USA Politics

Also, isn't it funny that Greenland is all of a sudden becoming a popular tourist destination for members of the US government and their families, especially considering this has nothing to do with Trump's bullshitting about annexing it? It's astonishing how coincidences work sometimes.
 
So lemme get this straight, Musk bought Twitter for $44 billion, tanked its value and now sold it to himself for $45 billion, and somehow we're still supposed to believe this guy is a genius?
 
timesofindia.indiatimes.com

Hundreds of international students wake up to an email asking them to self deport for campus activism - The Times of India

US News: The US Department of State has asked hundreds of international students, including Indians, to self-deport over alleged campus activism. Learn about the visa revocations and government policies here.
timesofindia.indiatimes.com timesofindia.indiatimes.com

I can't even be sarcastic about this anymore, I'm just stunned. I expected this to happen, but it hits different when it's actually happening.
 
Perun said:
timesofindia.indiatimes.com

Hundreds of international students wake up to an email asking them to self deport for campus activism - The Times of India

US News: The US Department of State has asked hundreds of international students, including Indians, to self-deport over alleged campus activism. Learn about the visa revocations and government policies here.
timesofindia.indiatimes.com timesofindia.indiatimes.com
Click to expand...

This was quite bad already but when you consider that it's done to basically support a genocide, it's unthinkable.

LooseCannon said:
First Amendment is dead, I guess.
Click to expand...

To be fair, most of international students are non residents, let alone American citizens. What about this, done to an American citizen and journalist during Biden.

 
____no5 said:
This was quite bad already but when you consider that it's done to basically support a genocide, it's unthinkable.



To be fair, most of international students are non residents, let alone American citizens. What about this, done to an American citizen and journalist during Biden.

Click to expand...
The First Amendment applies to everyone in the USA, regardless of residency status. Violating it for people on legal student visas is no less heinous than arresting someone born in Texas for speaking their opinion.


____no5 said:
To be fair, most of international students are non residents, let alone American citizens. What about this, done to an American citizen and journalist during Biden.
Click to expand...
I'm not watching Tucker Carlson, but my research suggests that Sanchez lost his job because he refused to register as a foreign agent. It is illegal for someone to work for a state (which, RT is a wholly owned vehicle of the Russian state) without registering as a foreign agent. That's not a First Amendment issue. You can tell how Rick Sanchez wasn't censored by the government by the simple fact that he can do interviews with Tucker lyin' Carlson and put it on Youtube.
 
LooseCannon said:
The First Amendment applies to everyone in the USA, regardless of residency status. Violating it for people on legal student visas is no less heinous than arresting someone born in Texas for speaking their opinion.
Click to expand...

It does, but then when you have foreign students publicly and en mass challenging the policies of the government even being non resident, state will find an excuse to evoke or not renew their visa so game over.
This is the common sense rule in most of the countries on planet earth.

LooseCannon said:
I'm not watching Tucker Carlson, but my research suggests that Sanchez lost his job because he refused to register as a foreign agent. It is illegal for someone to work for a state (which, RT is a wholly owned vehicle of the Russian state) without registering as a foreign agent. That's not a First Amendment issue. You can tell how Rick Sanchez wasn't censored by the government by the simple fact that he can do interviews with Tucker lyin' Carlson and put it on Youtube.
Click to expand...

Ok fair enough. I fully agree with foreign agents type-laws principal, but to note here that when the country of Georgia voted for it, US and EU placed them sanctions and a colour revolution almost occurred with EU officials talking to the crowds and such.
 
____no5 said:
Ok fair enough. I fully agree with foreign agents type-laws principal, but to note here that when the country of Georgia voted for it, US and EU placed them sanctions and a colour revolution almost occurred with EU officials talking to the crowds and such.
Click to expand...

Your audacity to bring up these lies after I already addressed them and you flat-out refused to respond is mind-blowing. Had you followed the standards you expected of me and read the sources I provided in that post, you would have understood the difference between FARA and the Georgian legislation:

In drafting their own foreign agent legislation, Russia and Georgia both referred to FARA. However, there is a key difference between their legislation and FARA: In the Russian and now-abandoned Georgian versions, “foreign agents” do not need to carry out activities on behalf of a foreign government, political party, business or individual.

As such, the use of the terms “foreign agent” and “agent of foreign influence” is incorrect from a legal point of view – agency activity does not even need to be proved.

Another source:

The ruling Georgian Dream party has claimed that the bill is an exact copy of the US Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA). But US Justice Department regulations clarify that FARA aims to monitor the direct influence of foreign powers on domestic politics, specifically in cases in which foreign-funded individuals do not act autonomously but operate entirely under the directives of and coordination of their principals.

FARA also does not equate receiving foreign funding with being under the direction and control of a foreign entity. The overbroad definition of “influence” of a foreign principal in the Georgian bill would allow abusive implementation against independent groups, Human Rights Watch said.

Here's the text of the Georgian draft, here's the text of FARA, if you want to check for yourself.

Have you done even remotely this amount of source-checking on this issue?

I think you simply don't care. You heard your version somewhere on a YouTube video once and think now you're the one seeing the truth. No further research required. Because it's what fits your world-view it must be the truth, no questions asked, and now you must spread the gospel. Sorry, but we're not that gullible. If you think your posts are the only confrontation we have with the "other side", you're gravely mistaken. That's why my answers are sometimes "disappointingly quick", because I've heard many of these things before, I don't exist in the vacuum of this forum, and I learned how to do research. That's literally my job.

I'm not content with just taking somebody's word from a YouTube video. But this is what you expect of us, because that's the maximum of what you will do.
 
Perun said:
Your audacity to bring up these lies after I already addressed them and you flat-out refused to respond is mind-blowing. Had you followed the standards you expected of me and read the sources I provided in that post, you would have understood the difference between FARA and the Georgian legislation:

In drafting their own foreign agent legislation, Russia and Georgia both referred to FARA. However, there is a key difference between their legislation and FARA: In the Russian and now-abandoned Georgian versions, “foreign agents” do not need to carry out activities on behalf of a foreign government, political party, business or individual.

As such, the use of the terms “foreign agent” and “agent of foreign influence” is incorrect from a legal point of view – agency activity does not even need to be proved.

Another source:

The ruling Georgian Dream party has claimed that the bill is an exact copy of the US Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA). But US Justice Department regulations clarify that FARA aims to monitor the direct influence of foreign powers on domestic politics, specifically in cases in which foreign-funded individuals do not act autonomously but operate entirely under the directives of and coordination of their principals.

FARA also does not equate receiving foreign funding with being under the direction and control of a foreign entity. The overbroad definition of “influence” of a foreign principal in the Georgian bill would allow abusive implementation against independent groups, Human Rights Watch said.

Here's the text of the Georgian draft, here's the text of FARA, if you want to check for yourself.

Have you done even remotely this amount of source-checking on this issue?

I think you simply don't care. You heard your version somewhere on a YouTube video once and think now you're the one seeing the truth. No further research required. Because it's what fits your world-view it must be the truth, no questions asked, and now you must spread the gospel. Sorry, but we're not that gullible. If you think your posts are the only confrontation we have with the "other side", you're gravely mistaken. That's why my answers are sometimes "disappointingly quick", because I've heard many of these things before, I don't exist in the vacuum of this forum, and I learned how to do research. That's literally my job.

I'm not content with just taking somebody's word from a YouTube video. But this is what you expect of us, because that's the maximum of what you will do.
Click to expand...
5:

giphy.webp
 
Mosh said:
5:

giphy.webp
Click to expand...

No. It's not this.

Perun said:
Your audacity to bring up these lies after I already addressed them and you flat-out refused to respond is mind-blowing. Had you followed the standards you expected of me and read the sources I provided in that post, you would have understood the difference between FARA and the Georgian legislation:

In drafting their own foreign agent legislation, Russia and Georgia both referred to FARA. However, there is a key difference between their legislation and FARA: In the Russian and now-abandoned Georgian versions, “foreign agents” do not need to carry out activities on behalf of a foreign government, political party, business or individual.

As such, the use of the terms “foreign agent” and “agent of foreign influence” is incorrect from a legal point of view – agency activity does not even need to be proved.
Click to expand...

Nobody expects the legislations to be the same. That's why I mentioned them as foreign agents type-laws

____no5 said:
I fully agree with foreign agents type-laws principal,
Click to expand...

The point is that all those countries are trying to face the exact same problem which is interference in their affairs. US is very resourceful and mega sophisticated to shaping public opinion with USAID, NED and literally thousands of NGOs. In Georgia there are 20,000 dormant and 4,000 active NGOs you bet that this country badly needs such a legislation.

I don't expect that their legislation can be of the same quality as US but fundamentally they are trying to face the same issue. Actually even more as nobody is as sophisticated and strong as US in this domain. US has been involved in hundreds of regime changing operations since the WWII. Hundreds. So it's a different kind of beast overall.

Perun said:
I think you simply don't care. You heard your version somewhere on a YouTube video once and think now you're the one seeing the truth. No further research required. Because it's what fits your world-view it must be the truth, no questions asked, and now you must spread the gospel. Sorry, but we're not that gullible. If you think your posts are the only confrontation we have with the "other side", you're gravely mistaken. That's why my answers are sometimes "disappointingly quick", because I've heard many of these things before, I don't exist in the vacuum of this forum, and I learned how to do research. That's literally my job.

I'm not content with just taking somebody's word from a YouTube video. But this is what you expect of us, because that's the maximum of what you will do.
Click to expand...

As you say, it's your job to research things and you do that best. If I bring YouTube videos, it's just a different media, nothing more. It isn't automatically inferior than if it came from NYT.
And it's not that I won't change my mind in a good argument. Just now, I conceded to LC for something that Sanchez failed to mention.
I expect from you to give me your common sense & opinion.
 
____no5 said:
The point is that all those countries are trying to face the exact same problem which is interference in their affairs. US is very resourceful and mega sophisticated to shaping public opinion with USAID, NED and literally thousands of NGOs. In Georgia there are 20,000 dormant and 4,000 active NGOs you bet that this country badly needs such a legislation.
Click to expand...

You didn't even read my post that you refused to respond to.

I'm truly baffled.
 
On one hand, I am actually grateful for No 5 as at least someone willing to disrupt the progleft circlejerk, even if by such dubious means.

On the other hand, as a result this thread really is cringe comedy at its finest. I find it bloody hilarious that being gone for 6 months and returning, I find this thread in exactly the same state as before, with 5 not only not being banned, but people actually still engaging in a conversation with him and getting frustrated as a result.
 
Perun said:
I'll stop stating my opinions if it offends you.
Click to expand...

Oh come on, it doesn't and I hope you are yourself not offended with a bit of acerbic banter. We have said nice things about each other in the past, let's not fuck it up by getting pissy about politics.

Also, I am perfectly aware that opinions are like arseholes - everyone has one and most of them smell badly to everyone else. Besides, I've decided to limit my presence in the politics subforums (and even the forum itself, at first) for a reason and I don't intend to frequent this particular thread much.

I actually agree with a lot of the Trump criticism and even the hate, believe it or not. What really irks me is that I had hoped that after November, the American "left" - what a stupid label - (and people that way aligned) will finally pull their head out of their arse and take a cold hard look at the situation in the bleak light of the day.
Because I despise Trump, I truly do. And how bad you must be to lose against such cunt twice?

Instead, what happened is exactly what I've called "circlejerk" and unfortunately, I can't help but feel it on this forum as well.

9p792p.jpg

(excuse the hyperbole, as I am a poet and a cunt)

People wail and gnash their teeth at how the world is ending, by Trump and Wilders and AfD and whoever else comes into power or is in the risk of becoming so. But apart from doubling down on their worldview and attitude, which obviously isn't enough, politically (and to many may be just as despicable as Trumpism), what are they doing about that, so it doesn't happen? Are we giving people a valid alternative? Because I don't see it.

For example, I am extremely pissed that so many US Catholics voted for Trump, and primarily because I suspect a performative mockery of their faith and values was probably preferable to the party that was openly hostile to them.

I see the same in my country - "the good guys" have decided that pointing their finger at the opposition and yelling about "democratic values" is enough - they got voted into power (including by myself) and fucked up everything they touched. Now the next election is coming and it's again just "we're the good guys, don't you know?" No, you aren't. It's gonna be another four years of the Slovakian Berlusconi as the Prime Minister of Czechia... but here also because the alternative for a common person is probably actually worse, however it might hurt me to admit so.

It's hard not to despair and the attitude I recognise here on the forum does not help. If I misread the forum and the thread, then I apologise, although I doubt that, also because of why I left in September in the first place, which I don't think was just a misunderstanding.

Anyway, I'm really sorry that you in particular got offended, I will refrain from posting in this thread anyway, I don't see the reason.

But part of my theological background is to actually look at everything that isn't immovable and play this sort of advocatus diaboli against myself. To try and deconstruct and reconstruct and prove (in the older meaning of the word) the things I am currently believing and up in arms about. You, just as I, may be wrong. Wherever you find yourself on the political compass, you will be at least somewhat wrong and you will support some deeply flawed things as well, because the compass is only two-dimensional.
I recommend this as a good practice that also strengthens the theory of mind within each of us. The politics discourse seems to have completely abandoned it.

TL;DR - I wish you all were more constructive. Or at least that it came across more.

Bye. Peace. Love. See you in other subfora.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top