You may be familiar with anon.penet.fi, which give you an
anonymous account.

Our service allows YOU to choose what the return address will be!

Please write for more info.

Aniko Dunford wrote:

>Janos Zsargo > wrote:
>
>>No need for apologize. I don't think you were ever able to resist. C'est la
>>vive. Some poeple are nazi, others are simple 'felnotas' and there are some
>>'bunko',too. :-))
>>
>>J.Zsargo
>
>Dear Dr. Doktor Aids:
>
>Clarification of a few points, that might best serve your upcoming visit:
>
>a) the word 'Vive' actually does not fit well above, if at all.  I felt
>   that pointing it out now, will save us precious time to address the
>   real issues you are anxious about.
>
>b) It would help me a great deal, prior to your actual arrival for your
>   appointment, if you could pinpoint precisely which of the above
>   outlined categories you see yourself fitting the best.
>
>That about covers its.  Looking forward to your visit dr.
>Aniko Dunford.
>Oh yes. I do sincerely apologize, that my secretary was unable to
>accommodate your requested visit, twenty minutes following your call.

Dear 'doktorno', watch out, you are mixing the patients! Dr Aids is not me
, he writes from , I am Napoleon (:-)) ), don't you remember?!
But thanks for offering free appointment, I might use it. Actually I am
fed up being genial stratega, I want a new personality. However being
Dr.Aids is out of my interest. How about being Einstein, can you arrange
it for me?

J.Zsargo

P.S: The answer for question b is the category of 'bunko'. I was awarded
this title by Joe Szalai earlier, however I have just recently proceeded into
the higher 'szoros bunko' (appr. hairy asshole) class.

Az, hogy a homoszexualitas nem elfogadott tarsadalmilag, es
hogy termeszetellenes, egybol folkinalja az ellenervet: termeszetellenes
a heteroszexualitas fogamzasgatlassal es valtott partnerekkel, sot meg tarsa-
dalmilag is elfogadhatatlan (az utobbi esetben).
A homoszexualitas tarsadalmi elfogadtatasa egy
karos es folosleges dolog, mert ez szuksegszeruen a lo tulso oldalara dobja
a dolgot. A homoszexualitas iranti ellenerzesek az emberi faj osi, a torzs-
fejlodes soran beepult tilalmai, eppugy, mint a tobbpartneruseg.

But what about me than?

Dr.Doktor Aids

At 01:57 AM 5/15/96 -0400, Janos Zsargo, wrote:

>Dear 'doktorno', watch out, you are mixing the patients! Dr Aids is not me
>, he writes from , I am Napoleon (:-)) ), don't you remember?!
>But thanks for offering free appointment, I might use it. Actually I am
>fed up being genial stratega, I want a new personality. However being
>Dr.Aids is out of my interest. How about being Einstein, can you arrange
>it for me?
>
>J.Zsargo
>
>P.S: The answer for question b is the category of 'bunko'. I was awarded
>this title by Joe Szalai earlier, however I have just recently proceeded into
>the higher 'szoros bunko' (appr. hairy asshole) class.

Go easy on Aniko, Janos.  She's just trying to be helpful and I can
understand her confusion.  After all, one 'bunko' looks like any other
'bunko'.  And no, I didn't promote you to the 'szoros bunko' level.  In my
previous post I said that you were lucky that I didn't do that.  Stop trying
to make yourself attractive to me.  I'm already taken!

Joe Szalai

At 01:57 AM 5/15/96 -0400, Janos Zsargo, wrote:

>P.S: The answer for question b is the category of 'bunko'. I was awarded
>this title by Joe Szalai earlier, however I have just recently proceeded
>into the higher 'szoros bunko' (appr. hairy asshole) class.

My poor Hungarian is going to get me into trouble yet.  I missed Janos'
'szoros bunko' comment in my previous post and accepted his translation as
being correct.  It is not!!  'Szoros' means 'tight'.  'Szo:ro:s' means
'hairy'.  Now, if he's trying to say that he is a 'szoros bunko', he's just
trying to tease me.

Joe Szalai

>
> Okay, Eva D., here's a golden oldie selection from Paul Johnson's 1988
> book, "Intellectuals" published by HarperPerennial here in the States (pp.
> 66-67). I'm picking up in the paragraph following Johnson's demolition of
> Engels's "Condition of the Working Class in England":
>

Well, I'd rather read the originals, once I have the time.
Even if you'd manage to prove, that Marx as an individual
was  despicable - and I have still doubts about that, if
through the tonnes of material he produced you can only come up
with this - you are still short on argument against his
philosophy.

If you think the working class had a continuous struggle-free
betterment over the last hundred years - especially globally,
than you better check your figures and pay attention to Marx.
The facts are that the distribution of the - vastly increased -
wealth has become more and more inequitable, there are more very
poor people literary and relatively, than in Marx's time.

Capitalism was just coming up to its heyday - for Marx,
considering the poverty/human degregation and the priodical
terrible crises already present in his time - had good
empirical reasons to believe that it had already
reached its optimal scope for development. It was more
flexible and tenacious, the price of survival was world wars,
environmental catastrophies - an other hundred years of
universal human misery. But hey, in some parts of the world
some people were doing alright - even if it was in the expence
of all the others - so why should anyone - except ofcourse
the evil bearded goaty-type - worry?

Eva Durant (non-academic staff, not particularily proud of it)

In article >, Andy Kozma
> writes:

>>Just a fast question:what are you puffing on Joe?
>
>
The real question is whether Joe, like President Clinton, ever inhaled.
Sam Stowe

First of all, Ferenc Novak does seem to understand why I don't think
that he is exactly a friend of mine. Well, once the archives of the Forum
and Hungary are open, I will quote a few passages from him which I found
objectionable.

        So, "a more sanguine member" of the Forum called me a pathological
liar. In case, members of Hungary are so forgetful that they need a
reminder: this sanguine member was no other than Andras Szucs (Andras
Pellionisz) and he made sure that not only the readers of Forum but
practically all internet organs concerned with Hungary would be able to read it
.

        Now Ferenc Novak--who so galantly came to my rescue--is changing is
mind. After all, Eva Balogh is a pathological liar because never, never
there was such a discussion which Eva Balogh claims there was. Well, Ferenc
Novak, you better learn that I am not a pathological liar. Moreover, my
memory is reasonably good, especially when it comes to reproduce
conversations or discussions. Here is just a small part of a rather
protracted discussion on the topic Ferenc Novak claims was never discussed
on the Forum. I have no time to translate it right now but I will be willing
to summarize it in English later. This is just the first article. Many more
followed:

> =======================================================
> Felado : Nemenyi Peter Andras
> E-mail : 
> Temakor: Vervadi perekrol Rubin Gyurinak ( 71 sor )
> Idopont: Thu Jun 30 17:33:42 EDT 1994 FORUM #1311
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Kedves Gyuri (Rubin):

Szeretnek hozzaszolni ket altalad emlitett temakorhoz:

>3. Kesobb a zsidokat, mint nepet, egyetemesen felosse tettek a Krisztus
gyilkossagert. Azt hiszem el lehet kepzelni, hogy azokban az idokben
ez milyen indulatokat valtott ki a nagyon vallasos, de tanulatlan tomegekbol.

Tehat ugy nez ki, hogy te sem tartod a kollektiv bunosseget minden esetben
hasznos politikanak? ....Olvasvan tovabb irasodat ami egesszeben tetszett
csak a kovetkezo sorokon akadtam el:

>Koszonom az erdekes kiegeszitesedet a temahoz. Azt azonban ketlem, hogy
>minden egyes zsidouldozes magyarazatakent valamilyen zsido hatalmi
>aspiraciot kellene keresni, mint ahogy azt az irasod sugalja.

Azt, hogy minden esetben, azt talan nem mernem allitani, de ha a nagy atlagot
vesszuk, ugy talan, de nezzuk, hogy mit is irsz kesobb...

>Biztos voltak ilyen esetek is, de tobbnyire teljesen
>artatlan emberek szenvedtek, teljes abszurd vadak kovetkezteben (pl vervadak,
>Krisztus gyilkossag, stb).

Ezt erdemes kicsontozni. A vervad/ritualis gyilkossag megertese erdekeben azt
kell szemugyre venni, hogy az adott kultura rendelkezik e ilyen dogmak apolasa-
val. A zsido Purim unnepet veve tenykent aminek alapja  Xerxes perzsa kiraly
zsido felesege, Esther es betelepult nepe ellen szolo Haman a kiralyi miniszter
elleni bosszu beteljesedeset hivatott unneples. A bosszu teljes volt, ami Hamas
10 gyermekenek is az eletebe kerult. Egy ilyen artatlan eleteket sem kimelo
bosszu ceremoniajahoz tartozik egy sutemeny keszitese ami emberi fulet formaz
es elfogyasztasa Hamas testebol valo lakomat jelkepez. Ezt Hamas fulenek neve-
zik ami nem kis cinizmussal es gunnyal, baratfule neven terjedt el Europaban.
Hogy a verhez kapcsolodjon az okfejtes, erdemes megemliteni, hogy a Talmud
szerint az Istennek a legkedvesebb a korulmetelesbol eredeo ver es a Paschal
Holocaust! Korulmeteleskor a "Mohel" borral a szajaban sziv vert a korulmetelt
nemiszervbol amit aztan egy erre a celra keszitett ritualis edenybe urit.
(Jewish Encyclopedia, 1903, Vol. IV., 99. oldal) De most ennyi bevezeto utan
terjunk az igazi vitapontra a veraldozatokra. Szent William esete erdekes esete
a veraldozatoknak. 1144-ben Norwickban, Angliaban a zsido "Passover" unnepen
keresztre feszitve talaltak egy 12 eves fiugyermeket. Theobald of Chambridge
egy attert zsido vezette a hatosagokat a bunteny felderitesere. Az ugy a gyer-
mek szente avatasaval vegzodott es az ugy eltussolasaval. Angliaban szinte min-
den evben voltak varvadi perek amik az 1290-es evben Oxfordban tortent gyermek-
gyilkossaggal erte el tetopontjat. Ez a gyilkossag, amiben Isaac de Pulet nevu
zsidot iteltek el vezetett King Edward altal kibocsajtott bullahoz, ami a zsi-
dok kiuzesehez vezetett Angliabol. Franciaorszagban a helyzet azonos volt.
1171-ben pl. Blois varosaban "Passover" unnepen talaltak kereszteny gyermeket
keresztre feszitve, vere lecsapolva. Az ugy kivizsgalasat zsido kivegzes ko-
vette (Monumenta Germaniae Historica) Az hivatalosan lefolytatott vizsgalatok
sok orszag terulete, konyveket tolthetne meg. Persze hazank sem volt mentes
a vervadaktol. 1494 Tyrnau. A fiugyermek eletet, s veret  veszti. Az ugyben
torteno kivizsgalas zsido ritualis gyilkossagot fed fel. A leghiresebb arany-
lag kesoi vervadi kivizsgalas hazankban az ugynevezett, hires tiszaeszlari ugy
volt ahol Solymosy Eszter  14 eves leany tunt el. A nyomravezetes veletlen
muve volt. Egy zsido templomi alkalmazott 5 eves gyermeke kotyogta ki, hogy
a kislanyt az o anyja csalta a helyi zsinagogaba. Dr. Bary Jozsef vezette a
nyomozast aki kesobb a Magyar Legfelso Birosag elnke lett. Az ugy egy vallasos
zsido csoport letartoztatasaval vegzodott, s vallomasukban beszamoltak, hogyan
vagtak el a gyermek nyakat, veret ritualis vazaban felfogvan. Nos az ugyet a
Rotchild csalad kozbelepese csititotta el az osztrak/magyar kolcsonok megve-
ttozasa elleneben. Ez a temakor kimerithetetlen, de teljesen felesleges ese-
tek halmazat felemliteni, mert nem atruhazhato a zsido tomegekre. A tortene-
lem viszont nem ilyen liberalisan tekintette meg az eseti gyilkossagokat sem,
hanem ugyanolyan sztigmatikaval, mint mondjuk az "utolso csatlos" szloganja.
A vervadak nem voltak alaptalanok, de az is igaz, hogy pl. Goebbels azokat
eltulozvan sajat hasznalatra hasznalta fel olyan artatlan emberek ellen akik-
nek fogalmuk sem volt egynemely vallasi fanatikus tetteit illetoleg.

Nemenyi Peter Andras

> =======================================================

        Respectfully submitted:

        Eva Balogh

On Wed, 15 May 1996, Sam Stowe,  wrote:

> The real question is whether Joe, like President Clinton, ever inhaled.

No, Sam.  The real question is whether you would still love me in the
morning, if I did.

As for President Clinton, I thought his problem was that he never exhaled.

Joe Szalai

Dear Ferenc,

 The following letter was published in the FORUM. I think Eva had this piece
 in mind. I am reluctant to translate it into English. The author is an
 employee of the Argonne National Laboratory and on the payroll on either
 the Department of Energy or the University of Chicago. As you will see
 he is not paid for nothing :-(((((. (For "only English" readers, this
 text is manifest blood-accusation.
 It is against a 1952 statute of Illinois but the law is moot.


> ----------------------------------------------
 Felado : Nemenyi Peter Andras
> E-mail : 
> Temakor: Vervadi perekrol Rubin Gyurinak ( 71 sor )
> Idopont: Thu Jun 30 17:33:42 EDT 1994 FORUM #1311
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Kedves Gyuri (Rubin):

Szeretnek hozzaszolni ket altalad emlitett temakorhoz:

>3. Kesobb a zsidokat, mint nepet, egyetemesen felosse tettek a Krisztus
> gyilkossagert. Azt hiszem el lehet kepzelni, hogy azokban az idokben
> ez milyen indulatokat valtott ki a nagyon vallasos, de tanulatlan tomegekbol.


Tehat ugy nez ki, hogy te sem tartod a kollektiv bunosseget minden esetben
hasznos politikanak? ....Olvasvan tovabb irasodat ami egesszeben tetszett
csak a kovetkezo sorokon akadtam el:

>Koszonom az erdekes kiegeszitesedet a temahoz. Azt azonban ketlem, hogy
>minden egyes zsidouldozes magyarazatakent valamilyen zsido hatalmi
>aspiraciot kellene keresni, mint ahogy azt az irasod sugalja.

Azt, hogy minden esetben, azt talan nem mernem allitani, de ha a nagy atlagot
vesszuk, ugy talan, de nezzuk, hogy mit is irsz kesobb...

>Biztos voltak ilyen esetek is, de tobbnyire teljesen
>artatlan emberek szenvedtek, teljes abszurd vadak kovetkezteben (pl vervadak,
>Krisztus gyilkossag, stb).

Ezt erdemes kicsontozni. A vervad/ritualis gyilkossag megertese erdekeben azt
kell szemugyre venni, hogy az adott kultura rendelkezik e ilyen dogmak apolasa-
val. A zsido Purim unnepet veve tenykent aminek alapja  Xerxes perzsa kiraly
zsido felesege, Esther es betelepult nepe ellen szolo Haman a kiralyi miniszter

elleni bosszu beteljesedeset hivatott unneples. A bosszu teljes volt, ami Hamas
10 gyermekenek is az eletebe kerult. Egy ilyen artatlan eleteket sem kimelo
bosszu ceremoniajahoz tartozik egy sutemeny keszitese ami emberi fulet formaz
es elfogyasztasa Hamas testebol valo lakomat jelkepez. Ezt Hamas fulenek neve-
zik ami nem kis cinizmussal es gunnyal, baratfule neven terjedt el Europaban.
Hogy a verhez kapcsolodjon az okfejtes, erdemes megemliteni, hogy a Talmud
szerint az Istennek a legkedvesebb a korulmetelesbol eredeo ver es a Paschal
Holocaust! Korulmeteleskor a "Mohel" borral a szajaban sziv vert a korulmetelt
nemiszervbol amit aztan egy erre a celra keszitett ritualis edenybe urit.
(Jewish Encyclopedia, 1903, Vol. IV., 99. oldal) De most ennyi bevezeto utan
terjunk az igazi vitapontra a veraldozatokra. Szent William esete erdekes esete
a veraldozatoknak. 1144-ben Norwickban, Angliaban a zsido "Passover" unnepen
keresztre feszitve talaltak egy 12 eves fiugyermeket. Theobald of Chambridge
egy attert zsido vezette a hatosagokat a bunteny felderitesere. Az ugy a gyer-
mek szente avatasaval vegzodott es az ugy eltussolasaval. Angliaban szinte min-
den evben voltak varvadi perek amik az 1290-es evben Oxfordban tortent gyermek-
gyilkossaggal erte el tetopontjat. Ez a gyilkossag, amiben Isaac de Pulet nevu
zsidot iteltek el vezetett King Edward altal kibocsajtott bullahoz, ami a zsi-
dok kiuzesehez vezetett Angliabol. Franciaorszagban a helyzet azonos volt.
1171-ben pl. Blois varosaban "Passover" unnepen talaltak kereszteny gyermeket
keresztre feszitve, vere lecsapolva. Az ugy kivizsgalasat zsido kivegzes ko-
vette (Monumenta Germaniae Historica) Az hivatalosan lefolytatott vizsgalatok
sok orszag terulete, konyveket tolthetne meg. Persze hazank sem volt mentes
a vervadaktol. 1494 Tyrnau. A fiugyermek eletet, s veret  veszti. Az ugyben
torteno kivizsgalas zsido ritualis gyilkossagot fed fel. A leghiresebb arany-
lag kesoi vervadi kivizsgalas hazankban az ugynevezett, hires tiszaeszlari ugy
volt ahol Solymosy Eszter  14 eves leany tunt el. A nyomravezetes veletlen
muve volt. Egy zsido templomi alkalmazott 5 eves gyermeke kotyogta ki, hogy
a kislanyt az o anyja csalta a helyi zsinagogaba. Dr. Bary Jozsef vezette a
nyomozast aki kesobb a Magyar Legfelso Birosag elnke lett. Az ugy egy vallasos
zsido csoport letartoztatasaval vegzodott, s vallomasukban beszamoltak, hogyan
vagtak el a gyermek nyakat, veret ritualis vazaban felfogvan. Nos az ugyet a
Rotchild csalad kozbelepese csititotta el az osztrak/magyar kolcsonok megve-
ttozasa elleneben. Ez a temakor kimerithetetlen, de teljesen felesleges ese-
tek halmazat felemliteni, mert nem atruhazhato a zsido tomegekre. A tortene-
lem viszont nem ilyen liberalisan tekintette meg az eseti gyilkossagokat sem,
hanem ugyanolyan sztigmatikaval, mint mondjuk az "utolso csatlos" szloganja.
A vervadak nem voltak alaptalanok, de az is igaz, hogy pl. Goebbels azokat
eltulozvan sajat hasznalatra hasznalta fel olyan artatlan emberek ellen akik-
nek fogalmuk sem volt egynemely vallasi fanatikus tetteit illetoleg.

Nemenyi Peter Andras
------------

 EG

You may have read some of the history discussion between our Greek friend
and myself.
The question came up, whether the discussion should be taken off the group
and be continued in private mail.
I do not have any idea whether there is interest in old history by this
group or not.
Thus I would like to have a quicky survey of what the rest of the group
thinks.

Regards, Jeliko

I bit of a correction:

I wrote:

>First of all, Ferenc Novak does seem to understand why I don't think
that he is exactly a friend of mine.

        Of course, what I wanted to say was: Ferenc Novak *doesn't* seem to
understand why I don't think that he is exactly a friend of mine.

        Eva Balogh

Because Comrade Horn didn't send me a check this month (;)) I had to
work a few hours this morning. Therefore, I was unable to answer Ferenc
Novak's letter. Here it is:

At 12:08 AM 5/15/96 -0400, Ferenc No wrote:
>On  Fri May 10 17:22:57 EDT 1996 Eva Balogh wrote in HUNGARY #664:
>
>> The situation on the Forum is quite unbearable.
>>
>>        And this is just the description of how the message is delivered.
>>But then there is the message itself. It is practically impossible to have
>>an intelligent discussion because it really doesn't matter where we start,
>>we end up at the question of Hungarian Jewry and their role in Hungary and
>>their attitude toward the "nation." The people who usually instigate that
>>kind of discussion steadfastly maintain that they are not antisemitic at
>>all. Yet, one of this non-anti-semites claimed that in the middle ages and
>>later, Jews actually killed Christians and drank their blood! All this
>          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>garbage is couched in pseudo-scientific language and a written demeanor
>>which seems to attract followers: mostly from Hungary. Nowadays from every
>>nook and crany there is a new antisemite who creeps onto the list and these,
>>mostly fairly young, people are convinced that our pseudo-historian/s is/are
>>the supreme authority on all matters relating to history. As opposed, of
>>course, to this ignorant so-called historian (that's me!) who usually have
>>no idea what she is talking about. A real ignoramus! I find all this quite,
>>quite dangerous.

Here comes Ferenc Novak:


>As a fairly long-time reader of FORUM, I am stunned to see the above
>statement.

        Stunned Ferenc Novak can be, but since his writing the above two
copies of the offending piece reached the subscribers and readers of
HUNGARY. I suggest that Ferenc Novak sit down and read Peter Andras
Nemenyi's piece carefully. Perhaps he will be stunned again.

>Many of us know that Eva has taken a lot of abuse there, and not entirely
>undeservedly.

        Most of the time entirely undeservedly. Here and there I might have
lost my temper but one would have to be a saint not lose one's temper
eventually as a result of the incredible abuse. And I am no saint. Why all
this abuse? Mostly because I called a couple of these people
antisemites--among them the author of the piece on ritual murder. That is a
cardinal sin, especially if it comes from a non-Jew. Somehow they forgive
Jews for raising their voices against antisemitism--after all, they reason,
they stand for their own *kind." But a Balogh? She is supposed to defend the
nation and if this Balogh says that these guys, who burn with nationalistic
ferver, are antisemites, my golly, she is a traitor. And that is exactly
what they think. Because I refuse to be enamored by nationalism, I am not a
patriot. No, I am worse: I am no longer a Hungarian. As far as Hungarian
Jews are concerned they don't belong to the nation and therefore they cannot
be traitors. That is their stand.

>She has a tendency to use her historian's credentials as a club to beat
>others over
>the head when they dare to question some of her opinions.

        Indeed, I resorted to this in a discussion with Peter Andras
Nemenyi, the pseudo-historian of the piece on ritual murder. This time it
was the interpretation of a document found in the British Home Office
concerning the fate of Hungary's Jewish population. The date was October
1943. Mr. Nemenyi is not only not trained as a historian but he also reads
history with a definite bias--pathological hatred of Jews. Therefore, you
can imagine what the interpretation of that particular document was.
Basically, and in a very abbreviated version, Mr. Nemenyi blamed
international Jewry for Hungary's failure to extricate itself from the
clutches of Germany. I tried to explain to him and, more importantly, to the
readers of Forum, that historians are taught in college and in graduate
school to weigh the evidence, make sure that there is some supporting
evidence to bolster one's claim. I voiced my opinion that it would be a very
sad situation if we studied history for about ten years and practiced for
another God knows how many and still there would be no difference between Mr
Nemenyi, on the one hand, and myself, on the other. I failed, of course.
Another luminary of Forum announced that Mr. Nemenyi has more knowledge in
his little finger than can be found in the brains of the whole Yale's
history department. (Quite a feat, given the fact that Yale's history
department is still the first in the country!) I also added that these
self-appointed historians are a dangerous lot and that they are far too
numerous in Eastern Europe.

>And she is not shy
>to voice opinions on any and all subjects, some of which fall way too far
>from her expertise.

        That is also untrue, for the most part. I write only when I have
reasonable knowledge of the subject. Ferenc Novak might have noticed that I
had nothing to add to the discussion on the Hungarian raids in the 10th
century, especially after our professor from Greece and Jeliko began
exchanging notes. I am a historian all right but my field the 10th century
and I don't know more about these raids than what I read about them in
secondary sources. However, I know quite a bit of history, not only of
Hungary but of Eastern Europe and international relations in general. Also,
I spent considerable amount of time studying the Hungarian political scene
and I think that although two years ago I didn't know very much, I have made
up my deficiency in that department. So, I feel quite secure about these two
topics.

>She elicits the most acrimonious debates with her provocatively contrarian
>style,
>seemingly taking pleasure in attacking anything resembling a national icon,
>sacred
>cow, or treasured national tradition.

        It is hard not to be provocative when one's opponents are people who
think that the Jews as late as the late 19th century engaged in ritual
murders, or that Hungary's inability to leave Germany was caused the Jews,
or that Szalasi was the savior of the nation, while Horthy, by trying to
extricate the country from Germany's clutches, was actually a traitor. This
people don't understand any kind of style; absolutely doesn't matter what
style you use unless, of course, you agree with them. As for "seemingly
taking pleasure in attacking anything resembling a national icon, sacred
cow, or treasured national tradition," I can't recall any but I am sure that
in Ferenc Novak's opinion whose soul is burning with national spirit, I
offended all sorts of sacred cows, all right.

>She finds it embarrassing to concede a
>point in a  hardly fought debate, and is apt to call her opponents
>anti-semitic to shut them up.

        Well, I will be damned if I concede that Mr. Nemenyi's
interpretation of that document is correct. I also refuse to accept a faulty
translation from someone (also Mr. Nemenyi, by the way), who is hardly able
to write a sentence in English. I refuse to accept stupid, antisemitic
interpretations as valid. I don't call my opponents without reason
antisemites. And by the way, if I am wrong, I readily admit it. But, you
know what Mr. Novak, I am almost never wrong when I discuss history with Mr.
Nemenyi, Mr. Noe, and others of their ilk.

>Recently she succeeded in provoking one of the
>more sanguine members of FORUM to viciously and irrationally attack her as a
>"pathological liar".

        At least Ferenc Novak could be a little more careful with his facts,
especially events which occured only a few weeks ago. Everybody on this list
knows that Eva Balogh didn't provoke Andras Szucs to call her a
"pathological liar." Eva Balogh didn't say a word. Eva Balogh wasn't even
around.

>I think Eva will attest to the fact that no one on FORUM joined her attacker
>actually,
>many -- myself included -- came to her defense.  Some tried to do so in a
>civilized tone,
>some in the same irrational and shrill language as the attacker.

        My memory must be faulty. Yes, here and there there were some weak
little voices, complaining about four-letter words or the way the message
was delivered but I don't remember anyone ever standing up against the
contents of these messages. Except, of course, the liberals. But, no, not
the Ferenc Novak kind.

>Now, as I read the above quote I wonder if some of us were not too hasty in
>our defense
>of Eva.  Because what she is saying is simply not true!

        If I were you I would never come to her defense again. Moreover, if
I were you I would just stand next to Andras Szucs, and keep yelling:
pathological liar, pathological liar!

>On the off chance
>that I missed
>the statement she is referring to, I would like to ask her to name the source
>of those
>statements and provide the original as well as an English translation.
> Somehow I am
>extremely doubtful she can do it.

        We can be wrong, can't we?

        Eva Balogh

P.S. I will make available the follow-up of the discussion on ritual murder.
Those of you who don't read Hungarian, I suggest the following: get, let's
say 10-15 issues of the Forum and put in a search tag: "zsido." You will see
how many times it will come up. It means "Jewish" in Hungarian.

Jeliko,

I enjoy reading the history discussions a lot.

- Mark

On May 15,  2:41pm, _JELIKO wrote:
> Subject: History Discussion on or off line?
> You may have read some of the history discussion between our Greek friend
> and myself.
> The question came up, whether the discussion should be taken off the group
> and be continued in private mail.
> I do not have any idea whether there is interest in old history by this
> group or not.
> Thus I would like to have a quicky survey of what the rest of the group
> thinks.
>
> Regards, Jeliko
>-- End of excerpt from _JELIKO

Jeliko, I'm very interested in this period of Hungarian history...I studied it
as a graduate student at Columbia university and have read most of the
literature on the subject....the topic fascinates me. I would like to be
included in a discussion on this topic whether on this list or not.

Bob Hosh

Eva Balogh writes:

>         First of all, Ferenc Novak does seem to understand why I don't
think
> that he is exactly a friend of mine. Well, once the archives of the Forum
> and Hungary are open, I will quote a few passages from him which I found
> objectionable.

Rest deleted.

It looks like an electronic forum can be as murderous as the original Forum
Romanum.

Now, so that I can be finished off on this particular forum, I would like
to add the following. For everyone of the past records that claim drinking
blood by the Jews, I can produce one for the same for the Hungarians. No
wonder most of the times the Hungarians and the Jews get along well.

I often drink blood also, whenever I cut myself the first impulse is to
lick it off and swallow it. If I recall correctly, I have even did the same
thing with my kids when they were little. (please no hygienical
commentary!) It is not bad tasting, somewhat salty, never enough for a full
meal (maybe needs paprika).

There is a lot of BS written in some of the so called "histories". If
everyone believes everything that was written in the past about everybody
and by everybody then we really have a problem.

That there are crazy folks doing something really strange is always
possible, the blaming of a group for a strange event that is percieved to
be *different* by the rest of the population is also a common act. In my
opinion, the true role of anyone claiming to be a historian, is to separate
the chaff from the wheat and not to derive data from the off the wall
writings. Unfortunately far to often the off the wall is emphasized and not
the *wheat*.

I am writing this not in defense of anything that was written in the HIX
Forum, but to try to explain how I feel about it.

In regard to as what five year olds say, just look at the results of the
many recent "child molestation" trials in the US. My five year olds came up
with some great stories also.

Maybe, we should use more often the old Hungarian criteria that it is not
enough to consider what is being said, but also who is saying it. But I
will defend the right of anyone calling me any names for this posting, even
if I would ignore what they are saying.

Please remember that the bulk of most folks on this earth are not really
different from each other.

Regards,Jeliko

In article >, Eva Durant
> writes:

>Even if you'd manage to prove, that Marx as an individual
>was  despicable - and I have still doubts about that, if
>through the tonnes of material he produced you can only come up
>with this - you are still short on argument against his
>philosophy.
>
>If you think the working class had a continuous struggle-free
>betterment over the last hundred years - especially globally,
>than you better check your figures and pay attention to Marx.
>The facts are that the distribution of the - vastly increased -
>wealth has become more and more inequitable, there are more very
>poor people literary and relatively, than in Marx's time.
>
>Capitalism was just coming up to its heyday - for Marx,
>considering the poverty/human degregation and the priodical
>terrible crises already present in his time - had good
>empirical reasons to believe that it had already
>reached its optimal scope for development. It was more
>flexible and tenacious, the price of survival was world wars,
>environmental catastrophies - an other hundred years of
>universal human misery. But hey, in some parts of the world
>some people were doing alright - even if it was in the expence
>of all the others - so why should anyone - except ofcourse
>the evil bearded goaty-type - worry?
>
>Eva Durant (non-academic staff, not particularily proud of it)
>
Why are you not particularly proud that you're non-academic staff? There's
not a darned thing wrong with that. You play an important role in making
the place run.

Confining your scope to Marx's work alone is a conscious decision on your
part to avoid any kind of critical scrutiny by others of that work. If
that's what you need to maintain the belief system you've built for
yourself around his philosophy, well, it's a free country. (even if it is
run by capitalists and liberal democrats) But to expect the rest of us to
accept it prima faciae (sp?) is a bit much. Johnson offers many other
examples of Marx's unscrupulous behavior when it came to dealing with
facts inconvenient to his philosophy. I clearly stated in my previous post
on the subject (and, I notice, you carefully deleted it in quoting for
your follow-up) that I would be glad to post other excerpts from Johnson's
work. Apparently the apple does not fall far from the tree when dealing
with true believers in the Marxist religion.

If Marx is such a great social scientist and keen analyst of the human
condition, he shouldn't have to stoop to the kind of intellectual
chiseling noted by Johnson. That he felt it necessary to lie over and over
again and to continue to lie when confronted with the truth tells me he
really wasn't much on empirical observation, much less grappling with the
"truth."

A few brief comments on your last post. First of all, there are more poor
people on the face of the earth today than in Marx's day because there are
more people period. I haven't seen any concrete figures on percentages of
"poor" people as a part of the overall world population, but I really
doubt it's much different on a worldwide scale than in Marx's day and
could be significantly less. When mentioning the two world wars, don't
forget that following their surrender to Germany in the first one, the
Marxists running Russia spent much of 1918-1921 trying to actively export
their revolution back to western Europe. When Kun's brief run ended in
Budapest, when the Spartacist uprising failed in Germany and when the
Estonians, Finns and Latvians had booted Russian-backed Communist armies
out of their respective territories, the Russian Marxist regime was
reduced to invading Poland and suffered a terrible defeat in the process.
So much for historic inevitability. The same pack of Russian Marxists
worked hand-in-glove with the Nazis to carve up the Baltic littoral in
1939-40. So much for moral superiority. And you have an immense amount of
either gall or sheer ignorance in bleating about environmental degradation
under capitalism when vast areas of the former Soviet Union have been
poisoned by the former Marxist regime's mindless insistence on
over-industrialization and militarization. Can you say Chernobyl?
Sverdlovsk? Paldiski?
Sam Stowe

P.S. -- More of Paul Johnson's expose of Karl Marx coming soon to a
computer screen near you.

>At 03:32 PM 5/14/96 -0400, Andy Kozma, wrote:
>
>>Just a fast question:what are you puffing on Joe?
>
>At my age, ... anything I want.
>
>Joe Szalai
>
>Could you be more specific.Not about,your age,who cares anyway,but your
puffing habits?

Daer People: my name is Andy Kozma.I tooke it on myself after a few Jawing
sessions with Keith Leal,who made up this list of people who would be
interrested in communicating.
Actuallt Keith suggestion was,that I should select some of that list members
and write them.
Well instead I tooke the liberty to try to start communication beetwee al
these members in a community way.Maybe not individual,but on an open forum.
Since our interrest are very diverse,probaly one thing we have in common:to
communicate in this land of Canada.
I don't wish to be any potante,I just like to wear the feather in my hat:I
started people to communicate with the help ofcourse from Keith.
As Keith pointed out in his note to me this should be a communicating chanel.
Quoting Keit "the forum will work only if we all drop our online reserve and
start interchanging"
My hope is there should be some result,and beginning of a healthy
communication in any subject you can think of.
Well as they say I started the ball roling,now it is up to any and all of
you to be succesfull.
With Regards: Andy Kozma

P.S.I beg your forgivness for any and all spelling,grammer and other mistakes.

Daer People: my name is Andy Kozma.I tooke it on myself after a few Jawing
sessions with Keith Leal,who made up this list of people who would be
interrested in communicating.
Actuallt Keith suggestion was,that I should select some of that list members
and write them.
Well instead I tooke the liberty to try to start communication beetwee al
these members in a community way.Maybe not individual,but on an open forum.
Since our interrest are very diverse,probaly one thing we have in common:to
communicate in this land of Canada.
I don't wish to be any potante,I just like to wear the feather in my hat:I
started people to communicate with the help ofcourse from Keith.
As Keith pointed out in his note to me this should be a communicating chanel.
Quoting Keit "the forum will work only if we all drop our online reserve and
start interchanging"
My hope is there should be some result,and beginning of a healthy
communication in any subject you can think of.
Well as they say I started the ball roling,now it is up to any and all of
you to be succesfull.
With Regards: Andy Kozma

P.S.I beg your forgivness for any and all spelling,grammer and other mistakes.

At 05:50 PM 5/15/96 -0400, Andy Kozma, wrote:

>>>Just a fast question:what are you puffing on Joe?
>>
>>At my age, ... anything I want.
>>
>>Joe Szalai
>>
>>Could you be more specific.Not about,your age,who cares anyway,but your
>puffing habits?

Really?  And do you want me to use Latin or English words?

Joe Szalai

At 14:41 15/05/96 PDT, Jeliko wrote:

<snip snip>

>Thus I would like to have a quicky survey of what the rest of the group
>thinks.
>
>Regards, Jeliko

Haliho, Jeliko!

Please, please, please do *not* remove your discussion to private e-mail.
This stuff is fascinating, and is not material that I would have ready
access to any other way, here in the wilds of Nova Scotia. I am sure that
there are many other people who are interested in Hungarian history and are
just as interested in your discussion as I am. Just as long as you don't
plan to subject us to any pop quizzes! :-) :-)

Nagyon sze'pen ko:szo:no:m,

Johanne

Johanne L. Tournier
e-mail - 
>
>

Dr Col. K-B writes:

>  This theory about the Secres (Szikelysig) seems interesting and
challenging.
>  I have been stationed in Saudi Arabia before the PGW,
>  then commanded a hospital unit in the war.
> Arabs were friendly, called me magyar. The public transportation
> in King Kalid Military City was in the hand of an Arab family
> called MAGHAROB. I have a few picture to shear with you.
> However my point of argument is that their knowledge about us did not reach
the
> early 9th century or more.

Ibn Rosteh died in 870
Gurdezi XI century
El Bekri XI century
Ibn Fadhlan wrote in 921/923
Istakhri,  951
Ibn Haukal 942/943
Masudi died in 956
Ibn Hajjan 988-1076
Dzajhani XI century

Just a few early writers of Arabic written documents regarding the
Hungarians. Not all were Arab, some were Persian and one was Jewish, but the
documents are in Arabic and who knows whether these are all.

Regards, Jeliko.

On Wed, 15 May 1996, _JELIKO wrote:

> You may have read some of the history discussion between our Greek friend
> and myself.
> The question came up, whether the discussion should be taken off the group
> and be continued in private mail.
> I do not have any idea whether there is interest in old history by this
> group or not.
> Thus I would like to have a quicky survey of what the rest of the group
> thinks.
>
> Regards, Jeliko
>
By all means, continue the public discussion. It's the best thing going
on this list.

Louis Elteto

At 02:41 PM 5/15/96 PDT, Jeliko  wrote:

>I do not have any idea whether there is interest in old history by this
>group or not.
>Thus I would like to have a quicky survey of what the rest of the group
>thinks.
>

I am very much interested.

Gabor D. Farkas

Dear Jeliko;

At 02:41 PM 5/15/96 PDT, you wrote:

>You may have read some of the history discussion between our Greek friend
>and myself.
>The question came up, whether the discussion should be taken off the group
>and be continued in private mail.
>I do not have any idea whether there is interest in old history by this
>group or not.
>Thus I would like to have a quicky survey of what the rest of the group
>thinks.
>
>Regards, Jeliko
>

Well, since I majored in both history (four fields) and anthropology, I love
a nice, rational discussion of history.  All too often attitudes that linger
hundreds of years from a particular perception of an event influence what
people are doing today.  Unfortunately while you will get a rational
discussion from some of the people all (or nearly all) the time, and from
all the people at least some of the time, you will never get a rational
discussion on all historical events by all the people all the time.

You will even find disagreement, which may or may not be rational, over what
incidents or periods of history are relevant to modern situations or not.
Now to anyone who majored in or taught history, the answer is all situations
and periods are still relevant, but not all people (actually darned few)
have that background on this group.   Good luck with your survey! ;-)

Cecilia L. Fa'bos-Becker
San Jose, CA
tel./fax: 408-223-6102
e-mail: 

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

At 02:41 PM 5/15/96 PDT, Jeliko wrote:
>You may have read some of the history discussion between our Greek friend
>and myself.
>The question came up, whether the discussion should be taken off the group
>and be continued in private mail.
>I do not have any idea whether there is interest in old history by this
>group or not.
>Thus I would like to have a quicky survey of what the rest of the group
>thinks.
>
>Regards, Jeliko

        I wouldn't take it off. I think it is very interesting and I am at
least learning something new.

        Eva Balogh

In article >, Joe Szalai
> says:
>
>At 12:18 PM 5/13/96 -0700, Eva Balogh wrote:
>
>>        Indeed. On the other hand, one bright star from the Forum compared
>>homosexuality to *smoking.* You can get used to it, you see. It is kind of
>>addictive, according to this gentleman. And since you could get used to it,
>>you can also change the habit! There is a lot to learn.
>
>What an interesting idea.  The only problem with it is that it's usually
>*not* a cigarette that gay men puff on.  Why, it's not even a cigar!

Hey Joe, excuse my naivete, but I don't get it. Don't bother to explain,
though, because I'm expecting BBB (Bossy Boots Balogh) to give me (and
everyone else) a patronizing lecture about what it means.

--
 George Szaszvari, DCPS Chess Club, 42 Alleyn Park, London SE21 7AA, UK
 Planet Earth, Milky Way Galaxy * Cybernautic address: 
 * Acorn..RISC OS * IBM PC..PCDOS..Win..OS/2 ** The ARM Club ** ICPUG *
               Interested in chess books? Ask for my list

First of all, in my note on Re: Eva Balogh's accusations, I typed
10th century instead of 20th century as my field of expertise. Sorry.

        Second, concerning the charge of being "confrontational" in my
historical discussions on the Forum I would like to add the following. There
is no *middle ground* between the position of, let's say, Peter Andras
Nemenyi and my own. One cannot strike some kind of compromise: maybe only
half of the ritual murders were committed by Jews, the other half were false
accusations. Or, Szalasi was a racist but was a nice, reasonable, thoughtful
racist. And after all, he had many followers, so his ideas must have been
beneficial (position of Zoltan Noe). The same is applicable to today's
politics and our positions concerning the future of Hungary. I stand
squarely on the platform of joining NATO and the European Union. I stand
squarely on building a Western-type democracy in Hungary. I stand squarely
on building a market economy. I stand squarely against falling back on the
dreadful practices of existing socialism. I cannot compromise on any of
these basic tenents. I cannot agree with those whose who are antidemocratic.
I cannot agree with those whose nationalistic passion drive Hungary away
from Europe. I cannot agree with their xenophobia; I cannot agree with those
demagogs, both right and left, who are making a real change in Hungary as
hard as possible. There can be no compromise between my position and theirs.
The Hungarian moderate right unfortunately refuses to turn against the
extreme right and therefore, although by inclination I would belong there, I
cannot join them. In the last two years, ever since I have been following
Hungarian politics, this became crystal clear to me. The moderate right in
Hungary either doesn't exist or if it does, it does not distance itself from
Albert Szabo, Istvan Csurka, and, yes, Jozsef Torgyan. Therefore, however
regretfully, I cannot join their ranks.

        Eva Balogh

In article
>, Joe
Szalai > writes:

>No, Sam.  The real question is whether you would still love me in the
>morning, if I did.
>
>As for President Clinton, I thought his problem was that he never
exhaled.
>
>Joe Szalai

Are you confusing love with respect? And as for Clinton, I am reminded of
what President Warren G. Harding's father supposedly said to his son after
learning about some of the unethical actions taken by some of Harding's
cabinet members: "Wurr'n, if you were a woman, you'd always be in the
family way 'cause you just can't say `No.'"
Sam Stowe

This might interest you.  It came to me from another list.  I will not
bear any responsibility for its (lack of) accuracy...

Who would have thought that we would be on the bottom of this totem pole?

Martha

> ========================================================================

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census. 1990 Census of Population and Housing
Data Paper Listing and Summary:

Persons, 5 years old and over, who speak language (1,000)

Only English: 198,601           Spanish: 17,339         French: 1,702
German: 1,547           Italian: 1,309          Chinese: 1,249
Tagalog: 843    Polish: 723     Korean: 626     Vietnamese: 507
Portuguese: 430         Japanese: 428           Greek: 388
Arabic: 355     Hindi(Urdu): 331        Russian: 242    Yiddish: 213
Thai(Laotian): 206      Persian: 202    French Creole: 188
Armenian: 150           Navaho: 149     Hungarian: 148
Hebrew: 144     Dutch: 143      Mon-Khmer (Cambodian): 127
Gujarathi: 102

You can also find some really great information in  "The Cambridge
Encyclopedia of Language". There is a very good section on "Language and
Identity".

In article >,
   Eva Durant > wrote:
>>
>>         Nobody says that poverty is completely gone, but if you bother to
>> make the comparison, let's say, between the industrial revolution in
England
>> and today there is, I venture to say, a bit of difference.
>>
>
>Now this is an understatement if there ever was one...
>The trend is the unwelcome return of victorian poverty,
>with the victorian so craved for "free market".
>Look at the homelessness and tb figures, illiteracy, etc.
>please in the UK, and the US, and the numbers for
>the growth of the "underclass".  Eva, how can anyone
>dismiss these insane facts, in societies that produce
>so unimaginable amount of wealth??

Are you truly claiming that the UK has returned to levels of Victorian
poverty?  Please check some facts, such as comparisons of infantile death
rate or average death rate before making such extraordinary claims.  The
Victorians did NOT crave a 'free market', we pursued an aggressive policy of
Empire building that directly led to Britain totally controlling world markets
in most commodities mainly due to its control of most of the world's sea
routes.  You must pay better regard to the history of the country you live
in before making these inexplicable statements.  And give accurate comparitive
figures for homelessness, tb and illiteracy if you expect to have your
arguments taken seriously.


>The defeat of the widest movements of people, mass unions/parties
>that seems to result in the rise of demagoguery and fascism,
>which thrive on disillusionment and apathy.
>
>Eva Durant


Unions lost their members because they failed to keep in step with the needs
of the people of a modern democracy.  They weren't 'defeated', their members
decided that they were no longer serving their needs, so voted for the party
that was committed to minimising their influence and power.  I do hope you are
not suggesting that that nice Mr Major is some kind of Demagogue or Fascist.
Most odd that you put both terms together, as they are mutually exclusive:
The ancient Greek demagogue was, of course, a 'democratic orator'!



'Just the facts, Ma'am'

Cecilia, you may have overlooked it, allow me to remind you that HL
(Hungarian Lobby) is for action items, while HUNGARY list is for
discussions.  Thus your comments more appropriately belong on this
list.

You also wrote:

>In 896, Stephen having learned what happened to the Avars, and being
in
>danger of his country's suffering a repeat, cut a deal with the Pope.

Although I am just a non-faculty visitor to the club, my vague
recollections from my gimnazium days is that in 896 Istvan or Vajk, aka
Stephen, was not even a gleam in his father's eye, and I am not even
sure if his father was already alive crossing the Vereckei Hago with
Big Chief Arpad.


Charlie Vamossy

In article >,
   Eva Durant > wrote:
>I thought we discussed if investment in a country is a
>good measure of "betterment" of the people, and you
>did not come up with any proof that it is.

I have the feeling that you have decided that you are right, and I don't feel
the need to convince you otherwise with 'proof'.  But perhaps we should stop
investing in schools, because it won't make them 'better'!

>Britain being appearantly a place to invest and a place to export
>money, doesn't mean more secure and wellpaid jobs. The
>millions of new jobs the tories like to talk about did not
>happen, new jobs are temporary contract and low paid,
>so
>are old jobs, if they still there.

The whole nature of work and job security has changed, and employment
practices have changed at the same time to allow greater flexibility to both
employer and employee.  Would you prefer to go back to the protectionalism of
the past?  This simply leads to leaden economies dominated by inefficient
industries.  Modern economies have to be able to react quickly to global
conditions.  What is your alternative?

>The standard of living
>is not getting better for those in jobs, unless you are earning
>a fair bit more than the average.

Extraordinary statement.  Especially as the 'average wage' continues to
increase with greater prosperity.  Just in the last two years the average
disposable UK income has risen by more than 20%, mainly due to the drop in
interest rates.  What data do you base your statements on?

>Hungarians have right to question these shiny examples...
>
>Eva Durant


As I said, I feel we have to agree to disagree, and terminate this discourse.
Any Hungarian economist would leap at the chance to be in the UK's current
economic position.  We have the lowest interest rates for thirty years,
inflation of 2.5%, the lowest unemployment for five years (7.8%), an extremely
strong economy and healthy balance of payments.  These facts are not in
dispute and I have to conclude that you must have an entirely different view
of how a modern economy should work.  It would be more interesting to hear
your view of how you feel Hungary will be best able to trade with the rest of
the world, rather than for you to make statements regarding Britain that are
simply not true.



>>
>> All I can tell you is that over the past ten years Britain has taken more
jobs
>> and plant from their traditional bases in the East than any other Western
>> nation, and is currently the world's fifth largest exporter in markets it
>> could only dream about twenty years ago.  The Welsh make TV's cheaper than
the
>> Koreans and supply Europe with more sets than Japan!
>>


Budapest lover!

Dear Andy -- forgive me, but I am confused...

This list, the HUNGARY list, as far as I know, has been around for
quite a while, owned and operated by the good Hugh Agnew.  With all
deference to Keith Leal, his name is not know to me.

You also write that "probaly one thing we have in common: to
communicate in this land of Canada."  This baffles me...  As a
Hungarian-American, I enjoy communicating with anyone around the world
who has something to contribute on the subject of Hungary and the
Hungarians, including Canadians.  This list, however, is definitely not
a Canadian list, especially since it is hosted at the George Washington
University, named after someone who is not exactly a national hero in
the land of our loyalist friends to the north.

Forum, another discussion group, which is in Hungarian has also been
around since the early dawn of our Internet day, having been started by
Jozsi Hollosi.  It still operates full blast on HIX, although you have
to have a strong stomach to partake its bill of fare.

Although you seem to be confused as to the origins of this group, I
wish you success in rolling your ball and wearing your feather.

Charlie Vamossy



You wrote:
>
>Daer People: my name is Andy Kozma.I tooke it on myself after a few
Jawing
>sessions with Keith Leal,who made up this list of people who would be
>interrested in communicating.
>Actuallt Keith suggestion was,that I should select some of that list
members
>and write them.
>Well instead I tooke the liberty to try to start communication beetwee
al
>these members in a community way.Maybe not individual,but on an open
forum.
>Since our interrest are very diverse,probaly one thing we have in
common:to
>communicate in this land of Canada.
>I don't wish to be any potante,I just like to wear the feather in my
hat:I
>started people to communicate with the help ofcourse from Keith.
>As Keith pointed out in his note to me this should be a communicating
chanel.
>Quoting Keit "the forum will work only if we all drop our online
reserve and
>start interchanging"
>My hope is there should be some result,and beginning of a healthy
>communication in any subject you can think of.
>Well as they say I started the ball roling,now it is up to any and all
of
>you to be succesfull.
>With Regards: Andy Kozma
>
>P.S.I beg your forgivness for any and all spelling,grammer and other
mistakes.
>

Martha Bihari wrote a very interesting post:
>
>This might interest you.  It came to me from another list.  I will not
>bear any responsibility for its (lack of) accuracy...
>
>Who would have thought that we would be on the bottom of this totem
pole?
>
>Martha
>
>=======================================================================
=
>
>Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census. 1990 Census of Population and
Housing
>Data Paper Listing and Summary:
>
>Persons, 5 years old and over, who speak language (1,000)
>
>Only English: 198,601           Spanish: 17,339         French: 1,702
>German: 1,547           Italian: 1,309          Chinese: 1,249
>Tagalog: 843    Polish: 723     Korean: 626     Vietnamese: 507
>Portuguese: 430         Japanese: 428           Greek: 388
>Arabic: 355     Hindi(Urdu): 331        Russian: 242    Yiddish: 213
>Thai(Laotian): 206      Persian: 202    French Creole: 188
>Armenian: 150           Navaho: 149     Hungarian: 148
>Hebrew: 144     Dutch: 143      Mon-Khmer (Cambodian): 127
>Gujarathi: 102
>
>You can also find some really great information in  "The Cambridge
>Encyclopedia of Language". There is a very good section on "Language
and
>Identity".
>

Although it is second hand information, I am told that in the US,
approximately 1.58 million people identified themselves as being of
Hungarian origin.  Of these, 70% speak Hungarian poorly or not at all,
20% speak it passably, and 10% speak it at the native level.  The above
figure seem to confirm that, although 148,000 is slightly less than
10%.

Now you see the root of the problem Hungarian-American organizations
are wrestling with.  Our choices are:

1.  Keep speaking Hungarian only at meetings, programs, events.

2.  Switch to English to attract the spouses, relatives, etc as well as
those of the next generation who for one reason or another do not speak
Hungarian

3.  Try both...



Sad, but true



Charlie Vamossy
President of the New York Hungarian House

At 01:28 PM 5/14/96 PDT, Jeliko, responding to a post by Andy Kozma, wrote:

>Smile, it cannot be as bad as you stated, besides some of the differences
>between Canada and Hungary are lessening, like the government deficits.

Jeliko just had to ruin an otherwise good post by this last sentence.  It
seems that the government deficit is *his* Beelzebub.  Please correct me if
I'm wrong, but wasn't one of Nicolae Ceausescu's great accomplisment the
elimination of Romania's deficit?  And look where it got him.  Hmm.  Maybe
it's not such a bad idea!

Joe Szalai

At 02:41 PM 5/15/96 PDT, Jeliko, wrote:

>The question came up, whether the discussion should be taken off the group
>and be continued in private mail.

I haven't had time to read all the posts as closely as I'd like to but by
all means keep them on this list.  Those who don't have the time, or
interest, to read the posts, can use their delete key.

Joe Szalai

At 01:43 PM 5/15/96 -0400, Sam Stowe, wrote:

>P.S. -- More of Paul Johnson's expose of Karl Marx coming soon to a
>computer screen near you.

I don't want to put you on the spot, Sam, but have you read *any* books by
Marx?  He wrote quite a few, you know.  And some are quite good.  I'm sure
that they'll be 're-discovered' again and again.  If nothing else he's a
damn good antidote to capitalist kaka.

Joe Szalai

Dear Jeliko;

At 06:02 PM 5/15/96 PDT, you wrote:
>Dr Col. K-B writes:
>
>>  This theory about the Secres (Szikelysig) seems interesting and
>challenging.
>>  I have been stationed in Saudi Arabia before the PGW,
>>  then commanded a hospital unit in the war.
>> Arabs were friendly, called me magyar. The public transportation
>> in King Kalid Military City was in the hand of an Arab family
>> called MAGHAROB. I have a few picture to shear with you.
>> However my point of argument is that their knowledge about us did not reach
>the
>> early 9th century or more.
>
>Ibn Rosteh died in 870
>Gurdezi XI century
>El Bekri XI century
>Ibn Fadhlan wrote in 921/923
>Istakhri,  951
>Ibn Haukal 942/943
>Masudi died in 956
>Ibn Hajjan 988-1076
>Dzajhani XI century
>
>Just a few early writers of Arabic written documents regarding the
>Hungarians. Not all were Arab, some were Persian and one was Jewish, but the
>documents are in Arabic and who knows whether these are all.
>
>Regards, Jeliko.
>
Very good, but did you know the Arab awareness of Magyars goes back even
further, to when they were part of the Khazar empire?  While parts (some of
his conclusions and assertions) of Arthur Koestler's book _The Thirteenth
Tribe_ are debatable, he does cite a lot of valid historical documentation.
He mentions how the Arabs inherited (absorbed, acquired?) several, early
Jewish accounts and even maps of the Khazar empire that go back as early as
the 7th century.  In these accounts and maps, the different peoples of that
empire were distinguished, and quite a number of towns in northern Russian
were all called "Magyar-this or that," and inhabited by a distinct people.
By the middle of the ninth century, the Arabs had quite a lot of detail
about the tribes within the Khazar empire both in relationship to the
empire, and a separate entities with separate dynasties, traditions,
mythologies, etc..

Respectfully,


Cecilia L. Fa'bos-Becker
San Jose, CA
tel./fax: 408-223-6102
e-mail: 


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

In article >, _JELIKO
> says:
>
>You may have read some of the history discussion between our Greek friend
>and myself.
>The question came up, whether the discussion should be taken off the group
>and be continued in private mail.
>I do not have any idea whether there is interest in old history by this
>group or not.
>Thus I would like to have a quicky survey of what the rest of the group
>thinks.

Please stay on the group. *Old* history, or any history, is fascinating.
Your and other contributions are much appreciated.

Best regards,
--
 George Szaszvari, DCPS Chess Club, 42 Alleyn Park, London SE21 7AA, UK
 Planet Earth, Milky Way Galaxy * Cybernautic address: 
 * Acorn..RISC OS..The ARM Club * IBM PC/AT/386 * Commodore=64..ICPUG *
 ** NW London Computer Club ** Want s/h chess books? Ask for my list **

On May 15,  2:41pm, _JELIKO wrote:
> Subject: History Discussion on or off line?
> You may have read some of the history discussion between our Greek friend
> and myself.
> The question came up, whether the discussion should be taken off the group
> and be continued in private mail.
> I do not have any idea whether there is interest in old history by this
> group or not.
> Thus I would like to have a quicky survey of what the rest of the group
> thinks.
>
> Regards, Jeliko
>-- End of excerpt from _JELIKO

    Jeliko,

       It is good to have you back. I cast my vote for having this
    discussion on the group. I find it fascinating  and please in-
    clude me even if you decide to have it off the list. I may not
    be able to contribute, but I am willing to learn.

                                             Regards,
                                                       Amos

In article >, Joe Szalai
> says:
>
 (George Szaszvari) wrote:
>
>>Hey Joe, excuse my naivete, but I don't get it. Don't bother to explain,
>>though, because I'm expecting BBB (Bossy Boots Balogh) to give me (and
>>everyone else) a patronizing lecture about what it means.
>
>George, if you don't get it, it's because you're just not interested, or,
>you're hanging out at the wrong places.  I'm afraid that if you want any
>more info on the matter I'm going to have to write in Latin as I wouldn't
>want to offend some of the readers on this list.

Gosh, Joe, don't corrupt me, man! Really, though, it was just a naughty
bit of wishful dreaming: I just wanted to see Bossy Boots doing it (the
explaining, I mean) :-) not that she'd take the bait now (pity, it would
have been hilarious.) Smarting from a recent virtual hiding, BBB will
hopefully be a bit more careful about getting too *personal* in future
(for a while, anyway...those types are pretty incorrigible.)  ;-)

--
 George Szaszvari, DCPS Chess Club, 42 Alleyn Park, London SE21 7AA, UK
 Planet Earth, Milky Way Galaxy * Cybernautic address: 
 * Acorn..RISC OS..The ARM Club * IBM PC/AT/386 * Commodore=64..ICPUG *
 ** NW London Computer Club ** Want s/h chess books? Ask for my list **

I've got the original article (from US News) in a text file if anyone
is interested.

jim

_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/

James D. Doepp
Department of Economic Theory
University of Miskolc (Hungary)




  By meanes whereof, they became lazie and slothfull in their dayly
endevours, even like to our Citizens; not minding or medling with
their wonted affaires: but, as a waiting for death every houre,
imployed all their paines, not in caring any way for themselves, their
cattle, or gathering the fruits of the earth, or any of their
accustomed labours; but rather wasted and consumed, even such as
were for their instant sustenance.

Boccaccio, _The Decameron_


_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/