131–140 of 179 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You do know his political stance, right? https://twitter.com/krides/status/1509841011295592450 Do you also have huge respect for Prigozhin for flying back to Moscow after agreeing to stop the revolt? Same energy.
My downstairs neighbour believes in crystals. Which is fine because she's not in a position to force me to use crystals, or the teaching of crystals as a healing method in schools (etc).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How will you be able to tell which is which? Take it step by step
With extreme difficulty. The only real step 1 — unless you want to get into a philosophical argument about the foundation of knowledge and the Münchhausen trilemma — is "get a law degree", which for most people is much too hard. The closest that nerds like me can do is to watch another lawyer explain what Trump's lawyers did wrong, and hope that YouTube isn't just one giant conspiracy by The Man (and while I have rea…
Also, what Man? I have no idea who that guy is, it's enough that he's a Trump hater, you don't need any conspiracy, jsut the one guy who doesn't like Trump. You don't like Trump, so you went and google for whatever link you could paste here as "proof" and that was it, that was your process. Youtube-lawyer-guy's process doesn't necessarily need to be much better than that.
Plus I asked you how can you tell the difference between "actual crime" and a political witch hunt. You haven't answered. Do you think Navalny's lawyers won't be found guilty with all the trimmings in a court of law? Do tell me how would you explain the difference to the proverbial just-landed-alien.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have you seen pictures of him lately? For some people that's worse than death. It's a clear message from Putin. Get in my way and you'll end up like him. Not everybody is going to take that risk.
The clear message by putin was prigoshins end. There is no negotiations or civil due process, if you come at the King you best not miss.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are plenty of photos of russians bombing civilians, hospitals, Mariupol drama theater had "children" written in letters so big that they can be seen from space. Still bombed. Just few weeks ago a funeral was hit with a rocket, 50+ civilians dead. Let alone the constant attacks on civilian power and port infrastructure trying to freeze and famine not only Ukraine. This is just a completely ignorant take that the…
I'm just saying exactly that - anybody may now take two sets of photos and compare the amount of rampage over the time period to approximate the "DPS" done to civilian infrastructure. Of course, I cannot prevent that person from being in denial due to cognitive dissonance.
Can you please clarify your thoughts?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Whatever Kasparov says or does in exile is quite irrelevant in Russia. This is how actual Russians think: "He's not even in Russia, what does he know." I don't know why Navalny returned to Russia after being poisoned and nearly killed by Putin's thugs, but it was a very brave thing to do. It makes no sense.
As close as I can tell, Russians tend to be very fatalistic. It's never been a happy place. It's cold, the state is corrupt, life is cheap. But people have a strong personal need for justice, to find those guilty and make them pay. But the state won't deliver justice, so you make a stand, and life is cheap so you take risks and double down. Hence Navalny, hence Litvinenko, hence all the journalists over the years who…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why do you write Israeli, when it was Gaza’s who bombed their hospital themselves. Like other autocracies tend to do to their citizens, by not valuing their lives.
Bombed with what? With a rocket made of water pipe and ammonia fertilizer? Obviously it would not do that kind of damage. We've seen impacts of stuff Hamas has and it can't do that. The angle from which Israel doing this damage control reciprocity blaming is laughable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm just saying exactly that - anybody may now take two sets of photos and compare the amount of rampage over the time period to approximate the "DPS" done to civilian infrastructure. Of course, I cannot prevent that person from being in denial due to cognitive dissonance.
The words you wrote here make no sense and are in direct contradiction to your original claim. Can you please clarify your thoughts?
Having two sets if inputs regarding somewhat similar events allows you to do a reality check. For example, you can compare civilian infrastructure damage footage from Gaza and that of Ukraine and arrive to some conclusions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
With extreme difficulty. The only real step 1 — unless you want to get into a philosophical argument about the foundation of knowledge and the Münchhausen trilemma — is "get a law degree", which for most people is much too hard. The closest that nerds like me can do is to watch another lawyer explain what Trump's lawyers did wrong, and hope that YouTube isn't just one giant conspiracy by The Man (and while I have rea…
Yeah, I do wonder as well, how come Trump can't hire better lawyers? Wait, I'm getting a weird brain wave. Could it be because any lawyer representing Trump will get targetted, disbarred and destroyed? No, that can't be it, it must be something else. Also, what Man? I have no idea who that guy is, it's enough that he's a Trump hater, you don't need any conspiracy, jsut the one guy who doesn't like Trump. You don't li…
"Any" is false, therefore the question yields false. I'd suggest watching the video again, but I assume that was too long for you — if so, (1) I recommend the "speed" button as this guy is quite watchable at double speed, and (2) it's a tier list and it starts that list with the most competent ones, who are all counter-examples to your premise because they're not in trouble.
Before the list, he basically asks your question but phrased differently.
> Also, what Man? I have no idea who that guy is, it's enough that he's a Trump hater, you don't need any conspiracy, jsut the one guy who doesn't like Trump.
(1) Are you unfamiliar with the phrase "The Man"? (2) Needs a lot more than one person as there are a multiple cases in multiple states, and it needs a judge/jury to agree with the prosecution.
> You don't like Trump, so you went and google for whatever link you could paste here as "proof" and that was it, that was your process
Nope, I was already familiar with this specific lawyer for the way he explains other legal topics. I just looked him up directly to see what he had to say on this topic. Hence why I wrote in the previous comment "I have reasons for trusting this channel specifically, I do not trust YouTube collectively".
> Plus I asked you how can you tell the difference between "actual crime" and a political witch hunt.
The important thing about a witch hunt, the defining characteristic even, is the lack of any objective evidence.
The important thing about a successful prosecution under the current systems in most of the world, is the presence of evidence.
In the case of Trump's lawyers, the ones who got into trouble did so by signing their name to untrue statements made under oath, emailing conspiratorial messages from their (other) employer's workplace that they then sued to keep secret, recording themselves on CCTV or dictaphones, etc. — all stuff with a surprisingly clear trail of evidence.
(Not germane to the point, but contrary to what you think you asked, it didn't seem like you were asking «how can you tell the difference between "actual crime" and "a political witch hunt"» but rather between "crime" and "a dictator looking for any excuse to throw their enemies away", which is a very much harder pair of things to differentiate because any competent dictator would just rewrite the rules of the game so they always win — "lawful evil" in D&D terms, whereas the things that are troubling Trump's lawyers are only troubling the specific lawyers that appear to be missing the "lawful" part of the alignment, which is kinda a big deal for a job that has "law" right there in the name).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>knowing I think the risk was huge (personally I thought 50-70% at the time), but not 99% or something. Also (in my opinion) people don't take into account that alternative was irrelevance in exile, just look at what happened with Kasparov's popularity inside Russia, and he was a prominent opposition activist in 2011-2012.
> irrelevance in exile, just look at what happened with Kasparov's popularity inside Russia Then again, Kasparov undermines Russia more efficiently while in exile than Navalny while inside (a prison no less). And Navalvy social media statements in exile might have been even more undermining Kasparov's. Of course, undermining Russia with words might not help at all anyway...
Grant money that can yield all right.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The words you wrote here make no sense and are in direct contradiction to your original claim. Can you please clarify your thoughts?
My thoughts are that the press (and moreso twitter) has a very skewed way to report stuff. It is designed for entertainment value and not for rigor, and also to push a narrative. Having two sets if inputs regarding somewhat similar events allows you to do a reality check. For example, you can compare civilian infrastructure damage footage from Gaza and that of Ukraine and arrive to some conclusions.
> The recent Israeli-Palestine conflict has shown that Russo-Ukrainian war is actually fought very carefully from both sides.