Log in

View Full Version : Anyone have that photo of Tito


KC
24th February 2011, 02:05
grabbing a tit?

:)
Hampton
24th February 2011, 02:07
http://all-funny.info/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/josip_broz_tito.jpg

http://grisson.files.wordpress.com/2007/08/grison-tito.jpg
Tablo
24th February 2011, 02:09
So random..
KC
24th February 2011, 02:16
Isn't there a better quality version than that?
Hampton
24th February 2011, 02:18
I dunno dude, I just googled it real quick. Might be a clearer version out there somewhere. Here's another good one though, not what you asked for.
gorillafuck
24th February 2011, 04:35
Does anyone else think that that womans head doesn't look real in that photo?
KC
24th February 2011, 04:39
Does anyone know who else is in the photo or who that woman is, or the story behind this photo? It's always interested the hell out of me.
Rafiq
25th February 2011, 01:51
This is so random
The Man
25th February 2011, 01:55
So random..
scarletghoul
25th February 2011, 02:01
my life is complete
Sir Comradical
25th February 2011, 02:23
Such a full hectic yugoslav badass with his shades n shit.
Ele'ill
28th February 2011, 22:21
What the fuck is this shit.
Red Commissar
1st March 2011, 00:18
Well, I guess he copped a feel on top of all the other things he is known for.
Sir Comradical
1st March 2011, 02:04
He puts the 'tit' in Tito.
Kléber
1st March 2011, 09:56
He's probably just reaching forward to hug her. I doubt that even pigs like Tito and his even sleazier buddy on the left would just grope someone in front of cameras and audience.
Bandito
1st March 2011, 15:12
I doubt that even pigs like Tito and his even sleazier buddy on the left would just grope someone in front of cameras and audience. http://www.revleft.com/vb/revleft/misc/progress.gif
Trust me, less you know about Tito, the better. In short, besides being a revisionist prick and autocrat, he was one horny motherfucker.
And...yes, he would do that in front of audience.
praxis1966
4th March 2011, 17:41
Does anyone else think that that womans head doesn't look real in that photo?

I think it's the bouquet she's holding. It's obscuring part of her neck, making it look far thinner than it is and thus distorting the proportion of her head to the rest of her body.
bailey_187
6th March 2011, 20:38
He's probably just reaching forward to hug her. I doubt that even pigs like Tito and his even sleazier buddy on the left would just grope someone in front of cameras and audience.

lol such spite. your posts about stalinists are funny.
Omsk
6th March 2011, 20:40
Are you suggesting Tito was a Stalinist?
bailey_187
6th March 2011, 20:44
Are you suggesting Tito was a Stalinist?

kleber would as a trot i assume
Omsk
6th March 2011, 20:46
But that is just ridiculous.
:mellow:
Even for trots. :P
Blackscare
6th March 2011, 20:46
kleber would as a trot i assume

Well that would be dumb of you to assume.
Omsk
6th March 2011, 20:48
Tito and Stalin were not the best bud's you know.:)
bailey_187
6th March 2011, 20:53
Its not dumb. For Trots, a Stalinist is some who thinks they can make socialism in one country, bureacracy over workers and all that.

Tito friendship with stalin is irelevent
KC
6th March 2011, 22:01
Its not dumb. For Trots, a Stalinist is some who thinks they can make socialism in one country, bureacracy over workers and all that.

LOL so you think Trots think Mao was a stalinist?
bailey_187
6th March 2011, 22:07
LOL so you think Trots think Mao was a stalinist?

probably some do. but theres the whole peasent thing tho.
Crux
10th March 2011, 05:12
LOL so you think Trots think Mao was a stalinist?
Yes? Titoism = Yugoslav variant of stalinism Maoism = Chinese variant of stalinism. To make it simple.
Bandito
10th March 2011, 12:45
Yes? Titoism = Yugoslav variant of stalinism Maoism = Chinese variant of stalinism. To make it simple.
Facepalm.
Omsk
10th March 2011, 12:53
@Majakovskij
Titoism never wanted to have anything with Stalinism or Maoism,especially after the Tito-Stalin split.
Titoism was similar to Dubček's Socialism with a human face.
You have to understand that Tito never clearly chose sides,he went against Stalin (and against Mao) but he never abandoned socialism and he was always considered a communist by the west.
bailey_187
10th March 2011, 18:06
@Majakovskij
Titoism never wanted to have anything with Stalinism or Maoism,especially after the Tito-Stalin split.
Titoism was similar to Dubček's Socialism with a human face.
You have to understand that Tito never clearly chose sides,he went against Stalin (and against Mao) but he never abandoned socialism and he was always considered a communist by the west.

you both have different defintions of stalinism so the whole argument is stupid
Crux
16th March 2011, 19:32
@Majakovskij
Titoism never wanted to have anything with Stalinism or Maoism,especially after the Tito-Stalin split.
Titoism was similar to Dubček's Socialism with a human face.
You have to understand that Tito never clearly chose sides,he went against Stalin (and against Mao) but he never abandoned socialism and he was always considered a communist by the west.
Okay then Stalinism is essence the political expression of bureacracy, it is the hand that strangle's the worker's democracy. Like with reformism, there are different degrees in hell.
Wanted Man
16th March 2011, 19:52
LOL so you think Trots think Mao was a stalinist?

Yes, Trots think exactly that.
Crux
16th March 2011, 20:07
Yes, Trots think exactly that.
I wouldn't deny that there are diffrent variants of reformism, so too there are different variants of stalinism.
Kléber
17th March 2011, 04:59
If you want to take Stalin's side in the debates vs. Trotsky, don't complain when people call it as they see it. Tito, Khrushchev, and Mao all were Stalinists who sided with the bureaucracy against the working people. They said that "socialism" could exist in a military dictatorship with disgusting capitalist-level inequalities. And in the 1930s all of them took part in murdering Trotskyist comrades.

Tito said and "believed" whatever helped the power of himself and his caste; he was an opportunist bureaucrat just like Hoxha. When Moscow ordered the purging of Communists in 1937, Tito jumped at the command and denounced his comrades, he rose to power by helping Stalin murder the old revolutionaries like Milan Gorkic (http://sr.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9C%D0%B8%D0%BB%D0%B0%D0%BD_%D0%93%D0%BE%D1%80% D0%BA%D0%B8%D1%9B), Filip Filipovic (http://sr.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A4%D0%B8%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%BF_%D0%A4%D0%B8%D0%BB% D0%B8%D0%BF%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1%9B_%28%D0%BF%D0%B E%D0%BB%D0%B8%D1%82%D0%B8%D1%87%D0%B0%D1%80%29), Sima Markovic (http://sr.wikipedia.org/sr-el/%D0%A1%D0%B8%D0%BC%D0%B0_%D0%9C%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%BA% D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1%9B) and Jovan Malisic (http://sh.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jovan_Mali%C5%A1i%C4%87). During the war Tito and Djilas organized repressions - killing of suspected Trotskyists throughout Yugoslavia.
Red Commissar
17th March 2011, 05:58
http://people.freebsd.org/~keramida/i-like-where-this-is-going.jpg
Nolan
17th March 2011, 06:26
Stalinist = some movement or state that waves a red flag and likes Lenin but is not part of the Trotskyist movement. Simple as that.

They talk about some vague terms, but in reality there's no rhyme or reason to it. This is why you see them denounce Yugoslavia and Albania or even modern China as equally "stalinist."

A lot of trots took a liking to Yugoslavia, however. That is not surprising considering its revisionist, market "socialist" nature.
Nothing Human Is Alien
17th March 2011, 20:16
For Trotsky the man at least "Stalinism" was the result of the degeneration of the October Revolution. Key features of "Stalinism" for him were control by a bureaucracy over the working class, "socialism in one country," etc. It's really not that difficult.

Of course sorting through the various sects that claim allegiance to him can be... or at least a pain in the ass.