Hollosi Information eXchange /HIX/
Copyright (C) HIX
Új cikk beküldése (a cikk tartalma az író felelőssége)
Megrendelés Lemondás
2 Re: Next liberal idiot; Horvath the brownnose (mind)  200 sor     (cikkei)
3 Re: Just how bad was communism morally? (mind)  221 sor     (cikkei)
4 Re: Just how bad was communism morally? (mind)  89 sor     (cikkei)
5 Re: More Than Etc Etc Etc For Maria (mind)  1 sor     (cikkei)
6 Exhibit (mind)  27 sor     (cikkei)
7 Re: A Geography Question (mind)  25 sor     (cikkei)
8 Re: Translation Software (mind)  8 sor     (cikkei)
9 Re: More Than Etc Etc Etc For Maria (mind)  11 sor     (cikkei)
10 More Than EtcEtcEtc, Maria Avoids to Answer (mind)  300 sor     (cikkei)
12 Re: More Than Etc Etc Etc For Maria (mind)  15 sor     (cikkei)
13 Re: More Than Etc Etc Etc For Maria (mind)  9 sor     (cikkei)
14 HUNGARY=MONGOLIANS ??? I m getting tired of this. (mind)  28 sor     (cikkei)




And best wishes for your future, YOU LIFELESS  WORM (PERIOD)

Gyula Krehó
Newmarket, ON Canada
+ - Re: Next liberal idiot; Horvath the brownnose (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)


I pity those who wish to sound authentic about 1956
by name dropping such as  "were you there in 1956? On
Baros ter, on the Ulloi ut, at the Kilian laktanya, or
at the Radio building on the evening of Oct. 23?"

 // Do you pity yourself too? After all from your outpourings one
  would get the impression that you fought the revolution
  singlehandedly. My name dropping is just to show that you were
  not the only one. So, why some of us who really were there,
  shouldn't declare it so.//

Not that there is anything wrong with "name dropping" -
if the idiot could actually spell the names.

  //Poor Andras, Szucs or Pellionisz -I, myself have the suspicion
  that you are the same person. I've just browsed through "your"
  writings and there seem to be so much hint that the same individual
  writes those "epistles" that are signed either by A. Szucs or A.
  Pellionisz. It's possible that the real Andras, either for fun or for
  some pathological reasons, takes on the Mr. Hyde or Dr. Jekill
  personality. These are the things that indicate that "you" are the
  same person: both signatories frequently mix the correct and incorrect
  spelling of "liar" (i. e. mix lier, liar). Well, we all make plenty of
  errors in spelling (even natives do). But spelling errors are fairly
  typical to a person. Strange, no, both of you just love to throw
  the words lies, lied, lying, liar around?
  Both of you tote the phrase Kadar-jugend, and miserable
  and liberalbolshevik, and so and so "is not our friend"
  (our friend? looks like you, unwittingly, acknowledge the multiplicity
  of our personality) around like a machine gun.
  I wouldn't pay special attention to this (after all the Internet is
  a rough place) if this "Andras" were not at times showing an ugly
  Dr. Jekill face. He can threaten: "...THEIR LIFE WILL BE MADE PURE
  HEROES OF A SMALL BUT PROUD NATION..." This is what he writes in
  his denounciation of Eva Balogh on July 9, 1996. Can we hear an echo
  of Herr Goebbels and Hitler, or Comrade Stalin's rhetoric in this
  But Andras can use a gutter language too when he turns Dr. Jekill.
  For one thing in this reprimand to me he calls me amongst others
  an idiot, a Gestapo/AVO/KGB man, likens me to OJ Simpson, a Silly ass,
  and somebody "to be up in his ass". Well, that's quite a mouthful.
  The sad thing about this is that if this Andras might also be
  Dr. A. Pellionisz then the poor Sillicon Valley Hungarian community
  is in a sad state: for Dr. Pellionisz not only a noted engineer,
  a businessman, etc. but also "A San Francisco Obolkornyeki Magyar
  Kulturkozpont fotitkarja" and "A 117 Amerikai magyar szervezetet
  tomorito AMOSZ igazgatosagi tagja".//

But poor Laszlo Horvath (Gestapo/AVO/KGB man) cannot. There was
(and there is) NO "Baros ter" (wrong sp!) in Budapest; there is
only (several) Baross ter and (several) Baross utca. (It seems,
Horvath has no idea who Baross Gabor was, anyway). Poor Horvath
obviously wasn't there at the Radio where the battle started,
otherwise would not refer to it "on the evening" - since
gunfire started only at night, close to 10 P.M., and would remember
the name of the street (Bro'dy Sandor utca). And actually
there was not much at the Kilian laktanya "on the evening
of Oct. 23" - as the battle at Kilian laktanya only started
on the 24th. (There was a little activity; some conscripts in
the huge barrack handed out their rifles through some windows
to Freedomfighters - but that was in the wee hours of 24th)

  //Yes, Andras, you're correct: it is Boraros ter. I slipped.
  But a person with any reasonable knowledge of English would
  see that I am not implying that all those events occured the
  same night. Now if I wanted to place myself where I was not,
  believe me, I would've looked up the fact. As a librarian
  of the Hoover Institution Library, which is acknowledged
  to own one of the largest collections anywhere on the Hungarian
  Revolution of 1956 (ranging from monographic works through
  newspapers, posters, diaries, etc.) and as one responsible for
  that collection, I would have the opportunity to
  check out the facts. And, by the way, I would like
  to extend to you an invitation to come over to Hoover on the
  Stanford Campus and I personally would show you our institution
  and the Hungarian collection (my office is
  in Tower Building, room 115; phone: 415-725-3426). At least
  you will not insist in the future that I am Kornai, etc.
  The Szucs/Pellionisz tactic is to call an opponent by all the
  socially-politically evil phrases. Never mind that they are
  not consistent. For how can a person be a gestapo, AVO, and a
  KGB men be at the same time. For good measure he also throws in
  terms like Holocaust denier, freedom fight denier, etc.//

As for "Baros ter"; Horvath is wrong threefold.
Spelling is a trivial mistake, but if he means "Baross ter"
he clearly does not know what he is talking about. NOTHING
happened in Baross ter (on which Keleti railway terminal is
located) -- this strategic point was held with overwhelming
force and was never challenged by Freedomfighters. For weeks,
thereafter, there was but a single Soviet tank at the
intersection with Fiumei ut, barrel pointing along Rakoczi ut.
But as a third mistake, it is rather obvious, that Horvath meant
Boraros ter, rather then Baros(s).

However, even at Boraros ter there was NOTHING on the eve of
Tuesday, the 23rd, as Soviet tanks started to roll from Soroksari
ut, turning right to Ferenc korut at Boraros ter only in the
morning of 24th of October. And for downtown Baross utca, for
that matter,the only worthwile thing to mention for the 23rd
was a handful of trucks, NO armored personnel carriers, only
ordinary trucks,hauling in a whiffy stonefaced young soldiers
- obviously scared wittless- turning the corner from Baross
utca to Muzeum korut, and then turning right again into Brody
Sandor utca at the Muzeum kavehaz, slowed to a halt by the
crowd there, at about 11 P.M.)
  //Yes, one can see you're well versed. The subject must be
  your obsession to the point that you're blind to larger

So much for the obviously sloppy recall of events by "Horvath".
Now for the "szabadsagharcosok". Earlier, I took the time for
the "Hungary"-list (when someone with similar bad knowledge
and even worse intentions engaged in "freedomfight-denial")
to properly reference in accepted publications 41 instances
(the first from the 24th of October, 1956) when our heroes
were called SZABADSAGHARCOSOK. (Persons used the term were of
an extremely wide spectrum, including Maleter Pal, Kiraly Bela,
Gergely Pongratz, Cardinal Mindszenty). It is a primitive lie
that the term was concocted abroad, and after the Revolution
and Freedomfight. I will not repeat the 41 pieces of evidence
I cared to collect (there are literally thousands). It speaks,
indeed, better than anything about Horvath that he used the name
Freedomfighter for HIS financial and egoistic satisfaction,
gaining personal profit from the Freedomfight of 1956, yet
denies it for those who DIED IN FREEDOMFIGHT. This is the "man".

  //Many of us who left in 1956, whether "freedom fighters" in
  your sense of the word, or some who would have been emigrants
  in a democratic society, were extended some help by the West.
  I too accepted the opportunity to live in a refugee camp and was
  housed and fed until the authorities found me a job. And later,
  when I was offered to get free transportation to Canada, I
  accepted the offer like thousands of Hungarians. You are indeed
  a morally superior person that you declined all such offer.
  You're either a rare bird or an unashamed liar.//

I used number 41, since in the OJ Simpson trial this was
the number of an evidence - and proud "Americans", like Horvath,
have proven to the World that one can get away with double
murder - no matter what evidence shows and how many times.

  //I see that you're fascinated by this OJ business since you
  use these sentiments in your diatribes against others too.//

And I wish I could appropriately call Horvath "silly ass", but
that would not be fair. A "silly ass" is not malicious
and Gestapo/KGB/AVO-type, like Horvath is, who brownnoses
everywhere, to make his nose more to his taste. Kornai and
whatshername let go - now its Horvath's turn to be up in my ass,
and badmouth Freedomfighters at the same time. Clearly, a
third-rate effort, an utterly boring epigon.

For Horvath's feeble attempt at "patriotism", maybe some at Hoover
can teach him some lesson that it DOES appear to be "American"
for members of small and proud nation to speak up, and FIGHT the
Holocaust-deniers and FIGHT those spineless who either did not
take part in the Hungarian Freedomfight of 1956, or escaped
it alive -- AND don't feel that they OWE the name to those who
gave their (mostly very young) lives to Freedom of Hungary.
Is Horvath chicken enough to be footsoldier among Freedomfight-deniers
only, or is he brave to be an officer of "Holocaust-deniers", too?

  //Are you Jewish by any chance Andras? A crypto Jew? Why is this
  hungup on Holocaust deniers? Yes, Holocaust deniers are a mean
  bunch. Do you think that Jews couldn't be good Hungarian patriots?
  Or Greeks for that matter? Or Hungarians of Slavic origin? There
  were Jews too amongst the freedom fighters. And I have known one.//

In general, it is very "American" to stand up for Freedom and
fight those who wish to trample Freedom to death.

  //If you admit that it is very American to stand up for freedom
  then why you try to censor opinions. You outright threan
  people with violence if they don't accept "your" interpretation
  of events. I quoted your very words above. If you live here
  then you should respect the American notion of freedom of
  opinion, speech, etc. and not sound like Herr Goebbels.//

Except in 1956, that is. At that time, most in America just
sat on their silly ass and did nothing to help Freedomfighters
of Hungary as they bled to their deaths.

And except in 1996, when brownnosing liberal idiots claim
themselves to be "American" (to qualify to ruin her), and dare to
take away even the name of those who fought - and died! -
for Freedom.

  //Thank you for calling me a liberal (although I would prefer it
  without "idiot". I showed it to my wife, children, and colleagues:
  so far I've been considered by some as a "bloody" conservative,
  a Reaganite, a Hooverite, etc. It was a surprise to them that some
  Hungarian considers me to be a liberal, or liberal bolshevik. Of
  course, they are wandering that if according to Hungarian standards
  I am a liberal than aren't Hungarians outright fascists?//
    Sincerely, Laszlo
+ - Re: Just how bad was communism morally? (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

> Oops, I did not intend to include your dad's name in the list until I saw you
> reference to "emigration".  From this I assumed he persued his Western academ
> career with the blessing of the Kadar regime.  
Blessing is overstated -- the Hungarian term is "fogcsikorgatva tu3rte1k"
they tolerated it, with much gnashing of teeth.  Anyway you don't seem to 
know much about his carreer or his works or anything about him -- may I 
suggest you look him up in Who Is Who before we continue with this nonsense?
Better yet, you might try to read some of his books or articles. He writes
very clearly (if I may say so) and most of his stuff is available in several 
languages. I particularly recommend his "Economics of Shortage" and "The  
Socialist System". 
> Otherwise I've never heard the
> term "emigration" used in connection with Hungarians who left the country
> without the permission of the Communist government.  This includes those, who
> refused to return when their visa called for it.  Such people *fled* the
> country, not emigrated.  In my book, at least ...
The term "fleeing" is usually reserved for those who have been persecuted in
their home country. Emigrants from Mexico to the US, who do their thing
without the approval of either the Mexican or the US authorities, are never
said to have "fled". Also recall we were talking about members of the "Ka1da1r
Jugend", not my father. 

> Now, as to the rectors, deans, etc. not inviting him ... I wonder how
> much of that was due to following the Party line and how much just simple
> professional jealousy.  Experience in the last 7 years taught me how much
> jealousy toward the emigres is there.
Except he wasn't (and isn't) an emigre (legal or illegal). He maintains two 
positions and commutes between the US and Hungary on a regular basis. 

> >In brief, both he and
> >Simonyi belonged into the "tolerated" category, as opposed to the "supported
> >and the "banned" categories, forming the "ta1mogatott/tu3rt/tiltott"
> >(supported/tolerated/banned) classification so characteristic of the period.
> I think you're painting with a broad brush here.  Since the case of Simonyi
> was several times mentioned in the HIX FORUM (and perhaps SZALON, as well),
> even you should know that there is no parallel here.  He was essentially
> forced to an "internal exile" which he used to write his famous tome on the
> cultural history of physics.  I'm not familiar with the details of your dad's
> "emigration", but from what you were saying, he was shunned *after* his
> leaving the country.  Was I getting this wrong too, and he was already
> "blacklisted" before his leave?  If he was, how was it manifested?
I think you are still too much focussed on the fifties and early sixties, 
when Simonyi was indeed banned. His rehabilitation must have happened sometime
in the sixties, for his "Cultural history of physics" was published in a 
lavishly illustrated volume, to great critical acclaim, sometime before 1975.

> Funny that you should mention Balczo, of all people, as an example to prove
> *your* point.  
Just because he did some rather unsavory things since? As far as I'm
concerned, Csurka wrote quite good stuff in the sixties and seventies (not the
same world-class talent in literature as Balczo1 was in sports, but quite OK),
and so did Istva1n Benedek. 

> I still think, however, that math is more of an inborn talent than athletics.
> I don't think brain power can be developed as much through exercise and
> perseverence as physical abilities, but that's probably arguable. 
I think it's a combination of both, and the mixture is the way Edison had it.

> Sure it was [in the sixties] but it was then when much of today's elite
> entrenched itself through those unfair advantages. 
There is a certain amount of truth to this, though less than your phrasing
would suggest. Those who were denied university-level education in the early
sixties were treated unfairly at the time and did not, for the most part,
become members of the elite (there are notable exceptions of course, because
uniquely talented people did often succeed even on a less than level playing
field).  But those who were unfairly admitted did not, just by dint of a
university degree, become part of the elite, and those who finished university
have not "entrenched" themselves at the time. There was quite a bit of work in
getting where they are today, and the playing field became less and less
tilted as time went by. 

> >Joe, it is nice of you to have so definite opinions on every matter,
> You mean only you can have them?
Well at least I'm refraining from speculating about what is on CSEPPSZ' mind,
while you are ready to psychoanalyze the "Ka1da1r Jugend" at every turn.

> I don't care what you were discussing privately about that.  One can easily
> follow the events with the help of FORUM archives.  Anybody can check it.
Yes indeed. And the archives show nothing about Z-T as being the reason.

> Why don't you tell the outsiders then how the members of [the Constitutional
> Court] were selected in '89; how many were selected by the outgoing
> communist government and how many by the opposition.  This court was meant to
> save the hide of the former communist rulers and act as a trottle to the pace
> of changes. 
Joe, I know you deny the legitimacy of the CC, indeed the legitimacy of the 
whole setup that was created when the communists handed the reins over. Yet 
it was a negotiated settlement, perhaps the best deal that each side could have
gotten at the time. 

> Since the legislators have not been willing to submit themselves to a thoroug
> lustration, they can hardly be expected to pass laws that would mandate an
> accounting of communist era crimes.  That's why issues like that, as well as
> their compensation and conflict of interest issues should be handled above
> their heads.
You also deny the legitimacy of Parliament, right? What you seem to forget is
that people like Hajdu were elected in 1994, so the popular mandate for "an
accounting of communist era crimes" can't be very strong. In fact the greatest
strength of the Ka1da1r-regime was that it spread wealth and power rather
broadly, so that actually a large number of people (including the insanely
numerous government employees and workers of favored industries like steel)
benefited. Those who did not make their compromises and were in fact
marginalized you seem to hate with a special passion. Take Gyo2rgy Petri,
whose poems about Brezhnev's death (Felfordult a ferdeajku ve1n trotty) were
of course only available in samizdat. Now that he got a Kossuth prize the
right wing can only see that he was just as irreverent about the Virgin Mary
as he was about Brezhnev... 

> I think following the Czech example would also be a good start.  
You seem to forget that repression in Czechoslovakia up to 1989 was about as
bad as in Hungary up to 1965, but Hungary has gotten considerably better in
the 20+ years that followed. The Czech model was appropriate for
Czechoslovakia 1990 as it would have been appropriate for Hungary 1966 (which
is the time frame you seem to have frozen into) but it wasn't appropriate for
Hungary 1990. 

> If MIEP had as much control over the national media as your ilk have, I'm sur
> the 5% could easily be on the other side.  At least on the retribution issue.
You overestimate the power of the media, and underestimate the power of reading
between the lines, an art Hungarians are very familiar with. It's not that Z-T 
didn't get enough coverage, for it got plenty, it's just that the idea wasn't 
very popular.

> And what has irredentism to do with this, unless as a cheap trick to line up
> DB on your side? 
Brutus already decided I was the enemy even before I dared to stop that
gallopping hobby horse of yours, and I doubt he will agree with me on
anything.  The point was (and remains) that retribution for communist-era
wrongs is one of the many issues on which the far right is completely out of
touch with the Hungarian electorate, retribution for WWI and WWII wrongs is
another. The plain and simple fact remains that Hungarians don't want
Transylvania back, and I think this actually displeases Brutus who would much
rather attribute Romania's less than sterling success in modernization to a
convenient enemy, irredentist Hungary. The fact that this Hungary exists only
in his imagination and yours makes the two of you such beautiful friends I'd
hate to break it up. 

> Only because compared to today's economic situation, the '70s and '80s look
> good in comparison.  And they don't think the pre-70s type of Communism has
> any chance of return.  It's a case study for Maslow's hierarchy-of-needs
> piramyd.
Do you honestly think it will return? I suggest we draw up a set of mutually
agreed criteria, like selective admission to universities or whatever, and
each of us deposits some serious money, let's say a thousand bucks, in an
escrow account, winner to be determined at January 1, 2000 by a panel we agree
on in advance. I say put your money where your mouth is. 

> After the successful and repeated deployment of the "Salami tactics" against
> the right, I don't expect big surprises in '98.
Salami tactics? The only portion that has been sliced off of the anticommunist 
front is SZDSZ, and I doubt you cry much over that loss. 

> >I never saw the point of this counterargument. Jews can be antisemites.
> It could then be interesting to watch how they sort it out who can call the
> other legitimately an anti-semite.
Indeed. The standard term for an antisemitic Jew is "self-hating Jew", a 
moniker awarded with significant frequency. 

> >Csoo1ri's
> >private life has nothing to do with it, it's his public opinions that matter
> Or rather how Kornai and his self-appointed fellow "judges" rate his public
> opinions.
People on usenet and mailing lists tend to be pretty much self-appointed, I
dare say this categorization applies even to Joe Pannon, spokesperson of the
MIE1P "masses". Also, please keep in mind that the most ringing condemnation
of Csoo1ri came from fellow writers like Esterha1zy and Me1szo2ly, who happen
not to be Jewish. 

> I, too, dislike the tendency of many leftists to assume that anything negativ
> that happens to them is due to anti-semitism.  You can't expect one without
> the other.
Well, since I'm neither leftist nor Jewish we might as well drop this fruitless
line of inquiry.

> >I'm not criticizing you for
> >criticizing communists, I'm criticizing you for the view that communists are
> >"Jewish (or mostly Jewish)" group. They are not, and they never were.
> There you go again.  I'd like you to provide cites from me where I made such
> blanket statements. 
"Jewish (or mostly Jewish)" was a direct quote from your preceding post. If you
insist, I can also dig stuff out from the HUNGARY archives. I say let's try to 
discuss the matter without bringing Jews and antisemitism in. 

> I was talking not necessarily about Hungarian practices only, but about the
> general principle.  The fact is that former nazies are still hunted wherever
> they are found.  
Except in Argentina, right?

> And the victims of that hunt are more often found innocent later than guilty.
> I'm not only talking about John Demianiuk, but such distinguished Hungarians
> as Ferenc Koreh, a former correspondent to VOA and RFE, as well as the long
> time voice of New York's Hungarian radio program (along with Geza Ziegler).
> So why are those hunts not considered "witch hunts"? 
I'm not going to comment on the case of Koreh of which I know nothing about, 
but how about the Hungarian gendarme Jo1zsef Szendi? I understand he was 
kicked out of the US because he tried to cover up his nazi past, and Hungary
took him back. 

> That's BS!  It was not the lack of desire for vengeance on the part of
> Israelis that stopped the wrongful prosecution of John Demianiuk, but the
> negative publicity the case generated for Israeli justice.
I thought the case generated positive publicity overall, since they let him go,
but it's all in the eye of the beholder. I again suggest that we ignore this 
whole issue or at least make a it separate thread, as it has nothing to do 
with the "badness of communism" issue we are discussing here.

Andra1s Kornai
+ - Re: Just how bad was communism morally? (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

> So people who were 18 in 1965 when you say that there was widespread 
> persecution would be in their mid 50's today. Most of them would still be  
> alive and all of them would be morally deserving of compensation wouldn't 
> you say? Even by your own statements there is some moral debt owed to a 
> wide part of the population. 
Sure there is.

> From the way you structure your statements, it is obvious that you
> would like to minimize the people who you have to admit are morally
> owed compensation. 
You might find it obvious, but I actually never said such a thing. Some people
suffered gravely (were killed or imprisoned) some suffered considerably (they
were fired from their jobs and/or forcibly relocated), some suffered less but
still noticeably (denied education, visas, promotions) and some suffered very
little (such as having to put up with the same bad food/bad housing etc. as 
almost everybody else), some got little advantages, medium advantages, big 
advantages. Altogether, I would reserve the term "persecution" to the first 
two categories on the list, and I would not say that there was "widespread 
persecution" in Hungary after 1965, as there were very few people killed,
imprisoned, fired, or forcibly relocated. 

> Was it a just opinion? Reread the subject line. It isn't a question of 
> legality but morality. Whether the court system is moral in most countries 
> is a hotly debatable topic. Even in the US the idea of the court as an 
> automatic standardbearer for morality would get you derision and disbelief.
Who said automatic? The court rendered a decision which was argued in rather
clear non-legalese language. I don't have the text, but it was published by
several weeklies and dailies at the time and should not be too hard to dig out.

> That's an interesting way of looking at the Israeli justice system. 
> Convictions are motivated by vengeance, not justice. Acquitals are a 
> sign that the thirst for vengeance has been slaked. What a bizarre view 
> of life and justice.
You really can't leave well enough alone, can you? The guy was a disgusting 
mass murderer, with several witnesses recognizing him and plenty of 
corroborating evidence. The prosecution couldn't make the case stick, and they 
let him go, because it _is_ better to let a hundred criminals go free than to 
have an innocent man suffer. 

> OK, let's get back here a bit to the principles. There were supported and 
> banned categories of people, you both seem to agree on this. What do each 
> of you think should be the moral debt that the supported owe to the banned. 
> How about the supported to that third (and most likely largest) category 
> the tolerated. And last of all what do the tolerated owe the banned in a 
> moral context?
I think the supported owe something, in direct proportion of their support,
and the banned are owed something, in direct proportion of their banishment.
I also think that this holds true independent of the moral character of the
institution that offered the support or the banning. To give a personal
example, early in my carreer I enjoyed the support of a professional society
that had the enlightened policy of giving travel grants to students from
countries where hard currency was unavailable. As soon as I started to earn
hard currency I started to contribute to the same fund, and helped setting up
a similar fund at another professional society. In dollar sums I paid already 
more than I ever got, but of course even the small sums involved at the time
really gave me a leg up, and in a moral sense I still fel indebted. Since the
communist system didn't give me similar goodies (not that I didn't apply!) 
I don't particularly feel indebted to them, and see no reason for my monies 
to go into the pool for restitution of the genuine victims (whose existence 
I am by no means denying or minimizing by saying that the situation was rather 
different in Romania and in Hungary). 

> Regime changeovers have had this feature for literally hundreds of years 
> in democracies. Look at the United States. Marbury v. Madison the seminal 
> case that defined the judiciary's power to review the constitutionality 
> of laws came as a result of just such a "packing" scheme.
Indeed. And the court's decision was to curtail its own powers as to the 
issuance of writs of mandamus. 

> So what is the correct moral stance for a new regime that enters after 
> a communist regime? Should the previous regime's appointments be respected 
> even though you know that many of them will sabotage you at every opportunity
> Is the fact of the nature of the regime that appointed a government official 
> a sufficient cause for immediate firing, review of the individual, or no 
> legitimate cause of action?
A particularly interesting case is that of the German judiciary after WWII:
needless to say, almost all were implicated in the evils of nazism. Yet they
were kept in place until the sixties, and only Chancellor Erhardt issued a
circular in which he _asked_ not ordered those who _themselves_ felt
implicated to step down. Many did. Here the case is further complicated by the
fact that unlike nazism, which got starker and starker until it was crushed by
an outside force, communism actually got milder and milder, at least in

> Have no fear, I know that we aren't discussing irredentism here. 
Great. Please feel free to ignore the part of my posting to Joe discussing it.

Andra1s Kornai
+ - Re: More Than Etc Etc Etc For Maria (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Is that so?or you make up stories.
+ - Exhibit (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

**************To SCM Subscribers in the New York City area*******************

My installation  "Album", is still on view at The National Arts Club across
from Gramercy Park. 

The album begins around the turn of the century through the thirties,
forties and fifties in Hungary, and ends around 1963 in  the US when I
became a citizen. I was  nine years old when I left Hungary in1956, and
returned there in 1990 as a  photojournalist. 

The theme of the show is:
"Home is where The Art is,
'Hybrid Affairs"

Show times are daily, including Sundays 12pm - 6pm. It closes at the end of

The National Arts Club
15 Gramercy Park South (20th between Irving Place & Park Ave. South)
New York, NY 10003


Thanks for your attention,

Anna M. Mogyorosy
+ - Re: A Geography Question (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Pedro Lisboa wrote:
> Greetings,
>   Could anyone out there please tell me where castle Csejthe (sp?) is located
>   Many thanks in advance,
> Pedro  //Hello Pedro,
    You're, probably, referring to Csejtevar, built in the second half
    of the 13th century in the valley of the river Vag (today, it is in 
    the Slovak republic, called Cachtice). After 1564 it came into the 
    possession of the Nadasdy family. The notable fact about the castle 
    that an infamous women, called Erzsebet (Elisabeth) Bathory (wife of 
    one of the owners of the castle) lived and died (in 1614) in that 
    castle. Erzsebet bathory was accused of being a sadist, that in the 
    Castle of Csejte, she took pleasure in the torture of hundreds of 
    young women (many of whom died of the torture). Eventually Erzsebet 
    was found guilty, but only some of her servants who carried out her 
    orders were executed. She herself was locked up in the castle where 
    she eventually went crazy. A Hungarian painter, called Istvan Csok, 
    (born 1865-) painted a historical painting of the insane Erzsebet    
    Bathory (1895) which created a great deal of sensation.
    Sincerely, Laszlo Horvath
+ - Re: Translation Software (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

check out this company.  They have hand-held electronic translators for
Hungarian/English and probably also the software that you need.



+ - Re: More Than Etc Etc Etc For Maria (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Maria Egorov ) writes:
> Is that so?or you make up stories.

No I don't make up stories. I'm afraid you'll have to face the truth and
deal with the facts as presented. Perhaps your claim that you are a
Russian Jew is just a story. Is that so? If you are, then I have dealt
with it. You appear to be afraid to face the truths in my postings to you
-- is that so Maria? 

Have you conducted a cyber-bloodtest on me yet to determine my
ethnic/racial roots? What does your Britannica say about people like me?
+ - More Than EtcEtcEtc, Maria Avoids to Answer (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

On July 14/96 Maria Egorov wrote:
|Is that so?or you make up stories.

Nope. I didn't make up any stories. I gave you names. I gave you book
titles. I posted it publicly. Go to the library and look it up if you have
any doubts. I openly challenge you to do so.

In the meantime, I will repost the material I have been politely asking you
to respond to. I am beginning to feel that you are choosing not to respond
to the details in my post because of several possibilities:

1. They are too detail-oriented and you are unable to deal with such
   precision of argument.
2. They totally undermine the contentions you have been making and you
   realize that you don't have a leg to stand on.
3. You realize the force of my arguments and you are too cowardly to
   face them publicly in SCM

I think all-of-the-above is the case. You can prove me wrong -- all you have
to do is continue the dialogue and dismantle my detailed arguements with
your own detailed arguements. I openly challenge you to do so.

Just to thicken the soup for you. Sergei Batovrin. Do you know who he is? 
He's from Moscow. Was exiled from the USSR. His father was a diplomat at the
UN. I first met with Sergei in September 1984 while he was living in the
Cloisters area of upper Manhatten. He had undergone treatment with
neuroleptic drugs after he had been arrested for peace activities. On a
second meeting at his Manhatten home the following year, I met with several
more peaceniks who had been arrested and exiled, Jews and non-Jews. We drank
vodka, and sang hearty Russian songs. In all cases, they never denied being
Russian, and would return to their roots if given the opportunity. 

If you want to look up am news article about Dr Roman Fin, you can check out
the editorial page of the Globe & Mail, July 23/84, which refers to both him
and me. It refers to another article about our activity.

The Russian Jew psychiatrist I referred to is Felix Yaroshevsky. You can
read about him in The Toronto Sun newspaper, June 3/85, page 14. Those in
Toronto can look this up at the local libraries. If need be, I can research
and provide other citations Maria.

Unfortunately for you, your innuendo that I am "making up stories" is
totally without foundation. Now that that is out of the way, the time has
come for you to address my postings which you have been avoiding. Please
have the Slavic courtesy to do so.


Subject: Re: Wally Keeler's Resp. to Maria
On July 13/96,m Maria Egorov wrote:
|I am not interested in your stories lady.
|I am a Russion Jew,the one you dislike.

Hello Maria;
Very interesting that you are a Russian Jew.
I have two friends who are Russian Jews.

Dr Roman Fin was Toronto's leading defender for Soviet refuseniks. He had
been an acquaintance with Andrei Sakharov and his Jewish wife, Yelena
Bonner. I worked with Dr Roman Fin as a liaison. Dr Fin, had been arrested
for his human rights activities and incarcerated in a psychiatric ward,
underwent drug torture, then was sent to the Gulag. He was later forced into
exile. He was an exceedingly intelligent and gentle man. In spite of what
was done to him as a Jew by his fellow Russians, he remained proud of his
Russian heritage.

Another friend, whom I will not name, came from Leningrad. He is currently a
psychiatrist here in Toronto. We befriended each other after a peace
demonstration. He went to protest against the naivite of the young
peaceniks. I went for the same reason. The following year, he and I rented a
truck and mounted a mock SS20 nuclear missile on it and drove it around
Toronto. It was good pr. It won the rage of Toronto's peaceniks. Pity. In
any event, this Russian Jew, who had undergone the same persecution as Dr
Roman Fin for his "ZIONIST" activities (persecuted for being a Jew) he
remained proud to be a Russian.

The past two days you have responded to the usenet posts of Gyorgy Kovacs,
Dr Laszlo Balogh, and others. They have been somewhat insulting to you, etc,
yet you replied to them. You have not extended that courtesy to me in spite
of the fact that I have not behaved as those mentioned. So once again, I
repost my material for you and request that you please read it and answer to
it specifically. I will send it to you via email also so that I can be sure
that you did not miss it. 

Da svidanya


 (Maria Egorov) claims:
|Lets put it like this, do you think Albert Einstein after arriving in 
|United States, started to yell "I am a German"?.NOT AT ALL.

I don't think he was yelling any message. I'm a fifth generation Canadian
and I've never yelled - "I am a Canadian." NOT AT ALL. Do you yell out your
nationality or ethnicity. The salient point is that Albert never <denied>
his roots.

Maria Egorov asks:
|Do you really think that the Jews from Hungary (those who escaped the 
|death camps) came to United States and proudly said:"I am a Hungarian" or 
|"long live Hungary"? 

They are more likely to say, Death to the fascist government, than to say
Death to Hungary and Hungarians. They are more likely to say they are
Hungarian, but absolutely they would not say, I am a fascist. These are the
nuances that you are unable to appreciate.

If you read George Faludy's autobiographical book, My Happy Days In Hell,
you'd find that he had no problem with being a Hungarian and Jew. He made
absolutely no effort to hide nor to even play down the fact. He was neither
ashamed of being Hungarian nor Jewish. He certainly didn't BECOME AMERICAN.
Although he moved to Toronto for a couple decades, and appreciated it more
than any other place, he remained a proud Hungarian and Jew, even with
Canadian citizenship. I knew other Hungarians and Jews and they never
expressed the kind of crap you think they do.

Maria Egorov continues to query:
|Do you really think that these same Jews(only older)would change their
|minds just because you changed the government?. Or because the new
|government is experimenting with the art of Public Relations?.Or because
|Germany&Austria,the masters of Public Relations and your traditional
|friends, are advancing the idea that Hungary is the most progressive
|democracy in Eastern Europe?.

What "traditional friends"?? I'd say Poland, Czech Republic and Hungary are
more Western than Slovakia, Romania, the Balkans and consequently more
inclined to share and practice liberal democracy. In this regard, yes
Hungary is one of the most progressive democracies in Central (aka Eastern)
Europe. Do you claim otherwise?

Maria Egorov claims:
|Any gesture of public relation(like inviting Jews to your home,etc.)will 
|attenuate the pain,but they will definitely not become the Hungarians,
|Austrians or Germans you wish them to be(PERIOD) 

I don't wish them to become anything other than what they are. You are silly
to suggest that George Faludy increased his identity-pain (angst) just
because he visited my home. How incredibly stupid you are(PERIOD)

Maria Egorov declares:
|In the past Hungary, Germany & Austria called the Slavs,Jews&Gipsies:

Yes, too many Hungarians, Germans and Austrians, but I would not claim that
the nation of Hungarian did. You are indulging in the broad brush approach
of nationalistic slander, which is a chauvinist streak you share with Gabor
Barsai when he claims that Canadians are uneducated. Similar claims are made
by rednecks about "niggers" being uneducated, or nazis that Jews and Gypsies
did not deserve education, indeed, a couple steps more and they decided that
they didn't need life at all.

Maria Egorov claims:
|This mentality still persists in Hungary and it is hidden as it is in 
|Germany and Austria of today. 

A minority of Hungarians continue with this mentality. Do you suggest that
such a mentality is prevalent throughout Hungary? and that the current
government shares such a repugnant mentality that it is now implementing
anti-Jewish legislation? I think not -- quite the opposite. Sorry, Maria,
unless you can come up with some real life, concrete examples to support
your racist contentions, then I don't think you will be able to convince
anyone of your thesis.

Maria Egorov states:
|In these circumstances I know that there are no Jews who would proudly
|say:I am a Hungarian.

In those circumstances I know and can name several Jews who are proudly
Hungarian and live in Hungary. The fact that you do not know of any may be
because you are an anti-semite.

Maria Egorov indignantly asks:
|You are accusing me of being a racist?. 

Yes I am. Everything you post is based on the thesis of racism. The world,
as you view it revolves around race or nationality or ethnicity. It is all
you focus on. 

Maria Egorov indignantly declares:
|Mr.,this is an unconvincing statement and it has to do with your ability of

You fail to comprehend the very real fact that there are Hungarian Jews (and
I know them, personally) who are proudly Hungarian. You are unable to accept
that reality.


Now I have been gracious enough to reply to your specific contentions, but
you have failed to specifically address mine. I post them here again, and
ask that you reply directly to each and every FACT as presented:

|(Maria Egorov) wrote:
||I should remind you that the Nobel Prize Winners you prezented to us are 
||all nonHungarians. 
|Liviu Iordache presented from Brittanica:
|]Wigner, Eugene Paul, (b.Nov.17,1902,Budapest,Hung.)
|]Olah, George A. in full GEORGE ANDREW OLAH (b.May 22,1927,Budapest,Hung.) 
|Wally Keeler wrote:
|>Being born in Hungary's capital city confers no Hungarianness upon a
|>person? Growing up within Hungary, within the Hungarian language, within
|>the Hungarian culture, within the Hungarian educational system confers no
|>Hungarianness upon a person? In spite of this Wigner and Olah cannot be
|>regarded as Hungarians or should be regarded as "nonHungarians" as you put
|>it? Please explain Maria Egorov. Please do. 

Please explain to all the Hungarians reading soc.culture.magyar why Eugene
Paul Wigner and George A Olah are "nonHungarians". If you cannot adequately
explain this, then I suggest you leave s.c.m.

|Maria Egorov explained:
||Another point which you should remember:
||The Hungarians sent over 300,000 Jews to forced labor camps and GAS
|>                                     \
|>                                      and the cigany, don't forget
|>                                      the despised subhuman cigany.
||CHAMBERS during WW2. (activity which was concluded proudly by the
||Hungarians, without German supervision). 
|             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|Adolf Eichmann was only a clerk right?

     Well, tell us what the Britannica says about Adolf Eichmann, 
     Maria. Look it up and post the answer. We'll compare notes 
     and see whether your absurd and unfounded claim that their 
     was no "German [nazi] supervison" of the Jewish assembly 
     line to the death camps is true or not

|Maria Egorov claimed:
||Knowing these facts, do you think it is easy for the Jews born in Hungary,
||survivors of the holocaust, (who are living abroad for obvious reasons) to
||identify themselves as Hungarians? NOT AT ALL.
|Wally Keeler wrote:
|Wrong. The great Hungarian poet, George Faludy, visited my home several
|times. He is a Jew. He suffered at the hands of the Nazis. He also suffered
|at the hands of the Communists. He is proud of his Hungarian identity, his
|Hungarian language, his Hungarian culture. In spite of 20 fruitful and
|peaceful years in Toronto, Canada, his Hungarianness compelled him to
|return to his beloved Hungary to end his days in his homeland.
|A good friend of Faludy's, George Egri, also a Hungarian Jew, who lived in
|Toronto for decades, returned to Hungary after the Communists ate dirt. He
|was a journalist and columnist in Toronto. I had many visits with him at
|his home and mine. When I met up with him in Budapest, he waxed poetic
|about being "home, I am home again." George Egri also suffered the same
|situation as George Faludy.
|Another good friend of George Faludy and George Egri, who is also a
|Hungarian Jew, and who shared their experience in Hungary -- also had been
|imprisoned together in the infamous Rajk concentration camp, although not
|returning to Hungary (because he has a good life in Canada) does not
|forsake his Hungarianness. His name is George Gabori. His experiences can
|be read in his book, WHEN EVILS WERE MOST FREE.
|I'm afraid, your claim that "NOT AT ALL" has no basis in fact. Your type of
|claim, that Jews are Jews, and can never be One with the native culture of
|any nation, is the mark of an anti-semite. A Jew can be every bit as much
|of a Hungarian as a Catholic Hungarian can be Hungarian. 

       In the case of the three Hungarian Jews I know of above, 
       they committed their pride of their Hungarianness and 
       Jewishness to published writing. You can't get more public 
       than that. Now I suggest you re-think your absurd and 
       unfounded claim of "NOT AT ALL". 

|Maria Egorov claimed:
||The Hungarians sent over 300,000 Jews to forced labor camps and GAS
||CHAMBERS during WW2. (activity which was concluded proudly by the
|Wally Keeler wrote:
|This should read "Some Hungarians sent over ... (activity which was
|concluded proudly by a few Hungarians..." 

     If I rewrote your statement to say as follows:

             Some Hungarians sent over 300,000 Jews to forced 
             labor camps and GAS CHAMBERS during WW2. (activity 
             which was concluded proudly by a few Hungarians...

     would you find that agreeable? Let us know how you view the 
     truth and reality. I think if you said it this way, it would 
     indicate reasonableness and that you have a bit of balance. 
     Otherwise, the following prevails:

|Wally Keeler wrote:
|Your method of stating it, Maria, suggests that you may well be a racist
|slanderer; it is similar to the nationalist, chauvinist blather of that
|DUNGarian, Gabor Barfsai who claims, "I know it's a contradiction to be a
|Canadian and be educated." Individuals who slander entire peoples with the
|broad brush of pejorative archtypes, are simply incapable of discoursing in
|a manner that appreciates the nuances and particulars of the mosaic of
|life. The same thread appears to pass through Maria and Gagbore Barfsai.
Wally Keeler					Poetry
Creative Intelligence Agency			is
Peoples Republic of Poetry			Poetency

check out this company.  They have taking hand-held electronic
translators for Hungarian/English.



+ - Re: More Than Etc Etc Etc For Maria (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Maria Egorov ) writes:
> Is that so?or you make up stories.

Why are you like this Maria? Why  are you here? Why do you persist with
your racist postings which serve no purpose other than to provoke and
denigrate Hungarians. The People of Hungary have done many noble and
ignoble things. So have Russian Jews. So have Russians. So have Canadians
in our relatively short history. 

In any event, your contentions that Hungarian Jews would be ashamed or not
proud to declare their Hungarianness is extremely stupid. There might well
be some Hungarian Jews who are like that -- I have not met any -- but I
will not deny that it could be so, however, you will have to face the fact
that there are Hungarian Jews who are proud of their Hungarian heritage.
You are in no position to deny this fact -- except to yourself.
+ - Re: More Than Etc Etc Etc For Maria (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Maria Egorov ) writes:
> Is that so?or you make up stories.

Obviously you are proud to be Russian in spite of the history of the
pogroms that the Russian people committed against Jews, including very
recent cruelties against the Jewish population (refuseniks, gulags,
psychiatric prisons, etc). In spite of this, you proudly declared yourself
to be Russian, and to do so publicly. Now why wouldn't a Hungarian Jew do
the same sort of thing? Please explain Maria.
+ - HUNGARY=MONGOLIANS ??? I m getting tired of this. (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Dear MEgorov,

I think you should learn more about Hungary and the Hungarians before
you start flamewars like this. Do you know facts about the present
state of Hungary ? If I look the contents of your letters I must say
you don't.

If you want to criticize a country or a nation you should know
something about it, don't you think ?

Visit Hungary, meet Hungarian people (or Hungarian Americans,
Canadians), talk with them ! Try to get some knowledge of our culture!
If you knew the thinking of your 'enemy', maybe you could understand
the HUMAN as well.
It's an old cliche I know, but it's true.

Your Hungarian friend


P.S. Forgive me my poor English, please. I haven't practiced for a
long time.

> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry, I have no private E-mail address yet.
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------