>>
>> Incidentally, there is a great book on Hungarian Jews (unfortunately,
I
>> don't think it has been translated yet), called "A Zsido Budapest".  I
>> couldn't believe my eyes learning about all the famous artists and
>> playwrights who happened to be all Jewish.  Eg. Kovacs Margit, the
famous
>> ceramist.  But these people didn't become famous as Jews, but as
>> Hungarian artist, writers, playrights, musicians, etc.
>>
>> Agnes Full title: Kereszteny vagy zsido Budapest Bpest: Held Nyomda,
1925, 144
>p.)
>
>Laszlo

No, Laszlo.  I have the 2-volume book.  It is called, "A Zsido Budapest".
 Agnes

In article >,
 says...
>
>Agnes Heringer wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > >It would be interesting to evaluate the success of kibutzim....
aren't
>> > >they based on some form of local communism?
>> >
>> > I'd be interested in knowing how many Hungarian Jews were among the
first
>> > kibbutzim in Israel.
>> >
>> > I don't think, there were many, or any.  The first kibbutzim were
>> founded by Russian Jews before the Russian revolution, as a necessity.
>> Hungarian Jews were very happy in Hungary at the turn of the century
and
>> did not think of pioneering in the desert.   Presently, only 2% of the
>> population lives on the kibbutzes, and the young ones are drifting
away.
>> - This is what a guide told me years ago, when I visited Israel and
took
>> tours.
>> > >
>> Regards,
>>
>> Agnes HeringerAgnes:
>
>I know next to nothing on the subject but I've read two work (both quite
>sometimes ago) that give fascinating points of view of the atmosphere
and
>spirit of the life on the kibutzim from the point of view of two
>Hungarian writers. Arthur Koestler in one of his autobiographical
>writings (Arrow into the blue; recently translated and published as
>Nyilvesszo a vegtelenbe) gives an account of life in the kibutzim as he
>had experienced it in his youth (although briefly). The other book is by
>Kardos Gyorgy, a fiction, based on life in the kibutzim, titled Avraham
>Bogatir het napja (Avraham's good week). Koestler, if I recall, also
>gives a bit of historical background for the kibutzim movement.
>Regards, Laszlo

I have read both books.  Worthwhile reading.  Agnes

In article >, 
says...
>
>Hi, Joe and Agnes!
>
>At 20:17 10/02/97 GMT, you wrote:
>>
>>>>And they are collecting now for starting a Hungarian TV station.
>>>>
>>>>Agnes
>>>
>>>You don't really mean that, do you?  Don't you mean 'programme'?  A TV
>>>station is very expensive.  Not even the Chinese community has it's
own
>>TV
>>>station.  I believe they have their own radio station now, but not TV.
>>>Maybe next century.
>>>
>>>Joe Szalai
>>
>>Sorry, Joe, you are right - forgive my "pongyola" English, but I am
sure
>>people understood what I meant.
>>
>>Agnes
>
>Now that you got that straightened out, could you ask the people behind
this
>drive to try to have the program put on CHCH in Hamilton? That is the
only
>Ontario TV station that we get down here in Nova Scotia, and I believe
they
>do broadcast quite of bit of ethnic programming, like Indian and
Portuguese
>programs on Saturday or Sunday morning.
>
>Thanks!
>
>Johanne/Janka
>
>
>We don't have it yet;  I have no idea on which station, and when it
will be.  Agnes>
>>
>Johanne L. Tournier
>e-mail - 

<<<<<<<<<<At 04:22 AM 2/9/97 -0500, Janos Zsargo wrote:

>E.Balogh wrote:

>The Munkaspart also
>>has a website where you can vote on the NATO issue. According to the latest
>>results the pro-NATO people are leading by a few hundred votes. Our vice



>These 'third-road ideas' are the real dangers. And I would add one more.
>Last summer when I was at home, I talked about this NATO issue with my
>family members. Let's say they was not really enthusiastic about the
>idea. They were not against it, but simple did not believe it. They
>kept saying 'they (i.e NATO) won't accept us, why to force it'. The
>same type of stupidy as the one made so many people to vote for the
>Socialist Party.

< ......
< .......



<        As for the Smallholders (since you mentioned that they may not be
<for NATO), I am sure they are not for NATO, even if Torgyan doesn't say so
<openly. Not only that but I bet that Torgyan's followers--and that is about<
<20 percent of the electorate right now--will go to the polls and vote with a
<"no" to NATO. In brief, I am worried about the referendum and the
<governments in Hungary are not noted for being able to "communicate" with
<the population. Again, I think because they are not accustomed to the kind
<of openness and accountibility we take for granted.

<        Eva Balogh

Hello everybody,

have a look at today4s Magyar Nemzet :
          www.magyarnemzet.hu/mn/kk002t.stm :
"A polgarok nagy resze a NATO-tagsag mellett"..."Folymatosan
noevekszik a NATO-csatlakozast tamogatok koere.." ( Keleti
Gyoergy )...( noha persze mar eleri az 52 szazalekot...25-30
szazalek nem foglal allast )

Also, for the all-time hit Soros vs Capitalism
         www.mhirlap.hu/ujanyag/soros/htlm
featuring :

         Soros Gyo:rgy : A kapitalista fenyegete4s,

the text from ( Magyar Hirlap, Ko:ze4p-Euro4pa melle4klet, 1997.janua4r 25. )

Miklos

At 11:51 PM 2/11/97 GMT, Sam Stowe wrote:

<snip>
>If by "symbiotic" you mean that capitalism and democracy inevitably go
>hand-in-hand, then no, you won't find an indestructible bond linking the
>two regardless of historical context. That doesn't mean, however, that the
>two are irreconcilable. Capitalism will thrive under a variety of
>political circumstances as democracy will thrive under a variety of
>economic circumstances. The two systems live in dynamic tension with one
>another and rarely find a satisfying equilibrium which lasts for very
>long. That's why we see swings in the amount of government interference in
>the economic sphere of life and why the wealth produced by that sphere
>sometimes has an unhealthy impact on the political sphere. It's a
>never-ending tug-of-war designed specifically to allow you to run off at
>the mouth with your crackpot theories.

My crackpot theories?  Why do you call them that?  Because you can't
understand them?  Or is it because you haven't discovered them yet?  Some of
my crackpot theories about 'corporatism' come from John Ralston Saul.  His
latest book, "The Unconscious Civilization", which is about corporatism, won
the Governor General's Literary Award late last year.  You may also be
interested in one of his major works, "Voltaire's Bastards: The Dictatorship
of Reason in the West".  Order them from a good bookstore and surprise your
friends that you can move beyond the 1950s in your political and social
philosophy.  "The Unconscious Civilization" would also be good reading for
anyone interested in a realistic understanding of what's happening in
Hungarian politics today.

<snip>
>Gee, why speak so hatefully of the proletariat unless you believe that
>stuff about an intellectual vanguard which will lead the masses to a
>higher class conscience? Sure, they can vote themselves bread and
>circuses. But in a real democracy, they can also change their minds and
>throw the bakers and the circus clowns out of office. If the Hungarians
>democratically elect a government to nationalize or socialize everything,
>that's their democratic prerogative. The question is whether that
>government, once the electorate decides it's had enough of nationalizing
>and socializing everything in sight, will accept its removal from power at
>the ballot box. If it doesn't, then it's no longer democratic. How's your
>juggling coming along?
>Sam Stowe

Social democrats have always used the ballot box to gain power and have
always respected the people's rejection of them.  That's probably why many
non-social democrats use that label.  And when they do that, they just
confuse some people about what social democracy is.  They sure managed to
confuse you!

>P.S. -- Ssssh. We'ah hunting wabbits...

Oh, I see.  In that case, forget about John Ralston Saul.  I mean, if you're
hooked on Elmer Fudd, you don't need any enlightenment by any Canadian
humanist philosopher.  By the way, have you caught up on all the "Father
Knows Best" reruns on TV?

Joe Szalai

The good displeases us when we have not yet grown up to it.
       Nietzsche

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

Priority:
   normal

Background:
   The International Court of Justice has elected a new President,
the American professor of law (the Johns Hopkins University) Stephen
Schwebel. 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 is sensible 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 for 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 from US: 011-31-70-3649-928
   Fax from Europe: 0031-70-3649-928

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 to your well deserved appointment as the new
President of the International Court of Justice. Your professional
background is a guarantee to further increase the reputation of the
court.

    In February, for the first time in history, your Court will decide on
an environmental lawsuit which effects 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
ground-water 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 taking this Compromise Plan into 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, 
the American professor of law (the Johns Hopkins University) Stephen 
Schwebel. 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 is sensible 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 for 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 from US: 011-31-70-3649-928
   Fax from Europe: 0031-70-3649-928

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 to your well deserved appointment as the new 
President of the International Court of Justice. Your professional 
background is a guarantee to further increase the reputation of the 
court. 

    In February, for the first time in history, your Court will decide on
an environmental lawsuit which effects 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
ground-water 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 taking this Compromise Plan into consideration as it
makes its historic ruling.  

Respectfully,

name, title, address

On Wed, 12 Feb 1997, George Jalsovszky wrote:

<snip>
> I am afraid, dear Joe, you have (slightly) misunderstood something. It is
> not "A" conservative morality, not to mention "THEIR" conservative morality.
> It is OURS that kadargyuri wants Hungarians to return to.

I'm sure I understood what kadargyuri meant.  What I'm interested in is;
who will be society's  scapegoats this time around?

By the way, it's 1997.  It is impossible to return to the past, no matter
how hard you try.  On the other hand, if you're interested in tragadies,
it's never too late for that.

Joe Szalai

At 03:56 PM 2/11/97 +0100, Miklos Hoffmann wrote:

>and much more about your concern re the position of Hungarians to NATO.
>Here a small promising sign : a survey of the Ministry of Defense shows
>the averall positive reaction (72 percent ) of Hungarians to the IFOR
>units stationed there ( mostly GIs ). "You came fourty years to late, boys..."
.
>
>You find more in todays Magyar Nemzet Online
>           //www.magyarnemzet.hu/mn/bp007t.stm
>
        I followed your advice and I looked at Magyar Nemzet's website. Some
of my friends from FORUM/SZABAD think that at the end the referendum will
pass. Our friend Lajos Monoki (who has been too busy lately to participate
in our discussions) thinks that the Hungarian army is in such terrible shape
that NATO will be surprised. Or rather that it will take an awful lot of
money to make something out of it. What he is most worried about is the
quality of the officer corps. He does know something about army matters
because he himself attended a military academy in Warsaw.
        As for the IFOR troops, the people who live in Kaposvar or around
there have high opinion of the American troops. But I understand that the
American servicemen can hardly get out of the barracks. They can go to
Kaposvar only in groups of ten and they need special permission to accept a
dinner invitation from the locals. I myself encountered Swedish troops in
Pecs a year ago when I visited my relatives there. I saw a few military
trucks but mostly Swedes wandering around in the supermarkets, stores, and
banks. One thing is sure the government and the ministry of defense is very
pro-NATO and they are trying their darndest to get in. As you know I agree
with that part of the government's program. The same is applicable to their
efforts concerning the European Union. I also applaud their efforts at
making peace with the neighbors. Unfortunately, the Slovaks are not
reciprocating. On the other hand, the Romanian developments and utterances
are very promising. I would be especially pleased if there was some decent
relationship between these two countries: after all, the largest Hungarian
minority happens to be in Romania.

        Eva Balogh

Kedves Gyoergy,

I think, it is evident that we do agree upon a number of issues.
I am not going to repeat them. Yes, I do subscribe to the des-
cription of the events and very much so to Eva4s elaborations.
The more important for a wider consensus is - not only for a list,
but for societies and nations as well - the value system, social
systems are built upon. I am trying to formulate carefully in order
to avoid misunderstandings : at least here in Western Europe, you
wouldn4t get very far with the message of "conservative moralism" -
especially with young people. I am afraid, the LABELS are worn off.
If you get down to specific elements on a basic level, however, it
is astonishing how many people could follow. And people must follow!
Part of the problem is a - maybe - radical shift in THE USAGE OF LAN-
GUAGE. And language is making world - not only since Wittgenstein.

Thus, first of all, before getting involved in arguments, I4d suggest,
you define the basics of your, George Jelsowski called it OUR ( with
capital letters... ), "conservative moralism". Maybe, we are all to-
gether. But in that case, we would need majorities...How to get them?
And if you are convinced of something, it is your task to transfer your
opinion to the others...Kadargyorgyevics!

>>>        Lectoris Salutem!

<<<I agree with Eva Balogh's elaborate description of the media-government
relation....

<<        Something else!
<<        Here is a good example of deliberate misunderstanding by J.Sz.:

Why deliberate? I don4t always agree with J.Sz.. But by
the sheer fact of being a creature, he has an unalianable
human right to misunderstand something - I think in the
best sense of conservative morality.

>At 07:09 PM 2/11/97 +0100, Kadar Gyorgy wrote:
>>snip>
>>Without the return of conservative morality
>>we  Hungarians (here in Hungary) will certainly be lost.

>What on earth do you mean that Hungary must return to a "conservative
>morality"?  I thought Hungary wanted to be a part of Europe, and not a
>part
>of central Asia, like Uzbekistan, Afganistan, Turkmenistan or Kirghizstan
>to name just a few of the nations who never abandoned their conservative
>morality.
>Joe Szalai

<<        F u n d a m e n t a l i s m   of central Asian nations
<<is not to be mixed up with
<<        European "conservative morality".
<<Two, too different concepts...

<<        Istenvelunk...                  kadargyorgy

There was and there is conservative, liberal, national, protestant,
catholic, jewish,...fundamentalism in Europe, America,etc as well...
just look at history....

Uedv
Hoffmann Miklos

ARCHDUKE FERDINAND FOUND ALIVE --
    FIRST WORLD WAR A MISTAKE

More details will follow!

Joe Szalai

In article >,
Darren Purcell > writes:

>Just out of curiousity, isn't this exactly what France seems to do every
>once in a great while, put a person in office who shifts the policies fat
>left or far right?
>
>Darren Purcell
>
>

There doesn't seem to be much of a political middle in French politics, does
there? What's striking to me in that context is how ruthless French governments
are in carrying out policy no matter what political tradition they represent.
Remember the Rainbow Warrior bombing in New Zeland years back?
Sam Stowe

"Nasal phlegm. Some guys may think it's
funny, Mr. Noir, but it's not."
-- The bartender in Guy Noir's office building

In article >,  writes:

>Sam
>
>Thank you for the kind words.

Always happy to oblige.

>
>Your response, confirms a belief:
>Cut rate prune juice, fortified with an old thesaurus and backed by a
>mickey -mouse degree from Pasadena is an elixir one should not take
>lightly.

The metaphor is as strained as the prune juice. You really should try to cut
back.

>Especially in the hands of insidious, self-absorbed would be writers,
>who
>have little tolerance for differing points of view.

It's "would-be." And I get paid pretty decent bucks to write, by the way. Do
you make much off of your work as a self-absorbed, invidious, would-be critic
who has little tolerance for differing points of view?

>
>Please carry on scribbling. There are always some pugnacious
>rapscallions and people of similar psychological makeup who are
>often entertained by lame retorts and outright rudeness.

The rudeness is forthright, not outright. The retorts must not be too lame,
else you wouldn't spend so much time trolling for them. And "rapscallions"? May
I suggest an updated thesaurus for you, old chap?

>
>With kindest regards

Bullshit.
>
>                       Mark

Sam Stowe


"Nasal phlegm. Some guys may think it's
funny, Mr. Noir, but it's not."
-- The bartender in Guy Noir's office building

In article >, 
(MDtoCEO) writes:

>Subject:       Re: first generation hungarian
>From:   (MDtoCEO)
>Date:  12 Feb 1997 20:40:06 GMT
>
>Is your nationality in your genes, or in your head?

I keep my wallet, passport, keys and change in my genes. My nationality won't
fit, even when I fold it up several times over.

>
>My genes are Welsh.  My passport is American.  My heart is Magyar.

Rydych chi yn gymysgedd, 'te! The three are all mutually compatible as long as
you can wave your hands about and dance up and down at the same time. So which
nationality is your head? And welcome to BLH, by the way, where the men are
men, the women are women and no one's really sure about the Romanians.
Sam Stowe

P.S. -- Never mind Frank Novak. He's from Barcelona, you know.
>
>Na?
>
>Kristof



"Nasal phlegm. Some guys may think it's
funny, Mr. Noir, but it's not."
-- The bartender in Guy Noir's office building

At 06:55 PM 2/12/97 +0100, Kadar Gyorgy wrote:

<snip>
>        F u n d a m e n t a l i s m   of central Asian nations
>is not to be mixed up with
>        European "conservative morality".
>Two, too different concepts...
>
>        Istenvelunk...                  kadargyorgy

Your terms are relative.  And why shouldn't I mix up central Asian
fundamentalism with European "conservative morality"?, with "OUR" (as George
Jalsovszky tells me) Hungarian "conservative morality"?  Because Europeans,
or, "our" moralities, are "better"?  Because Europeans aren't as "fanatical"
as the central Asians?

Joe Szalai

Convictions are more dangerous foes of truth than lies.
         Nietzsche

what this is all about?


----------
>From:  Ferenc Novak[SMTP:]
>Sent:  Tuesday, 11 February 1997 12:12
>To:  Multiple recipients of list HUNGARY
>Subject:  Re: Oh, No -- NATO!
>
 on Feb  8 18:44:27 EST 1997 in HUNGARY #909:
>
>snip
>
>Agreed.  While in 1956 a lot of people would have liked Hungary to join =
>in a
>Western alliance for protection against Soviet domination, it would have =
>been
>impolitic to state it outright.  It would have given the Soviets an =
>excuse
>for intervention (not that they needed one) and would have alienated =
>those
>who, while opposed to Soviet domination of the country, were also =
>against
>joining the other side that had been portrayed by the communists as =
>"western
>imperialists bent on starting another world war".  Neutrality was =
>something
>everyone could live with.
>
>Ferenc

The whole thing looks like it was re-typed by someone.  The quoted lines were
snipped.  Thereb are hard linefeeds all over.  Can somebody tell me how this
happened?

Ferenc

Joe Szalai > wrote on Tue Feb 11 17:31:13 EST
1997  in HUNGARY #912:

>At 07:09 PM 2/11/97 +0100, Kadar Gyorgy wrote:
>
><snip>
>>Without the return of conservative morality
>>we  Hungarians (here in Hungary) will certainly be lost.
>>Of course I see the  desperate idealism of all the above text...
>
>What on earth do you mean that Hungary must return to a "conservative
>morality"?  I thought Hungary wanted to be a part of Europe, and not a part
>of central Asia, like Uzbekistan, Afganistan, Turkmenistan or Kirghizstan to
>name just a few of the nations who never abandoned their conservative morality
.
>
I am afraid, dear Joe, you have (slightly) misunderstood something. It is
not "A" conservative morality, not to mention "THEIR" conservative morality.
It is OURS that kadargyuri wants Hungarians to return to.

George Jalsovszky

Lectoris Salutem!

I agree with Eva Balogh's elaborate description of the media-government
relation in the period 1994 -->1997, my examples wanted to illustrate the
1990 "pre-war" unilateral hatred by the media towards the then new-born,
still innocent Antall-government.
        The roots are probably to be looked for in 1989. On March 15 and
June 15 (re-burial of Nagy Imre and the unknown 56-er) the opposition of
the MSzMP could show its capability, and that could have been enough even
for a more radical revolution. Antall, Tolgyessy and others of the
moderate line (unlike Orban and Csengey) chose the path of negotiations.
For several months of the long summer of 1989 the media elit (and many
more) "crowded the Damascus road" and surprising conversions could be
detected. Most of the media elite wanted to stay elite, wanted to seem
ultra-modern, more than Hungarian, more than European (that is American
style). The SzDSz, "volent-nolent", found itself in the tight ring of
newly converted ultra-neo-liberal journalists.
        "The moment of truth (momento della verita)" arrived on the date
of September 18. The negotiations of the "national round-table" were
concluded and a document to be signed by all the participants was
prepared. Before the ceremony of the signature no sign of discontent was
expressed by any of the partners.
        {Here I open a parenthesis. After March of 1995 in a discussion
list I condemned Gyula Horn because he did not refuse the signature of the
Slovak-Hungarian basic treaty, instead he received and accepted the letter
of Meciar in the last moment before signature. That letter expressed the
intention of the modification of the common understanding of the content
of the basic treaty. In such a case - IMHO - one has to choose the ardous
path of renegotiation in order to find a new compromise.}
        Without any preliminary warning (let alone discussion with the
other opposition partners) on 18 September the SzDSz and Fidesz announced
that they do not sign the closing document, but do not demand any
renegotiation, they go on their own way (propose referendum). It would be
very interesting to know, how and why this (I am sorry to say,but that is
what I think) betrayal happened. Why was it so important in that moment
for the "liberal faction" to be separated so clearly from the "national
faction" of the opposition of the MSzMP? (The "President of the Republic"
question could have been renegotiated, the other three questions of the
later referendum were clearly decided in the closing document as to the
common will of all opposition partners). The "national faction" did not
see any intention of compromise from the part of the "liberal faction",
did not want to throw away all the other, commonly agreed, very important
points of the document, signed it securing the process of peaceful
political transition.
        The ultra-neo-liberal journalists were content and happy to find
a contraposition between partners, who earlier could agree with each
other without any shoutings and (virtual) shootings. Journalism is too
monotonous without enemies. They found their enemy in the ("labszagu,
mucsai") MDF-centered "national faction" of the opposition, more
convenient solution than to turn against their earlier MSzMP masters. This
may be a kind of explanation.
Converted neophytes are dangerous...

        Something else!
        Here is a good example of deliberate misunderstanding by J.Sz.:
>At 07:09 PM 2/11/97 +0100, Kadar Gyorgy wrote:
>>snip>
>>Without the return of conservative morality
>>we  Hungarians (here in Hungary) will certainly be lost.

>What on earth do you mean that Hungary must return to a "conservative
>morality"?  I thought Hungary wanted to be a part of Europe, and not a
>part
>of central Asia, like Uzbekistan, Afganistan, Turkmenistan or Kirghizstan
>to name just a few of the nations who never abandoned their conservative
>morality.
>Joe Szalai

        F u n d a m e n t a l i s m   of central Asian nations
is not to be mixed up with
        European "conservative morality".
Two, too different concepts...

        Istenvelunk...                  kadargyorgy