Noutăți

Surpriză: Filmul documentar TRANSILVANIA, ISTORIE FURATĂ nu este contestat de unguri!!! Le e frică de nenumăratele documente maghiare invocate în el?

Lansat în urmă cu 5 zile pe internet, filmul TRANSILVANIA, ISTORIE FURATĂ s-a bucurat de foarte multă apreciere, ajungând în acest moment la 25.700 de vizionări, adică la o medie zilnică de peste 5.000 de vizionări.

Cu toate că filmul se anunță unul cu o audiență foarte mare, fiind un film care spulberă falsurile istorice cu care a fost mistificată istoria Transilvaniei, el nu a fost luat la țintă încă de revizioniștii maghiari și nici de mistificatorii “români” ai istoriei noastre. Oare pentru că filmul conține prea multe citate din cronicarii maghiari care le stau în gât extremiștilor unguri și istoricilor români cu doctorate luate la Budapesta? Le este teamă că, atacându-l, vor atrage atenția supra lui și vor avea mai mult de pierdut, decât de câștigat? S-ar putea!

Cele câteva comentarii supărate de pe facebook sau de pe canalul de youtube nu înseamnă nimic…

Una dintre tehnicile de limitare a pagubelor atunci când apare un material care lovește in falsurile istorice este ignorarea lui, pentru a-i diminua influența, fiind știut că atunci când ataci un astfel de proiect, implicit vei stârni curiozitatea în legătură cu el. Iar dacă omul nu este prost, un astfel de film îl va pune pe gânduri.

Doar că noi suntem pregătiți să îl facem foarte cunoscut: în acest moment se lucrează la traducerea lui în engleză, franceză și spaniolă și sper să găsim o soluție și pentru traducerea lui în maghiară. De asemenea, îl vom propune cu titlu de difuzare gratuită tuturor televiziunilor din România, fie ele naționale sau locale.

Rămâneți aproape pentru că urmează și celelalte două părți ale filmului. Până atunci, sprijiniți-l și voi cum puteți – cu un share, cu postarea pe propriul blog sau site. Mulțumim!

Daniel Roxin
http://daniel-roxin.ro/

TRANSILVANIA, ISTORIE FURATĂ – filmul documentar care aruncă în aer revizionismul maghiar!


Intră pe pagina principală a site-ului pentru a vedea cele mai noi articole! Clik aici: Acasa

8 Comments on Surpriză: Filmul documentar TRANSILVANIA, ISTORIE FURATĂ nu este contestat de unguri!!! Le e frică de nenumăratele documente maghiare invocate în el?

  1. Spor la tradus.
    Cat despre contestatari,
    stati fara grija …”coc” ei ceva.Iar cand or incepe sa “dea ” in tastatura vom fi si noi pe faza.De !…Avem smart-uri cu acces la net nelimitat.
    Din cate observ multi sunt destul de rezervati in a- si spune opiniile dupa ce a castigat Trump alegerile in SUA.Nu prea mai ciripesc.Sunt in asteptare.Uite de exemplu astia de la hotnews au cam facut ciocu’ mic , il tot tin pe Boia pe prima pagina de vreo saptamana iar in rest , inafara de stirile zilnice , nu prea mai fac afirmatii.Nu mai auzim nimic despre LGBT , nationalisti, dacopati,etc.Vin alegerile si si-au dat seama ca o vor lua in freza, ceea ce se va si intampla din pacate.Ne-ar fi prins bine un P”National”L “sanatos”.In fine, cred ca vor sta cuminti pana dupa alegeri.

  2. De multe ori ignorarea sau conspiratia tacerii e mai efectiva decat argumentarea contra …ei stiu ca daca intra in contra cu voi va fac reclama gratuita, asa ca merg pe burta …

  3. Va rog frumos sa adaugati subtitrarea in lb romana, ganditi-va la persoanele cu probleme auditive. Sau limba engleza e binevenita!

  4. Poate ca nu l-au vazut multi de nu comenteaza nimeni …

  5. Nu conteaza daca suntem unguri cu adevarat sau romani cu adevarat sau de alta natie, e cert ca ne-am nascut pe aceste meleaguri si stramosii nostri au trait aici cu multi ani inainte de orice invadatori. Important e ca ne intelegem si suntem un popor pasnic. Satul in care locuiesc are locuitori romani, maghiari si ucraineni si cu totii ne intelgem foarte bine, de fapt suntem acelasi neam doar de-a lungul istoriei am fost sub diferite dominatii. E frumos documentarul merita sa ne cunoastem istoria oricare ar fi ea, dar va rog D-nule Daniel Roxin sa nu starniti ura si conflicte intre romani si unguri:)

  6. Dear Mr. Roxin, (we are not afraid, but don’t think you are read in the first place by Hungarians. Here is the contest, anyway with involving Hungarian documents – as you’ll see below you just compromitated yourself, not us….)

    since you suggested you wait opinions, reactions to this recent video, now you’ll have one.
    First of all, about some parts of the description of the video:

    – just because counter-opinon exist, it does not mean they are all “extremists” or revisionists” or “hostile forces”

    – the video does not “blow” anything, and anyway the theories are not “revisionist”, since they were already existed before revisionism, and as it will be demonstrated, you misuse much of the sources, as well you ignore others and other counter-evidence, so the assertion is false that would take out of the ground of “extremists” (again an improper generalization)

    – by claiming and asking the people to reach as many, as you will see, you won’t serve the real cause of your point-of-view/belief, since every educated, interested or professional with proper knowledge or objectivity will see the huge fallacies and ignorance, and nevertheless the propagandistic approach of the movie, that will have a totally different effect that is desired, also regarding Hungarians (of course, those who are the utmost believers of the Daco-Roman myth/theory or dislike Hungarians or just not are objective will celebrate and enjoy this, but as you say you are interested in the truth yes?)
    Well let’s the problems, mistakes and errors of this work, trying to hold the chronological order as possible:

    1. You pinpoint in the video more times that what is presented is the TRUTH, even sarcastically claiming Hungarians – without disctinction – who would not agree are “extremists”, “revisionists”, “follower of Magyarism”, and “Hungarians should learn they true history”. This contradicts the necessary objectivity, since you in advance do not give a chance that you might have mistaken, althouh you promoted the video in spite of not being hostile to Hungarians. Of course, you have the right to have an own point of view, but even excluding the possibilty that you may have not right, you already set the cube and fall into the mistake of that narrow-minded approach, that we met often with Romanian historiography in the new era, reminding to further insanities during the Commnunist Era. Although people – also among Hungarians respect your struggle for the truth, distortions of the mass-media, supernatural science, against Communism and the New World Order and conspirations, nevertheless that you stood from the beginning next to Hungary regarding the migrant question.

    2. In the beginning of the video a huge mistake comes immediately, you state the “Michael The Brave united the the three principalities”, that is a well-known hoax and urban legend among Romanians, although he did not even united the administration of Wallachia and Moldavia, he just became the ruler of the three principalities at the same time, that anyway he could not be united as Transylvania was part of the Lands of the Hungarian Crown and thus that time the hereditary land Habsburg Monarchy. Moreover he did not have a motivation to unite anything he lacked about any national charachter, despite the movie that is propagating else.

    3. Zamfirescu tells about such a principles that we already know from Densusianu, the problem is not Hungarians seem to ignore these principles, but unfortunately himself, you and other’s who manifest in the movie as we will see with what mistakes or ignorant, fringe assumptions, statements arise.

    4. Hungarians did not stand on that point of view the Carpathian Basin would be deserted, there is no debate on Slavic presence at some regions

    5. You and Mr. Popescu claims that fringe theory that Hungarians would have finished “conquering” Transylvania in “300 years” or until “1250”, that is inherently false, and this theory was invented only to bridge the missing time until the fisrt Vlachs were settled in Hungary. In 1000. A.D, Hungary existed with his full territorial extent with Hungarian presence, including Transylvania, as well Romanian sources can reinforce this on the other hand the Archbishopry of Gyulafehérvár/Alba Iulia was founded in 1009, that also shows how ridicoulus and unprofessional this fringe theory is.

    6. You are hihglighting and promoting more and more times in a propagandisctic way Simon de Kéza’s attestation about where the Székelys their special writing took from, but you ignore that it CANNOT PROVE your point of view, since Romanian DID NOT HAVE a runic script, that has only connection to the Old-Turkic, non-Indo European writings…practically it shows the “Blacki” Kézai attest cannot refer to Romanians, but to the Turkic Bulak people who vere attested also by several medieval authors. You ignore this heavily – wilfully or not – and this makes concerns of your benevolent intentions. You misuse the Gesta Hungarorum and other documents as it will be seen further also.

    7. Mr. Ioncica, did you think about that Hungarian language is having the one of the richest vocabulary approximatively with 1 million words? How you ever thought that approx. 2333 alleged words of Romanian origin is how little and tiny? And you suggest that the Romanian langauge was richer and that’s why we had to borrow? Do you know the size of the Romanian vocabulary even today yes? Maybe that’s why there are even Hungarian topnyms in Moldavia and Wallachia…

    8. You claim to to use Hungarian sources, but what you forget to say that a source is not enough and regardless of the authors nationality what is count that it can PROVE something or not….at the same time you ignore plenty of other Hungarians and even Romanian sources that are heavily contradicting or disproving your claims, just because it does not support your point of view….you think is the way for truth? How then your claims would be distinguished from propaganda and objective approach?

    9. The recurring statement of yours is that Romanians would have lived and being always the majority not even Transylvania, but also Pannonia…this is again a heavily distorted fringe theory. Many Romanian works wilfully mistranslate from original Latin (although they claim the Latin roots also), since the “Pastores Romanorum” are distuinguished from “Blachij”, and even the latter one is dubios if it would refer Vlachs as we seen, above, the confusion is big since many similar etymologies were used to designate different people and those times Vlach not necessarily referred all the time to Romance speaking people. You cite census date only from the 17th century when Romanians start to became the most numerous ethnic group (= not ncecessarily and absolute majority, but bigger than any other ethnic group), but you ignore the time before when Romanians in the beginning were a tiny minority in Hungary.

    10. Your corruption of St. Stephen’s origin remind us to Ceaucescu Era or the insane Dogaru-sytle of falsifying history. Menomorut was not Romanian but Khazar according to the Gesta, but of course the Romanian historiography tried to corrupt all non-Hungarian leaders as Romanians, even if it is literally stated that they are Khazass, Bulgars, etc….so Mr. Roxin how is about the truth or fair approach? Do you realize how much disappointment you cause to thos persons that anyway do not consider you unintelligent? St. Stephen did not have any Romanian origin, it is ridicoulus, and his name was not “Voicu” – again a falsification to a later Romanian phonetics – but Vajk, that has a Turkic, pagan origin.

    11. During the video, you many times refer of Transylvania as a “Romanian land”. That is improper, since until 1920 it was part of Hungary, then the Eastern Hungarian Kingdom that trasnformed to the Principality of Transylvania, and those were Hungarian states and/or Lands of the Hungarian Crown.

    12. You misuse the concept of the peasant revolts – again remembering some old habits also embraced by the Communist Era in Romanian – and try to identify them as national conflicts although they were conflicst between classes. In the revolt of Bábolna or Budai Nagy Antal revolt the Hungarian and Romanian peasants together revolted against their status, it had no connection to any possible oppression of Romanians.

    13. You claim the “John the Get” in all chronicles, although this is misleading, why don’t you attest also he was called Ugrin Janko, Jencsó Secuiul ansd Jencsó Ungurul by foreigners? Is it inconvenient to the your beloved Daco-Roman theory?

    14. Vasile Lupasc says that Hungary disappears after the Battle of Mohács and he is designated as a historian, then he should be aware he cannot state such, since Royal Hungary and the Eastern Hungarian Kingdom continoues to exist? What proof he could give that “Matthias Corvinus had it mind his Romanian origin”? Did Mr. lupasc know that Matthias Corvinus in 1463 ordered the military service for the three Transylanian nations (he does not mention the so-called “majority Romanian” people surprisingly). He gave to the Székelys an own order establishment to make them defended from the over-taxing from the landlords. He created the Saxon autonomy. But nothing care wregarding Romanians..if they would be in such a large number, would not he then also take care of them? On the contrary, he made orders to regulate the Romanians because of some improper behavior, in 1478 he ordered to unbuild a newly set Romanian village because “he did not wanted the Vlachs to have nest on the expense on the royal peasants”. Interesting, however.

    15. You claim that the evidence are hidden, you speak of millenary continuity, and Romanins being a permanent majority. As it seems, not Hungarians are hiding information so far. The theory of millenar continuity can be contested very easily, especially – among many other evidence and contradiction -the official documents attest when and how the Hungarian Kings settled Vlachs and where and also wher they took them. At the same time, Vlachs continously influxed in the north of the Danube many of the leaving the Balkan area, as well in Hungary. How interesting that they copied initially everything from Hungarians, Slavs, and Saxons, and their own creations only encountered much later in the end of the 13th, 14th century, also regarding may other aspects including Wallachia and Moldavia.

    16. You claim in a propagandistic way a “cruel Magyarization” of all time, although Hungary was well known about his hospitality towards other nations as following the intentions of St. Stephen, and after the big depopulation of wars Hungary settled almost 14 nationalities in his country. Where else it was better? The conditions and rights i.e. in Wallachia and Moldavia were much more worse, on the contrary of your theory of exodus, Romanians continously migrated to Transylvania, despite having less rights than the three nations since they living standards were either better. About this even a Romanian ruler complained to the Hungarian King, why don’t you present this information, or the Romanian poem about better to escape to Transylvania than to live and suffer in their principalities? Did the Habsburg provide or any other country, or even your principalities a better life for any ethnic group? Not really, despite of the critics Hungary was one of the most liberal states in medieval Europe also. Could you tell me how “forcibly Hungarians tried to delete the identity” or “annihilation” of other people? Why Hungarian states are the first by intorducing the minority laws or freedom of religions or by introducing schools for the minorities? Or it does not fit to your statements? The fact the number of minorities continously grew in Hungary, including Romanians?

    17. Dear Mr. Iscru, Mr. Theodoru, how could you define exactly this “extremism”? You mean Hungary was the first country in Europe who introduced minority laws and full emancipation, and they were abolished because of the Austrians, did they kept they promise to Romanians, you did not forget how iancu ended up? The time when in the U.S. still there was slavery, the English heavily oppressed Irish, as well the French the Bretons? In 1867, Hungary immediatley reintroduced everything being still the first….Romania did not have minority laws, they even denied the Jews and granted no citizenship, when Hungary received nearly 1 million of them. Everything has to be judged contemporarily yes?

    You may criticize some extension of ethnic or common laws, of course it cannot be compared with modern conditions, and Romania or other countries were not better still after 1920. You may critize the low number of representants of the Transylvanian Romanian National Party in the Parliament, but what you cannot deny among the myriads of accusation: Romanians lived the best in Hungary, not other country!
    Mr. Theodoru, being part of the army you were taught of emotional nationalistic speeches yes, but what about the “truth” that is emphasized by Mr. Roxin in the movie?

    – did you know thet after the reunification of Hungary and Transylvania, Transylvanians vote those press laws to remain that was under Austrian rule? Did you know that the Transylvanian Romanians had 43 newspapers and were distributed in an amount of 3 743 000?

    – did you know in Hungary there were more Romanian schools than in Romania, and the standard of education of Transylvanian Romanians were higher as it was acknowledged by Romanian press? That the Hungarian state supported the Orthodox Churches, Greek-Catholic Churches, Priest Congrua, Romanian elementary schools, Romanian secondary schools, Romanian professor schools with an amount of 5 997 585 Crowns? Onisifor Ghibu attest in 1915:

    – “Hungary has the most developed cultural and political instutions regarding the neighboring countries”

    – ” The Orthodox Romanian churches in Hungary has higher priviliges than the ones in Romania, Russia, Bulgaria, Serbia or Greece”

    – “In Hungary all churches are lead in a democratic way, everyone has it’s own autonomy”

    – “The simple comparison of the status of the Romanian Schools in Hungary and Romania is enough to convince all Romanian who consider themselves as good compatriots: to know the situation of Romanian schools in Hungary is national obligation for Romania.”

    So, Mr. Theodoru, how dare you claim the situation of the schools….maybe the Apponyi-law that introduced to learn the Hungarian lanugage? Of course, the accusers forget to mention it DID NOT mean the cessation of the minority langauge, it was a plus since it is necessary to know the language of the country you live….today Romanians argue in such a way….

    Mr. Theodoru, did you know that in 1872 Banca Albina was founded that major goal was among other Romanian banks to finance to have the lands of Transylvania for Romanians? Until 1899, already 73 Romanian banks operated. In 1903 all Romanians banks founded the Solidaritate, the alliance of all Romanian banks. Until 1914, 152 (!) Romanian banks operated in Hungary, with a total own capital of 64,9 million, total deposit of 108,3 million, total debenture-capital of 11 million, moving 263,4 million of capital. Despite in Romania, not even the 40 % of this were reached as a capital-concentration.

    Mr. Theodoru, and all of this during the horrible “extremism and Magyarization”. “Ethnocide, Genocode, H-o-l-o-c-a-u-s-t”, are you not ashamed, or you Mr. Roxin? Haven’t you studied the situation of Romanians in Bessarabia, where even to issuse a Romanian newspaper was a problem???

    18. You claim the Székelys came only in the Middle Ages….would it mean you use only those parts taken of the Gesta that would fit your point of view? But how so, some part are the holy truth and other’s are not true? It is written the Székelys who were the men of Attila as hearing Árpád is approaching came after to receive him….oopps..

    19. Mr. Roxin, Mr. Tanase, I hope both of you do not regard Hungarians as stupids? You think they don’t recognize such tricks to put Hungarian nations into different ethnicity codes such as “Magyar”, “Székely”, “Csángó” as the fox plan of the divide et impera principle? So the Romanian nationalism can prevail and claim less right due to less number? Hmmmm? That’s why Székelys register as Magyars, because they are NOT stupid…

    20. The claim that around 500 000 Romanians would have remained in the truncated Hungary is false, a huge distortion, just see the statistical datas. The German minority had such number, and anyway you again were mistaken since the so-called “Great Union” was just a symbolic, one way and illegal proclamation with zero consequence, the 1920 Treaties set the final borders that were anyway not identical with those territories that Romanians demanded, since they demanded more that they got, as another proof of the unprofessional and invalid approach.

    21. Just because there are artifacts remanined in Transylvania (as well all around Europe) it does not mean that the current local population has a continuity, in this way Hungarians could have also claimed a different ancestry. I think ridicoulus is better after more hundred years being unable to prove the Daco-Roman theory since claiming ancestry of the Dacians.

    22. Referring to other theories that you discredit and considering rubbish, your argumentation again fails, claiming Hungarians being migratory could not have any connection to ancient cultures or writings. Please let me to remember you that the symbols of the Tartaria tablet’s or Sumerian wriring has zero connection to Indo-European culture or writing, that was not even born that time, 7000 – 3000 B.C. until, present-day Europe and half of Asia were inhabited by mainly agglutinative speaking nations and cultures, and only after the Indo-Europeans MIGRATE to their present-day areas (anyway they are just a lanugage family and the 19th romantic nationalism corrupted many nations to Indo-European regerdless before all sources designated them culturally and linguistically different.)

    23. Finally, Mr. Roxin, we agree about the princpiples of “plainly”, “frankly”, “telling the truth even if it is unpleasant”, but then why did not you applied this in this video? “Finally Hungarians should learn their true history”…Really? And from you? Or what did you expect, you are joking? We are open to any debate, if you ignore objectivity and outcommunicate “universal truth” because you are presonally convinced about the Daco-Roman continuity and this is you greatest passion, than you won’t reach anything just more hatred and dislike also among those people, who are not “extremists” or “revisionist” but are sane persons learning, knowing, analyzing, assesing history in a professional manner, regardless they are Hungarians, Romanians or any other ethnicity.
    Sincerely from those, who respect historical objectivity and are anti-propagandist about “Istorie furata”…

    • dear stranger scrie in romaneste ce pareri ai ca nu toti stim engleza .dince am inteles pe sarite nu prea esti de acord cu postarile noastre in care ne revendicam vechimea si treirea continua pe acest pamint al vechii dacii si ca atestarile maghiare nu ar fi chiar potrivite a fi pomenite

    • Ion Logofatu // 30 iulie 2017 at 22:40 // Răspunde

      It will be nice to read the name of your nationality and find for yourself what and from where the name “Huns” is from. Just for the sake of argument, the logic of mixing dates and elements available only in Hungarian language, as in History and literature, does not make it or pass as Universal Truth, yes it may pass as an opinion of a past Imperialistic view. However, the fact that you arguments have the fallacy and bias of your ethnic approach. Re-editing the history of locals from Transylvania in Hungarian language, and quoting from those documents do not go out of the close circle argument? Let see what was first, the “chicken or the egg”?

Adauga un comentariu

Adresa de email introdusa nu va fi publicata.
Comentariile care conțin cuvinte obscene și limbaj violent sau care instigă la ură și discriminare nu vor fi publicate!


*


Termeni si conditii