On Tue, 13 Sep 1994 01:38:28 GMT > said:
>In article > The Old Theologian,
 writes:
>>
>>--I would make the above comment about psychoanalytic theory.
>
>
>since you discount freud's statements about religion nbecause he was not
>a theologist, i presume you are a suitably certified
>psychoanalyst/psychologist
>
--I am a certified social worker, trained at the period of time when
all schools were oriented to Freudian theory.  Freud had a greater
impact on social work in American than he did in psychiatry.

>> Freud's view of human behavior is not based on science as we know it.
>
>quite the opposite. freud was actually a neurophysiologist who had
>several reaearch papers published. since he was jewish he was barred from
>pursuing an academic career and turned to medicine as a way of supporting
>his family. freud and his views epitomise the scientifica culture of his
>day and today again. he was a physical reductionist. he believed that
>ultimately
>all of pstchology would be reduced to biochemistry, physiology, etc. ---
>and so ultimately to chemistry and physics --- when our knowledge was
>sufficiently advanced
>
--This is pretty standard knowledge.  Yes he was trained as a
neurologist and practiced that for awhile--and wrote several papers.
But psychoanalysis isn't neurophysiology and it is a real stretch to
find any research that validates any psychoanalytic concept using the
ordinary canons of science.

>i presume, on the basis of your earlier dismissal of freud's views on
>religion that you are also a certified natural scientist. so let me ask

--You are a mathmatician.  Are you also a natural scientist?  My
brother is a pathologist who did around 300 autopsies a year until
he retired.  He assures me that he never found a soul, an ego, or
a superego.  Even without that, those concepts are less scientifically
acceptable because there are scientific ways of charting and measuring
electrical fields and electrons, right?

>
>when was this letter written?
>
--I'll give you the exact reference later.  I have to get off the
mainframe right now.  I assure you that it exists.

Charles

>> Goulash is certainly not restricted
>> to a special day, I get it about once a week in the corporate canteen (!)
>> and it is gradually improving,

> And what do they mean by that ?

asked George Antony in HUNGARY #76 (Sep 13).
I think, George questioned the "gradually improving" judgement.  Well, they
don't serve it with potato mouse (as it is the usual, dreadful habit elsewhere,
especially in "better" fast food dispensers).  Now it comes in a bowl, as a
thick soup and it contains better quality beef.  So it looks like GULYAS, but
it still tastes like goulash.  A subtle difference for everybody, except
Hungarians.  I eagerly await the last step in the gradual improvement.

> My pet hate is the kind of "paprika's" beef (or lamb, less often other meats)
> stew with carrot bits and chopped celery stalks (yuk) in it, thickened with
> corn starch (arghhh) to a jelly-like consistency and sweetened, that is often
> dished up in canteens in Australia.  Of course, it is proudly declared
> "Hungarian goulash" - if I could only find the person who dreamed up that
> "improvement" of the original !

I recommend you, George, to visit a Hungarian restaurant of better reputation.
Although any dish can be made badly (to the limit of unedible), paprika's is
not an over-sophisticated dish and most of the cooks make it well.

To confuse you further, there is another dish, called "vadas", a sort of
venison (but can be based on beef too).  That comes with a thick, sweet sauce,
containing plenty of carrots.  We eat it with large, ball-like dumplings,
called "zsemlegomboc".  I'm unable to find a proper translation for that.

Since I happily clean the house, change diapers and do whatever requested but
keep away from the kitchen, it is time to pass the subject to an expert.

Gabor

Sorry, guys, of course I meant mashed potato!
This lapse gives a further dimension to the food improvement possibilities. ;-)

Gabor

Zoli Fekete, keeper of hungarian-faq writes:
>
>  George Frajkor revealed on 12 Sep 1994:
> > Still water sinks in. Flowing water does not.
>  Now this is amazing! Is it the velocity or the force in vertical
> direction that interferes with the horizontal movement caused by the
> gravity (which I understand is still in force under the Slovakized
> riverbed)?

     No but a few courses on the following topics: osmosis,
permeability, and laminar flow may enlighten you.
   Briefly, if you let a gallon of water sit on a permeable or
semi-permeable bed, a gallon will eventually sink in.  If you flow
water over that bed, you may have to flow 100 gallons over it before a
gallon sinks in. The time taken for a gallon to sink in will be the
same.

> Either way, it is a bigger blow to Newtonian physics than
> Einstein et.al. could ever achieve.

   I doubt it. I don't remember Newton working on osmosis or laminar
flow.  But I guess my memory could be going.

>Too bad we can't learn any details
> at least until the International Court enlightens itself with the
> findings available only to those in the know ;-<...
>
  YOu can.  The same report is already in the hands of the Hungarian
authorities and has been since October last year.  You just haven't
asked about it and they do not seem to be interested in telling you.
Try asking them. It is not a secret who was on the panel nor that the
report was done.  It is possible, of course, that it was given to both
sides for comment and challenge.  But if the Hungarian side is not
willing to talk about it that is not my problem.



    Jan George Frajkor                      _!_
 School of Journalism, Carleton Univ.      --!--
 1125 Colonel By Drive                       |
 Ottawa, Ontario                            /^\
 Canada K1S 5B6                         /^\     /^\
       /   
  o: 613 788-7404   fax: 613 788-6690  h: 613 563-4534

>> > Still water sinks in. Flowing water does not.

> The time taken for a gallon to sink in will be the same.

        Thanks :-) ;-<                          --  Zoli
PS those who overlooked it: due to my editing error the words "vertical"
and "horizontal" were exchanged in my original reply. I hope this mistake
doesn't take away from the enjoyment of this immensely scientific debate ;-(.

Zoli Fekete, keeper of hungarian-faq writes:

>Too bad we can't learn any details
> at least until the International Court enlightens itself with the
> findings available only to those in the know ;-<...

Zoli, Magyar Hirlap published an article on July 12, 1994, which was
written by the Magyar academician, professor Emil Mosonyi, an abridged
article follows:

 Even our grandchildren will pay the compensation for breaking the treaty
 Gabcikovo-Nagymaros. - told Magyar academician, professor Emil Mosonyi,
 who is thought to be the "father of idea" to build water plant system in
 the Danube.  The dialog with him was published in Magyar Hirlap.
    In his opinion - "one need not to wait to judgement of International court
 in Haag and it's necessary to discuss immediately with Slovaks". He has
 already met with the designated minister of industry and trade and
 recommended to him to lend ear and take advice from Hu. experts
 - energetists, economists, ecologists  and of hydrologists (?).
 In last years irresponsible people caused various illusions in Hu. goverment"
 - said prof. Emil Mosonyi. "the departing goverment and parliament didn't
 balance to what extent international prestige would be diminished and
 what economics losses were to occurr after renounciation of the treaty. It was
 shown it had been an illusion to think that Slovaks wouldn't build against
 Hungarians' grain the least acceptable C variant. It seems to be an illusion
 that Haag's tribunal will judge against Slovakia in favor of Hungary and
 that it will be the solution to all matters. He told Slovakia may perhaps be
 accountable for unilateral steps, but Hungary surely too for not keeping
 international engagements and both sides will again have to come to an agree-
 ment.

Tony

..is running for governor of New York against Mario Cuomo.

Does anyone know if he is of Hungarian descent?

--Greg

In a lengthy article published in the New York Times about 2-3 weeks ago,
there was a profile of Pataki.  In the article, he said that his grandfather
had moved to the U.S. from Hungary.  Note that none of the news sources
use a Magyar pronounciation of the name.

Robert Jenkins

Greg pointed out something interesting:
> From RFE/RL:
>
>HUNGARY STAYS AWAY FROM NATO EXERCISES. Hungarian Defense Ministry
>spokesman Lieutenant Colonel Lajos Erdelyi told MTI on 12
>September that his ministry lacked the necessary funds for the
>army to participate in the "Cooperative Bridge 94" maneuvers in
>Poland....
>
>
>What was that fuss about, a while back?  Whether or not the Horn
>government supported Nato membership?  Perhaps in this instance,
>the PM also personally supported participation?  But didn't feel
>qualified to make a decision better left to the budget office?


You may recall that Zoli Fekete and I had quite a discussion about the new
government's attitude toward NATO membership. I discovered what I considered
contradictory statements by Gyula Horn on the topic and I drew the conclusion
that the new government might change foreign policy direction: while the
former government was pro-NATO, the Horn government might want to pursue a
course of neutrality.

I am glad that Greg brought the above to the attention of list members. I
must say that my suspicions are further raised by this move. Eva Balogh

Collective Guilt and Ethnic Cleansing in Czechoslovakia:

A good reference on the subject under discussion is the following:

        A.M. deZayas, Nemesis at Potsdam: The Expulsion of the
        Germans from the East. 3rd Ed. University of Nebraska Press,
        Lincoln and London, 1988. (paperback)

A footnote to this sordid chapter of european history was the courageous
statement from Pres. Vaclav Havel admitting publicly the wrongfullness
of the acts of the Czechoslovak leadership.

On this subject, the news item from HARC, Vol.5, #2 may be of general
interest.

        Local Government Rejects Memorial to
        Hungarian who Defended Slovakia's Jews.

        by Charles Jokay

When Czechoslovakia was dismembered by Nazi Germany in 1938, Slovakia
emerged for the first time in history. Led by a cleric named Tiso,
Slovakia became a Nazi puppet state. During this same year, portions of
Czechoslovakia were returned to Hungary which resulted in approximately
80% of Czechoslovakia's Hungarian population being once again under
Hungarian sovereignty. Some Hungarian populated areas, however, remained
in the Slovak rump puppet state. The Hungarian Count Janos Eszterhazy
was a member of the Slovak parliamnent during World War II. He was the
only member of Parliament to have voted against the Jewish laws that led
to massive deportations of the Jewish community.

As a result of Eszterhazy's actions, at the end of the war the
Czechoslovak government declared Eszterhazy a traitor and sentenced him
to Soviet concentration camps. Recently, his daughter wished to erect a
memorial plaque in Szenc in her father's memory. The local government
flatly refused her request, since according to Slovak officials,
Eszterhazy is still considered a traitor.

Eszterhazy is an embarrassment to Slovak nationalists, who want to
forget that Slovakia collaborated with Hitler and that a Hungarian was
the only MP who opposed the discriminatory Jewish laws. Matica
Slovenska, the cultural organization of Slovaks with strong ties to
ultra nationalist organizations, qualified the memorial to Eszterhazy as
"yet another Hungarian attempt to threaten the territorial integrity of
Slovakia" (Magyar Nemzet, June 16, 1994).

Due to the difficult financial situation the army has already cut its
home exercises so just maybe saving money on the rather expensive
foreign excursion is nothing but saving money on the rather expensive
foreign excursion.

 -- Zoli 

Zoli Fekete writes:

>  Due to the difficult financial situation the army has already cut its
> home exercises so just maybe saving money on the rather expensive
> foreign excursion is nothing but saving money on the rather expensive
> foreign excursion.

It is a clear indication of priorities, and of the long-term value the
government places in Nato membership.

--Greg

Szia!

I am interested in spending some months in Hungary, and the only way I
can see that I can afford to do this (having just graduated from
university) is to work as a representitive of a British (preferably
engineering) company in Hungary. Does anyone know of any such companies
working in Hungary, or liaising with Hungarian companies?

Udvozlettel:

Jeff Ratcliffe

>It is a clear indication of priorities, and of the long-term value the
>government places in Nato membership.

 No, it isn't.                                  --      Zoli
PS are 3 1/2 word answers allowed ;-)?! I've had some real hard days ;-<.

Zoli Fekete writes:

> >It is a clear indication of priorities, and of the long-term value the
> >government places in Nato membership.
>
>  No, it isn't.

What is the saying about a wink, a nod, and a blind horse?  :-)



> PS are 3 1/2 word answers allowed ;-)?! I've had some real hard days ;-<.

Take it easy.

--Greg

Greg Grose wrote:

>Zoli Fekete writes:
>>  Due to the difficult financial situation the army has already cut its
>> home exercises so just maybe saving money on the rather expensive
>> foreign excursion is nothing but saving money on the rather expensive
>> foreign excursion.
>
>It is a clear indication of priorities, and of the long-term value the
>government places in Nato membership.

I would have thought that sending a couple of staff officers and a few
signals corps soldiers would not be prohibitively expensive, so it is
most likely a case of revealed preference through willingness to pay,
just to dump some economic jargon on you.

Even so, I cannot fault the Hungarian government.  NATO has an identity
crisis.  It is a paper tiger beyond the territory of its current member
states, as illustrated by the utterly shameful behaviour of its member
countries in the Yugoslav conflict.  It is most reluctant to take on new
members, for a number of resons.  One growl from Russia was enough to put
an end to all speculation about Eastern European countries being admitted.

Hungary is, in any case, the most troublesome potential applicant.  Nobody
in NATO would want to see the Greek-Turkish animosity replicated many times
over with quarreling new members.  Here is a nice Catch 22 for you: Hungary
will not get any security guarantees from NATO countries as long as it needs
them.  (Her neighbours are not likely to be given a better status than Hungary
either, as the importance of the Small Entente belongs in the past.)

So, Hungary cannot expect any tangible benefits from NATO, and already has
bilateral military contacts with most of its members.  She has much better
military contacts with her neighbours than the general state of relationships
would indicate, so it does not need Clinton's wishy-washy 'partnership' to
talk to them.  Then why bother with NATO ?

George Antony

On Tue, 13 Sep 1994, George Frajkor wrote:

> Zoli Fekete, keeper of hungarian-faq writes:
> >
> >  George Frajkor revealed on 12 Sep 1994:
> > > Still water sinks in. Flowing water does not.
> >  Now this is amazing! Is it the velocity or the force in vertical
> > direction that interferes with the horizontal movement caused by the
> > gravity (which I understand is still in force under the Slovakized
> > riverbed)?
>
>      No but a few courses on the following topics: osmosis,
> permeability, and laminar flow may enlighten you.
>    Briefly, if you let a gallon of water sit on a permeable or
> semi-permeable bed, a gallon will eventually sink in.  If you flow
> water over that bed, you may have to flow 100 gallons over it before a
> gallon sinks in. The time taken for a gallon to sink in will be the
> same.

If there is water constantly ower the bed it is totally irrelevant
flowing or not. SB.

>
> > Either way, it is a bigger blow to Newtonian physics than
> > Einstein et.al. could ever achieve.
>...............
...
>