No, it's a bad comparison
Few days ago I compared Soros to Dillinger.
= = = = = START REPRINT:
Soros is telling Britain:
My 60 years of experience tells me the pound will plummet, along with your living standards. The only winners will be speculators.
In other words:
The last time you pulled away from My Empire, I robbed you blind. I will also rob you blind this time.
I was thinking that this blame-the-victim shit is a lot like the commies blaming Trump for the commie demonstrators who attacked Trump supporters. Trump instigated
those violent thugs by existing.
Then I realized ... No, it's not A LOT LIKE, it's THE SAME FUCKING THING, because those anti-Trump thugs WERE WORKING DIRECTLY FOR GEORGE SOROS.
We wouldn't let John Dillinger blame the bank tellers for allowing him to rob them.
Why do we allow Soros ... Oh. Yes. Dillinger wasn't Master Race. Soros is. When you are Master Race, everything you say is logical, true and mandatory by definition.
= = = = = END REPRINT.
Now that Soros has stolen a few trillion and laughed about it, I see the comparison was poor. Unlike my cartoon, Dillinger was NOT a lone gunman. He stormed a bank with a dozen subthugs, taking out all guards and cops along the way. Everyone understood that resistance was suicide.
Soros, like the rest of his Tribe, doesn't use guns. What's more, he doesn't rob small-town banks and ordinary citizens; he robs BIG traders and investors by manipulating transactions. These BIG traders and investors must know that they are being swindled by Soros or by an agent acting for Soros. No guns are involved, nobody can get killed. So: WHY DON'T THEY REFUSE TO BE MANIPULATED? With billions at stake you could afford serious investigation and publicity to block Soros's actions and frontrun his blackmail. Why don't they permanently lock out all of Soros's tentacles? I don't get it.
Labels: Asked and unanswered