", 3 July 2009 (UTC) 
 ::::::::::Sorry, but issues such as the use of terms that have little to no relation to the facts described (the most gross misappropriation being  ""genocide"") are really much more problematic that the ""not-especially-controversial precedent"". And I don't understand how issues like this has anything to do with Tismaneanu. Some of the accusation, from the most disgusting like his origins, to the more down-to-earth ones like his opinions before emigrating and his dubious positions in the 2000's, are indeed about the person VT, but most of the legit criticism is against the Report as a whole (Shafir or most of the guys in Iluzia...). You may be too emotionally connected to that article (as in: you wrote most of it, spent a lot of time researching and naturally you must feel proud about your work) to see its flaws. Try getting some neutral feedback (like randomly choose one of the most active wiki contributors and ask him to review it). 
 ::::::::::Badea is paid because his show attracts a lot of audience, so the channel gets a lot from sales revenues. VT was also paid for his work in the commission (even if directly, such as free room in a top hotel, free transportation, copyright fees for the Humanitas edition), and probably he's still getting money (there's an optional course is Ro schools based on the report, so he gets royalties from there too... a true Roller of the 21st century). You'll never see Badea attacking Voiculescu or the PC, but neither you'll see VT attacking Basescu or his party. 
 ::::::::::Your (and VT's defenders' generally) reductio ad Hitlerum is quite self-evident... man, you even used the ""f"" word, what further proof do you need? You always try to diminish the criticism by boasting the ludicrous far-right criticism and diminishing that from other ideological positions. Once I read a blog post by VT. He virtually put everyone who dared to criticize the report on the same level with CVT... reduction ad Vadimum is just a ""Romanian way to reductio ad Hitlerum"", and it's pretty weak for an ""unconditionally accepted"" work. 
 ::::::::::Now we're discussing Romanian politics? I'm accusing you of nothing, I'm just saying the VT article you mostly wrote may lead the reader to a certain conclusion, which is not actually a neutral one.  23:35"