Ion Antonescu the war criminal 'hero' - Oglinda (1994) Discussion

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] petru-clej 16 years ago

I suggest you read the report on the Holocaust in Romania, officially endordsed by the Romanian state in 2004 http://www.inshr-ew.ro/pdf/Raport_final.pdf.

Ion Antonescu was a war criminal and his cult is banned and criminalized by the Law 107/2006 adopted by the Romanian parliament.

And BTW I reported your message as abuse. It is not only vulgar, but xenophobic as well.

reply

[–] erronache 16 years ago

Get lost! History is made by people. There's such a "margin" (a hundred thousand?) because jews from Transilvania (which was part of Hungary that time) were deported by hungarians, but they where listed after war in Romania's expense. So, take it easy.

reply

[–] petru-clej 16 years ago

Here we go again. Please read the official report http://www.inshr-ew.ro/pdf/Raport_final.pdf, endorsed by the Romanian President in 2004, i.e. by the Romanian state which officially recognized the responsibility of the Antonescu regime (not the Romanian people) in the Holocaust.

You will find there the fate of the Jews of northern Transylvania, for whose deportation the responsibility is clearly assigned to Nazi Germany (from page 259).

The number of Jews killed in Bessarabia, Bukovina and Transnistria is estimated at between 280,000 and 380,000 (on page 178 you will find various estimations).

To deny this in 2008 after the report was published in 2004 is futile. And BTW, do you have an alternative figure, or is this simply Holocaust denial?

An finally, mind your language. If you cannot stand the truth, don't lose you temper and civility and think before writing.

reply

[–] MagusPinhead 16 years ago

Holocaust in Romania? Are you short-minded or what? Only 2000 jews died on this teritory while 6000 legionaires died here, not to mention the thousands from the romanian army. Holocaust? Try reading some history books. Antonescu wasn't a criminal, he was a genuine romanian hero who loved this country more than anything unlike yourself. Why do I say that? You disrespect this country by not reading and learning its true history. You just take for garrant what they teach you in school and believe the government that still have slight traces of communism.

It's obvious that you have no idea how to see Romania from a military point of view and you can't recognise possible threats towards it. Maybe you are a hungarian that wants independency in Transylvania even though you carry the christian-romanian name of "Petru". Please stop trying to convince foreigners of a fake history and stop being narrow-minded. The true history lies in true facts, undeniable facts and not in reports made after 60 years. There was no holocaust here. The number of the dead romanians is a lot bigger than the number of the dead jews.

p.s.: thank you for reporting my early reply. You reported it by being obscene. What did you find obscene there and how old are you? You also reported it by being xenophobic. Well then... I bet that you are much more xenophobic than me. In your writings you clearly say the word "jew". "Jew" is not politically correct" but you still keep on writing it. And you being so against Antonescu and all other patriots is also xenophobic. Discrimination is not against only towards the people which have other skin color, it's also against other beliefs. By searching reasons of arguement against other people, you are xenophobic.

reply

[–] petru-clej 16 years ago

"Magus Pinhead" you are denying the Holocaust - which is a criminal offence in Romania according to Law 107/2006.

You are branding Antonescu - a war criminal and perpetrator of crimes against humanity - a hero, which again is a criminal offence according to the same law.

I repeat: reaf the report of the Wiesel Commission http://www.inshr-ew.ro/ OFFICIALLY endorsed by rhe Romanian Presidency in 2004, i.e. by the Romanian state.

The Antonescu regime is responsible for killing between 280,000 to 380,000 Jews and you cannot quote one serious book stating that only 2,000 Jews died in Romania during the second world war, it is a blatant lie and you know it.

Why are you clinging to lies? Why are you xenophobic? Why are you antisemitic? Why are you a Holocaust denier?

To the admin's attention: I have again reported the message posted by "Magus" Pinhead - for race hate speech (antisemitism) and Holocaust denial.

Holocaust denial is a criminal offence in nine countries, among them Romania, and this site could be prosecuted for abetting this offence.

As this "Magus Pinhead" bravely hides behind an alias, I think IMDB risks being dragged in front of a court.

reply

[–] MagusPinhead 16 years ago

Where have I said anything antisemitic? Just underline my antisemitic-xenophobic statements!
You are hiding behind laws but remember one thing: laws don't represent good or bad, just the popular mentality. No government can tell me how to think. It's democracy, not communism. I respect your opinion and so should you respect mine. Maybe it was a holocaust, but for sure not on this teritory. If I deny a thing that means I have broken the law? Well, I also deny the christian god, should I be stoned to death for that? As I said before, laws don't represent good or bad. Just try to open your mind a little bit and stop being narrow minded. Unfortunately mentalities like yours are often met on this planet and there will pass more hundreds years before humanity can really see the whole truth.
I recommend that you read some philosophy books, history books, and if you are bored of such stuff, at least try some George Carlin shows. Maybe those will brighten you up.
And again, I'm not xenophobic. I really don't know where you saw discriminational lines in my words. Oh and I'm not hiding from anyone. I'm also a public person and I've always had the guts to speak my own mind. I'm a webdesigner, musician and an editor to a romanian metal webzine. I'm not hiding because I ain't a coward. IMDb doesn't risk anything. You're a fool for saying that and you're afraid of almost anything. The purpose of a forum is to tell your opinion. Do you know what democracy is? Don't you ever question the governments decisions? I'm not saying to rebel up, I'm just saying that sometimes you should think for yourself and not letting others to decide for you. Do you like living and being part of a flock?

"I'm not afraid to speak my own mind
I'm guaranteed that freedom, I'm born with that right
And for that I'm ready to fight"

reply

[–] petru-clej 16 years ago

The Holocaust-denier who continues to cowardly hide behind an alias has started to change, albeit slightly, his story.

He started by inserting a "maybe" concerning the Holocaust, but adds "for sure not on this territory". He does not say which territory.

Anyway, the fact remains, and this is essential, that Ion Antonescu is a war criminal, even if he carried out the Holocaust on territories which at present are not part of Romania (this is irrelevant, the relevant fact is that he is responsible for killing between 280 and 380 thousand Jews and 11,000 Roma/Gypsies).

Democracy means respecting the laws as long as they are valid. And as far as I know, Law 107/2006 which criminalizes the denial of Holocaust and the apology of war criminals is still in force.

Holocaust denial is a crime in countries like Germany, France or Poland and nobody would dare say these are not democratic countries.

Any internet site abetting Holocaust denial is liable to be prosecuted in those countries for the content posted by cowardly anonymous nobodies like you.

I suggest you read the Wiesel Commission report, endorsed by the Romanian state and stop blabbering nonsense.

You failed again to mention a single book which seriously states that Antonescu did not commit a Holocaust.

About your antisemitic and xenophobic tendencies - I think you learned a lesson after the admin deleted your first post and toned down.

But Holocaust denial is still a criminal offence in Romania, whether you or I agree or not with this - I happen to disagree, taking as an example the US or UK, where Holocaust denial is not criminalized.

Finally, have you heard about the Iasi pogrom and the "Trains of Death" - June - July 1941? Do you know how many Jews were killed then on a territory is still Romanian today?

reply

[–] petru-clej 16 years ago

Essential reading on the Antonescu Holocaust:

Wiesel Commission report http://www.inshr-ew.ro/ro-wiesel.htm - full version

and its executive summary: http://www.presidency.ro/pdf/date_arhiva/6101_ro.pdf

Dennis Deletant "Hitler's Forgotten Ally: Ion Antonescu and His Regime, Romania, 1940-1944"

Radu Ioanid "The Holocaust in Romania: The Destruction of Jews and Gypsies under the Antonescu Regime, 1940–1944."

Jean Ancel, "Transnistria"

Alex Mihai Stoenescu, "Armata, Maresalul si evreii: Cazurile Dorohoi, Bucuresti, Iasi, Odessa"

I also recommend three books of memoirs by persons deported by Antonescu to Transnistria:

"Evrei, treceti Nistrul" by Silvia Palty
"Jurnal de ghetou" by Miriam Korber Bercovici
"Shattered" by Felicia Carmelly Steigman

I am still waiting for the name of one single (not more) book which demonstrates that Antonescu did not perpetrate a Holocaust (I seriously doubt such a book exists).

reply

[–] petru-clej 16 years ago

„Art. 5. - Promovarea cultului persoanelor vinovate de savârsirea unei infractiuni contra pacii si omenirii sau promovarea ideologiei fasciste, rasiste ori xenofobe, prin propaganda savârsita prin orice mijloace, în public, se pedepseste cu închisoare de la 3 luni la 3 ani si interzicerea
unor drepturi.”

„Art. 6. - Negarea în public a holocaustului ori a efectelor acestuia constituie infractiune si se pedepseste cu închisoare de la 6 luni la 5 ani si interzicerea unor drepturi.”

For admin: in Romania the cult of personalities guilty of crimes against peace and humanity (like Ion Antonescu) is punished by prison sentences from 3 months to 3 years.

Holocaust denial in public is punishable with sentences from 6 months to 5 years.

These are translated extracts from Law 107/2006 adopted by the democratically elected parliament of Romania.

Holocaust denial is a criminal offence in the following countries:

Austria
Belgium
Czech Republic
France
Germany
Lithuania
Poland
Romania
Slovakia

reply

[–] MagusPinhead 16 years ago

I see that you still can't make a difference between good and bad and you still can't see beyond lines. You obviously believe in every romanian law. You like your flock life and you enjoy the sheep lifestyle. I can't continue arguing with you because you will never get out(or at least try) of your shell. Thinking isn't an option for you.
Oh and "your" laws reffer to ~fascism, racism and xenophobic~ matters. I wasn't promoting those. I was promoting nationalism and patriotism. It's a big difference between these terms.
There's also no point on underlining any history book because you won't read it anyway. You've got your laws and that's enough for you. If the government tells you to jump in the Danube, you'll be the first doing it. This government "pickpocketed" us for 4 years and you still believe in it. You are indeed a sheep.
I won't continue this chat with you. Feel free on writing dumb doctrines.

reply

[–] petru-clej 16 years ago

I don't believe in "every Romanian law", I believe in the rule of law, if you know what that means.

You are a Holocaust denier, a racist, a xenophobe, an antisemite and a liar, as your post deleted by the admin showed.

And because you don't have a single argument against Ion Antonescu being a war criminal, a criminal against humanity and a perpetrator of a Holocaust - the topic of this discussion - you are blabbering nonsense.

About your "patriotism and nationalism" - may I remind you what Samuel Johnson (if you ever heard of him) said - it is "the last refuge of a scoundrel".

I offered you a list of books in support of my thesis and in return you only offer insults.

reply

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] naly202 15 years ago

i have a question for you. are you the same guy who wrote the Wikipedia aticle about Antonescu? cause if you are, you surely got an obsession there, pal.
i can't understand why you keep arguing and weeping and howling over things that happened years ago. if Nicolaescu wanted to depict Antonescu as a hero, what's the problem with you? the movie is great, antonescu himself (the real one) was an interesting character, (well, personally i consider Hitler a fascinating figure as well(don't worry, i'm not a neo-nazy lololol). and so what? it's a free world after all... or, is it? cause whenever the tabu jewish topic is mentioned, one risks to commit a public offence. you know what, i'm tired! for how long the entire world shold appologise to them???
i suppose you haven't heard of the massacres they are doing against the Palestinians, i know people who were there in Jerusalem and know a different story from that which is told on TV. poor innocent victims...
i see you're very fond of your knowledge about the Holocaust and stuff. you probably studied a lot, but have you ever thought you lack objectivity? since anything you cite reflects the official, "politically...correct" point of view.
i'm not a xenophobic, antisemitic blablabla, i only demand a bit of decency.
you take things too personally, calm down.

ps. never had any doubts regarding the authenticity/ accurency of those praised reports and archived docs of yours? history is a tricky thing and it's always written by the winner.
cheers!

reply

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] naly202 15 years ago

iar tu esti dus cu pluta, prietene. dar rau de tot. si banuiesc ca stii si unde sa ma pupi.
numa bine.
pa.

reply

[–] petru-clej 15 years ago

Better to be "dus cu pluta" than an anonymous Holocaust-denier scumbag.

reply

[–] naly202 15 years ago

hai ca incepi sa ma distrezi. esti pe pozitii. loool.

reply

[–] petru-clej 15 years ago

Do you have any intelligent comment to make? May I also remind you that the language of this forum is English.

reply

[–] Hemiola_78 14 years ago

Perhaps some clarification is needed as to why Romanians still foster pro-Antonescu feelings.
Years ago I had the privilege to meet several WWII veterans (and even a WWI veteran) who held Antonescu in a great esteem, and more so wished Hitler had won the war. Most people would be disturbed and disgusted by such views (as I was). It was only later I understood their point of view, though I can't condone any form or racism or discrimination. To them – a generation now mostly lost to the ravages of time – Antonescu was the man who stood against everything that Soviet Union meant. They had no vision of a Romania under the third reich (had Hitler won the war) or perhaps they never cared to ponder. But sure as hell they experienced the other version of the story only too utterly. To them, the slogan "the enemy of my enemy is my friend/hero" rang true, no matter how simplistic such an approach might seem to you with the benefit of hindsight.
Siding with Germany was as far as they were concerned was the lesser of two evils. Why? In the years following WWII, many of them saw their properties and lifelong earning confiscated, their liberties restricted, while being harassed, beaten, imprisoned and killed simply because they were members of the wrong political party, they had too much money, they didn't bow to the Soviet might, they had relatives/friends members of the priesthood, or simply because of invented guilts. What's more, Romania was condemned to a 45 years long communist rule, the effects of which are felt by many even today. It's no great surprise that their thoughts were echoed by the Romanian populace and media at the time. No, contrary to the "official version", Romanians didn't welcome Red Army soldiers in Bucharest with smiles and flowers, and even if they were forced to, they soon had plenty of reasons to change their minds. In the words of a well known stand up comedian of the day: “Rau era cu der, die, das / Da-i mai rau cu davai ceas” (It was bad with “der, die, das” / But it's worse with “davai ceas”). Shall we – in the name of political correctness – also declare Constantin Tanase a nazi collaborator?
Unlike you, I am a bit skeptical to the extent that I wouldn't take whatever report/investigation as the ultimate and absolute truth. Don't forget the history is always written by victors and it's not a science in the sense mathematics and physics are (i.e. formal or natural).

reply

[–] petru-clej 14 years ago

Stan Papusa's comment is typical for most uniformed Romanians, who were denied access to historical documents before 1989 and were lied to by various former national-communist "historians" after 1989.

I therefore suggest he reads

"Hitler's Forgotten Ally: Ion Antonescu and His Regime, Romania 1940–1944"
Dennis Deletant
School of Slavonic and East European Studies, University College, London

Mr Deletant is one of the best if not THE best historian of the Communist period in Romania. He is highly respected academic, who teaches Romanian at the University of London. Therefore, he cannot be accused of being biased.

And BTW, the Wiesel Commission Report http://www.inshr-ew.ro/pdf/Raport_final.pdf is based almost entirely on documents from Romanian archives.

reply

[–] Hemiola_78 14 years ago

Petru-clej, from your interaction with previous users (and the way you're replying to my post) it's becoming clear you have some attitude issues. Lack of respect would be one of them (and I can go on and on), but I'll stop here.

Where the hell to do see any reference to so-called "national communist historians" in my previous message? I only quote WWI & II veterans (by the way, how many of each you ever met personally?) which to me - as first hand accounts - are even more valuable than some books or documentaries. Perhaps you'd like to dismiss those as anecdotal evidence; what about Tanase's couplet?
Is that also a later fabrication of national communist historians?

And don't call me uninformed, or I'll smack you in the back of your head with your history books that're you're so fond of, and yet seem to have read only selectively.

Go and do more reading on how Romanian citizens were treated by Red Army after the coup (arguably fomenting further pro-Antonescu feelings), or how communists "won" the first elections!
Just because you're denying the fact that many Romanians were "Antonescu nostgalgic" in the first years of communist rule, doesn't make it so!

reply

[–] petru-clej 14 years ago

I would like to draw to the attention of the site managers the violent threats by this uneducated and ill informed commentator.

Fact is - and few can deny it - Antonescu sent to their deaths not only a quarter of a million Jews and over 10000 Roma, but also half a million Romanian soldiers. As a result of this adventure alongside Hitler Romania suffered consequences after 1944.

There were democratic politicians, like Maniu and Bratianu, who constantly protested against Antonescu's war beyond the river Nistru and opposed his deportation of ALL Romanian Jews, which Antonescu had planned with the Nazis before the summer of 1942 when he changed his mind.

You can therefore see that there were courageous politicians who did not choose between Communism and Nazism.

And anyway, we are in 2009 and any nostalgia for Antonescu which might have been justified 60 years ago has lost any of its legitimacy.

reply

[–] Hemiola_78 14 years ago

I would like to draw to the attention of the site managers the violent threats by this uneducated and ill informed commentator.

Honestly, I think it's time to denounce yourself! And by the way "smack you with a history book" it's not a violent threat, it's just another way of saying you too can be educated! ;)

Fact is - and few can deny it - Antonescu sent to their deaths not only a quarter of a million Jews and over 10000 Roma, but also half a million Romanian soldiers.

You're desperately trying to defend those statistics against an attack that isn't being made! Who denies those figures? I certainly haven't!
In case you were wondering about my earlier statement "history is always written by victors", then take this: even 65 years after, bringing up Stalin in a conversation will most likely cause no antipathy (even if you speak in positive terms), while bringing up Hitler will automatically make people think you have some hidden agenda (neo-nazi, holocaust denier, etc).
And why is that, because he's the ultimate bad guy who started it all, killing over 6 million jews in the process, because of his atrocities, or also because he lost the war? In absolute numbers (including famine, deportation, political purges), Stalin superseded Hitler by a few millions (depending on the source between 1 and 20). That comparison however is rarely being made, and why? Is it because Stalin's victims are less worthy of being remembered, or because he was one of the victors?

As a result of this adventure alongside Hitler Romania suffered consequences after 1944.

True, but simply blaming Antonescu for over 40 years of communist rule is just plain silly. Hint: look what happened to Poland compared to Finland. But hey, you're supposed to be the well informed historian!

And anyway, we are in 2009 and any nostalgia for Antonescu which might have been justified 60 years ago has lost any of its legitimacy.

Thank you for conceding at least this tiny bit. Frankly I am surprised you did!

reply

[–] petru-clej 14 years ago

You obviously have lost the plot. Antonescu is by any standards a criminal against humanity (the Romanian Supreme Court has rejected in 2008 an appeal against his conviction for crimes against humanity). This discussion does not refer to the Nazi or Communist systems, Hitler or Stalin, just to put the record straight concerning the dictator who ruled Romania from 1940 to 1944 and led it to the brink of disaster (were it not for the King Mihai led coup of 23 August 1944). There are enough ignorants in 2009 who regard him as a hero.

reply

[–] Hemiola_78 14 years ago

You obviously have lost the plot.

Not quite, I merely allowed myself to go on a tangent in order to explain the "history is always written by victors" statement. I feel obliged to do that because you accused a previous user (who made a similar comment) of anti-semitic, neo-nazi, holocaust denial "symptoms". Non sequitur at best...

Antonescu is by any standards a criminal against humanity (the Romanian Supreme Court has rejected in 2008 an appeal against his conviction for crimes against humanity).

You seem to take great pleasure in reminding people things they already know. Again, nobody's denying this!

This discussion does not refer to the Nazi or Communist systems, Hitler or Stalin...

Yes and no. It matters in a larger context, i.e. the state of affairs Romania found itself in at the start of WWII.
Picture this (and I admit it is pure speculation): what would have been like if Romania fought alongside Soviet Union all the way, only to become a satellite state anyway after the war? Do you honestly think Stalin would have allowed for a completely independent "island of capitalism" in a sea behind the iron curtain? (talking about bitter irony). It's not that Antonescu's stance was right, it's just that neither choice would have been completely “clean” and beneficial. Unlike us, he also didn't have the benefit of hindsight. I'm only discussing his strategic choices of course. As a side note, before the 2008 Supreme Court decision you mention, the Bucharest Court of Appeals briefly overturned Antonescu's conviction for certain crimes against peace, precisely on the grounds I mentioned earlier (objective conditions of 1940 justified a preventive war against the Soviet Union).

There are enough ignorants in 2009 who regard him as a hero.

... and there were probably enough ignorants in 1949 who felt the same. But then again, were those people racist, cruel, anti-semitic, nazi, deluded and ignorant, or were they simply too involved with themselves and their then-current problems? If you agree with the former, you start sounding like another bunch of ignorants who say "germans are a criminal race".

reply

[–] petru-clej 14 years ago

You are going on a lot of tangents, simply because you lack arguments. "History is always written by victors" is in a fact a non-sequitur. Read the books I have just recommended and stop this "what-if?" rubbish.

You just mentioned Finland. Why did Finland - a country which unlike Romania fought Stalin over Ribbentrop - Molotov territorial claims - refuse to fight further after regaining Karelia in 1941? Why did Finland refuse German demand to handover Finnish Jews?

I did not mention anything about crimes against peace, I said Antonescu was a criminal against humanity, something which many Romanians either don't accept or haven't heard about.

The fact that in 1949 in a Soviet-occupied Romania quite a few people saw Antonescu as a hero is understandable. The fact that in 2009 in a democratic Romania a quite large number of Romanians see Antonescu as a national hero, as can be seen with the naked eye even on this forum is disturbing. That's what we are talking about, not about which was the more criminal system, Nazism or Communism, which in my view is a stupid debate.

reply

[–] Hemiola_78 14 years ago

You are going on a lot of tangents, simply because you lack arguments.

I wouldn't get too cocky if I were you. Or perhaps it's your lack of respect I referred to earlier. Funny thing is, I give my opinion as to why people might have elevated him to a hero status, you call me uninformed, only to conclude later on "the fact that in 1949 in a Soviet-occupied Romania quite a few people saw Antonescu as a hero is understandable." (which is essentially what I was saying all along).

I did not mention anything about crimes against peace, I said Antonescu was a criminal against humanity, something which many Romanians either don't accept or haven't heard about.

I, on the contrary, didn't mention anything about crimes against humanity. I'm sorry I can't give you the debate you want. That's not because of lack of arguments, but there's simply nothing for me to refute. You cannot have an argument if both sides are saying the same thing.
That said, I still maintain a certain amount of scepticism regarding the trial and the evidence bough forth, as the prosecution team seemed to follow a soviet/communist agenda and was infiltrated by PCR supporters.

The fact that in 2009 in a democratic Romania a quite large number of Romanians see Antonescu as a national hero, as can be seen with the naked eye even on this forum is disturbing.

Then again maybe not. With the fall of communism 20 years ago, many of the pre WWII symbols were rehashed/revisited, and Antonescu was one of them. And if young men born in the mid 20's were angry anti-communists, so were those born in the mid 70's. I think it's wrong to equate anti-soviet, anti-communism with pro-Antonescu, but hey... like it or not, people have rights to their opinions.
You seem very proud of the fact that holocaust denial is banned nowadays in Romania. I guess this topic is important enough for basic human rights (freedom of speech, freedom of thought) to be suppressed or discouraged, ridiculed, etc.
In my view, it is silly (if not dangerous), to forbid people to be silly if they chose to; “dumb on purpose” that is.

reply

[–] petru-clej 14 years ago

So in the end you put nothing forward. Antonescu is a criminal against humanity and in 2009 to still maintain he is a hero is plain stupid. In Romania it is illegal and I for one think the Anglo-Saxon model of not incriminating Holocust denial is better, but this cannot stop from calling Holocaust deniers and Antonescu-lovers, of there are loads in Romania, ignorant.

You do not dare deny that he was a genocidal maniac, but as this is very frustrating for you, there is always the stupid comparison that you can call upon - but what about the Communists, as if this was a contest of evils.

No, the topic is Antonescu and nothing else.

reply

[–] Hemiola_78 14 years ago

So in the end you put nothing forward.

..and you "put" forward what?! Again, I have the feeling you'd like to debate for the sake of debating.
Or you'd like me to deny the reality so you'll have a convenient target for your venom (or a good chance to display your knowledge on the matter)...

You do not dare deny that he was a genocidal maniac.

Why would I do that?

but as this is very frustrating for you

I am willing do have a dialogue as long as you don't project your own feelings on others ;)

there is always the stupid comparison that you can call upon - but what about the Communists, as if this was a contest of evils.

Nobody says it is, you missed my main point. Deconstructing Antonescu's "myth" is a pointless exercise unless one considered the social, political and economic context that produced him. If you fail to see that, then I'm sorry but you're a failed historian.
While there can be no excuse for the genocide he perpetrated, his political/military decisions might have been at least partly justified in the heat of the moment. That's something (I feel) you refuse to accept or even consider.
That still doesn't make him a hero in my eyes, but it does for other people, and like it or not, both you and I have to live with it.
Last but not least, instead of calling people stupid and ignorant, I'd rather find the source of the problem...

reply

[–] petru-clej 14 years ago

At least you have dropped all the stupid pretenses and the tangents about Communism. Many people are stupid and ignorant. In the year 2009 there are next to no excuses left to consider Antonescu a national hero. And it is not only the poorly educated who have this opinion of Antonescu, there quite a few educated people too. And this is not stupidity, this bad faith.

reply