegger's philosophy is
that it is "polysemic," that it lends itself to expropriation by radicals
on both the right and the left. Most serious Heidegger scholars ground the
master in the wave of German radical conservatives such as Ernst Junger,
Oswald Spengler, Carl Schmitt and others who, through their writing and
teaching, helped undermine Weimar democracy and lent intellectual gravitas
to national socialism. Most of those intellectuals, like Heidegger,
remained faithful to Hitler and the Nazi regime throughout the 1930s until
the bitter end in 1945.

Heidegger's image and philosophy have been co-opted by the resurgent
German right since 1989 as it seeks to limit Germany's guilt for the
Holocaust. I think Zoltan's posts offer the clearest insight I have yet
seen that the Hungarian far right is taking its clues from its ideological
soul-mates in Germany. Heidegger and the rest of his generation of radical
conservatives wanted to try a Sonderweg, a special way between capitalism
and communism, a way that emphasized what they saw as particularly German
strengths. Ironically, Hungary has been victimized by that Sonderweg and
communism. Perhaps its long-term interests might be best-served by moving
closer to the western European/North American political economy which
Zoltan and Heidegger explicity rejected.

I'm truly sorry for the length of this post. The only defense I can offer
for its length is that, as I have said in this forum so many times before,
ideas have real-life consequences. And the consequences of what Zoltan
preaches are so revolting and alien to what I believe that I cannot remain
silent in good conscience.
Sam Stowe



"I only use my gun
Whenever kindness fails..."
-- Robert Earl Keen
+ - Heidegger and Hungary Part 3 (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

This is continued from Part 2. Duh.

In article >, Zoltan Szekely
> stops tokin' on that Sumatran hissing roach and
exhales:

>4. The corruption of mind begins when you accept the authority
>   of technology in the human ways and means. What was a human
>   decision in the earlier Centuries, now becomes a technology
>   question. What used to belong to the human essence, now is
>   subdued by technology. The relation to the earth's life
>   power is one of these human relations. Antique societies were
>   arranged around this life power of the earth, around of the
>   life power of the big rivers, around the life power of the
>   green pastures. Life and blood stemmed from it. Now, it seems
>   to be overpowered by motorized forces, chemicals, technology.
>   This step of human corruption to technology could end up in
>   the loss of moral, theoretical and actually, practical
>   discernment. It is not about equating things which are not
>   the same. But it is about finding some possibly common roots
>   for the explanation of different things. And in the extreme
>   you may visualize the ultimate inhumanity, as manifested in
>   the gas chambers and extermination camps.

Once again, boiler plate radical conservativism from 1920s Germany. It
makes a grand appeal against the modern age in favor of what? "Life
power"? Anybody other than Zoltan care to offer up a definition of what
this life power is? I mean, if I'm throwing out my television set and this
computer in order to get back my uncorrupted authentic Dasein, I want to
know just what the hell the contours of this grand new life are going to
be. This mysticism draped in philosophical trappings sucked in Weimar
Germany, it sucked when French philosophy gobbled it down after World War
II and it bloomed in a million or so rotting corpses under a hot Cambodian
sun between 1975 and 1978 when it was actually implemented on a broad
scale for the first time ever. Empty the cities, shoot everyone who knows
how to make the machines run -- "I'm goin' up the country, baby, do you
want to go?"

>
>5. It is just a humble trial to interpret a text. Maybe I am not
>   right. Anybody has a chance to come up with his/her own
>   interpretation. But being unfair should not be a guarantee for
>   acceptance.
>                                                         Sz. Zoli
>
>
Let me be the first to assure you -- you aren't right. You're not even
close. If I might offer some career advice to you, I strongly urge you not
to air these views in public, especially around the office. It's one thing
to pump this out over an Internet full of strangers. You do it in front of
the people you work with and it will bring you major trouble in the most
immediate way.
Sam Stowe


"I only use my gun
Whenever kindness fails..."
-- Robert Earl Keen
+ - Heidegger and Hungary (Part 2) (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Look, folks, I warned you in the first installment of this thread that it
would get wordy. I wasn't kidding.

In article >, Zoltan Szekely
> puts down that German brown cockroach and sez:

>Sam:
>
>> Here's Heidegger on technology, for instance:
>>
>> "Agriculture is today a motorized food industry, in essence the same as
>> the manufacture of corpses in gas chambers and extermination camps, the
>> same as the blockade and starvation of countries, the same as the
>> manufacture of atomic bombs."
>>
>> I can't think of a better response to this post-war piece of barbarism
>> than to quote Richard Wolin ("The Politics of Being: The Political
Thought
>> of Martin Heidegger," Columbia University Press, 1990): "That Heidegger
>> can in good conscience equate mechanized agriculture with the genocidal
>> politics of the Nazis is not only a monumental non sequitur in
historical
>> reasoning; it suggests a fundamental incapacity for both moral and
>> theoretical discernment." (Wolin, p. 168)

>
>0. First of all, you are pre-occupied. You begin with judgement
>   against Heidegger, calling his writing a 'piece of barbarism'
>   without any analyzing effort whatsoever as to the merits of
>   the text. At least, you should explain what do you mean by
>   barbarism and why do you accuse him (and not the exterminators)
>   by barbarism. You are eager (just as Mr. Wolin) to condemn
>   somebody without any deeper insight in his thoughts. It is a
>   sure sign, that you cut this text out of its contextual
>   environment, just to make your accusation.

The text has no merits other than to clarify for us that Heidegger is
either unable or unwilling (much more criminally culpable in my book) to
make simple moral distinctions. The quote is not cut out of its contextual
environment. In fact, I defy you to show us a contextual environment that
would make it morally acceptable. And to accuse Richard Wolin of not
having any deep insight into Heidegger's thoughts shows how little you
really do know of this subject. Wolin is without a doubt the finest
Heidegger scholar in the United States at the moment.


>
>1. Next, I have to mention that modern hermeneutics is based on
>   a high respect toward the text you analyze. You can not find
>   too many quotes from Heidegger about gas chambers and exter-
>   mination camps. Therefore you have to be cautious, and use all
>   of the available tools of modern philosophy in order to get
>   the right conclusion from the few quotes you have. And these
>   tools include hermeneutics.

You won't find too many quotes from Heidegger about gas chambers and
extermination camps because after the above howler issued from his mouth,
a French de-Nazification court used it as evidence that Heidegger had no
business going near a college classroom. This is no evidence that
Heidegger repudiated his previous political convictions favoring national
socialism. Instead, he shut up in the hopes that he would eventually get
his job and his pension back. Hermeneutics, for those of you playing the
home version of our game, is a fancy word for interpretation. And don't
lecture me on how to use the available tools of modern philosophy, Zoltan.
In that respect, you are Tim "The Toolman" Taylor to my Al Borland. (He'll
have to actually watch American network television to get it. I am not, as
you see here, above torturing my opponents.)

>
>2. Considering the merits of the text, our first thought is about
>   the unhuman character of the technology. Machines don't have
>   moral and theoretical discernments. Machines don't mind the
>   loss of lives, or the quality of material they manufacture.
>   They even accept corpses. Is it not the living horror on the
>   Earth?! Is it not the ultimate behavior of 'death factories'
>   across the life span of this most hated Century of ours? Is it
>   not the driving force behind the ten millions of deaths in
>   the GULAG, the millions of deaths in Auschwitz, the other millions
>   in Cambodia, Ukrain, the ten thousands at Srebenica? And what
>   about Hiroshima, Nagasaki? They are all about the technology
>   of killing. More exactly, about the way murder could become
>   and actually became a pure mechanical question in this Century.

Nope, boyo, the driving force behind most of these deaths was ideology.
Ideology played a particularly conspicuous role in Stalinist Russia,
Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge and Nazi Germany. But only in the last of
those three did an entire nation scheme to murder unto the last man, woman
and child another people. Technology simply made the implementation of the
ideological extreme feasible. Ideas have real-life consequences. Said it
before. Have a feeling that in your case, I'll be saying it again a lot.

>3. All of these people were denied to have a chance to die in
>   dignity. You can not be dignified when you face machines. You
>   can not have human death if humanity is denied from you. Even
>   your death is consumed by technology just as your life was
>   identified by the stamp you got on your skin. If technology
>   rules, there are no heroes, no human greatness, no pity, no
>   mercy. No value of life.

These people were denied the right to die naturally and with dignity by
other human beings. This is not Terminator 2. The technology was, in many
respects, value-neutral. There's nothing inherently evil or threatening
about a railroad, an oven or an aerosol insect repellant. (We could argue
about guns and barbed wire in this regard.) But it takes human
intelligence to put them together in the proper sequence to carry out a
Holocaust.
 Sam Stowe

To Be Continued in Part 3



"I only use my gun
Whenever kindness fails..."
-- Robert Earl Keen
+ - Hungary and Heidegger Part 4 (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

In article >, Zoltan Szekely
> diktates:

>Sam:
>>
>> In article >, Zoltan Szekely
>> > idol-worshipping Euroweenie writes:
>>
>> >Heidegger is rooted so deeply in the European culture
>> >that we don't need, thank you very much, culturally
>> >challanged advices from over the sea.
>> >
>> >As about faults, well, everybody may have faults.
>> >Even a Heidegger. But putting him and his philosophy
>> >on the flames of a self-indulged entellectuel witch-
>> >hunt is a different story.
>>
>> First of all, this will be the third or fourth time I will point out to
>> you that I am a serious student of Heidegger's philosophy.
>
>Thanks. So may we have a chance in the future to discuss
>the topic in merit? Just asking...
>
>> If America is
>> so "culturally challenged," then what's a provincial horse's ass like
you
>> doing here [etc.]


>Sam, you are an excellent person. But please, do not
>identify yourself with America. It was YOUR advise, that
>I called culturally challanged. It was you, who called
>Heidegger a 'bavarian peasant'. Thanks, I do not need
>this kind of 'advices'.

I think anyone, no matter how well-educated he or she might be, who cannot
think in universal terms and reflexively sees his or her culture as
naturally superior to all others in every respect had best get used to
having people tell them they have a peasant's outlook on life. The man
was, in many respects, the German equivalent of a redneck. The sooner you
accept this, the sooner the deprogramming will take hold. Spirits, come
out!

>
>I never called American culture, as part of the global
>culture, culturally challenged. I know a couple damned
>good thinkers of American origin, who are so brilliant
>as few in Europe. That is the truth. Culturally chal-
>lenged opinion is represented, actually, by a small
>minority in the US, who are 'too clever' to admit the
>obvious and so fall short in their reasoning. (It is a
>completely different question, that how this minority
>influences the society at large.)

Who are these "couple damned good thinkers"? No one leads cultural opinion
in the U.S., although many would love to. Put three Americans in a room
and ask them to come to agreement on one issue and an hour later they'll
emerge with four or five different opinions.

>
>To make more sense of this, I will discuss shortly a
>recent publication about Heidegger. You will find cul-
>turally callanged positions from Europe as well, as from
>the US. And also, you will find very decent defences of
>Heidegger's legacy from the US as well, as from Europe.
>You will have a chance to compare which is culturally
>challanged and which is more decent standpoint from over
>the sea or from Europe. I hope you can make a difference.
>
>> Would you include those Hungarians of the Jewish faith as being among
>> "your people"? How about those Hungarians who are gay or lesbian? Uh
huh.
>> Didn't think so.
>I don't understand why could not be a Jew or a homo-x
>Hungarian. They are part of the nation. Sorry, I just can
>not get your hint here.

Let's try a simple little exercise here. Write the above paragraph in a
more directly positive way -- such as "Jews and homosexuals are part of my
Hungarian nation." It wasn't a hint, by the way. Hints are much too subtle
for my rhetorical taste.

>
>(Or was it a sign for the general deadly attack against
>me? Then I congratulate. You did it.)
>
>> Mickey, at the very least, has much higher standards of personal
conduct,
>> intellectual rigor and orthographic precision than you.
>Huh, you like ad hominem, don't you. I kept laughing on
>your joke about 2 hours long. Sorry, I just could not stop
>it. You are a big master of funny little jokes, aren't you.
>Anyway, I believe I got your message.

You may address me as "Master" if you so desire. I'm not into that kind of
fawning discipleship, but it might give Joe Szalai a good laugh. Maybe
even longer than two hours. Thank you, thank you -- I'll be here all week.
Try the veal.

>
>But what about the witch-hunt issue? Or is it not tasting
>well?

People with cockroach-eating fetishes shouldn't raise questions of taste.
Anyway, I forgot what the witch-hunt issue is. Simply repeat it in your
next action-packed post in this thread and I will make it an object of
ridicule and scorn. It's late and I need to get some sleep.
Sam Stowe





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

In article > (Michael
Hajovsky) writes:
>From: (Michael Hajovsky)
>Subject: Re: Mr. Frajkor, listowner of Slovak-L
>Date: 28 Aug 1996 11:30:13 GMT

>In >  (Ross
>Hedvicek) writes:

>  > Professional? "Professionals" like you put Andrei Sakharov to
>  > mental hospital, because his opinions were not liked by the
>  > communist regime. I assume that you  "earned" your questionable
>  > title during a communist regime
>     [Rest of the drivel deleted]

>An unhustified cheap shot. Here you lost all your credibility.

You think so? Read the part below please...

>  > You forgot to end up your post by "Heil Hitler!"

>But you did not.

     When you talk to fascists you should remind them of their favorite
     greeting.

     I have here following information to Szurek's attack on Mr. Kanala and
     about her questionable, as she puts it, "professional advice".

     Here are some facts.  She is not a professional, she is not a scholar
     and she does not have any experience in the field.

     Miss Szurek has just graduated from York University (June 1996) with
     Bachelor degree in Psychology.  She has been also desperately looking
     for a job (of course, there is nothing wrong with that).

     How do I know?  She has advertised herself in various usenet fora
     related to child psychology.  BTW, she has received 2 or 3 responses.
     One such response, from Marion Baumgarten ) on 27
     June, 1996 reminded her that "a BA in psychology doesn't get you far.
     Most counseling situations require a Master's with a Doctorate
     preferred".

     Obviously, her professional opinion is even more out of place in
     Slovak-L.  She is of course free to express her opinion and expose her
     thinking, but not under a cover of "professional advice", which then
     becomes a low and nasty personal attack on Mr. Kanala.

     So, Miss Szurek is FULL OF IT - and IT is not any professional
     qualifications.


     Enjoy your day, Mr. Hajovsky.

     Rosta
+ - Re: Komondorok, Kuvaszok, es Pulik (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

In article >, =?iso-8859-
1?q?Andrew_R=F3zsa?= > writes
>All this discussion about dogs rekindled a long desire of mine to get
>a Hungarian dog. Never had the space or the time for one, but now
>there is a fence in the back, some nice woods, and the kid is almost
>10, so here I go, dreaming again.
>
>I like the looks of Hungarian dogs. Read a lot about them. They are
>described as strong-willed, hard-to-handle, imperious, aloof, and
>difficult to groom. But as with reading ABOUT a city, personal
>experiences are much more meaningful. There seems to be some expertise
>within the readership of this list, so I would be very appreciative if
>some of you could post personal experiences, anecdotes, suggestions,
>etc. about Komondorok, Kuvaszok, and Pulik.
>
>Ello"re is ko"szo"nom,
>
>Bandi
>=============================================================
>      Andrew J. Rszsa - Birmingham, Alabama, USA
>                 <mailto:>
>-------------------------------------------------------------
>          Pain is inevitable. Suffering is optional.
>=============================================================
>
>
>

Kedves Andrew:
Javasalom a vislat. Very loving, easy to train (according to friends
that have one) and beautiful.  Vislas are red (fox colour) with short
fur and big silky ears.  After seeing many of them, adoring their owners
as they rode on trams or sat obediently in Budapest restaurants, I can't
think of a dog I'd rather own.  Pulis have their attractions, after all,
you might be the only one on the block with a rastafarian dog.  However,
they're pretty smelly and get very dirty!!!  Your biggest problem will
be finding a good breeder, as I doubt Hungarian dogs are very well known
in your neck of the woods.
Good luck!

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

On 26 August 1996, Mr. Frajkor wrote the following message to
bit.listserv.mideur-l newsgroup, also on the UBVM server as
 .

The message is addressing some points raised in my original
posting, but has been posted only to mideur-l. Indeed, Mr. Frajkor
seems to be the listowner of this mailing list, too, and in order
to keep his multiple identities separated, he felt a need to try
to correct his image on one of the forums.

Mr. Frajkor wrote:

~Roman Kanala writes:
~
~> Dear fellow Netizen,
~> In advance, I apologize for the crossposting but I think this
~> issue may be of interest to this forum, too.
~
~> Slovak-L is a mailing list created by Mr. Frajkor himself to
~> promote hatred, extreme nationalism and rehabilitation of the
~> Slovak fascism. Mr. Frajkor, a professional propagandist, is
~> routinely having recourse to various tricks from the lowest
~> arsenal of a bad journalist, such as purpose lies, falsifications
~> and other manipulations.
~
~
~       As those who read Slovak-L know, it is a list created to bring
~Slovakia to the attention of the international community, to allow
~Slovaks abroad to express themselves to the world, and to permit a
~free exchange of all opinions in the Western democratic tradition.

As those who read Slovak-L know, opinions on the list vary. The
expression "free exchange of all opinions" sometimes may have surprising
meanings that are not exactly in the Western democratic tradition.

Let's recall that Mr. Frajkor has attempted to get rid of an uncomfortable
contributor from Carnegie Melon University back in 1993 who did not fit
into the "mainstream". Was it because the gentleman was a Czech ? Or
because he was a Jew ? The issue has never been explained.



~> The articles will appear in Slovak-L only and will not be crossposted
~> in order to preserve bandwith and people's adrenaline. Mr. Frajkor
~> already is an unwelcome person in a number of forums.
~
~     No one is unwelcome on Slovak-L as long as they discuss matters
~in a rational, scholarly manner without resorting to name-calling,
~personal abuse, or offensive language.

About two years ago, Mr. Frajkor called a contributor to the Slovak-L
list "a sleazy creature and garden limace". It was when the gentleman
mentioned that spreading fascist ideology on a public forum is contrary
to the law in Canada. That person is still reading the Slovak-L list
and if needed, he will testimony.

This is continuing to go on, over years. Only two weeks ago, Mr. Frajkor
called me "little Hungarian Bolshevik" and was threatened by a legal
recourse. Mr. Frajkor knows that I am a Slovak and he knows that I left
the socialist Czechoslovakia as a refugee. No satisfactory explanation
offered.

The methodolody Mr. Frajkor is routinely having recourse to will be
analyzed in detail on Slovak-L list. Now that I have undertaken all the
important preliminary steps, I am ready to publish the texts.


~> Slovak-L can be read either as a newsgroup
~>        bit.listserv.slovak-L
~> or can be subscribed to by sending a message to
~>        
~> with an empty subject line and the body of the message as follows:
~>        SUBSCRIBE SLOVAK-L First_name Name.

Roman Kanala
+ - Re: Speaking in many tongues (was Re: American Imperial (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

At 08:39 PM 8/28/96 -0400, Joe Szalai wrote:
>At 02:40 AM 8/27/96 GMT, Agnes Heringer wrote:
>
><snip>
>>Unilingual Quebecers (ironically, now it is the French
>>Canadians, because all the anglos and allos are going into immersion
>>schools and are fully bi or trilingual) speaking French only have really
>>no future in Canada outside Quebec.  I can see the unilingual Spanish
>>speaking people have no great future in the US either.
>
>And I suppose you can say that unilingual Magyars don't have a great future
>in Romania or Slovakia.

        I don't know whether this is what Agnes was thinking, but it is
certainly true that unilingual Magyars don't have much future anywhere, not
even in Hungary, but certainly not in Slovakia, Romania, Serbia, or Croatia.
At least not in the late twentieth century and in a more or less modernized
world. However, just as a reminder, let me quote you some figures from 1910,
the year of the last census in Hungary before World War I.

        In Hungary proper (that is, excluding Croatia-Slavonia) only 54.5
percent of the population was native Hungarian speakers. The rest: Germans
(10.4) Slovaks (10.7), Romanians (16.1), Ruthenians (2.5), Croatians (1.1),
Serbs (2.5), others (2.2). Out of all these non-Magyar speakers only 22.5
percent could speak Hungarian, the official language. Or in other words,
there were 11,990.562 Magyars and 10,859.120 non-Magyars. Out of these more
than 10 million non-Magyars approximately 2 million could handle the
Hungarian language. But given the relative backwardness of the country
(mostly agricultural) it didn't greatly interfere with people's lives. Most
people lived in villages which they rarely left. And if they did, like many,
many Slovaks, who moved to Budapest, they became bilingual in no time. The
relative speed of Magyarization was mostly achieved by speeded up
urbanization as a result of quick economic growth. It is certain that the
percentage of Hungarian speakers would have grown quite rapidly without such
calamities as World War I and aftermath. However, some Hungarians today are
far too sanguine about the Hungarians' chances of creating a linguistically
homogenous country. As a starter, some of these people don't even know the
exact numbers of Hungarians versus non-Hungarians in Hungary before World
War I. One correspondent on the Forum a few days ago announced that 66
percent of population was Hungarian before Trianon! The Hungarian pre-war
governments would have danced the csardas if that had been the case! Second,
said our correspondent announced that with intermarriage, urbanization,
radio, and TV today a greater Hungary would be overwhelmingly Hungarian.
This is, of course, is one of those "ifs" in history. However, I doubt that
the ethnic relationships within Hungary would have been so simple as he
imagines it.

        Eva Balogh
+ - Re: The Bloody Footprints of the Commissar (2) (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

At 11:56 PM 8/28/96 -0400, Ferenc Novak, the ex-soldier, wrote:

>I am taking the role of a "political officer" (i.e. comissar) from recent
>history.  And I am speaking from personal observation.  Sorry, Eva, in this I
>am more knowledgeable than you.  But as I said before, you can be excused for
>not knowing.  You probably didn't serve in a communist army.

        You don't get it, do you? You took as your example a Soviet-type
army, let's say in the 1980s, and assumed that the Hungarian Red Army in
1919 was identical to the one you served in. This is wrong. Neither the
economic, political, or military structures of the Hungarian Soviet Republic
(however short-lived it was) were identical to the later Soviet type which
had gone through a certain evolution. In fact, the Hungarian variety of
communism of 1919 differed considerably from the contemporary Russian model
because Bela Kun didn't have Lenin's tactical skills and took a more radical
path to "instant communism."

        Thus, we still don't know Lukacs's exact role, *on the basis of the
documents provided,* by Csaba Zoltani.

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

At 10:04 PM 8/28/96 +0200, Roman Kanala quoted Kristina Szurek:

>> I do not know what the Slovak government has up their sleves (I do not
>> follow overseas politics too closely), but they should introduce more of
>> those laws that strengthen and support Slovak nationalism and unity.
>...

        How typical. She doesn't "follow overseas politics too closely," yet
she has very decided views on the subject. And her remedies seem to be
rather on the primitive side: the Slovak government is "the owner" of
Slovakia and therefore can run the country as it sees fit! How charming.
Miss Szurek somehow forgets that this government is there only because of
the will of the people of Slovakia, and, whether Miss Szurek likes it not,
that also includes a fairly sizeable Hungarian minority.

>Mr. Frajkor is using lies as a work tool.
>Mr. Frajkor is approving hate-driven harrassment.
>Mr. Frajkor is approving, participating in, or issuing himself
>national-biased hatred statements, all that in a public forum.

        I quit Slovak-L after a few months because I realized that no
rational discussion could be conducted there with rabid nationalists. (I
often wonder what would happen if one let the nationalists of Slovak-L and
the nationalists of the some of the HIX lits get at each other with full
force. Wow!)

>Mr. Frajkor is currently an Associate Professor at the School of
>Journalism, University of Carleton, Canada, a country where spreading
>of national hatred is forbidden by the law.

        For me this is the saddest thing of all because Carleton is my alma
mater. I had difficulty comprehending that there are people like Mr. Frajkor
on its faculty.

        Eva Balogh
+ - Re: Komondorok, Kuvaszok, es Pulik (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

>Kedves Andrew:
>Javasalom a vislat. Very loving, easy to train (according to friends
>that have one) and beautiful.  Vislas are red (fox colour) with short
>fur and big silky ears.  After seeing many of them, adoring their owners
>as they rode on trams or sat obediently in Budapest restaurants, I can't
>think of a dog I'd rather own.  Pulis have their attractions, after all,
>you might be the only one on the block with a rastafarian dog.  However,
>they're pretty smelly and get very dirty!!!  Your biggest problem will
>be finding a good breeder, as I doubt Hungarian dogs are very well known
>in your neck of the woods.
>Good luck!
>
>Visszonthalasra
>--
>Karen Dunn Skinner

        Actually I was also thinking of the vizsla. Wonderful dogs! And
Karen is wrong: there are many, many, excellent vizsla breeders and vizslak
in this country. If I were you, Bandi, I would give a telephone call to AKC
(Madison Avenue, New York) and ask for the secretary of the national club of
vizsla breeders. (Or the person who is in charge of referrals. Our national
club, the Basset Hound Club of America, has a designated person who then
refers you on to local club secretaries in your area.) I have another piece
of advice. Be patient. Some people think that breeders have puppies *all the
time,* something like buying a coat off the rack! That is not so. Most
reputable breeders are hobby breeders which means that they have one or two
litters a year. So, if you find a breeder (and pick one who also shows his
dogs) you will have to wait until he/she has a litter. Meanwhile, go to dog
shows--again, AKC can help you here--, visit the breeder/breeders, and do
some research in your public library on the the breed of your choice.

        One more thing. Check the Web. It is very possible that the national
vizsla club (or komondor, puli club) has a webpage with full of information.
Our national club has a wonderful webpage. More and more people who come to
buy a puppy from me come with printouts on the basset from the Internet. It
is heartwarming.

        Eva Balogh
+ - Re: Komondorok, Kuvaszok, es Pulik (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

>Kedves Andrew:
>Javasalom a vislat. Very loving, easy to train (according to friends
>that have one) and beautiful.  Vislas are red (fox colour) with short
>fur and big silky ears.  After seeing many of them, adoring their owners
>as they rode on trams or sat obediently in Budapest restaurants, I can't
>think of a dog I'd rather own.  Pulis have their attractions, after all,
>you might be the only one on the block with a rastafarian dog.  However,
>they're pretty smelly and get very dirty!!!  Your biggest problem will
>be finding a good breeder, as I doubt Hungarian dogs are very well known
>in your neck of the woods.
>Good luck!
>
>Visszonthalasra
>--
>Karen Dunn Skinner

        Actually I was also thinking of the vizsla. Wonderful dogs! And
Karen is wrong: there are many, many, excellent vizsla breeders and vizslak
in this country. If I were you, Bandi, I would give a telephone call to AKC
(Madison Avenue, New York) and ask for the secretary of the national club of
vizsla breeders. (Or the person who is in charge of referrals. Our national
club, the Basset Hound Club of America, has a designated person who then
refers you on to local club secretaries in your area.) I have another piece
of advice. Be patient. Some people think that breeders have puppies *all the
time,* something like buying a coat off the rack! That is not so. Most
reputable breeders are hobby breeders which means that they have one or two
litters a year. So, if you find a breeder (and pick one who also shows his
dogs) you will have to wait until he/she has a litter. Meanwhile, go to dog
shows--again, AKC can help you here--, visit the breeder/breeders, and do
some research in your public library on the the breed of your choice.

        One more thing. Check the Web. It is very possible that the national
vizsla club (or komondor, puli club) has a webpage with full of information.
Our national club has a wonderful webpage. More and more people who come to
buy a puppy from me come with printouts on the basset from the Internet. It
is heartwarming.

        Eva Balogh
+ - Good Reading (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Hello Peter,

At this moment I don't have your personal email, so I'm posting this to the
list.  (Anyway, others may be interested, too.)

Earlier you asked what historical documentation has there been where a society
has recognized homosexual behavior.  Well, one interesting book totally slipped
my mind, you may want to read it:

SAME-SEX UNIONS in Premodern Europe  by  John Boswell
ISBN: 0-679-75164-5

It talks about the Eastern and Western Churches' previous recognition and
sanctioning of same-sex unions.  It reminds me of your comment regarding the
Church once allowing married priests.

By the way, I was thinking about the idea that gays are somehow punished with
AIDS and must face the consequences, but why, then, are lesbians the group with
the LOWEST risk of AIDS?  In this logic, then, it would seem that lesbians are
blessed by the god.

Thank you (That should be all.),
Mark
+ - Re: Church, morals, identities etc... (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Mark Humpreys:

> It is pathetic to see that you would likely be bothered by someone eating
> something that you don't like.  You are very sad and hateful, aren't you.
You mean cockroaches? Not at all. I guess cockroaches are
pretty nice bugs. You may even discover some kind of
aesthetics in their build-up, their shape, their move.
And they are also loaded with nutritious supplements.

I have nothing against people who eat them. They just
should not do it in public.

> If you have to compare dignity and personal human sexual preferences to cock-
> roach eating, you really must have a low-level mind.
Ah, so you have bad feelings about cockroach eating?!
I just can not believe it. You, the great anti-
discriminatorian fighter discriminate against nice
bugs. What a surprise! Why do you hate cockroaches?

                                              Sz. Zoli
+ - Re: Sophistry (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

ESB:
> The United States has its own history--so, you, as a
> non-American, are unable to comment on the philosophy of William James? Or
> because you are not an American you are unable to comment on American
> history?
You have to have an insight in the American history before you
comment it. That's all what I claim.

> ZSz:
> >Sam has never explained me
> >that how could all the European powers in 1938 allow Hitler
> >to occupy Czechslovakia peacefully.
>
>        Why should he explain that to you? And what does that have to do with
> his understand of Heidegger.
Chamberlain and Daladier had an awful lot of misconceptions
about Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Germany at 1938. And the
history of 1939-45 shows that pretty well. (Why were these
guys forced to resign when the war erupted, anyway?)

The same kind of misconceptions can be identified when speaking
about Churchill's relationship to Dzugashvili. Churchill had a
chance to attack Hitler on the Balkan as early as in 1943. But
he allowed this region of Europe to be controlled by the Soviet
and he finally got to Europe in France in 1944 only. He also
maintained good relationship with Dzugasvili until the famous
Fulton speech in 1946. At this time the war already was over,
and nothing could be done against the takeover of countries like
Hungary by the communists in Eastern-Europe.

>        I know you will come forward with the theory that the Americans
> purposely left the Jews die although they knew darn well what was going on
> in the camps.
Come on, Eva. It is a very ugly try to implicate Americans. The
fact of the matter is that Americans simply did not believe to
their own intelligence. They did not believe what was going on
in the camps although the secret service had exact informations.

Another interesting point is that in Nuremberg, when the movie
about the camps were shown at the Nazi trial, it had a very strong
emotional effect because it revealed the brutality and the in-
humanity of these camps in full extent. These details were unknown
to the public still in 1946.

> 1896 there was phenomenal accomplishment behind
> those celebrations. In thirty years or so, Hungary had become a modern
> nation.
We have the same chances right now. In thirty years or so,
Hungary could become a modern nation again. And if people want
to celebrate, you don't have to join them. If the nation
celebrates it would not mean that everybody have to celebrate.

>         Jerusalem is a bit more than a dwelling place which happens to be
> 3,000 years old. I bet there are a lot of towns which, with the help of
> archeologists, can be dated that old or older.
Why don't you name same of them? You could not find too much...
The people of Jerusalem have all reasons to celebrate and you
just can not go there and tell them to stop it.
                                                       Sz. Zoli
+ - Re: Church, morals, identities etc... (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Mark Humpreys:
> You implied several times earlier that AIDS is god's punishment of gays.
I never said so. You messed up something or me with
somebody else. Get the quote from the person, please,
before you claim anything like that.

> If that is so, then I repeat again that
> your Yahweh is then an utter inept ass.
It is a shame, that you despise 3500 years of the cultural
history of a people. I hope you did not mean it.

> BTW: The only closet I would ever like to get out of
> are the ones in your house.
I don't have a house, I don't have a closet, and I don't
need you in my closet. Thank you very much.
                                                Sz. Zoli
+ - Re: Church, morals, identities etc... (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Andy:
> Yes Zoli some of them went to jail,but most of them with the help of the
> Church got transfers to other locations,so they can do the same thing all
> over.
If they are convinced, their place is in the prison.
If they are not convinced, how could you judge them?

And why don't you talk about Father Bernardin, who
was accused by a homosexual, HIV-infected, drug-
abuser person. It was a very shameful case. The guy
was sick, and his doctor pushed him into a baseless
accusation against the high-ranked Catholic priest.
The handling of the case by the media was simply
outrageous. Some people don't respect anything
respectable.
                                           Sz. Zoli
+ - ??? Clogged Arteries ??? (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Are you concerned about having clogged arteries?  If you would like more
FREE information about an all natural, scientifically proven remedy to
clean out up to 85% of artery build-up, not just a few inches like by-pass
surgery or coronary balloon angioplasty, I invite you to leave your name
and E-mail address at .  Please specify artery information.
Thank you
Mary
+ - Re: Sophistry (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Sam:
> >
> >(On the other hand, I don't understand why did not the US
> >troops bomb railways leading to concentration camps in the
> >end of the war. Many lives could have been saved. The
> >American intelligence had exact informations what's going
> >on in death camps.)
>
> This is debatable. By the end of the war, most of the biggest death camps
> in Poland and the east had been overrun by the Russians or shut down and
> the remaining inmates force marched back to the Reich, most of them dying
> 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.

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.

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

Sam,

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.

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.
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
+ - Re: Church (civil, calm response) (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

(PLEASE SEE BELOW FOR MY CIVIL AND CALM RESPONSE.)

> Mark Humpreys:
>
> > It is pathetic to see that you would likely be bothered by someone eating
> > something that you don't like.  You are very sad and hateful, aren't you.
> You mean cockroaches? Not at all. I guess cockroaches are
> pretty nice bugs. You may even discover some kind of
> aesthetics in their build-up, their shape, their move.
> And they are also loaded with nutritious supplements.
>
> I have nothing against people who eat them. They just
> should not do it in public.
>
> > If you have to compare dignity and personal human sexual preferences to
 cock-
> > roach eating, you really must have a low-level mind.
> Ah, so you have bad feelings about cockroach eating?!
> I just can not believe it. You, the great anti-
> discriminatorian fighter discriminate against nice
> bugs. What a surprise! Why do you hate cockroaches?
>
>                                               Sz. Zoli
>
Zoltan,

Unfortunately, your above statements are too cute for me.  Yes, if you have to
 compare some-
thing as important as sexual preference to cockroach eating... that is sad.
 Where did I say
I was against cockroaches???  (If you weren't bothered by your son or someone
 eating cock-
roaches, then why would you consider hitting them? For fun?)

I would rather talk about the real issue and debate with facts....
 Unfortunately, I am not
finding that.  That is a root of my present frustration. When I take a stand on
 an issue and
the basic responses I receive are: fantasy stories that sidetrack the point and
 comments that
I will be prayed for... why continue?  You couldn't even answer direct question
s
 of mine.

Ferenc was funny yesterday.  He used a curse word I used (which is a very
 appropriate label
for an indiscriminate spreader of a ghastly disease by someone <god or whatever
>
 in an ex-
tremely inept way) as a pretense to shut me up.  Well in a debate on the teflon
 Church
and morals, what does he want?  ....
is he only happy if both sides are pro-Vatican? pro-religious zealots?  Is that
 a debate?

Please do not put words... or any cockroaches... in my mouth for me.

I am still waiting for New Testament evidence that Jesus was promoted
 discrimination and
did not like homosexuals....

At your service in a very civil way,
Wishing you well as always,
Mark
+ - Re: Church, morals, identities etc... (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

At 10:53 PM 8/26/96 -0400, Zoltan Szekely > wrote:

>Joe:
>> What process caused you to become a social outcast, Zoli?  Did it already
>> start in Hungary or do you think you're still experiencing culture shock?

>Come on, Joe, is it really you who ask me?
>It is so funny...

If you think it's so very funny that "I" can ask "you", then you really are
suffering from culture shock.  However, yours is not the kind you experience
when you travel from one culture to another.  Yours is the kind you
experience when you realize that you're living in the late twentieth
century, not the late nineteenth.  Get with it!  Relax in social situations!

Joe Szalai

"Don't be silly.  Of course mathematicians masturbate.  Perhaps more than
most.  Much more"
             Herbert Marcuse
+ - Re: Church (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

> > Andy:
> > Yes Zoli some of them went to jail,but most of them with the help of the
> > Church got transfers to other locations,so they can do the same thing all
> > over.
> If they are convinced, their place is in the prison.
> If they are not convinced, how could you judge them?
>
> And why don't you talk about Father Bernardin, who
> was accused by a homosexual, HIV-infected, drug-
> abuser person. It was a very shameful case. The guy
> was sick, and his doctor pushed him into a baseless
> accusation against the high-ranked Catholic priest.
> The handling of the case by the media was simply
> outrageous. Some people don't respect anything
> respectable.
>                                            Sz. Zoli
>

Hello again, Zoltan:

Why should he mention the above, unfortunate case when we were discussing Churc
h
 authority?
We were talking about your statement that homosexuals are people who go against
 authority and
are social outcasts.  What Andy mentioned, as well as my comment about the
 Church's hush
money, was  relevant to the topic, because it was an actual case where the
 authorities were
wrong and justice seemed a bit light.

Why should the above story be mentioned?

Thank you,
Mark

PS: I do agree, though, that that was a sad incident. I'm glad that Fr.
 Bernardin's reputa-
tion weren't ruined because of it.  As a matter of fact, I think he is seen as 
a
 strong
person for the mature way he handled the whole affair.  But that does not excus
e
 the
priests who do wrong and are protected by the authorities of the Church.
+ - Re: Church, morals, identities etc... (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

(Please see my response below.)

>From Mr. Szekely:

> Mark Humpreys:
> > You implied several times earlier that AIDS is god's punishment of gays.
> I never said so. You messed up something or me with
> somebody else. Get the quote from the person, please,
> before you claim anything like that.
>
> > If that is so, then I repeat again that
> > your Yahweh is then an utter inept ass.
> It is a shame, that you despise 3500 years of the cultural
> history of a people. I hope you did not mean it.
>
> > BTW: The only closet I would ever like to get out of
> > are the ones in your house.
> I don't have a house, I don't have a closet, and I don't
> need you in my closet. Thank you very much.
>                                                 Sz. Zoli
>
Dear Zoltan,

YES, you did imply several times that AIDS is the work of your god to get
 homosexuals.
But remember, if AIDS were an act of judgement by god, then LESBIANS ARE
 BLESSED.  These
homosexuals are the smallest AIDS group.

No, I do NOT despise 3500 years of the cultural history of a people.  There is
 much more to
a culture than just a Yahweh, just as there is much more to a person than simpl
y
 saying they
are a Protestant, a Moslem...  Yes, I repeat: If there were a god that would be
 so inept as
to spread a horrid, wretched disease in an indiscriminate manner, than that god
 would seem
to be a really inept jerk and spiteful creep.  I could not call that the action
s
 of a "Just,
Holy and Loving Father." Can you? (Eathquakes, floods and droughts all fit in
 this category.)

!!! I also do not despise the Church- AS I'VE SAID EARLIER! I do not see where
 putting a
Church or a Yahweh in its proper perspective is considered hatred and despising
.
 It's sad
that Ferenc probably didn't read my earlier postings, bec. he maybe puts more
 importance on
his feelings towards a person than their views on a topic. If he hits the delet
e
 key every-
time he sees my name, than he has missed not only thought provoking questions
 about religion, but also a short, nice discussion on hi'mes toja'sok. Well,
 that's his loss.

By the last paragraph in your posting above, it sounds like you are comfortable
 enough to be
in the closet by yourself.  That is fine; I can respect that. Just pls don't be
 such a harsh
judge on those who have decided to come out of their closets and live freely
 with something
others want them to hide.

Did you receive my version of the cockroach story? The List seemed stuck the
 other day. I
just thought it was an interesting twist to your made-up story... eventhough I
 would rather
stick to the issues instead of trying to sidetrack them with anecdotes and othe
r
 things.

I hope you enjoyed my concrete answers to the questions you counter-posed me
 yesterday.

Understandingly yours,
Mark
+ - Re: Church, morals, identities etc... (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

>Andy:
>> Yes Zoli some of them went to jail,but most of them with the help of the
>> Church got transfers to other locations,so they can do the same thing all
>> over.
>If they are convinced, their place is in the prison.
>If they are not convinced, how could you judge them?
>
>And why don't you talk about Father Bernardin, who
>was accused by a homosexual, HIV-infected, drug-
>abuser person. It was a very shameful case. The guy
>was sick, and his doctor pushed him into a baseless
>accusation against the high-ranked Catholic priest.
>The handling of the case by the media was simply
>outrageous. Some people don't respect anything
>respectable.
>                                           Sz. Zoli
>
>Zoli:don't talk about one case wich might have been something
somewhere?Personaly i never heard of it,but that is probaly my fault.
On the other hand Zoli,as I mentioned a bunch of those priest were
transfered from the place they were accused.It cost the Vatican a lot of
monney to keep the people quiete,and not to have them prosecuted.
I have nothing against priests if they follow there Job.Iy is a job,just the
same as any other one.I have something against the radicalism and brain
washing of any religion.To me it has similarities,to communism,nazism and
any other form of brainwashing.
I don't feel that anyone has the right to feel superior to any other person
for any reason what so ever.This is also true for those who had "chosen" to
be Gay or Lesbians.This is there form of living and if there wouldn't be any
sex invalved,well then it would might be OK.
Andy.
+ - Re: Church, morals, identities etc... (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

> "Don't be silly.  Of course mathematicians masturbate.  Perhaps more than
> most.  Much more"
>              Herbert Marcuse
>
This message is morally wrong.        Sz. Zoli
+ - Re: Church, morals, identities etc... (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Mark Humpreys:
> YES, you did imply several times that AIDS is the work of your god to get
>  homosexuals.
No, I never implied that. Period.

Now, how to go on from this point?
(Maybe you can't find the quote??)

                         Sz. Zoli
+ - Re: Sophistry (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

At 02:29 PM 8/29/96 -0400, Zoli Szekely wrote:

>The same kind of misconceptions can be identified when speaking
>about Churchill's relationship to Dzugashvili. Churchill had a
>chance to attack Hitler on the Balkan as early as in 1943. But
>he allowed this region of Europe to be controlled by the Soviet
>and he finally got to Europe in France in 1944 only. He also
>maintained good relationship with Dzugasvili until the famous
>Fulton speech in 1946. At this time the war already was over,
>and nothing could be done against the takeover of countries like
>Hungary by the communists in Eastern-Europe.

        There is no way of getting anywhere with this discussion if you
refuse to keep the facts straight. Churchill didn't have a chance to attack
Hitler in the Balkans because the army brass (Eisenhower included) vetoed
such a military move. He tried but he couldn't go against the wishes of his
allies and the military. And what do you mean that

>He also
>maintained good relationship with Dzugasvili until the famous
>Fulton speech in 1946.

        Come on! What do you mean? They were friendly, body-bodies?
Churchill, in fact, was extremely suspicious of Stalin, much more suspicious
than Roosevelt. What you are saying here sounds as if Churchill was best
friends with Stalin until suddenly he changed his mind and stabbed his good
friend in the back, when he, out of the blue, made the Fulton speech in
1946. And this is just not so!

>Come on, Eva. It is a very ugly try to implicate Americans.

        Indeed, it is.

>Another interesting point is that in Nuremberg, when the movie
>about the camps were shown at the Nazi trial, it had a very strong
>emotional effect because it revealed the brutality and the in-
>humanity of these camps in full extent. These details were unknown
>to the public still in 1946.

        So, the Americans who knew all this kept it a secret from the public
until 1946?

>> 1896 there was phenomenal accomplishment behind
>> those celebrations. In thirty years or so, Hungary had become a modern
>> nation.


>We have the same chances right now. In thirty years or so,
>Hungary could become a modern nation again. And if people want
>to celebrate, you don't have to join them. If the nation
>celebrates it would not mean that everybody have to celebrate.

        (1) The accomplishments took place in the thirty years before the
millennial celebrations, not afterward.

        (2) The problem was that people were not celebrating with the same
enthusiasm as they did a hundred years ago. It has nothing to do with me. I
am on an other continent and I can't attend any celebration.

>>         Jerusalem is a bit more than a dwelling place which happens to be
>> 3,000 years old. I bet there are a lot of towns which, with the help of
>> archeologists, can be dated that old or older.
>Why don't you name same of them? You could not find too much...

        Even my hometown is close to 3,000 years old and even if we don't
know the exact history of European and mid-eastern cities they did exist.
Much longer than 3,000 years.

>The people of Jerusalem have all reasons to celebrate and you
>just can not go there and tell them to stop it.

        I don't want anybody stop to celebrate anywhere. I was trying to
explain why the Hungarian celebrations were not as exuberant as some people
on the right hoped.

        Eva Balogh
+ - Re: Sophistry (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

At 03:22 PM 8/29/96 -0400, Zoli Szekely wrote:

>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.

        Well, don't be too suprised because you were all confused about
pronouns. As Sam most likely knows (except he forgot about it), the
Hungarian language doesn't distinquish among "he, she, it," and therefore
Hungarians often make the mistake of mixing up third-person pronouns. I
assume that Zoli meant "its people," meaning "Jerusalem's."

        Eva Balogh
+ - Re: Church, morals, identities etc... (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Mark Humphreys suggested that YAHWEH is #%$^^@

That IS UNACCEPTABLE both on the internet, and from my personal prespective.
The LEAST I would expect Mark is that you can be respectful. If you have
a problem with him
then perhaps you should learn to communicate with him by reading more of
what he said and PRAYING.

If you cannot express yourself better then you have fallen into the gutter
(regardless of how angry you may be), It was just uncalled for.
Peter Soltesz
+ - Re: Church (civil, calm response) (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

I do not remember who said it but someone on the net perhaps mistook
comments on being anti-church, etc. He was apparently quite upset about it.

The way I look at it, that the church (regardless of which one) cannot take
some criticisms or purposefully distorts the truth is NOT a true church.

The fact of history will be known bey more and more people about what
actually took place. If the listeners think that the truth of Jesus and
Moses, etc. have not been distorted (subtly I must say) then you better
do a lot of research, instead of just accepting the dogma.

Yes there is a GOD, yes there was a Jesus, Moses, Mohamed, et al.
Yet what they have said then and what is being stated as what they said
is apples and oranges.

Too bad that most of us have not had the opportunity to learn Hebrew, Greek,
, Aramaic, etc. so that we could figure out  what was said (if in fact
what we might be looking at is the true version).

For example, why is it that WE have yet to see a translation of the
'recently' found scrolls??? Havent they had enough time to come up with a
story yet??

This does not mean that people on the net (with a few exception) are anti
this or that. We are (I think all searching for the truth -- except those
who are willfully obfuscating it).

Peter Soltesz
+ - Re: Church, morals, identities etc... (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Well there is an instruction book to life called the Bible.
Yes you are right, that there seem to be many many contradictory
pieces in there. One cannot take out segments too well and
try to complete or infer one thing..it seems to go together as a whole.
In fact there are many places that were sealed from people till the end
time( or just before).

Perhaps Mark and others, it may behove all of us to read and discuss it
more.

Yes God does punish those who do not follow his laws -- that is clear from
all of the biblical references. Why do you think that Britain has
the Mad Cow disease?? Because they stopped following the prescribed
feeding suggested in the bible. They starteed to feed animal matter
to cows that were designed for grasses Greed got the better of them, as
it will
here in the USA and elsewhere.

Here is something to chew on Hungary...perhaps you have been not keeping
the laws of God... with all those lies, cheating, theft, abortions, etc
,etc.

Peter Soltesz
+ - Re: Church, morals, identities etc... (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Andy & Zoli, et al:

Perhaps we need to agree that in every church, like in every country,
every race, every peoples there are good and bad people. Perhaps some are
more of one than the other.

BTW it is very clear that God will punish the leaders twice as hard as those
who follow!

Peter Soltesz
+ - Re: Church, morals, identities etc... (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

At 05:25 PM 8/29/96 -0400, you wrote:
>> "Don't be silly.  Of course mathematicians masturbate.  Perhaps more than
>> most.  Much more"
>>              Herbert Marcuse
>>
Quoting Sz.Zoli:

>This message is morally wrong.        Sz. Zoli
>
Zoli:

Having read a few of your postings I am shocked to see, that the word
"moral" is within your realm of knowledge, let alone to see you actually
utilizing it.

Aniko
>
+ - Re: An opinion from Hungary (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Re the obvious demoralization of Hungarians in not even being up to
celebrating the 1100th anniversary . . .

Here's a terrible generalization from an outsider: but I feel the
Hungarians are demoralized because they overcame fascism and communism to
reach freedom (the capitalist version), and look what they've got.  This
was supposed to be the pinnacle of life, and now there's nothing beyond,
only the abyss.  What future can "Hungary" possibly have if this is how
people (or rather, politicians) treat their compatriots under freedom?  It
looks like Arpad's taken his last ride, unless the "H" in Hungary can come
to stand for Humanism.

Burian
+ - Re: Sophistry (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

At 2:29 PM 8/29/96, Zoltan Szekely wrote:

>The same kind of misconceptions can be identified when speaking
>about Churchill's relationship to Dzugashvili. Churchill had a
>chance to attack Hitler on the Balkan as early as in 1943. But
>he allowed this region of Europe to be controlled by the Soviet
>and he finally got to Europe in France in 1944 only.

Stalin was known as Stalin and not as Dzugashvili. What is your purpose in
recalling his original name? And Churchill did not have much of a
"relationship" with Stalin. Landing on the Balkan was never seriously
considered by the Allies. Churchill suggested a short-cut to Vienna but the
Americans rejected the proposal. England was not strong enough to oppose
Stalin, to stop the
Russian steam roller. Finally, one must remember that the Allies  first
landed in Europe in Sicily and not in France.

Peter I. Hidas

Hungarian Studies
Department Of Russian and Slavic Studies
McGill University
Montreal, Quebec, Canada

+ - Re: An opinion from Hungary (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

In article >,  says...

>Re the obvious demoralization of Hungarians in not even being up to
>celebrating the 1100th anniversary . . .

>Here's a terrible generalization from an outsider: but I feel the
>Hungarians are demoralized because they overcame fascism and communism to
>reach freedom (the capitalist version), and look what they've got. <snip>..

Has Hungary really gotten rid of fascism and communism? What is Gyula
Horn, if not at least one of these (or both!?)? Perhaps the labels
have changed, but has the essence? What about the slimey creatures
(career bureaucrats, officials, etc) that still crawl around in the
woodwork (infrastructure) from the bad old days?

--
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: Church, morals, identities etc... (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

At 07:40 PM 8/29/96 -0400, Peter Soltesz wrote:

>Mark Humphreys suggested that YAHWEH is #%$^^@
>
>That IS UNACCEPTABLE both on the internet, and from my personal prespective.
>The LEAST I would expect Mark is that you can be respectful. If you have
>a problem with him
>then perhaps you should learn to communicate with him by reading more of
>what he said and PRAYING.
>
>If you cannot express yourself better then you have fallen into the gutter
>(regardless of how angry you may be), It was just uncalled for.

Mark is not being disrespectful.  He just doesn't have the same
superstitions that you do.  Is that a crime?

Joe Szalai
+ - Re: Reminder. (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Mr. Arpi,

Why not reserve your comments for the Forum, after all that is the forum that
you contribute to regularly.

AGYKONTROLL ALLAT AUTO AZSIA BUDAPEST CODER DOSZ FELVIDEK FILM FILOZOFIA FORUM GURU HANG HIPHOP HIRDETES HIRMONDO HIXDVD HUDOM HUNGARY JATEK KEP KONYHA KONYV KORNYESZ KUKKER KULTURA LINUX MAGELLAN MAHAL MOBIL MOKA MOZAIK NARANCS NARANCS1 NY NYELV OTTHON OTTHONKA PARA RANDI REJTVENY SCM SPORT SZABAD SZALON TANC TIPP TUDOMANY UK UTAZAS UTLEVEL VITA WEBMESTER WINDOWS