Posts Tagged ‘ICR Chisinau’

Scrisoare Deschisa catre Smithsonian Institute in cazul Scandalului antiromanesc “Mostenirea maghiara: Radacinile renasterii”/“Hungarian Heritage: Roots to Revival”. Folclorul si traditiile romanesti nu sunt nici unguresti nici tiganesti. In atentia mass-media, a MAE, SIE si SRI

x Bozgori homosexuali la Smithsonian Folklife Festival 2013 via Ziaristi Online18 July 2013

To:       The Smithsonian Institute Board of Regents

The Directors and Managers of the Smithsonian Folklife Festival

The Ethnographers, Historians and Managers of the “Hungarian Heritage: Roots to Revival” event


Fm:      Media Professionals of the Worldwide Romanian Diaspora


Re:       Request for Information, Clarification and Corrective Actions Regarding Representations and Incidents at the 2013 “Hungarian Heritage: Roots to Revival” Event, National Mall


  • ·                    Purpose.  The purpose of this correspondence is to request information, clarification and corrective actions regarding representations and incidents at the 2013 “Hungarian Heritage: Roots to Revival” event staged at the National Mall in Washington, D.C. on behalf of numerous media professionals and media organizations of the worldwide Romanian Diaspora.


EXCLUSIV Dan Tanasa Ro, in atentia SRI, SIE si MAE: Budapesta cheltuiește un milion de dolari ca să promoveze “Ungaria Mare” in SUA. Scandalul antiromanesc de la Smithsonian Folklife Festival. GALERIE FOTO

Dublu scandal antiromanesc in SUA. Reactia MAE inexistenta. Ungurii fura “Ciocarlia” romaneasca si agreseaza ziaristi romani la Smithsonian FolkLife Festival. ICR pune paie pe foc: Tigani autointitulati ansamblul “Ciocarlia” reprezinta Romania

Associated Press prezinta Transilvania drept o regiune a Ungariei in stirea despre Festivalul unguresc de la Washington. Ambasada Romaniei nu are nici o reactie.

Associated Press against Romania -  Transilvania - Hungarian Roots - Smithsonian Institute


  • ·                     Event Background. Between 26-30 June and 3-7 July, the Smithsonian Institute organized “Smithsonian Folklife Festival” on the grounds of the U.S. National Mall. This year, the guest of honor was the country of Hungary which was invited to participate in the program by Smithsonian Institute organizers. Under the name of “Hungarian Heritage: Roots to Revival”, the Hungarian program was produced by the Smithsonian Center for Folklife and Cultural Heritage in partnership with the Balassi Institute, Budapest. Major support was provided by the Hungary Initiative Foundation and National Cultural Endowment of Hungary. Additional support was provided by the Hungarian American Coalition, American Hungarian Federation, Hungarian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Embassy of Hungary in Washington, D.C., and others.  The stated overarching goal of the Folklife Festival programsin general is to present and bring close to attendees the folk cultural heritage of invited countries to the American public. The showcase of traditions of culture was masterfully done. However, several incidents happened on the background of a tense political situation in Hungary and Romania today that require specific answers from the American organizers, namely the Smithsonian Institute/Smithsonian Center for Folklife and Cultural Heritage.  The geo-political issue in which the Smithsonian Institute has apparently inserted itself is important enough that it demands answers from the Board of Regents, as well as directors and managers of the “Hungarian Heritage: Roots to Revival” event.


  • “Hungarian Heritage:  Roots to Revival” Overview.  As a guest of honor, Hungary was handed the opportunity to showcase its rich culture and traditions to a large American and international audience on the Washington, D.C. National Mall. The preparation for this program took approximately two years, according to the Hungarian organizers,with over one million dollars of expenses paid by the Government of Hungary, according to the Hungarian Ambassador in Washington, D.C., as well as other substantial donors.  This data was publicized at the following URL:

Approximately 120 participants were brought to Washington, D.C. from Hungary, Romania, Serbia, and around the U.S.A. Among them, approximately 30 participants were dancers and singers, most of them from Romania, a preponderance from the Romanian region known most famously as Transylvania.The master chef in one of the food kitchen tents at the festival, for example, is a well-known Magyar (ethnic Hungarian) restaurant owner in Chicago who was born and raised in Romania, still celebrates his Romanian roots and spoke with journalists in his native Romanian language as well as English for media interviews.  It therefore came as an unwelcome surprisethat Transylvania was constantly cited only in a Hungarian ethnic context during the stage performances and afterwards during recorded video interviews with performers and organizers.  Numerous discrepancies arose which caught the attention of attending members of the credentialed media, which need to be addressed by the Smithsonian Institute responsible personnel and experts.  These items are detailed herein.


  • Map Graphics, Regional and Village Naming Conventions by Smithsonian Institute.  Prominently displayed around the “Hungarian Heritage:  Roots to Revival” tents and exhibits were large maps, detailing the areas from which the songs, music, arts and crafts were drawn; the vast majority of which are in Transylvania within the sovereign territory of Romania.  Names of villages and regions, on Romanian territory, are presented with only the Hungarian names and leaving attendees and audience members with the clear misunderstanding that Transylvania is a part of modern Hungary.  In fact, research indicates that the maps, as illustrated and presented by the Smithsonian Institute at this Festival, are strikingly similar to Hungarian “separatist” maps publicized by those seeking to break Transylvania away from the country of Romania.  These are maps used by Hungarian ultra-nationalists and separatists in their ambition to “liberate” a large portion of Romania to “autonomy” for the Magyar minority.  Against this background, those of us in the media and international Romanian Diaspora wish an explanation:  How were these maps selected by the Smithsonian Institute? Which experts at the Smithsonian vetted these map graphics? Did the Smithsonian organizers, sponsors, managers or historians seek to blur the distinction between Transylvania as part of the sovereign territory of Romania, versus suggesting that it is somehow part of modern-day Hungary, or was this misrepresentation a simple error and oversight by the Smithsonian Institute for which it takes responsibility? Did anyone take into account regional sensitivities when drawing up this map for public display?


  • Traditions, Songs and Cultural Traditions Presented at the Festival.  Media observers noticed and recorded traditional Romanian songs, dance and dress being presented several times on such venues as the Danubia Stage, but with the announcers making only passing reference to the “Transylvanian” and “Hungarian” roots but without acknowledging the actual historic Romanian roots.  The fact that various Romanian traditions were presented as Hungarian was even acknowledged on-camera in media interviews with performers, event managers and organizers (in at least one case the interviewee stated that the organizers “were not proud, but not ashamed” of the Romanian roots of the songs, dance and dress that were being presented as Hungarian traditions).  During the Hungarian Ambassador’s radio address about the Festival, he makes no mention of Romania or even Transylvania in his eight-minute interview, or even acknowledges the multi-cultural traditions presented on the stages by a talented cast (as noted, comprised of many Romanian citizens).  Repeatedly, all references are solely toward Hungary.  Against this information, could the Smithsonian Institute and experts please offer explanations?  Was the Board of Regents or any other responsible executive body of the Smithsonian Institute aware that Romanian songs, dance and dress were presented on-stage but without acknowledging the Romanian roots?  Who was the responsible historian or ethnographer from the Smithsonian Institute who vetted the songs, dances and dress that appeared on stage, and was it a conscious decision to mention the “Transylvanian” history in reference to Hungary, but without adequately citing Romanian culture and traditions?  How does the Smithsonian wish to respond to the query as to why “Hungarian” roots for revival was presented by so many Romanian citizens and drew heavily on Romanian traditions, but was presented almost exclusively as “Transylvanian” or “Hungarian” culture?


  • Incidents of Intolerance, Separatist and Ultra-Nationalist Actions by Hungarian/Magyar Participants.  Shortly after the construction of the large festival dance pavilion was completed, some of the Hungarian/Magyar participants in the festival raised a flag over the structure.  The flag was the Hungarian-colored flag of the Magyar Separatist Movement in Transylvania, also displayed on the festival map as “Székelyföld”.  It was taken down by Festival organizers, but perhaps was prologue to later incidents of intolerance.  After a wonderful, high-energy performance at the Danubia Stage, three Magyar/Hungarian performers cursed at an elderly woman who had a wrist-ribbon of Romanian colors (this is on video).  The same performers accosted a U.S. citizen and journalist, also wearing a wrist ribbon of Romanian colors (similar, incidentally, to those on the trim of many of the dancers’ costumes), cursed the cameraman and one Magyar/Hungarian member physically grabbed the hand and arm of a media professional while another said in Hungarian language, “while wave that Romanian flag, Transylvania belongs to Hungary.”  This entire incident is also on video.  The Romanian flag was being held by a Romanian national while a Romanian journalist, incidentally, was simply conducting an interview on the gravel path adjacent to the Festival “tavern” tent with another U.S. citizen of Romanian descent who was raving about what a marvelous performance it was.  These audience members and credentialed media personnel were happy and excited about the excellent stage productions, “high-fiving” many performers and speaking at length in Romanian language with numerous Romanian cast members who were delighted to be recognized and appreciated by fellow Romanian countrymen.  It was on this scene of pleasant celebration of an excellent stage production that the three Magyar/Hungarian performers inserted their separatist and ultra-nationalist agendas, alleging that the presence of Romanians and their flag on the National Mall was “a provocation” and insisting that the Romanians—and the media members and associated U.S. citizens of Romanian descent—leave the area.  Videos and images have been made available, and reportedly other citizens have already written the Smithsonian requesting answers.  The undersigned media members and Romanian Diaspora would like the Smithsonian to kindly address whether the Smithsonian Institute organizers vetted the performers?  Were the performers who were pursuing Magyar Separatist agendas known to the Smithsonian?  As many cast members were Romanian citizens and presenting Romanian dances, dress and traditions, a few singing Romanian songs in Romanian language, can the Smithsonian executive team please explain the rationale behind the “Hungarian Heritage:  Roots to Revival” event featuring these as “Hungarian” but without acknowledgement that Transylvania is Romania?  Do the historians, experts and event organizers at the Smithsonian believe that Transylvania is part of Hungary?


  • Conclusions.  Although we are not seeking, as members of the media and worldwide Romanian Diaspora, a judgment on the actions or conduct of a number of Hungarian/Magyar participants or the incidents themselves, we collectively are calling upon the Smithsonian Board of Regents—which includes several high ranking officials of the United States Government and therefore has significant clout on geo-political issues such as the Magyar Separatist movement—and the Smithsonian executive management to issue a joint and public statement on the issues we raised in this letter.  At this point, an observer would conclude that the Smithsonian Institute and the senior U.S. government officials on the Board of Regents either tacitly or explicitly endorse the ethnic-Hungarian—Magyar Separatist movement in Transylvania.  Apparent efforts by the Festival event organizers—from map graphics to stage presentations, to chasing away Romanian audience members and media, to the attempt by Hungarian artists to fly the Hungarian Separatist Flag from the top of the constructed festival dance pavilion and statements to the media made by these performers expressing strong desire of autonomy for Transylvania—indicate the need for precise explanations and an official position published by the most senior executive members of the Smithsonian.  The stage performances, music, dress and dance were spectacular and thrilling to observe.  That many of these were adopted by Hungarian groups and shared and enriched by and between Gypsy/Roma, Romanian, Jewish and Hungarian ethnicities is testimony to the treasure that is multi-cultural heritage.  That such beauty on stage, could be marred by apparent displays of separatist agendas, ultra-nationalism and intolerance among some Magyar/Hungarian participants—as well as academic blurring of the Romanian territory of Transylvania as being “Hungarian”—remains an issue in need of direct comment and a statement of position from the Smithsonian.  In summary, the issues for direct comment by the Smithsonian’s executive team:


  • The Festival’s use of the map of the Hungarian Kingdom and Magyar Separatists representing Romanian Transylvania with Hungarian graphics and text;
  • Why the Smithsonian organizers failed to acknowledge that three of the six featured communities for the “Hungarian” Folklife festival are Romanian;
  • An explanation as to why Romanian songs, dances and costumes were featured as “Hungarian” on the stages and on the website of the Hungarian festival;
  • A statement on the Magyar/Hungarian cast members and performers exhibiting their Separatist agenda, both in interviews and in incidents of intolerance captured on video by credentialed journalists, and in response we respectfully request a clear statement of the Smithsonian’s position on these incidents;
  • An explicit acknowledgement by the Smithsonian Institute from your experts, historians, ethnographers and executive management team as to whether the region of Transylvania is legally and geo-politically part of the sovereign state of Romania, and whether any presentations, graphics, artworks or public statements suggesting otherwise are in factual error;
  • An explicit acknowledgement by the Smithsonian Institute experts and executive team including the Board of Regents that there was no intent by the Smithsonian, or the event organizers, to take a position supporting the Magyar/Hungarian Separatist movement to the detriment of the sovereign nation of Romania.


We have a team of expert historians and ethnographers ready to work with the Smithsonian Institution experts and revisit the program and determine which of the traditions presented under ”Hungarian Heritage” name may have been, in fact, Romanian in origin and artistic credit.


Sincerely, the undersigned members of the media and Romanian Diaspora


PhD. Eugen Vasilescu, Georgetown University, U.S.A.

PhD. Marius Petraru, California State University – Chief Redactor, Miorita U.S.A.

PhD. Theodore Bucur, Professor HEI of Lille, International Expert, France

PhD. Adrian Boeru, National University of Arts Bucharest, Romania

PhD. Adrian Botez, Publisher, Writers’ Union of Romania

Prof. Lia Lungu, Folklore Interpret; awarded U.S. Citizen for Extraordinary Ability, NY

Valentin Tepordei, Professor & Researcher USGS Scientist Emeritus, Arlington, VA

Mihai Boicu, Researcher, Professor, George Mason University (Fairfax, VA) U.S.A.

Daniela Ionescu,Masters in History of Art, California State University, U.S.A.

PhD Vasile Lechintan, Historian, Transylvania, Romania

Adelina Palade, Councelor and Analyst, Chamber of Deputies, Romania

Editorial Staff „Miorita USA” Romanian American Newspaper

Editorial Staff of„Ziaristi Online”, Romania

„Iuliu Maniu” Foundation, Boston, MA, U.S.A.

Marcela Maria Băjeanu –Gymnastics Coach, Maryland, U.S.A.

Ana Hontz Ward – Journalist, Voice of America, Washington, D.C., U.S.A.

Dorin Suciu, Journalist, Romania

Corneliu Leu, Publisher, Canada

Dan Tanasa, Freelance Journalist, Madrid, Spain

Mihaela Biliovschi, International Journalist, Washington, D.C., U.S.A.

Dacian Dumitrescu – Deputy Chef Editor, Romanian Breaking News Press

Victor Roncea, Journalist, Founding President „Civic Media” Association, Romania

Dana Deac, Vicegovernor, Cultural Society„Filarmonia” Turda, Plastic Artist & Journalist, Romania

Cultural Association„Miorita”, California, U.S.A.

Benone Neagoe, Military Journalist, Romania

Corneliu Vlad, Journalist, International Policy

Phd Grid Modorcea, Journalist and writer, New York

Eng. Simona Botezan, Deputy Manager „Miorita”, Washington, D.C.

Dan Leontescu, Editor “The Eastern European Echo”, Seattle WA, U.S.A.

Cultural Association„Miorita”, California, U.S.A.

Elena Andronache, Independent Group for Democracy, Founder, Romania

Eng. Gabriel Neagu, System Analyst, Gaithersburg, Maryland

Theodor Codreanu, Writer, Romania

Florin Palas, Journalist, Romania


Tigani Unguri Gypsy Hungarians against Romanians on Smithsonian Institute site - Ciocarlia

Romani or Gypsies - Smithsonian Institute against Romanians

Ziaristi Online: Regrete masonice pentru Radu Vasile. Profesorul Constantin Barbu: “Toţi cei nouă agenţi străini care au produs rapoarte împotriva lui Eminescu sunt evrei unguri şi evrei austrieci”. ICR-Chisinau recidiveaza: Falsuri istorice si propaganda pentru Biserica KGB a “Intregii Moldove”

Regretele Marii Loje nationale masonice 1880 pentru fratele Radu Vasile - Doc Ziaristi OnlineZiaristi Online:

“Fratele” Radu Vasile, regretat de Marea Loja Nationala a masoneriei romane fondata la 1880

Regretele Marii Loje nationale masonice 1880 pentru fratele Radu Vasile - Doc Ziaristi Online

Radu Vasile, un strălucit Frate, ne-a părăsit. Suferinţa l-a răpit temporar, dar acolo sus, la Orientul Etern, unde cu toţii ne vom întâlni, Radu Vasile va continua să strălucească.

Profesorul Constantin Barbu: “Toţi cei nouă agenţi străini care au produs rapoarte împotriva lui Eminescu sunt evrei unguri şi evrei austrieci”. INTERVIU Cuvântul Libertăţii

Constantin Barbu cu unul dintre volumele Integralei Manuscriselor Dimitrie Cantemir

Eminescu este viu, extrem de viu fiindcă geniul său este unul historial, el ghicind „enigma vieţii”. N-am vrut să spun până acum, dar toţi cei nouă agenţi străini care au produs rapoarte împotriva lui Eminescu sunt evrei unguri şi evrei austrieci. Toată povestea stupidă cu antisemitismul lui Eminescu aici trebuie căutată. Este un lucru gingaş pe care va trebui să-l lămuresc.

ICR-Chisinau recidiveaza: Falsuri istorice si propaganda pentru Biserica KGB a “Intregii Moldove” din banii romanilor


La un an de la anexarea Basarabiei la Imperiul Rus în 1812, Guvernul ţarului Alexandru I a comis încă o fărădelege, de data aceasta faţă de sufletele locuitorilor de aici. La 21 august 1813 a fost semnat Decretul imperial privind crearea Mitropoliei Chişinăului şi Hotinului, act unilateral, samavolnic, prin care locuitorii dintre Prut şi Nistru supuşi canonic Mitropoliei Moldovei au fost rupţi de la matcă şi trecuţi la nou creata mitropolie. Ce a urmat se ştie: rusificarea, deznaţionalizarea, interzicerea ţinerii serviciilor religioase în limba română etc.

Bursierii ICR, agenti anti-Romania platiti din banii pensionarilor si mamelor cu alocatii taiate. Cazul Republica Moldova: Doi bursieri ICR au blocat predarea Istoriei Romanilor copiilor basarabeni. RAPORT catre BASESCU/SRI

La cererea lui Mircea Toma – noul MC al lui Patapievici – republic un Raport deschis catre Basescu si SRI privind bursierii ICR, veritabili agenti anti-Romania platiti din pensiile si alocatiile taiate in numele “crizei”. In numele aceleiasi crize, conform Raportului Curtii de Conturi, angajatii lui Patapievici nu au avut salariile reduse cu 25%. Ba chiar dimpotriva. Comentariile sunt de prisos. Nesimtirea totala, incomensurabila, a acestui vierme cu ochelari – din celebra galerie a “limbricilor mintii” – il va distruge pe Basescu la Referendum.

Foto/Info: Basarabeni.Ro. Vezi si Nistru-Prut.Info – Membru al Comisiei Ghimpu: “Institutul Cultural Roman este finantat de Federatia Rusa?“; Un alt membru al Comisiei Ghimpu, in Adevarul-Moldova: Cum promovează ICR românismul la Chişinău; Monitorul: Este ceva putred; s.a.m.d.

”Institutul Cultural Român este o instituţie de cultură aflată sub autoritatea preşedintelui României, care are ca misiune promovarea culturii şi civilizaţiei naţionale în ţară şi în afara ei”– Misiunea ICR

“Preşedintele României este preşedinte de onoare al Institutului.” – Legea de functionare a ICR

Raport Deschis

Catre: Presedintele Romaniei, dl Traian Basescu

Directorul Serviciului Roman de Informatii, dl George Maior

Re: O “institutie de interes national” impotriva interesului national si a directiilor enuntate de Presedintele Romaniei pentru apararea identitatii si a demnitatii romanilor din jurul granitelor

Agenti anti-Romania stipendiati de ICR

Programe antiromanesti perfectate prin intermediul ICR, respectiv ICR-Chisinau

Cheltuirea a 2.000.000 de euro pentru un bun al Rusiei – “Zemstva Guberniei Basarabia” si infiintarea unei filiale “moldovenesti” a Colegiului Noua Europa

Demolarea Clădirii Scolii confesionale ortodoxe romanesti din Jula, cu o vechime de 180 de ani, revendicata de comunitatea romaneasca pentru un muzeu al romanilor

Seminar ICR-Budapesta impotriva Romaniei si a adevarului istoric privind evenimentele din martie 1990 de la Targu Mures


Domnule Presedinte al Romaniei si Presedinte de Onoare al Institutului Cultural Roman,

Domnule Director al Serviciului Roman de Informatii,


Va scriu in calitate de jurnalist preocupat de peste 20 de ani de problemele comunitatilor romanesti din jurul granitelor si de cetatean roman oripilat de bresele in securitatea nationala perfectate prin intermediul unei institutii publice “de interes national”, cum este Institutul Cultural Roman condus de dl Horia Roman Patapievici si al carui Presedinte de Onoare este chiar Presedintele Romaniei.

Am aflat recent ca si din taxele mele si ale membrilor familiei mele care au fost siliti sa paraseasca Romania rasariteana in urma invaziei trupelor sovietice de ocupatie, ICR a cadorisit cu burse de 7000 de dolari doi istorici din Republica Moldova care au votat in cadrul asa-numitei Comisii Şleahtiţchi – supranumita la Chisinau “Comisia Rusinii” – pentru eliminarea obiectului Istoria Romanilor (ca obiect separat) din instituţiile de învăţământ preuniversitar ale Republicii Moldova, conform

Numele celor doi sunt Igor Casu si Virgil Paslariuc si beneficiaza de bursa ICR ce poarta numele lui Alexandru Sturdza, pentru a-l onora (!) pe greco-romanul care a fost fiul primului guvernator al Guberniei Basarabia după raptul de la 1812, atasat al Ministerul de Interne al Imperiului Tarist timp de 22 de ani, sub conducerea ţărilor Alexandru I şi Nicolae I, si care a mai primit si titlul onorific de “consilier de taină” al ţarului.

Votul in “Comisia Rusinii” a fost de 11 “contra” la 9 “pentru”. Asadar, predarea Istoriei Romanilor in scolile din Republica Moldova a stat exact in votul celor doi bursieri ICR. Astfel, viitorul educatiei copiilor din stanga Prutului, investitia in zeci de mii de manuale de Istoria Romanilor pentru scolile din Basarabia a Departamentului pentru Romanii de Pretutindeni impreuna cu toate dezideratele enuntate de Dvs din 2004 pana azi, pentru pastrarea si apararea identititatii nationale a romanilor din jurul Romaniei, au fost aruncate la cos de… doi bursieri ai ICR.

Atat Ministrul Educatiei, Mihail Şleahtiţchi, cat si Igor Casu, bursier ICR si membru al “organelor decizionale” ale Fundatiei Soros – Moldova, s-au antepronuntat inca de la infiintarea “Comisiei Rusinii” si inainte de efectuarea “cercetarii” asupra eliminarii obiectului Istoria Romanilor. Astfel, intr-un editorial din ziarul “Adevarul”, din 20 decembrie 2011, Igor Casu afirma: “Când vom înţelege şi noi că nu există o istorie a românilor în afara istoriei Europei? O disciplină numită Istoria ar oferi prilejul să mai renunţăm şi la anumite clişee şi interpretări triumfaliste din istoria românilor pe care le-am preluat din manualele editate în România în anii 1990, care nu mai sunt în circulaţie în drepta Prutului, sau de la istorici servili regimului ceauşist de dinainte de 1989. Deci, pe când vom putea spune şi noi, românii basarabeni: Good bye, Ceauşescu?”. In opinia bursierului ICR, Istoria Romanilor echivaleaza cu Ceausescu si Istoria din manualele romanesti a anilor post-decembristi, intr-un sens peiorativ. Pe aceeasi directie, a propagandei antiromanesti, bursierul ICR Igor Casu isi permite sa afirme intr-un interviu pus la cale in Evenimentul Zilei, in preajma aniversarii Marii Uniri, ca „Nimeni nu mai vrea unirea cu România!”.

Dintre cei patru membri ai Comisiei ICR care a hotarat stipendierea celor doi istorici mancurtizati, Igor Casu si Virgil Paslariuc, au facut parte Mihail Neamtu si Petre Guran, directorul ICR – Chisinau.  Dl Petre Guran, fost bursier al Colegiului Noua Europa, este prieten apropiat al celor doi, dupa cum se poate vedea pe pagina de internet a Forumului Plural, ce se doreste a fi un embrion moldovenesc, in sensul sovietic, al Colegiului Noua Europa condus de rectorul Andrei Plesu. Dl Mihail Neamtu este si el un bursier al Colegiului Noua Europa, in calitate de “invitat al rectorului“, si bursa pe care le-a conferit-o celor doi istorici de la Chisinau pare sa fie in sensul afirmatiilor sale despre propriile lui beneficii de (fost) bursier si bugetar: „Aveam un grant al Academiei Române care îmi asigura un post căldicel, cu șofer, casă de la RA‑APPS. Mai aveam un post de director științific la Institutul pentru Investigarea Crimelor Comunismului prin care puteam călători oricând la orice hotel de patru stele din Europa. Mi‑am depus demisia de la stat pentru că simțeam că stagnez, că nu mă dezvolt, că sunt închistat.” (Interviu

Tot bursier al Colegiului Noua Europa (“New Europe College – Новая Европа колледжа”) este si ambasadorul Romaniei la Chisinau, Marius Lazurca, finul altui bursier “NEC – NEK”, dl Teodor Anatol Baconschi, fostul ministru de Externe esuat lamentabil la mal prin cel mai slab mandat al diplomatiei romane de la Sergiu Celac incoace. Dl Lazurca s-a gandit sa ofere un adevarat exemplu de romanism devenind “fiu duhovnicesc” al unui cunoscut activist anti-roman in cadrul Patriarhiei Moscovei, Pavel Borsevschi, la biserica caruia s-a gandit sa duca si Corul Bisericii Stavrapoleos din Bucuresti, aflat la Chisinau in cadrul unui program al… ICR. Tot dl Lazurca s-a gandit sa fie si ghidul bisericesc al lui Mircea Geoana intr-un “pelerinaj” care a cuprins doar manastirile din Basarabia aflate sub obladuirea Moscovei. Si tot dl Lazurca este cel care “a uitat” sa-i invite si pe patriotii romani inchisi timp de 13 si 15 ani la Tiraspol, de Ziua Nationala a Romaniei, pentru prima oara de la eliberarea lor din temnitele rusesti.

La fel ca ministeriatul nasului sau, dl Lazurca a fost considerat, in precedentul sau post, drept cel mai jenant ambasador la Vatican din tot corpul diplomatic acreditat pe langa Sfantul Scaun, conform aprecierilor de la fata locului. Ca sa dam un singur exemplu, dl Lazurca a refuzat sa sustina in 2008 celebra expozitie internationala realizata in triplu parteneriat Romania-Moldova-Ucraina, “Cucuteni-Trypillia. O mare civilizaţie a Vechii Europe (5000 – 3000 î.Ch.)” , riscand eliminarea primelor doua din expozitia de la Vatican, respectiv a Romaniei, care reprezenta si Moldova, in favoarea unilaterala a Ucrainei. Dupa eforturi de diplomatie culturala incomensurabile si fara absolut nici un sprijin din partea Ambasadei Romaniei expozitia care definea autenticul “brand” romanesc, al vetrei civilizatiei europene, s-a desfasurat pana la urma dupa cum fusese prevazut dar sub patronajul… Ambasadei Ucrainei pe langa Sfantul Scaun!

Ca sa ne intoarcem la Chisinau, cei noua istorici basarabeni care au incercat sa salveze obiectul de studiu Istoria Romanilor sunt Ghe. Cojocaru, dr. în istorie, Directorul Institutului de Istorie, Stat şi Drept, Academia de Ştiinte a Moldovei; Dragnev D., membru-corespondent al AŞM, Institutului de Istorie, Stat şi Drept, AŞM; Eşanu A., academician, Institutului de Istorie, Stat şi Drept, AŞM; Gonţa Gh., dr. habilitat, Facultatea de Istorie, Universitatea Pedagogică “I. Creangă”; Moşanu Al., dr. habilitat, membru de onoare al Academiei Române; Negrei I., istoric, Institutul de Istorie, Stat şi Drept, AŞM; Negru Gh., dr. în istorie, Institutul de Istorie, Stat şi Drept, AŞM; Parasca P., dr. habilitat, Facultatea de Istorie, ULIM; Varta I., dr. în istorie, Institutul de Istorie, Stat şi Drept, AŞM. Acestia sunt membri ai Comisiei pentru studierea și aprecierea regimului comunist totalitar din Republica Moldova – Comisie infiintata de fostul sef interimar al republicii, Mihai Ghimpu – in frunte cu presedintele acesteia, dl Gheorghe Cojocaru, se afla in conducerea Asociatiei Istoricilor din Republica Moldova si fac parte din Mişcarea Civică „Anul 1812” initiata de istorici basarabeni pentru comemorarea raptului rusesc din urma cu 200 de ani. Se lupta de 10 ani pentru apararea studiului Istoriei Romanilor. Nu sunt bursieri ICR.

Actiunea anti-romaneasca a celor doi bursieri ICR a starnit revolta altor colegi de breasla, mai ales ca si dl Igor Casu a facut parte din Comisia Ghimpu. Dr Veaceslav Stăvilă, la randul sau fost membru al Comisiei, se intreaba public daca nu cumva “Institutul Cultural Roman este finantat de Federatia Rusa?“. Ar fi fost mai bine, cred eu, pentru ca cel putin nu se cheltuiau banii vaduvelor si pensionarilor romani. Nici nu ar fi fost nevoie de schimbarea initialelor institutiei “de interes national”: ICR = Institutul Cultural Rus.

Dr. Mihai Tasca, secretar al Comisiei Ghimpu, apreciaza de-a dreptul ca ICR  este un adevarat vector al antiromanismul la Chisinau. Intr-un articol plin de mahnire aparut in “Adevarul”-Moldova, acesta rememoreaza cum directorul ICR – Chisinau, dl Petre Guran, la o conferinţa din 24 ianuarie 2011, ziua Micii Uniri, a vorbit celor prezenţi despre… Bizanţ. “Neobişnuit a fost discursul şefului ICR Chişinău şi la conferinţa din 27 martie 2011, când a povestit unei săli arhipline de unionişti care au venit să marcheze ziua Unirii Basarabiei cu Patria-Mamă … despre istoria Franţei”, scrie dl Mihai Tasca.


Powered by WordPress

customizable counter
Blog din Moldova