>GERMANY GRANTS MORE LOANS TO HUNGARY. During a two-day visit to Germany
>by Hungarian Prime Minister Gyula Horn, German federal and state
>governments granted DM 1 billion ($650 million) in loans to Hungary,

Isn't this like giving another glass of brandy to a drunk?
How long can they delude themselves that they can keep paying old loans
with new ones?

Of course in cases like this, the lenders are just as much to blame as
the borrowers when it comes to default.  And that day will come rather
soon, IMHO.

Joe

-- Cut Here -- cut here

In article >,
 (Poetician1) wrote:

> In article >,  wrote: 
> > You have to give them is DIGNITY: 
> > Dignity by Recognition as Nation between Nations with a large degree  
> > of Authonomy.  
> > Then you have to give them AFFIRMATIVE ACTION and/or some exclusive  
> > Trade Privileges. In the 19 century Austria gives them trade  
> > privileges and it worked. 
> > If The NY Times is right there are 3.5M Roma in Romania. You could not  
> > assimilate them because they are less educated than the rest. 
> 
>  (T.M.Lutas)
> |non-assimilation, preferential treatment, and the ability to wiggle out  
> |of the daily trials of the rest of the population by virtue of their  
> |autonomy 
> 
> Autonomy does not mean wiggling out of daily trials. It means wiggling out
> of a set of daily trials distinctive from the set of daily trials of
> another. It is not preferential treatment to expect that rights be
> respected -- right of free speech, movement, association, enterprise.

Equal treatment under the law means just that. It is a goal to be 
strived for. It cannot be achieved under an autonomy plan based on ethnicity 
because the very nature of the arrangement is that the government will 
treat a citizen differently based on his ethnicity. 

> There was a case in Ontario, Canada, where the Ministry of Health required
> that all milk producers must use a certain technological method to ensure
> the safety of milk. The Mennonite people protested, because it is there
> belief and tradition to not use any technology. (They have a lifestyle
> similar to the Amish). They presented their case -- that they have
> historically taken such care of their cows and manual equipment that there
> had not been one documented case of any person every getting sick from
> their product. The law was rewritten in such a manner that it acknowledged
> this situation. It could be argued that the Mennonite community obtained
> preferential treatment and did not need to invest in technology which
> other milk producers were required to do. It should be noted that the
> "other milk producers" wilfully chose in their cultural tradition to
> involve technology in the processing of their product and to upgrade the
> technology as it evolved, and that the technology itself came with
> particular vulnerabilities to contamination while at the same time
> increasing productivity beyond that capable of one man manually producing.
> Their ceiling of possible profit was much higher than what a Mennonite
> could expect. The Mennonite maintained their precious autonomy, and the
> cultural landscape of Ontario did not slide into interethnic anomosities
> as you predict would happen from such a situation.

Since you did not include the law or a reference to it, I cannot be sure 
but the law could be rewritten to take into consideration the mennonites 
situation without any grant of autonomy at all. If a mennonite would 
abandon his forefather's milk producing practices and become sloppy, 
even dangerously dirty, would his religion save him from a run-in with 
the law? I certainly hope not. If it did and children died from it, it 
would certainly cause resentment and a certain level of hate against all 
Mennonites. 

> The Roma have been a nomadic people with their own cultural peculiarities.
> Why should they have to assimilate and become Romanians. 

They do not have to. But they do have to obey her laws while they reside 
in Romania. Nomadism is no excuse for lawlessness. 

> The world is big
> enough for all kinds of people. Canada had a kerfuffle with a few
> dinosoars who felt that the Mounties could only wear a Stetson hat, and
> not a turban. Well, the supreme court decided that a turban was quite fine
> and did not dishonour the Mounties. The man with the turban enforced
> federal laws just as effectively and fairly as those wearing Stetsons and
> in the end, that was the salient point. 

The problem is not a turban or a stetson, it is things like a lack of 
respect for property, the idea that truth can be subordinated to ethnic 
loyalty, and a stubborn antipathy to formal education that cause so much 
of gypsy problems. Certain cultural peculiarities can, and have been 
adjusted to in Romanian societies. Others cannot without destroying the 
society that romanians wish to create. 

DB

-- 
The Romanian Political Pages               http://haven.ios.com/~dbrutus
Now available: The Romanian constitution in Romanian, an URL minder
Coming soon: An expanded Ilascu section, and victims of communism memorial!
These posts are not official PNT-cd policy unless specifically marked as such.

Poetician1 > wrote:
>
>What!! You have feelings? And bad ones? You must have re-established contact 
>with that Romanian therapist, what's-his-namescu?

Grotescu, what else?

Joe

G'day all,

Could anyone knowing the URL for the Hungarian Internet Radio, please
post it here or Email to me in Australia.

With many thanks,

Peter Hersch

T.M.Lutas ) writes:
> In article >,
> cristian > wrote:
>> On 2 Oct 1996, Istvan Szucs wrote:
>> > I love it when someone volountarily gives up all
>> > credibility. 
>> > Congratualations for disqualifying yourself from all
>> > meaningful conversations.
>> > Istvan
>> 
>> I am sure that your veiled hate of Romanians and the spreading of poison 
>> qualify you plenty for 'meaningful conversation' !
>> 
>> Lucky we only have a few anuses like you and Mr. Albu spreading their
>> noxious writings around. Else Transylvania would be worse than Bosnia
>> by now.  
> 
> Unfortunately, one of the people who spread noxiousness is yourself. You 
> can take your general position without being noxious, or even particularly 
> unpleasant. You do your own cause more harm than good with your obscenities 
> and displays of barbarity. Or perhaps it is on purpose...

Although I agree that it was a display of Barbarity, unpleasant, obscene,
and noxiousness, the alternative would be sterile and bland and oh so
polite and passionless -- yawn.

On Fri, 4 Oct 1996, T.M.Lutas wrote:

> Unfortunately, one of the people who spread noxiousness is yourself. You 
> can take your general position without being noxious, or even particularly 
> unpleasant. You do your own cause more harm than good with your obscenities 
> and displays of barbarity. Or perhaps it is on purpose...

Of course it is on purpose. Do you think 'dickheads' understand, or at
least are perturbed, by any other language but the one of vulgarity and
barbarism ?  It is the only language that holds any fluency with a certain
crowd.
However it is not my fault if for some, the truth is 'particularly
unpleasant' ;  On that you can pick an argument with God, it is him that
brought the wandering Gypsies and the 'settling' magyars. However seing
with people like you and Cruceanu, I am tempted by the thought that God
brought these unpleasant people upon us, as a punishment for our (your)
vickedness !

m. cristian

In article >,
Judith Toth > wrote:

| 
| How so? While I disagree with a lot of claims and attitudes
| >of Zionism, I don't see how from what you said here would
| >mean that this man was a Zionist. In fact in Stalinist
| >USSR Zionism was ruthlessly prosecuted.
| -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------
| ANSWER: 
| 	COMMUNISM OR ZIONISM?
| 	"It is well known in History that at the time of the Revolution some
| 3/4 of the Bolshevists leaders were  Jewish... When the Bolsheviki
| came into power, all over Petrograd we at once had a predominance of
| Yiddish proclamations, big posters and everything in Yiddish." - said
| dr. Simons, Pastor of the Methodist Church in Petrograd decades ago.)
| 	The Jewish Chronicle of London wrote on April 4th, 1919:
| 	"There is much in the fact of Bolshevism itself, in the fact that so
| many Jews are Bolshevists. The ideals of Bolshevism are consonnant
| with many of the highest ideals of Judaism." 

Interesting,. I heard a very similar proclamation about
Catholicism from South America... In fact athere are many
many movies made about the collaboration ofthe catholic
church with the Communists, including guerillas. BUt what
does that prove?   Nothing!~

 Of couirse there are
extreme left Jewish organizations - even today. But what
is that supposed to prove? 


| 	 Article 124 of the Soviet Constitution says:
| "Freedom to perform religious rites and freedom of anti-religious
| propaganda is recognized for all citizens

YOu gotto be kidding quoting the SOviet constitution! DIt
would help your case if you even *pretended* to want some credibility.

| 	In Article 123: 
| 	"Any direct or indirect restriction of these rights... as well as any
| propagation of racial or national exceptionalism or hatred and
| contempt is punishable by law."
| 	

Ditto... Taking the Soviet constitution at face value for
someone , esp simeone Hungarian  should be ample to consider
that person unfit for any intelligent debate.

| 	Today it is  politically correct to say that "in Stalinist USSR
| Zionism was ruthlessly prosecuted."  [Indeed, it is considered  a
| hate-crime to say othe

Yeah.. it is a hate crime.. right...  How many people were
prosecuted, ofor only saying that in Stalinist USSR Zionism
was not prosecuted?
BTW First of all, are you aware of the many dozens of trials
of Zionists being sent to Siberia, merely for being
Zionists? Are you aware of the USSR sponsored bills in the
UN against Zionism?

rwise!]  - The fight between Communists and
| Zionists has lasted right down to the present day. But is it really
| and truly a fight... or only a power struggle between

SO first you concur that Zionists and COmmunists were
fighting. I guess what you said above  then - even you agree
to be untrue.


| brothers?

| History is there to clear the air!....

SO why don't you make a claim and try to support it? SO far
you have raised a question...

| 	Without being labelled would anyone dare on this discussion group to
| enumerate the bankers and industrials who actually financed the
| Bolshevik Revolution? Can anyone say how much money was involved? For
| example:  The British War Cabinet issued its official White Paper
| listing Kuhn, Loeb & Co. and other Zionist bankers who financed Red
| Russian Revolution. Does anyone know the life story of Armand Hammer
| or Robert Maxwell?...
| 	When the state of Israel was born, tens of thousands of Zionists were
| PERMITTED to emigrate from Russia and satellite territories to
| Palestine, in a move which still continues today... It should also be
| noted  that  during this time  non-Jews were never permitted to
| emigrate from Communist Russia 

I wonder why these people wanted to leave Russia so much if
they ruled RUssia anyway.  Today so called revisionist
scholars make the same claim - they wanted Jews to be
allowed to leave Europe - for Palestine, and America among
other places. Do yu claim that the Nazis wer also Jews, and
Zionists? (The two of course are separate claims). 

| 	It is also true that the Communist  authorities have been exceedingly
| reluctant to permit young Jews to emigrate and in many cases
| permission has been denied. It always boils down to the question of
| power struggle.

SO apparently they were not freely allowed to
emigrate... Therefore  the claim you made above is untrue as
well. I enjoy when you keep contradicting yourself. That
much less work for me.


 Because the Soviet State has already spent so much
| money on young Jews'  education, their  reluctance to let them leave
| to another country  is quite understandable. This is called
| "brain-drain". Thus the fight continues.

SO what you are saying now is taht comminist were reluctant
to let Jews leave because it would have hurt the USSr -
isn't the same true of non Jews as well? So isn't being Jewish
a onn issue here?


 But we should remember that
| this is a fight between Jews! Whether Communists or Zionists, they
| still retain their Jewishness and they stand united against all
| non-Jews. 

THis statement makes everything you said previously totally
unneccssarry. If you can and will porve this everythign else
comes included...  Without this however what you said before
makes no sense, especially with the previous self
contradictions and jumps of logic you expressed.
Let's see therefore your support for this argument.

They travel different paths, and of course not all Jews are
| Communists or not all of them are Zionists either, however, both
| Communism and Zionism happened have the same common
goal...

Again, the same goes.. if  you prove this premise the rest
is proven. Let's see the paragraph that all this depends on:

| 	Chaim Weizmann once stated:
| 	"We are one people despite the ostensible rift, cracks and differences
| between the American and Soviet democracies. We are one people and it
| is not in OUR INTERESTS that the West should liberate the East, for in
| doing this and in liberating the enslaved nations, the West would
| inevitably deprive Jewry of the Eastern half of its world
power."

SOunds great. Now as a credible journalist you must know
that a quote is only as credible as its source and context. 
Before I fall to my knees in front of all your clear concise
to the point arguments, would you kindly name that source?

| 	And believe me Mr.  Szucs, there is much more stuff on this
| subject!...

Oh if you say so - I guess then I just have to throw up my
hands and say you are right.  NOT :)

| Judit Toth
| http://www.infobahnos.com/~jtoth
| -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------
|

 (Istvan Szucs) wrote:

>In article >,  > wrote:
>| Istvan Szucs > wrote:
>| 
>| >Note: The posts were getting enormous with little new
>| >content, so I went back and erased some text from the posting for
>| >readability. I only erased text that I consider to be
>| >irrelevant. If Judith Toth disagrees with their relevancy I
>| >am sure shee will let us know .
>| 
>| The best thing you could do is to erase your own posts entirely for there
>| is no substance to them.  Your retorts consist mostly of "visszapofazas", 
>| but no serious addressing the issues.

>Oh really... funny.. I thought that maybe except for the
>last comment I made in the post I have argued my points,
>while Judith Toth kept labeling and assuming my responses
>(wrong for the most part).
>Furthermore I have rejected misinterpretations of my
>responses that Judit Toth keeps making. 
> It's one thing to say that you
>disagree with what I said - but could you perhaps tell me
>which responses do you regard as merely "visszapofazas"?
>I am honestly curious.


>| Perhaps you would do better if you shared your visdom with the FORUM 
>| audience about the voting franchise of Hungarian citizens living abroad.  
>| That happens to be a hot topic right now over there and
>| judging from your recent posts on the subject here, that also happens to
>| be your hot button.  Please, for goodness' sake ... don't deny us the
>| pleasure reading the responses to your well known opinion on that
>| subject! 
--------------------
SZUCS wrote:

>Personally this discussion with Judith Toth is more
>important for me, because I consider her opinion to me much
>more dangerous than the issue of voting. Thanks for calling
>my attention to the discussion on FOrm though.
> =================================================================
October 4th, 1996
	TOTH: I am honoured that Istvan Szucs considers discussions  with me
"important"! However he says that  my opinions are dangerous.  In what
sense? To whom? What or whom could  my "dangerous opinions" hurt? The
commonly accepted socalled ... Historical facts? How can anyone change
quotations from dr. Chaim Weizmann,  THE CANADIAN JEWISH NEWS or even
Ilya Ehrenburg into the opinion of Judit Toth? On what grounds?  Of
course  yes, silly me!  After  J. Toth writes  down teh quotations
they automatically become J Toth's opinion, huh? Very
interesting!.....

>SZUCS wrote: The posts were getting enormous with little new
>| >content, so I went back and erased some text from the posting for
>| >readability. I only erased text that I consider to be
>| >irrelevant. If Judith Toth disagrees with their relevancy I
>| >am sure shee will let us know .

TOTH writes: -- How practical! So when posts get  too "enormous" or
better said: too HOT to handle,  they get erased from the public eye?
Just like the  "4 million names" from the memorial marble tables in
Auschwitz?...
	Since the subject of "erasing things" came up let me share an
interesting item  with the readers of soc.culture.magyar. On October
20th , 1982 during his visit to Poland  Pope John Paul II  - together
with other dignitaries of the Catholic Church and a few hundred
survivors - paid  his respect to the "4 million Jews murdered in
Auschwitz." [Note: at that time  there were no complaints about "the 4
million" figure.]
	To the story that was published at the time world wide, two
photographs were published in a German newspaper.
 On the first  we see the pope dressed  in white,  his head bowed in
prayer and sadness  in front of the tables with names on them. He is
surrounded by bishops, priests and survivors.
	The other picture has no visitors and the area where tears were
falling in 1982 looks rather deserted with no more names on the
tables. They were all taken off! What happened and why? Somebody tried
to deny the victims of Auschwitz? 
	In July 1990 the director of the Auschwitz  Museum gave orders to
remove the 19 marble tables, because  according to the management and
scholars the "4 million  number is exageration and unrealistic. Only
about 1 million victims can be considered."
	The museum's director  Mr. Piper said, that new marble tables would
only be  erected when an international organization presents the true
figures and data  and makes it public: statistically how many Jews and
other nationalities were victims in Auschwitz."
	Pertaining to the subject Professor Yehuda Bauer of Jerusalem wrote in
1991:
"(...) the French Jewish  historian George Wellers, himself an
Auschwitz survivor,  determined the total number of victims in the
whole Auschwitz complex at about 1.6 million. Of these, about
1,350,000 died of maltreatment, and the rest by gassing. The total
number of Poles killed there was 83,000. Twenty thousand Gypsies and
11,000 Russians were also murdered there.
In the meantime, Polish scholars arrived at substantially the same
figures. The figure of four million was never used by Raul Hilberg,
for instance, because it was obviously a propaganda figure, without
any basis, invented by Polish communists, whose aim was basically the
same as that of David Irving, namely the denial of the specificity of
the Holocaust.
The number was therefore NOT "REDUCED" BUT CORRECTED. The total number
of the victims of the Holocaust was about 5.8 million, including of
course those who died at Auschwitz." [Prof.Yehuda Bauer, Jerusalem/
Quoted from the CANADIAN JEWISH NEWS, January 17, 1991]
	
	[By the way the photographs and the article were published in the
Hungarian language monthly magazine UJ HIDFO, Febr. 1991. p.9.]

	One has to wonder though, why World Jewry did not complain about
erecting the 19 marble tables with 4 million names on them in
Auschwitz in the first place?  The  visit by the Pope and other
survivors dates back to 1982. So it took almost 8  years (to 1990) to
realize  that the Polish communists  actually "used the  4 million
figure for propaganda"  to the denial of the specificity of the
Holocaust? The leaders of Jews did not know about it? 
	Was  this same  "4 million"  figure also used after the war at the
Nuremberg trial? Can anyone out there answer to this one?...
	Raul Hilberg Jewish historian wrote his (790 pages) book THE
DESTRUCTION OF THE EUROPEAN JEWRY in 1961. Now then, according to
Prof. Yehuda Bauer "The figure of four million was never used by Raul
Hilberg.." Yet, for three long decades from 1961 to 1990 World Jewry's
scholars - the likes of R. Hilberg -  actually ALLOWED the propaganda
of the Polish communists to erect 19 marble tables with 4 million
names on them without any complaint or objection on the part of
Holocaust scholars? And all of a sudden in 1990  - 45 years after the
end of World War II they say, .... oh sorry,  the figures are all
wrong, we are not reducing, just correcting...  all along those damned
communists  are the one  responsible for not using  true figures of
the Holocaust...!??? 
NO FURTHER COMMENT
Judit Toth, editor 24. ORA
http://www.infobahnos.com/~jtoth

Dear Isxtvan, I just tapped into this discussion - usually I am only on 
the Hungary list.  My opinion is that there always will be revisionists 
like in Canada Ernst Zundel.  They are writing nonsense, and then are 
quoted as truth.  I just read an article that was taken over from the 
Nepszabadsag, that there is a teacher in Hungary who teaches that the 
Jews caused all the wars and oppressions in Hungary, starting with the 
Mohacsi vesz...  Fortunately, the majority of the people do not take 
these creatures serious.
Regards, Agnes
In article >,  
says...
>
>In article >,  > 
wrote:
>| Istvan Szucs > wrote:
>| 
>| >Note: The posts were getting enormous with little new
>| >content, so I went back and erased some text from the posting for
>| >readability. I only erased text that I consider to be
>| >irrelevant. If Judith Toth disagrees with their relevancy I
>| >am sure shee will let us know .
>| 
>| The best thing you could do is to erase your own posts entirely for 
there
>| is no substance to them.  Your retorts consist mostly of 
"visszapofazas", 
>| but no serious addressing the issues.
>
>Oh really... funny.. I thought that maybe except for the
>last comment I made in the post I have argued my points,
>while Judith Toth kept labeling and assuming my responses
>(wrong for the most part).
>Furthermore I have rejected misinterpretations of my
>responses that Judit Toth keeps making. 
> It's one thing to say that you
>disagree with what I said - but could you perhaps tell me
>which responses do you regard as merely "visszapofazas"?
>I am honestly curious.
>
>
>| Perhaps you would do better if you shared your visdom with the FORUM 
>| audience about the voting franchise of Hungarian citizens living 
abroad.  
>| That happens to be a hot topic right now over there and
>| judging from your recent posts on the subject here, that also happens 
to
>| be your hot button.  Please, for goodness' sake ... don't deny us the
>| pleasure reading the responses to your well known opinion on that
>| subject! 
>
>Personally this discussion with Judith Toth is more
>important for me, because I consider her opinion to me much
>more dangerous than the issue of voting. Thanks for calling
>my attention to the discussion on FOrm though.
>

| October 4th, 1996
| 	TOTH: I am honoured that Istvan Szucs considers discussions  with me
| "important"! However he says that  my opinions are dangerous.  In what
| sense? To whom? What or whom could  my "dangerous
opinions" hurt? 

I consider your opinions dangerous because they support
unfounded scapegoating through propagating half truths ies
and one sided accounts of facts. 
Your style is a perfect example of how it works - there ais
little reasoning being done -  - half of your text was
totally irrelevant to the statement you made and were
defending, and with one exception you did not even object to
them being  labeled irrelevant. There is little coherence in
the arguments, a lot of extreme statemtns that can not be
verified. The method of argumentation is not reasoning, it
is not intellectual or rational, it is mostly emotional,
attempthing to create a feeling of unease and anger as
oopsed to making a statement and proving it through rational
means.

The
| commonly accepted socalled ... Historical facts? How can anyone change
| quotations from dr. Chaim Weizmann,  THE CANADIAN JEWISH NEWS or even
| Ilya Ehrenburg into the opinion of Judit Toth? On what grounds?  Of
| course  yes, silly me!  After  J. Toth writes  down teh quotations
| they automatically become J Toth's opinion, huh? Very
| interesting!.....

What are you referring to? What hcommonly accepted
historical fact did I label your opinion?

 
| >SZUCS wrote: The posts were getting enormous with little new
| >| >content, so I went back and erased some text from the posting for
| >| >readability. I only erased text that I consider to be
| >| >irrelevant. If Judith Toth disagrees with their relevancy I
| >| >am sure shee will let us know .
| 
| TOTH writes: -- How practical! So when posts get  too "enormous" or
| better said: too HOT to handle,  they get erased from the
public eye?

What did I erase that was too hot to handle? You are
accusing me of misrepresenting your views. The posts are
public, and are still acessible - for once back up your
allegation - and show me what of the text I erased was a
misrepresentation of your argument that pertains to the
discussion at hand?

| Just like the  "4 million names" from the memorial marble tables in
| Auschwitz?...

What is the logical relevance of this sttatement?

| 	Since the subject of "erasing things" came up let me share an
| interesting item  with the readers of soc.culture.magyar. On October
| 20th , 1982 during his visit to Poland  Pope John Paul II  - together
| with other dignitaries of the Catholic Church and a few hundred
| survivors - paid  his respect to the "4 million Jews murdered in
| Auschwitz." [Note: at that time  there were no complaints about "the 4
| million" figure.]

What is the relevance of this to the ongoing discussion? Are
you really incapable of holding a straiught argument, and
determining what is relevant and what is not?
Continuation of this argument is admittedly erased, snice it
contains NOTHING relvant to the ongoing discussion.

This is exactly wahat I am talking about. It is obvious that
your intention is not to clear the air about the subject we
are discussing. The pattern of issues introduced have on
thing in common - they have something negative to say about
Jews. Whether your reason for jumping around is to abandon
a topic before it is clear that you lost the argument, or
that your introduction of new and unrelated issues is just a
result of you r inability to stay with one issue - it is
unfair of me to expect to be able and willing to to follow
you in every topic you choose to bring up.

I continue to be interested and willing to discuss the
original statement(s) you made, regarding Zionism and
Communism. If you are unwilling to discuss that topic in itself
imed you wanted to do) is impossible, and no progress or
resolution of a rational discussion is possible.

Sincerely,
Istvan

In article >,  says...
>
It maybe verlazito, but who can read this?  Agnes
>begin 644 milkok.txt
>M(""0:FIE;"UN87!P86P@<Y1T@G0@@6=Y96L-"B`@2&]M($=Y=6QA(&B"=&:3
>M;B!N87!I<F5N9"!E;)-T="!S>J)T(&N"<G0@82!087)L86UE;G1B96XL(()S
>M(&B@<F]M('!E<F,@E'1V96X-"FV@<V]D<&5R8VEG('1A<G2B(&9E;'-ZHFQA
>M;*!SH&)A;B"A9X)R971E="!T971T(&%Z(()P<&5N('-O<F]S(&MO<G)U<&-I
>MHF=Y86ZC<R"!9WD-"FMO<FV@;GEZ871I(&MI=FEZ<V>@;*!SH')A+B!%;&AA
>M;F=Z;W1T('9A;&%M:2!M@F<@82!KE'J4<R!F96QE;)-S<X)G<I-L(&ES+"!S
>M(&)E<WJ"9&4-"G:"9X)N(&$@;6EN:7-Z=&5R96QNE&L@;65G:Y1S>I1N=&4@
+"!H;V=Y('9I9WF@>J(@<WIE;8)T(&$-"F=O
>M;F1O:V]N('1A<G1J82X@2&]M($=Y=6QA('1E:*!T(&*B:V]L="!A>B!E;&QE
>M;GJ":VYE:RX@5F%G>6ES(&YA9WD@8F%J('9A;BX-"B!!<G*B;"!A(&)O='*@
;'EI:R!D<BX@5&]C<VEK($V@<G1A(*-G>6YE
>M=F5Z971T('-I:V5R9*%J82!N>6\M#0IMH&X@<F]B8F%N="!K:@CU!6
!S>F%K@G)TDVN"@8J%Z=&$@;65G(&YE=F5Z
>M971T(&B4;&=Y970-"F5Z(()V(&5L96J";BP@:&]G>2!A;&MU9&IO;B!M96<@
>M87H@E&YK;W)MH&YY>F%T;VMK86PZ(()R:H)K(&)E(&ME=F5S96)B96PL(&UI
>M;G0-"F%M96YN>6D@82!B96QT97*!;&5T:2!FE&QD:F5I:V5N(&R"=I,@H&QL
>M86UI(':@;&QA;&%T;VL@H'1A;&%K=6R@<V$@=72@;B!N96MI:R!A:Z!R#0IR
@<B!KH'""8F5N(&$@=)1R=H)N>2!S>F5R:6YT(&J@
>M<FYA+B`H3*!S9#H@16=Y(&B"="P@."X@;VQD86PN*0T*("!%('24<G2";F5T
>M(&UA:F0G(&UI;F1E;B!E9WEE<R!M;WIZ86YA=&$@=H)T(&$@36%G>6%R($N4
>M>G2@<G-A<Z!G(()R=H)N>6)E;@T*;()VDR!J;V=R96YD:(&%Z
:R""<G1H971E=&QE;BP@:&]G>2!M:8)R
>M="-"F%D=*!K(&MI(&$@;75N:Z!T+"!A>B!A>F]N8F%N('24
>M<G:";GEE;&QE;F5S+"!H;V=Y(&1R+B!4;V-S:6L@<*!L>:!Z=&%TH',@;H)L
>M:X%L#0IK87!T82!A(&UE9V*A>J!S="X@*%-U8VAM86X@;6EN:7-Z=&5R(&5N
>M;F5K(&%Z(&5L;&5N:V5ZDVJ"=""@;&RA=&IA+"!E<F=O(&YY:6QVH&XM#0IV
>M86RB+"!H;V=Y('-E;6UI9H)L92!PH&QYH'IT872@<R!N96T@=F]L="XI(%1O
>M8W-I:<WJ4<B"@=&DM#0IT=6R@;'2@:R!A
<V5K+"!A>G2@;B!H86UA<F]S86X@:VED97*!;'0L
>M(&YE;2!T86=J82!E9WEI:R"#0IK86UA<J!N86L@<V5M+"!A(&B"
>M=&:3:2!V:72@8F%N('!E9&EG($1E=71S8V@@:X)P=FES96R3("A&:61E<WHI
>M(&UE;&R":V5S96X-"FUE9VIE9WEE>G1E.B!D<BX@5&]C<VEK(&5L;&5N(&]K
>M:7)A="'*@<R!F;VQY="X@*$%Z(#$Y.3`M
#0IN97-Z=&EA<F5N9&5L970@;6EA='0@97)E9&V";GEE(&5N;F5K
>M(&YE;2!L971T+B!!(')E;F0@:V5D=H*"<G0Z(&1R+B!4;V-S:#0IN
>ME'-S@F>"="!T96B@=";VYYH71O='2@:RDN(%248F(@;6EN="!G
>M>6%NHW-A:R!A('"";GIM;WIGH'-O:SH@82!85FPN#0IK97*!;&5T:2"4;FMO
:=&]R($)RHFME<B!2="XM
>M;B!;5D(I(&ME<F5S>G2!;&IU="T-"FAA=&]T="!H;WIZH"!K:6%L:W5D;W1T
>M('9A9WEO;J!H;WHL(&UI=72@;B!A>B!R="!L979O;G1A(&$@:Y1Z=F5TH723
>M(%9E:W1O<B!2="X-"($$@5B""<R!A(%9"(&N"
>M="
>M92T-"FQE;G1V92P@@G,@82!K@G0@8X)G('9E>F5TDVIE(()D97-T97-T=H)R
>M96LN($V@<VN"<'!E;B!F;V=A;&UA>G9A.B!A>B"(&IE+0T*;&5N
>M=()K96YY(*!L;&%M:="
>M92X@16=Y97,@<&]L:71I:;*!D=&%G+0T*:F%I;F%K(&5Z96X@
>M8X)G96MB96X@=F%LHB!KE'IV971E='0@@G)D96ME;'1S@F>"<I-L(&V@<B!H
>M86QL86YI(&5Z="UA>G0Z(&UI;F1E;BT-"F5S971R92!S;VMA=&UO;F2B+"!H

@CU!6(%)T+B!E9WF"8FN";G0@82!,96=F96QSDV)B($*A<J)S
=()T(&5L<W5MH&MO;"T-"G9A(&N"
>M;GES>F5RH71E='1E(&%L:W5D;WJ@<W)A(&%Z()1N:V]R;:!N>7IA=&]K870L
>M(&UO;F1VH&XL(&5G>65Z>H%N:R!M96<L#0IH82!K87!N:2!A:V%R=&]K('9A
>M;&%M:70N("@Q.3DU(&YO=F5M8F5R@F)E;B!A>B!,0B`R+#,U(&UI;&QIH')D
>M(&9O<FEN=&YY:";'0@;65G(&$@9'5N8:-J=J!R
>M;W-I()1N:V]R;:!N>7IA=&YA:RXI($$@:&%T86QO;6UA;"!V86RB('9I<W-Z
>M88)L@G,-"($1E('24<G:"
>M(&N4=F5T=&5K(&5L(&%Z()1N:V]R;:!N>7IA=&]K(&ES+"!M:79E;"!A#0HH
>M8J!R;65N;GEI<F4@:6YD;VMO;'0I('9A9WEO;G-Z97)Z@G,@;*!ZH&)A;B""
>M9W9E(&9I9WEE;&UE;B!KH7:!;"!H86=Y=*!K(&$-"FN4>F)E<WIE<GJ"<VD@
>M96QJH'*@<R!S>F%BH&QY86ET+B"<X)R=),@=F]L="!A>B!!
>M;G1A;&PM0F]R;W-S+6MO<FV@;GDL#0IFDVN"@:X)T(()R:6YT
>M971T('1A9VIA+"!3>F%BHB!486V@<R!FDW!R:79A=&EZH'1O<B""<R!#<V5P
>M:2!,86IO<R!A:VMO<FD-"H]6FBUTHG1U;69A::R!N96T@:&%J
>M=&]T=*!K(':"9W)E(&%Z(#$Y.#DN(()V:="P@;65G
@82!M86D@>F%V87)O<R!H96QY>F5T970N#0H@
>M4W5C:&UA;B!%="!#;RX@<WIE<FEN=""3:R!E9WD@<F%KH',@<()N>G0@;65G
>M=&%K87*A=&]T=&%K(&%Z(*!L;&%M;F%K+B!!>B"4;BT-"FMO<FV@;GEZ871O
>M:R!A>G0@;6]N9&J@:RP@:&]G>2!L96=A;*!B8B!H;WIZH&IU=&AA=&YA:R!J
>M879A:6L@96=Y('*"<WJ":&5Z+`T*86UI:@6P@:&%M87)O<V%N(&)E
>M8W.39)1L;H)N96LN($$@;6%I(&MO<FV@;GD@82!T96=N87!I(&UU;&%S>G2@
>M<Z!RHFP-"F)E<WJ";"P@<R!H;V=Y(&YI;F-S('"";GHL(&5Z@G)T(&$@:X)N
>M>7-Z97)M96=O;&2@<RX@02!T96=N87!I(&MO<FV@;GD@;65G(&%R+0T*<J)L
>M+"!H;V=Y(&$@;6%I(&YE;2!A9"="!A>B"4;FMO<FV@;GEZ871O:VYA
>M:RP@=FELH&=O<R!T96B@="P@:Y1Z<&]N=&]SH70L#0IH;WIZ82!V:7-S>F$@
<WIE<G0@@G,@H6=Y('1O=J!B8BX-"B!-:6YD96YK:2!A
>M('"";GIR92!H:79A=&MO>FEK+B!3(&%L:=*!R<V%S
>3H&<@=)1R=H)N>65I<F4N#0H-"@``
>`
>end