In article >,
 says...
>
>aheringer > wrote
>Istvan:
>> >Biztos, azt akarod hogy, oreg, alacsony, kopasz, kover, magyarok
legioja
>> >irkaljon neked leveleket?
>> >Istvan
>> >
>Agnes:
>> En is alacsony vagyok, oreg es kover (nem kopasz).  Nem akarok
>> hozzamenni felesegul.  De bar mindenki ugy gondolkodna ahogy Dominus.

>> Sokkal intelligensebben valaszolt, mint ahogy en valaha is meg tudnam
>> fogalmazni a mondanivalomat - ezert nem is valaszoltam a maga
>> provokaciojara - Dominus valaszolt helyettem es nagyon halas vagyok
erte.
>> Agnes
>
>Akkor minden rendbe van mert nekem is tetszettek Dominus levelei.  Talan
o
>nem is oreg, alacsony, kopasz, meg kover.  Kulonben is, en nagyon boldog
>hazas vagyok (a felesegem itt al mogottem es mondta, hogy ezt irjam), es
>nem tudom megkerni felesegul.  Talan Dominus?
>Istvan

En sem vagyok venkisasszony....

Agnes

Dear Helen,

What you can do is write, write and write. Best regards: Bela bacsi

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

The Honorable Al Gore
Vice President of the United States
The White House
Washington, D.C. 20001
(E-Mail: 

Dear Mr. Vice President,

On the 21st of August, 1993, you wrote to professor Bela Liptak about your
concern for the Danube ecosystem. Today, mankind is approaching an important
precedent: On the 3rd of March, 1997 the International Court of Justice will
start the first international environmental lawsuit in The Hague.
       The ICJ will decide a case involving the Danube and the destruction of
its ancient wetland region: the Szigetkoz. This name, losely translated,
means:  The region of a thousand islands,  yet today there is not a single
island left there, because the water is gone. Still, the implications of this
case go beyond the future of just one river or just the 400 endangered
species of one ancient ecosystem.
      This lawsuit will set a precedent for the whole planet and will answer
a much more basic question:  Do national governments have the right to do as
they please with our ecosystems, or does mankind as a whole have a right to
protect the rich natural treasures, which belong to all of us?
      Mr. Vice President, in 1995, nine international environmental NGOs have
submitted a memorial to ICJ, which its president, the Honorable Mohammed
Bedjaoui has accepted. A Compromise Plan was also submitted to the Court,
which would guarantee the restoration of the ancient Szigetkoz wetlands,
together with fulfilling the water- supply, shipping and energy needs of the
region. For details of this plan and for other aspects of the lawsuit, please
ask Bela Liptak or visit the web-site at: http://www.goodpoint.com/duna.htm
      Dear Mr. Gore. It is very important that the first international
environmental lawsuit be given the attention it deserves by the media. The
Foundation to Protect the Hungarian Environment can inform you of the
details. A statement by you, can guarantee that attention. Please make that
statement.

Respectfully yours,

Your name, title and address

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
The Honorable Stephen Schwebel
President of the International Court of Justice
Carnegieplein 2, 2517 KJ,
Den Haag
The Netherlands
FAX:  011-31-70-3649-928

Dear Mr. President:

Congratulations on your well-deserved appointment as the new
President of the International Court of Justice.  Your professional
background is sure to further increase the reputation of the Court.

This month, for the first time in history, your Court will decide on
an environmental lawsuit which affects all humankind.  In ruling on
the future of the Danube in the dispute between Hungary and Slovakia,
you and your fellow judges can set a precedent by ruling that rivers,
forests, and oceans are not the sole properties of nations, that
nations do not have the right to destroy unique ecosystems.

The ecosystem of the Szigetkoz is dying due to the tragic drop in
groundwater level which is caused by the rerouting of the Danube. This
region, which was the oxygen supply of the Danube, has been destroyed
because the lung of the river (the wetland region) has been cut out.
Shipping on the Danube has suffered because of flimsy construction and
because the dam is not designed to handle ice.  Most importantly, the
population of the region is in physical danger and two-thirds of the
populations of Dobrohost, Vojka and Bodiky have already fled.

The Foundation to Protect the Hungarian Environment has submitted to
the Court a Compromise Plan to return the Danube into its natural
riverbed.  I hope and trust that the Court will save the ecosystem of
the Szigetkoz by giving this Compromise Plan serious consideration as
it makes its historic ruling.

Respectfully,

your name, address, title

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

The Honorable Madeleine Albright
United States Secretary of State
United States Department of State
Washington, DC 20520
( E-Mail:  )

RE: First Environmental Lawsuit (Danube) in The Hague

Dear Madame Secretary,

Please accept my congratulations on your well deserved appointment, which to
us Americans with Central European roots gives a special ray of hope. We hope
for even greater American understanding and compassion for the people of
Central Europe, for their progress and stability.

Madame Secretary, you now have a great opportunity to set a new tone for
American policy in connection with the Danube lawsuit, which is beginning
next week in the Hague. This new tone would be  consistent with the US policy
of expanding Western structures to Central and Eastern Europe, and to engage
the US more actively in helping resolve emerging inter-country conflicts in
the Region by (i) urging your West European partners to assist more
pro-actively; and (ii) calling on both parties (Hungary and Slovakia) to
accept the Compromise Plan prepared by the environmental NGOs and thereby
cooperate in the quest for a solution that can set an example for the future.

Your help in resolving the Danube problem would also be consistent with the
present US policy based on a global approach to environmental issues and on
seeking to mobilize all relevant political (multilateral, international,
non-governmental and civic society) forces to assist in avoiding
environmental catastrophes caused by bilateral agreements that had been drawn
up by non-representative governments under a regional policy framework which
was imposed by Moscow.

Therefore please exert your influence on the outcome of the first
international environmental lawsuit in human history. You would not be
interfering in the operation of the International Court of Justice, but would
be fulfilling an American obligation by so doing. This is, because it was the
Paris Peace Treaty which set the border between Czechoslovakia and Hungary
and it was that  Treaty which named the Great Powers as the guarantors of the
integrity of the two nation's territories. The Treaty also stated that the
two nations DO NOT have the right to make changes, unless the Great Powers
first approve of the change. Yet in 1977, under Soviet direction, the two
nations signed a contract to move the Danube, previously their border river,
into an artificial canal on Slovak territory. For so doing, they did not ask,
 nor did they receive the approval of the Great Powers.

Madame Secretary. The International Court of Justice must be advised that the
Moscow initiated 1977 Contract was and is INHERENTLY INVALID, because it is
in conflict with the Paris Peace Treaty. It is both the legal obligation and
the moral duty of the United States to fulfill her role as a guarantor of the
Paris Peace Treaty. Even more importantly, it is in the interest of the
United States to make sure that the Danube is returned into its riverbed and
thereby the stability of the region is maintained.

Madame Secretary, a single statement from you will resolve this issue. Please
make that statement.

Respectfully yours,

Your name, address, title








---------------------
Forwarded message:
From:    (Adam Barsby)
To:     
Date: 97-03-18 20:28:29 EST

Dear Professor Liptak,

I just wanted to let you know that I was extremely impressed by your pages
of
information on the Danube wetlands on the Internet. My father informed me
about it by reading the Hungarian paper in Toronto. I am appalled at the
damage which the diversion of water has created as well as the lack of
belief in sovereignty exercised by Slovakia. I must inform you that I was
quite ignorant of this occurence and this applies as well to the university
where I am attending at present. If there is anything I can do to exert my
concern to the cause, please do not hesitate to contact me. I will be
writing to my Member of Parliament to find out what is occurring.

Thank you for informing me of such a grave yet important topic for the
repurcussions are immense.

Sincerely,

Helen Szabo-Barsby

Dear Helen,

What you can do is write, write and write. Best regards: Bela bacsi

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

The Honorable Al Gore
Vice President of the United States
The White House
Washington, D.C. 20001
(E-Mail: 

Dear Mr. Vice President, 

On the 21st of August, 1993, you wrote to professor Bela Liptak about your
concern for the Danube ecosystem. Today, mankind is approaching an important
precedent: On the 3rd of March, 1997 the International Court of Justice will
start the first international environmental lawsuit in The Hague.
       The ICJ will decide a case involving the Danube and the destruction of
its ancient wetland region: the Szigetkoz. This name, losely translated,
means:  The region of a thousand islands,  yet today there is not a single
island left there, because the water is gone. Still, the implications of this
case go beyond the future of just one river or just the 400 endangered
species of one ancient ecosystem.
      This lawsuit will set a precedent for the whole planet and will answer
a much more basic question:  Do national governments have the right to do as
they please with our ecosystems, or does mankind as a whole have a right to
protect the rich natural treasures, which belong to all of us?
      Mr. Vice President, in 1995, nine international environmental NGOs have
submitted a memorial to ICJ, which its president, the Honorable Mohammed
Bedjaoui has accepted. A Compromise Plan was also submitted to the Court,
which would guarantee the restoration of the ancient Szigetkoz wetlands,
together with fulfilling the water- supply, shipping and energy needs of the
region. For details of this plan and for other aspects of the lawsuit, please
ask Bela Liptak or visit the web-site at: http://www.goodpoint.com/duna.htm
      Dear Mr. Gore. It is very important that the first international
environmental lawsuit be given the attention it deserves by the media. The
Foundation to Protect the Hungarian Environment can inform you of the
details. A statement by you, can guarantee that attention. Please make that
statement.

Respectfully yours,

Your name, title and address

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
The Honorable Stephen Schwebel
President of the International Court of Justice
Carnegieplein 2, 2517 KJ,
Den Haag
The Netherlands
FAX:  011-31-70-3649-928

Dear Mr. President:

Congratulations on your well-deserved appointment as the new
President of the International Court of Justice.  Your professional
background is sure to further increase the reputation of the Court.

This month, for the first time in history, your Court will decide on
an environmental lawsuit which affects all humankind.  In ruling on
the future of the Danube in the dispute between Hungary and Slovakia,
you and your fellow judges can set a precedent by ruling that rivers,
forests, and oceans are not the sole properties of nations, that
nations do not have the right to destroy unique ecosystems.

The ecosystem of the Szigetkoz is dying due to the tragic drop in
groundwater level which is caused by the rerouting of the Danube. This
region, which was the oxygen supply of the Danube, has been destroyed
because the lung of the river (the wetland region) has been cut out.
Shipping on the Danube has suffered because of flimsy construction and
because the dam is not designed to handle ice.  Most importantly, the
population of the region is in physical danger and two-thirds of the
populations of Dobrohost, Vojka and Bodiky have already fled.

The Foundation to Protect the Hungarian Environment has submitted to
the Court a Compromise Plan to return the Danube into its natural
riverbed.  I hope and trust that the Court will save the ecosystem of
the Szigetkoz by giving this Compromise Plan serious consideration as
it makes its historic ruling.

Respectfully,

your name, address, title

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

The Honorable Madeleine Albright
United States Secretary of State
United States Department of State
Washington, DC 20520
( E-Mail:  )

RE: First Environmental Lawsuit (Danube) in The Hague

Dear Madame Secretary,

Please accept my congratulations on your well deserved appointment, which to
us Americans with Central European roots gives a special ray of hope. We hope
for even greater American understanding and compassion for the people of
Central Europe, for their progress and stability.

Madame Secretary, you now have a great opportunity to set a new tone for
American policy in connection with the Danube lawsuit, which is beginning
next week in the Hague. This new tone would be  consistent with the US policy
of expanding Western structures to Central and Eastern Europe, and to engage
the US more actively in helping resolve emerging inter-country conflicts in
the Region by (i) urging your West European partners to assist more
pro-actively; and (ii) calling on both parties (Hungary and Slovakia) to
accept the Compromise Plan prepared by the environmental NGOs and thereby
cooperate in the quest for a solution that can set an example for the future.
           
Your help in resolving the Danube problem would also be consistent with the
present US policy based on a global approach to environmental issues and on
seeking to mobilize all relevant political (multilateral, international,
non-governmental and civic society) forces to assist in avoiding
environmental catastrophes caused by bilateral agreements that had been drawn
up by non-representative governments under a regional policy framework which
was imposed by Moscow.
           
Therefore please exert your influence on the outcome of the first
international environmental lawsuit in human history. You would not be
interfering in the operation of the International Court of Justice, but would
be fulfilling an American obligation by so doing. This is, because it was the
Paris Peace Treaty which set the border between Czechoslovakia and Hungary
and it was that  Treaty which named the Great Powers as the guarantors of the
integrity of the two nation's territories. The Treaty also stated that the
two nations DO NOT have the right to make changes, unless the Great Powers
first approve of the change. Yet in 1977, under Soviet direction, the two
nations signed a contract to move the Danube, previously their border river,
into an artificial canal on Slovak territory. For so doing, they did not ask,
 nor did they receive the approval of the Great Powers.

Madame Secretary. The International Court of Justice must be advised that the
Moscow initiated 1977 Contract was and is INHERENTLY INVALID, because it is
in conflict with the Paris Peace Treaty. It is both the legal obligation and
the moral duty of the United States to fulfill her role as a guarantor of the
Paris Peace Treaty. Even more importantly, it is in the interest of the
United States to make sure that the Danube is returned into its riverbed and
thereby the stability of the region is maintained. 

Madame Secretary, a single statement from you will resolve this issue. Please
make that statement.

Respectfully yours, 

Your name, address, title








---------------------
Forwarded message:
From:	 (Adam Barsby)
To:	
Date: 97-03-18 20:28:29 EST

Dear Professor Liptak,

I just wanted to let you know that I was extremely impressed by your pages
of
information on the Danube wetlands on the Internet. My father informed me
about it by reading the Hungarian paper in Toronto. I am appalled at the
damage which the diversion of water has created as well as the lack of
belief in sovereignty exercised by Slovakia. I must inform you that I was
quite ignorant of this occurence and this applies as well to the university
where I am attending at present. If there is anything I can do to exert my
concern to the cause, please do not hesitate to contact me. I will be
writing to my Member of Parliament to find out what is occurring.

Thank you for informing me of such a grave yet important topic for the
repurcussions are immense.

Sincerely,

Helen Szabo-Barsby

****************** CALL FOR ACTION ****************

Priority:
  Normal

Background:
   The International Court of Justice has elected a new President,
Stephen Schwebel, professor of law at The Johns Hopkins University in
America.  Since the new President probably does not know the details
about the upcoming Danube lawsuit yet, it is important that we inform
him.  It is likely that the new President would be receptive to a
letter campaign.
   We have to convince President Schwebel about the Compromise
Plan proposed by Bela Liptak and environmental organizations. This
plan ensures the survival of the Danube Wetlands.

What to do:
   Please send a letter to the new President of the World Court,
Stephen Schwebel.  Ask him to rule in favor of the environment; that
is, to consider the Compromise Plan.  Feel free to use the sample
letter below.  Unfortunately we do not have the e-mail address. Please
do not hesitate to send him a fax.  EVERY FAX IS IMPORTANT!!! PLEASE
ACT!! ASK YOUR FRIENDS TO JOIN YOUR REQUEST!!
   Fax number:  ++31-70-3649-928

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<date>

The Honorable Stephen Schwebel
President of the International Court of Justice
Carnegieplein 2, 2517 KJ,
Den Haag
The Netherlands
FAX: ++31-70-3649-928

Dear Mr. President:

Congratulations on your well-deserved appointment as the new
President of the International Court of Justice.  Your professional
background is sure to further increase the reputation of the Court.

This year, for the first time in history, your Court will decide on
an environmental lawsuit which affects all humankind.  In ruling on
the future of the Danube in the dispute between Hungary and Slovakia,
you and your fellow judges can set a precedent by ruling that rivers,
forests, and oceans are not the sole properties of nations, that
nations do not have the right to destroy unique ecosystems.

The ecosystem of the Szigetkoz is dying due to the tragic drop in
groundwater level which is caused by the rerouting of the Danube. This
region, which was the oxygen supply of the Danube, has been destroyed
because the lung of the river (the wetland region) has been cut out.
Shipping on the Danube has suffered because of flimsy construction and
because the dam is not designed to handle ice.  Most importantly, the
population of the region is in physical danger and two-thirds of the
populations of Dobrohost, Vojka and Bodiky have already fled.

The Foundation to Protect the Hungarian Environment has submitted to
the Court a Compromise Plan to return the Danube into its natural
riverbed.  I hope and trust that the Court will save the ecosystem of
the Szigetkoz by giving this Compromise Plan serious consideration as
it makes its historic ruling.

Respectfully,

<name, title, address>

****************** CALL FOR ACTION ****************

Priority:
  Normal

Background:
   The International Court of Justice has elected a new President,
Stephen Schwebel, professor of law at The Johns Hopkins University in
America.  Since the new President probably does not know the details
about the upcoming Danube lawsuit yet, it is important that we inform
him.  It is likely that the new President would be receptive to a
letter campaign.
   We have to convince President Schwebel about the Compromise
Plan proposed by Bela Liptak and environmental organizations. This
plan ensures the survival of the Danube Wetlands.

What to do:
   Please send a letter to the new President of the World Court,
Stephen Schwebel.  Ask him to rule in favor of the environment; that
is, to consider the Compromise Plan.  Feel free to use the sample
letter below.  Unfortunately we do not have the e-mail address. Please
do not hesitate to send him a fax.  EVERY FAX IS IMPORTANT!!! PLEASE
ACT!! ASK YOUR FRIENDS TO JOIN YOUR REQUEST!!
   Fax number:  ++31-70-3649-928

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<date>

The Honorable Stephen Schwebel
President of the International Court of Justice
Carnegieplein 2, 2517 KJ,
Den Haag
The Netherlands
FAX: ++31-70-3649-928

Dear Mr. President:

Congratulations on your well-deserved appointment as the new
President of the International Court of Justice.  Your professional
background is sure to further increase the reputation of the Court.

This year, for the first time in history, your Court will decide on
an environmental lawsuit which affects all humankind.  In ruling on
the future of the Danube in the dispute between Hungary and Slovakia,
you and your fellow judges can set a precedent by ruling that rivers,
forests, and oceans are not the sole properties of nations, that
nations do not have the right to destroy unique ecosystems.

The ecosystem of the Szigetkoz is dying due to the tragic drop in
groundwater level which is caused by the rerouting of the Danube. This
region, which was the oxygen supply of the Danube, has been destroyed
because the lung of the river (the wetland region) has been cut out.
Shipping on the Danube has suffered because of flimsy construction and
because the dam is not designed to handle ice.  Most importantly, the
population of the region is in physical danger and two-thirds of the
populations of Dobrohost, Vojka and Bodiky have already fled.

The Foundation to Protect the Hungarian Environment has submitted to
the Court a Compromise Plan to return the Danube into its natural
riverbed.  I hope and trust that the Court will save the ecosystem of
the Szigetkoz by giving this Compromise Plan serious consideration as
it makes its historic ruling.

Respectfully,

<name, title, address>

Hi Everyone!

Just thought, that I'd drop a few lines for the fun of it all:-)

I get back from being away, and there are over 300 messages to download; -
once I am here, there are none!  This is about the third time I've
experienced this - save over xmas when we were all too aware that it was
hardware related .... which still leaves two other times to knaw at my pea
brain.  So ... what's going on?  Is everyone allergic to my "being back" or
have we all simply ran out of things to say?  Or are we all burried in
taxes at this time?  Why the eerie silence?

Just wondering, and missing ya 'all
Aniko

At 07:26 PM 3/18/97 -0400, Joe Szalaiwrote, quoting me:

>>        I don't know how many times we have to repeat it that although 40
>>million people are not insured they are receiving medical treatment gratis
>>from the hospitals. If they didn't American vital statistics wouldn't be
>>practically identical to the Canadian ones. Hospitals therefore must charge
>>more the treatment of those who are insured.
>
>Hmmm.  Sounds a bit like slipping money to the doctor for 'better' and/or
>'faster' service.  In Hungary it's called a bribe.  In America it's called
>private insurance.  The result is the same.  Those who have money get
>better, preferential treatment, and those who don't, don't.  How humane!

        I really wonder how your mind works because what you just wrote
above makes no sense whatsover. Or, rather, I have no idea how you came to
that conclusion from what I wrote.
        Let me try again. Hospitals can't lose money indefinitely. They
would go under otherwise. They perform gratis medical care for those who
have no insurance. Gratis, as you know, means free. In order to break even
the hospitals must charge more than otherwise they would for services
rendered. If all people had insurance the stay in the hospital for
"everybody" would be less. But as it is, services cost much more than they
should be because the hospitals are carrying the burden of all those people
who are uninsured. Thus, we, who are insured, pay higher premiums than we
would if all people were contributing. Is this so terribly difficult to
understand? Or is this has anything to do with slipping money to the doctor
for better and faster service? Bribing? You must be outright crazy to
compare the two situations!!

>In a previous post you also mentioned that Canada is having problems with
>the health care system because some doctors are leaving Canada for the
>States.  Yes, that's true.  However, I have little sympathy for those
>professionals who aren't happy with a quarter million dollars per year in
>Canada and go to the States for even bigger bucks.  The way I see it,
>Americans aren't getting better health care from these professionals.
>They're just getting more expensive doctors.

        Did I say that I like this system? No, in fact, I said the opposite.
I don't think that doctors should be as much money as they do make. However,
it is a fact of life that if Canadian doctors feel that they could make more
money next door, they will go next door, especially since they have no
language problems. It is simply selling the house in Canada and buying a new
one in the United States. Most likely a bigger and better one and making a
great deal more money. That's human nature.
        Eva

At 11:57 PM 3/19/97 +0100, Magda Zimanyi wrote:

> Richard P. Feynman (1918-1988) was a Nobel prize winner in physics.
>The book contains autobiographical stories from the life of Feynman
>told in first person singular.
>
> On pages 30-33. one can read as follows:
>
> "I was the best in sicence, the best in Mathematics, the best in
>physics, and the best in chemistry [at school]. [...]
>
> My mother reassured Dr. Augsberry [math teacher of R. Feynman]:  'We
>are saving money as best we can, and we're trying to send him to
>Columbia or MIT.' [...]
>
>After that summer I went away to college at MIT. (I couldn't go to
>Columbia because of the Jewish quota. *)"
>
>There is a footnote in the book to explain what the quota system was:
>
> "Note for foreign readers: the quota system was a discriminatory
>practice of limiting the number of places in a university available to
>students of Jewish background."
>
>As Feynman was born in 1918 all this happened about 1936-38.
>
>I can recommend to everybody to read the book. Feynman was an
>extraordinary personality and the book is a fascinating reading.

        Maybe Richard Feynman was actually lucky!! No, I am just kidding, of
course, but most likely MIT gave him a better science education than
Columbia would have. Plus, he could get away from home this way!
        As I mentioned some of the Ivy League School had such a
policy--never written down, of course. I would say that Columbia was even
more discriminatory against Jewish students than other Ivy League schools
for the simple reason that Columbia is situated in New York City. Columbia
considered itself a "national school" and if they let in every bright, even
brilliant, Jewish students from Manhattan and the five boroughs into
Columbia the school would have stopped being a national school but would
have been considered a local Jewish school.
        The fact is, of course, that there are many, many considerations
when it comes to admission to some of the best schools in this country. I
will talk about Yale University, simply because I know that school best.
Moreover, I was on the Admission Committee one year and therefore I have
first-hand knowledge about the process. As I mentioned a place like Yale
considers itself to be a national school but the fact is that we could have
filled the whole freshman class just from Connecticut, Massachusetts, and
New York. Not once but twice over. Yale has only 1,300 places to fill each
year and the Admissions Committee thinks in terms of the whole country. And
in addition to the whole country there is the world. For example, I am happy
to announce that one of the three top students two years ago at Yale was a
Hungarian girl who is at MIT at the moment as a graduate student!! Fantastic
achievement it was! I was really, really exicted because I know what it takes!!
        So, there is geography. Then there is the Yale Symphony and the Yale
Band. The college needs a tuba player, or a trumpet player! And there are
the sports: the football coach will have a list and the hockey coach will
have a list. Then, there are the ethnic groups: the Admissions Committee
would like to see some well-qualified blacks, for example, and surely, they
don't want a class which is comprised only Japanese or Chinese Americans!
Then they are men versus women. The catchword is: balance. To have a class
in which you find people interested in math, interested in music, interested
in literature, people who might want to go to graduate school, or might want
to go to law school, or might want to go to medical school. Interesting
people, not just smart people.
        Eva Balogh

Interjecting a conversation here between Joe Sz. and E. Balogh
Snipping some; responding to some;

E. Balogh says, in response to a snipped comment from Joe Sz.

>        Did I say that I like this system? No, in fact, I said the opposite.
>I don't think that doctors should be as much money as they do make. However,
>it is a fact of life that if Canadian doctors feel that they could make more
>money next door, they will go next door, especially since they have no
>language problems. It is simply selling the house in Canada and buying a new
>one in the United States. Most likely a bigger and better one and making a
>great deal more money. That's human nature.
>        Eva

Eva:

While for some doctors your synopsis is likely true to the word, there is
also another point to consider:

A fairly close acquaintance of ours has recently moved to the States.  When
scrutinized for his move by the locals, he had but a few things to say.  In
summary:  He is facing a student loan in excess of $50K Can.  He is
earning, 35K Can and is working 16+ hours a day.  He has a family of three
to support.  His earnings simply cannot cover this student loan, his
insurance fees, rented home and his extremely modest living standards.  In
this instance, a doctor and his family simply migrated to the States, in
order so that they can faster rid themselves of debts incurred just trying
to become a doctor.

Many locals have the philosophy that since the *government* funded his
education through student loans, he *owes* the country.  He prefers to look
at it in such a way, that until he's able to pay back the government, the
people have a legit gripe.  And as such, he has made a decision to pay back
that, which he feels he owes likely at a faster rate than he could by
remaining in this homeland.

The way I see it; neither his lifestyle or his income will be any greater
by the decision to move south of the border.  Initially, only the speed of
which he pays back his debts is increased through the move.  When one looks
at that in this light, one begins to wonder as to who is actually letting
who down?

Just another perspective.  Regards,
Aniko

>

In article >, Janos
Zsargo > writes:

>As far as I know, not only there was no attack on US shipping or on US Navy,
>but Hitler and Donitz prohibited any such attempt. There was
>however a strong offensive on US shipping after Pearl Harbor (~January 1942).
>It was called 'the second happy time' by the germans, referring to their easy
>hunting on British shipping before the convoy system was fully established.
>The US was completly unprepared for submarine warfare. There were no convoys,
>no radio silence, no adequate costal defence, etc. Of course the 'happy time'
>did not last long.
>
>J.Zs
>
>

Dan van der Wat has about the best history of the Atlantic Campaign of any I've
read recently. I can't locate my copy, so I may have to voyage to the library
and peruse theirs. It seems like I
remember the Germans were sinking shipping off the southern coast of the U.S.
prior to Pearl Harbor. I wish George Szaszvari were currently with us because
he could assuredly provide us with a
definitive answer.
Sam Stowe
LookedAtNewGroups 0
NewsrcVersion 4
NumConnect 2
NumEmails 0
TotalConnect 3401

1 858811541 0 0 alt.binaries.erotica:
1 858811541 0 0 alt.binaries.erotica.fetish:
1 858811541 0 0 alt.binaries.multimedia.erotica:
1 858811541 0 0 alt.binaries.nude.celebrit

"If you hear a Southerner say, 'Hey, y'all, watch this!',
move away from him immediately. They're usually
the last words he'll ever utter..."
-- from "Southbound," a primer for our Northern friends
contemplating a move to the promised land.

Ma temettek Sima'ndy Jozsefet...

Delelott 10 orakor az Operahaz elocsarnokaban felallitott ravatalnal
muveszetenek tiszteloi rottak le kegyeletuket a kiemelkedo opera- es
oratoriumenekes elott. Az Operahaz orokos tagjatol  Szineta'r Miklos
es Melis Gyorgy bucsuzott.

Delutan 2-kor a Farkasreti temeto ravatalozoja elotti bagyadt
marciusi napsutesben tobbezer gyaszolo hallgatta nagy figyelemmel Lipp
Laszlo atya megemlekezo es vigasztalo szavait. (Sima'ndy Jozsef
eletenek utolso szakaszaban a gazdagreti katolikus kozosseg tagja
volt, amelynek pasztora Laszlo atya, a Szomszedok c. televizios
sorozat es a radioban elhangzo Vasarnapi Ujsag rendszeres szereploje.)
Megemlekezeseben kiemelte: az elhunyt nemcsak kiemelkedo es
lelkiismeretes muvesz volt, hanem melyen hivo es hazajat  szereto
ember is.

Mikozben a temeto muveszek szamara fenntartott parcellajaban vegso
nyugalomra  helyeztek, balatonfelvideki baratai es cserkesztestverei
bucsuztak tole. Palyatarsait itt az Operahaz korusa kepviselte Bach
gyonyoruseges "Herzlich tut mich verlangen" (BVW 244) koraljanak
szivet melengeto eloadasaval.

A temetesi szertartas utan a farkasreti kapolnat zsufolasig megtolto
hivek elott Laszlo atya tobb paptarsaval egyutt szentmiset mutatott be
Sima'ndy Jozsef lelki udveert. Orgonan Gergely Ferenc jatszott.

Sima'ndy Jozsef azon ismerosei, baratai es hodoloi, akik az operahazi
ravatalnal, a temetesen vagy az azt koveto szentmisen nem tudtak reszt
venni, es kegyeletuket le szeretnek roni, megtehetik ezt csutortokon,
marcius 20-an 20 orakor a budavari Matyas templomban, ahol gyaszmiset
tartanak az elhunyt lelki udveert. A misen a templom enek- es zenekara
Tardy Laszlo vezetesevel es az Operahaz szolistainak kozremukodesevel
Mozart Requiemjet adja elo.

GJ

There was some debate a few days ago about the numerus clausus in the
U.S. in the thirties. Here is a contribution to this topic.

An excerpt from the book

"What Do You Care What Other People Think?"
Further Adventures of a Curious Character
Richard P. Feynman
as told to Ralph Leighton,
W.W. Norton&Company
New York, London, 1988

 Richard P. Feynman (1918-1988) was a Nobel prize winner in physics.
The book contains autobiographical stories from the life of Feynman
told in first person singular.

 On pages 30-33. one can read as follows:

 "I was the best in sicence, the best in Mathematics, the best in
physics, and the best in chemistry [at school]. [...]

 My mother reassured Dr. Augsberry [math teacher of R. Feynman]:  'We
are saving money as best we can, and we're trying to send him to
Columbia or MIT.' [...]

After that summer I went away to college at MIT. (I couldn't go to
Columbia because of the Jewish quota. *)"

There is a footnote in the book to explain what the quota system was:

 "Note for foreign readers: the quota system was a discriminatory
practice of limiting the number of places in a university available to
students of Jewish background."

As Feynman was born in 1918 all this happened about 1936-38.

I can recommend to everybody to read the book. Feynman was an
extraordinary personality and the book is a fascinating reading.

 Best regards

 Magdolna Zimanyi
 KFKI Research Institute for Particle  Phone: +36-1-395-9242
 and Nuclear Physics                   FAX:   +36-1-395-9151
 Computer Networking Center            E-mail: 
 H-1525 Budapest 114, POB. 49, Hungary URL: http://www.kfki.hu/~mzimanyi
 -----------------------------------------------------------------------