An Open Letter to Dylan Avery
This terrific letter came to me via email today from Jasa Slavjansky:
Hello,
I am now familiar with your film "Loose Change", as well as the critique of the film by Mark Roberts. Recently, I saw what appeared to be a screenshot of a "personal profile" for yourself akin to something on either a blog, myspace page, or some other similar account owned by you. In this screenshot, it shows a quote, allegedly from you, that "Mark Roberts is CIA".
Now, assuming that you did write those words, I think this might be a valuable lesson for you: Have you ever wondered why some people call you a conspiracy nut, kook, or other derogatory terms of this nature? Well it might have a little something to do with the fact that you(assuming you did make such a claim) feel compelled to label anyone who disagrees with your theory as a part of the conspiracy itself. And you wonder why people refer to these things as conspiracies?
I read Mr. Roberts critique, and the ease with which many of your film's claims are debunked, particularly the ease by which the actual facts are found(via Google in many cases) is shocking. Basically, based on the amount of factual errors in this film, we can only come to two conclusions:
1. The "researchers"(including yourself), as in most conspiracy theories, started with a preconceived conclusion, and then purposely cherry-picked any story that seemed to support this conclusion while ignoring everything that doesn't. In other words, at a great deal of deliberate deception was involved(something like the Bush case for war in Iraq).
2. Complete incompetence. And while we're on that note, please deny that one of your colleague's on a radio show claimed that the damage to the Pentagon could have been done with a Javelin missile. Seriously, I DEMAND an apology for that remark that is idiotic beyond all mortal comprehension, seeing that the Javelin is an ANTI-TANK missile with a HEAT warhead- something that tends to leave a hole no bigger than a PENCIL. Here is a link that will explain both these concepts to you and your colleagues:
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/javelin.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Munroe_effect
But I digress...
The point is, conspiracy believers have no right to complain about this label when they constantly label anyone who questions them as an agent of the CIA, Mossad, Illuminati, or simply paid-disinformation operative. For my questioning(simply questioning) of the 9-11 controlled demolitions theories, I have been over the past year or so been accused of being:
1. A CIA agent.
2. A Jew(by self-proclaimed "white nationalists")
3. A Neocon(I am actually more or less a socialist who actually left the United States to live in Europe)
4. A paid agent of Larry Silverstein.
Everybody that contradicts or fails to support the conspiracy is accused of being part of the conspiracy. Does that sound even remotely rational to you? If so it would explain a lot. My advice, next film you release should have the support of a credible demolitions-expert or structural engineer. Otherwise don't bother.
JPS
posted by Pat @ 7:10 AM
62 comments
62 Comments:
while you're cataloguing the labels they like to give people, don't forget to mention "brainwashed republican sheep"... i like that one.
particularly the ease by which the actual facts are found(via Google in many cases) is shocking.
The official fiction is easily found everywhere, google is no exception. This is the type of stuff "debunkers" always resort to when trying to prove folks that say otherwise wrong.
As for the rest of her tirade, she's currently leaving the area of denial and trying to actively fight the truth. We all know the next phase is acceptance. She'll come along eventually.
The official fiction is easily found everywhere
There is no official fiction. Unless they reversed the defintions of fiction and fact when I wasn't looking.
This is the type of stuff "debunkers" always resort to when trying to prove folks that say otherwise wrong.
Scare quotes, the last bastion of the ruined.
We all know the next phase is acceptance.
We're in big trouble if everyone disregards logic and evidence and sides with you.
There is no official fiction. Unless they reversed the defintions of fiction and fact when I wasn't looking.
Bin Laden and 19 hijackers is provable fiction. It is the propaganda story pushed by the media and government so that makes it "Official Fiction."
im still waiting for your proof on this
There is no "proof" these guys even boarded the planes. If there is such "proof" then why hasn't the FBI released the airport videos? Innocent until proven guilty.
"Provable fiction?"
You impart an entirely new meaning to the word oxyMORON.
Correct! It's exactly like a "jihadist" going to a strip bar, bwa ha ha ha.
boading manifests show the hijackers on each plane, seems like proof to me
The security boarding check point videos would be a bit more convincing don't you think?
It's exactly like a "jihadist" going to a strip bar, bwa ha ha ha.
Men want to see naked women? Gasp! Stop the presses!
If you had ever left your parents basement you would discover that this is quite common, even among so called devout Muslims.
Men want to see naked women? Gasp! Stop the presses!
If you had ever left your parents basement you would discover that this is quite common, even among so called devout Muslims.
No,no. That's not the "official" line. These guys were fanatical enough to take their lives for their cause, in fact, look at the Taliban's treatment of women to see how real fundamentalists feel towards the opposite sex.
So if Atta and crew went to strip clubs, did coke and had girlfriends, then they really weren't fantastical enough to take their lives in this "operation" now were they?
The government gave you an oxymoron as "proof" and you guys ate it. I actually feel sorry for you.
Your evidence comes from a limited set of data "released" by the FBI and eyewitness at the screen that support the OS selectively
Once again, please point out the lies, distortions, quote mining, and false experts that this site is relying on. I can point out dozens of cases where CTs do that, and all you do is complain that I don't rely on every nutty source you come up with.
Sorry, I don't consider the neo-nazi American Free Press to be a credible source, or a retired theology professor to be an expert on structural engineering. You are just going to have to accept that.
That's not the "official" line. These guys were fanatical enough to take their lives for their cause, in fact, look at the Taliban's treatment of women to see how real fundamentalists feel towards the opposite sex.
These guys weren't Taliban, and most had lived in the West extensively.
I am saying this based off of the experience of living in two different Muslim countries. How many have you lived in?
So if Atta and crew went to strip clubs, did coke and had girlfriends, then they really weren't fantastical enough to take their lives in this "operation" now were they?
Look up Ramzi Yousef, dumbass.
The Koran has allowances for breaking the rules as long as you're using it in the fight against unbelievers. Read it sometime.
These guys weren't Taliban, and most had lived in the West extensively.
I am saying this based off of the experience of living in two different Muslim countries. How many have you lived in?
Irrelevant, how many suicide hijackers have you met before? What about suicide bombers? What about fantastical Islamists? Plain everyday folks don’t count.
But you are right about one thing here, Atta and company did live in the west extensively, heck, they even trained on US bases. That's all provable facts you choose not to see.
Your logic rules out events you can't accept or in your mind unlikely, or "my government wouldn't do that".
You don't even understand basic logical fallacies so where do you get off saying anything to me? I've never ONCE said "the conspiracy theories are bunk because the government wouldn't do that" (excellent strawman though).
Your evidence comes from a limited set of data "released" by the FBI and eyewitness at the screen that support the OS selectively used to write the FEMA reports, the NIST reports, and the Kean comission.
Watch out, you're poisoning the well now. "It must be faked/wrong if the government says so even though I have no evidence for it being faked/wrong, just trust me".
You over look many other evidence simply on the fact the weren't accepted by the government on hte basis that the do not support the OS.
Boy do you love strawmen. I don't accept the evidence because it isn't evidence, not because it "goes against" the official story. It's like the nonsense that creationists try to pull, where evolutionists ignore the creationists' evidence (I use the term loosely here).
You viciously attack and mock people who point out this evidence.
When people continue to parrot points debunked countless times, I will call you morons, idiots, retarded, and every other term that rightly defines you.
The Koran has allowances for breaking the rules as long as you're using it in the fight against unbelievers. Read it sometime.
So why did Atta snort coke? Did that help in anyway to "fight against unbelievers?" How exactly do you figure that "helped?" Hahahahahahaha. I can't actually believe you believe in that Zionist propaganda so dearly.
You don't even understand basic logical fallacies
As I pointed out before, that's all you ever see becase you want to.
Watch out, you're poisoning the well now. "It must be faked/wrong if the government says so even though I have no evidence for it being faked/wrong, just trust me".
Wrong. There are plenty of facts exposing the government lies beyond "trust." You just choose not to take them as such and simply quote more government lies to try and detract from the plainly evident facts.
But you are right about one thing here, Atta and company did live in the west extensively, heck, they even trained on US bases. That's all provable facts you choose not to see.
Oh yeah, I read one guy even attended DLI. I guess he was studying Chinese or something.
I wish you guys could keep your stories straight. In one argument you claim they are trained CIA spooks, and then the next moment you will claim that they are patsies who are proclaiming their innocence to the BBC. Which is it?
care to explain why the CDs on 9/11 didn't make any loud bangs that echoed around NYC as is the case in real CDs?
Wrong. Look here for that.
Also, according to eyewitness accounts released by NYT, many heard cracking, popping and saw flashes under the demolition waves as the buildings fell. That's all documented.
I wish you guys could keep your stories straight. In one argument you claim they are trained CIA spooks, and then the next moment you will claim that they are patsies who are proclaiming their innocence to the BBC. Which is it?
Well, don't get lost here. It's quite simply, really. Osama and the entire "Terror Network" also known as "Al Qaeda" was/is simply a drug smuggling operation out of Afghanistan. Atta and company were in the business of transporting drugs to the CIA backed Florida "Flight Schools." I was a very simple thing to make them appear to be the hijackers because of their extensive need to travel and the concealment of their "classified" activities.
Atta and company were guilty of drug running, but not much else. The CIA and Mossad were the actual masterminds of 9/11 and had Atta and company as the convenient fall guys.
So to reiterate, if Atta and the 19 weren’t suicide hijackers than who pulled off 9/11? The entire official story falls to pieces under the light of scrutiny and you guys can try and make all the excuse you want, but the fact a plainly evident.
nesnyc,
have you ever seen a CD in your life?
After a CD there isn't a few people who say they heard "pops".
EVERYONE WITHIN A MILE HEARS THE BANGS!
You need a lot of power to cut steel beems.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: get yourselves some structural engineers and CD experts.
The 911eyewitness video was filmed across the river and documents at least 9 separate major explosions as the towers collapsed. These weren't the sounds of the floors crashing into one another; there were explosions that sounded like thunder. Now that fits with your CD scenario doesn't it?
Also, like I pointed out, many saw the flashes of the cutter charges going off. Stop denying the facts.
Yeah, OK. I usually hire Egyptian engineers living in Hamburg to smuggle my Afghan opium. Makes perfect sense to me...
So why did Atta snort coke? Did that help in anyway to "fight against unbelievers?" How exactly do you figure that "helped?" Hahahahahahaha. I can't actually believe you believe in that Zionist propaganda so dearly.
They are supposed to completely immerse themselves in the enemy society. It isn't "zionist propaganda" you disgusting anti-semite, it's in the GODDAMN KORAN. You've never read the book so stop arguing from ignorance. It says you can lie, cheat, and steal as long as it furthers the cause of Islam and is against infidels.
As I pointed out before, that's all you ever see becase you want to.
I see them because they're there, dumbass. I don't just invent them, you're using friggin' logical fallacies. You don't even try to show how they aren't logical fallacies. You just go "nope, they're not". How childish.
There was nothing controlled about that demolition. In controlled demolitions you don't get fragments of the building damaging other buildings two blocks away.
As far as the hijackers snorting coke and going to strip clubs, we've answered that numerous times, but I'll do it again:
1) The Al Qaeda manual (which I have in my desk) states specificaly that in order to avoid standing out, "brothers" may be required to foregoe some aspects of their faith, and may even be required to do things which are strictly forbidden by the Quran. In other words, they fuly understand that operational requirements supercede religious tennents. Just like Sikhs in the military are permitted to cut their hair and shave their beards, despite their religion stipulating otherwise.
2) An individual who expects to go to heaven for commiting murder-suicide isn't going to be too concerned about commiting sins in the days leading up to that act. Muslim men are generaly repressed, both sexualy and in other ways. Muslim fanatics in particular tend to alternate between praying for forgivness and commiting extreme acts which defy their religion. One of the ex-members of my regiment is an EXTREMELY devout Muslim, but when he busts loose, he REALLY busts loose. The guy will spend 48 hours in a drunken stupor, sleep with prostitutes, and get his ass kicked by strangers. Then he'll spend the next two months praying every couple hours, fasting, punishing himself, and chastizing the rest of us for drinking. It's the classic symptoms of a repressed personality, and it's a very common occurence in religious extremists.
Yeah, OK. I usually hire Egyptian engineers living in Hamburg to smuggle my Afghan opium. Makes perfect sense to me...
Well, we don't really know the logistics of the operation. But going by the Mena Arkansas scandal, we know that the CIA needed to cover their tracks a bit more carefully when they moved the operation to Venice Fl. Atta was paid big money and was often seen sporting a lot of gold. Whatever he was, he was getting paid big time.
There was nothing controlled about that demolition. In controlled demolitions you don't get fragments of the building damaging other buildings two blocks away.
Not really. If the trade towers had been prepared for the implosion like normal CD than the damage to the surrounding buildings would be lessened. However, clearly, the criminals had limited access to do this since the buildings were still operational. Come on guys, use a little brain power, it's not that difficult.
I like this site, it's hilarious
2) An individual who expects to go to heaven for commiting murder-suicide isn't going to be too concerned about commiting sins in the days leading up to that act. Muslim men are generaly repressed, both sexualy and in other ways. Muslim fanatics in particular tend to alternate between praying for forgivness and commiting extreme acts which defy their religion.
This is all speculative and contrary to the facts.
However, clearly, the criminals had limited access to do this since the buildings were still operational.
Well replace "limited" with "not even close to enough time to plant any type of explosives that would demolish a building" and you're right on the money.
Come on guys, use a little brain power, it's not that difficult.
Irony alert.
Atta was paid big money and was often seen sporting a lot of gold. Whatever he was, he was getting paid big time.
Hey, if you can't trust the Mad Cow Morning News, who can you trust?
This is all speculative and contrary to the facts.
hahaha not it isn't! There's precedent for it. There's the goddamn Koran. READ IT SOMETIME.
And if you don't think a majority of Muslim societies are repressed you need to read something other than anti-"Zionist" drivel.
Nesnyc, even you should be able to see the irony in pushing aside a point because it's spectulative and ignoring the facts. It's what you do practically every time you post on here.
They are supposed to completely immerse themselves in the enemy society. It isn't "zionist propaganda" you disgusting anti-semite, it's in the GODDAMN KORAN. You've never read the book so stop arguing from ignorance. It says you can lie, cheat, and steal as long as it furthers the cause of Islam and is against infidels.
Since Arabs are Semites too, and you passing Zionist propaganda as coming from the Koran, then you must be anti-Semitic too right?
Since Arabs are Semites too, and you passing Zionist propaganda as coming from the Koran
Are you really this dumb? I've read the Koran. I didn't read some website's take on it, I read the book itself.
By the way, Arabs =/= Muslims. There are plenty of Christian and Jewish Arabs, and plenty of non-Arba Muslims (Blacks and Persians). You're such a ridiculous apologist for what the book literally says it's laughable. (But of course you'd say the violent passages in the Old Testament aren't any sort of propoganda.)
About the letter itself:
3. A Neocon(I am actually more or less a socialist who actually left the United States to live in Europe)
Neoconservativism is more-or-less a socialist philosophy with a hawkish foreign policy.
(But of course you'd say the violent passages in the Old Testament aren't any sort of propoganda.)
Those old holy book leave a lot up to interpretation. And judging how you're interpreting the solid facts of 9/11, I'd say your interpretation skills are skewed.
There are certain passages in the New Testament that can be twisted to sound Anit-Jewish. There are certain passages in the Talmud that can be twisted to sound anti-Christian. Why wouldn't the Koran be left to the same (mis)interpretation and then seized upon by the Zionists to con you to believe otherwise?
Facts:
1. Someone fanatical to commit a martyr mission has to be clean to do so
2. Atta and company were not "clean" according to their doctrine.
3. Atta and company were connected to CIA front aviation schools and trained in US bases. They already knew how to fly and didn't need flight schools.
4. Atta was often seen drinking and using cocaine. Also, sporting jewelry and had a American Caucasian girlfriend.
5. He was not videotaped or photographed getting on any flights supposedly connected to the 9/11 attacks.
None of your conjecture takes away from any of the above facts.
except in a CD there are hundreds of explosions, for something the size of the WTC there would probably be thousands, not just 9
Key word [MAJOR] the eyewitness closer to the event documented the explosions in-between the major explosions. They stated "crackling sounds" and "flashes."
Logically, the buildings were possibly divided into 10 section increments by major bombs to take away the central core incrementally. The smaller cutter charges took away the floors and pulverized them so the bombs below could do their work.
The Thermite/Thermate in the subbasements took away the central support at the base and initiated the collapses in a downward direction.
The 911eyewitness video is pretty conclusive in that the major blast points went off at perfectly timed increments.
Why wouldn't the Koran be left to the same (mis)interpretation and then seized upon by the Zionists to con you to believe otherwise?
The Koran is the only holy book written by a warlord. And it's not "misinterpretation", the Old Testament does order the Chosen People to destroy their enemies.
1. Someone fanatical to commit a martyr mission has to be clean to do so
Wrong. The martyrdom erases all past sins (kind of like confession in Catholicism).
2. Atta and company were not "clean" according to their doctrine.
And that's not odd whatsoever. Ramzi Yousef (you may recall he tried to topple the towers) is a good character to look up.
3. Atta and company were connected to CIA front aviation schools and trained in US bases. They already knew how to fly and didn't need flight schools.
They didn't all know how to fly. They weren't trained by any CIA fronts or US bases.
4. Atta was often seen drinking and using cocaine. Also, sporting jewelry and had a American Caucasian girlfriend.
Again, not odd at all.
5. He was not videotaped or photographed getting on any flights supposedly connected to the 9/11 attacks.
He was caught on tape prior to his flight to Boston. So was he just an innocent victim on his flight from Logan? And not "supposedly" connected, those flights were all crashed.
Logically, the buildings were possibly divided into 10 section increments by major bombs to take away the central core incrementally. The smaller cutter charges took away the floors and pulverized them so the bombs below could do their work
Logically, you're an idiot, with no concept of how demolition works.
The question still stands: WHY?
If you're going to topple a building, any deomlition expert will tell you that you can do it simply by collapsing the bottom two floors and letting gravity do the rest.
If you're going to do a CONTROLLED demolition, you'd need at the very least something like 10,000 charges for a building like the WTC. Idealy, you'd use many more.
So why do something in between? Break it up into 10 floor sections? Are you retarded? Once you initiate the demolition, there's nothing stopping it, so why bother planting explosives on every 10th floor? None of your conclusions make the least bit of sense.
The 911eyewitness video was filmed across the river and documents at least 9 separate major explosions as the towers collapsed. These weren't the sounds of the floors crashing into one another; there were explosions that sounded like thunder
It sounded an aweful lot like a mildly gusty wind blowing across the microphone of a camcorder, to me. I've watched a few (completely-unrelated) videos lately and noted such breeze sounds, thinking to myself "man, i wonder where those explosions are coming from!"
if Atta and the 19 weren’t suicide hijackers than who pulled off 9/11?
Again, here's the example of you deciding on a conclusion first, and then finding facts which seem to support it.
Fortunately for us, so far you're the only one here who buys into this insane idea, so your whole premise is moot. Guess that means the OS is correct! w00t!
hint: gravity does the downward part
Had the core columns in the basement not been removed prior to the upper explosions, the whole thing would have tipped over.
Again, here's the example of you deciding on a conclusion first, and then finding facts which seem to support it.
Point is you guys are completely lost because of this fact. The utter failure of the government to conclusively prove, let alone have an decent investigation conducted shows that this whole operation has been held up by lie after lie. Its a house of cards built up on the lie about "Al Qaeda" and even this blog is based on that. Remove it and you are left with NOTHING.
Remove it and you are left with NOTHING.
You are correct. When you remove the truth you are left with nothing.
So why do something in between? Break it up into 10 floor sections? Are you retarded? Once you initiate the demolition, there's nothing stopping it, so why bother planting explosives on every 10th floor? None of your conclusions make the least bit of sense.
If you recall the failed OK City CD, then you'll know why they put in redundancies with the WTC. They wanted no mistakes this time and wanted the thing to be bought down completly with no traces left of anything. That's exaclty what happened.
If you're going to topple a building, any deomlition expert will tell you that you can do it simply by collapsing the bottom two floors and letting gravity do the rest.
If you're going to do a CONTROLLED demolition, you'd need at the very least something like 10,000 charges for a building like the WTC. Idealy, you'd use many more.
So what is it, the bottom two floors or 10,000 charges? Gee, as mixed up as you are, you should be staying clear of this topic.
But you should note the trade towers weren't built like other buildings so they needed fewer explosives to compromise the structure. All that was needed was to take away the basement columns and this created stresses shaped like a vortex and then chop up the spine while at the same time blowing out the floors. All the videos of the event show just that and the molten metal fires in the basement also point to that. Get your facts straight.
You are correct. When you remove the truth you are left with nothing.
To clarify, what I'm saying is that if you remove the lie about Osama, then the 9/11 scam falls to pieces, so does this blog that depends on that lie.
To clarify, what I'm saying is that if you remove the lie about Osama, then the 9/11 scam falls to pieces, so does this blog that depends on that lie.
Not really, we are dedicated to exposing the lies and distortions of Loose Change and the conspiracy movement. We have shown dozens of examples of their lies, which exist independent of whether Osama is a Saudi terrorist or a girl scout.
If you recall the failed OK City CD
Uh the explosion in Oklahoma City (why am I not surprised you ignore all the evidence and assume its the government?) was even less like a controlled demolition than WTC (especially since the whole side of the building was torn off).
Uh the explosion in Oklahoma City (why am I not surprised you ignore all the evidence and assume its the government?) was even less like a controlled demolition than WTC (especially since the whole side of the building was torn off).
OKC was a CD and McVeigh was a patsy. That's fact well established.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Here's some news footage presented by Alex Jones:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6m88MAsR8I
OKC was a CD and McVeigh was a patsy. That's fact well established.
I was going to explain some of the other points to you, but after that....I'm done. I can't argue with someone this fucked up.
OKC was a CD and McVeigh was a patsy. That's fact well established.
It doesn't look even remotely like a controlled demolition you utter moron. It's not a "well established" facr in any sense of the phrase. What's well established is an anti-government extremist detonated a van laden with an explosive concoction outside the federal building in Oklahoma City.
Cruise missiles also don't damage three rings of a reinforced concrete building. TH CTers STILL can't come up with a even remotely logical explanation of what hit the pentagon.
2. To the person that claimed that Neoconservatives are "socialists". You are a moron.
"Neoconservativism (or neocon) refers to the political movement, ideology, and public policy goals of "new conservatives" in the United States, that are relatively unopposed to "big government" principles and believe in limited restrictions on social spending."
Big government and limited restrictions on social spending is socialist. Traditionally, conservatives want the smallest possible government and harsh restrictions on social spending.
Neoconservatives were instrumental in waging a war to undermine and destroy the lives of million of people in Eastern Europe- which is precisely the result of the Cold War.
Because it was a paradise under the Soviet Union, right?
Neocons favor privatization of EVERYTHING, hardly something that a socialist does.
Obviously you are incorrect.
By the way, the people that want privatization of (nearly) everything are called libertarians (which I am).
Look how they railed against the Belarussian president
Uh he's the only Soviet-era tyrant still in power over there. Did you think of that?
Also, you are
After WW2 and the Nazis, it's my second most researched topic (and usually from primary documents or books written by Russians).
After looking at these two factors with obejctive and experience eyes one realizes that yes, the Soviet Union was something of a paradise despite the fact that it was a nation in progress.
The Soviet Union was one of the most repressive empires in the history of humanity and was hell on Earth. It's not ignorant to say these things, because it's what its citizens have said time and time again. Stalin rivals Hitler for people killed. The entire enterprise was under the guise of democracy, when it was an autocratic dictatorship supported by secret police.
Rather reminds me of the Iraq argument. There's still people who will tell you that Iraq was a paradise under Sadam. Some of those people lived there at the time, and were the ones in power. Others are simply outsiders who like to beleive that things only get worse when the evil capitalists intervene. Either way, Soviet and Iraqi revisionists have a lot in common.
I would have agree with Shawn, and I got my degree in Russian Studies, speak the language, and have traveled and worked in some of the former Soviet Republics, as well as the former Yugoslavia. I am one of those "ignorant Cold War hawks" you speak of.
Lukashenko is a tyrant, just like Lenin and Uncle Joe. Just because he makes the trains run on time does not change that. When Stalin died millions turned out for his funeral to mourn him. Thousands were trampled to death. He was a butcher, he killed millions, but to this day people still praise his socialist memory.
Ponimaesh tovarishsch?
Everything that happened post-USSR in Russia, and especially Ukraine, proves WHY socialism was important and should have been maintained. The various oligarchs, corrupt officials, and other scum show why Stalinist tactics were needed back then, and they are needed now.
Sorry,but my "books" tell me that murdering tens of millions of people is no more justifiable under Soviet socialism than under National Socialism.
You cannot argue that just because you are Russian (or vaguely of Russian descent) that you somehow hold the truth, anymore than I can argue that because I am American you cannot hold a more correct view on American politics than I do. I have met Russians who mourn the death of Stalin, but I have also met Russians who were some of the most free market pro-US types you could ever find. Their ethnicity does not give them infallibility.
I even met Yelena Bonner once, I think she knows more about the true nature of Soviet communism than someone who just lived there for a while.
poka
"Notice that people that have money seem to be VERY pro-Capitalism, and those that lose their daughters to forced prostitution and can't afford proper health care or education seem to support the Soviet system a little more."
Actually, I find it to be the other way around. Once people have been oppressed for a while by tyrants who claim to be doing it "for your own good", the poor tend to be the first to start breaking out the system. Meanwhile, the rich keep deluding themselves into thinking that taxing the people more while providing useless services will somehow make the situation better.
Post a Comment
<< Home