In article >, 
(Istvan Szucs) wrote:


> I am wondering what you mean by the content being the
> language. If you mean language in an extended (almost over
> extended) sense I agree. 

i think that is what i mean. which, i suppose would also mean the
witnessing of a given culture, and the personal expression thereof.

>I think however, that the choice of subject
> matter can provide lots of context to the "language". 

or again, could perhaps the choice of language provide the context for the
subject matter.

ef

-- 
NWHQ
http://www.knosso.com/NWHQ/

Hello everyone,

I will be moving to Toronto area soon, and I need to locate book stores that ca
rry 
new age subject books in Hungarian. Thank you. Please e-mail me at 
a

Carmen

In article >,
 > wrote:
| First, about your lie.
| 
| Istvan (Szucs), it is a pity that you don't actually read
| what you are attempting to debate. It is an outright lie
| that I said about Eva Balogh that "SHE doesnt's speak Hungarian".
| I simply quoted her ACCOMPLICE (he, the liberal idiot); I was
| talking about HIM (not her, note gender difference) who
| wanted to be "judge" if we in Hungarian call 1956
| Szabadsagharc (Freedomfight). He is on record of admitting
| that HE (a) has never been to Hungary, (b) HE does not speak
| Hungarian at all.

FIne.. I guess I lied too. I was not wrong, I lied. 

| 
| When you consider something "juvenile", please refer your
| adjective to the idiot who pretends to be the "judge" wishing
| to determine how we call Freedomfight in Hungarian - when HE
| does not speak the language!
| 
| Yes, it is "juvenile" on the part of Eva Balogh and her
| accomplice.

Your accusations and style is juvenile. You have a
misunderstanding about what term to use about the
revolution, and whether freedom fight is an appropriate
word. The conclusions you draw from this difference of
opinion, or from the fact that Eva Balogh may be wrong (I
actually think she is), the noise you make about this is
juvenile. 

| 
| As for your double standard:
| 
| You guys are a bit two obviously using a very liberal standard
| when it comes to defaming (denying the existence) of probably the
| brightest days of Hungarian history, our SZABADSAGHARC (freedom-
| fight) of 1956.

Oh?
So what would be a non-liberal standard? (Legal, moral or otherwise)
| 
| On the other hand, standards are extremely severe when anyone
| would deny Holocaust. 

The issue here is not that she denied that the fact of the
revolution. THe only issue is whether to call it freedom
fight or not (I guess the alternative is
revolution). Therefore she is not denying what happened, and
that it happened. I guess the difference is whether someone
would argue that we don't call the holocaust extermination
of the jews , we "only call" it genocide, and holocaust.

In some countries this would be an outright
| crime, in other countries (e.g. USA) even a celebrity like
| Marlon Brando would be "haunted down and the rest of his life
| would be made pure hell" even for a much lesser "sin", just for observing a
| fact, not even defaming at all a small heroic nation.

Nope.. I heard what he said and you know as well as I do
that it has nothing to do with the holocaust and denying
it. THis is completely irrelevant. If you want to argue
about what Brando said that's fine, but what he said has
nothing to do with the issue at hand, which is one of terminology.
| 
| Had he utter "there was no Holocaust in WWII" the severe variety
| of the double standard would have hit him a few million times harder than
| what Eva Balogh was getting away with.

Again, had he uttered that we don't call the  holocaust an
extermination of a people, we call it genocide, etc, it
would not have been a big issue.
| 
| Are you suggesting the same standard for those who deny
| Freedomfight and Holocaust? Should both be trivialized as
| "juvenile" hairsplitters, or both defamators should be dealt
| with in the customarily harsh manner?

NO. I am suggesting that your argument about terminology,
and calling someone a liar for using a different terminology
is juvenile, since the terminology she denies as being used 
does not imply a denial of the fact, heroism etc of the
revolution. She is merely arguing about the use of one
terminology and uses another one instead of it that bears no
consequence (ei it is not any different) to the glory of the
revolution, its historical or political status, or deny its
occurence.

Istvan

In article >,
 > wrote:
| In article >, 
| (Istvan Szucs) wrote:
| 
| > I agree, but I cannot imagine how the text in the
| > excerpts could be justified by anything in the story.
| 
| i have not read the excerpts; i have not read the story. *but* (it seems to m
e)
| 
| 1. a literary work should be considered in its entirety... always.
| 
| 2. a literary work should be considered on the basis of its literary merit
| and *not* its subject-matter.
| 
| ( now #2 is difficult, i admit, even for myself. seeing as some
| subject-matters do indeed impact adversely on my ahm... emotional
| well-being. and still i will maintain: that the content of a literary work
| is its language, and not its subject-matter. dunno... celine comes to
| mind.)
| 
| ef
| 
| -- 
| NWHQ
| http://www.knosso.com/NWHQ/

I am wondering what you mean by the content being the
language. If you mean language in an extended (almost over
extended) sense I agree. I think however, that the choice of subject
matter can provide lots of context to the "language". If I
found a subject, or message that would make the "language"
used or the excerpted text justified, I would not object to
it even if it is hurtful to some people - Dante,
Maplethorpe, Serrano, Attila Jozsef, Ady  etc. I just cannot
conceive anything that would justify the excerpts quoted. 
I will however try to get my hands on the full text.

Istvan

First, about your lie.

Istvan (Szucs), it is a pity that you don't actually read
what you are attempting to debate. It is an outright lie
that I said about Eva Balogh that "SHE doesnt's speak Hungarian".
I simply quoted her ACCOMPLICE (he, the liberal idiot); I was
talking about HIM (not her, note gender difference) who
wanted to be "judge" if we in Hungarian call 1956
Szabadsagharc (Freedomfight). He is on record of admitting
that HE (a) has never been to Hungary, (b) HE does not speak
Hungarian at all.

When you consider something "juvenile", please refer your
adjective to the idiot who pretends to be the "judge" wishing
to determine how we call Freedomfight in Hungarian - when HE
does not speak the language!

Yes, it is "juvenile" on the part of Eva Balogh and her
accomplice.

As for your double standard:

You guys are a bit two obviously using a very liberal standard
when it comes to defaming (denying the existence) of probably the
brightest days of Hungarian history, our SZABADSAGHARC (freedom-
fight) of 1956.

On the other hand, standards are extremely severe when anyone
would deny Holocaust. In some countries this would be an outright
crime, in other countries (e.g. USA) even a celebrity like
Marlon Brando would be "haunted down and the rest of his life
would be made pure hell" even for a much lesser "sin", just for observing a
fact, not even defaming at all a small heroic nation.

Had he utter "there was no Holocaust in WWII" the severe variety
of the double standard would have hit him a few million times harder than
what Eva Balogh was getting away with.

Are you suggesting the same standard for those who deny
Freedomfight and Holocaust? Should both be trivialized as
"juvenile" hairsplitters, or both defamators should be dealt
with in the customarily harsh manner?

In article > ,  writes:
>"...Es mi az egyhaz?  Az ures, riadt, felos emberek vedegylete, vara. A
>hulyek szovetsege. Semmi az emberre nem hasonlit jobban, mint,
>papjai."

Szerintetek a Spiro milyen nemzetisegu ?

Tamas

References: >
Organization: Wang Federal Inc.
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.92.6

In article >,  
says:
>
>[snip]
>[snip]
>[snip]
		

There is a snake in the grass.....!

Can anyone give me some history of the canal that was built in the mid
1800's between the Tisza
River and the Danube and going to Budpest, or a source for such
information.

Jerry Worthing

Fijjjugg, 

lessz itt muri, ugy latom! Megjelent a masik terhelt is.
(Meg Elek Gabi hianyzik ... )
A Bulgar almagyar alkereszteny Marinov. Ugylatszik az USA-ban 
kivagtak a gyogyibol.
Ugyanez a pasi a HIX VITA-n, a HIX RANDI-n ugy viselkedik, mint valami
szerzetes. En ugyan sokakkal egyetemben nem vagyok a listak kozti
athivatkozasoknak a hive, de azert a sok szerencsetlen fiatal srac
a VITA-ban  asszem nem lenne olyan udvarias ezutan Marinov "Ur"-ral
(Ez a het vicce, hogy o "Ur". Egy igazi, hamisitatlan Bolgar 
gentleman. No, de nem irok ilyeneket, semmi bajom a Bolgarokkal.)

Ivan Marinov wrote:

Eloszor onmagara utal, csak kicsit rejtjelezve. Szlovak egyenlo Bolgar
a megfejtes kulcsa.

>Szlovak almagyar elvtars!

>Mar megint a soc.culture.magyar-on idetlenkedsz!

Errol, ami ezutan kovetkezik,  a Rapulok nevu rap egyyutes "notaja" jut 
eszembe, amit a Hollosi irt a HIX KULTURA megjelenesere mottoul.
      Hazafele adok a kulturanak,
      Elovasom mind a KRESZ tablakat
Marinov "Ur" edukacioja sem volt magasabb, ugytunik.

>Szegyelled magad, s kotrodj a kurva anyad budos picsajaba a
>bolsevik-szalasista lapoddal egyutt.

Ehhez kepest a Rapulok egy Arany Janos. Majd a szokasos technikaval,
az aldozat es az elkoveto felcserelesevel tortnelem iras (mit 
iras, koltes) Balogh S. Eva-i magaslataira emelkedik.

>Miattatok volt 45 evig kommunizmus Europaban! [...]

De bar a vatasz szolna belole (a bolondoknak neha vannak latnoki
kepessegeik):

> [...] Tobbet nem lesz.

Igy, kijelento modban, orosz elnokvalasztas elott. Bar a tozsde mar
eldontotte kire tesz, ugyhogy nagy valoszinuseggel az is lesz.

> Barmennyire is akarjatok.

Itt egy finom olvasotabor valtozasnak voltunk tanui. Valoszinuleg
O maga sem vette eszre.

>U. I. Bocsnatot kerek az olvasoktol, de ezekkel a kommunista 
fajgyulolo
>allatokkal nem lehet civilizalt modon ertekezni.

Hajjaj. Ez a nota csak nem akar kimenni a fejembol. 
   Hazafele adok a kulturanak,
   Elolvasom mind a KRESZ tablakat

Nem hiszem, hogy a Toth Jozsef fajgyulolo lenne. Az ilyen 
csodabogarakat sem gyuloli, mint kedves Marinov Ur. Inkabb szorakozik 
rajtuk. Szerintem a NEMZET szerkesztosege koszoni Marinov "Ur"-nak az
ingyen reklamot!

Tibor 

O'dor Tibor

 (Istvan Szucs) wrote:

> She obviously does not mean to deny
>the revolution, she insist that a different term is
>appropriate. For the umpteenth time you are bringing this up
>asserting that thsi makes her a patholigcal liar, and that
>she doesnt's speak Hungarian. 

>You may be right that she is wrong, but your assertion only
>shows  how childish you are. 

>Just consider the issue at hand, and  think about how it
>warrants your reaction. WHat Balog Eva says is a question of
>word usage that does not imply anything derogatory about the
>revolution. This is just a non-issue, and if you keep
>bringing it up on every forum repeatedly it just shows how
>childish you are, and how you cannot be taken seriously.

>Istvan

	Well, you see Istvan, Andras Szucs thinks that if he just repeats a
falsehood time and time again, ad nauseam, it will become truth. He
may not be too far off. Unfortunately, there are many examples from
history when actually these tactics worked very well. Obvious lies
were accepted by naive followers as Gospel truths.

	Eva Balogh

 (Istvan Szucs) wrote:




>The conclusions you [Andras Szucs] draw from this difference of
>opinion, or from the fact that Eva Balogh may be wrong (I
>actually think she is), the noise you make about this is
>juvenile.

	Istvan, I think Eva Balogh is right. Because the only thing Eva Balogh
says is as follows. In everyday conversations we don't refer to 1956
as "szabadsagharc." In ordinary conversations we talk about 1956 as
"forradalom." In writing, in titles of organizations, one can find the
coupling of revolution (forradalom) and war of independence
(szabadsagharc) but not always. See, for example, the 1956-Institute
which doesn't carry the word "szabadsagharc." Therefore Szucs's
ranting and raving about nothing. He gives examples from written texts
and names of organizations. I am talking about spoken Hungarian usage.

	Eva Balogh
 

>| 
>| As for your double standard:
>| 
>| You guys are a bit two obviously using a very liberal standard
>| when it comes to defaming (denying the existence) of probably the
>| brightest days of Hungarian history, our SZABADSAGHARC (freedom-
>| fight) of 1956.

>Oh?
>So what would be a non-liberal standard? (Legal, moral or otherwise)
>| 
>| On the other hand, standards are extremely severe when anyone
>| would deny Holocaust. 

>The issue here is not that she denied that the fact of the
>revolution. THe only issue is whether to call it freedom
>fight or not (I guess the alternative is
>revolution). Therefore she is not denying what happened, and
>that it happened. I guess the difference is whether someone
>would argue that we don't call the holocaust extermination
>of the jews , we "only call" it genocide, and holocaust.

>In some countries this would be an outright
>| crime, in other countries (e.g. USA) even a celebrity like
>| Marlon Brando would be "haunted down and the rest of his life
>| would be made pure hell" even for a much lesser "sin", just for observing a
>| fact, not even defaming at all a small heroic nation.

>Nope.. I heard what he said and you know as well as I do
>that it has nothing to do with the holocaust and denying
>it. THis is completely irrelevant. If you want to argue
>about what Brando said that's fine, but what he said has
>nothing to do with the issue at hand, which is one of terminology.
>| 
>| Had he utter "there was no Holocaust in WWII" the severe variety
>| of the double standard would have hit him a few million times harder than
>| what Eva Balogh was getting away with.

>Again, had he uttered that we don't call the  holocaust an
>extermination of a people, we call it genocide, etc, it
>would not have been a big issue.
>| 
>| Are you suggesting the same standard for those who deny
>| Freedomfight and Holocaust? Should both be trivialized as
>| "juvenile" hairsplitters, or both defamators should be dealt
>| with in the customarily harsh manner?

>NO. I am suggesting that your argument about terminology,
>and calling someone a liar for using a different terminology
>is juvenile, since the terminology she denies as being used 
>does not imply a denial of the fact, heroism etc of the
>revolution. She is merely arguing about the use of one
>terminology and uses another one instead of it that bears no
>consequence (ei it is not any different) to the glory of the
>revolution, its historical or political status, or deny its
>occurence.

>Istvan

In article >,
TU Vienna  > wrote:
| 
| Nem hiszem, hogy a Toth Jozsef fajgyulolo lenne. Az ilyen 
| csodabogarakat sem gyuloli, mint kedves Marinov Ur. Inkabb szorakozik 
| rajtuk. Szerintem a NEMZET szerkesztosege koszoni Marinov "Ur"-nak az
| ingyen reklamot!
| 
Nem .. Toth Jozsef csak bevallottan Hungarista, es a 24
oraban melynek webmastere Szalasit vedik. De fajgyulolo.. az
nem.

Istvan