Cluster bombs

[Scott777]

Russia are jailing people (lots of people) for simply calling it a war. Much like Scott did.

This is significantly harsher than Ukraine's jailing of a foreign national for outright supporting Russia's aims (in this case the erasure of the Ukrainian nation as a separate entity).

Scott's comparison of the two is false equivalence, something he is very good at.

Actually, the law in Ukraine says you cannot say stuff which is not the official line, which they call propaganda.  And what you have done there is a strawman.  We are not talking about active support for Russia (actually physically helping them), but if you simply disagree with Ukraine, that could be seen as supporting Russia.  So it's exactly the same as what Russia do.  It is an actual equivalence, but because you have a double standard, and you are a massive hypocrite, all you can do is talk shit.

"The National Union of Journalists of Ukraine has also raised issues with the new media law, releasing a statement saying such powers are clearly excessive"

"The EFJ has previously defended Danish journalist Matilde Kimer, who was excluded from reporting in Ukraine and had her press credentials revoked after being accused of being "pro-Russian" by the Zelensky government."

So, if you use more than 2 brain cells for just a moment, being pro-Russian, by simply saying you disagree with Ukraine, will lead to censorship and removal of your right to do journalism.

https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2023/01/07/european-journalist-federation-concerned-by-ukraine-media-censorship-law/

[Nick]

Overnight, the heroic russian forces used drones and cruise missiles to target the extremely dangerous grain silos of the Ukrainian military in the port of Odessa

On the other hand the cowardly Ukrainian terrorists targeted a defenceless military base and ammunition depot that was on holiday in Crimea.

You're pissing in the wind. 

[BeElBeeBub]

Overnight, the heroic russian forces used drones and cruise missiles to target the extremely dangerous grain silos of the Ukrainian military in the port of Odessa

On the other hand the cowardly Ukrainian terrorists targeted a defenceless military base and ammunition depot that was on holiday in Crimea.

[BeElBeeBub]

Again, you don't know the facts are wrong.  You have no evidence that the reason he is still in prison is because of an extradition request.  That's what they have told you.  And if you think that is a legitimate and legal reason to keep someone in prison, you are an idiot.  Imagine if you travelled to a country with an extradition agreement with the US, and a complete stranger just decided to make up a story that you sexually assaulted them, and they request extradition, but you're not well and can't travel, so they just keep you in prison.  You would have a fit.

Scott is unconsciously incompetent - "dunning Kruger" in popular culture.

The facts are he was sentenced to 50wk in custody for failing to report to court.  This is a matter of public record

Here are the judges sentencing remarks

https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/sentencing-remarks-assange-010519.pdf

In the intervening time whilst he was in prison the US made an extradition request (that would ultimately be granted, thus giving lie to his reasoning for resisting extradition to Sweden - that he would be liable for onward extradition to the US).

When his time in prison was up, his status converted from being a a prisoner, to being someone on remand awaiting extradition. At this point, his lawyers could have applied for bail pending his various appeals. This.is common practice and often granted. 

In Assange's case his lawyers didn't even bother, likely because they knew it was futile as he was a proven flight risk

We know this because this is exactly what the judge said.

District judge Vanessa Baraitser told him: "You have been produced today because your sentence of imprisonment is about to come to an end. When that happens your remand status changes from a serving prisoner to a person facing extradition.
"Therefore I have given your lawyer an opportunity to make an application for bail on your behalf and she has declined to do so, perhaps not surprisingly in light of your history of absconding in these proceedings.
"In my view I have substantial ground for believing if I release you, you will abscond again."

There is no debating the facts they are court documents, the judge was very clear.

Your hypothetical example bears no resemblance to this case.

Imagine if you traveled to a country with an extradition agreement with the US. Then a 3rd country made an extradition request on a serious charge to the country you were in

Imagine you fought that extradition request on the basis that it was a sham request to get you to that 3rd country so they could extradite you to the US.

Imagine that you were granted bail whilst your various appeals were heard.

Imagine that, upon the failure of those appeals, you broke your bail conditions and avoided capture for 7 years.

Imagine that when you returned to the country you had absconded from and we're out in jail for absconding you then faced an extradition request from the US on serious charges and appeal against that request.

Do you imagine you would be granted bail again? So you think your promise that *this time* you would surrender tontgenxourt should your appeal fail?

[BeElBeeBub]

Try to focus on the point.  It doesn't matter what you call it.  It's the same thing for Russia and Ukraine.  So, is it ok to imprison people who disagree with the facts about the military activity, or not?  I hope the question is not too tricky for you.

Russia are jailing people (lots of people) for simply calling it a war. Much like Scott did.

This is significantly harsher than Ukraine's jailing of a foreign national for outright supporting Russia's aims (in this case the erasure of the Ukrainian nation as a separate entity).

Scott's comparison of the two is false equivalence, something he is very good at.

[Scott777]

Again Scott gets his facts wrong

JA wasn't imprisoned for 3 years for jumping bail

He was sentenced to 50 weeks for "jumping bail" with half of that to be served in prison.

However, when the 25 weeks was up, he remained in prison because, by then, the US had requested extradition and whilst that case and subsequent appeals were heard he was considered a flight risk.

Again, you don't know the facts are wrong.  You have no evidence that the reason he is still in prison is because of an extradition request.  That's what they have told you.  And if you think that is a legitimate and legal reason to keep someone in prison, you are an idiot.  Imagine if you travelled to a country with an extradition agreement with the US, and a complete stranger just decided to make up a story that you sexually assaulted them, and they request extradition, but you're not well and can't travel, so they just keep you in prison.  You would have a fit.

[Nick]

Inject their citizens in the neck with a powerful sedative to shut them up. NO PROOF

That's where you're wrong, I have the video, it wasn't her neck it was in her thigh or something, but I remember the neck cause that's where they grabbed her to drag her to the floor.

https://youtu.be/Wxo7fPvhqkI

As for being followed, I can't prove it to you but I know it to be true as I was on the receiving end of it. You can choose to believe it or not.

Clearing customs entering Russia then take my passport away to check if for authenticity even though it's bee to the Embassy in London and has a valid visa in it

[Scott777]

Now there is a massive irony. Scott here would be liable for jail in Russia for that statement. Russia is not at war. It's a special operation. 

Try to focus on the point.  It doesn't matter what you call it.  It's the same thing for Russia and Ukraine.  So, is it ok to imprison people who disagree with the facts about the military activity, or not?  I hope the question is not too tricky for you.

[Scott777]

It was literally broadcast live on TV.

The mother is shouting at the officials, naval officers try to restrain her, a woman is seen behind the mother with a syringe (which I'm sure Scott will say we have no evidence it has sedative in it) then, after syringe lady is doing something to the lady, she collapses (Scott will no doubt say she was overcome with grief).

https://youtu.be/Wxo7fPvhqkI?t=50

You do understand what proof is, don't you?  Try not to confuse the word with spoof, or poof, or spoon.  This is no more proof than David Kelly being murdered.

I note he hasn't given us his thoughts of MH117, was that the CIA?

Or the Skripal poisonings. the CIA?

Or the polonium poisonings that left a radioactive trail across London. Was that the CIA?

Yes, but it's Nick who started asking for proof, and I noticed you haven't asked him the same questions.  According to Nick, these type of things are conspiracy theories.  So can you prove it was the Russians who poisoned Skripal or Litvinenko?  You are saying there was a conspiracy.  Without proof, these are theories.

[BeElBeeBub]

In prison for 3 years, for jumping bail.  🤣  Oh look, what's this headline:  "Thousands of bail jumpers to escape jail after guidelines are weakened to ease prisons" - 2007.

Again Scott gets his facts wrong

JA wasn't imprisoned for 3 years for jumping bail

He was sentenced to 50 weeks for "jumping bail" with half of that to be served in prison.

However, when the 25 weeks was up, he remained in prison because, by then, the US had requested extradition and whilst that case and subsequent appeals were heard he was considered a flight risk.

It is unarguable that is is a flight risk given he had fled to a foreign jurisdiction to avoid extradition previously.

The massive irony is, if he hadn't fled extradition to Sweden he would have been extradited, charged and the probably faced trial. Whether he was found guilty or not is unknowable. But, if his defence of "the women are CIA plants, it's a setup" he might well have been found guilty. In that case he would have got maybe it wouldn't have. If he had been found guilty he would have served a few years in a Swedish prison before being released.

Even if extradition was then sought by the US, he would, most likely have been granted bail whilst the appeals were heard (and he would be much more likely to prevail in Sweden, then a non-NATO European country with strong human rights protections than the UK) and could point to his *not* skipping bail in a previous extradition case as grounds for being granted bailm

His lengthy incarceration is entirely his own doing.

[BeElBeeBub]

Oh right, so given that Russia is also at war, they too can imprison people if they believe it's propaganda, (so anything they disagree is factual).  Don't let hypocrisy get in your way.  😉

Now there is a massive irony. Scott here would be liable for jail in Russia for that statement. Russia is not at war. It's a special operation. Calling it a war, like Scott did here, is a crime that many of those jailed in Russia are guilty of.

I'm sure Scott would throw himself at the mercy of the Russian courts, plead guilty to his crime and accept any sentence they impose as Russia is such a beacon of virtue and honesty. 

[BeElBeeBub]

Inject their citizens in the neck with a powerful sedative to shut them up. NO PROOF.

It was literally broadcast live on TV.

The mother is shouting at the officials, naval officers try to restrain her, a woman is seen behind the mother with a syringe (which I'm sure Scott will say we have no evidence it has sedative in it) then, after syringe lady is doing something to the lady, she collapses (Scott will no doubt say she was overcome with grief).

https://youtu.be/Wxo7fPvhqkI?t=50

I note he hasn't given us his thoughts of MH117, was that the CIA?

Or the Skripal poisonings. the CIA?

Or the polonium poisonings that left a radioactive trail across London. Was that the CIA?

[Scott777]

Rules about enemy propaganda during war time are different from peace time. Just ask William Joyce (who Scott probably also classes as a journalist)

Oh right, so given that Russia is also at war, they too can imprison people if they believe it's propaganda, (so anything they disagree is factual).  Don't let hypocrisy get in your way.  😉

As for Assange (who actually was a journalist). He's not imprisoned because of his work with wikileaks despite what his supporters would like you to believe 

He's imprisoned because he jumped bail. That's something you go to jail for. He knew that when he deliberately jumped bail. His reason for jumping bail was to avoid facing charges of rape. His defence of "it's a plot to extradite me to the US" was clearly and transparently bullshit as decided by multiple courts.

In prison for 3 years, for jumping bail.  🤣  Oh look, what's this headline:  "Thousands of bail jumpers to escape jail after guidelines are weakened to ease prisons" - 2007.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-457471/Thousands-bail-jumpers-escape-jail-guidelines-weakened-ease-prisons.html

[Scott777]

NORD-2 : No proof.
JFK:        No proof.
Epstein:    No proof.
Assange:  Put peoples lives at risk by releasing g names of secret agents.

All conspiracy theories with no substance.

Inject their citizens in the neck with a powerful sedative to shut them up. NO PROOF

I don't get followed by secret service agents in the U.K. like I do in Russia. NO PROOF

It doesn't take me 4 hours to clear customs in the U.K. like it does in Russia. What's that got to do with disinformation or corruption?  It sounds like they are more secure.

I don't have have my EMEI code taken from my phone in any other country other than Russia.  NOT YET, BUT IF VACCINE PASSPORTS HAD GONE AHEAD, IT WOULD BE WORSE.

It doesn't cost £50 to buy a £1 part in the U.K. like is does in Russia due to the 5 levels of corruption before I see the part.  PROOF THAT CORRUPTION IS REPONSIBLE?

Conspiracy theories with no substance, or just irrelevant.  You are just exposing your double standard for Russia and the West.

[BeElBeeBub]

NORD-2 : No proof.
JFK:        No proof.
Epstein:    No proof.
Assange:  Put peoples lives at risk by releasing g names of secret agents.

All conspiracy theories with no substance.

You forgot Roswell, Flouride in drinking water and the fact the royal family are actually lizards 😁

As for his "journalist imprisoned" he neglected to mention he isn't really a journalist. He's a youtuber who used to be a dating coach, and has lately pivoted to Kremlinntalking points in a country at war with, and partially occupied by Kremlin troops.  Rules about enemy propaganda during war time are different from peace time. Just ask William Joyce (who Scott probably also classes as a journalist)

As for Assange (who actually was a journalist). He's not imprisoned because of his work with wikileaks despite what his supporters would like you to believe 

He's imprisoned because he jumped bail. That's something you go to jail for. He knew that when he deliberately jumped bail. His reason for jumping bail was to avoid facing charges of rape. His defence of "it's a plot to extradite me to the US" was clearly and transparently bullshit as decided by multiple courts.