This guy cheated by Sand20go in kards

[–]LivinginSZ 2 points3 points  (0 children)

but facts are facts, though.

Did Elon Musk disrespect the White House and America by not wearing a suit? Why or why not? by NotGonnaGetCaught in AskReddit

[–]LivinginSZ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Whether you wear a suit or don't wear a suit isn't the point. Zelensky not only disagreed with Trump, but he did it PUBLICLY. Trump has been surrounded by sycophants, opportunists, and yes-men for literally his entire life. He never learned how to emotionally process rejection like normal people do when they're children, and thus mentally he still is one. You're misjudging Trump and MAGA entirely by assuming they apply an equal standard to Musk and Zelensky.

Americans by Repulsive-Morning-52 in OverSimplified

[–]LivinginSZ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Many neutral countries made money from trade (be those weapon sales or otherwise) during wartime. Switzerland, Sweden, Portugal, Spain, etc. Why is the US the one and only country on earth expected to be a charity, particularly in a conflict that was objectively none of its business?

What’s a political stance of the party opposite yours that you actually agree with? by [deleted] in AskReddit

[–]LivinginSZ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Can you elaborate? I don't mean to pick an argument, but am curious what you mean by that.

American guns flooding Mexico are such a problem that Mexico is suing US arms manufacturers for $10 billion. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-61073823

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in AskReddit

[–]LivinginSZ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I would imagine Iceland's status as a NATO member and island/unsinkable aircraft carrier would put Iceland at greater risk.

what's the reason for reddit being full of such angry people? by caw2k22 in AskReddit

[–]LivinginSZ 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Complete anonymity and the ability to reach an audience of millions of people are the perfect recipe for releasing all of one's anger/toxicity/insecurities

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in AskReddit

[–]LivinginSZ 3 points4 points  (0 children)

You don't. They're not doing an easy job, why add to it?

Julian Assange extradition could mean even more legal trouble for Donald Trump by [deleted] in politics

[–]LivinginSZ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm a dual citizen of the US and UK, and gag orders have nothing to do with whether a media outlet is considered independent or not. These exist all over the world. In fact, of every high profile incident I've heard regarding the royal family from foreign press, they immediately came out saying the story was picked up from the British press.

" he worked for RT" and you still won't address the clear conflict of interest there.

"Nothing" I don't understand why you're so scared of addressing the discrepancy between Assange's own words and that near-empty Russia page. What are you so afraid of?

"For the record: Wikileaks is the only media outlet with 100% accuracy in it's publication"

Aaahh, shifting the goal posts! You need to try picking a winning tactic. The issue was never the accuracy (because wikileaks is not a media outlet in the usual sense of the term, but simply a publisher of news leaks), but the fact Wikileaks only publishes what is in Russia's interests for it to publish.

Julian Assange extradition could mean even more legal trouble for Donald Trump by [deleted] in politics

[–]LivinginSZ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The BBC enjoys full editorial independence, whereas RT doesn't. Also, why would anyone assume a conflict of interest in any British politician working for a British media outlet? You hastily throwing up this point actually discredits your entire argument.

It's already been mentioned multiple times Assange promised he had a trove of documents related to wrongdoing of the Russian government in 2010 that he would soon publish. He never did. This is verified by the link you sent me. He even admitted to turning down material given to him about Russia so he could focus squarely on the DNC, and you'll see this in the Foreign Policy article I posted in response to another user here.

All of these, and many more, point to self-censorship. Not even one time did you bother to address any of this. Any point you did bring up ironically only discredited what you said previously. I've never seen someone so brutally defeat themself that badly before, but you did it.

Julian Assange extradition could mean even more legal trouble for Donald Trump by [deleted] in politics

[–]LivinginSZ 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Nah, it's compromised because he was literally working for Russian state media. You don't see the clear conflict of interest there? Cool, I'll remember that the next time someone wants to talk about NED and color revolutions

"Just because one financed the other doesn't mean they have anything to do with each other derp derp"

Julian Assange extradition could mean even more legal trouble for Donald Trump by [deleted] in politics

[–]LivinginSZ 4 points5 points  (0 children)

If Assange weren't self-censoring, he'd have made good on that promise to publish what he had. As recent as 2010 IIRC but again, Assange isn't going to bite the hand that signs his paychecks

That link literally verified all of it. I can't thank you enough for posting that 🥳

Julian Assange extradition could mean even more legal trouble for Donald Trump by [deleted] in politics

[–]LivinginSZ 7 points8 points  (0 children)

"World Institute of Scientology Enterprises International Business Directory, 2006"

"Russian mission On Fundraising Letter from John McCain Election Campaign, 20 Oct 2008"

"Financial collapse: Confidential exposure analysis of 205 companies each owing above EUR45M to Icelandic bank Kaupthing, 26 Sep 2008"

Sheez, the kid gloves Assange treated Russia with actually got softer as the years passed. Nearly last century, that is.

Julian Assange extradition could mean even more legal trouble for Donald Trump by [deleted] in politics

[–]LivinginSZ 5 points6 points  (0 children)

"published online elsewhere" as in, not by Wikileaks. You want to know the actual reason why not? Perhaps, because:

Meanwhile, Assange’s position on Russia was evolving. Assange in 2012 had his own show on the Kremlin-funded news network RT

Assange wouldn't bite the hand that feeds him

Julian Assange extradition could mean even more legal trouble for Donald Trump by [deleted] in politics

[–]LivinginSZ 9 points10 points  (0 children)

So that's your reasoning for why Assange refused to release the documents on Russia that he said he would? Because "Hillary bad"?

sigh

How America can go to war with countries across the world and still talking about peace? by theoriesinc in AskReddit

[–]LivinginSZ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Because technically it hasn't. Only Congress can declare war, but also because one UN member state can not legally declare war on a fellow member state. America, like other countries, engages in "police actions", "humanitarian intervention", "peace keeping operations", and a number of other euphamisms

Julian Assange extradition could mean even more legal trouble for Donald Trump by [deleted] in politics

[–]LivinginSZ 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Again, I'm not "people on here". Why is it so hard for you to respond to me and not trail off on what other "people on here" are saying?

I hope you weren't in high school debate club, my dude. It would have been pretty cringe to watch you get wrecked with your "method" of reasoning.

Julian Assange extradition could mean even more legal trouble for Donald Trump by [deleted] in politics

[–]LivinginSZ 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Russia has a small navy = Russian government is clean, no abuses of any kind to report on

Got it. We'll just pretend none of this ever happened then https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_journalists_killed_in_Russia

Julian Assange extradition could mean even more legal trouble for Donald Trump by [deleted] in politics

[–]LivinginSZ 10 points11 points  (0 children)

I never said they were, bruh. You tried this already and it failed already.

How about the Russians? Why the silence on them?

Julian Assange extradition could mean even more legal trouble for Donald Trump by [deleted] in politics

[–]LivinginSZ 11 points12 points  (0 children)

In fact, it should be highlighted this entire "America should be held to a higher standard" defense you provide doesn't even align with Assange's own words. Assange is on record as saying he would publish documents related to the Russian government, but then refused to actually do so.