[Misc] If you accidently solve a murder that happened in a foreign country, what do you do?

[maltaseagull]

Ok here is the scenario, strictly hypothetical of course.

Lets say that 20+ years ago a journalist was murdered in some country in Eastern Europe. Like... Hungary.

12 years ago, someone from your country made this documentary about some relatively obscure Hungarian.

Suddenly, the murder of this journalism leads to a trial against a suspected murderer.

You discover that the obscure person featured in the old documentary you watched is linked to the murderer, and that there is one piece of information in the documentary that could perhaps solve this hypophetical Hungarian murder. And you are pretty sure that no one else has noticed it, since only you and a few thousand more saw this documentary.

What would you do?

Tough choice!

Either a penalty to Manure or a free kick to Villa.

 

[drew]

Thought this was going to be about something you'd spotted in the Zapruder film that no one else had noticed!!

 

[PILTDOWN MAN]

He called me a facist, so I put him on ignore. But I think I'll unblock him now because, although we'll have him only for as long as G-Pott head coaches our team, I suspect he is the reincarnation of BG, his spirit filtered through a haze of weed smoke and essence of pizza, and that's good enough for me.

You're wrong HWT, no mention of left back status in the narrative.

 

[Paulie Gualtieri]

Get my affairs in order and appointment a power of attorney


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Pfft, deep down you know you are a little bit fascist...

I prefer the word 'technocratic'

My understanding of fascism is being in favour of "authoritarian ultranationalism characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition and strong regimentation of society and of the economy".

I am not an ultranationalist and believe in international co-operation, and fluid movement of people based on personal desire and mitigated by national need, with full citizenship granted after a set time (with a citizenship test, like the one my son, a Canadian by birth, took) regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation or religion.

I am an enemy of dictatorial power and am a big fan of democracy. That said I'd like to see people pass a test before being allowed to vote, rather like a driving test for citizenship. I am pretty sure my missus' dad would fail the test and, ironically, he wouldn't care, which sort of explains my point.

I am very much against forcible suppression of opposition. That said I am also against fake news and the propagation of racism, conspiracy theories and other lies that can sway the opinion of the feeble minded. However, if freedom to say any old shit you like is a major concern, with my plan for a voter exam, it may be possible to allow people to promote racism and other fantasies on the internet without it doing any real damage (I'm only half joking).

I am very much against strong regimentation of society and the economy. I know what it's like to be assaulted for my appearance/clothing. Embracing diversity is ingrained in my employment and personal life. Although I'm a member of the labour party I am essentially a free marketer, with some checks and balances (including the encouragement of trade unions), of course. Fascism meets communism when it comes to wages (from each according to ability, to each according to need), albeit fascists exclude the elite (i.e., themselves) from the equality (as indeed did the Russian commies, who really knew how to build a dacha). I support 'free collective bargaining' and salary structures, with promotions, annual increments, annual appraisal, employment protection, but also flexibility (for example it bothers me not that footballers can earn stupid money). The command economy, whether commanded from a left or right perspective, may work at a local level but it is no way to run a country.

So am I a bit fascist? Well we disagree fundamentally over 'tin foil hat' issues, but if you think that means it's OK to call me a fascists when I disagree with you, perhaps you are simply the reincarnation of Rik Mayall?

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

You're wrong HWT, no mention of left back status in the narrative.

It will happen, I feel it in my water

 

[Swansman]

I prefer the word 'technocratic'

My understanding of fascism is being in favour of "authoritarian ultranationalism characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition and strong regimentation of society and of the economy".

I am not an ultranationalist and believe in international co-operation, and fluid movement of people based on personal desire and mitigated by national need, with full citizenship granted after a set time (with a citizenship test, like the one my son, a Canadian by birth, took) regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation or religion.

I am an enemy of dictatorial power and am a big fan of democracy. That said I'd like to see people pass a test before being allowed to vote, rather like a driving test for citizenship. I am pretty sure my missus' dad would fail the test and, ironically, he wouldn't care, which sort of explains my point.

I am very much against forcible suppression of opposition. That said I am also against fake news and the propagation of racism, conspiracy theories and other lies that can sway the opinion of the feeble minded. However, if freedom to say any old shit you like is a major concern, with my plan for a voter exam, it may be possible to allow people to promote racism and other fantasies on the internet without it doing any real damage (I'm only half joking).

I am very much against strong regimentation of society and the economy. I know what it's like to be assaulted for my appearance/clothing. Embracing diversity is ingrained in my employment and personal life. Although I'm a member of the labour party I am essentially a free marketer, with some checks and balances (including the encouragement of trade unions), of course. Fascism meets communism when it comes to wages (from each according to ability, to each according to need), albeit fascists exclude the elite (i.e., themselves) from the equality (as indeed did the Russian commies, who really knew how to build a dacha). I support 'free collective bargaining' and salary structures, with promotions, annual increments, annual appraisal, employment protection, but also flexibility (for example it bothers me not that footballers can earn stupid money). The command economy, whether commanded from a left or right perspective, may work at a local level but it is no way to run a country.

So am I a bit fascist? Well we disagree fundamentally over 'tin foil hat' issues, but if you think that means it's OK to call me a fascists when I disagree with you, perhaps you are simply the reincarnation of Rik Mayall?

View attachment 131002

I think that the definition of fascism over the years got very distorted (or re-defined to the point of meaning nothing). People just throw it as a ball of shite to anyone they dont like, redifining it mid-air. To understand what fascism is, every kiddo should be required to read the most underrated British journalist of all time, George Seldes, and his book "Sawdust Caesar" from 1935. Its a very critical take on fascism, but it isnt afraid of expressing it ideas ie through transcribing the speeches of Mussolini.

Fascism and nationalism (in the modern sense of nationalism) are not very connected. Rather it is nationalism in the sense that - not always but in some phases of societal progression - everyone needs to sacrifice a bit of their liberalism for the greater good of the nation and its people.

Mussolini believes that if you do not sometimes as a state demand discipline and law and order in the population, it transcends into extremes: super-socialism (on the basis of, well, socialism) that allows people to perform nothing and thus leads to stagnation, or super-capitalism (based on liberalism) that allows corporations to transcend into ruling the fate of mankind according to the principles of capitalism. Mussolini describes the latter in a speech:

"At this stage, super-capitalism draws its inspiration and its justification from this Utopian theory : the theory of unlimited consumers.

The ideal of super-capitalism would be the standardization of the human race from the cradle to the coffin. Super-capitalism would have all men born of the same length, so that all cradles could be standardized ; it would have babies divert themselves with the same playthings, men clothed according to the same pattern, all reading the same book and having the same taste for the movies — in other words, it would have everybody desiring a single utilitarian machine. This is in the logic of things, because only in this way can super-capitalism do what it wishes.

When does capitalistic enterprise cease to be an economic factor?

When its size compels it to be a social factor. And that, precisely, is the moment when capitalistic enterprise, finding itself in difficulty, throws itself into the very arms of the State; It is the moment when the intervention of the State begins, rendering itself ever more necessary.

We are at this point : that, if in all the nations of Europe the State were to go to sleep for twenty-four hours, such an interval would be sufficient to cause a disaster. Now, there is no economic field in which the State is not called upon to intervene. Were we to surrender — just as a matter of hypothesis — to this capitalism of the eleventh hour, we should arrive at State capitalism, which is nothing but State socialism inverted."

Fascism is, simplified, the state stepping in requiring law and order and discipline based on the belief that everyone has to sacrifice their utopia for the general good of everyone. Of course there are issues (at least according to what is seen as morally justifiable today) - like the lack of democracy, since Mussolini believes people would opt for the lazy option, and the lack of economic freedom, since Mussolini believes that corporations would gain too much control. But fascism just like most ideologieis are not nearly as bad or good or black or white as described nowadays.

With this definition in mind, wouldnt you agree that you are a little bit fascist? (I'm not judging it as wrong, just sort of the opposite of my desired anarchism).

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

I didn't think anything could make me smile more than news of an approved vaccine today, but you just did, well done. You do realise, you've just incriminated the 1992 Hungarian Olympic swimming team coach in an unsolved murder case? I hope he doesn't read NSC.

Could this be linked to the Brighton trunks murders?

 

[Baldseagull]

Yes, something like that.



Good idea tbh.

How about this plot:

a Hungarian man pretends to convert into some obscure Budapest religion. He joins a sect. He steals all of their money.

He then moves to the US, what he does there is a bit unknown but he meets another Hungarian, a sports journalist covering the 1984 Olympics.

After that, he moves to Israel, pretending to be orthodox jewish and convince one of the rabbis to start a diamond store. He then steals all the diamonds, worth 60 million dollars, and moves around the world while the Israeli diamond business is trying to chase him down.

He then moves back to Hungary and hooks up with the guy he met in Los Angeles. He cant swim, and actually he is afraid of water, but somehow he becomes the manager of the Hungarian 1992 Olympics swimming team, and they win a bunch of medals.

After the olympics, he disappears, taking all the money of the swimming team with him. The sports journalist he met in LA takes his place in the Hungarian swimming federation.

Then, he gets himself a very expensive Archbishop-costume, takes the boat to Sweden and lives in Malmö for a year while pretending to be sent from the Vatican. People lend him money, he pays back double. Until one day when he doesnt. He is gone, with all their money.

He returns to Hungary and gets arrested. But the police have problems. They can only interrogate him for one hour at a time, or they fear he will take control over them. They let him out and give him an apartment and a gun.

Hs friend, the sports journalist from LA who replaced him as boss of the swimming team, is now also some kind of media mogul. But another media mogul says: "this guy is shady, and he is shady together with the weird fraudster guy".

The rival media mogul gets killed. Not much happens for 22 years until some secret recordings creates a case against the friend (the LA sportsjournol-media-mogul-swimming-guy) of our main character (the diamond dealing Archbishop 1992 Olympics swimming coach) and finds some, but perhaps not enough, evidence that they murdered the murdered guy (the other media mogul).

But what is the mystery evidence in the documentary that seals the conviction?

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I think that the definition of fascism over the years got very distorted (or re-defined to the point of meaning nothing). People just throw it as a ball of shite to anyone they dont like, redifining it mid-air. To understand what fascism is, every kiddo should be required to read the most underrated British journalist of all time, George Seldes, and his book "Sawdust Caesar" from 1935. Its a very critical take on fascism, but it isnt afraid of expressing it ideas ie through transcribing the speeches of Mussolini.

Fascism and nationalism (in the modern sense of nationalism) are not very connected. Rather it is nationalism in the sense that - not always but in some phases of societal progression - everyone needs to sacrifice a bit of their liberalism for the greater good of the nation and its people.

Mussolini believes that if you do not sometimes as a state demand discipline and law and order in the population, it transcends into extremes: super-socialism (on the basis of, well, socialism) that allows people to perform nothing and thus leads to stagnation, or super-capitalism (based on liberalism) that allows corporations to transcend into ruling the fate of mankind according to the principles of capitalism. Mussolini describes the latter in a speech:

"At this stage, super-capitalism draws its inspiration and its justification from this Utopian theory : the theory of unlimited consumers.

The ideal of super-capitalism would be the standardization of the human race from the cradle to the coffin. Super-capitalism would have all men born of the same length, so that all cradles could be standardized ; it would have babies divert themselves with the same playthings, men clothed according to the same pattern, all reading the same book and having the same taste for the movies — in other words, it would have everybody desiring a single utilitarian machine. This is in the logic of things, because only in this way can super-capitalism do what it wishes.

When does capitalistic enterprise cease to be an economic factor?

When its size compels it to be a social factor. And that, precisely, is the moment when capitalistic enterprise, finding itself in difficulty, throws itself into the very arms of the State; It is the moment when the intervention of the State begins, rendering itself ever more necessary.

We are at this point : that, if in all the nations of Europe the State were to go to sleep for twenty-four hours, such an interval would be sufficient to cause a disaster. Now, there is no economic field in which the State is not called upon to intervene. Were we to surrender — just as a matter of hypothesis — to this capitalism of the eleventh hour, we should arrive at State capitalism, which is nothing but State socialism inverted."

Fascism is, simplified, the state stepping in requiring law and order and discipline based on the belief that everyone has to sacrifice their utopia for the general good of everyone. Of course there are issues (at least according to what is seen as morally justifiable today) - like the lack of democracy, since Mussolini believes people would opt for the lazy option, and the lack of economic freedom, since Mussolini believes that corporations would gain too much control. But fascism just like most ideologieis are not nearly as bad or good or black or white as described nowadays.

With this definition in mind, wouldnt you agree that you are a little bit fascist? (I'm not judging it as wrong, just sort of the opposite of my desired anarchism).

Aside from you apparent declaration of antipathy (!) I thank you for that thoughtful post.

The answer is no, in much the same way that even though Hitler and I have/had in common probably 99% DNA homology and a fondness for watercolours, I am definitely not Austrian, and nothing would be gained by suggesting I am.

I am relaxed about lables when they can be used to provide precision and accuracy (i.e., are informative) but, otherwise, not. Unless I am feeling mischievous, and wishing to be offensive

 

[Swansman]

But what is the mystery evidence in the documentary that seals the conviction?

Its very complicated, but to summarise it as easy as possible the assistant of the Hungarian fraudster (Zemplényi ) says in the documentary that they met in a bar in LA in the mid 80s, the same time when the alleged murderer Tamas Gyarfas covered the 1984 olympics. It is confirmed that Gyarfas met some Laszlo guy from the Hungarian Olympics committe and some other Hungarian counter-feiter in LA.

From that point, Gyarfas and Zemplényi somehow had a ton of resources and crossed roads over and over again. In 1992, Zemplényi who couldnt swim and was afraid of water became the coach of the swimming team, and after he escaped to pretend to be some Archbishop in Sweden, Gyarfas took his role in the swimming association (as well as running a media business).

When Zemplényi gets arrested in Hungary in 1996, the murder victim (Janos Fenyo) reveals that his rival - Gyarfas - wants to start a sports tv channel with Zemplényi, who is awaiting trial. This is not good for Gyarfas reputation and he states that they have nothing to do with eachother besides the swimming part. The assistant interviewed in the documentary could very well be a key witness in proving the opposite.

 

[peterward]

Ok here is the scenario, strictly hypothetical of course.

Lets say that 20+ years ago a journalist was murdered in some country in Eastern Europe. Like... Hungary.

12 years ago, someone from your country made this documentary about some relatively obscure Hungarian.

Suddenly, the murder of this journalism leads to a trial against a suspected murderer.

You discover that the obscure person featured in the old documentary you watched is linked to the murderer, and that there is one piece of information in the documentary that could perhaps solve this hypophetical Hungarian murder. And you are pretty sure that no one else has noticed it, since only you and a few thousand more saw this documentary.

What would you do?

Go attention seeking on NSC and start another look at me thread.

 

[WATFORD zero]

I think that the definition of fascism over the years got very distorted (or re-defined to the point of meaning nothing). People just throw it as a ball of shite to anyone they dont like, redifining it mid-air. To understand what fascism is, every kiddo should be required to read the most underrated British journalist of all time, George Seldes, and his book "Sawdust Caesar" from 1935. Its a very critical take on fascism, but it isnt afraid of expressing it ideas ie through transcribing the speeches of Mussolini.

Fascism and nationalism (in the modern sense of nationalism) are not very connected. Rather it is nationalism in the sense that - not always but in some phases of societal progression - everyone needs to sacrifice a bit of their liberalism for the greater good of the nation and its people.

Mussolini believes that if you do not sometimes as a state demand discipline and law and order in the population, it transcends into extremes: super-socialism (on the basis of, well, socialism) that allows people to perform nothing and thus leads to stagnation, or super-capitalism (based on liberalism) that allows corporations to transcend into ruling the fate of mankind according to the principles of capitalism. Mussolini describes the latter in a speech:

"At this stage, super-capitalism draws its inspiration and its justification from this Utopian theory : the theory of unlimited consumers.

The ideal of super-capitalism would be the standardization of the human race from the cradle to the coffin. Super-capitalism would have all men born of the same length, so that all cradles could be standardized ; it would have babies divert themselves with the same playthings, men clothed according to the same pattern, all reading the same book and having the same taste for the movies — in other words, it would have everybody desiring a single utilitarian machine. This is in the logic of things, because only in this way can super-capitalism do what it wishes.

When does capitalistic enterprise cease to be an economic factor?

When its size compels it to be a social factor. And that, precisely, is the moment when capitalistic enterprise, finding itself in difficulty, throws itself into the very arms of the State; It is the moment when the intervention of the State begins, rendering itself ever more necessary.

We are at this point : that, if in all the nations of Europe the State were to go to sleep for twenty-four hours, such an interval would be sufficient to cause a disaster. Now, there is no economic field in which the State is not called upon to intervene. Were we to surrender — just as a matter of hypothesis — to this capitalism of the eleventh hour, we should arrive at State capitalism, which is nothing but State socialism inverted."

Fascism is, simplified, the state stepping in requiring law and order and discipline based on the belief that everyone has to sacrifice their utopia for the general good of everyone. Of course there are issues (at least according to what is seen as morally justifiable today) - like the lack of democracy, since Mussolini believes people would opt for the lazy option, and the lack of economic freedom, since Mussolini believes that corporations would gain too much control. But fascism just like most ideologieis are not nearly as bad or good or black or white as described nowadays.

With this definition in mind, wouldnt you agree that you are a little bit fascist? (I'm not judging it as wrong, just sort of the opposite of my desired anarchism).

I think it's safe to say that

Never, in the history of football forums has so much been said, by so few, to the complete apathy of so many

Don't you go changing Swansman

 

[Swansman]

Go attention seeking on NSC and start another look at me thread.

You would? I'd like to see that. You dont strike me as the thread starting type of guy. More like the grumpy complain about everything all the time-kind of guy.

 

[raymondo]

Email the EU Commission immediately, with a copy to Interpol

 

[herecomesaregular]

I think it's safe to say that

Never, in the history of football forums has so much been said, by so few, to the complete apathy of so many

Don't you go changing Swansman

I would just like to say well done for finishing reading all of it. I couldn't manage it.

edit- and also, I think Harry Wilson's Tackle and Swansman would make a lovely couple.

 

[Ⓩ-Ⓐ-Ⓜ-Ⓞ-Ⓡ-Ⓐ]

Personally, I would email Paul Barber

 

[Cheshire Cat]

Restart the medication.

I would lay off the medication. It has clearly got some unexpected side effects.

 

[Baldseagull]

Its very complicated, but to summarise it as easy as possible the assistant of the Hungarian fraudster (Zemplényi ) says in the documentary that they met in a bar in LA in the mid 80s, the same time when the alleged murderer Tamas Gyarfas covered the 1984 olympics. It is confirmed that Gyarfas met some Laszlo guy from the Hungarian Olympics committe and some other Hungarian counter-feiter in LA.

From that point, Gyarfas and Zemplényi somehow had a ton of resources and crossed roads over and over again. In 1992, Zemplényi who couldnt swim and was afraid of water became the coach of the swimming team, and after he escaped to pretend to be some Archbishop in Sweden, Gyarfas took his role in the swimming association (as well as running a media business).

When Zemplényi gets arrested in Hungary in 1996, the murder victim (Janos Fenyo) reveals that his rival - Gyarfas - wants to start a sports tv channel with Zemplényi, who is awaiting trial. This is not good for Gyarfas reputation and he states that they have nothing to do with eachother besides the swimming part. The assistant interviewed in the documentary could very well be a key witness in proving the opposite.

You could be right, but I think accidentally solving the murder case is overstating what you have done. You have identified someone who may or may not be able to add some weight to the evidence of a relationship between two men, which if he could, he may or may not be willing to do, and in any case, is extremely unlikely to prove a murder, just that the suspect lied about not having ties to a conman, which to be honest, most people would distance themselves from publicly.

It might be worth an email to the prosecution team to make sure they are aware of the man and to let them know why you think he might be useful to their case though. Good luck.

 

[junior]

Lay off the crack pipe.