At 08:43 AM 9/30/96 +0100, Zs. J.  wrote:
>A.Kornai wrote:
>
>>While the bulk of the rounding up and deportation happened after Germany
>>occupied Hungary, there was already one major act of rounding up and
>>deportation, resulting in the death of some 16,000-18,000 Jews at the hand of
>>the SS in August 1941, under the Ba1rdossy government. By that time, the thir
d
>>Jewish Law was already in effect. This law, noted for its stringent
>>(Nu2nberg-style) racially based measures forbid, among other things, the
>>marriage of Jews and non-Jews.
>
> Andras, do you really think it would have been possible to save all the
>Hungarian jews (or a large portion of them) with preserving their all
>civil rights and without any discrimination? Among those geopolitical
>circumstances and with a fictive ideal Hungarian government.

Well, there were cases where under worse geopolitical circumstances all the
Jews were saved. And when the Germans ordered the wearing of the yellow
stars, the whole country, including the royal family put it on.

So, the answer is yes (as far as I am concerned).

Gabor D. Farkas

Janos Zsargo writes:

> If this is your opinion about the West Europian "military powers" why
> do you expect them to solve any problem? I guess you don't expect
> anything from them, but why others (like Sam) do (I doubt they have
> better opinion about the West Europians)?
> About Russia, do you have anything to support your point or you just
> made up your mind and that's it?

Certainly, there is an (although somwhat mythical) affiliation between the
Serbs and the Russians. This is based on some of the Panslavic ideas and
the initial aspoects relate to the Russian perception of coreligionists
fighting the common enemy, i.e. the Turks. Later it simplified itself to
another access to the Mediterrenian and the competition with the Habsburghs
for the Balkans. However, it is also presented by the Serbs as it was by
the erstwhile Albanina regime except in that case it was with the Chinese
that we and the Russians together are a world power. The Yugoslav case is
and was for some time a mess. They made an even worse case of their
nationalities issues than the AU monarchy. But please remember that it was
not Russia butt the French and the Brit governments who made Yugoslavia
with not much involvement from other post WW I powers. They also nurtured
and protecetd it in its existence until the last few years, albeit after
Tito's flip the US became a guilty party also. It should also be remembered
that after WW I parts of the AU monarchy and after WW II parts of the
little antant countries which were as guilty as for example Hungary in
their participation in the war were treated differently. Yugoslavia became
a winner even though Croatia was allied with the Germany and Czechoslovakia
also became a winner even though Solvakia per se was a looser.
Unfortunately, there is no specific cure for political schysophrenia.
Thus the "cultural" alliance between Russia was and is with the Serbs and
not per se Yugoslavia, and it is based mainly on religion with some old
baggage attached to it. I also stress that the Russian support is twofold,
part from the new Russian religio-nationalists and part from simple Russian
geopolitical aspects. The latter is not as strong at the present time as
the former. Note even the settle difference between Russian support to the
remnant Yugoslavia and the Serbs in Bosnia/Herzegovina.  However, the
Russian govt. is willing to score coups, when it can get away with it. It
is important to them that some folks look upon them as "protectors" and are
willing to meddle as long as they can get away with it without any serious
involvement. The religio-nationalist support while getting more publicity
is really not the policy of the Yeltsin govt. even if at time they kowtow
to it for home political reasons.

On the other hand, the Russian military is in its greates turmoil since the
1917 revolution. Please rememeber that the main support (and the decisive
one) for the 1917 revolution came from the disgruntled soldiers and not the
striking workers or the opportunistic leftist intelligentsia. The Russian
soldiers are far less effective today than they were any times since the
Polish war. Thus expeditionary activity is an empty threat and a known
danger to the Russian leadership from the Afganistan days. The sorry
effectiveness demonstrated by them in Chechenia is only one aspect of their
near demoralization. There are Russian soldiers leased out to private
enetrprises as guards (cruise boats, private restaurants, western goods
shops, etc.) to eke out a living. Most of them are paid only meager wages
which are months behind in arriving. Their food and lodging are miserable
and the generals are jockeying for political status. They are in fact not a
serious threat to any West European action if it was undertaken in Bosnia,
even now under the NATO aegis there is no mention of counteracting the
a western activities through other geopolitical means.

The main reason for the US involvement is simple, the European powers (or
wannabes) were not willing to commit either their resources (money) or
troops (again money and home politics) to settle issues for which
originally they were responsible. When they originally arrived, it was
under the shackles of the UN, which is another debating society (gitt
egylet) with near zero effectivness in solving any problem. So I am back to
the basic questions: Why should my son be killed for Bosnian peace, when
other European fathers are not willing to expose their children to that
risk? And why should the US taxpayer finance the stabilization of the
eventual better market conditions in a country that was made by the
European powers, for other European countries?

I hope you can fill in the lines between the argument presented. If
everything was detailed out this response would be a book and not a
newsgroup message.

Regards,Jeliko.
It is also true that recently the Russians were giving (mainly oral)
support to the Serbs

At 3:11 AM 9/30/96, S or G Farkas wrote:
>At 08:43 AM 9/30/96 +0100, Zs. J.  wrote:
>>A.Kornai wrote:

>> Andras, do you really think it would have been possible to save all the
>>Hungarian jews (or a large portion of them) with preserving their all
>>civil rights and without any discrimination? Among those geopolitical
>>circumstances and with a fictive ideal Hungarian government.
>
>Well, there were cases where under worse geopolitical circumstances all the
>Jews were saved. And when the Germans ordered the wearing of the yellow
>stars, the whole country, including the royal family put it on.
>
>So, the answer is yes (as far as I am concerned).
>
>Gabor D. Farkas

Bulgaria refused to  hand over its Jewish citizens to the Germans but would
not protect the Jews who lived on its annexed territories. Finland had no
Holocaust. The Danes saved their Jews but it is a myth that their king wore
the star of David. The Germans were aware of the rescue of the Danish Jews
to Sweden and decided not to prevent it.

Hungary introduced anti-Semitic laws well before Hitler came to power.  The
three so-called Jewish Laws were passed in the late 1930s and early 1940s
in order to pacify  the large consituency of Hungarian pro-Nazi extremists
as well as for ther purpose to obtain Hitler's support for the revision of
the Treaty of Trianon. Both Bulgaria and Hungary were willing to to rob
their Jewish citizens of their properties, dignity and livelihood but not
their lives. Professor Istvan Deak wrote in The New York Review of Books
that without the occupation of Hungary, which came about because the
government became unreliable from Germany's point of view, the deportation
of the Hungarian Jewish community would not have taken place.

Peter I. Hidas
Montreal

>In article >, Andy Kozma
> writes:
>
>>O my will I get bashed over my head to write anything different about the
>Us.
>>Hey wait a minute,my Son just became a US citisen,and will be able to
>vote
>>for the first time.Give me a break.
>>Regards:Andy.>
>>
>>
>
>Andy, you're a man out of your time. As late as the 1950s, comedy based on
>ethnic stereotyping was still acceptable in the U.S. But the social
>upheaval of the 1960s has changed all that. You no longer have to confine
>yourself to playing the insular, smug Canadian. I don't know how you'll
>deal with this newfound freedom. Ask Joe Szalai -- he may have some useful
>ideas.
>Sam Stowe
>
>P.S. -- I hear they're redesigning the U.S. flag to make room for the new
>stars that'll have to be added when Ontario and every province to the west
>petition for admission to the Union. And there's nothing wrong with your
>spelling. It is, I presume, the standard version taught in Canada's public
>schools?
>
>
>"The true champion of justice, if he intends to survive
>even for a short time, must necessarily confine
>himself to private life and leave politics alone."
>-- Plato, "Apology"
>
>Plato was right,and this proves my point about intellectuals in this thread.
 Your thought about public schools in Cnada,might be right,except in my
case,since I finished all my schooling in Hungary,and did not have the
pleasure of any canadian or american schooling.
Most of you had the great fortune to study on this continent,so naturaly you
must have a higher educationthen me.I learned from life,newspapers,tv etc,to
read and write english,and to speak as well as I do.
By the way Plato did not predict a new flag for the States,and as far as I
am concerned we are quite happy to live in this Country,and ahve the
pleasure to watch all the good american chanels,especialy the football games.
I don't think our affiliation to the ever loved States will happen,even if
Quebec dumies would like to separate.
You know hwo it is:as long life is good,you might think you will have a
better one.No way Hose.
Regards:Andy.

Well let me tell you about my own experience in 1944.
I was graduating that year from the Tnarkepzo Gyakorlo Gimnazium.Yes I wore
the yellow star.Yes my parents were already in the gheto.Yes my Brother was
already
in Bor (yugoslavia).Shortly after graduation I received an invitation to
join,the forced labour camp.Yes as you can see I surviuved,so did my
Parents,and my Brother,thanks to Raul Wallenberg and our Swedish passport.
This sounds very easy,but who did not go through this period and was't
humg,or shot in the Danube by the arrowcross ,and wasn't in those labour
camps,well you were lucky and your life is and was different.
I am gratfull to whom it may concerne,that this was our fate,but I can tell
you,that very similar things happened to all of us in the Rakosi aera.
Do anyone blame me that I am gratfull and happy to live in a country,where I
don't have to even think about the people doing this ?
Andy.

In article >,
 says...
>
>At 12:20 AM 9/28/96 GMT, George Szaszvari wrote:
>
><snip>
>>Interesting. I remember reading in his attributed biography (of about
>>25 years, or so, ago) that he admitted: *we made mistakes in Hungary*,
>>but I cannot believe the Soviet hawks could have allowed anything but
>>suppression of the revolution, whatever misgivings Kruschev might have
>>had. Installing the Kadar regime was presumably better than other
(worse)
>>possibilities that would have happened had Stalin still been around.
>
>That recent document I referred to yesterday was mentioned on the CBC
radio
>news.  The news report said that the document was released by Boris
Yeltsin
>a couple of years ago.  I thought it was interesting because it was news
to
>me.  Perhaps Khrushchev saw Imre Nagy as another Tito.  And maybe he
was, but
>we'll never know.  However, it's interesting to note that, with time,
Kadar
>turned out to be like Tito.
>
>Joe Szalai

I have read an article about this in the Toronto Star.  However, there is
no mention about it why Khrushchev changed his mind in the last minute.

Agnes

In article >,
 says...
>
>        An absolutely disgusting article appeared in the September 2
issue
>of *Nepszava." I found it so disgusting that I was contemplating sending
a
>fax to *Nepszava* and tell them what I think. At the end I decided to
bag it
>because too much time elapsed between the appearance of the article and
my
>reading it.
>
>        It is about the new anti-smoking law which had been prepared for
>discussion in parliament for the fall session. There have been
discussions
>about this law for years but the Ministry of Public Welfare (Nepjoleti
>Miniszterium) seemed to be either unwilling or unable to prepare an
>anti-smoking law. At the end the job was given to a professor of law who
for
>a lump sum of money prepared what appears to be a fairly strict--by
European
>standards at least--law concerning smoking in public. So, this has been
in
>the works for a considerable amount of time but as usual in Hungarian
>political life, the grounds were not properly prepared for such a law.
That
>is, no public education concerning the ill effects of smoking was ever
>attempted. The law, practically unannounced, simply appears from
nowhere.
>
>        The early reaction to the announcement of the forthcoming
proposal
>was not auspicious. One highly regarded writer and intellectual (sorry,
I
>forgot his name) simply announced that thisproposal was the "stupidest
>thing" he has ever heard. A journalist (most likely a non-smoker) wrote
a
>whole article on the responsibility of the intellectuals and his shock
at
>reading this great man's reactions. Now, a stupid, irresponsible
journalist
>(and a nonsmoker at that) opened his mouth with disastrous results. His
name
>is Laszlo Seres. (And I don't care if Mr. Seres's friends tell him that
an
>awful person called Eva Balogh called him ignorant, irresponsible and
stupid.)
>
>        Mr. Seres doesn't even seem to know the background of the
proposed
>anti-smoking law. Somehow he thinks that the appearance of the Hungarian
law
>has something to do President Clinton's latest efforts at restricting
>availability of cigarettes to teenagers. That is sin number one! A
>journalist must do some research before embarking on a topic. He should
have
>realized that Clinton's signing this or that has nothing to do with the
>Hungarian law. It is nothing else but a coincidence. Sin number two: he
is
>writing his article with the firm belief that restrictions on
advertising of
>smoking and drinking is somehow a against the "free market." Surely, we
>should also advertise heroine, for example, and if we don't, well, it is
>against the laws of the free market! Sin number three: he is bemoaning
the
>fact that the Hungarian tobacco industry (all American and English
firms)
>from here on will not support Hungarian sports and surely this is a very
>important consideration. After making some incredible references to
"public
>health," "positive life style" he announces that all banning of
advertising
>of tobacco and alcohol is simply "confusing." He then announces that
>Hungarians "always managed to import the worst features of American
>democracy," in this case, ban of smoking at the workplace. He then
announces
>that "the passive smokers will have such rights which the Gypsies, the
>disabled, and the gays can't even dream of." And as if these stupid
>statements weren't enough he adds the following: "the law will separate
>smoking and non-smoking spouses and make them sit in different parts of
the
>restaurant." As far as health is concerned he thinks that such law,
whether
>in the United States or in Hungary, has nothing to do with health
issues. It
>is only rhetoric and it has something to do with the presidential
elections
>in the States and in Hungary--and I am afraid, I will have to quote this
in
>Hungarian because I am not sure whether I can comprehend its meaning
either
>in Hungarian or in English--"idehaza meg a tudorakos, szivbeteg ember
csupan
>az ugyszinten beteg egeszegugy budzsejet terhelo tenyezo, a
>biztositotarsasagoknak meg rizikofaktor." Well, I am not sure what Mr.
Seres
>is talking about exactly but it has something to do with patience with
lung
>cancer and heart disease and medical insurance. I guess, his thinks that
the
>only reason we don't want people of dying of lung cancer and heart
disease
>so that the insurance companies wouldn't have to pay out so much to the
>doctors and the hospitals. Does he care about human life? Surely, this
is
>the last thing he is thinking of. He thinks that in Hungary the only
>beneficiary is the medical insurance lobby. Surely, the anti-smoking law
is
>to their benefit. The people who are dying, surely, Mr. Seres isn't
thinking
>of them!
>
>        In case, Mr. Seres didn't say enough stupid things, he then goes
on
>about Clinton's acceptance of the fact that nicotine is addictive. He
>doesn't doubt that it is addictive, but he demands that the president of
the
>United States should announce the legality of marijuahana and hashish
>instead of announcing that nicotine is habit forming.
>
>        At the very end he pretty well comes out saying that the
>state/society shouldn't make any laws which would restrict individual
>freedom. If an individual wants to kill himself either by hard drugs or
by
>cigarettes and alcohol, let them die. "Individual suicide," says Mr.
Seres,
>"is a private matter." And says Mr. Seres, "there is no such public
health
>issue which would warrant the state's interference in free competition.
>Everybody himself/herself is responsible for his/her health."
>
>        But if that's the case, please I don't want to hear about the
>incredible statistics on life expectancy. I don't want to hear about the
end
>of the Hungarians as a distinct ethnic group because of low birthrate
and
>high deathrate. I don't want to hear about the poor men and women who
die in
>their fifties. I don't want to hear about those poor sixteen-year-old
boys
>who will most likely die before age of 65.
>
>        But after calming down--which is difficult facing so much human
>stupidity in one article by a so-called intellectual--the fact is that
in
>typical Hungarian fashion a proposed law is introduced without any
>preparation whatsoever. The Hungarian people were never told in a
serious
>way that "smoking kills." There has been no attempt to change public
>perception and public behavior. The doctors themselves who are supposed
to
>do the educating are smokers themselves. It is like the law--which I
applaud
>by itself--concerning legal equality of gay couples with heterosexual
ones.
>Overwhelming majority of the population is rabidly anti-gay but a small,
>educated, and enlightened group, maybe one percent of the population,
knows
>enough about the whole matter to pass judgment. Surely, the members of
the
>constitutional court belong to that small intellectual elite. They
passed a
>remarkable law but that law was passed in a total void. This law was
passed
>over and above the heads of the ordinary citizens. Just as the
anti-smoking
>law, if it ever gets out of parliament (which I doubt), will be enacted
into
>law in a country which is totally unprepared for its passing.
>
>        Eva Balogh

Eva, I agree that the guy who wrote the article is a complete idiot.
However, I disagree that there was no change in Hungarians re: smoking.
When I visited Hungary in 1989, all friends and relatives offered us a
cigarette immediately upon entering their homes.  My husband stopped
smoking in 1982.  I never smoked and developed an allergy to smoke.  When
people got together in our honour, and started to smoke, I coughed my
lungs out.  So the filtered out one by one to the kitchen for a smoke,
until I, the guest of honour, remained solo in the living room....

In 1995, the situation was drastically different.  Many people stopped
smoking and those who did smoke, automatically went out when they wanted
to smoke.  We took a bus trip to Transylvania and there was absolutely no
smoking allowed on the bus.

Agnes

In article >,
 says...
>I strongly suggest you read Sanador Kopacsi: In the name of the Working
Class and George Gabaori: When evils ran free (something like that).  If
you still read magyar, the best book on the topic is Aczel-Mera: Tisztito
Vihar.

Agnes
>Joe At 12:46 PM 28/09/96 -0400, you wrote:
>>At 01:56 AM 9/26/96 GMT, George Szaszvari wrote:
>>
>><snip>
>>I don't think we have to bring in environmental or hereditary factors
to
>>this discussion. <...>
>>
>>Unfortunately, all this posturing has had a rather negative effect on
this
>>newsgroup.  Debate has almost dried up.  Eva's "back slappers" and
"thank
>>you-ers" don't challenge her and rarely contribute to discussions.
>
>This is great Joe, just great!  Let's bring in a little categorization
of
>list members instead and ooohhhh let's not forget a *little* demeaning
while
>at it?  Since I was the last one to do the unthinkable and dared to
thank
>people for efforts extended, I take the above very personally and to
heart
>at that:(.  I was not aware that a thoughtful gesture would result in
being
>categorized as a "back slapper".  As for challenging Eva, and,
contributing
>to discussions relating to History, 56, and today's political scene; has
it
>ever occurred to you that certain members just simply do not have a
>knowledge level with which to do it with effectively or even
comfortably?
>
>For instance, my entire scope of History has derived from being educated
in
>Hungary, during the late fifties and sixties.  Since then, I have taken
it
>upon myself to expand on what I consider to be "no knowledge at all" or
if
>given a tad of credit "very biasedly imparted knowledge if that".
Surely,
>you can imagine the scope of garbage dumped on students in that subject,
let
>alone some others during that "era". (Take sciences out of this
discussion
>- which were far more advanced, and I think that some still are - but
that's
>another topic).
>
>If you cannot, I'll be pleased to cite one example.  When I left Hungary
>(67), the principle of my school was shocked to think that I would as
much
>as *entertain* the thought of moving to North America, where Presidents,
>politicians, can be shot "just like that"  - and no, she was *not* a
stupid
>person by any standards.   Regarding 56, my father was extremely
involved -
>whom I only met once in my life.  I want to learn as much about this
topic,
>as I possibly can - since no one within my family has even as much as a
clue
>- and if they do, they are holding it tight to their chest.  The 56
>revolution served to shape my entire life and it's results are solely
>responsible for my being here in the first place. Today, the next
generation
>being my children; are asking questions, for which no one seems to have
>answers to.  With regards to topics involving today's economic climate,
>politics et al in Hungary, well, let's just say that I have a vested
>interest - but not always the time to keep on top of things on a day to
day
>basis, as I ought to.  Having said this, I hope that you can appreciate
as
>to why I appreciate the writings on these topics. And also, I hope you
can
>appreciate as to why (while I am in my right mind that is); I would not
>challenge a discussion related to these topics.  Having a clear grasp of
my
>limitations however, ought not be an open door for any personal attack,
or
>attempt at demeaning or categorizing my being.
>
>And.... before you even allow yourself to think that this is a
>justification; don't!  Unfortunately, it just is, the way it is written.
>
>Regards,
>Aniko.

In article >,  (Mpflerr)
writes:

>Hello Everyone,
>I signed on to soc.culture.magyar and I saw the following posted by
>A.Albu.
>What is he trying to do?
>
>Regards,
>Marina

Hello, Marina!
He's trying to import hired guns from the far-right to stir this thing
into a knock-down, drag-out fight. Albert won't be happy until he has
proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that Hungarians are lilly-white and
completely innocent of mistreating Jews and participating in the
Holocaust. Dr. Hidas has given him a glimmer of hope in his post. Albert,
however, will ultimately remain the same frustrated schizophrenic that we
all know and love.
Sam Stowe

"The true champion of justice, if he intends to survive
even for a short time, must necessarily confine
himself to private life and leave politics alone."
-- Plato, "Apology"

In article <v01540b00ae74542c4439@[198.168.48.48]>,
 says...
>
>At 2:30 PM 9/29/96, Andras Kornai wrote:
>>> Felado :  [Canada]
>>>
>
As a Jewish survivor of this period, I have to agree with Peter Hidas.
With all the restrictions in place, we lived a relatively comfortable
life while all our relatives already long disappeared from Vienna and
Brunn.  The real trouble started after March 19/44.  I also recall, as we
were taken to the ghetto by the regular police, that they were very
humane, evebn helped to carry some baggages of old people.  As a
contrast, people who were rounded up by the arrow cross, were shot into
the Danube.  I was hidden in a convent until the arrowcross raided all
the convents, when the nuns took us to relative safety.

Agnes
>>
>>I'm sorry to see Pe1ter Hidas trying to whitewash this rather shameful
period
>>of Hungarian history. Eichmann and the German occupiers of 1944 didn't
operate
>>in a vacuum. To the contrary, they operated with the enthusiastic
>>collaboration of the Hungarian police and paramilitary forces
(particularly
>>the gendarmes) and they operated in an environment where the gradual
>>disenfranchisment and dehumanization of Jews was a nearly complete
process,
>>with racial legislation leading every step of the way.
>>
>>Andra1s Kornai
>
>Whitewash? There was nothing in my brief description of 1944 to justify
>your accusation. A group of Torontonians are trying to prove the
opposite
>and devote a whole internet Home Page to my denunciation. By the way,
the
>the gendarmes were regular police in charge of the countryside. The
regular
>police was less involved in the presecution of the Jews and their
so-called
>enthusiasm was never universal. You may know about their similar
attitude
>in 1956. The fact remains, that in the spring of 1944 close to a million
>Hungarian Jews were living in Hungary in relative safety in their own
>homes. They were humiliated, persecuted, deprived of their businesses
and
>so on but they were alive unlike the more than five million European
Jews
>who perished up to that time. Yes, the government was responsible for
the
>death of tens of thousands of Hungarian Jews who were murdered under
>Hungarian jurisdiction and so were they responsible for the death of
close
>to half a million Hungarian soldiers. Nevertheless, despite  Hitler's
>insistance, Horthy and Kallay, as I mentioned before, refused to hand
over
>the Hungarian Jews to Germany. What happened after 19 March 1944 is
another
>story. The fact remains that until that time Hungary remained a
relatively
>safe place for Jews.
>
>Peter I. Hidas
>Montreal

Andras Kornai wrote:
>
> > Felado :  [Canada]
> >
> > The rounding up and deportation of the Jews began on May 15, 1944. Germany
> > occupied Hungary on March 19, 1944 and installed the Sztojay government.
> > Horthy remained governor.
> While the bulk of the rounding up and deportation happened after Germany
> occupied Hungary, there was already one major act of rounding up and
> deportation, resulting in the death of some 16,000-18,000 Jews at the hand of
> the SS in August 1941, under the Ba1rdossy government. By that time, the
third
> Jewish Law was already in effect. This law, noted for its stringent
> (Nu2nberg-style) racially based measures forbid, among other things, the
> marriage of Jews and non-Jews.
>
> I'm sorry to see Pe1ter Hidas trying to whitewash this rather shameful period
> of Hungarian history. Eichmann and the German occupiers of 1944 didn't
operate
> in a vacuum. To the contrary, they operated with the enthusiastic
> collaboration of the Hungarian police and paramilitary forces (particularly
> the gendarmes) and they operated in an environment where the gradual
> disenfranchisment and dehumanization of Jews was a nearly complete process,
> with racial legislation leading every step of the way.
>
> Andra1s Kornai

---------

In what is stated appears that some major part 20%? 30%? 40%?
of the population not only hated the Jews but they wanted them
exterminated. This is something that I have difficulty comprehending.


What was the cause of that degree of deadly hatred of the race
that give so much to Hungary staring so early in its history.
To what degree that hatred was incited, to what degree was
imposed internally and externally. These are questions rarely
expressed on this group and questions newer answered to my comprehension.

I read recently heated debate about the motivations of the
Romanian Holocaust on the Romanian group.


Albert Albu

In article >,
 says...
>
>On Friday, October 4, at 10pm, TVO presents "Child Murders" (1993,
drama)
>staring Barnabas Toth and Ilona Kallai.
>
>"A poor Hungarian boy's friendship with a pregnant Gypsy leads to
ostracism,
>suicide and revenge."
>
>All of you who live in Ontario, and in neighbouring States, mark your
>calenders to watch this movie.
>
>Joe Szalai
>

>http://library.uwaterloo.ca:80/~jgszalai/JOESMAIN.HTM

I saw it last year during the film festival.  It is extremely depressing,
but not bad.

Agnes

Eva Balogh writes:

>         Why are you so surprised? The Hungarians themselves didn't know
the
> origin of their own language until the end of the eighteenth century;
i.e.,
> after the publication of the famous Encyclopedia of Diderot.

Hmmm, We got to apples from oranges. What are you implying, that it was the
French encyclopedists who told the Hungarians what is the origin of the
their language? What does the origin of the language has to do with the
developmental opportunities for the 1700s ? As an example we still do not
know the origin of the dual crown, does this mean that we did not have
kings? What I was showing that the French encyclopedists did not know the
relationship or differences between the various languages cied. I f you
read the tomes you can also find out that they palced Hungary in Asia also.
Maybe the "intellectuals" even then did not talk to the
"military/indutrial" complex, whic knew exactly where Hungary is since they
were closely involved with Rakoczi.


> >At least the Hungarian encyclopedia from 1699 is more factual in its
> >description of France.

>         I'm afraid but that makes me laugh a bit. It reminds me of some
> Canadian journalist who complained that while the Canadian papers are
full
> of news on the United States, there are few articles on Canada in U.S.
> papers. Do you know how few people ever visited Hungary before the
> nineteenth century? Mighty few. Hungary seemed to them like the end of
the
> world and from Western European perspective it was!

Well, at least in my field whenwriting a tome about the state of the art on
anything (which an encyclopedia is suppose to be), one does review of what
was written by others, instead of inventing the sections when the writer
does not have the expertise on the subject. Not being a historian, I am not
familiar what the practice is in that field. The first Hungarian
Encyclopedia was written and published in 1653 by Apaczai Csere, so there
was a possibility for the good French encuclopedists to read something
about it. I disagree with you on the number of visitors also. The armies
fighting the Turks, had many west Europeans also. There were ambassadors
floating around in relation to the west European wars and the Turkish wars.
Please remember also the "French connection" of Rakoczi's wars.

But for references, you may want to peruse:

Gyula Antalffy "A thousand years of Travel in Old Hungary" (it is also
available in translation by Elisabeth Hoch (Kner, 1980)

Charles-Marie, marquis de Salaberry d"Irumberry "Voyage a Constantinople,
en Italy, at aux iles de de l"Archipel, par l"Allemagne et la Hongrie."
Paris 1799, for a feminine view.

Palmer R.R. & Colton J. "The transformation of Eastern Europe, 1648-1740"
from "A History of the Modern World" New York Knopf 1965.

Kopeczi, B. "A Rakoczi szabadsagharc es Europa" Budapest 1970

Eustache Le Noble the Frenchman, has published about Hungary in 1704. 1705
1706 and 1707 showing as an example in the "Fable of the Lion' Cavern"
RaKoczi as the wise fox resisting the Habsburgh lion.

in addition to the Larry wolff book already referred to.

But lets look at a specific comments between what was predicted and what
they observed

Charles-Marie: "At length I am safely with all my familiy in good
health arrived at Peterwaradin, having suffered little from the rigor of
the season and found everywhere such tolerable accomodation, I can hardly
forbear laughing when I recollect all the frightful ideas that were given
to me of this journey (in Vienna)"
or another view form later

John Paget: "The reader would certainly laugh, as I have done since, did I
tell him one half of the foolish tales the good Viennese told us of the
country (Hungary) we were about to visit."

The two above quotes cover a 100 years or so. The misinformation in both
cases started in Vienna.

> >Yes, there was some backwardness in the area after the Turkish
expolsion,
> >but the extant western descriptions are not really "accurate". Please
> >remeber that this was the time when in several western countries there
was
> >also significant backwardness both economically and culturally.

>         I think you ought to read some of the books of Berend-Ranki duo
on
> comparative economic history of Eastern Europe to get a fair idea what we
> are talking about.

I have several of the Berend-Ranki books, but at least the ones I have, do
not cover the subject in the time period discussed. Could you be more
specific to assist me.

> >In Scotland
> >and Ireland the English were keeping miners and peasants perhaps even
more
> >oppressed than was the case for the peasants in Hungary. No surprise
that
> >extensive emmigration took place to the colonies.

>         This is not the kind of "backwardness" we are talking about. But
> general, low level of economic development. We are talking here about the
> time when the industrial revolution is just beginning in England and
Western
> Europe. And look at Eastern Europe and Hungary.

Please read Istvan Imreh in "A torvenyhozo szekely falu" Criterion, 1983,
what type of economic and social development occured in the village level
starting in Gyergyoujfalu in 1581 which reached over a 150 by 1847. Or
about the purchasing power of commerce based communities in the early 1700s
where even relatively small towns had sufficient capital accumulation to
purchase large feudal estates. Or Miklos Bethlen's book "Az olajagat viselo
Noe galambja" which is strong endorsement of mercantilism. And I repeat
please read Zrinyi "A torok afium ellen valo orvossag" published in 1705 in
Kolozsvar. Look at the examples of the Italian rennesaince in Bethlen
Miklos' castel in Bethlenszentmiklos from 1668.  A general review, although
somewhat Transylvania centered is available from Volume 2 of Erdely
Tortenete chapter 7 " Viragos reneszansz, szuleto barokk". The painting (I
am not sure if we even know the painter) of Janos Kemeny from the latter
half of the XVII century is an artistic quality matching any
contemporary western painter.

In a previous posting I have listed the growth of industrialization by
giving specifics, while all you have answered back so far is unreferenced
generalities.

However, all indications are that the aftermath of Rakoczi and the complete
Habsburgh control slowed and in some areas repressed the earlier growth.
But even taking your line of thought, please remember the level of
industrialization in the US in the 1700s and see what happaned after
independence. What I am claiming is not a specific to Hungary situation,
but a general change to more advanced economic and cultural development in
a country not on strings from Vienna.

> >The rebuilding of Hungary
> >after the Turkish occupation and the more than a century of warfare was
an
> >enermous task, which was not helped by the Habsburgh exploitation. In
spite
> >of that and almost surprisingly there was also cultural development.

>         I really would like to hear a list of Habsburg
> exploitations--please, come up with them. I find it very difficult to
> believe that a supranational royal family would exploit its own lands--I
> guess because they hated the Hungarians. Right?

I would like to take this as another special response in the following
mailing, because it is also extensive. However, please compare where the
crown lands were and where the direct economic wellbeing of the
royal,family and their immediate cronies resided.

> > The
> >reformed churches used Hungarian as the language of service and that by
> >itself was an accelerator for the improvements, because those churches
> >maintained contact with western reformed church dominated countries on a
> >much broader basis than that of the RC (hierarchy only) with Rome via
> >Vienna.

>         Accelerator for improvements? In what sense? That they used
> Hungarian as language of worship? The Hungarian language was in very poor
> shape in the 1700s and it was only at the end of the century, beginning
of
> the nineteenth that the so-called "Reform Period" began, which started
with
> language reform.

Well, at least you are consistent in not being familiar with some of the
issues. Please look at the Erdelyi Magyar Szotar which for most wrds gives
extant Hungarian usage from the XV through the XVII centuries. The
Hungarian of those days was perfectly capable for expressing more
sophisticated dissues than discussed here in this newsgroup. There were
Hungarian publications written in perfectly readable and expressing even
abstract ideas. Have you read any book from the XVII to XVIII century? Do
you feel that there is any problem with the language?


Thousands and thousands of new words were introduced in
> order to be able to express more sophisticated philosophical concepts or
> technical vocabulary.

A language is always growing, there are generally few words that are
invented before their time. But the so called language reform created a lot
of new words, for which already perfectly good words existed, except the
new word creators did not know it. There were thousands of words added to
French and English and Italian also but because often they were modified
Latin words their "newness" is not credited. (The reformers also added many
words, that were so makeshift that fortunately they did not survive.). But
to state that the prereform Hungarian language was not usable to express
sophisticated subjects is possible omly if one is ignorant of the books
published in Hungarian before the language reformation. You must have read
Balint Balassi, do you have any problems with his expressiveness? I do not.

Hugh Agnew wrote a whole book on the Czech language
> reform period. So, he might want to say a few words on that topic. And
> Hungary was worse off than Moravia-Bohemia.

I will await his commentary.

> >If anything the Habsburgh domination in the XVIII century created a
> >more dismal situation than that which existed in the XVII century.

>         So, you think Hungary would have been better off under Turkish
> occupation, just like Serbia or Bulgaria until a century later? Is that
what
> you are saying?

You got back to apples again, please remeber that we were not discussing
comparative oppression. Where, in this discssion was this claim made? It is
your introduction that brought it up. I repeat the issue was whether
Hungary would have developed faster if Rakoczi won and the development
could have continued in Hungary without the commensurate dependent
status and the following several hundred years of Habsburgh oppression
would not have occured.

> >The more
> >I look into it the more I am convinced that if Rakoczi won, the economic
> >and cultural development of the country would have been better.

> It is one of those "ifs" in history which, generally speaking,
> cannot be answered. But in this case I am almost certain that it is not
> the case.

I would appreciate if you could supply relevant references for your case.


 And one more thing which we all must keep in mind--unfortunately
> Hungarians are apt to forget it. Without belonging to the Habsburg
Monarchy,
> historical Greater Hungary might have collapsed way before the end of
World
> War I.

That is another conjencture, that in my opinion and on the basis of
references that I am aware of, is nearly impossible to support. The
standard policy of the Habsburghs was always to divide and conquer. Bu
after reading about your case I am willing to tackle that issue also. For
the time being I take it as your opinion.

>At the time of the Rakoczi Rebellion, we had no censuses but it is
> fair to assume that Hungarians constituted a minority of the population.
> Perhaps no more than 35-40 percent. And there were already signs of
> reluctance on the part of the Slovaks and Romanians to support the
Hungarian
> cause.

Nation and nationality at that time had different meaning. Please remeber,
for example the massive Serbian immigration from Serbia proper that occured
under Habsburgh control. The Saxons were also not considering themselves
as Habsburgh orinted at the time, they had a much closer affiliation with
the Hungarians than later on, after being favored by the Habsburghs as
fellow travelers. The Serbian immigration was solely to assist the Balkan
interests of the Habsburghs and not because it was in Hungarian national
interest. I do not know how we can guess what the nationality distribution
was for areas other than Transylvania, because the Transylvanian conditions
had more continuity in saving racords than the rest of the country.

> >I do not feel that Hungarian culture is superior to any other, but I do
not
> >suffer from an inferiority complex either,

>         Neither do I. But I have no difficulty to comprehend that Hungary
> was way behind western Europe all through its history and I don't blame
the
> Habsburgs for it either.

We are all entitled to our opinions and comprehensions. Whether they are
convincing and verifiable is another story.

Regards,Jeliko.

On Sun, 29 Sep 1996, kate sulzer wrote:

> Ok, how about "Szulzer?" That was what our name was until the immigration
> officials got to it. Does anyone know about this one?
>

I cannot be sure, but the Upper-German root for 'salt' is the most likely
explanation: brine, pickles, certain sausage types, salt water, even the
word 'sauce' go back to this root-variant.

Louis Elteto

Zoltan Szekely writes (most deleted):

> We know, what happened to people during Rakosi in Hungary, when
> they stepped out of the Communist Party. We know how they lost
> any chance of dignified survival whatsoever. Many of them ended
> up in Recsk and their families in complete despair. Do you know,
> what this single word means to Hungarians: Recsk? Do you have
> the slightest idea? ... And it happened in Hungary.

You know Zoli, I do not carry much pain about those who stepped out of the
communist party. I have painful memories about those who never joined. That
it was more dangarous to be a communist under Rakosi than under Horthy is
ironic, but my sympathy stops before I get to them.

Regards,Jeliko.

George Antony writes:

> (No, there was no village called Anto'n in Hungary: my ancestors
> were given just a piece of land big enough for seven plum trees,
> as the Hungarian saying goes, and lost it on cards anyway as real
> Hungarians are supposed to.)

Thanks George, for a while I was worried that Antonescu may have been named
after a village in Hungary.

Regards,Jeliko.

Zoltan Szekely quotes and writes:
> From the News of the Batthyany Lajos Foundation:

> *************

> A KDNP parlamenti frakcioja hetfoi ulesen ugy dontott, hogy
> taviratban tiltakozik az Egyesult Allamok budapesti nagykovetenel es
> az amerikai kulugyminiszteriumnal a Washington Post szeptember 19-ei
> szamaban megjelent Bosznia moge tekintve cimu iras egyes kitetelei
> miatt. A cikkben Donald Blinken, az USA budapesti nagykovete es Alfred
> Moses, a bukaresti amerikai nagykovet ugy fogalmazott, hogy a
> Magyarorszag es Romania kozotti ezereves rivalizalas a
> Kozep-Azsiabol erkezett magyarok betelepulesevel kezdodott. Az
> iras szerint a magyar dominanciat vegul a trianoni bekeszerzodes
> szuntette meg.

Obviously the good ambassadors now history as little as some others. So
where is a good balanced English language tome which would help to discuss
the problem without the traditional rabidity of either side? Check out any
of the American folks who may qualify for ambassadorship or their State
Dept. keepers and you will find the same problem. But whatever is used to
ameliorate this problem has to be defensible and far less emotional than as
an example the tone on this newsgroup.

Regards,Jeliko

Albert Albu commands an opinion:
> Judit Frigyes and Peter Laki wrote:

>  > Bela Bartok was a Nationalist -> chauvinist -> antisemite


> I want opinions from:

>         Eva, Sam Stowe, Peter I. Hidas, Joe Szalai, Aniko, Jeliko,eorge
> Szaszvari of Milky Way and all others.


My answer is "no, no, never"

PS I knew I can find a use for this slogan.

Regards,Jeliko.

Stowrites:
> >

> They were murdered with the active assistance of the Hungarian
government.
> Remember, the Germans didn't seize control of the country until the
> process of rounding Jews up and shipping them off to Auschwitz was
already
> well underway. Hungary could have resisted the German pressure to hand
> over its Jews. It did so successfully for several years. The Danes helped
> their Jewish population (admittedly a much smaller percentage of their
> total population) escape to Sweden, while the Bulgarians simply refused
> point-blank to either turn theirs over to the Nazis for extermination or
> to do the job themselves. Thousands of Christian Hungarians risked their
> own lives to save those of Jewish neighbors. But thousands more willingly
> and eagerly participated in the round-ups.

We went through this discussion in considerable detail several years ago.
The reference to what happened before the German takeover relates to the
deportation of Jews who were claimed to be non permanent residents of
Hungary to beyond the then borders of Hungary into German occupied Ukraine.
Many if not most of them were exterminated by the Germans oputside Hungary.
There were no transports from Hungary to Aushwitz prior to the German
occupation. Yes there were collaborators in Hungary, in proportional
numbers to that found in many other German occupied countries. It is a
shame that unfortunately we will have to live with, as well as with the
shame of those who put on the pufajka at a later day. There is no excuse to
mistreat your fellow men for whatever economic or political reason and that
the action took place to kowtow to a foreign rule is no excuse either.

Regards,Jeliko.

Sam Stowritten:

. Postmodernism has had more of an impact on American
> intellectuals, but no further than deluding some university English
> professors into believing that their discipline is a lot more important
to
> the society and culture than it really is.

I agree if you do not restrict it only to English professors.

Regards,Jeliko

Eva Balogh writes:
> The two other deputy directors make 294.541 Fts/month. Ten directors at
the
> TV make 366,391 Fts./month and 30 heads of departments 190.000
Fts./month.
> The prime minister's salary is only 270,000 Fts./month.

>         Americans who are used to fabulous salaries of anchor men and
women
> at American tv companies might not find these figures too high. But I
think
> that these salaries should rather be compared to salaries at National
Public
> Radio or TV, where some well positioned people make no more than
> $30-40,000/year. And that in the United States and not in Hungary where a
> doctor's take-home pay is around $25,000 Fts./month.

Why should not whitchdoctors make more money than regular ones? :-)

Regards,Jeliko

Just want to call your attention to a video "N is a number: A portrait
of Paul Erdoes".  It was done by George Paul Csicsey in 1993.  I
assume (or hope) that most college or university math departments might
have a copy, as it is distributed by the Mathematical Association of America)
Elizabeth

In article >,
 says...
>
>At 08:43 AM 9/30/96 +0100, Zs. J.  wrote:
>>A.Kornai wrote:
>>
>>>While the bulk of the rounding up and deportation happened after
Germany
>>>occupied Hungary, there was already one major act of rounding up and
>>>deportation, resulting in the death of some 16,000-18,000 Jews at the
hand of
>>>the SS in August 1941, under the Ba1rdossy government. By that time,
the third
>>>Jewish Law was already in effect. This law, noted for its stringent
>>>(Nu2nberg-style) racially based measures forbid, among other things,
the
>>>marriage of Jews and non-Jews.
>>
>> Andras, do you really think it would have been possible to save all
the
>>Hungarian jews (or a large portion of them) with preserving their all
>>civil rights and without any discrimination? Among those geopolitical
>>circumstances and with a fictive ideal Hungarian government.
>
>Well, there were cases where under worse geopolitical circumstances all
the
>Jews were saved. And when the Germans ordered the wearing of the yellow
>stars, the whole country, including the royal family put it on.
>
>So, the answer is yes (as far as I am concerned).
>
>Gabor D. Farkas


I agree.  Agnes

In article >,
 says...
>
>At 04:55 PM 9/29/96 -0400, Peter Hidas wrote:
>>By the way, the
>>the gendarmes were regular police in charge of the countryside. The
regular
>>police was less involved in the presecution of the Jews and their
so-called
>>enthusiasm was never universal.
>
>        My good Internet friend, Dr. Georg Fischer from Sweden, spent
>months, until the Russians arrived, in the Budapest ghetto. According to
>him, the Budapest police actually defended the ghetto from Szalasi's
>Arrowcross troops. He says that not too many people know about this. I
keep
>urging him to record his memories of that time. I know that there are
>several oral history projects which would be very interested in what he
has
>to say.
>
>        Eva Balogh

There is a good little book about those times, written by Ibolya
Grossman: "An ordinary woman in extraordinary times"
It won a Canadian award.  I met the lady a few years ago, when I visited
the Holocaust exhibition where she was a volunteer.  Of course, in 2
seconds we discovered each others strong Hungarian accent, and when she
introduced herself, I realized she was the author of the book.  As it
turned out, we were neighbours in the ghetto.

Agnes

At 7:32 PM 9/29/96,  wrote:

>In what is stated appears that some major part 20%? 30%? 40%?
>of the population not only hated the Jews but they wanted them
>exterminated. This is something that I have difficulty comprehending.
>
>
>What was the cause of that degree of deadly hatred of the race
>that give so much to Hungary staring so early in its history.
>To what degree that hatred was incited, to what degree was
>imposed internally and externally. These are questions rarely
>expressed on this group and questions newer answered to my comprehension.
>
>I read recently heated debate about the motivations of the
>Romanian Holocaust on the Romanian group.
>
>
>Albert Albu

How do you measure deadly hatred? What makes you think that a significant
proportion of the Hungarians wanted to see the Jews dead in the early 1940s
or any time? The Jewish scholar Raphael Patai in his recently published
book THE JEWS OF HUNGARY; HISTORY, CULTURE, PSCHOLOGY (Detroit: Wayne State
University, 1996) writes that in the middle ages the kings of Hungary
protected their Jewish subjects. Most of the anti-Jewish agitation at that
time eminated from German city-dwellers and the representatives of the
pope. Many Jews who were persecuted in Germany, especially during the times
of the Crusades, and the ones who were persecuted in Russia, often found
safety in Hungary. The liberals of the nineteenth century also had little
trouble with the Jews. In 1848 the German citizens of Budapest embarassed
the revolutionaries with their pogrom. The Jewish elite allied itself with
the ruling gentry and aristocracy between 1849 and 1918. Hungarian
anti-Semitism only began to bloom after the First World War.

Peter I. Hidas
Montreal

In article
>,
 says...
>
>God gave life..Only God can take it away!
>SUICIDE is against ALL that God has planned.
>It is wrong...in fact it is also against the law.
>
That's the Judeo-Christian belief.  There are other cultures where
suicide is not only accepted, but considered honourable - like in Japan.
Also, it is quite natural in many tribal cultures.

Agnes
>On Sun, 29 Sep 1996, Lon Roberts wrote:
>
>> SUBJECT: SUICIDE
>>                   Suicide is an opening to another dimension of
>> overwhelming happiness and the departure from a place of hostility and
>> pain,to a place of tranquility and everlasting joy.This place I'm
>> referring to is called another World far from this one.This
paradisical
>> World I talk about only gives everlasting peace and the blissfulness
of a
>> mystical wonderland of intrigue and euphoria,so lets give our hearts
out
>> to those people who will someday be in the bossom of the Father.We
must
>> not lament on their passing,but know they are now with the Father of
love.
>>

At 05:44 AM 9/29/96 -0400, Sam Stowe, in an attempt to cheer up Andy Kozma,
wrote:

>Andy, you're a man out of your time. As late as the 1950s, comedy based on
>ethnic stereotyping was still acceptable in the U.S. But the social
>upheaval of the 1960s has changed all that. You no longer have to confine
>yourself to playing the insular, smug Canadian. I don't know how you'll
>deal with this newfound freedom. Ask Joe Szalai -- he may have some useful
>ideas.
>Sam Stowe
>
>P.S. -- I hear they're redesigning the U.S. flag to make room for the new
>stars that'll have to be added when Ontario and every province to the west
>petition for admission to the Union.

Sam, are you dipping into Albert's medication?  Give your head a good shake,
man.  Americans don't understand Canadians at all!  We're much more than a
country of Mounted Police and queens, you know.  Besides "manifest destiny"
was last centuries brain candy.  Why are you trying to upset Andy?

Joe Szalai

At 05:40 AM 9/29/96 -0400, Sam Stowe wrote:

>In article >, Joe Szalai
> writes:
>
>>
>>Thank you for your post, Aniko.  To show my appreciation for your candor,
>>I'm going to take your name off that list right away.
>>
>>Joe Szalai
>>
>>"Leave the personal insults, vindictiveness and ugliness to Szalai and
>>me.  We're trained professionals."
>>              Sam Stowe
>>
>>
>
>Szalai, if you change this sig anytime in the near future, it will be
>difficult for me to forgive you.
>Sam Stowe
>
>"The true champion of justice, if he intends to survive
>even for a short time, must necessarily confine
>himself to private life and leave politics alone."
>-- Plato, "Apology"

Which sig are you talking about, Sam?  Yours, or the one you credit to
Plato?  I say "credit to" because I believe that it wasn't Plato who said
those words, but your hero, Ross Perot.

Joe Szalai

"Which one of the three candidates would you want your daughter to marry?"
           H. Ross Perot

At 11:47 AM 9/30/96 -0400, Peter I. Hidas wrote:

>The Danes saved their Jews but it is a myth that their king wore
>the star of David.

The Italians have a nice saying: Si non e vero, e bene trovato (if it is not
true, it still fits). I sincerely wish, that a similar myth could be
attributed to a Hungarian head of state.

Gabor D. Farkas

In article >, Andy Kozma
> writes:

>Most of you had the great fortune to study on this continent,so naturaly
you
>must have a higher educationthen me.I learned from life,newspapers,tv
etc,to
>read and write english,and to speak as well as I do.

I think you got a PhD along the way. There are a lot of folks with a lot
more formal education than you who aren't nearly as sharp as you are.

>By the way Plato did not predict a new flag for the States,and as far as
I
>am concerned we are quite happy to live in this Country,and ahve the
>pleasure to watch all the good american chanels,especialy the football
games.

I wish the Canadian Football League had not tried to expand into the U.S.
I miss watching the CFL, though. We used to get it on cable when I was a
teenager in Wyoming. That reminds me -- we need to get a thread going on
the Hungarian connection to the National...Football...League (Da, da, da,
da!)  And, of course Plato never predicted a new flag for the States.
You're thinking of Nostradamus ("Then shall the land of the snowy
socialist librarian writhe under the baleful eye of the Newt..." --
Quatrain CCCXIII).

>I don't think our affiliation to the ever loved States will happen,even
if
>Quebec dumies would like to separate.

I bet they'll let you carry the Stars and Stripes in the Fourth of July
parade in your town a year or two from now if you'll ask nicely. And
"dummies" should be in French in letters at least three point sizes larger
than the English word. You risk being flamed by Joe Szalai if you don't.
This Hungarian thing of his is merely a cover to disguise his French
ancestry and whole-hearted allegiance to the PQ.

>You know hwo it is:as long life is good,you might think you will have a
>better one.No way Hose.
>Regards:Andy.

Agreed, bubba.
Sam Stowe

"The true champion of justice, if he intends to survive
even for a short time, must necessarily confine
himself to private life and leave politics alone."
-- Plato, "Apology"

A.Kornai wrote:

>While the bulk of the rounding up and deportation happened after Germany
>occupied Hungary, there was already one major act of rounding up and
>deportation, resulting in the death of some 16,000-18,000 Jews at the hand of
>the SS in August 1941, under the Ba1rdossy government. By that time, the third
>Jewish Law was already in effect. This law, noted for its stringent
>(Nu2nberg-style) racially based measures forbid, among other things, the
>marriage of Jews and non-Jews.

 Andras, do you really think it would have been possible to save all the
Hungarian jews (or a large portion of them) with preserving their all
civil rights and without any discrimination? Among those geopolitical
circumstances and with a fictive ideal Hungarian government.

J.Zs

G.D.Farkas wrote:

>>The Danes saved their Jews but it is a myth that their king wore
>>the star of David.
>
>The Italians have a nice saying: Si non e vero, e bene trovato (if it is not
>true, it still fits). I sincerely wish, that a similar myth could be
>attributed to a Hungarian head of state.
>
>Gabor D. Farkas

Myth can be created and destroyed, the only thing you need good journalists
and organized campaigns.

J.Zs