TrueScotsman
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
“And what does Grover Furr say”
“If the Soviets “did it”, I’d like to know. Frankly, I have my doubts. But it’s far from impossible, too.”
You’ve taken the quote out of context. He has proved absolutely that victims that were claimed to be those of the Soviets could not have been.
In 2011 and 2012 a joint Polish-Ukrainian archeological team partially excavated a mass
execution site at the town of Volodymyr-Volyns‘kiy, Ukraine. Shell cases found in the burial pit
prove that the executions there took place no earlier than 1941. In the burial pit were found the
badges of two Polish policemen previously thought to have been murdered hundreds of miles
away by the Soviets in April-May 1940. These discoveries cast serious doubt on the canonical,
or ―official,‖ version of the events known to history as the Katyn Massacre.”Professor Furr does not claim there were no executions of Polish officers by the Soviets. Some Polish officers responsible for atrocities against Soviet citizens were indeed executed.
““…The head of the Board of the District NKVD in Kalinin, Major Dmitry Stepanovich Tokarev, recalled years later: “I
“In 1990, 1991, and 1992 three aged former NKVD men were identified and interviewed.
They discussed what they knew of executions of Poles in April and May of 1940. None of these
executions had taken place at the Katyn Forest, site of the German exhumations.”“How China solves the housing problem.”
As I understand it the buildings were supposed to house rural families that it was predicted would be migrating to the city. The migration never materialised. That along with the other problems mentioned in the article led to the decision to demolish them.
“How old Marx and Engels would have laughed at that. Sorry to keep emphasizing the point but this guy is the very paradigm of Leftist bourgeois thinking and exposes the fact that the Left are no closer to socialist consciousness than are the Right.”
So no answers to those very simple questions then? Come on, humor me? Or am I to presume you are that naive that you believe there will be no capitalist counter-reaction?
“With his suppression of dissent and repression of pro-democracy protesters in Hong Kong”
Fascist thugs were indeed repressed as they should be. Or is it that you admire fascist hooligans who set people on fire, murder elderly street sweepers and beat women within inches of their lives for merely disagreeing with them?
“Xi doesn’t exactly provide the Taiwanese with much confidence in any similar arrangement.”
Taiwan is a province of China. As long as Washington’s quislings there don’t declare independence, there will be no military conflict.
“Xi could have shot himself in the foot with his intransigence to political opposition in Hong Kong.”
All states have national security laws. Every single one of them. Why should Hong Kong be any different?
“But mention has already been made on this thread of the extensive commercial links that exist between the two Chinas.”
False. There is only one China as recognised by the United Nations and almost every country on earth.
Very well, it looks like the post was lost. My main points from memory were that Furr has proven that the official narrative is seriously flawed. Archeological proof has emerged that people allegedly killed by the Soviets at specific times and at specific places were not killed at those places or at those times. Those victims could not have been killed by the Soviets. It was impossible. One of the lead Polish investigators into the massacres inserted language into the translations of Soviet documents to make it appear as if they were execution lists. Why do so if the evidence was so compelling? Almost all the victims were killed using German ammunition. Children were executed. The Soviets did not execute children. The bodies of victims were placed in the burial pits in a manner consistent with German death squads. The victims of the massacre were “discovered” by the Nazis just three months after the German loss at Stalingrad. How convenient for the Nazis. The pogrom just happened to be “discovered” after this major defeat when division in the allied camp would have been most advantageous to the Nazis. Finally, the entire narrative of the Katyn massacre emanated from Goebbels’ propaganda ministry. Goebbels was a proponent of the Big Lie and didn’t believe in telling the truth about anything.
Really? I sent a mail with the entire post I’d written that wouldn’t upload. It was concerning the Katyn incident.
My original answer to your challenge Alan failed to upload. I wrote to the moderator but it still hasn’t appeared. If it doesn’t show up in the next day or two I’ll rewrite it.
“At least, TrueScotsman, we are socialists”
You keep saying that but all I really see is you taking dumps on socialists. What you really are are reactionaries. You condemn all socialists. Why would any worker you are engaging with be interested in fighting for socialism if at the same time you condemn all socialist movements as bloody, totalitarian betrayals? They’re just gonna say, rather stick with the devil I know then, won’t they? You don’t make revolutionaries that way, you make liberals. Your party and your ideology are both abject failures.
“You are a bootlicking supporter of the billionaire-friendly Chinese capitalist regime.”
What is it with you and bootlicking? Far be it from me to kink shame anybody but keep it to the bedroom, would you?
“The only kind of revolution your way of thinking could ever countenance is a bourgeois-capitalist one.”
Sure, China, Cuba, the USSR, Vietnam, Laos…all bourgeois capitalist? Do you ever listen to yourself when you speak? You should try it sometime, it’s pretty funny.
“True, a socialist revolution may never materialise. That would be your loss as well as ours as workers, sneer at though you will.”
It certainly won’t materialise if anyone listens to you lot. Serious question; how many members does your little cult have?
“Your rhetorical question – how many revolutions have we spontaneously erupted lately? – only highlights how remote and opposed are your ideas to revolutionary socialism. It is not up to the SPGB to foment a socialist revolution. Such a revolution can only be made by the working class as a whole; it cannot be led or imposed from above.”
And how is that going to happen if there are no leaders? How is the capitalist class going to be overthrown? If your revolutionary moment is successful, how are you going to protect yourselves from the inevitable capitalist counter-reaction? You’ll need a military for that. Who’s going to lead it? No one? Serious questions. What are your answers.
“For your information, we don’t have any need or use for leaders”
Yeah, I know. Remind me, how many revolutions have you spontaneously erupted lately? One? Half? A quarter? Zero? Oh, yeah, zero. Is that what oblivion looks like? Well, you’re welcome to it. Enjoy.
“Lenin and Stalin made unbelievably spectacularly bad
judgements about at least the following people…”Like I’ve said, I’m not much interested in the trials. But saying Lenin and Stalin should have known the listed names were traitors is ridiculous. Sukarno should have known Suharto was a traitor, Caesar that Brutus was a traitor, etc? You think traitors don’t exist?
When you lead your revolution (Lol) I’m sure there won’t be a single traitor. You will never misjudge anothers’ character because you are a Marxist superhero, armed, no doubt, with a lasso of truth and x-ray vision that can see into a man’s very soul. Am I right? Come on, I’m right, right?
“In any other forum but this he would have long ago been booted out as troll. Perhaps he needs to reflect on this and adjust his behaviour to something approaching what we might expect of an adult”
Pot, meet kettle. So You can ask me BTW am I huffing glue? And you are taking the moral high ground? Lol
“TS, i have admitted and explained why I have not read Furr.”
You haven’t read Furr because until a few days ago you’d never heard of him. Once you had you went to Anti-commi-pedia and got yourself a double helping of confirmation bias.
“I have now asked you to show me that you yourself have read Furr and understand his arguments sufficiently enough to communicate them”
Furr is a prolific author who has written dozens upon dozens of articles and books. I have not read everything he has ever written. In fact, my interest is much more related to WW2. I have read an article or two of his about Trotsky but am not particularly interested in the topic. The fact is, you chose the subject of Trotsky and the Moscow trials not me. So, you read his 170 pages and refute his arguments to your heart’s content. You wanna talk to me about Furr’s research surrounding WW2, then I’m game.
“So far in this exchange I have maintained what I would consider a degree of civility towards you. However I now weary of your ad hominems.”
No, you have not. You have implied I am a white supremacist. You wanna fling mud, well, that’s one of my favourite things to do. So bring it on.
“It is ironic that you become so indignant that I pointed out the overlap of your own views with a racist”
There is no overlap. Hitler was a vegetarian. Therefore vegetarian’s views overlap with Hitler’s. There’s dumb, there’s retarded then there’s Alan.
“when from the earliest posts I have defended the pro-democracy activists in Hong Kong from being judged instruments of the CIA and NED because they happen to share an anti-Beijing agenda with the protesters.”
They don’t just happen to “share” the same “agenda”. They’re being financed and working alongside foreign governments and intelligence agencies as I have amply demonstrated.
“it is clear you cannot produce the evidence”
Rubbish. I’ve provided a link to 170 pages of evidence. Anyone who cares to, friend of the CIA Alan included, can read through it and find all the evidence they like. I’m not going to play Alan’s little game nor yours. The fact is that neither of you care a jot about the truth or the participants in the trial. You hate them all to a man. The only thing you snowflakes care about is discrediting the USSR along with all other socialist countries. You are useful idiots of the capitalists and imperialists; a bunch of morally bankrupt fanatics. I fart in your general direction.
“But these are not legal if made under any form of duress. That is not restricted to torture but includes threats to ones family safety and well-being, or inducements such as promises of clemency.”
And I presume you have evidence of such “duress”?
“On my cyber travels, I learned that TS has a strange bed-fellow who justifies Stalin’s trials as a patriotic nationalist protecting his nation from jewish marxism.”
And that friends, is what is known as an “association fallacy”. You really are a bore, Alan.
“An association fallacy is an informal inductive fallacy of the hasty-generalization or red-herring type and which asserts, by irrelevant association and often by appeal to emotion, that qualities of one thing are inherently qualities of another. Two types of association fallacies are sometimes referred to as guilt by association and honor by association.”
So, following Alan’s logic, if a white-supremacist wrote a book on teetotalling or vegetarianism then all vegetarians and teetotallers are bedfellows with Nazis. Alan, you’re a joke.
“You say you have read all his claims”
I’ve never said anything of the sort. I did say his work convinced me that just about everything I’d ever “learned” about Stalin was false. To which you attempted to discredit the good professor by pointing to a Wikipedia article (LOL) and a podcast (LOL) as the final word on his work. I said your sources were a laugh and that given you had never read any of Furr’s writings you were not qualified to expound upon it. You then read “half” of one of his articles and “skimmed” the rest and now claim to be an authority on things Grover Furr. Good old Alan, arrogant as they come.
“so it will be easy for you to copy and paste the relevant facts that are irrefutable.”
And why would I get into arguments about a criminal trial with you, Alan? You are a dishonest interlocutor. Not only have you pathetically tried to associate me with white supremacists, you don’t seem to understand some of the most basic tenets of law. You think eyewitness testimony and hearsay are the same. You think confessions are not evidence. I mean, how can I have a discussion about law and evidence with someone so dim? I’ve gotta ask, was dropping you on your head as a baby your mother’s full time occupation?
