Re: Russians in Latvia are without a rights

J. Anderson wrote:
> MTRP=99 wrote:
> > Now, now, Johnny, I still remember you confusing Russian flag with
> > that of Serbia ...
> You still remember incorrectly,

Hmm, let's ask Karla, aka ostap_bender_1, then.

> and the Russian flag still does not carry
> Serbia's coat of arms. Nor does the Serbian flag have a horizontal white
> field on the top. The Russian one does.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Serbian_flags.
> But you still keep lying about all this.

??? I never wrote anything about Russian flag, weirdo. Ergo you keep
lying.

> Is it in the blood ('genetic disposition')?

Hardly. I guess it's you schozophrenia, Jonhhy.

> > First try to define "sovoks" and "genetic disposition" - just to prove
> > that you are able to think (thus far you've only proved that you are
> > able to lie).
> How about: 'Sovok' =3D person for whom the Soviet tradition of
distorting =
the
> truth has become second nature.

Not very good. First, truth distorting tradition is very much older
that SU a/o communism, and nowadays its stronghold is USA, wheras SU
is dead and buried. Second, should it be truth as a whole? Should it
include natural sciences, too? Besides I don't see much of the said
distorting here in SCB. Actually you are the boldest example that
comes to mind ...

> This leads him/her to believe that everybody
> else is lying too. [From SOVetskaya O****botshnost' i Krivda.]

I dunno. Even stalinist propaganda didn't claim that everybody else
was lying. Except for some funny exceptions like genetics or
philosophical cybernetics (or whatever the official name then back in
stalinist times) they didn't lie about "real" science and scientists
(re: math, physics, etc.). Well, we learned that Khruschev was lying
about mais, et al, but he was just stupid hohol. :-) So try it again
please.
Now back to "genetic disposition" - where is your definition?