I apologize for such a delayed response, BadNews Bear, I wasn't aware there were more posts (until the email notification today). Now, let's see what I can cover here...
Badnews Bear said:
In my previous posts in this thread I was telling the OP something very similar to what you just told me:
So then, why did you go on to make the same mistake yourself? You tell OP not to generalize GR through post association, then go on and do exactly that...
Telling me that you warned OP about this, doesn't alleviate your own mistakes made later on...
Badnews Bear said:
I never said the west is superiour, only that PR would not have been jailed for what they did.
You're right, you never flat-out said that the west is superior. You implied it, by making an argument based on your assumption that they wouldn't be jailed if they were in the west. By mentioning multiple times that this wouldn't happen in the west, you are implying that the west is judicially superior in some moral sense. If you took the time to actually compare legality before assuming, you'd find that, under Section 319 of the Canadian criminal code & Section 249 of the US criminal code, they could have gotten the exact same sentencing of 2 yrs in prison. I'm not saying that they would have, but they
could have. Unlike your argument, I'm not trying to make any assumptions here. But this does negate your unflinching position, that they absolutely wouldn't have gotten jailed for what they did in western courts. That's a wrong assumption to make, and I think you should reconsider it.
Badnews Bear said:
However in some ways I suspect Russian courts are more openly corrupt than even the US.
Yet another assumption that you don't even attempt to back up...
I think former civil rights/constitutional lawyer, Glenn Greenwald, covered this topic pretty well in his piec
e, U.S. Justice v. the world. Here's a good quote from it, "...the U.S. Government has invented — and federal courts have dutifully accepted — a whole slew of legal doctrines which have only one purpose: to insulate the country’s most powerful political officials from legal accountability even when they commit the most egregious crimes, such as imprisoning
incommunicado and torturing an American citizen arrested and detained on U.S. soil."
You see, by law, some US citizens aren't even allowed due process and can be indefinitely detained. Last I checked, Russia isn't allowed to do even a fraction of what US legal can do to citizens since 9/11 and the Patriot Act.
Now, if you want to talk about specific "openly corrupt" court cases, then just look at the recent Trayvon Martin-Georg Zimmerman ordeal. This case made public US corporate-court collusion/corruption with groups like ALEC allowing corporate interests to literally write their own laws...Last I checked, there hasn't been any news breaking of Russian corporate corruption with their courts...
So, tell me again about your suspicions that Russian courts are more openly corrupt than the US.
Badnews Bear said:
Upon reading the
transcripts of the Pussy Riot (henceforth "PR") case, some very questionable events occurred during the trial which I doubt would fly in the US. For example, security guard
Sergei Beloglazov did not return to work in the Church for for 2 months because of 'trauma' from the incident. But the problem goes beyond one individual exaggerating trauma:
Is this really what you consider to be proof of Russian courts being more corrupt than the US? Come on man... You honestly believe that exaggerated and even out-right false testimony doesn't "fly" in the US (or the rest of the west)? We could probably list hundreds of thousands of cases where this kind of corruption happens in western courts on a daily basis. A false testimony from someone in the Pussy Riot case doesn't prove that the US/west is judicially superior. This is a petty claim that doesn't hold any weight.
Badnews Bear said:
But my main reason for bringing this up is that I have no interest in demonizing Putin, but rather the Church for [likely] encouraging false witness, the court for being one-sided and draconian, and apologists for the Church and Court like Juan and Tony.
Wow man, really? So the whole point of this is to demonize the church through your own unproven accusations.
Some sound argument you have here...
Badnews Bear said:
I am aware of western corruption toward peaceful protest (false-flag black bloc vandalism, bill of rights as ass-wipe), but I don't know much about beatings/arrests for asking wrong questions. Not that I don't believe it happens, just that I haven't seen it. do you have examples?
Police State USA: Student assaulted and tasered by police for asking John Kerry wrong question.
Badnews Bear said:
Not to excuse the west by any means, but I would rather get tazed and locked up for a few days than be led away peacefully to spend 2 years in Russian Prison.
You're comparing apples and oranges. Different incidents, different repercussions. Don't conflate the two, that's a misleading argument to make..
Badnews Bear said:
Here I disagree strongly. Obviously I am not anti-Voina and don't care if the girls were involved, but Voina's 'art' ranges from the technically illegal but mostly absurd (crazy Ivan, drawbridge boner) to the somewhat disturbing (throwing cats, chicken vagina) and obviously illegal. (Shoplifting, Vandalizing Police Car)
Obviously you're not anti-Voina, but rather pro-Voina, considering that your avatar on here is of Voina...
BadNews Bears said:
Only one of the 3 girls convicted was a leader in Voina, and Maria is not known to have been involved with Voina at all. Juan totally blurs the lines to support his personal smear campaign, and I don't understand how anybody can deny this. The way you use leaders in the plural when only one member fits this description shows you are not fully informed.
Listen man, nobody is blurring the lines between Pussy Riot and Voina as a smear campaign. The Associated Press were the first to report about the obvious connection between the two groups (see: AP - Women Behind the Mask of Russia's Pussy Riot Band). When Voina broke up, Nadezhda Tolokonnikova and Pyotr Verzilov (husband and wife/former prominent Voina members) started a new group under the same name Voina. They then re-named to Pussy Riot, which is why they were widely considered to be the "Moscow faction of Voina" as reported by Reuters [*]. The politics of Voina are virtually the same as Pussy Riot (ie. anti-Putin/pro-opposition).
Now, as far as your attempts to disassociate the arrested Pussy Riot girls from Voina, I'll just give you one quote from the AP article to answer that. "Voina's chief ideologist Alexei Plutser-Sarno told The Associated Press that the three "performed courageously" with the art group."
So, please, tell me more about how, "Maria is not known to have been involved with Voina at all."
From what I've read of Juan from Global Research, he's basically extrapolating on what outlets like AP and Reuters had already published. So your accusation of him "blurring the lines to support his personal smear campaign," is basically accusing the Associated Press and Reuters of the same. The connection between Voina and Pussy Riot is well known and widely reported on, and I don't understand how anybody can deny this (to use your words).
Badnews Bear said:
I only bring Canada into it to criticize the Globalreserch articles. I am very convinced Canadian girls could do the same thing* with Harper as a substitute ,and not receive 'religious hatred' charges or jail time, Yet the articles go on as if it is unquestionable that the girls would be jailed in the west.
Wait a second, I thought you said earlier that the problem wasn't President Putin. Now you're telling me that, with Canadian PM Harper as substitute, they wouldn't have been charged or gone to jail. You do realize that this stuff (crime charging, sentencing) is the job of the judiciary and not the executive branch, right? If what you believe were true, we'd be worrying about a whole lot worse corruption (totalitarianism) here.
Wait a second, second, I think we've stumbled on the endgame for our debate over Russian vs Western judicial systems. See, here in the United States, our president
can, in fact, override the judiciary and act as the ultimate judge on US citizens when it comes to the "war on terror" - denying them due process & proceeding to drone them (which he's done to a 16 yr old US citizen).
Harper is hardly any better when it comes to overriding the courts with his systematic discrimination against first nations peoples. Then going on to play international judge by blocking off UN indigenous human rights reviews on his country because he know what will be revealed.
So, tell me more about how PM Harper would've protected Pussy Riot.
Badnews Bear said:
I respect plenty of people I don't agree with (for example I respect you so far), my ad honinem is IMO reactionary to already existing ad honinem. I have a history of that and sometimes get carried away...
I'm not so sure that you really respect people that you don't agree with, when you describe them as "annoying" and "assholes." All that shows is that your confirmation bias was challenged...If you can't handle critical points of view maturely, then how am I supposed to take your arguments seriously?
Badnews Bear said:
No, I didn't try to discredit his work 'simply' because he linked to his own article, I just used that as a lead-in to my argument that his claim was not 'totally proven', as he seems to indicate. I do not deny it is invalid to bring up, but I found it comical that he presents it as an established fact, then links to his own article, which IMO does not establish it as a fact at all. If I wanted to back up something I was saying with a link, I myself would be my own last choice; that just seems like basic psychology. If I link to myself it appears that I may be the only person who holds that view... So I led in my argument by pointing that out of Tony.
You start this paragraph by saying that you're not trying to discredit him for linking to his previous work, and at the end of the graph you try to discredit people who link to their own work. Good one.
Now, as far as the validity of his article goes, I think he brought up some pretty legitimate points with evidence to back it. He shows some clear connections between Pussy Riot and anti-Putin opposition leaders in Russia (that have US funding) as well as US backed NGOs (ie NED) that have a pretty nefarious past when it comes to US covert destabilization missions against many different countries over the past fifty years.
So, tell me more about how he doesn't establish any facts at all...
Badnews Bear said:
Admittedly it is not always easy to spot ones own bias, but it appears to me that your bias on this issue is stronger than mine.
Please explain to me why my bias is stronger than yours. Especially in light of your Voina avatar, and emotional response to Pussy Riot critiques by calling authors annoying assholes. To me, it's seems that
you are the one that's emotionally vested with strong bias in this situation.
Badnews Bear said:
I had based my idea that GR had racist posts based on Tony's article.
That's a pretty serious accusation, please show me where in Tony's article you read racist remarks because I can't find any.
How could someone even incorporate racist view points into an article on Pussy Riot? The Pussy Riot debacle wasn't a racial issue whatsoever. You're going a little bit overboard here with the smear, BadNews Bear.
BadNews Bear said:
But after looking into Tony a bit more I found no pattern of antisemitism
You do know that there's a difference between racism and antisemitism, right? Antisemitism is specifically directed against Jewish peoples. While racism can be against any ethnic group of peoples.
BadNews Bear said:
but strangely some pro-Israel stuff, and even some critics accusing him of Zionism.
Okay...
So first he was antisemitic, and now he's zionist...That makes a whole lot of sense, BadNews Bear.
I took a quick look through his articles archive at Global Research and found this:
The World Must Unite Against the US-Saudi-Israeli Proxy War in Syria
So, BadNews Bear, please tell me more about how he's pro-Israel or even Zionist...
You know, it's funny because you accuse him of smearing your sacred cow, Pussy Riot. Yet it is
you who is looking like the smear artist now.
BadNews Bear said:
So while Tony's post on Pussy Riot does sound anti-Semitic
I've re-read the article in question multiple times now, I haven't seen any mentions of Jewish people (not that I expected to). Why would someone bring up jewish people in an article on Pussy Riot? Is there a connection that I'm missing here?
BadNews Bear said:
I am no longer comfortable with my claim that GR has "racist" posts.
Good, because it's entirely unfair to accuse any publication of supporting racism without any evidence whatsoever...
BadNews Bear said:
For now I still think these posts on Pussy Riot at GR are plenty stupid though.
Plenty stupid?
Do you understand how an argument works? You present your reasons as to why you agree or disagree with something. Calling something plenty stupid gets nobody nowhere... Your entire argument throughout this debate has been empty assumption after assumption, after baseless statement after statement, without any legitimate reasoning or rational, whatsoever. Your final analysis here, in calling their article "plenty stupid" really says it all for you.
On the contrary, I find this past paragraph of yours, about the author being anti-Semitic and racist when writing about Pussy Riot plenty, plenty,
plenty stupid.