I've just read in the HVG the list of organisations
to be financially assisted by govt, one of them
"Magyar Garaboncias Szovetseg". Can anyone tell me
what thisorganisation  is?
I only know the word "garaboncias"
as an adjective of students in the old times (very old).
I thought it ment traveller or something similar.
Eva Durant

Kedves Eva!

At 08:48 13/05/96 +0100, Eva Durant wrote:
>I've just read in the HVG the list of organisations
>to be financially assisted by govt, one of them
>"Magyar Garaboncias Szovetseg". Can anyone tell me
>what thisorganisation  is?
>I only know the word "garaboncias"
>as an adjective of students in the old times (very old).
>I thought it ment traveller or something similar.
>Eva Durant

Checking in my *Nagyszo'ta'r*, I found this:

garaboncia's - a [adjective], ~ dia'k - wizard (disguised as travelling
student able to raise storm in popular superstition)

It would be amusing, would it not, if the government is subsidizing an
organization of wizards? Does anyone know if the weather is Hungary recently
has been unusually dry? :-)

Yours,

Johanne

Johanne L. Tournier
e-mail - 


>

Roman Kanala  > wrote:
>
>The case of South TIrolia has been frequently quoted by Meciar II in
>the early days when it still wasn't clear what his agenda was. It's
>an example that the collective rights might lead to a creation of a
>ghetto and ethnic stratification, an evolution from a spectre to a
>dichotomy. Short, exactly the opposite what would be in interest of
>Slovakia given its history, settlement pattern and common cultural
>heritage of the two nations.

You know what's wrong with this?  That the majority wants to tell the
minority what's good for them.  I suggest it's the Tyroleans themselves
who should decide what's good for them, not the outsiders.  Judging from
the peace there since the current arrangement, they must like it.
It's only natural that most people want a place where they feel like at
home among their own kind.  Especially in this atomized, alianated
world.

Joe

>>Miert te is homokos vagy?
>
>        Why? Does it make a difference to you?
>
>        Eva Balogh

Nekem van gyomrom!!! (I still have a stomach!!!)

At 05:57 AM 5/13/96 GMT, Laszlo May wrote:

>>>Miert te is homokos vagy?
>>
>>        Why? Does it make a difference to you?
>>
>>        Eva Balogh
>
>Nekem van gyomrom!!! (I still have a stomach!!!)

That's very good.  Now, do you still have a brain?  Can you use it
rationally?  I notice that your email address is in Canada.  Now that Canada
has a law that prohibits discrimination against gays and lesbians, I hope
you don't feel that you have to move on.  If you do, perhaps Russia can
offer you the freedom from fags that you desire.  There's not much chance
that Russia will have a no discrimination law in the near future.  The last
poll I saw on the matter indicated that only 30 percent of Russians support
such a law.  On the other hand 30 percent of Russians want gays to be
killed.  If Russia sounds a bit too harsh perhaps Romania may be to your
liking.  There, homosexuality is considered to be one of the worst illness
around.  So, just because Canada is making you swallow something you don't
like, there are still places on this planet where you'd feel right at home.
Call your travel agent before it's too late.

Joe Szalai

Before George Szaszvari goes further and further into a hole and before I
can read all his massive postings of yesterday, I would like to make it
clear that our senior citizen Jozsi ba' of poor knowledge of Hungarian,
recovered within days, doesn't exists. So, let's not get too righteous.

        Eva Balogh

At 04:24 PM 5/12/96 -0700, you wrote:
>I am not trying to butt in  but I do remember Jozsi ba's postings of a while
>ago. I am sure if George had a chance to read them, he would understand.
>
>Maybe Eva can dig some of them out.
>
>Gabor D. Farkas

        Unfortunately, HIX's archives are under reorganization and
unavailable. But as soon as it is restored, for George Szaszvari's sake, I
will certainly dig it up. Our virtual Jozsi ba' trampled on my good name,
attacked me as a professional, and altogether used language unacceptable in
my circles. If George Szaszvari finds Jozsi ba' so sympathetic, he can
always find him in his new position as the editor of Nemzet at
siliconvalley. And if he thinks that we are unfair to the virtual users of
siliconvalley, perhaps he neglected to read the posting of one of their
members, starting around March 15. The siliconvalley crowd is not much of a
crowd and the ideas expressed there I find objectionable and dangerous.
Obviously, George Szaszvari has a different opinion.

        Eva Balogh

>Cecilia's longish P.S. was really quite unnecessary. She simply
>misunderstood my line about her knowledge, or rather its lack of, Hungarian.
>My note simply said that if she could read the Forum--a Hungarian-language
>list--I doubt that she would accuse us of overreaction. Gabor Farkas, who
>has the "privilege" of being able to read day in and day out the most
>vitriolic antisemitic, national socialist drivel, is right. There is no
>overreaction here. That's all. The English-language list for those who can
>handle English, including the native speakers. On the other hand, the Forum
>is a closed book for those who don't know Hungarian and most of the
>antisemitism we are talking about takes place on the Forum.
>
>        I will spare the readership of quoting Cecilia's P.S. of
>considerable length.
>
>        Eva Balogh
>
>Eva:I understand from the Forum,that you are a paid propagandist by the
Governement of Hungary.Otherwise how could you have so much time to write in
all the hungarian related threads.Good news eh?As we say in Canada.A.K.

Well, I read both of the pieces. Don't you think you have overdone
it a bit, George?

        Here is a list of my sins, according to you, of course.

        agressive
        distasteful
        self-righteous
        shocking
        gratitous personal attack
        dreadfully patronizing
        vulgar
        thoroughly astonishing
        shameless
        nauseating

        I am sure if I tried harder I would find a few more. Maybe indeed it
is a personality clash between us. Or perhaps your problem is that I made
mention of the fact that your friend Cecilia couldn't read the Forum because
she doesn't know the language. Now it turns out that you don't either. There
is nothing wrong with not knowing Hungarian. What is wrong is your jumping
to conclusions without knowing the facts.

        I also find it "thoroughly astonishing" that you personally found
nothing wrong with the virtual Andras Szucs's postings. Well, in that case,
"kvittek vagyunk."

        Eva Balogh

In last week's Toronto Star,there was an article about Raul Wallenberg,the
Swedish diplomat whose help to Hungarian Jews saved thousands of life's myne
included.
According to this article Mr.Wallenberg was a US.spy,and this was the reason
the soviets tooke him away.
His where abouts where unknown so was his life or death.
I would appreciate if anyone could comment on this.
Thank you:Andy Kozma.

>Thanks to Andy Kozma for reminding us that only on a list dealing with
>East/East Central Europe (in this case, Hungary) could being an academic
>be considered as being on a par with being, say, a child molester, or
>a sub-humanoid.  My profound apologies to Andy and his friends for having
>earned a Ph.D.
>
>Udv.,
>William M. Batkay, Ph.D., Columbia University 1972, M.A., columbia
>        Univesity 1967, Certificate from the Institute on East Central
>        Europe, Columbia University 1967 (perhaps the most offensive of
>        my degrees?), BA, Fordham University 1965
>
>Congratulation on earning aPh.D.
It is your suggestion wich disturbs me as a responsible cytisen that you try
to put words in my mouth comparing academics with molesters and what is a
sub-humanoid?
Since I did not earn a PH.D.will you expand on your thoughts.
Andy Kozma.

>At 07:50 AM 5/12/96 GMT, Laszlo May wrote:
>>In article >, Joe Szalai
> says:
>>>
>>
>>>
>>>Any chance that Hungary will be the third nation in the world to have such a
>>>human rights law?
>>>
>>>Joe Szalai
>>
>>Miert te is homokos vagy?
>
>        Why? Does it make a difference to you?
>
>        Eva Balogh
>
>Did you include Canada as well?The law has just be passed,and this way
according to Joe we are all Homokos.
What aboutyou Joe?Are you scared from them?Anyone otherthan you?

OK, to all those who still have a stomach after the abuse Joe Szalai has
been taking, from people who do not stomach the presence of alternative
lifestyles...GET A CLUE!

YOu are not near anyone in space, it doesn't transmit, homosexuality is
not a disease, and for the gay friends I have in Hungary, it is a real
issue.

An exchange student from the US I knew in Budapest made it very clear
that it was a dangerous situation. He wasn't exactly open about his
preferences for men, but it drew trouble to him. It hit me as well.  I have
been attacked by skinheads on
the justification of being foreign and potentially gay based on a
clothing style, the spanish or latin baja was considered queer clothing
by this group of skins.
. (Pecs is in the
videk, no?). So before people start on the queer inquisition, think about
what life might be like if you were gay and very much the minority. Might
start feeling like Hungarians in Voivodina, where you are not able to be
yourself and have to suppress an identity in public space.

And don't say that they could change or bring it upon themselves, That
would be the argument
the nationalist parties of Romania and Serbia might try to use in regard
to minorities in their regions.

More
than my two cents worth. This kind of reaction makes MY stomach turn.

Darren Purcell
Department of Geography
Florida State University

Dr Antonopoulos writes:

>      Actually I was not referring to the slave trade, but rather
> to the taking of prisoners who would work in the mines, on craft
> and possibly agriculture.
  In his other work, the Legatio
> ad urbem constantinopolitanam, Liutprand of Cremona explicitly
> states that he witnessed the dragging of 500 Greek prisoners by
> 300 Magyars near Thessalonica (I can supply you with the Latin
> text if interested), and he is certainly not lying at this point.

Well, Liudprand is an interesting chronicler. It is certain that he is not
biased toward the Hungarians of those days. I always found it quite
interesting how he "quotes" Hungarian war councils. I am reasonably sure
that he was not present, and even if he was, he would not have understood a
word they were saying. Now in the "De Legatione Constantinopolitana"
he does mention (in the reprt to his new boss Otto) Chapter 45 "When you
(Otto) were besieging Bari, not more than three hundred Hungarians laid
hands on five hundred Greeks near Thessalonica and hauled them off to
Hungary. Their success induced two hundred Hungarians in Macedonia, not far
from Constantinople, to attempt a similar feat; but forty of them retiring
carelessly along a narrow pass, were taken prisoners. These men Nicephoros
has released from prison, and dressing them in the most costly garments has
made them his bodyguard and defenders, to go against the Assyrians. What
sort of an army it is you can infer from this fact: the chief officers
came from Venice and Amalfi." (it look like the good bishop of Cremona had
other prejudices than just against Hungarians. Now this occured during
Liudprand's second visit to Constantinople in 968.
(Please note that in 973 March 23 twelve Hungarian nobles asked Otto to
assist in the conversion of Geza and the Hungarians to Christianity, thus
it was also the late times in raiding if the story quoted actually took
place as recited by Liudprand.)
However, the siege of Bari by Otto's forces took place before Luidprand got
to Constantinople, thus the good bishop of Cremona could have heard the
cited case only as hearsay. But it is a good story, whatever the numbers
were on either side. (During that visit to Byzantium, he is very derogatory
of anything Greek, so who knows what the actual numbers were.)


> At the same time, the Byzantine sources explicitly state the
> capture, and freedom by the merciful emperor for that cause, of
> prisoners by raiding Magyars.

Yes, as cited above, even if they were under the command of the despised
Venetians and Amalfi.


If we take things a bit further, I
> would suggest that the story of Botond indirectly points to that,
> as well as the acquisition of wealth, perhaps more directly.

I do take Anonymus' writings with a grain of salt also, whatever source he
used to copy the Botond legend.

>      Coming to this point true, Magyar bands would not need to
> travel as far as Spain to acquire wealth, but geographical
> distance is one relative factor.  The other is the feasibility of
> the project.  If nearby German towns looked stronger at the time,
> and a "kind prince" would instigate the Magyars come far afield
> to pick their lot, then conditions favour such an adventurous
> enterprise.

Well lets use Liudprand as a source for the Spanish visit. He was having
trouble with the Saracen army which was headed toward Italy (Antapodosis
Chapter 16) but he paid them off temporarily to station themselves between
Schwabia and Italy to prevent Berengar from entering Italy (Antapodosis
Chapter 17), but when Berengar failed, Hugo was ready to sick the
Hungarians on the Saracens as can be read in Chpater 19 "At the same time
King Hugo made piece with the Hungarians, giving them ten pecks of gold. He
then extracted hostages and expelled them from Italy, supplying them  with
a guide to show them the road to Spain." Fortunately for the Saracens, that
year, the rain in Spain did not come, so the Hungarians "thinking that they
and their horses would die there of thirst, they beat to death the guide
that Hugo had given them and went back quicker than they came"

Please understand that I am not claiming that there was no wealth involved
in the movements of the rapid reaction forces of the Hungarians, but it
certainly appears that they were willing pawns of the stirrers of the mess
that western Europe was, up to the establishment of a strong monarchy by
Otto. Sometimes, as indicated above, they even collected their fees before
departing on a visit to lands far away.


>      Coming to the sack of towns, well I think Italian and German
> sources do not always exaggerate.  The descriptions of the battle
> of Brenta, and especially the sack of Pavia in 926 seem to me to
> be pretty sound, and German descriptions are no better, if less
> dramatic.

It is specifically those descriptions by Liudprand that I have problems.
Luidprand was born in 920, so some of the descriptions are either
precedding him (Brenta) or were childhood memories (Pavia, If he was there
and survived the "pillage") For the Brenta battle Luidprand writes "King
Berengar who had never before even heard the word 'Hungarian', could not
contain his surprise....". Considering that he already had a visit from
them as allies of Arnulf I, this is obviously not correct. (note that the
Brenta battle is claimed by Liudprand to have happaned in the same year in
which King Louis died and Conrad became king.) He probably combined the
stories of the Brenta Battle from 899 and later events. As far as the
burning of Pavia is concerned, at that time they came as allies of the
desperate Berengar and burned Pavia in 924 and Berengar was assasinated in
April of that same year. Liudprand waffles over the date when Rudolph tried
to take over Lombardy saying only that "about the same time", ignoring that
the battle for Lombardy was going on since 921, when Rudolph actually
crossed the Alps. As a matter of fact the Hungarians continued their
warfare even after Berengars murder into Rudolf's lands i.e. Burgundy. So
the statement that the Hungarians acted "after Berengar's death and while
Rudolph was absent by Luidprand is not correct. However, there are
indications that the outer parts of the city were burned because, Luidprand
talkes about the stout resistance of the survivors. Thus the siege efforts
of the Hungarians in the extant records is still limited.

I will forward mu source list by direct mail.


 Now as to Hamartolus, or Georgius
> Monachus as known by us Byzantinists (Hamartolus being mainly the
> slavonic derivation), I shall check and let you know if there is
> an English translation, before saying that I think there isn't
> one.  But if anyone of you needs some help with Greek sources,
> please do not hesitate to let me know and I shall always do my
> best to assist.
Thank you for the offer, I am particularly interested in the "Continuatus"
parts.

I will respond separately on the Szekely. although some others may beat me
to it.

Regards.JLK.

Andy Kozma:

>>Eva:I understand from the Forum,that you are a paid propagandist by the
>Governement of Hungary.Otherwise how could you have so much time to write in
>all the hungarian related threads.Good news eh?As we say in Canada.A.K.

        Yes, I was quite amused. Gyula Horn's agent at that! It must have
been that our Gyula read the Forum and read several of my writings in which
I keep repeating that I can't quite forgive him for 1956 and he said to
himself: yeah, that's our man. Pardon woman. Victor (whoever he is) also
thinks that I might not be a woman, I just pretend to be in order to
disguise my true identity. Or, maybe he thinks that women in general are too
stupid to carry on any intellectual conversation.

        And in today's Forum our Lajcsi (pardon nowadays called Pagony) says
that our Victor's piece is a philosophical masterpiece and compares it to a
notorious antisemite's long and confused letters.

        I don't quite know what the Forum's antisemites will do when they no
longer have me around. They will find themselves another victim, I guess.

        Eva Balogh

>Andy Kozma:
>
>>>Eva:I understand from the Forum,that you are a paid propagandist by the
>>Governement of Hungary.Otherwise how could you have so much time to write in
>>all the hungarian related threads.Good news eh?As we say in Canada.A.K.
>
>        Yes, I was quite amused. Gyula Horn's agent at that! It must have
>been that our Gyula read the Forum and read several of my writings in which
>I keep repeating that I can't quite forgive him for 1956 and he said to
>himself: yeah, that's our man. Pardon woman. Victor (whoever he is) also
>thinks that I might not be a woman, I just pretend to be in order to
>disguise my true identity. Or, maybe he thinks that women in general are too
>stupid to carry on any intellectual conversation.
>
>        And in today's Forum our Lajcsi (pardon nowadays called Pagony) says
>that our Victor's piece is a philosophical masterpiece and compares it to a
>notorious antisemite's long and confused letters.
>
>        I don't quite know what the Forum's antisemites will do when they no
>longer have me around. They will find themselves another victim, I guess.
>
>        Eva Balogh
>
>As you can see I am an avid reader of Forum.The unfortunate thing is,that
if you read it for a while my stomach is not only getting updet(hanyinger),but
as I mentioned before my opinion of the Hungarian people and my experience
when I "lived"in Hungary is not the most enthusiastic.
In conclusion I have decided that I will be "lurking"only on this thread.
Maybe I let you know what I feel,but asfar as I can see,my best way is not
reagalni to those extremist.I know there is a discussion that we shouldn't
let them get away with it,but at the same time we give them further platform
for there ugliness.
I allways wonder what would an American or a Canadian think of Hungarians
after reading those articles.This is the main reason I am greatfull to be
Canadian,and not very proud of my heritage.Sorry about that Eva,but this is
my personal priviledge,
Regards:A.K.

In article >, "W. BATKAY"
> writes:

>Thanks to Andy Kozma for reminding us that only on a list dealing with
>East/East Central Europe (in this case, Hungary) could being an academic
>be considered as being on a par with being, say, a child molester, or
>a sub-humanoid.  My profound apologies to Andy and his friends for having
>earned a Ph.D.
>
>Udv.,
>William M. Batkay, Ph.D., Columbia University 1972, M.A., columbia
>        Univesity 1967, Certificate from the Institute on East Central
>        Europe, Columbia University 1967 (perhaps the most offensive of
>        my degrees?), BA, Fordham University 1965
>
Huh? Boy, I sure didn't take Andy's post to mean what Dr. Batkay did. I
thought Andy was expressing relief that the list was back under the
control of academics. Szucs, after all, did take a shot at him during his
last incarnation here. Then again, Szucs's puppet master does ostensibly
hold academic credentials.
Sam Stowe

Eva Durant > said
>Michael Decker > said

(Bah!...you snipped out the bit where you said that totalitarian regimes
featuring slave labour were the best countries to invest in because they were
so safe!)

>> I can't think of a single totalitarian state which would be thought of by
>>any
>>financial institution as a safe investment.  Quite apart from the political
>>implications of investing in states with oppressive regimes, the main reason
>>is that it is simply not worth the risk.

>China, Indonasia, Malaysia, Saudi Arabia
>ok investmenwise,etc, etc. They are sold plenty tools of torture
>etc and arms to keep the place "secure".

There is a clear distinction between SELLING goods to a country and INVESTING
in a country.  We will SELL Tornado aircraft to Saudi, but we wouldn't dream
of setting up production facilities to build them there - the country has only
existed for 75 years or so!  But yes, we'll sell most things to any nation
that can afford to pay for them.

>>these nations are also the nations considered to be the best places in which
>>to invest?  That is why the top industrial nations get away with offering
>>relatively low interest rates: you can get a better rate elsewhere, but at
>>higher risk.  The point I made in my previous post (which you snipped!) was
>>that only by playing the game with the World Bank and IMF will nations like
>>Hungary get to be thought of as good places to invest.  Only when that
>>reputation is built will Hungary be able to compete globally.


>I snipped stuff, because I was told it is neticette to
>only copy the relevant stuff.

The bit you snipped was entirely relevant to the thread of the original post
with regard to Hungarian economic policy, and snipping it meant it made no
sense!  On the other hand, perhaps it made no sense anyway!

>The World Bank and the IMF is rightly blamed for imposing
>draconian economic structural adjustment policies that have
>only benefitted the rich.

Erm... you just can't say 'rightly blamed'!  That might be your opinion, but
it would be a minority view among people with a more thorough understanding of
economics and global business practise.  And Draco of Athens would be proud to
see you use his eponymous adjective after all these years.  Now there was a
nation that knew all about trade and effective ways of running an economy!

>The favouring of private industry
>has left people " more dependent on their own resources".
>But these are stretched rather now.
>Globally one percent of the world now controls 60 percent of
>the resources, and 80 percent srrabble for 15 percent of
>resources. (Harriet Lamb) And the trend is for worse, not for better.

Sorry, but this just isn't correct.  What is 'one percent of the world'?  Do
you mean 1% of the world's population, or 1% of the nations of the world?  Or
what?  And what are 'the resources'?  Are 60% of the 'resources' squeezed into
1% of the land?  Sorry, I just don't understand what you are saying here.
However I suspect it is more of a political comment than anything to do with
the principles of good financial management in countries that wish to trade
with other nations competitively.  Which is what this thread was originally
about!


>>Cheap, well-trained and
>>motivated workforces are NEVER out of date and DON'T just work for a
'limited
>>period'!  The workforce is the key element of any industry, almost without
>>exception.

>The question is than: how cheap? The brits are about the cheapest
>in Europe - but alas, not cheap enough.

All I can tell you is that over the past ten years Britain has taken more jobs
and plant from their traditional bases in the East than any other Western
nation, and is currently the world's fifth largest exporter in markets it
could only dream about twenty years ago.  The Welsh make TV's cheaper than the
Koreans and supply Europe with more sets than Japan!

>>a plant.  I think you are suggesting (please chastise me if I am wrong!)
that
>>after five years the directors of Ford, or whoever, pack a few suitcases
with
>>#20 notes and flee the country!  That's just not what happens, but perhaps
you
>>have access to statistics regarding exploitation of government subsidies
that
>>I do not have.


>Well, my experience in this part of the UK - fancy new developments
>closing down in a few years, new buildings left abandoned and wasted.
>I am not a research worker or a sociologist, I just read the
>"quality" liberal - not particularily left-wing - press, that
>happens to give you some data at times, if you look for it.

I don't know where you are in the UK, but of course some businesses do not
survive.  And abandoned buildings get used by new businesses after a while.
It's a bit like arguing that because we have many empty houses, that there is
no homelessness problem.

Anyway, I've enjoyed our exchange but I think we have to end it by agreeing to
disagree!  It will be interesting to watch how mid-European nations deal with
their fiscal problems over the next few years.


Budapest lover!

At 11:19 AM 5/13/96 -0400, Darren wrote:
>OK, to all those who still have a stomach after the abuse Joe Szalai has
>been taking, from people who do not stomach the presence of alternative
>lifestyles...GET A CLUE!
>
>YOu are not near anyone in space, it doesn't transmit, homosexuality is
>not a disease, and for the gay friends I have in Hungary, it is a real
>issue.

        Indeed. On the other hand, one bright star from the Forum compared
homosexuality to *smoking.* You can get used to it, you see. It is kind of
addictive, according to this gentleman. And since you could get used to it,
you can also change the habit! There is a lot to learn.

>And don't say that they could change or bring it upon themselves, That
>would be the argument
>the nationalist parties of Romania and Serbia might try to use in regard
>to minorities in their regions.
>
>More
>than my two cents worth. This kind of reaction makes MY stomach turn.

        My reaction is exactly the same.

        Eva Balogh

>    It seems to be a contradiction. Why?

writes
>    Tibor Asztalos SZEGED

Sorry, but I do not want to repeat the citations. I hate to argue with a
foldi, but I do not see a contradiction. In my opinion, we are talking
about slightly different meanings of translation or word use. As I have
stated earlier, the useage is somewhat different in English than in
Hungarian. I am not bothered when the English text calls the folks
freedomfighter or the Hungarian text forradalmar. I know who the folks
were, and do not have to try to derive who they were from the words.
Certainly there was an element in the 1956 action that stressed the
independece from Moscow, but even more importantly it fought for the change
in Hungary itself, even if after Nov 4 it was almost solely the fight
against Russian troops. I have read in several places that the Kadar regime
tried to emphasize the "heroic" action of some of the Hungarian traitors,
but as a partcipant, I can state my experience  that until Nov 9 in
Budapest and until Nov 14 in western Hungary, those guys did not come out
of their rathole yet. In spite of this, the participants, did not change
the terminology to szabadsagharc, which after Nov 4, it could be more
justified to use.

I am afraid the whole discussion is about semantics and any deep meanings,
even if for some readers it appears as one.

Regards,Jeliko.

PS. Maybe if I make it to Hungary in the future, we can discuss this over a
non-virtual barack.

A. Kozma wrote:

>As you can see I am an avid reader of Forum.The unfortunate thing is,that
>if you read it for a while my stomach is not only getting updet(hanyinger),but
>as I mentioned before my opinion of the Hungarian people and my experience
>when I "lived"in Hungary is not the most enthusiastic.

I do not understand why someone does something if it does not feel good. If A.
Kozma's stomach getting updet(hanyinger), he should finish to read (unless
he likes to have 'hanyinger'). I do not like Forum either (and I do not read it
just occasionally), but not because I have anything with my stomach, but becaus
e
 it is not possible to have a normal debate there (and this is valid to almost
everyone including E.Balogh,etc). What I hate is to listen to these complains
about those guys on the Forum actually behind their back (no possibility to
respond). The Forum became the blacksheep here, where everybody can freely
split. If some reader here thinks that those guys on Forum represent any real
danger to anyone and can prove this, that is OK, than you can (and should) try
to make them removed from internet or HIX. But this should be done on the Forum
 in front of those and not here. If this is not possible then one have to excep
t
the existance of such guys, if you don't like their post don't read them nobody
force you to do so.

J.Zsargo

On Mon, 13 May 1996, Eva S. Balogh wrote:

> At 11:19 AM 5/13/96 -0400, Darren wrote:
> >OK, to all those who still have a stomach after the abuse Joe Szalai has
> >been taking, from people who do not stomach the presence of alternative
> >lifestyles...GET A CLUE!
> >
> >YOu are not near anyone in space, it doesn't transmit, homosexuality is
> >not a disease, and for the gay friends I have in Hungary, it is a real
> >issue.
>
>         Indeed. On the other hand, one bright star from the Forum compared
> homosexuality to *smoking.* You can get used to it, you see. It is kind of
> addictive, according to this gentleman. And since you could get used to it,
> you can also change the habit! There is a lot to learn.

HMMM, that is assuming that homosexuality is a learned thing, just like
being heterosexual is learned as well. I wonder where my
6 foot 8 inch football playing friend learned his homosexuality from,
given that college football is not exactly a gay friendly environment.

>
> >And don't say that they could change or bring it upon themselves, That
> >would be the argument
> >the nationalist parties of Romania and Serbia might try to use in regard
> >to minorities in their regions.
> >
> >More
> >than my two cents worth. This kind of reaction makes MY stomach turn.
>
>         My reaction is exactly the same.

Eva, whose reaction are you referring too specifically? (Intended as a
serious question, as the context for me is not quite clear)

I may spoken to strongly, but this is one I stand behind, no matter what
space the forum is in, cyberspace, the lecture hall, or public space.

Darren Purcell

I read with interest the recent exchanges involving the topic of homosexuality.

I was, however, surprised by Eva Balogh's mentioning that someone on the Forum
said the homosexuality is addictive like smoking.  He reportedly said you can
get used to it... so you can change the habit.

Well, I have a respectable, intelligent lesbian sister.  I don't think she
CHOSE to be part of a persecuted minority!  If homosexuals supposedly decide
to be homosexual, then I guess heterosexuals choose to be heterosexuals also.
Choice means having options.  Many gays never felt any urges for anyone of the
opposite sex.... so where is this option?  Did everyone, except me, on this
list sit down one day and choose their sexuality?

This brings to mind several sad opinions I'd like to mention quickly:

1) Recently a "Christian" broadcast said civilizations that permitted homo-
   sexuality have all perished. !  Well, even the thousand-year Reich could
   not last!  Rome did quite well before and seemed quite blessed way before
   Christianity entered the scene!  Even Communism who hated homosexuals fell!
   Where's the consistency?

2) They also said homosexuals are not natural, because you don't find them in
   the animal world.  Ez mulatsagos!  What a laugh!  Someone better tell that
   to rabbits and dogs in the park.  Also, if humans are such wonderful crea-
   tions of god and better than animals, WHY then do people suddenly want to
   make animal comparisons when talking about homosexuality?  If we are each
   unique in the eyes of some god, then why is it ONLY with sexuality that we
   have to be the same?

As my mother would yell at my sister, "Well, if we were all homosexual...."
Well, no one wants everyone to be homosexual.  Thank god we're not all one
type (egyforma).  (Gay men mean less competition for us straight men; is that
bad?)

After we heterosexuals do a better job of cleaning our houses of divorce,
spousal abuse, murders, deadbeat dads, child molesting.... then we can
judge others.

If a person's sexuality is supposed to be so NATURAL, then why is there the big
argument that anyone can seem to change theirs at will?

These ignorant remarks make my head spin and heart saddened just as much as the
y
make other peoples' stomachs turn.

I am in Philadelphia where the Catholic Church opposes rights and protections
for gays.  (I like how selective the Church is with their brotherly love.)  It'
s
funny, because who actually could trust a bunch of unmarried men, other thirty
and *supposedly* celebate, getting clothed in dresses and preaching about
family values? !! ?

Thank you for my two cents.
Marek

Tibor Asztalos wrote, first quoting me:

>>         On the use of "szabadsagharc," I said, we normally do not refer
to 1956
>> as "szabadsagharc" in Hungarian. I gave an example of a couple of sentences
>> in Hungarian which would be never uttered. "Janos: Hol voltal a
>> szabadsagharc alatt? Peter: En nem vettem reszt a szabadsagharcban." Well,
>> anyone familiar with the Hungarian language would laugh these two gentlemen
>> out of the room. People wouldn't even know what they were talking about.
>> People, off the bat, wouldn't even know that they are talking about 1956.
>
>
        Then Tibor quotes Jeliko:


>
>> >To my knowledge, during the revolution in 56, nobody called us
>> >"szabadsagharcos" in Hungary.
>>
>> >It was outside Hungary that I have first heard
>> >the term *freedomfighter*.

        And finally he quotes Csaba Zoltani
>>
>>         Az 1956-os magyar forradalom: Reform-felkeles-szabadsagharc-
>
>                                                        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>
>>         megtorlas
>>
>> has just been published under the title:
>>
>>         The Hungarian Revolution of 1956,
>>         Reform, Revolt and Repression 1953-1963
>>         G. Litvan (ed), Longman, London and
>>         New York, 1996 (paperback)
>>
>The first chapter, by the well known writer George Schopflin on
>> "Hungary after the Second World War", gives a concise and well rounded
>> portrait of the years, event and players leading up to Hungary's fight
>> for freedom.
>
>  ^^^^^^^^^^^

        And Tibor adds:

>It seems to be a contradiction. Why?

        I don't think that it is. Tibor simply didn't quote the end of my
letter in which I explained that Joe Pannon had rounded up the discussion by
observing that in Hungarian "szabadsagharc" is found in more formal usage,
like names of associations, or titles of books. As for Csaba's comment at
the very end: he is not writing in Hungarian--he is writing in English where
fight for freeom, freedom fight seem to be much more often used than revolution
.

        Eva Balogh

P.S. As a footnote, poor George Schopflin made the mistake of writing a nice
thoughtful letter to the Forum. His thoughts were not appreciated. He was
told where he could go with his outlandish liberal ideas. I don't know
whether he still reads the Forum or not; one thing is sure, he didn't
return, to my great regret.

At 04:31 PM 5/13/96 EDT, Marek wrote:

>I read with interest the recent exchanges involving the topic of homosexuality
.
>
>I was, however, surprised by Eva Balogh's mentioning that someone on the Forum
>said the homosexuality is addictive like smoking.  He reportedly said you can
>get used to it... so you can change the habit.
>
>Well, I have a respectable, intelligent lesbian sister.  I don't think she
>CHOSE to be part of a persecuted minority!  If homosexuals supposedly decide
>to be homosexual, then I guess heterosexuals choose to be heterosexuals also.
>Choice means having options.  Many gays never felt any urges for anyone of the
>opposite sex.... so where is this option?  Did everyone, except me, on this
>list sit down one day and choose their sexuality?

        Of course, not. I just brought it up as one of the more outrageous
and ignorant things I have heard on the subject the longest time. I have
heard many others: sickness, fault of the mother, father, what not; but like
smoking! that was new.

        Eva Balogh

Janos Zsargo:

>What I hate is to listen to these complains
>about those guys on the Forum actually behind their back (no possibility to
>respond).

        The hell they don't have the opportunity. Most of them live in the
United States and can read and
write--more or less--English. Moreover, they read this list and quote from
it all the time. Mostly to show what I traitor I am to Hungary.

>The Forum became the blacksheep here, where everybody can freely
>split.

        I assumed you meant "spit," and this is exactly what those people
deserve.

>If some reader here thinks that those guys on Forum represent any real
>danger to anyone and can prove this, that is OK, than you can (and should) try
>to make them removed from internet or HIX.

        No, I don't think that they are dangerous--they are just disgusting.

>But this should be done on the Forum
> in front of those and not here.

        Janos, you try to go there and try to remove them from the Forum and
the Internet. Good luck!

        Eva Balogh

At 04:36 PM 5/13/96 -0400, Darren wrote:
>On Mon, 13 May 1996, Eva S. Balogh wrote:
>

>> >More
>> >than my two cents worth. This kind of reaction makes MY stomach turn.
>>
>>         My reaction is exactly the same.
>
>Eva, whose reaction are you referring too specifically? (Intended as a
>serious question, as the context for me is not quite clear)
>
>I may spoken to strongly, but this is one I stand behind, no matter what
>space the forum is in, cyberspace, the lecture hall, or public space.

        Sorry, Darren but I was kind of busy today (Mr. Horn didn't send me
this month's salary(;) and I had to do a little work) and misread your
sentence. I thought that your reaction was: my stomach turn. And in answer I
said, my reaction is the same; i.e., my stomach turns too.

        Eva Balogh

At 04:31 PM 5/13/96 EDT, you wrote: Quoting Mark Humphreys:
>I read with interest the recent exchanges involving the topic of homosexuality
.

Ditto!!
>I am in Philadelphia where the Catholic Church opposes rights and protections
>for gays.  (I like how selective the Church is with their brotherly love.)
It's
>funny, because who actually could trust a bunch of unmarried men, other thirty
>and *supposedly* celebate, getting clothed in dresses and preaching about
>family values? !! ?

Isn't it interesting, that opposition for gay rights and protection by the
Catholic Church is fast becoming an epidemic?  Similar news was circulating
around here in Canada also - their influence was nullified in this issue..

About five years ago, in Newfoundland a small town was forced to devastation
when discovered that their trusted priest, had been molesting the small boys
of the village for over 12 years.  It was further unveiled that the
orphanage, ran by the same parish had utilized this practice  - going as far
back as fourty years.  This is only one of thousands of similar incidents I
have heard of, involving priests and priest ran orphanages.  One would
therefore conclude that the Priesthood is filled with enough gays that
protection of gay rights should be an issue to be blessed instead of
opposed?  Perhaps then; they would not have to resort to child molestation,
utilizing god fearing practices against the innocent and frail?

Aniko

I will be traveling with our college to teach English this summer in the city
of Debrecen.  Last summer I spent two months there teaching as well.  I was
wondering if anyone had any advice about places unknown to the general tourist
 to go and visit in the area or in the town that I may not have
possibly visited last year.   Any tips on restaurants or special events that
are happening there this summer would be greatly appreciated as well.  Thank
you all for any information you can supply!

Haliho!

At 20:01 13/05/96 +0200,  Asztalos Tibor dr. wrote:
>    Hi!
>
>  Eva S. Balogh wrote:
>
>> Felado :  [United States]
>> Temakor: Re: FW: Just a few words. ( 57 sor )
>> Idopont: Sat May 11 18:13:23 EDT 1996 HUNGARY #665

<snipping ref to Andras Kornai>

>>                                                   One is normally refers to
>> 1848-49 as "forradalom es szabadsagharc," the second word denoting Hungary's
>> war of independence against the Austrian Empire. We eventually ascertained
>> that Andras was thinking in terms of pitched battles between two armies and
>> in this sense 1956 was not really a war of independence. The overwhelming
>> odds against the Hungarians pretty well excluded such an outcome.
>>
>>         On the use of "szabadsagharc," I said, we normally not refer to 1956
>> as "szabadsagharc" in Hungarian. I gave an example of a couple of sentences
>> in Hungarian which would be never uttered. "Janos: Hol voltal a
>> szabadsagharc alatt? Peter: En nem vettem reszt a szabadsagharcban." Well,
>> anyone familiar with the Hungarian language would laugh these two gentlemen
>> out of the room. People wouldn't even know what they were talking about.
>> People, off the bat, wouldn't even know that they are talking about 1956.
>
>
>Citation again:
>
>> >To my knowledge, during the revolution in 56, nobody called us
>> >"szabadsagharcos" in Hungary.
>>
>> >It was outside Hungary that I have first heard
>> >the term *freedomfighter*.
>
>
>However the next letter from CSABA K ZOLTANI was the following:
>
>
>> Felado :  [United States]
>> Temakor: Summer Reading ( 18 sor )
>> Idopont: Sat May 11 20:14:00 EDT 1996 HUNGARY #665
>> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>>
>> An English translation of
>>
>>         Az 1956-os magyar forradalom: Reform-felkeles-szabadsagharc-
>
>                                                        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^

>>         megtorlas
>>
>> has just been published under the title:
>>
>>         The Hungarian Revolution of 1956,
>>         Reform, Revolt and Repression 1953-1963
>>         G. Litvan (ed), Longman, London and
>>         New York, 1996 (paperback)
>>
>> The first chapter, by the well known writer George Schopflin on
>> "Hungary after the Second World War", gives a concise and well rounded
>> portrait of the years, event and players leading up to Hungary's fight
>> for freedom.
>
>  ^^^^^^^^^^^
>>
>> CSABA K ZOLTANI
>
>
>   It seems to be a contradiction. Why?
>
>
>   Tibor Asztalos SZEGED

At the risk of being presumptuous, as I probably know less than most of the
readers of this List about the events of 1956, let me attempt an explanation
based on the statements made by some of Listmembers in the time since Andras
Szucs was *unsubscribed.* It appears to me that the pretty well
uncontradicted statement of Ms. Balogh and others was that the term
*szabadsagharc* was not used in Hungary *at the time* to describe the
freedom fighters. Apparently, the term *freedom fighter* was widely and
commonly applied in the Western media (and that is the way I remember it) to
these (mostly) young students who were fighting in the streets - in reality
the struggle may have been as much against the Hungarian government in power
as the Russians, but the struggle was definitely seen in the West as
primarily a struggle against the Soviets.

The citation from Csaba Zoltani only *appears* to be contradicting Eva
Balogh's statement, then, as that book was apparently written fairly
recently, and the term *szabadsagharc* may well have become commonly used in
Hungary as a result of the widespread use of the term in the West - but only
*after* the Revolution itself was history.

A suggestion most humbly submitted for your consideration.

Tisztelettel,

Johanne

Johanne L. Tournier
e-mail - 
>
>

At 04:27 PM 5/13/96 -0400, J. Zsargo  wrote:

. What I hate is to listen to these complains
>about those guys on the Forum actually behind their back (no possibility to
>respond).

It is not behind their backs. Anyone can read Hungary,  either by
subscribing to the list (in which case they can also contribute) or by
subscribing to it via HIX.

>The Forum became the blacksheep here, where everybody can freely
>split.

I assume you mean spit. Well, no one here did that, especially if I compare
what I read here with what I read there.

> If some reader here thinks that those guys on Forum represent any real
>danger to anyone and can prove this, that is OK, than you can (and should) try
>to make them removed from internet or HIX. But this should be done on the Foru
m
> in front of those and not here. If this is not possible then one have to
except
>the existance of such guys, if you don't like their post don't read them nobod
y
>force you to do so.

These are things one cannot prove. I do it on the Forum (not trying to have
anyone removed but "debating" such issues whether Hitler was or wasn't
right) as much as my time and nerves permit. I presented a couple of
examples of the Forum specimen because the discussion at that point (on
Hungary) made it timely.

Gabor D. Farkas

At 12:14 AM 5/13/96 EST, you wrote:
Dear Dr. Batkay:

Would you kindly expound on this post?  I am lost, if not loosing it?  But
most definately, I am missing something!
Thanks, Aniko

PS: (not sarcastic or demeaning;  truly, my request is sincere)

>Thanks to Andy Kozma for reminding us that only on a list dealing with
>East/East Central Europe (in this case, Hungary) could being an academic
>be considered as being on a par with being, say, a child molester, or
>a sub-humanoid.  My profound apologies to Andy and his friends for having
>earned a Ph.D.
>
>Udv.,
>William M. Batkay, Ph.D., Columbia University 1972, M.A., columbia
>        Univesity 1967, Certificate from the Institute on East Central
>        Europe, Columbia University 1967 (perhaps the most offensive of
>        my degrees?), BA, Fordham University 1965
>
>

At 07:56 PM 5/12/96 -0700, you wrote:

>Perhaps if we leave the "faculty" off the name, yet retain our
>faculties, it would be a great deal more open to all.
>Charlie Vamossy

Interesting concept; still lacks solution though.  Simply "club"?  Ney!
Surely,  we can get more explicit as well as original.. yes?
Re; great deal more open to all - hmm... Hugh Agnew.... where are you? When
you are most needed?
Aniko Dunford
>
>

Lectoris Salutem...
        Five hundred years of foreign domination have trained the people
of Central-Eastern Europe to be position-oriented instead of being
performance-oriented. The criterion of excellence was the ability of
showing the most obedient face in front of the foreign master instead of
the ability to be genuine and creative... the ability of licking the hind
(sorry for misspelling  ;{)  I mean: the hand) of the foreign master
instead of the ability of kicking...goals in soccer. The word: foreign
might need some words of clarification here. I don't think of any kind of
"racial" or "linguistic" or "hereditary" meaning, I think simply of
carelessness, lack of deep involvement in common destiny, aiming at
external goals and values, lack of feeling comfortably at home. (For
example I think to be at home in my Budapest house, now less at home and
more foreigner in the village of my childhood, but much more foreigner in
the village, where my wife was born. All belong to me in a sense.)
        In case of Hungary Mohacs was a tragic turning point: after
1526 for 150 years one part of the country was occupied and devastated by
the Turks, another part (Transylvania) for the price of recognizing some
kind of loose Turkish supervision could preserve some independence and
autonomy, while the third part was incorporated into the Austrian Habsburg
Empire.
        Since the Ottoman Empire represented a completely alien culture,
it was just natural that Hungarians of all the three parts of the
country expected the help of the Habsburgs in the efforts to reunite the
three parts of the Kingdom of Hungary. Many Hungarians sincerely thought
of a Habsburg monarch as of their King.
        But the Habsburgs were (again natural from their point of view)
the Emperors of a great European Empire, and the Hungarian case was a
matter of periphery for them. Their attention was attracted more by the
newly explored Eldorado to be plundered by the Spanish cousins, than by
the swampy, belligerent Great Plain of those rebellious Hungarians, who
always fought against those other oriental barbarians, the Turks. The
Habsburgs remained foreigners in the land, which fell into their lap as a
ripen golden apple (just breaking into three pieces).
        The Habsburgs did not take care of and plainly betrayed their
property and their subjects in Hungary. Those subjects, who were forced to
gather a sense of common history, common nation, "common inspiration"
(ko:zo:s ihlet) during those hard 150 years.
        Tinodi, Balassi, Bornemissza, Pazmany, etc.
        editions of the Holy Bible and other books
        the impact of the christian reformation and counter-reformation
        the foundation of high-schools and universities,
        the Transylvanian spirit (first law of freedom of religion),
        all these signs show, that a certain form of Hungarian culture and
patriotism (tolerant nationalism if you prefer) was formed in the depth of
the chaotic events of the Turkish-Austrian careless foreign domination.
        The problem with the Habsburgs after liberation from the Turks was
not that they were foreign non-Hungarians, but the famous saying of
Kolonits (if I am not mistaken): The Hungarians should be converted first
into beggars, then Catholics and finally Germans. What? No attention when
we were bleeding, and brutal colonialization when we start working? Such
an idea, the idea of religious and linguistic homogenization came too late
(the French kings were more clever and effective in this respect).
        The population of Hungary, which had been so many times abandoned,
still (relatively) educated, was too much aware of its history, of its
values. Then the Hungarian nation (then it meant nobility) was fairly
competitive with, in some respects even better than any nation of the
Empire including the Austrian. That is why this nobility-nation insisted
that its right vis-a-vis the King of the country should be based upon
traditional Hungarian laws and accords (e.g. Corpus Juris, Golden Boule).
        The contraposition of the political will of the ruler(s) and
the instincts and intentions of the subjects is always contraproductive.
The importance of the cooperation between the "King" and the nation was
illustrated by the relatively independent or balanced periods of our
post-1526 history: the "golden age" of Transylvania, the 40 years of
Austria-Hungary before WWI, the Bethlen-consolidation decade, the
1945-48 pre-bolshevik years (shorter and shorter...).
        Unfortunately, the contraposition of "our own rights" and "their
foreign will" - a feature of the Habsburg domination uptill 1867 - was a
reentrant phenomenon even in the later history of Hungary, inherited to
the relations with other external "Big Brother-like" partners too.
        And more unfortunately the "unifying force" of such
contrapositions always diverted our attention from our own contemporary
economic and social problems. The problem of "our rights", of "our
independence" was always considered more important than our economy and
society for the best of the nation, and many times the dream of
independence could almost be reached.
        And most unfortunately there came always some "muscovite-leaders"
(muszka-vezetok) from the worst of the nation, who helped the  Austrians,
the Germans, the Russians to pretend that their brutality - in treading on
our rights and uprisings - could be justified and legalized as a way of
consolidation.  And the nation as a whole usually retreated into passive
resistance.
        Rights and independence - these have been for centuries the main
goals to achive for the Hungarian "nationalists". When six years ago
these goals were (or at least seemed to be) again at reachable distance,
it proved to be too late (by about 300 years, but at least 45). The elite
of the nation was too much accustomed to licking hinds, to sitting in soft
positions instead of working hard, and the nation as a whole was too much
accustomed to passive resistance.
        The nation fell again into (at least three) parts. Now political
election-winners want to form the hind to be licked, and continue the game
of cementing themselves into ruling positions. In this game the
"nationalistic" political right (lacking practice) is much less effective
than those who are familiar (say, by family traditions) with position
oriented leftist methods. This lesson seems to be common for all countries
of the Eastern Central European region, where Great Empires have trained
the people to be position-oriented instead of performance-oriented.
        In the power-grabbing game of the "elite" the hunt for positions
renders tacitly acceptable more and more ways which are touching (or going
beyond) the limits of illegality. In the same time the value of
professional excellence can be illustrated by the well known fact, that
any janitor of a Budapest Bank (sorry: bank) is better paid than a
university docent.
        "I must work harder..." - said the horse in "Animal Farm" ;{)
        May God bless us all...                 kadargyorgy

Hi!

  Eva S. Balogh wrote:

> Felado :  [United States]
> Temakor: Re: FW: Just a few words. ( 57 sor )
> Idopont: Sat May 11 18:13:23 EDT 1996 HUNGARY #665

Citating Andras Kornai:


> introduced. At that time he accused Andras Kornai of the same crime, i.e.,
> according to him, Andras denies that 1956 was freedom fight! As it turned
> out, Andras did maintain that it was not a "szabadsagharc," in the Hungarian
> sense of the word, that is, a war of independence.

after agreeing:

>                                                   One is normally refers to
> 1848-49 as "forradalom es szabadsagharc," the second word denoting Hungary's
> war of independence against the Austrian Empire. We eventually ascertained
> that Andras was thinking in terms of pitched battles between two armies and
> in this sense 1956 was not really a war of independence. The overwhelming
> odds against the Hungarians pretty well excluded such an outcome.
>
>         On the use of "szabadsagharc," I said, we normally not refer to 1956
> as "szabadsagharc" in Hungarian. I gave an example of a couple of sentences
> in Hungarian which would be never uttered. "Janos: Hol voltal a
> szabadsagharc alatt? Peter: En nem vettem reszt a szabadsagharcban." Well,
> anyone familiar with the Hungarian language would laugh these two gentlemen
> out of the room. People wouldn't even know what they were talking about.
> People, off the bat, wouldn't even know that they are talking about 1956.


Citation again:

> >To my knowledge, during the revolution in 56, nobody called us
> >"szabadsagharcos" in Hungary.
>
> >It was outside Hungary that I have first heard
> >the term *freedomfighter*.


However the next letter from CSABA K ZOLTANI was the following:


> Felado :  [United States]
> Temakor: Summer Reading ( 18 sor )
> Idopont: Sat May 11 20:14:00 EDT 1996 HUNGARY #665
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>
> An English translation of
>
>         Az 1956-os magyar forradalom: Reform-felkeles-szabadsagharc-

                                                        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^


>         megtorlas
>
> has just been published under the title:
>
>         The Hungarian Revolution of 1956,
>         Reform, Revolt and Repression 1953-1963
>         G. Litvan (ed), Longman, London and
>         New York, 1996 (paperback)
>
> The first chapter, by the well known writer George Schopflin on
> "Hungary after the Second World War", gives a concise and well rounded
> portrait of the years, event and players leading up to Hungary's fight
> for freedom.

  ^^^^^^^^^^^


>
> CSABA K ZOLTANI


   It seems to be a contradiction. Why?


   Tibor Asztalos SZEGED